On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 08:07:59PM +0100, David Shepheard wrote: > I actually think that Mark's "Open Game Content" logo is a better sounding > name that is more likely to be recognised by gamers, but as this is a term > used in the OGL can Wizards of the Coast say that it is their intellectual > property?
That is a very good question. I'm not a lawyer, but here is my opinion. A trademark must identify a saleable product (typically in interstate commerce). As WotC is not using "Open Game Content" as a product identity, I doubt it would qualify for a trademark. However, "Open Game Content" is a service that Hasbro provides, so it may qualify for a service mark. Finally, WotC is very careful to indicate which intellectual properties they claim as far as trademarks and copyrights. I've never seen them claim "Open Game Content" as an intellectual property. > BTW: Mark - For some reason I couldn't get your Open Game Content logo to > come up on your web page. I don't know if I was having a problem with your > style sheet. I hacked your HTML to get a direct link to the JPG file and it > looked pretty good Thanks for letting me know. I'll debug that. > (although I think that it would be good to have an icosahedron within the > logo if you could add one without WotC eating your children ;-) ). Well, I've certainly learned that there isn't a standard "Open Game" logo which the Open Gaming Foundation (OGF) has recognized. I don't know who is on or who owns the OGF, but may I suggest that the OGF sponsor a logo competition? The winning logo would then become the official open game logo recognized by the OGF. What do you say? I'll even add an icosahedron to my logo to see if you like it better that way. Mark _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
