Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Goblinoid Games" data-source="post: 4188597" data-attributes="member: 47388">I'm not sure if I understand your concern, so please correct me if I'm wrong here. The STL allows one to indicate compatibility with the d20 trademark (which has been poorly defended I might add, but that is a topic for another discussion), not compatibility with the numbers "3.5". The clause you quoted (it seems to me) refers to claiming compatibility with someone else's product identity. The term "3.5" has not been designated as product identity, and it is not a trademark. That clause from the OGL, as I read it, does not mean you can't say anything about compatibility in general. Only compatibility with PI and someone else's trademark. Of course you should just hire a lawyer if you want a better interpretation. Of course you can't say "RuneQuest" without permission, but edition numbers that are not part of a trademarked (and product identity) term should be fair game.Also keep in mind that technically, the clause only refers to product identity when we're dealing with nontrademarked terms. That means it must be designated as PI under the OGL, since "product identity" outside of that context is meaningless. As long as you are not dealing with trademarks, the issue is PI as defined and designated under the OGL.</blockquote>