Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

On 14 Jun 2003 Lizard scribbled a note about Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario: > Well, when the terms of the contract include "authority to > contribute", *and* include a period for cure of a breach, it takes > quite a bit to claim something was added accidentally which cannot be > de-added.

Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

At 08:43 PM 6/14/2003, you wrote: On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 07:40:54PM -0700, Lizard wrote: > > Well, let's see. Is there an extensive public record of Lime Samurai > announcing their intent to make nearly all the content closed? Does this > follow the pattern of their previous books? Have they spoke

Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 07:40:54PM -0700, Lizard wrote: > > Well, let's see. Is there an extensive public record of Lime Samurai > announcing their intent to make nearly all the content closed? Does this > follow the pattern of their previous books? Have they spoken at length > about how "It's

Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

> If this went before a jury, it would be pretty open-and-shut. In my experience, NOTHING is open-and-shut when it comes to a jury. All depends on the jury selection. Andrew McDougall a.k.a. Tir Gwaith ___ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://

Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

At 06:40 AM 6/14/2003, you wrote: I'm trying to understand this employee mistake scenario. Hypothetical: Lime-Green Ronin publishes Mercenaries of Seaport as 100 percent open text. The company intended to do this, but the only written documentation of this intent is the book itself. One month late

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

As I've said before, if you accept WotC as a faceless Monolith then sure, there is a big difference. Now what if I was lisenced to use SOME of Pepsi's products? In my contract is says in somewhat confusing language "You may use Lays, KFC, Slice, and Pizza hut in any way you like. you may NOT us

Re: [Ogf-l] Mongoose's d20 Cyberpunk

At 12:35 PM 6/12/2003 -0600, Leroy Van Camp III took quill in hand to say: Anyone seen any details on Mongoose's d20 Cyberpunk? There is a blurb from Mongoose on it at Gaming Report. The blurb seems to indicate that it is an OGL game, like Mutants & Masterminds. If this is true, can they really pu

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

At 16:55 -0400 6/13/03, Bill Olander wrote: Which is the case for all other publishers as well. Going back to an old example: I could release a PDF file on my website declared as 100% OGC. In it I have a monster "The Pepsi Golem" made from Pepsi cans. Use of 'Pepsi' is in violation of the OGL there

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

On Saturday, June 14, 2003, at 12:47 PM, Joe Mucchiello wrote: Are you manually putting in bookmarks? If so, what layout program are you using that you need do this? I am insane (or just cheap) and do not own Acrobat. I use Word Very sorry to hear that. This time around, I plan to include an al

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

At 12:11 PM 6/14/2003 -0600, you wrote: On Saturday, June 14, 2003, at 11:58 AM, Joe Mucchiello wrote: If not Tuesday, then by the end of the week. Depends on how long it takes me to finish the layout and put in the bookmarks. Are you manually putting in bookmarks? If so, what layout program are

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

On Saturday, June 14, 2003, at 11:58 AM, Joe Mucchiello wrote: If not Tuesday, then by the end of the week. Depends on how long it takes me to finish the layout and put in the bookmarks. Are you manually putting in bookmarks? If so, what layout program are you using that you need do this? Leroy

RE: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

> Hypothetical: Lime-Green Ronin publishes Mercenaries of Seaport as > 100 percent open text. The company intended to do this, but the only > written documentation of this intent is the book itself. I think they're probably unlikely to be able to make a compelling case that the material was rele

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 22:11, David Chart wrote: > > (And, incidentally, I think you would have to be a certifiable idiot to > use the term in a book published under the OGL and/or d20 STL. It might > be arguable in court, but you would have to do that, and WotC has Bigger > Scarier Lawyers, and f

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

On Saturday, June 14, 2003, at 11:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He probably should, but just as an FYI, his "Custom Hero" product has been available already for some time in one incarnation or another. This is true. Version 1.0 of The Custom Hero was put out as a freebie back in January. Due t

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

At 01:43 PM 6/14/2003 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He probably should, but just as an FYI, his "Custom Hero" product has been available already for some time in one incarnation or another. BTW -- are we gonna actually see your product next Tuesday, Joe, or is it still on indefinite hold. Tha

