On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 11:44:03 -0700 (PDT) Highmoon Media Productions <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ian Sturrock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Yeah, my reading of the license allows a company to do what >> Mongoose (or Rebellion, the Slaine IP owners) seem to have done >> here -- to prevent other companies from using a load of essentially >> public domain terms in d20 products by declaring the names >> Product Identity (whether or not one uses >> the game mechanics from the game system). > > I know some have read the license that way, but that doesn't make > any sense. If that was the case, I could publish an OGL product > with every word in the Oxford English Dictionary and then claim > them all as PI, thus negating their use in further OGl products > without my permission, which is, obviously, ridiculous.
There are two problems being conflated here. The first is whether or not I can declare public domain words as PI and thereby prevent you from using them in OGL books that borrow OGC from my book. The second is whether or not I can declare words (public domain or otherwise) as PI and thereby prevent you from using them in OGL books even if you'd never seen my book. Only if you accept the most extreme position in both these cases is the declaring the OED PI tactic a problem for anyone. But some people have argued for more limited readings that *do* make sense and that would still cause you problems if a judge agrees. Spike Y Jones _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
