In short: They can put whatever they like into a Product IdentityYou forgot the qualifier, Ryan. "...enforing that declaration on a 3rd party _who is willing to fight the legal battle_ is probably impossible..."
clause, but successfully enforcing that declaration on a 3rd party is
probably impossible for something as vague as "d20" in anything other
than a trademark infringement case.
If an ambiguous statement that requires a court case to determine enforcement clutters the issue, then it's a restriction on the safe harbor, and thus a minor defeat to the "openness" of the OGL. It isn't enough for the GPL to be able to stand-up in court--the important factor is that FSF provides sufficient briefs to settle nearly all infringement and license violations out of court.
A competent small-time publisher who wishes to play by the rules and who has no malice should be able to successfully operate without holding tens of thousands of dollars in escrow for a legal defense. Thankfully, a simple inquiry to WotC is sufficient to calm the waters of the safe harbor, if anyone is really concerned about it.
DM
P.S.: My memory may be slipping, but I did recieve a reply from WotC re: use of "Dungeon Master." It's off-limits as far as they're concerned, and it's inclusion in the old SRD was a mistake. Thank god for WinGREP.
_______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
