Well written summary of the "trademark" issues snipped. I think Faust did
a good job laying this out. It's not what I'm responding to, but just so
no one thinks I'm "attacking" Faust, I wanted to make this clear.
> There is still a (small but silent) paranoia contingent that tries to "look
> behind" the ramifications of the OGL and hypothesizes what the "giant
> corporation" could do with it. The only major objection I have heard from
> this quarter is that for the first time under the OGL's particular rules the
> "giant corporation" could use selective enforcement of trademark laws to
> punish those they don't like for minor trademark transgressions, while
> rewarding their buddies by overlooking similar small transgressions.
The problem with this paranoia contingent that Faust refers to is that
they have no understanding of trademark law. You can't "selectively"
enforce a trademark through court action. Failure to go after some while
suing others can be used as evidence that the trademark holder is not
defending said trademark and therefore has lost their trademark rights.
Trademark law requires the vigorous defense of your trademark and the OGL
language does nothing to change this.
later,
alec
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
