Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wicht" data-source="post: 6190915" data-attributes="member: 221">Because you said that people were asking for a trademark license of unlimited duration. The thread is about asking WotC to extend the OGL to 5e. The OGL is an unlimited license. I just assumed you were mistakenly conflating the two. My apologies for the error. No I meant that rules cannot be trademarked or copyrighted. Putting rules under the trademarked name of Dungeons and Dragons is not the same as trademarking those rules anymore than Coke putting the calorie count of their 12 oz. soda on a can with their logo trademarks the number of calories. And of course here is where the major disagreement in business philosophy occurs, but we've already hashed it out, so I won't do more than note that I sincerely hope that is not, contrary to your assertion, WotC's viewpoint or they are indeed going to slowly smother their game. The open market is already here and thriving and I do not believe that a closed market can compete with what I think is clearly a superior model for the consumer over the long haul. Namebrand only gets you so far. Eventually a superior product and superior services are going to win out. Open Gaming provides superior choice to the consumer (and the publisher if they take advantage of it) and is not going to die anytime soon, I do not believe.   Sure, but that's besides the point I made, section 8 still require you to note, in the publication which parts of the publication are closed and which are not. And closed content can be new rules as well as trade dress, IP, and what not.  That being said, I truly believe it is in the best interest of all OGL publishers to make as much of their game Open as they can. Paizo seems to agree seeing as how, in point of fact, they have released quite a few things that did not have to be Open, but they did it anyway.</blockquote>

Verification