andish and still, at this late date, continue to hold to the sort of
paranoia not seen since the OGL's first days.
Steven Trustrum
President
Misfit Studios
http://www.misfit-studios.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Ogf-l mailing list
Ogf-l
. The plan you seem to be
proposing works more from a "bottom up" position and won't suit the needs of
the majority. Again, not intended to be rude but was addressing what many
others have said about why similar attempts have failed in the past.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
Preside
>>
> http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
>>
>
>
>
>
> __
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> __
hought your logo achieved any of the goals you set for it, or if you were
putting forth the best possible way to spread it around to serve your stated
needs, you can be assured you'd have heard positive feedback from me.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money r
Then the thing you need to consider, Mark, is which of our goals is actually
looking at what the people on the list here are talking about: a feasible
logo that could even attempt to fill the shoes of the d20 logo in case of
the latter's retraction.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
Presiden
lly, though for past products it might be a moot point. "
[Steven Trustrum] WotC can go after such a logo about as easily as going
after the Tri-Stat or Unisystem logos. The only ways you can open yourself
to litigation from WotC is to infringe on their d20 trademark or by tying
the logo to the O
"You're saying the same thing a lot of people say, or that they try not
to say while still trying to get the point across. I don't feel
comfortable with that level of winking."
[Steven Trustrum] Why? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that level of
"wink
r
logo just ends up being a graphic element the average customer can't figure
out the purpose for.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
http://www.misfit-studios.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
-Original Message-
From
As I see it, the major problem with that logo is there's nothing to tie such
products to d20 in the consumer's mind, which is by far the first thing such
a logo would need to do.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
http://
nique products to the market. Yes, the whole "ride the authenticity of d20"
aspect would disappear, but that's not even remotely the same as opportunity
disappearing entirely.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
http://www.misfi
uch an attempt would have the opportunity
to capitalize on the transition. The important difference is the amount of
effort people put behind the situation because they don't have the d20 logo
to fall back on.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs o
d
branding. That too, is (as you put it), a fact.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
http://www.misfit-studios.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behal
If your inclusion goes beyond just using the title of "Star Frontiers," and
can be tied to their copyright, even though you're not directly using their
copyright, you can still get burned on product confusion.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the
worked
to make a license that satisfied all the concerns WotC might have
(which is your point), but which also satisfied enough of the other
publishers so that the license would actually get used by some of
them.
[Steven Trustrum] Sure, they asked around. I'm not saying they didn't. Wha
I wouldn't rush to put it that way, Rob. Let's just say I've gotten a few
emails along the lines of "I know what you're talking about, but you're
butting your head against a wall." The voice of incomprehension doesn't
become correct because it is speaking
> I think that's enough from you for today. Take a time-out.
I guess this means you don't know that "doom on you" means "if you allow
for bad things to happen to you they'll happen", no? Oh well.
___
Ogf-l mailing list
Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:55:43AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Look, at this point it's become a semantic argument, and I'm going to
> give up.
>
> You have all but ceeded the point, but don't admit it. You
> *immediately* broke the symmetry in your hypotehtical "two companies
> with equ
> They have created a warm kiddie pool for all of us to
> swim in and there are no mean sea monsters anywhere in
> sight.
>
> I think it is time to acknowledge that WotC has been
> the biggest friend to openness that anyone could have
> expected.
Yes they have, which is why I really shouldn't need
> I truly do not know what leverage WotC could have over other publishers
> who offer their own rules system in SRD while under the OGL. You'll have
> to elaborate this influence WotC can affect companies like Gold Rush
> Games through the OGL. Was there similar incident when someone uses the
> Ope
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:29:16AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> What can WotC do that the other company can't do?
>
> There isn't anything. If you come back and say, oh, well, D&D is
> WOTC's, then you've broken the symmetry.
They remain the only company that can access the d20 STL wit
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> But with whom did the final decision rest? If they accepted opinions,
>> it was still up to them to make that final choice.
>
> My god. It's a flashback post from March of 2000. We appear to have a
> WotC conspiracist back in the mix, ladies and gentlemen! Someh
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:29:16AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> It does not grant WotC any leverage.
>
> The licence is already out there. Yeah, the WotC of the past may have
> exerted leverage by defining the terms of the licence. But the WotC of
> the present and future have no special
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 07:59:05AM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> > I should also point out somewhere around here that WotC isn't the
>> only company that has released Open Content into an SRD. True, in
>> the case of GOO
>>
>> Yes, but even those SRDs must still point back to the origi
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 08:34:44 -0700 (PDT)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, not all of the various posts you made while I was out of town
> actually matched up to this point. But I have three points to make:
I'd wager that largely had to do with the point wandering around and
having to backtr
> I'm not even sure at this point what you guys are
> arguing about/discussing.
