Duncan Haldane
Explorer
The Sigil said:
Clark stated in other threads that he came to a private arrangement with WotC to use two of his creates from CC. This was not done under the OGL.
Duncan
(MM2) WotC violates the OGL...
- Thread starter The Sigil
- Start date
Clark stated in other threads that he came to a private arrangement with WotC to use two of his creates from CC. This was not done under the OGL.
Duncan
Nightfall
Sage of the Scarred Lands
My only problem with that (and I'm glad at least they changed the names, since the NAMES are trademarked), is that Clark WASN'T one of the developer for the book. He was just a producer AND the creatures they used were done by Steve Wieck I believe. Even so, it's MINOR issue and I REALLY don't care. For once it's just NICE for a book that's been maligned by some to have a DECENT recognition by WotC staff.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
Xeriar said:
First, names can be part of a copyrighted property, but that is a larger debate.
Second, you do not have to file for trademark registration to have the protections of most trademark laws (both state and federal). Merely creating the name and using it in commerce is sufficient to qualify for most legal protection. It is, however, easier to win a trademark violation case if your trademark is federally registered.
sheesh!
Sheesh!! The Sigil never said that the names were copyrighted, all he said (and has since been corrected) is that they released names into the OGC that they shouldn't have.
(note: this type of thing is called Product Identity in the OGL, and is totally apart from copyrighting or trademarking anything. Neither of those concepts have ANY bearing on his original post.
Mistwell said:
Sheesh!! The Sigil never said that the names were copyrighted, all he said (and has since been corrected) is that they released names into the OGC that they shouldn't have.
(note: this type of thing is called Product Identity in the OGL, and is totally apart from copyrighting or trademarking anything. Neither of those concepts have ANY bearing on his original post.
Gargoyle
Adventurer
Enkhidu said:
Makes you wonder if they'll do it more in the future. I wonder if 4th edition D&D (and no it won't happen for years) will have Monte's Ranger, Bard and Sorcerer variants, the best spells from Relics and Rituals, etc.
It would truly be worth the cost of a new edition to see them use the best of d20 in the official rules. Some have theorized that this was the long term plan from the beginning. If that happened, we'd probably get an SRD 2.0, which would have some weird legal ramifications. Ach, I'm giving myself a headache with logic loops....
Gargoyle said:
Not necessarily...
Linus Torvald has done quite well with the idea that he can incorporate open content code into the new Linux kernal, and the system of open content code has not changed to my knowledge.
It is possible, however, that D&D's 4th Ed will in actuality be the new edition of d20 as a whole, and that D&D will become merely the "fantasy flavor" of d20 that is produced by Wizards...
If you check out interviews with Ryan Dancey, you'll find that this was always the intention of the d20 license - they'd be able to grab good bits of design by other people and release it themselves.
There are two provisos here:
* They must keep it Open Game Content, OR
* They must license it from the owner.
WotC have chosen the second option (licensing from NG). The fact that it is released as OGC in the MM2 would be subject to that license, the details of which we are not privy to!
Cheers!
There are two provisos here:
* They must keep it Open Game Content, OR
* They must license it from the owner.
WotC have chosen the second option (licensing from NG). The fact that it is released as OGC in the MM2 would be subject to that license, the details of which we are not privy to!
Cheers!
Similar Threads
