>But nonunique spell names (i.e., "fire bolt") aren't necessarily
>protected by a PI declaration ANYWAY (check your lawyer, don't trust
Again, see my point re: recipe collections. Except for their sideline commentaries, instructions in a recipe are NOT copyrightable. Collections are. I presume that any collection capable of being copyrighted that is explicitly listed in the PI declaration section as being subject to PI is then subject to PI.
Note that individual units are not copyrightable in a recipe book. It is the creative selection of what does and does not go into the book that makes the collection copyrightable.
PI is worded so that it seems to classify things that aren't even copyrightable or trademarkable as being eligible for PI. So I see no reason to believe that people PIing collections of spell names are not abiding by the terms of the OGL.
At worst, as Ryan might claim, some of their PI declarations may de facto provide no protections. But I don't think that would make their PI declaration a violation of the OGL.
<And even if they're not, they're doing
something that's really rather annoying.>
Just because something annoys you doesn't make it a violation of the OGL.
Lee
_______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
