tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904133056957353312.post4989855405096241342..comments2024-03-01T11:52:44.729-05:00Comments on Bat in the Attic: How not to use the OGL.Robert Conleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03863009007381185340noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904133056957353312.post-82235159783495083552010-08-13T08:50:00.638-04:002010-08-13T08:50:00.638-04:00All right chums, I'm (back)! Let's do this...All right chums, I'm (back)! Let's do this! LEEROOOOOOOY JEEENKIIIIIINSSS!!!Todd the Viking Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09095270082622545180noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904133056957353312.post-13428658559572206862010-08-12T14:18:38.884-04:002010-08-12T14:18:38.884-04:00There may be a dozen reasons why they did that (so...There may be a dozen reasons why they did that (some may be even legal in nature), but I think the OGL was clear enough not allowing that.<br /><br />The question is if this will affect the whole OSR movement or it'll be considered a different issue altogether.Marcelo Paschoalinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05869301766211022548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904133056957353312.post-78986201608927545242010-08-12T11:02:14.306-04:002010-08-12T11:02:14.306-04:00Right. The OGL issues could have been resolved by ...Right. The OGL issues could have been resolved by simply not using the OGL (that Product Identity definition is a real killer—it’s basically everything the old TSR wanted to get out of trademark law but couldn’t).<br /><br />But man, when I first saw that cover photo, my thought wasn’t “what a cool retro module”, it was “did someone find an unpublished TSR module in their attic?”<br /><br />I would have at least recommended changing “TSR1” to “OSR1” and using the small text that TSR used to put on their covers as a disclaimer instead. Even then, though, there’s a difference between making it look like it was published in 1986, and making it look like it was published by TSR in 1986.Jerryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12518234031222836203noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5904133056957353312.post-33964225675993944572010-08-12T09:51:48.120-04:002010-08-12T09:51:48.120-04:00This goes beyond an OGL violation. Using "Adv...This goes beyond an OGL violation. Using "Advanced Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover (and without TM indicator), numbering the product "TSR1", and the familiar trade dress will run them afoul of the <a href="http://marklaw.com/trademark-glossary/confuse.htm" rel="nofollow">likelihood of confusion</a> standard. Wizards has to go after this guy to protect the AD&D mark, unless he has a license.Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12096724870715714696noreply@blogger.com