On 13 Aug 00, Faustus scribbled a note about RE: [Open_Gaming] Trademarks and Me:
> Oh please. Before you jump all over me go back and READ the Apple License
> - there is *no* comparison. The Apple license is reasonable,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Key phrase there.
> straightforward, and does >not< paranoically try to expand trademark
> protections. The Apple license simply works within the confines of
> current trademark law.
>
> But Ryan has specifically expressed the opinion that WotC does not favor
> this because the industries are different ... a matter of opinion.
The following is solely my opinion of how I percieve things.............
Correction, Ryan has expressed that WOTC's opinion is different. Minor
change of wording can cause big change in meaning.
Now, Ryan may also be of this opinion as well, but that is beside the point.
They are two different industries, that much is a fact, not an opinion. Just
as it is a fact that what works for one industry may not work in another.
I currently work in the computer industry, as a javascript programmer, as
part of a team that is developing what may eventually become a core
feature of the much touted (vaguely defined) Internet Operating System. In
the past, I have also worked for a software shop, which produces
professional tax software.
I have also worked (as a very minor freelancer) in the gaming industry for
several years now, and have actually had several small pieces appear in
books (I said very minor - and this was for only one company). As well as
also having experience on the retail end of the gaming industry.
Through experience, I can say that these two industries are, despite
superficial appearences to the contrary, extremely different.
Both software and gaming deal with IP issues and in certain cases,
trademarks.
Software has more leeway in how they can handle something, especially a
company like Apple (which owns a major OS). In their case, having a few
guidelines for use of "their" trademark works for them.
In the case of the OGL. this is extremely different. WOTC can tell you what
conditions prevail to use "their" trademark, and this is covered in the D20
STL. But, and this is the major point, they cannot detail how to use a
trademark by another company. Nor in the creation of the OGL can they
give free reign to allow different interpretations of the laws because by not
placing some sort of restriction, another company may come along and file
suit, saying that WOTC engendered an atmosphere that allowed or even
condoned abuse of another companies trademarks. Hence they place a
clause into the OGL which requires permission of the trademark holder to
use his trademark. Thus they cover their own backsides in this.
I can almost hear the choruses of huh?'s .......
Step back and take a look at the big picture for a moment. Who is holding
the copyrights to the license? WOTC is. This means that if somebody
makes a liberal interpretation of the license, and does something illegal
with it (such as violating copyright or trademark laws), and says that they
did so because that is how they interpreted the license, then the plaintiff
can turn around and sue WOTC for creating this confusion (though I
suspect a more distinct suit would be filed).
The following clause:
<begin quote>
7. Trademarks:
The use of any Trademark in Open Game Content does not constitute a
challenge to the ownership of that Trademark.
<end quote>
has a great potential for an interpretation meaning "I can use any
trademark, however I want without breaking laws", at least by the
average layman that is....
*************************
********TANSTAAFL********
*************************
Rasyr (Tim Dugger)
E-Mail:
Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Work:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
WebPage: http://www.rpghost.com/rasyr/
Last updated: October 6, 1999
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
