The SRD and Monsters Not in it?

[Scribble]

And how do I do that?
I don't believe that's the way it works because I've seen people screaing everywhere for a 'loth book and there's no one on sight.
But, as always, there's a (fairly big) chance I'm wrong.
Is there a place to send suggestions?
Or petitions?
Or whatever?

Thanks =)

I would say either go to their page and look for a customer service email link or just send them some snail mail.

 

[Scribble]

(I'm not a lawyer either, but...) Publishing under the OGL seems orthagonal to whether WotC's lawers could sue you. The OGL simply grants other people the rights to use and modify your creation. (And note that anyone can license original material under the OGL, without so much as referencing the SRD or any other wizards IP.) If the Jabberfloozy is close enough to the beholder that it infringes upon wizards IP, they can sue you regardless. And if it isn't, then using the OGL doesn't give them extra power over you.

Shrug... I guess it's the same question OSCRIC will be facing. Is it legally defendable in court if say you use the same number stats and powers and words listed in the SRD, but call it the Ogaly Moogaly, and describe it differently. (like it has mouths where the eyes would be...)

 

[Garnfellow]

According to Gary, Terry Kuntz came up with the beholder as early as sometime in 1974, about two months after he joined their gaming group. This "Wandering Monster Eye", I wonder if it had the same overall shape and powers?

I think the acknowledgements note to the Greyhawk supplement mentions Terry. My understanding (from a Rob Kuntz email, maybe?) was that Terry's version was more of a joke monster that was substantially revised for inclusion in the supplement.

 

[Henry]

(I'm not a lawyer either, but...) Publishing under the OGL seems orthagonal to whether WotC's lawers could sue you. The OGL simply grants other people the rights to use and modify your creation. (And note that anyone can license original material under the OGL, without so much as referencing the SRD or any other wizards IP.) If the Jabberfloozy is close enough to the beholder that it infringes upon wizards IP, they can sue you regardless. And if it isn't, then using the OGL doesn't give them extra power over you.

I say nothing about extra power, I'm saying it's more likely to get their hackles up. (Same way as if you are invited into someone's home and you use the opportunity to try and sleep with their wife.)

But think about it: The OGL and the d20 STL DOES give WotC extra power over a publisher; it's a tradeoff in that you can publish what you want with the terms that they designate (Alignment descriptors, spell mechanics, for example) in exchange for your not contesting their owndership of these things, as opposed to you asserting that right through publishing under NO license, and risking them suing you, whether they succeed or not. to paraphrase Ben Franklin, it's giving up a liberty for a security, one that give many publishers an opportunity to do something they wouldn't normally consider..

 

[Barendd Nobeard]

There has already been at least one product that attempted to replace the missing monsters in such a way as to not be legally actionable:

http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=4546&

And it's by EN World's own Mouseferatu, too.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

My bad. If that's the case, then it would be the ones who inherits her estate regarding her IPs.

It's an understandable mistake. She took a male pseudonym to avoid any bias against female writers. By the way, she wrote Quag Keep, which is, as far as I know, the first novel set in Greyhawk.