Erotic Adventures, "Third party sexy adventure rules for 5th edition Dungeons and Dragons," now on Kickstarter!

[Alzrius]

Rysky wrote:

Did some more digging and while KoK was not made under the GSL that may have been due to WotC not wanting to go after Kenzer again due to the earlier settlement with Kenzer revolving around the KatDT strips.

It's worth noting that this is extremely speculative, with nothing to back it up.

Likewise, this doesn't explain why the original Kingdoms of Kalamar was never targeted by TSR:

David S. Kenzer wrote:

We sold Kalamar from 94-2001. A dozen or more products. never once did even litigious TSR send a letter. Let alone WoTC themselves (who, IIRC, got their start by making 3rd party product for Palladium games).

[Alzrius]

Jurassic Pratt wrote:

I'll disagree with your assertion that its "victim blaming" to blame an entity for not taking the cautious legal route.

You should take the legally cautious route when you're already taking a significant amount of public funding. In fact, I'd argue that you have an obligation to your backers to do so. Not doing so is reckless and your backers have every right to be upset at you.

Of course, you're free to disagree.

TOZ wrote:

And will.

And do. Or is that "does"? ;)

Don't get me wrong, I think that the safer choice is the more preferable one, but if you're still doing nothing wrong and someone targets you with litigation anyway, well, that's not your fault. You've still done nothing wrong.

[Jurassic Pratt]

Fair enough. Blame in a non-legal sense is pure opinion anyways :)

[Gorbacz]

I've just witnessed a funny little case here in Poland where a small startup was producing high-end lemonade branded, wait for it, "JOHN LEMON".

They were quite succesful. They registered the trademark in Poland and in Alicante (the EU's trademark authority is located there).

Then Yoko Ono came along and threatened to sue over violation of the "JOHN LENNON" trademark. Before an European court, more precisely, a Dutch one (it's a long story as to why, but the Netherlands is very much a typical Yurpeen jurisdiction without all those crazy punitive damages shenanigans of US law).

Were they OK to use the branding? Was that an infringement of trademark? Is lemonade sufficiently different from a dead Beatle? Is selling soft drinks competetive to selling music and other artwork? We'll never know, because the boys tallied up the legal costs and threw the towel in. They're rebranding to "On Lemon".

So you could walk over to them and say that yes, you think that they were perfectly fine and that there's no way some salty widow can win this in court, but it still doesn't matter if you were right, it matters what the ROI was. For the plucky Polish lemonadeers, it obviously wasn't, so they walked away and are likely now cursing their decision to ever get close to anything trademarked in the first place.

[Rysky]

Alzrius wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Did some more digging and while KoK was not made under the GSL that may have been due to WotC not wanting to go after Kenzer again due to the earlier settlement with Kenzer revolving around the KatDT strips.

It's worth noting that this is extremely speculative, with nothing to back it up.

Likewise, this doesn't explain why the original Kingdoms of Kalamar was never targeted by TSR:

David S. Kenzer wrote:

We sold Kalamar from 94-2001. A dozen or more products. never once did even litigious TSR send a letter. Let alone WoTC themselves (who, IIRC, got their start by making 3rd party product for Palladium games).

Speculative, but also explanatory, especially since upon further reading I found out Kenzer is a Lawyer with heavy knowledge of trademark law and thus knew the exact right thing to do and not do and to say and not say.

[Alzrius]

Gorbacz wrote:

I've just witnessed a funny little case here in Poland where a small startup was producing high-end lemonade branded, wait for it, "JOHN LEMON".

They were quite succesfull. They registered the trademark in Poland and in Alicante (the EU's trademark authority is located there).

Then Yoko Ono came along and threatened to sue over violation of the "JOHN LENNON" trademark. Before an European court, more precisely, a Dutch one (it's a long story as to why, but the Netherlands is very much a typical Yurpeen jurisdiction without all those crazy punitive damages shenanigans of US law).

Were they OK to use the branding? Was that an infringement of trademark? Is lemonade sufficiently different from a dead Beatle? Is selling soft drinks competetive to selling music and other artwork? We'll never know, because the boys tallied up the legal costs and threw the towel in. They're rebranding to "On Lemon".

