> From: Russ Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> You're missing the point. Dancey's claim that a "tentacle-headed > humanoid" mind flayer infringes on WotC IP is rather > questionable If I gave you the d20 stats for Chewbacca from the Star Wars RPG, but didn't give you a physical description other than something like "has long pointy teeth", and you gave me back a picture of a wookie, I'd say your picture was an infringement on Lucas' copyright. And I suspect the courts would agree with me (especially if you called it a "wookie".) If I give you the d20 stats for a mind-flayer, but don't give you a physical description other than "has four tentacles around its mouth", and you give me back a picture of a mind-flayer, I'd say your picture was an infringement on WotC's copyright. And, again, I suspect the courts would agree with me (especially if you called it an "illithid".) You're in an especially bad situation with regard to your image of Mind-Flayers, because d20 has a >defined term< meaning "generally human-like in appearance" (Humanoid) and a >defined term< meaning alien or monsterous in appearance (Abberation). As the game is strongly typed, you'd have a tough time making the argument that an Aberration should look like a Humanoid (or vice versa) >without< drawing on a 3rd party reference. You'd be subjected to the "reasonable person" test: Would a "reasonable person" spontaneously generate an image of an aberration with tentacles around its mouth that looked like an octopus-headed human, or would a "reasonable person" spontaneously generate some other image? Oh, and we're all friends here. Please call me Ryan. Ryan _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
