> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Ryan S. Dancey
> Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2001 5:56 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Ogf-l] Let's Pause, and Take a Deep Breath...
>
>
> My own opinion is that a publisher should only seek to claim "Product
> Identity" for material that is A: Named something completely unique and
> original (not just a few common English words used as a name or a title),
> AND B: describes something that is also completely unique and original.
The
> point of Product Identity should not be to cut a wide swathe through Open
> Game Content claiming everything that might possibly be of value - it
should
> be used like a scalpel to clearly deliniate things with real commercial
> value.
...
> Now I have two caveats to make. If and when WotC chooses to add Forgotten
> Realms (and other campaign setting) content to the SRD, I wouldn't be
> surprised to see all manner of fairly simple common English words used as
> names designated as Product Identity. That may just be the way the cookie
> crumbles. With a multi-million dollar IP, you tend to err on the side of
> caution.
Because you are a multi-million dollar company, part of a multi-billion
dollar company. Similarly, if a multi-thousand dollar company wants to err
on the side of caution to protect their multi-thousand dollar IP, they
should do so. I'm sorry, but I don't see that scale makes one bit of
difference in this regard. It would hurt Gamer Bob far more to lose control
of and profit from BobWorld -- his one and only game product, and the one
that will make or break him in the gaming business -- than it would hurt
WotC to lose control of Forgotten Realms, as that is only one lucrative item
in your diversified IP portfolio. If you are going to ignore "the good of
the community" for the sake of your financial interests, you should not be
surprised or disappointed if others do the same.
> And in the case of Star Wars, we may be forced to declare certain
> things Product Identity even if we would prefer to do otherwise due to the
> rights issues with Lucasfilm.
>
> My other caveat is that for a new publisher creating content without any
> current commercial brand equity, opening as much of that content including
> proper names as possible is, in my opinion, a valuable and worthwhile
> choice. The challenge of creating something really new and unusual is a
> high bar, and I suspect that many new or inexperienced publishers who
think
> they've brought forth something the world has never seen before would be
> dismayed if someone knowledgable was to sit down and start telling them
what
> their work was "derivative of".
I kept these two sections together, because I know this list could get
distracted for days -- maybe weeks -- sitting down and telling George Lucas
all the things that Star Wars is "derivative of". "Derivative" and
"creative" are not antonyms. I realize that this complicates things to no
end, particularly in regard to copyright law; but the whole point of OGL (I
thought) was to set up a safe harbor where there was clear delineation of
which potentially-derivative areas would be considered licensed (derivative
or not) and therefore safe from litigation; and which would be considered a
violation (particularly in regard to PI) and thus potentially subject to
litigation.
> Designating something as Product Identity
> is the same as announcing to all the world that you think you "created"
> something unique and original. My advice is: don't do so, unless you
> really have. And don't assume you have, until you've had some very
> experienced >professionals< review your work and talk about the prior art
> it's based on.
"Immature artists imitate. Mature artists steal." Lionel Trilling,
_Esquire_, Sep 62.
But who are we to judge whether a work is immature or mature? Let the market
simply decide if it is good or not.
Martin L. Shoemaker
Martin L. Shoemaker Consulting, Software Design and UML Training
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.MartinLShoemaker.com
http://www.UMLBootCamp.com
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
