> The OGL specifically includes a line noting that rules materials can be > defined as product identity
If it does or not, I still consider it bad form to PI rules. (Game mechanics are noted under OGC, not PI--and there isn't a specific line outside of the OGC definition that obviously says "Game rules can be PI'd") A case could be made that a unique rule that adds flavor to the setting, or is otherwise closed (like the chip-in rule in Deadlands) would be a good candidate, and I'd rather have it PI'd than be left out because of fear, but I'd still rather have it OGC. More interesting hypothetical question: would a company ever actually be made to change their product because of wrongfully labeling something as PI? I don't mean something derivitive, but just something that can't be marked as PI... like game mechanics, common quotes, or real-world geography. DM --------------------------------------------- This message was sent using Road Runner's Web-based e-mail. _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
