On Sun, 13 Aug 2000, Tim Dugger wrote: > Because by not doing so turns the OGL, which is supposed to be > a system independent license, into a solely WOTC tool. This is > something that Ryan has been attempting to avoid (which is why > WOTC's interests are covered in the D20 STL, and not the OGL). I agree. > > In order to keep the impartiality, they cannot say that this specific > clause applies solely to themselves. > But the new clause is not very impartial. Trademark holders benefit. The more valuable the trademark the more valueable the benefit (ie. best for WotC). Non-trademark holders are left feeling unwelcomed. ------------- For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
- [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me John Kim
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kevin J. Brennan
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me John Kim
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kal Lin
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kevin J. Brennan
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kal Lin
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kevin J. Brennan
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Corey Reid
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kal Lin
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Tim Dugger
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kal Lin
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Tim Dugger
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Faustus von Goethe
- Re: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Kevin J. Brennan
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Corey Reid
- [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me John Kim
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Corey Reid
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Faustus von Goethe
- RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me Corey Reid
