Took a lunch break and read through the docs over a buffalo chicken salad at
Denny's... In general, I think the new draft of the D20STL is very good. I
have a couple of points for clarification, of course:
Logos
=====
The question of color in the logo has already been brought up, with respect
to black-only publications (or interior uses of the logo, such as on the
title page of one of our works). A related point is that we need to have an
authoritative location of the authoritative current logo(s), preferably as
EPS files or otherwise scalable, and in CMYK channels. Perhaps the Logo
Guide should identify a URL for such a file or directory.
Translations
============
On the general topic of translations: This is something that will come up
very quickly, as a number of parties are interested in doing foreign
translations of existing D20 titles. My questions/suggestions in this
respect:
(1) It may be of value to have native language trademark acknowledgements,
which the "Translation Rights" section apparently prohibits? Maybe there
could be a requirement that the notice be in English *as well as* a
subordinate translation. Maybe it's not a big deal.
(2) A related topic: Perhaps the OGL should discuss translations, in that it
should allow for translations of the OGL to be included in foreign language
OGL works but with the warning that the English text is definitive in case
of ambiguity or contradiction. (There's boilerplate to this effect in most
foreign deals that come with agreements in two languages.) Alternately, we
could just go with the current situation, which I guess implicitly would
require non-English-language OGL publishers to include the OGL 1.0 in
English; and by not endorsing any translations of the OGL at all we would
try not to encourage people who are not able to read and understand the
English original.
(3) The D20 license might clarify how sublicensing of D20 licensed products
proceeds. Atlas Games does not have the authority to sublicense the D20
logo, does not have the necessity to license the use of our Open Gaming
Content (already open for translation under the OGL), but we do have the
right to license translations of our Product Identity and non-open text
within D20/OGL works. Therefore, a company wanting to do 3D2K in Spanish
must itself agree to the terms of the D20 STL and submit its card to WotC.
Is my understanding correct, and if so is sufficient for these points to be
implied by the OGL and D20STL or should it be made explicit in the logo
guide?
Restricted Trademark Use
========================
How does this section interrelate with third parties? For example, does
Atlas Games have to require retailers and distributors not to use the terms
"Dungeons & Dragons" or "Wizards of the Coast" in catalog listings,
solicitation sheets, in-store displays, and other aspects of "advertising
and marketing"...? If so, how do we enforce it, or what do we suffer if we
are unable to enforce it?
Another question: How do we solicit for a new D20 System product and
appropriately acknowledge the licensed trademark without violating the
clause against using the trademark "Wizards of the Coast" in
advertising/marketing? Does WotC want us not to acknowledge the trademark
in ads/solicitations that use the D20 System logo?
As partners in the whole D20 thing, we all have a vested interest in seeing
the D20 System trademarks maintained, because the restrictions in the
license assist us all by creating a clear idea in consumers' minds of what
they are getting. Imagine if someone challenges the D20 marks, saying that
they saw dozens of ads and sell sheets from different manufacturers, and
none saying whose mark it was, so it was presumed to be in the public
domain. I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know how that would hold up as an
argument for a diluted trademark (maybe it's not really a problem?), but if
such a case prevailed and undermined the D20 System trademark it would hurt
us all.
Grandfathering
==============
Here we get to that risk that early D20 publishers have shouldered... ;)
What if any provision is or will be made for products already published
under the gentleman's agreement/draft D20STL up to this point? Do items
published under draft versions of the license prior to 1.0 count under
paragraph 9 of the D20STLA as "existing material that complies with a
previous version of the D20 Trademark Logo Agreement" that may continue to
be sold until we have a chance to reprint under the terms of the final
license?
If some or all existing non-WotC D20 publications might be considered to
"breach" of the final version of the license, what would be necessary to
"cure" it?
My hope (and assumption) is that we are all good to continue selling
existing printings until they run out, with reprintings and new materials
being produced under the final license. But since that isn't 100% clear, so
I figured I should ask...
Other Stuff
========
On the question of not having to include the license, as Steve noticed and
Ryan confirmed -- definitely a good thing. (In fact, I admit to overlooking
the need to include the D20 license in 3D2K in the 500 copies we had at Gen
Con).
I can imagine nitpicking over what defines the 5% threshold for Open Game
Content. Is it 5% of the word count, 5% of the pages containing some OGC,
or 5% of the "live area" or page layout containing OGC? The number 5% seems
low enough that it should not be a big issue, but perhaps it is better to
err on the side of over-definition.
Typo, paragraph 13 of the Agreement: It says "MAKES NOT
REPRESENTATION" --replace "NOT" with "NO."
-John Nephew
President, Atlas Games
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
