QUESTION FOR RYAN OR WOTC BELOW: >From: Michael Cortez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> "These are super-intelligent man shaped creatures of > >> great (and lawful) evil. Their heads most resemble a > >> small octopus, with four tentacles which are used to > >You know of course, it's those three lines right there, or actually just >these few words "man shaped, heads resemble octopus" that people are most >interested in. > >I don't think we can state: > > Mind Flayer - Man shaped creature with head resembling octopus > >w/o violating the license, because that description doesn't appear in any >OGC, therefore it's derivitive of closed content, because as the arguments >here have proven -- it can't be inferred by the description provided in the >SRD...
You know, I've been following along this conversation, throwing in tangential $0.02 now and then, not really feeling it was too important. But really, now that you put it that way it really does seem REALLY ODD that such a basic physical description is not included in the SRD. Ryan, is this an oversight or is it intentional? Is it the INTENT of WOTC to maintain character copyright over the physical descriptions of these creatures? More specifically, is it really WotC's intent that we D20 producers can only (legally) include the actual creature BY REFERENCE, and never by description or image? Faust PS. I'm not saying that would be good or bad. I wholly agree that WotC has every right to handle it that way. I'm not denigrating the gift; but if that is the INTENT, then you (or somebody) can just say so, and we can all just learn to deal with it and go back to arguing about how to best mark PI. _________________________________________________________________ Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
