"Martin L. Shoemaker" wrote:
> Justin, old buddy... I respectfully suggest that you have confused "OGL"
> with "D20" (and implicitly with "D&D").
No. Its rather obvious that no such confusion is present. "D20" is a trademark.
"D&D" is a trademark. My whole point is that there is not trademark for
describing products developed under the OGL.
> OGL is about explicit permission for other people to derive from your rules
> work
I suggest you read some of Ryan Dancey's reasons behind the OGL: Specifically,
standardization in the marketplace. Take, for example, his favorite analogy: The
Windows operating system. Now imagine that Microsoft had set things up so that
people who developed programs to run under Windows 98 were not allowed to tell
anybody that they were compatible with Windows 98.
Or think about Linux. How effective would the open nature of Linux be if nobody
could refer to their Linux products by the word "Linux"?
> Well, as soon as we have an official OGL, I plan to
> type up and release to the world a couple of these: "Tilez" and "Take", most
> likely.
Well here you're talking about releasing products under a separate OGL, right?
I'm talking about products specifically developed under WotC's OGL (this was
both implicit and explicit in my message). Are you intending to release Tilez
and Take under an OGL, but prevent people from using the word "Tilez" or "Take"
in their derivative products?
Justin Bacon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
