SRD Question

[annadobritt]

I've been working on putting the official SRD into a pdf (complete with bookmarks, table of contents and an index).

I'm at the Spells section, specifically Summon Monster spells.

slaad, red is listed as one of the creatures that can be summoned with Summon Monster VI. However, the slaads are not in the Monsters section of the SRD.

So should the slaad, red be listed under Summon Monster VI?

 

[Voadam]

the full text of the summon monster spells have been released by WotC under the OGL. As OGC, it can not be revoked after release.

Since there are no stats it would not serve much of a purpose to keep them in, but somebody could legally create their own summonable creature called a red slaad, so long as they only used other material in the srd as the basis for its stats.

Someone also could, I guess, write a summon monster red slaad tactic into a module and not reference their stats, description or anything else besides the name and be within their rights under the OGL.

If your purpose is to create the full srd in a single linked document, then include it.

If your purpose is to include a completely self contained useable srd, then I wouldn't include the legally authorized but mechanically empty slaad reference.

 

[Mark]

Any creatures that are still referenced within the summon spells (or anywhere else) that were cleansed from the SRD monster sections because of IP issues are only still within those sections by mistake. They were meant to be cleansed from the spell sections as well and should in conscience be omitted from any work functioning under the licenses. It's not a matter of doing what you can get away with doing, no matter how anyone dresses it up to sound proper, it is a matter of doing what is right. The SRD is a gift and if it just so happens that the people at WotC have turned out to be as human as the rest of us, taking advantage of their stumble is no more in the interest of a third party publisher than it is of WotC. It does not benefit anyone to take a hardline on this subject.

 

[Flyspeck23]

And I'd say that you could never-ever use the name "Slaad" (red or otherwise) in a publication, because WotC stated that this is considered PI. That's would not be stretching the license, that would be breaking it. Nobody could " legally create their own summonable creature called a red slaad".

Not seeing the "Slaad"-reference while putting together the document is another matter. But the reference wouldn't serve a purpose anyway, so why not delete it?

 

[smetzger]

Thanks Mark and Flyspeck, can you provide links to comments from AV or Andy the Intern that support your claims?

I emailed Andy about this awhile back, because it directly effects my d20 summon monster stat blocks, and never received a response. I can only assume that WOTC doesn't care.

Also, it is possible to release your own version of the Slaad using the WOTC rules for converting older material.

 

[Flyspeck23]

Sorry, no quote from AV or Andy available. But I guess someone else on this board might provide those.


To your new question: the "WOTC rules for converting older material" are for discontinued old material only. The Slaads (red or otherwise) do exist from WotC for 3rd Edition. Same goes for the Umber Hulk or the Beholder, for that matter. You couln't just say "I base these on the older versions", because a) the monsters do exist and are not part of the SRD, b) the name of the monsters is considered intellectual property.

Generally speaking: I would stay away from converting old monsters. And it's definetly a "no way" if the old creature is also a new creature

 

[Mark]

Thanks Mark and Flyspeck, can you provide links to comments from AV or Andy the Intern that support your claims?

Nope. I wasn't telling you what someone else thought, I was telling you what I think.

I emailed Andy about this awhile back, because it directly effects my d20 summon monster stat blocks, and never received a response. I can only assume that WOTC doesn't care.

Ask on the OGF lists if my own position doesn't impress you. You may get quite a few different answers. It will very likely be seen by Andy (and AV) on that list.

Also, it is possible to release your own version of the Slaad using the WOTC rules for converting older material.

I didn't think anyone was more knowledgeable about the conversion policy than you. I've always worked with the OGL and d20SL, so I would have no idea.

Have you floated this plan past Clark? I think he'd be a good person to give you an opinion and I'd think your working with him in the past would get an email answered.

Sorry I can't give you more than my own opinion on this. It isn't a matter of law, as that has already been stated by Voadam (though I do not know if Voadam is a lawyer.) My opinion, as posted above, isn't law-related. I'm saying that despite whatever the law may be that it is not a good idea to take advantage of what is obviously an oversight by WotC.

Take for instance the recent events involving one publish who wasn't allowed to get away with their mistakes (no quarter, handled strictly by the license right down to book destruction.) Weigh that against those publishers who had some books in the pipeline with some monster names that were being eliminated from the SRD and retained as IP (they could have just been told to scrap their plans, but WotC made special arrangements so that the small publishers would not lose money.)

As anyone continues to work in this industry, they have to decide whether they plan to be someone who wants to ignore the finer points (regardless of the absolute letter of the law), try to find ways to take advantage of any leeway or accidents that might present themselves and be likely be treated as "difficult to work with" and not given any leeway when some inevitable mistake is made on their part.

Or...

You can understand that sometimes things slip through the cracks and it is unwise to pounce on them since somewhere down the line you may need a bit of compassion or leeway thrown your way.

Ultimately, if you get the chance to finally ask Andy you will get a definitive "yes" or "no" sooner or later, but I think it is pretty obvious that they'd prefer people not do what is proposed here and therefore (despite the fact that you may be able to "get away with it") probably better to spend your time on a project that won't be ruffling feathers.

Leave IPed names out of any third party work unless you get a special license or permission to do otherwise. At least that would be my thinking on it. Do as you will and I'll be sure to adjust my opinion if I am mistaken on this.

 

[Voadam]

And I'd say that you could never-ever use the name "Slaad" (red or otherwise) in a publication, because WotC stated that this is considered PI. That's would not be stretching the license, that would be breaking it. Nobody could " legally create their own summonable creature called a red slaad".

I think you are factually wrong here.

Could and should are two different things.

Once something is released as OGC that is irrevocable under the license. WotC could not, for instance, declare magic missile as IP now and forbid d20 companies from using it as OGC from the older SRD.

Even if they revised the srd posted on their site, it is valid under the OGL to use the original released OGC.

Note that the draft srd was not released so that can not be used, but anything that actually was released as OGC is fair game under the license, regardless of whether the releaser changes their mind later or accidentally released something.

Should you use it? That is a different question.

Mark and Flyspeck seem to be saying don't do it, it will tick off WotC which is not right after they gave us the SRD, and it is not in the interest of the d20 publishing community to antagonize WotC, particularly since WotC is generally helpful and friendly with the d20 community so far.

I agree completely with maintaining friendly relations with WotC and avoiding ticking them off unnecessarily.

However, I don't think repeating the full released srd in a document, including the slaad reference, will be a big deal that gets WotC worked up either way. Since you are just putting their srd into one document with links, I wouldn't imagine they would object. That said, it wouldn't hurt to ask them and abide by their preferences on such a small matter.


PS, please do not take my views on this as legal advice. For that hire an IP lawyer.

 

[HellHound]

At least one other company has asked this question to WotC directly regarding the Red Slaad and has received permission ot reference the creature by name due to its inclusion in the SRD in the summon monster tables.