At 10:08 PM 5/3/01 -0400, Doug Meerschaert wrote:
>Andrew Crossett wrote:
>
>> There on page 18, Lovitz states: "Although you cannot secure trademark
>> rights on the title of a single work, you can for the title of a series of
>> works."
>
> From the OGL:
>
>(f) "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
>
>Comments to the negative notwithstanding, I would not feel comfortable
>assuming that the title of a book does *not* fall under this catagory
>unless I have my lawyer check it over and give me a legal opinion.
Yep...as I said, the terms of the d20 contract take precedence over
trademark law (or supplement it, actually) in cases where one d20
licenseholder is referencing the products of another.
Normally, a bibliography or recommended reading list falls under fair use
as long as any trademarks are attributed, but the d20 license would
prohibit you from referencing verbatim any PI title by WotC or any
licenseholder unless that title was declared open content.
>Since I don't have a lawer, and I can't afford to get one, my caution is
>based not on wining a lawsuit, but on not getting suied in the first
>place. It's true that I probably err on the cautious side, but then
>again no one's sued me yet. :)
My post was really more of a "hmmm...I found something interesting"
statement rather than a recommendation that people feel free to reference
any title. Nobody should enter into a contractual agreement without the
advice of a lawyer unless they're willing to take their chances (having a
lawyer isn't a 100% guarantee against trouble either, but it gives you a +4
competence bonus to your saving throw).
>> If true, this is something I never realized before. Assuming that revisions
>> and updates of the same work do not constitute a "series", that would
>> explain why TSR and WotC never trademarked the titles of many of their
>> rulebooks. Since there was only one book entitled "Dungeon Master's Guide",
>> they could not have trademarked it. By my understanding, though, they
>> *could* have trademarked "Monster Manual", since there was a "Monster
>> Manual II", and they certainly could have trademarked "Monstrous
>> Compendium" -- and did.
>
>I think this is yet another example of why this isn't a good idea.
>"Dungeon Master" is a trademark, and AFAIK so is "Dungeon Master's
>Guide." There have been at *least* three books by that name, and at
>least three "Player's Handbook"s, "Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting",
"Dungeon Master's Guide" would have a "virtual" trademark status because of
the use of the phrase "Dungeon Master". Whether or not "Dungeon Master's
Guide" could be registered separately as a trademark would depend on
whether or not the courts regard revisions and rewrites of the same book to
be separate works in a series, rather than just updates of a single work.
The three existing publications entitled "Dungeon Master's Guide" are
intended to replace and supersede each other, not to constitute a series.
However, they all contain completely new text and artwork, so --- who
knows? I'm sure case law exists that would straighten this out...time to
see Mr. Lawyer again.
>> Most of the time, however, the titles of game books cannot be trademarked,
>> although they can be virtually trademarked by including a trademarked word
>> within them ("The Living Greyhawk Gazetteer", for example). Such titles as
>> "Psionics Handbook", "Defenders of the Faith", "Sword & Fist" cannot be
>> trademarked. Unless of course you accept a license such as d20 in which you
>> voluntarily agree to treat those titles (PI but not trademarks) as if they
>> *were* trademarks, in exchange for the marketing benefits the license and
>> logo provide.
>
>I'd wager that Wizards can claim trademark on "Psionics Handbook" as
>it's the second book of its kind, and there will probably be a third in
>ten to fifteen years,
Nope...the first one was entitled "Complete Psionics Handbook" and the new
one is titled "Psionics Handbook". The exact same title must be used in
order to trademark a series title.
>and "Living X" is something that they / the RPGA
>can probably claim as well.
You couldn't trademark "Living X" unless you actually publish a series of
books called "Living X" -- there's no such thing as a "fill in the blank"
trademark (unless you hold a trademark on the word "living", which isn't
likely). "Living City", "Living Jungle" and "Living Greyhawk" could all be
registered, but not "Living whatever".
>
>Then again, knowing my lack of cash, I'd better not wager any of it.
>
>
>DM
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ogf-l mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
>
>
Andrew Crossett
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
