In a message dated 12/11/00 6:06:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> If I can apply the OGL and the D20 agreements to "articles", then I can
>also include non-covered materials in the same book, regardless of source
>or their otherwise-impact on the licenses, and be safe. Like including
>an OGL version "article" of character generation in a book with a D20
"article"
>of the rest of the game and get away with it.
>
>Unless it specifcally had to be "article in a periodical."
>
>And, not if it was "an articile in a periodical, and all references to
>that article in that or any other issue of the periodicial."
>
The definition of a periodical is such that that can be twisted...weasel
words like these will only serve to A) confuse people and B) make it to where
no magazine will have any interest in including that material due to the
artificially stupid restraints...which will hurt the publicity effort.
>> And then there is the "review" of D&D which is thrown in to allow the
>use of that logo on the cover which gives me the cover art I want.
>
>You'd have to say "new D&D reviewed inside!", which is reasonable use to
>get people to buy your magazine.
>
I could say "See the new <insert D&D logo here> inside!"
And run that same capsule review (or a different 2 paragraph version) in
every issue.
>You'd just have to include a D&D review.
>
Here's the review - "I thought it was cool, and had cool pictures."
Now, you gonna try and define a review now so a real one has to be generated?
How about making sure someone doesn't run the same review issue after issue?
>> See how it can all be twisted?
>
>Technically, yes. Which is why the "reasonable man" standard exists.
>
Be honest -- how many "reasonable men" exist in gaming these days?
Don't try and over-define things or you'll create situations that are
nightmares for everyone except the guy taking advantage of you...
-Paul @ Team Frog Studios
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
