D20 Future Trademark Usage

[philreed]

I've asked around and poked around and I cannot find official permission to use the "D20 Future" trademark. Yet I see several small publishers stating "for D20 Future" or similar things in their products and product descriptions.

If official permission does exist, such as can be found in the D20 System Trademark Guide for other WotC trademarks, could someone please point me in the right direction. And if it doesn't exist, any opinions on this subject?

 

[Ghostwind]

Have you emailed Charles Ryan, Phil?

 

[DanMcS]

It's not in the System Trademark Guide.

I searched the US Patent and Trademark Office website. It doesn't look like anyone owns a trademark on "D20 Future". WotC has the "D20 System", including the little logo. They also have "D20 Modern". Doesn't look like they filed for D20 Future, so those random guys might not need permission.

 

[philreed]

Have you emailed Charles Ryan, Phil?

Yes. No response. And it's been (roughly) a month now.

It's not in the System Trademark Guide.

Right. And that's where it should be if WotC wants to allow others to use it with the OGL/D20 licenses.

I searched the US Patent and Trademark Office website. It doesn't look like anyone owns a trademark on "D20 Future". WotC has the "D20 System", including the little logo. They also have "D20 Modern". Doesn't look like they filed for D20 Future, so those random guys might not need permission.

Unfortunately, the "The D20 System Trademark License version 6.0" states:

"2. License to use
You are hereby granted the non-transferable, non-exclusive, non-sublicensable, royalty-free license to use the d20 System trademark logos, the d20 System trademark, and certain other trademarks and copyrights owned by Wizards of the Coast (the "Licensed Articles") in accordance with the conditions specified in the current version of this License and the d20 System Guide."

In the D20 Future rulebook "D20 Future" is claimed as a trademark. The license does not concern itself with registered trademarks, instead clearly stating allowable use of ANY WotC trademarks.

So just because they haven't filed "D20 Future" doesn't mean that it isn't a trademark. It's just not a registered trademark or, currently, under application for registration.


Maybe I'm just worrying about this for nothing, but I'd rather follow the license correctly than find myself stuck dealing with a friendly letter.

 

[DanMcS]

Maybe I'm just worrying about this for nothing, but I'd rather follow the license correctly than find myself stuck dealing with a friendly letter.

If d20 future isn't a registered trademark, and it isn't listed in the d20 system license as one of the prohibited trademarks, it would be really hard for Wizards to argue that someone is in breach of that license for mentioning something it doesn't explicitly prohibit. They could try, and they have more money for lawyers, but they wouldn't necessarily be right.

If you want to be conservative on this, then yeah, you've got your answer already.

 

[philreed]

If d20 future isn't a registered trademark, and it isn't listed in the d20 system license as one of the prohibited trademarks, it would be really hard for Wizards to argue that someone is in breach of that license for mentioning something it doesn't explicitly prohibit. They could try, and they have more money for lawyers, but they wouldn't necessarily be right.

My primary problem with this argument is that by following this line of reasoning I can release "Monster Manual IV" next week. I feel there are some things it's safer to have spelled out than to just do without concern of the consequences.

But, I do want to thank you for discussing this with me. So far I've encountered very few people that even feel this is a topic worthy of discussion.

 

[Justin D. Jacobson]

If d20 future isn't a registered trademark, and it isn't listed in the d20 system license as one of the prohibited trademarks, it would be really hard for Wizards to argue that someone is in breach of that license for mentioning something it doesn't explicitly prohibit. They could try, and they have more money for lawyers, but they wouldn't necessarily be right.

If you want to be conservative on this, then yeah, you've got your answer already.

I'm sorry, but I think this is just dead wrong, and rather clearly so. It is a matter of general intellectual property law that you can't use someone's trademarks without their permission. Note, this is not restricted to registered trademarks. Trademark registration is essentially a matter of convenience (though I admit that's not quite the right word), such that it makes enforcement of the trademark easier (and gives access to an award of attorneys' fees inter alia). So, WotC doesn't need to tell you not to use their trademarked "d20 Future"--ip law does that for them. They would need to tell you that you could use it in order for you to have a right to do so. The d20 license specifically does not authorize it. So, you cannot lawfully use it.

I've been using "Future SRD" (which is actually a suggestion that Phil made previously). I think you can also get away with something like "Future rules for the d20 Modern system," but that's something of a mouthful.

 

[GMSkarka]

I've been using "Future SRD" (which is actually a suggestion that Phil made previously). I think you can also get away with something like "Future rules for the d20 Modern system," but that's something of a mouthful.

I haven't produced anything for Future yet (although I've got some stuff in the planning stages), but for THRILLING TALES, for example, I've referred to it as being for use with "Modern D20." The same switcheroo could work with "Future D20" as well.

 

[Justin D. Jacobson]

I haven't produced anything for Future yet (although I've got some stuff in the planning stages), but for THRILLING TALES, for example, I've referred to it as being for use with "Modern D20." The same switcheroo could work with "Future D20" as well.

I think it pushes the envelope -- but doesn't break it. Certainly, for pdfs I'd feel comfortable using it. Less so, if a nasty letter from WotC meant I had to pulp my print run.

 

[Dextra]

By the way...

Phil,

I've never had any luck with Charles Ryan with regards to license questions. After three weeks of no answers to emails, I picked up the phone and called Charles and was told that Andy Smith is the guy.

I love the power of voice!