This Teri Lee person also does not understand the distinction between copyright and trademark law very well.
She writes, "Part of copyright and trademark law is the concept of defend it or lose it. So if a game, or fanfic gets published on line, and it can be shown that Misty gave permission, or had knowledge of the action and did not take steps to stop the infringement, she has not defended her intellectual property. The long term consequences of this could be that the entire book could become public domain and Misty could lose her ability to make a living from the writing."
Defense of trademarks is vital, but you don't need to fret about having a book (or other creative work) become public domain by failing to prosecute copyright infringers -- copyright just doesn't work that way. You have to actively and explicitly give something to the public domain to get rid of your copyright -- or wait until your death plus 80 years (or whatever it is now after the latest Disney law). And then, as for trademarks, a later Q&A states, "The contents of the books are copyrighted, not trademarked." So apparently trademark isn't even an issue.
In any case, I agree with Orcus. These don't seem like people who are friendly to the idea of working with game publishing. In fact, they seem a bit frightened and confused by the whole concept.
In many ways, they're wrestling with the very issues that led to the Open Game License. Fans are obviously excited by this author's work, and they wish to find ways to immerse themselves further in the world she has created. She is fearful of losing control of her creation -- she sees lost revenue potential (the lost potential of licensing fees), rather than seeing that fan activity as something that could lead ultimately to much more visibility and profitability from her core business of selling novels.
Consider, in contrast, H.P. Lovecraft, and his welcoming of other authors to play in his world, as it were. If Lovecraft hadn't opened his Mythos to other writers, would he be remembered today, or be as popular and influential as he is?
You can't really blame someone for trying to assert control of their intellectual property, though, especially in an era where the whole concept of publishing and the implications of rights management are thrown for a loop by technologies like the internet. As game publishers, we've just dealt with it more and had to get more comfortable, since an essential part of our products is the active involvement and creativity of our fans, as opposed to the merely passive reading of novels.
It would be very interesting to know if there's a correlation between fan activity/permissions/involvement issues and the sales of novels. For instance, in the Q&A it's mentioned: "And yes, I know, Robert Jordan and others allow it---my agent personally believes that is very foolish, and he will not allow any electronic use without licensing. No MUCKS, MUDS, MUSHES, or online RPGs." From what I hear, Robert Jordan HAS made it to the NY Times bestseller list... Too, Forgotten Realms novels are often bestsellers -- and they are in a world that of course allows the most devoted readers to immerse themselves in it via D&D.
Most novel fans are not roleplayers or online gamers, but I would wonder if the most devoted fans who do want to get this greater level of involvement become a steady vector to attract new (non-gamer) readers. The typical midlist fantasy novel is gone from the shelves in a year or less, and vanishes into the forgotten past...but an active community of gamers using the world of those novels is likely to generate a continuing stream of new would-be readers looking for the books that inspired their worlds. It could be that fantasy authors who are too fearful of allowing fans to play with their worlds and characters are missing out on a tremendous marketing opportunity that would pay them great dividends in the long run.
(Heck, would Lovecraft be half as popular if the Call of Cthulhu game didn't exist to bring new readers to appreciate him?)
)
