> From: Michael Cortez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> OK, let's assume if we claimed Free20 as a Trademark that > WotC would have > ample reasons to litigate, and could possibly win. OK; though I wouldn't make that assumption without talking to a trademark lawyer. (In other words, I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that "Free20" infringes on "d20 System"). > What if we didn't claim Free20 as a Trademark. Here's how I'd approach the problem. Put on your "consumer" hat. If, as a consumer, you think something is a trademark, it's a trademark. So if I see the same piece of artwork repeated on a number of products, and there's a campaign underway to make me understand that when I see that artwork it means something about the product the art is on, then the art is a trademark. > Let's just call it a piece of Art, a simple Logo. That is, in fact, how the whole concept of trademarks emerged. They are, literally, "marks" used "in trade"; like the mark a silversmith would put on a candlestick, or a miller would put on a bag of flower, or a brand a rancher put on a cow. The idea that a trademark could evolve into a whole range of methods of telling a customer that something is made by someone is a relatively recent development. Ryan _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
