Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 1157239" data-attributes="member: 10201">Um, where have i used &quot;D20 System&quot;, the D20 System logo, &quot;D&amp;D&quot;, &quot;Dungeons &amp; Dragons&quot;, or any other PI term or trademark in my &quot;D20SRD(3.5)&quot;?&nbsp; My work *is* WotC OGL-only, without the D20STL.&nbsp; I have very carefully *not* claimed my work is part of the D20 System.&nbsp; The closest i've come is that they *might* be able to make an argument that titling it &quot;D20SRD(3.5)&quot; is &quot;using &quot;D20&quot; as a trademark.&nbsp; Except that (1) i'm not and (2) i'm willing to go to court to prove that nobody can own the term &quot;d20&quot; in an RPG context, in any case.&nbsp; Since i'm *not* using the D20STL, i'm merely restricted from using a trademark to indicate &quot;compatibility or co-adabtability&quot;--&quot;d20&quot; isn't a registered trademark--and from using PI--and i'm not using any PI.&nbsp; Actually, the one thing i'm doing that probably *is* breaking the license is including the revised D20SRD's PI declaration, since i'm not supposed to include those words in my work.&nbsp; But i'm breaking the license in WotC's favor [without that reproduced PI declaration, it is *really* easy for people to circumvent it through claiming ignorance, by just using my work], so i'd be more than happy to remove it (and may do so anyway, when i finish polishing everything).Huh?&nbsp; How is making feat names PI [n.b.: they're PI, and thus governed by the WotC OGL, rather than closed content which may or may not be governed by the WotC OGL] in any way related to the decision to include rules for chargen/advancement [both of which are OGC]?&nbsp; I'm completely missing the connection.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="woodelf, post: 1157239, member: 10201"] Um, where have i used "D20 System", the D20 System logo, "D&D", "Dungeons & Dragons", or any other PI term or trademark in my "D20SRD(3.5)"? My work *is* WotC OGL-only, without the D20STL. I have very carefully *not* claimed my work is part of the D20 System. The closest i've come is that they *might* be able to make an argument that titling it "D20SRD(3.5)" is "using "D20" as a trademark. Except that (1) i'm not and (2) i'm willing to go to court to prove that nobody can own the term "d20" in an RPG context, in any case. Since i'm *not* using the D20STL, i'm merely restricted from using a trademark to indicate "compatibility or co-adabtability"--"d20" isn't a registered trademark--and from using PI--and i'm not using any PI. Actually, the one thing i'm doing that probably *is* breaking the license is including the revised D20SRD's PI declaration, since i'm not supposed to include those words in my work. But i'm breaking the license in WotC's favor [without that reproduced PI declaration, it is *really* easy for people to circumvent it through claiming ignorance, by just using my work], so i'd be more than happy to remove it (and may do so anyway, when i finish polishing everything). Huh? How is making feat names PI [n.b.: they're PI, and thus governed by the WotC OGL, rather than closed content which may or may not be governed by the WotC OGL] in any way related to the decision to include rules for chargen/advancement [both of which are OGC]? I'm completely missing the connection. [/QUOTE]

Verification