In reading through the archives, I found a message
where Brad Thompson seemed to be saying that there
would be no PI in the SRD. Wizards doesn't plan to
classify any of the spell names as PI, then? The
entire document will be free to use, redistribute,
quote under the OGL?
Also, with regard to PI, would it be accurate to state
that things like spell names, character classes and
the like aren't PI by default but must be declared as
such somewhere in the text of the product? I have
read through the list of things that can be PI, but it
seemed to me that the author would actually have to
say which things are and aren't PI in his product. In
reading through the legal notices in some of the D20
products I've seen in stores, they do seem to be
taking time to spell out which things are PI.
So here's a [fictitious, of course] scenario we'll
likely see in the near future, after the SRD is
released. Joe Gamedesigner likes what he reads in the
SRD, but he wants to optimize it for an Ancient Rome
game he's been tinkering with for years. He gets rid
of some character classes, adds a few, tinkers with
the skill list, adds some new spells, and so on. He
decides to make his whole product, with the exception
of the name, Open Content. He reserves the game name
"Gladiators and Generals" and its logo as PI. Anybody
else who wants to build on, quote from, and
redistribute his rules system is free to do so, but
they can't use the PI [the name and the logo] without
abiding by whatever terms he has set out for use of
his trademark. Is this how it'd work?
A follow-up question regarding the above scenario: If
Joe rewrites the entire SRD from scratch in his own
words, maybe throwing in language to give the document
more of an Ancient Rome feel, how does this affect the
documentation he has to provide with regard to the
"parent" work? A changes log wouldn't be exactly
workable, since the whole thing is in Joe's words. Is
it sufficient for him to say that his rules system is
based in part on the system set out in the SRD but
that the words, examples, and artwork are his own?
I've noticed that some D20 products on the market are
putting all the creature names in Closed Content,
while the creature stats are in Open Content. I'm not
clear on the reason behind this. It probably makes no
difference to consumers, but it renders the product
less than useful, or so it seems, to the open gaming
community. What's the use of a list of stats if an
author who wants to use the Open Content can't say
what the stats belong to? Honestly, maybe I've just
missed something on the rationale here, and if someone
can make it a little clearer to me, I'd really
appreciate it.
Neal
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
