> Christopher DeLisle
>
> Section 7 of the OGL states: "The use of any Product Identity in Open Game
> Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product
> Identity. " This says that PI remains PI of the owner even if it
> appears in
> text designated as OGC.
I think this is a contradiction with 1(d), but it might not be. Here's why:
The OGL does not assign ownership. If you write material and make it OGC
you still retain all rights to that material, and may publish it under
normal copyright law in addition to making it available as OGC. That's how
the d20 SRD works.
I think this language exists in the OGL because it is a special phrase out
of trademark law. Bear with me, because IANAL. Trademarks must be defended
in order to remain valid, and any claim of ownership of a mark that goes
unanswered will cause that mark to become the property of the new claimant
or, in the case of OGC, will cause the mark to fall into 'common usage' and
become ineligible to be trademarks.
If you place that mark in OGC then everyone can use it as part of their OGL
works, which would normally be a problem under trademark law. This phrase
allows marks to be placed under the OGC without such use constituting a
challenge of ownership, thus the owner of the mark is not required to defend
it, and the mark remains valid.
No matter what, 7 and 1(d) and 1(e) seem to be in contradiction, and one of
them needs to be changed.
> If this doesn't satisfy you there's an easy solution. In the text at the
> beginning of the product which defines what is PI and what is OGC, simply
> state what is PI first and in the definition of what is OGC say
> "All content
> in gray boxes is OGC except what has already been defined as PI."
That will work just fine.
-Brad
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
