I have a spell called "Shot in the Dark".... It let's the target see at night as well as in bright daylight to fire a bow. I PI the name, but open up the spell. Martin you publish it as "Martin's Nocturnal Sniper Vision". A 3rd party gets the spell and looks at it and says, "hey, wouldn't it be catchy if this were called 'Shot in the Dark'?" To me, this looks like somebody violated a licensing agreement with me, but this 3rd party can claim independent invention and claim he got the spell from you. The legal safe harbor seems to shrink, or alternately the PI protections are diminished. But it looks like one or the other has got to give, and they seem mutually exclusive.
I don't think it "diminishes" the protections of PI, i think it illustrates what they've always been: equal to copyright, no more, no less. *What* can be PIed is broader than what can be copyrighted, but, IMHO, the protections afforded are equivalent.
--
woodelf <*>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://webpages.charter.net/woodelph/
William Safire's Rules for Writers: Don't use no double negatives. _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
