"Ryan S. Dancey" wrote:
> > I write a derivative product, and reference PEG's HELL ON EARTH.
>
> If you indicate compatibility or co-adaptabilty, you're breaching the OGL.
Okay, this is the crux of why I keep getting confused. The relevant part of
section 7 reads:
"You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark
in
conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly
licensed in another..."
Remember that Section 1 defines Trademark:
""Trademark" means the logos, names, mark, sign, motto, designs that are used by
a
Contributor to identify itself or its products or the associated products
contributed to the Open Game License by the Contributor"
Let's say I use OGC from THIEVES IN THE FOREST, that antecedents both through
THIEVES IN THE FOREST and (eventually) the SRD. So I couldn't use any PI
identifed by Atlas or WotC in those works (no D&D, D20, Penumbra). But, in my
reading of section 7, I *could* say: "Compatible with VAMPIRE: THE MASQUERADE"
(since White Wolf is not a Contributor to the OGL).
Now, OTOH, if I used OGC from Swords & Sorcery, I might be treading dangerous
ground, since "VAMPIRE: THE MASQUERADE" might, arguably, be a mark that White
Wolf uses "to identify itself or its products". I might still squeak by, but
it's a lot shakier.
Another interesting scenario: I use OGC from the SRD, but not from any Penumbra
product. Presumably I could now say: "Compatible with PENUMBRA Products".
> PEG, if they sought to claim breach, would then look to the
> COPYRIGHT NOTICE section of the OGL included with your product. If the
> disputed mark does not appear as Product Identity in any of the works cited
> as the ancestors of your OGC, then PEG does not have a claim - with one
> exception.
Okay. So it is just antecedent works that are applicable.
> If PEG can show that you did use some other OGL'd source in your work, that
> did include the Hell on Earth Product Identity, you'll be in breach of the
> OGL, provided that your use of the Hell on Earth Product Identity extended
> to something more protectable than just those three words.
Let's build a slightly more protracted situation:
COMPANY 1 produces OGC, and identifies A as PI
COMPANY 2 uses COMPANY 1's OGC
COMPANY 3 uses COMPANY 2's OGC
COMPANY 4 uses COMPANY 3's OGC and uses A
COMPANY 4 would be in breach of the OGL, right? Or would they only be in breach
if the OGC that they're using is OGC directly from Company 1?
Compare with this situation:
COMPANY 1 produces OGC
COMPANY 2 uses COMPANY 1's OGC, and identifies A as PI
COMPANY 3 uses COMPANY 1's OGC and uses A
In this case, COMPANY 3 would *not* be in breach of the OGL, right?
Justin Bacon
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