So you could walk over to them and say that yes, you think that they were perfectly fine and that there's no way some salty widow can win this in court, but it still doesn't matter if you were right, it matters what the ROI was. For the plucky Polish lemonadeers, it obviously wasn't, so they walked away and are likely now cursing their decision to ever get close to anything trademarked in the first place.

Which is to say, they were completely right on the law, but caved because the other side could afford to bring expensive and time-consuming litigation against them to the point where they'd be bankrupt long before the case ever got anywhere near a conclusion. And that's absolutely right; indeed, it's one of the more common ways that the court system is abused to let corporations and individuals with deep pockets get their way regardless of the merits of their suit. That's certainly a possibility here (and in almost anything else). But that has very little relation, as you've noted, to the legalities of the suit itself.

[Alzrius]

Rysky wrote:

Speculative, but also explanatory, especially since upon further reading I found out Kenzer is a Lawyer with heavy knowledge of trademark law and thus knew the exact right thing to do and not do and to say and not say.

It's no less speculative, or more explanatory, than saying that WotC chose not to go after them because they knew that they (Kenzer) were completely right, and didn't want to fight a losing battle against a company that had their own resources to bring to bear.

Likewise, yeah, David S. Kenzer is indeed an IP attorney. Hence why he could so confidently say what he did...which is the same thing that I'm saying now.

[Leg o' Lamb]

Gorbacz wrote:

I've just witnessed a funny little case here in Poland where a small startup was producing high-end lemonade branded, wait for it, "JOHN LEMON".

They were quite succesful. They registered the trademark in Poland and in Alicante (the EU's trademark authority is located there).

Then Yoko Ono came along and threatened to sue over violation of the "JOHN LENNON" trademark. Before an European court, more precisely, a Dutch one (it's a long story as to why, but the Netherlands is very much a typical Yurpeen jurisdiction without all those crazy punitive damages shenanigans of US law).

Were they OK to use the branding? Was that an infringement of trademark? Is lemonade sufficiently different from a dead Beatle? Is selling soft drinks competetive to selling music and other artwork? We'll never know, because the boys tallied up the legal costs and threw the towel in. They're rebranding to "On Lemon".

So you could walk over to them and say that yes, you think that they were perfectly fine and that there's no way some salty widow can win this in court, but it still doesn't matter if you were right, it matters what the ROI was. For the plucky Polish lemonadeers, it obviously wasn't, so they walked away and are likely now cursing their decision to ever get close to anything trademarked in the first place.

I will drink Leninade until the capitalist pigs pry the empty bottle from my cold dead fingers!

[cmastah]

I think the project could come under fire due to a mensa et thoro, should Hasbro choose to file a motion under the mens rea act of 1997 enacted under President Bill Carter. In this specific case, there's also the matter pertaining to registered trademarks protected under felo de se pertaining to the nominated nominal nominee whose local offshore accounts would be subjected to asset freezing under the copyright registration act of 2002 enacted under president George Obama that states that all proprietary commissions writ large are to be subjected to a thorough enactment of habeas corpus. Subsection 21 of section 7 under clause A limits a defendant's right to de bonis asportatis, subjecting the defendant to a prosecution as per Semper Fidelio, causing punitive damages in excess of no more than $100,000, seven years in jail, and attending at least three of my kid's birthday parties to sing showtunes.

Also it might hurt WotC's feelings.

[Berik]

Alzrius wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Speculative, but also explanatory, especially since upon further reading I found out Kenzer is a Lawyer with heavy knowledge of trademark law and thus knew the exact right thing to do and not do and to say and not say.

It's no less speculative, or more explanatory, than saying that WotC chose not to go after them because they knew that they (Kenzer) were completely right, and didn't want to fight a losing battle against a company that had their own resources to bring to bear.

Likewise, yeah, David S. Kenzer is indeed an IP attorney. Hence why he could so confidently say what he did...which is the same thing that I'm saying now.

But this line of discussion started with you disagreeing that the creator here needed to be very careful and conscious of her legal position. WotC chose not to go after a company run by a top lawyer who was quite ready to take things to court if they attempted to shoot him down. And Dave Kenzer went into publishing with full knowledge of the law, I presume he's already thought to be careful about any details which he needs to be careful about to keep this as a case he's expect to win.

