Well sure, why wouldn't he? It's a flavor of D&D, since it's essentially based on 3.5 D&D.
No, I understand that aspect. IP wise it isn't D&D. I'm surprised being the President of WotC he'd make a slip like that.
Well sure, why wouldn't he? It's a flavor of D&D, since it's essentially based on 3.5 D&D.
So, he considers Paizo's offering "D&D?
Well sure, why wouldn't he? It's a flavor of D&D, since it's essentially based on 3.5 D&D.
Because that statement could be used to challenge the Trademark on D&D as the trademark owner is himself diluting the trademark by calling other products D&D as well.
No, I understand that aspect. IP wise it isn't D&D. I'm surprised being the President of WotC he'd make a slip like that.
Because that statement could be used to challenge the Trademark on D&D as the trademark owner is himself diluting the trademark by calling other products D&D as well.
No, I understand that aspect. IP wise it isn't D&D. I'm surprised being the President of WotC he'd make a slip like that.
Except he's not being quoted but loosely paraphrased. Can't be used for anything but forum melodrama.
There's a reason he didn't allow the conversation to be taped or transcribed.
Nope. It's a licensed product. Cannot really argue dilution by use of a licensed product, since dilution generally requires unauthorized use.
Nope. It's a licensed product. Cannot really argue dilution by use of a licensed product, since dilution generally requires unauthorized use.
Except he's not being quoted but loosely paraphrased. Can't be used for anything but forum melodrama.
There's a reason he didn't allow the conversation to be taped or transcribed.