>
> Clark
My point can be summed up as "if you're the one who creates the license,
you're the one deciding what goes in there and nobody else" and that this
has worked to WotC's advantage, legally and with regards to m
> Clark Peterson wrote:
> "WOTC is vil! The OGL is a plot to STEAL YOUR IDEAS!"
Actually, I'm not arguing that at all. My point has nothing to do with
WotC's intentions and I am, in fact, very supportive of WotC as a
corporation (please read the archives or visit similar threads at RPG.net
if
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 19:41:06 -0400
> "Steven Trustrum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Have to point out: The SRD contains material from the PHB, not the other
> way around. And that makes all the difference.
EXACTLY.
And how is this? Because WotC has the benefit of o
> On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:28:21 -0400
> "Steven Trustrum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure on this point, but am I remembering correctly that WotC
> accepted some input from some other publishers on the details of the
> licenses before the first versio
specified it in the license. That gives WotC a
considerable advantage in the market, an advantage that arose because only they
were given the choice as to whether the default section 15 would include
references to the core books or the SRD.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For
Life (or
Unless I'm mistaken, they are operating under license from WotC, however.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Beha
WotC some great degree of
special treatment with regards to the OGL and d20 STL is a laughable point
to try and make.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTE
st of us
use the OGL to point to our products and not our own SRDs. That's a rather
advantageous point to say that their being the drafter of the license had
nothing to do with.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
[EMAIL PROTECTE
e WotC is the owner of both the license and original
materials."
> I believe that you said they get off the hook on the OGL because they
> orginated the license (in other words, because they drafted it.
>
> "[Steven Trustrum] Â I imagine, considering WotC is the licenseâs
>
> In a message dated 8/24/2005 2:30:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> That's entirely different from saying that the OGL applies differently
> to WotC when they use it. When they actually use it, they get no
> special treatment simply because they drafted the license.
Correction.
They don't get s
> In a message dated 8/24/2005 12:12:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Not true. The PHB has nothing to do with the OGL. The OGL is a
> licensing agreement. They don't need a licensing agreement to use
> their own content.
>
That's my point. The PHB contains informati
> Thanks for the info, Ken. I wonder if they used to do that, but I'll
> leave Woodelf to do the research on that.
>
> In any case, I think that the OGL does not automatically apply in full
> to all parts of a bundle. I think that it applies:
>
> a) only where is explicitly applied AND ALSO
> b
> And there's nothing at law that says the drafter of a license
> can ignore it's provisions.
In that case, even Wotc wouldn't be able to publish the PHB as they'd be
restricted to the material in the SRD and that has since been made OGC by
third parties.
There are obviously cases where WotC is
On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 09:31 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is anyone having reply-to problems. A lot of the posts off this list,
> when I click "reply" are set to reply to the original author instead
> of to the list. Is this a problem with the list or with mail headers
> for the individuals I
> In a message dated 8/24/2005 10:09:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Nobody is talking about licensing stuff from themselves. They clearly
> don't need the OGL for that.
That's not what I'm saying
> Woodelf said that there are OGL'd things in some magazines and that i
> In a message dated 8/24/2005 9:35:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Nothing about the license allows it to apply disparately to WotC as
> opposed to the rest of us.
Except that they are not a third-party and are the owners of the material
from which all else is derive
saw.) It’s entirely non-functional.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For
Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 24
purchased MnM and not just an ad. I find it very hard to believe that this is
how the license is interpreted.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For
Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto
> So, apparently several books sold bundled together are one work, but a
> single issue of a magazine is multiple works. Or Dragon is in a lot of
> trouble.]
Dragon is licensing directly from WotC, if I'm not mistaken. Dragon
doesn't need to follow the OGL or d20 STL at all because it is getting
d
> LOL. So are you saying you are declaring that as PI?
> :)
>
> And if so, is that "automatically declared" because it
> is a product name, or is that "enumerated" PI? :)
>
> Oh and are you declaring that as a part of a work or
> are you endorsing the "anyone in the world can just
> say something i
> By the way, I love "Canukistan." That is hillarious. I
> am stealing that, I hope you dont mind :)
I'll grant you a limited license ;)
___
Ogf-l mailing list
Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/og
> In a message dated 3/2/2005 12:01:10 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> If you disagree with me, find me a basic book on Contract Law that would
> go through the above steps and then say the result is not a contract.
I can't speak for American law, but my lawyer up here in
> In a message dated 3/2/2005 11:39:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> But the terms "offer", "acceptance", "grant", & "consideration" are used
> in this license. And it is a binding contract.
It is a conditional license with only one party identified by name. It is
a lic
> On 2 Mar 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled a note about Re: [OGF-L] Who
> can declare Product Identity (Thi:
>
>> The OGL _is_ a contract.
It's not a contract. Neither I nor WotC had to sign anything when I use
it. It's a license.
___
Ogf-l mailing li
have
anything to do with actual sales. All of d20 could be tanking for all MGM
and Sony cared, so long as the licensing fee was what they wanted.
