On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 17:26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Then how are concepts ever protected under the OGL as PI?
If I was Arthur C. Clarke, and the year was 1940, and I, out of my own imagination and knowledge of celestial mechanics, enunciated the "concept" of geosynchronous satellites and explained why their unique nature would be useful, I could claim that "concept" as Product Identity. It would be very difficult for a 3rd party to produce a reference to the specific "concept" I had enumerated that predated my own. It would thus clearly constitute an enhancement over the prior art. The problem of finding a concept unique and original enough to garner useful PI protection isn't a problem faced by the OGL; it's a problem faced by people who might seek such protection. The problem faced by the OGL is the proliferation of publishers who claim all sorts of things as Product Identity, either because they think they can, they have been told by their lawyers that they should "just in case", or they really don't understand the reason the Product Identity clause is in the license. The fact that WotC put "d20" in its Product Identity list is unfortunate for the confusion it might cause and the stress it may engender, and I hope they remove it, since it doesn't really give them any enforceable right of any kind. Ryan _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
