On Sun, 1 Feb 2004, woodelf wrote: > If i put on my book "This game product is not > compatible with Dungeons & Dragons, 3rd Edition." am i in the clear > with the "no trademarks for compatibility/co-adaptability" clause? > Assuming this is a true claim--i'm envisioning a game book that is > derived from the D20SRD, but is sufficiently far removed that making > it work with most other D20 System products would be arduous, at > best. Thus, this would be a truth-in-advertising warning, so that > those who recognized it as D20 System (such as by reading the Sec.15) > wouldn't then just assume it was "same old, same old", get it home, > and be frustrated with not being able to slot it into their > Spycraft/Midnight/Greyhawk/whatever game. > > Yes, i'm aware that this would also be sneaky backhanded advertising, > using someone else's trademark to possibly get the customer's > attention. But is it forbidden by the letter of the WotC OGL?
If someone tried to get on your case, accusing you of breaching the compatability claims clause, you'd have to be able to prove incompatability in order for this argument to hold up. That would probably mean that the system would not only have to be different from all other D20 System games, but *more* different than all the games that are assumed to be compatible with D&D no matter how variant they are. If your game is only at the same level of incompatability as, say, the Scarred Lands, then it's really more compatable than incompatible. If there was a numerical method for measuring compatability, your game would have to have a score of less than 50% compatible in order for you to be able to argue that your incompatability claim doesn't breach Section 7. Spike Y Jones, tongue only partly in cheek _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
