Dale Thurber wrote:
1) What are some examples of "derivative material" that could not beWell, anything that's derivitive. Unfortunatly, this is a topic that the law doesn't give clear guidance on--if it did, the OGL might never have been written.
declared Product Identity?
Derivitive or not, it's bad form to make "rule text" (text that describes a rule or game mechanic) Product Identity--and the more closely your rule matches the SRD'd text, the more likely it's derivitive and, form or not, you can't make it PI / non-OGC.
2) What examples of any company's Product Identity includeThe only thing that can be made PI is something that the company could make without the OGL at all. PI is a way to mark "exceptions" to an OGC declaration; it's not a new form of IP.
borrowed/adapted/altered material from the SRD, if any? Is this legal, or
is it considered "derived" and therefore OGC?
2) Would creating a product in a different graphical/physical format -GET A LAWYER! That's a highly specific question that you shouldn't be trusting this list (and defintily not ME) on.
taking text and creating it into a 3-D tangible physical product, but the
product itself is governed/defined by text specifications - in other words,
the parameters come from pre-defined rules in the SRD, but the product
itself is a different physical and graphical manifestation of those rules,
represented in an "original way (unique graphics and formats used)" - would
this necessarily be OGC, or could it be declared Product Identity?
Having said that, you *might* be able to make a case that your format is a "themantic element" that can be protected as different from the OGC text it conveys. But remember (and remind your lawyer) that the text is still OGC, and the harder it becomes to identify what's OGC and what's not, the more likely you'll be bitten by that "Clearly Identify" clause in the OGL.
DM
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
