> woodelf > > so far, everyone seems to be operating under the assumption that "art > doesn't count". even the Freeport adventures, which are "100% OGC" > have closed artwork. and some of that artwork is surely illustrative > of the content of the adventure.
That isn't necessarily a problem. In the case of an adventure, the author owns the copyright on any new material they create. If that material the illustration is based on is not required to be OGC by the OGL, then there is no need for the illustration to be OGC. Imagery depicting a fictional creature, a particular scene, or any of hundreds thematic elements are mostly likely wholly owned by the author. If however they create images of existing OGC that they borrowed from another source (such as an OGC description of a creature, or an image that is clearly based on the OGC Stat Block in the Monsters section of the SRD) then those images must be OGC. > the only place that artwork or illustration is mentioned is in 1(e): That isn't evidence that artwork must be PI, only that it can be. OGC can be "any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor" and "including translations and derivative works ". That certainly is broad enough to include artwork or illustrations based on OGC. -Brad _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
