No, I understand that aspect. IP wise it isn't D&D. I'm surprised being the President of WotC he'd make a slip like that.
My phone call with Creg Leeds
No, I understand that aspect. IP wise it isn't D&D. I'm surprised being the President of WotC he'd make a slip like that.
Brown Jenkin
First Post
Because that statement could be used to challenge the Trademark on D&D as the trademark owner is himself diluting the trademark by calling other products D&D as well.
That was my thought but I'm not an IP atty. I just know that as a business exec I wouldn't refer to another company's product as my TMed product.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Nope. It's a licensed product. Cannot really argue dilution by use of a licensed product, since dilution generally requires unauthorized use.
Except he's not being quoted but loosely paraphrased. Can't be used for anything but forum melodrama.
There's a reason he didn't allow the conversation to be taped or transcribed.
It just shows he's not a seasoned exec when it comes to interviews, recorded or not.
From the legal standpoint, yes, as it is a D20 lic. From a mktg/PR standpoint it isn't bright since he is trying to sunset prior editions and the game he was referring to is a 3.x compatible game.
Yawn...
That are pretty unimpressive answers. I mean, what else could he have said besides "4E is going well, all the criticism doesn't bother us as it is a minority, pulling PDFs was no mistake which we have to correct.
Those answer don't contain any information and are just generic corp speak.
That are pretty unimpressive answers. I mean, what else could he have said besides "4E is going well, all the criticism doesn't bother us as it is a minority, pulling PDFs was no mistake which we have to correct.
Those answer don't contain any information and are just generic corp speak.
Brown Jenkin
First Post
It's a licensed d20 system product, not a licensed D&D product. I would love it if Pathfinder was a licensed D&D product.
Dillution doesn't require unauthorized use. Consumers calling all facial tissues "Klennex", People refering to making "Xerox" coppies, and People "Hoovering" their rugs all dilute those trademarks. There is no other product using those terms in their products or advertising, the only unauthorized use is the consumers regularly missusing the brand names when refering to something else. I suppose consumers could be sued for trademark violations but that would be stupid.
And that is Greg Leeds real defense.