Regards,
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
-Original Me
ublisher in
question.
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel
Marshall
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2004 12:27 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Ogf-l] D20 O
You cannot use it without a license because it is not open. Depending upon
what you want to use, and in what context, I'd suggest asking them for a
limited license/permission, though. You never know ...
___
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://ma
There's no actual requirement to ask. Even that, amongst all the scenarios
you provided, is more than what's necessary. Essentially, when "asking"
someone you're not so much asking someone as telling them in the phrase of a
question.
Steven Trustrum
President For
ness ethics just as I don't presume anything about anyone else's until
they give me cause to.
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Maggie
Vining
Sent: Frida
As a business owner, I'm hoping I act in a manner that doesn't require me to
worry what my employees learn of me.
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
I agree, which is why I refrain from voicing my opinion on the matter, but I
also don't like watching people taking cheap shots against someone who has a
valid concern.
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs out)
Misfit Studios
-Original Message-
From: [
listserv
considering this revelation concerning a GAME-RELATED organization. The fact
that Bruce decided to make a statement with regards to such concerns is not
beyond understanding in light of this and the "Fix Gama" ordeal.
Steven Trustrum
President For Life (or until the money runs
I’d strongly suggest differing
sub-titles just to avoid confusion amongst consumers, retailers, and
distributors. I’d certainly hate to order a copy of the d20 book only to
have the retailer thought I meant the OGL version. As for the legality, I’m
not certain if you chose to keep the exact
ntent are actually prepared to *do something about it* instead of just
moaning about it.
I think you'll find that most people don't have the means to do it, even
if they were all to team up and pool funds.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage:
http://w
At 10:07 AM 4/9/2004 -0700, Fred you wrote:
--- "Steven \"Conan\" Trustrum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 09:10 AM 4/9/2004 -0700, Fred you wrote:
> >But isn't the very idea of a FEAT a mechanic that is derived from the SRD?
>
> If I make a feat
of published products and how WotC reacts to them, however, and
it could just be that they've been slipping under the radar and my
interpretation is wrong.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.trustrum.com
"The only real people are the
At 11:26 AM 4/9/2004 -0400, Steven \"Conan\" Trustrum you wrote:
Feats are "derived" mechanics, and thus can't be closed by anyone except
WotC. The names yes, any fluff accompanying them yes, but not the mechanics.
Sorry, I should amend that: feats using new mechanics
ock down a large chunk of their new feats and
rules.
Feats are "derived" mechanics, and thus can't be closed by
anyone except WotC. The names yes, any fluff accompanying them yes, but
not the mechanics.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage:
htt
ust look like jerks if they try, but
there CANNOT be any official acknowledgement that it even exists.
Not to mention some rpg companies. There are some well known game companies
with reputations for stomping on fan material that is derived from their
properties.
Steven "Cona
ything.
I'm not trying to belittle the efforts done on that product, but I think you need to
be very clear on how erroneous what you're saying here is considering the people it's
being said to.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
g else entirely, so
all I can do is cover my ass by making sure I understand what my rights are and not
hiding from every POSSIBLE way that someone else might try to screw me over, even when
I'm not doing anything wrong.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTE
> intention--they just got called on it and knew they couldn't defend
> it).
Exactly. ANYTHING can be CLAIMED as PI, but claiming it doesn't matter if you can't
defend that claim.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.trustrum
s
worth the paper it's printed on. If the PI claim isn't defendable, feel free to send
me all the C&Ds you like -- I'll be sure to thank you for providing me with a means to
start my fireplace.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: ht
ne else's toes, regardless of the source. The ultimate
state of compliance is the bottom line.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.trustrum.com
"The only real people are the people that never existed" -- Oscar Wilde
uld defend that declaration.
Simply SAYING something is PI isn't sufficient -- you have to also be in a legally
defendable position to do so, as well.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.trustrum.com
"The only real peop
#x27;t claim those names as PI. You can't even claim your version as protected
if you made the stats open. If the stats were closed, however, it would be just a
simple case of copyright infringement. The names, PI or not, wouldn't be relevant.
Steven "Conan" Trustru
ng on your VERSION of the gods. Whether or not they
use your open system with a public domain name wouldn't matter -- they'd
actually have to infringe on your closed USE of your new system in the
gods' game stats, not the use of the new system to make their own versions
of those same g
claim as PI, with your OGC Hero System, but
you wouldn't have a leg to stand on because your PI claim to those particular names is
invalid.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.trustrum.com
"The only real people are the people that never
I'm thinking that I'll wait a while before I download the new SRD. I'd hate
to start work on something only to later find out that half of what I was
using were 3.0 files mistakenly left on the site, or something of the sort.
Steven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PR
teven "Conan" Trustrum
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage: http://www.trustrum.com
"The only real people are the people that never existed" -- Oscar Wilde
___
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
74 matches
Mail list logo
