With the exception of the occasional passer-by on this list, I don't
think anyone is trusting the collective legal acumen of this list (or I
sure hope not, at least!). :)
-Tom Caudron
On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 18:05 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't feel anyone should feel secure in their li
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Tom Caudron wrote:
> Clark said, ""Terms" may not change, but enforcement sure does."
>
> The Prometheus project violates no part of the OGL of which I am aware,
> which was the implied claim of the original email to which I was
> replying. In the context of that comment, I
ginal Message
> From: Tom Caudron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Chris Helton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:29:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] Re: OGL Logo
>
>
> I've been notified of use by three or
TED]>
To: Chris Helton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 2:29:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] Re: OGL Logo
I've been notified of use by three or four people (some for multiple
products). My intent---and I've been a bit lax on ca
n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:16:43 AM
> Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] Re: OGL Logo
>
>
> Clark said, ""Terms" may not change, but enforcement sure does."
>
> The Prometheus projec
Yeah, I agree that is the danger of any license. But discounting the
sort of out-of-the-blue legal upset that could derail us all (and is
unlikely in the extreme), I guess all I'm trying to say is that
Prometheus is not particularly at risk above other d20srd-based works,
which was the original im
> From: Chris Helton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<>
Who all is using this, I don't know, but we've released five with OPenDie
and for with Prometheus. We wouldn't want to be without it. I know there
are others.
Mark Oliva
Webmaster, the Vintyri Project (TM)
Internet: http://www.vintyri.com
E-Mail:
>
> I tend to believe that amongst all the various lawyers all of us have
> spoken with, at least one of them would have raised the red flag if the
> terms of the OGL were somehow dangerously mercurial or if there were
> enforcement leeway on those terms that made them so.
No matter how many lawye
10:16:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Ogf-l] Re: OGL Logo
Clark said, ""Terms" may not change, but enforcement sure does."
The Prometheus project violates no part of the OGL of which I am aware,
which was the implied claim of the original email to which I was
replying. In the context of that
Clark said, ""Terms" may not change, but enforcement sure does."
The Prometheus project violates no part of the OGL of which I am aware,
which was the implied claim of the original email to which I was
replying. In the context of that comment, I have to stand by my claim.
Future kings in the Hall
> I'm as willing as the next guy to engage in wild
> paranoia (to a fault
> ), but it's worth pointing out that contract law
> is contract law and
> the terms of the OGL don't change based on who the
> CEO of WotC is. And
> if it did, then we should all run for the hills and
> adopt a new system
Steven Trustum said, "There's definately a difference in the prospective
success of the collective ownership model and the "choose an alpha and
the rest of the pack will follow" model."
I agree, but the Prometheus license and logo (the one being discussed
mostly in this thread) isn't a collective
Mark Clover said, "I'm going to point out that there are different WotC
people in charge of whether or not it matters than there were then and
there likely will be different people in charge at some point in the
future than there are now."
I'm as willing as the next guy to engage in wild paranoia
nt 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 Behalf Of Mark
Clover
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 1:19 AM
To: ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
Subjec
Mark Clover wrote:
I'm not convinvced. Shall we just leave it at that and agree it
hasn't been testing in court and won't matter until it is? We could
be at this a long time doing a dance of semantic variations and never
get anywhere.
I'd say no, because we know why that line was put in the O
This is why I also don't think a collective effort would work. The best
way I see a third party logo coming to carry any weight in the market is
by looking at examples where this has already happened. You have a
publisher with respectable market penetration build the logo for their own
use and then
Ah look. Just another example of "publishers working
together in enlightened self-interest." How bucolic
and utopian.
:)
Lets all put that crack pipe away, shall we. :)
Clark
PS--sorry, I wasnt trying to single you guys out. You
know I like both of you guys.
But I thought it might be an inte
[Doug Meerschaert] "It's all in what you indicate compatability with.
If, for example, SSS wants to say that all of their Warcraft d20 books
are both compatible and co-adaptable, the OGL certainly can't say
anything about it."
I'm not convinvced. Shall we just leave it at that and agree i
Steve, you know full well my mention of "negativity" was in regard to
your rudeness, ala - "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" (basically telling me to shut up if my goals
differ). Twis
uns out)
Misfit Studios
http://www.misfit-studios.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
416-857-2433
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark
Clover
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 12:21 AM
To: ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org
Subject: [Ogf-l] Re: OGL Logo
[Steven Trustrum] "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."
Not as such. The dis
21 matches
Mail list logo
