Azzy
KMF DM
Given that the Willow TV series isn't getting a second season... maybe not.
WotC WotC doesn’t own the trademark for Mind Flayer
- Thread starter overgeeked
- Start date
EzekielRaiden
Legend
I get that this is a joke, but properly speaking, I'm pretty sure that symbol actually belongs to the government which enforces said rules. (Which makes me wonder what symbols are used in other languages with different script...)
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
In terms of Star Wars, the Wookieepedia page for the mind flayer doesn't have references to any other shows.
Paul Farquhar
Legend
Actually, they have backpeddled on that a bit. I suspect they are waiting to see if it can pick up a bit of slipstream from Honour amongst Thieves.
bedir than
Hero
Oh, link?
Burt Baccara
Explorer
Doubt it. Part of the reason Dave Arneson left was that he would not sign an employee agreement that purportedly included an onerous work-for-hire clause. Kask would have been asked to sign the contract, no?
Burt Baccara
Explorer
Turns out it was not the first time the Mind Flayer device was mentioned. It was mentioned by Kara Dune in Chapter 8: Redemption.
Then there is the tentacled, brain-bending, Mairan. One named Bor Gullet appeared in the film Rogue One. Another showed up in the comic Doctor Aphra #21.
In the former, we have use of the name for a brain-destroying machine, and in the latter a brain-bending tentacled creature.
This is 100% speculative fan fiction of how I imagine part of this going down:
Kara Dune in Chapter 8: Redemption mentions a "Mind Flayer" on December 27, 2019, it could be the Mairan depiction started it, or a combination.
D&D Franchise Team: Hey, we own that name, you know Stranger Things pays us to use it, you need to work with us to use that. (People keep maintaining Stranger Things licensed it, though there is zero press or statements from either party to back that up, but for this, I'll go with it).
Disney Legal (internally): Checks trademark registry.
Disney Legal to Wotc: "No."
D&D Franchise Team (internally): They are taking our IP! We need to stop this kind of thing.
WotC Licensing Team (internally): Hello no they don't! See, we keep telling you all this OGL stuff is wack. Open Source is so last decade, even in software when it comes to corporations.
I then picture the WotC Licensing Team and Disney Legal doing a dance of WotC saying "well how about this contract or license," and Disney replying "nope," every time.
All of this stocked part of the OGL debacle, making Kyle Brink's mention of the fear of large corporations stealing D&D IP factual, though still weird to connect to the OGL.
I also see the Star Wars creative getting wind of all of this at some corporate confab and going, "oh, that bothers them, they do know this is Star Wars, we love D&D and there is nothing more Star Wars than making call outs like this, so...let's do it again!"
One more time, this is just what I imagine in my head.
The Bulette was one of the first monsters to appear in the strategic review/Dragon. For several years, TSR only got one time publishing rights. Nothing was kept track of very well and it is impossible to know for sure who owns what rights. It’s the reason WotC came under a lot of fire when they released the digital cd rom package of the first 250 issues of dragon, and why the haven’t done anything like that since. A lot of that content belongs to the creators, not WotC.
For the Bulette, Tim says he technically still owns the rights to. For that reason. He’s just never called TSR/WotC on it.
Burt Baccara
Explorer
That was for rules design, not employees. They switched to work for hire for work from employees right quick. Tim has mentioned he does not have rights to it in his videos.
I talked to him not a couple months ago, and he does have the rights. He thinks he won’t win in court because he hasn’t pressed it over the years. I think he’s mistaken on that because I don’t think failure to press copyright in the past automatically means he loses it. But as of a couple months ago, he said he still holds the rights.
My conversation with Ray Winnger pretty much backed it up (not Tim’s specific case, but in general)
Burt Baccara
Explorer
Copyright has a three-year statute of limitation.
I'm no expert on copyright law, but I'm damn sure copyright lasts longer than three years.
There appears to be a three-year statute of limitations on copyright infringement, but that still puts WotC on the hook for every Monster Manual they've sold in the last three years. And then there's D&D Beyond subs, which I have no idea how you'd even begin to assess.
Last edited:
AnotherGuy
Hero
Disney Plus’ Willow isn’t canceled, just paused for at least a year, says producer
Jon Kasdan says reports of the show’s death are greatly exaggerated
www.polygon.com
Paul Farquhar
Legend
Not automatically, no, but it very much weakens it.
Really the idea that someone definitely and indisputably owns an IP is plain wrong. there is no black and white, only grey.
Rabulias
the Incomparably Shrewd and Clever
Eh, i think this is wishful thinking by the executive producer of the show. Disney is not walking back their cancellation waiting to see how the D&D movie performs. I will be very surprised if we see further seasons of Willow, and you can all point and laugh at me if we do.Disney Plus’ Willow isn’t canceled, just paused for at least a year, says producer
Jon Kasdan says reports of the show’s death are greatly exaggerated
In the real world the calendar marches on, but on the Internet (if you're old enough) we've been in Eternal September since 1993.
(Back in the day the internet was mostly academics - September was when the new students would show up with their school accounts and things would be nuts for a while on Usenet until they learned the culture. Then in '93 the major BBS providers like AOL and Delphi became ISPs and, well, that was the year that September never ended.)
Similar Threads
