On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 20:35:30 -0800 "Michael Cortez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A spell that has been submitted to the D20 Exchange comes from a > book that declares all it's spell names as PI, and then provides > a license to use that spell name. > > The spell has the name: Shadow Weapon > > So, lets say I wanted to create a replacement name that would be > released as OGC, what methods could I use? > > My first method was to show the spell description, which is 100% > OGC, to my wife who does not play D&D and who is not familiar > with the spell in question. I then asked her what the spell > should be called. She replied, "uh, Shadow Weapon?" > > In this case, since the name was "developed" independent of knowing > the original name, can I release it as OGC? I don't intend too, but > I'd be interested in hearing other peoples opinions on it.
You could argue it, but it would be a hassle. > Taking it a step farther, I tried to think up a new name. Would > these be considered violating the PI statement? They are > functionally the same, and use the same "words" -- but are not > identical: > > * Weapon of Shadow > * Shadow, Weapon of These would be fair, but could be seen as tweaking the nose of the original creator (especially the second, which is arranged specifically to look like the original). Try Shade Sword or Umbral Weapon or Shadow Sword. Spike Y Jones _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
