On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 14:26:25 -0700 (PDT) Charles Greathouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Problem is, there is no good way to do a designation > > like that. It is either PI or it isnt. I guess a > > publisher could say, "...and the name Arthur, but only > > to the extent that name reflects an NPC unique to this > > product." I dont know. > > I'm reminded of "d20 (when used as a trademark)" from the SRD.
If I remember correctly how that came about, first WotC announced a list of forthcoming PI that included "d20". When enough people pointed out on this list (and I assume through back channels as well) the problems this would cause, the text was amended to include the "(when used as a trademark)" tag, which isn't entirely accurate but which gets the general intention across. Yes, descriptors or explanations can be useful in conjuntion with bald "these words are PI" declarations. Spike Y Jones _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
