Something else that this declaration of "d20" as PI does that I just thought about (along with "d20 system").
Now it would no longer be valid to include the term "d20" in any sort of marketing or advertising, include the back cover text of a product. This means that any company that creates an OGL product, that does not use the d20STL can no longer claim that that it is "based on d20".
That, in and of itself, poses a hard choice for me:
--stick to my principles, that PI requires some sort of ownership and you can't PI common terms (and, for that matter, can't PI knowingly-OGCed terms)
--play end-run and just derive everything from the D20SRD(3.0). Which isn't really a problem, since none of the changes that have been made even matter to me, really. I'm not working on D&D-genre games, so beyond the basics, i'm not even using much of the D20SRD (of any iteration)
Additionally, the website claims that the 3.5 SRD is a "revised" SRD. Meaning that it is an alteration of the original. To me this says that it is meant to prevent the use of the term "d20" in products based off the original SRD as well. The inclusion of a generic term such as this will definitely have major repercussions, even more than we currently can think of, I am sure.
Right. So, just in case, i'd like to make it public record that i have not yet, nor will i ever, look at the "revised" D20SRD, and i am therefore unaware that it has a PI declaration, or that that declaration includes the term "d20". There, that should cover me. :-b
Ok, seriously, what about this:
I work exclusively from, say, Spycraft, Dynasties & Demagogues, Mutants & Masterminds, Traveller D20, Babylon 5 D20, BESM D20, and CoC D20. Because those are the games that have content i want, and any content that i want from the D20SRD is reprinted in one or more of them. They were all published before the D20SRD(3.5). Even if they weren't, it seems to be illegal to reproduce someone else's PI [declaration] without special permission, so they *can't* inform me as to the PI declared in the D20SRD(3.5). So, i never even know that there is such a PI declaration. Of course, i include the D20SRD copyright line, but i'm not actually using it, i'm using just 2nd-generation products. In fact, this almost describes me. There's a *very* good chance i never would have looked at the new D20SRD, had people not talked about the new formatting on this list. The D20 stuff i'm working on has in common with D&D only the base mechanic, a few feats, some of the progressions (saves, attacks, etc.), and some of the skills. Oh, and stats for about 6 weapons. And, even then, i'm taking the feat and skill descriptions from Spycraft, 'cause they're better.
Good luck trying to actually enforce the new PI declaration, especially where "d20" is concerned.
Can A declare something PI when B has declared it OGC? Does it matter whether B originally contributed it to OGC, or A did?
-- woodelf <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://webpages.charter.net/woodelph/
The Laws of Anime <http://www.abcb.com/laws/index.htm>: #8 Second Law of Temporal Mortality It takes some time for bad guys to die... regardless of physical damage. Even when the 'Bad Guys' are killed so quickly they didn't even see it coming, it takes them a while to realize they are dead. This is attributed to the belief that being evil damages the Reality Lobe of the brain. _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
