Art work is dealt with like any other art. Artwork released as OGC is OGC. Artwork NOT released OGC is not OGC. Regardless of whether it is derivative or not, does not matter.
It is very simple. Richard -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Weldon Dodd Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 8:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Ogf-l] Re: Open Creature Project Lizard wrote: > What about creatures derived from OGC, such as the Hornsaw > Unicorn, or > any of the golems? (The golems in CC and CC2 resemble 'D&D' > golems much > more than they do the golem of Jewish legend). Any any of the other > "adjective noun" monsters, where "noun" is the name of a > creature in the > SRD? If the artist could cite public domain sources for inspiration in creating the illustration of the Hornsaw Unicorn, you could make the case that they didn't derive from OGC and is therefore not required to be OGC. A closed illustration of a more unique monster from the SRD might not be defensible in this manner. I like your thinking. There are clearly some interesting implications for translating OGC from one form into another. I don't suppose anyone's imagined all of them yet. Weldon Dodd [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