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

On Saturday, June 14, 2003, at 11:38 AM, Joe Mucchiello wrote: At 09:36 AM 6/14/2003 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 3) you can call your gaming product: "Modern Roleplaying Character Customization" I would hope you would find a name a bit more different than the name of my soon to be release

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

In a message dated 6/14/03 1:40:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >3) you can call your gaming product: "Modern Roleplaying Character >Customization" I would hope you would find a name a bit more different than the name of my soon to be released product: http://www.throw

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

At 09:36 AM 6/14/2003 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 3) you can call your gaming product: "Modern Roleplaying Character Customization" I would hope you would find a name a bit more different than the name of my soon to be released product: http://www.throwingdice.com/products/customize.html

RE: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

You can not use d20 in the title we wanted to as well, but we did the  “Player’s Archive” and have the d20 on the cover and our blurb states “Requires the use of the Revised Players Handbook, published by Wizards of the Coast, Inc.”  It will be the first char sheet for3.5.   Hal “Yes I am

[Ogf-l] Cure Period

Just a note. None of the list's resident lawyers or legal professionals have commented on this, but, AFAIK, the OGL doesn't specify who has to inform whom for the cure period to begin. Hypothetically, if "Lawsuit Happy Games" sues "Criminal Amateur Press" for wrongfully including the "Happy La

Re: [Ogf-l] Mongoose's d20 Cyberpunk

Rogers Cadenhead wrote: You gotta be kidding me. Once something is published under the OGL, the terms of the license only apply if the employee or employees who prepared the material had authorization to release the material, something that's not evident at all in any OGL-licensed work? Nope

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

On Saturday, June 14, 2003, at 07:36 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First, you'll have to contend with the "no character creation" part of the d20 STL. Despite the fact that my product is all about character creation, I have managed to cover that.  If you can make your product with that in pl

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

In a message dated 6/14/03 11:19:05 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: <

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

On Saturday, Jun 14, 2003, at 12:12 US/Eastern, Tim Dugger wrote: On 14 Jun 2003 DarkTouch scribbled a note about Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC: You're making the mistake of looking at WotC in terms of a faceless monolith. Try breaking it down into individuals and it might make more sense to

Re: [Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

The situation you describe is possible, although not very likely. During the Discovery phase of the pre-trial preparations, Third Party Games would request copies of all Lime-Green Ronin materials related to the product. It's certainly possible that they wouldn't find any `incriminating' evid

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

On 14 Jun 2003 DarkTouch scribbled a note about Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC: > You're making the mistake of looking at WotC in terms of a faceless > monolith. Try breaking it down into individuals and it might make more > sense to you. Wrong! WOTC, as a company, released the SRD under the O

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

You're making the mistake of looking at WotC in terms of a faceless monolith. Try breaking it down into individuals and it might make more sense to you. Rogers Cadenhead wrote: On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 16:55:00 -0400, Bill Olander wrote: Thus being in violation, thus activating the cur

[Ogf-l] Employee mistake scenario

I'm trying to understand this employee mistake scenario. Hypothetical: Lime-Green Ronin publishes Mercenaries of Seaport as 100 percent open text. The company intended to do this, but the only written documentation of this intent is the book itself. One month later, an animation company offers

Re: [Ogf-l] d20 Modern in a Product Title

In a message dated 6/14/03 12:39:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > First, you'll have to contend with the "no character creation" part of th

Re: [Ogf-l] Dungeon Master in OGC

On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 16:55:00 -0400, Bill Olander wrote: >Thus being in violation, thus activating the cure period. Someone e- >mail WotC and start counting off their 30 days. The cure period applies when a third-party publisher doesn't have the right to use another publisher's content. WOTC has t

RE: [Ogf-l] Mongoose's d20 Cyberpunk

On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:54:31 -0700, Ryan S. Dancey wrote: >Taking something from a document that has been demonstrably released >in error that you >know< is likely to cause you troubles and using >it anyway defeats the whole purpose of the OGL. True, but isn't it also an OGL-defeating scenario for

RE: [Ogf-l] Mongoose's d20 Cyberpunk

On Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:14:23 -0700, Ryan S. Dancey wrote: >In other words, the person who placed that content in a file that >was licensed with the OGL was not authorized by Wizards of the Coast >to do so. Since that material was not authorized for licensing with >the OGL, all Wizards has to do t