>On 12 Aug 00, Faustus scribbled a note about RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks
>and Me:
>
> > >The clause from the Apple license is great and somebody should point
>that
> > >out to Ryan. There might be a way to use that sort of language in the
> > >OGL. It would have to say something like, "The Publisher of Open
>Content
> > >agrees to allow use of their trademarks under the following
> > >conditions..."
> >
> > Don't knock yourself out on this - I have suggested it about four times
>so
> > far. It is not WotC's intent.
>
>Huh? If that is not their intent, then why do they have the D20 STL?
>The D20STL is nothing more than what is suggested in the first
>paragraph (you can use this trademark that we own, under the
>following conditions)
Oh please. Before you jump all over me go back and READ the Apple License -
there is *no* comparison. The Apple license is reasonable, straightforward,
and does >not< paranoically try to expand trademark protections. The Apple
license simply works within the confines of current trademark law.
But Ryan has specifically expressed the opinion that WotC does not favor
this because the industries are different ... a matter of opinion.
Faust
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
