On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 22:28:33 -0700 (PDT), Hal Whitewyrm wrote: >Speaking of the new nameless spells, it has been >suggested various times that one option is to put a >note in a product where we basically tell consumers >that such and such spell (or those marked *) have a >different name but correspond to named spells in the >Player's Handbook. Or something to that effect. >My question is, is doing this kosher with WotC? I >assume it is, but just wanted to check.
My non-lawyerly guess is that you would be running afoul of this part of Section 7 of the OGL: "You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark." Melf, Bigby, and the other spell-naming mages could be considered trademarks of WOTC, even if they aren't registered or claimed as such. The note you describe would be, in effect, indicating compatibility with them. -- Rogers Cadenhead, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 9/27/2002 Weblog: http://www.pycs.net/workbench _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
