On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Sixten Otto wrote: > At 01:49 PM 1/24/02 -0700, Alec A. Burkhardt wrote: > >Your final sentence is more along the lines of what constitutes *clear > >identification* as opposed to *does PI have to be clearly identified*. > > Yes. The point I was trying to make was that if there is no requirement to > be clear, then vague identifying statements (or the assumption that no such > statement is even necessary) would be all we could hope for, and the > difficulty in redacting the universe of OGC for "safe" public consumption > would grow dramatically.
Ok, then you should be happy because there is a requirement that all PI must be clearly identified just like all OGC must be clearly identified. But recognize that a number of publishers feel that identifying PI with statements such as: "any locations, gods, historic events, magic items, organizations" "any stories, storylines, plots, thematic elements" meets the clear identification requirement. (Generally these would be included in a list of more specific items such as specific product names, trademarks, etc.) If these are the type of things you mean by vague identifying statements, we're back to the point I made about no one being able to define *clear identification by a reasonable person* fully until it's brought before a court. alec _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
