> From: lizard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 02:32 PM
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > In a message dated Mon, 9 Oct 2000 11:44:24 AM Eastern
> Daylight Time, Glenn Frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > <<
> > Saying that one "could" use filler text to get around the
> terms is not the
> > same as saying that one "would" do so. The real concern,
> here, is that there
> > are others out there who would do so, thus weakening the
> value of the d20
> > trademark to its beneficiaries.
> > >>
> >
> > But don't you folks believe that the Market would dump on
> these folks and cry bullshit? Bad product won't sell --
> Quality Product will.
> >
> I suspect the fear is that, if enough crap is released under the D20
> logo, then, gamers will not bother checking each book for 'good stuff'
> -- the D20 logo will be a 'warning label', not an advertising boon.
That, plus doubts regarding the average consumer really paying much
attention to what d20 is "intended" to mean. I see the average potential
customer noticing the d20 logo and thinking, "Hm. Wonder what that's about."
They will then form their own ideas as to what the logo is meant to mean
based upon the other products they see it on.
So far, the early wave of d20 products are all great, but if they are
followed shortly by a much larger wave of non-game products that all carry
the logo with little reason, then the logo itself will lose meaning.
Yes, the market will shun bad products, but the value of putting d20 on my
product is that the trademark will mean something to my customers. Devalue
the trademark, and much of the reason for my even caring about the license
fades away.
