So has the D20 STL been officially revoked?

We all know that the only source of information that the D20 STL was going to be revoked January 1st, 2009 was a single forumpost by Scott Rouse. I'm curious to whether or not there actually HAS been any revokations of the licenses today?

Even more interesting: what PDFs are still left for sale? I see Necromancer's and (your) Dreamscarred's stuff is still at the ENWorld storefront...

We will continue to sell our OGL material ad infinitum and we're working on updating away from the restrictive D20 STL. Expect new 3.5 and Pathfinder material during 2009.

So nothing official yet huh?

I don't recall an official official announcement, but the d20 archive no longer holds the d20STL, only the SRD and the OGL and related FAQs.

Yes, no NEW licenses are opened, but the old one haven't been revoked and thus you can continue to sell D20-licensed material after Jan 1.

Well the d20stl is no longer availible at Wizards SRD archive. But they might have pulled it when they put up the 4e stuff.

Yup, it went away as the GSL went live.

Angellis_ater said:

Yes, no NEW licenses are opened, but the old one haven't been revoked and thus you can continue to sell D20-licensed material after Jan 1.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested to see if they even can unilaterally revoke the license, technically.

The d20 STL has terms for revoking a license for a particular publisher for breach, and it has terms for unilaterally updating the license, but I don't see anything about unilaterally revoking it. Unless there's something in trademark law outside of the d20 STL that says the licensing party can just walk away whenever they want, I don't think WotC can revoke it.

So until there is a d20 STL version 7 that says "You can't use the logo anymore", I don't see any reason to stop selling d20-logo'ed material (well, except for GSL compliance like Goodman's DCC line, but that's a separate issue and only per product line).

kenmarable said:

I'd be interested to see if they even can unilaterally revoke the license, technically.

The d20 STL has terms for revoking a license for a particular publisher for breach, and it has terms for unilaterally updating the license, but I don't see anything about unilaterally revoking it. Unless there's something in trademark law outside of the d20 STL that says the licensing party can just walk away whenever they want, I don't think WotC can revoke it.

So until there is a d20 STL version 7 that says "You can't use the logo anymore", I don't see any reason to stop selling d20-logo'ed material (well, except for GSL compliance like Goodman's DCC line, but that's a separate issue and only per product line).

Click to expand...

They can, if they exercise their right of ownership to their trademarks. After all, by accepting the d20STL, you acknowledge WotC's ownership of the listed trademarks and not contest nor challenge them.

You could always bring the argument to court.

Ranger REG said:

They can, if they exercise their right of ownership to their trademarks. After all, by accepting the d20STL, you acknowledge WotC's ownership of the listed trademarks and not contest nor challenge them.

You could always bring the argument to court.

Click to expand...

If company A continues to sell products with the d20 logo on them isn't a challenge to WotC's trademark. Company A is operating under a license to use that trademark, and the terms of the license do not address revocation without a breach. So there is no challenge to the ownership since Company A is operating under a legitimate license.

But I think it'd be dumb to force the issue, especially considering how little that logo means now. I'm just saying that a forum post by a WotC employee isn't technically enough to end the license. On its face, in fact, it appears that WotC needs to update the license rather than revoke it.

But of course I'm not a lawyer, so there may be something in trademark law in general that allows WotC to unilaterally cancel a trademark license. But, it is not a challenge to the ownership of the trademark. It would be a challenge to whether or not WotC can revoke the license rather than update it. Within the STL, there is nothing addressing that. In U.S. trademark law, I have no clue and don't claim to have one.

All I'm saying is that within the d20 STL itself, anything short of a d20 STL version 7 doesn't prevent currently licensed publishers from continuing to use the d20 logo. Plus, I'm mostly pointing it out for the sake of theoretical argument. I don't plan to publish any d20 logo material (although I did "download the enclosed graphics" back when they had the graphics on the site, so technically, I'm still licensed to distribute d20 material). It's just that if you read the fine print of the d20 STL, there isn't anything in the license that allows WotC to unilaterally revoke it and therefore prevents publishers from continuing to sell d20 material.

Plus if I were a publisher that doesn't visit EN World, I would have no notice at all yet (I would be bad at my business if I didn't visit the top fan site, but that's a different matter.)

If nothing else, if I were a publisher I wouldn't pulp any books without consulting a lawyer first.