Trademarked Monsters

[Jergmo]

Is there a list somewhere of the monsters that are trademarked by WotC? I only know of Beholders and Illithids. Also, is there some way that said monsters can be used in literature without getting sued? I like to write stories about my homebrewed setting (which uses them), but I don't want to get sued. Do I need to edit out my favorite Aberrations?

[Mando Knight]

Gith, both 'yanki and 'zerai.

[RTGoodman]

From d20SRD.org (http://www.d20srd.org):


Q: Why are some monsters missing from this site?
A: The following monsters are considered "Product Identity" by Wizards of the Coast and are therefore not part of the SRD:

beholder
gauth
carrion crawler
displacer beast
githyanki
githzerai
kuo-toa
mind flayer
slaad
umber hulk
yuan-ti

Also, anything in a WotC Monster Manual (besides the Scorpionfolk and Razor Board in MM2) is not OGL content, so you can't reproduce them (stat-wise, at least) in your work.

[Mando Knight]

Also, is there some way that said monsters can be used in literature without getting sued? I like to write stories about my homebrewed setting (which uses them), but I don't want to get sued. Do I need to edit out my favorite Aberrations?

Do you intend on making any kind of profit? If not, it's probably protected under "derivative work." If you do, you could contact WotC and work out a licensing deal, but I have no idea on the steps to doing that.

[Thatguyoverther]

I would just rename them. The illithid was kind of stolen from Lovecraft anyways.

[Jergmo]

Alrighty, thanks. I'm sure I could re-flavor them and it'd work. I'm considering changing some of their aspects for the campaign anyhow.

[Kurald Galain]

I know several non-D&D games that use Beholders-by-any-other-name, such as the Gazers from Ultima and the Floating Eyes from Nethack. Let's face it, there are several original things in D&D but their fantasy kitchen sink (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FantasyKitchenSink) full of monsters isn't one of them.

[kamikasei]

I would just rename them. The illithid was kind of stolen from Lovecraft anyways.

I thought they were nicked from Larry Niven (the Thrintun slavers?)

[Jergmo]

I'm thinking of doing away with Elder Brains for Illithids, as they seem totally unnecessary other than serving the purpose of a BBEG which could easily be replaced. Possibly making it so that instead of morphing their victim's body, the head is just a kind of cocoon. Their icky tentacle-muck can form a sac or something. Apart from the name change, that should be enough, right? I'm not sure what all I'd need to do with Beholders.

[Thatguyoverther]

I'd add more tentacles. You never can have enough tentacles.

[Jergmo]

I'd add more tentacles. You never can have enough tentacles.

You know, it seems strange to me that their face-tentacles are so good at grappling. I would think they'd need larger ones to grab you, and besides, that would still leave your arms open. The Half-Farspawn template has tentacles that can be used for making slam attacks and grappling.

[Mando Knight]

I would just rename them. The illithid was kind of stolen from Lovecraft anyways.

And tentacle-faced Mindflayers are used in FFIV...

[KillianHawkeye]

And tentacle-faced Mindflayers are used in FFIV...

And tons of other FF games, including the original NES one. The original Final Fantasy was pretty much a D&D rip off, though.

[Lord Loss]

The book Epic (One of my faves) has Beholder under the smae name, with the same physical description.

[arguskos]

I thought they were nicked from Larry Niven (the Thrintun slavers?)
1. Wow, someone actually knows the Slavers. Awesome. :smallamused:

2. I believe that Illithids actually predate Niven as an author by several years, though it's close (IIRC).

[AngelOmnipotent]

Considering Lovecraft first invented the concept of Cthulhu and Illithids sometime in the very very early 1900's, I really think he came first :smallwink:

[Deth Muncher]

And tentacle-faced Mindflayers are used in FFIV...

SPOILERS. Gosh. :P I only just beat Mt. Ordeals...

What, you say the game has been out since the SNES? WELL FORGET YOU TOO!

[Mando Knight]

SPOILERS. Gosh. :P I only just beat Mt. Ordeals...

Not really. They don't do anything other than show up in random encounters.

[erikun]

Anything in a D&D book which isn't in the OGL/SRD is trademarked.

Mind you, there are a number of fantasy creatures which D&D monsters are based on - those are not copyrighted. Writing a story about a "Fleshraker Animal Companion with Pounce, Rake, and Improved Trip" would probably be a problem, but a story involving a Velociraptor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velociraptor) would not be trademarked, as it is a real (extinct) animal.


And really, "Mindflayer-like monsters appear in FFIV" is a spoiler? That's just some vague information about random encounters. :smallamused: Now, saying that [SPOILERS] appears at [SPOILERS] and then does [SPOILERS] when [SPOILERS] [SPOILERS] in FFIV, now that would be worthy of a spoiler tag!

[Forbiddenwar]

Also, is there some way that said monsters can be used in literature without getting sued? I like to write stories about my homebrewed setting (which uses them), but I don't want to get sued. Do I need to edit out my favorite Aberrations?

Note that Rich has never been sued or even been threatened of a suit, even with a beholder on the site. No one can copyright a name or an idea. WotC does not own the idea of a floating eye that shoot out magic beams from various eyes. No one can Own that idea. What WotC copyright own is that the text is the descriptive section of the books. ( I E the first eye shoots X, the second eye shoots Y, etc)They can't even copyright the graphs.
Copyright protects Original Fixed Expressions of ideas. Graphs are just numbers they are not considered original.
If it isn't original, fixed AND an expression of an idea, than it is not protected by copyright.

