But that's exactly what the D20 STL is. It's permission to use the
trademark. The D20 trademark is a way for WotC to allow people to claim
"compatible with" status with D&D without releasing their valuable brand.
D20 is at arm's length from D&D, so they don't run the risk of having their
brand damaged through association with inferior or improper products.
The problem that Ryan is wrestling with is that current trademark law allows
anyone to use the OGL material (the D20 SRD) and circumvent the D20 concept
simply by using the (perfectly legal) method of printing "Compatible with
D&D" on their cover. This is probably a non-starter for WotC. And I don't
blame them in the slightest -- on the contrary, I support this. I feel the
same way about my trademarks.
So what he's trying to do is put a limitation on the use of trademarks in
material derived from OGL sources. This forces people developing material
based on OGL content to use the D20 STL and thus keeps them at arm's length
from WotC's brand.
Anyone who is also publishing material under OGL can create their own
Trademark License similar to the D20 one and allow people to publish under
that.
> ----------
> From: Kal Lin
> Reply To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, August 11, 2000 9:54 AM
> To: 'opengaming'
> Subject: Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me
>
>
> Thank you for your input. I am glad to have reasonable voices
> in this discourse.
>
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, Corey Reid wrote:
>
> > I take your point, Kal, that the clause does reduce the barrier to
> > intervention by trademark holders. And you're correct in that it can
> make
> > things more difficult for those hoping to make use of other's trademarks
> --
> > but only in that they have to acquire permission from the trademark
> owner.
>
> Someone else long ago pointed out that in effect you will never
> get specific permission to use most trademarks, even in a casual
> way which the current trademark laws allow.
>
> A company may not even care if you use their trademarks in a
> casual way but they will fear and loathe actively granting you
> such permission. They will drag their feet and not respond,
> give you an ambiguous answer, refer you to a policy statement
> which doesn't answer your query or flat out tell you no.
> They will not even say, "You have permission to casually use
> our trademark as long as our people can review your work to
> make sure our trademark is not cast in a negative light." That
> would be too much trouble unless you are willing to pony up
> some dollars to make it worth their while.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------
> For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
>
>
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