Remember copyright law is suppose to encourage the creation of new art and sciences, not supress it.

Even if you want to use a copyrighted section of WotC matieral, and even if it is for profit, it still can be legal under fair use.
Send me a message for more information, I have just spent the last 3 years studying copywrite law for a Master's Degree.

End note: the above response if for US law, other countries laws vary greatly.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

From d20SRD.org (http://www.d20srd.org):



Also, anything in a WotC Monster Manual (besides the Scorpionfolk and Razor Board in MM2) is not OGL content, so you can't reproduce them (stat-wise, at least) in your work.

But anything on the d20SRD website IS covered by the SRD, including a great many critters out of the MM1, and a couple out of the MM2.

Basically, if it's in a D&D book, and it isn't on the SRD website, then it's under the copyright

[daggaz]

And tons of other FF games, including the original NES one. The original Final Fantasy was pretty much a D&D rip off, though.

Dude, thats why it was so good!

*Puts on his "I survived the Ice Cave and all I got was this lousy Floater" T-shirt." :smallcool:

[Kurald Galain]

Note that Rich has never been sued or even been threatened of a suit, even with a beholder on the site. No one can copyright a name or an idea..

That, and I'm quite certain that parody is explicitly allowed under copyright law.

[kamikasei]

2. I believe that Illithids actually predate Niven as an author by several years, though it's close (IIRC).

I checked. It seems Gygax based the Illithid off a Mythos short story/novel (though not by Lovecraft, and not starring Cthulhu). What I was thinking of is that Charles Stross, when creating the gith, cast them as the slaves to the illithid's Slavers.

[tarbrush]

What book did he create them in please?

[kamikasei]

What book did he create them in please?

Do you mean Stross and the githyanki? An issue of White Dwarf magazine, apparently (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Githyanki). First actual sourcebook appearance was the 1ed Fiend Folio. He nicked the name from a George R R Martin novel.

[oxybe]

And tons of other FF games, including the original NES one. The original Final Fantasy was pretty much a D&D rip off, though.

i was watching my roommate play the wii sequel to FF4 and what popped out?

a monster named "mind-flayer" complete with the huge wizard robe, with a popped collar. here's a picture of the bugger

http://www.videogamesprites.net/FinalFantasy4/Enemies/MindFlayer.gif

i guess a palette swap from purpleish to yellow-orange is the only thing needed?

[Dixieboy]

Not sure if it has been said before but anyway:
If you don't plan to SELL the stories you write WoTC doesn't really care.

[jmbrown]

i was watching my roommate play the wii sequel to FF4 and what popped out?

a monster named "mind-flayer" complete with the huge wizard robe, with a popped collar. here's a picture of the bugger

http://www.videogamesprites.net/FinalFantasy4/Enemies/MindFlayer.gif

i guess a palette swap from purpleish to yellow-orange is the only thing needed?

Mind Flayers have been in Final Fantasy since the first game. The purple version of them were called pseudo-something or something that began with a 'p.'

Big Trouble in Little China had a "beholder" in it.

Wizards has a trademark on the names + likeness, not the likeness by itself. You can create a floating mouth with an eye in the center and disintegrating ray shooting eye stalks but you can't call that same creature a beholder.

[Optimystik]

SPOILERS. Gosh. :P I only just beat Mt. Ordeals...

What, you say the game has been out since the SNES? WELL FORGET YOU TOO!

Sorry, there's a statute of limitations (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouShouldKnowThisAlready) on this stuff!


Dude, thats why it was so good!

*Puts on his "I survived the Ice Cave and all I got was this lousy Floater" T-shirt." :smallcool:

Ugh, Vancian casting in a Final Fantasy game? Do not want.

[Riffington]

I'm seeing some misinformation here.

mind flayers are "product identity". They are not trademarked or copyright. I have every legal right to draw mind flayers, to describe mind flayers, and to make mind flayers breakfast cereal.

However, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, AD&D, the D&D logo, the AD&D logo, the d20 System logo and d20 are trademarks of WotC. I cannot label my game with any of those things or otherwise convince people that my product is a D&D/D20 product without WotC's permission. They give permission to use those trademarks to everyone who agrees not to use product identity without permission. Thus, if I use mind flayers in a product that purports to be D20, I am violating WotC's trademark on D20.

IANAL, but if I were you and really wanted to publish something about mind flayers, I'd include a notice that your publication has no relationship with WotC, and is not a D20 or D&D product.

[Ninetail]

Do you intend on making any kind of profit? If not, it's probably protected under "derivative work." If you do, you could contact WotC and work out a licensing deal, but I have no idea on the steps to doing that.

What? No. No, no, no, no, no. IP law does not work that way, though it's a common misconception.

In truth, intention to profit (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with whether a piece is protected or not. It might have some impact on the penalties for infringement, but "it wasn't for profit" is NOT a defense against copyright or trademark infringement claims. Additionally, "derivative work" is not protected... rather the opposite, really.

What is protected is "fair use." In copyright, this is not nearly as broad as many people believe. There are actual standards a work must meet to be considered, for instance, a parody -- it's not enough to simply claim it's a parody.

With trademark, things are even more strict, in that a company which holds a trademark is obliged to defend it. A company can look the other way when it comes to copyright, if it so chooses, but not against trademark, or it risks losing the trademark.

Disclaimer: IANAL, although I do have a fair knowledge of US IP law.