Even Matt Finch in your quote said he thought that Kenzer would win, not that he was certain of it. That risk is one thing to take on if you're an established company with strong legal representation, it makes sense for an individual to be less keen on that fight.

in this case we're talking about a project that might bring in a few thousand dollars and already has some ambitious goals. Even if she'd win a case, fighting against a cease and desist order would still take time and money. Where does that money come from? It would certainly be better to just know what the courts will judge as legal or illegal use, but that's not how the law works right now. So if you're up against somebody with greater resources it makes sense to do everything you can to avoid getting entangled in court action in the first place.

[Alzrius]

Berik wrote:

But this line of discussion started with you disagreeing that the creator here needed to be very careful and conscious of her legal position.

I believe it's more accurate to say that this line of discussion started when I pointed out that the creator here wasn't doing anything that was in violation of the law.

Quote:

WotC chose not to go after a company run by a top lawyer who was quite ready to take things to court if they attempted to shoot him down.

I'm comfortable speculating that the fact that he wasn't actually doing anything wrong also played a part in that.

Quote:

And Dave Kenzer went into publishing with full knowledge of the law, I presume he's already thought to be careful about any details which he needs to be careful about to keep this as a case he's expect to win.

Sure, I have no doubt that's the case. Hence why he felt comfortable publishing a compatible system with D&D and advertising it as such. Which is, at least according to what was on the Kickstarter, how this book was also being presented.

Quote:

Even Matt Finch in your quote said he thought that Kenzer would win, not that he was certain of it.

Again, that's completely understandable. Each case is ultimately decided according to its own circumstances, and even if things are open-and-shut, litigation can still be filed to begin with. The fair use doctrine and other provisions are defenses that you can use in the event of a legal challenge, rather than negating such a challenge to begin with.

Quote:

That risk is one thing to take on if you're an established company with strong legal representation, it makes sense for an individual to be less keen on that fight.

Calling that "risk" is something of a misnomer, to my mind. It presumes that the possibility of litigation is somehow under the control of the person performing the action, when in fact it's entirely up to the other party/parties involved (i.e. whether or not they want to make that challenge to begin with). It's not a "fight" unless the other guys decide that they want to take you to court, and if they want to do so then they're going to do it. There's nothing that can prevent that to begin with (including the OGL).

Quote:

in this case we're talking about a project that might bring in a few thousand dollars and already has some ambitious goals. Even if she'd win a case, fighting against a cease and desist order would still take time and money.

Also correct; this is what Gorbacz was talking about earlier, wherein a group with deep pockets can go after a much smaller outfit in an attempt to secure a favorable outcome by wearing them out with expensive legal proceedings (or, more usually, getting them to back down at the mere threat of such proceedings). It's one of the more common abuses of civil suits.

Quote:

Where does that money come from? It would certainly be better to just know what the courts will judge as legal or illegal use, but that's not how the law works right now.

No one is arguing otherwise; or at least, I'm not. My position is that, based on how trademark laws are written, this author has yet to do anything wrong. It's entirely possible that you can still be pressured into changing something at the threat of being sued even if the suit is baseless. That's another example of fear, uncertainty, and doubt at work.

Quote:

So if you're up against somebody with greater resources it makes sense to do everything you can to avoid getting entangled in court action in the first place.

Again, I don't disagree; that's why I'm such a big fan of the OGL. But if someone doesn't want to go that route, and is otherwise making sure to comply with the existing laws regarding trademark, I think it's better to hope that someone else doesn't baselessly sue them, rather than treat them as if they were being irresponsible for conducting perfectly legal activity.

[Sara Marie]

I think the legal discussion is going off into the weeds a bit and resulting in a lot of back and forth and spinning of wheels in the conversation. If you want to further discuss legalities please take it elsewhere.

[Sissyl]

Exactly. Much better things to discuss about this project.

[Alzrius]

Sissyl wrote:

Exactly. Much better things to discuss about this project.

Very true, like the fact that the project is now just shy of $2,500! The author has posted that more funding means more features for the forthcoming Android app!

[Alzrius]

Somehow I missed this up to now, but an outline for the book has been posted! Check it out!

[Alzrius]

With a week left to go, funding has skyrocketed to over $3,200 from over one hundred backers!

This has unlocked a new stretch goal: an iOS version of the Android app! There are also new add-ons, including ordering copies of the book in bulk, and getting a character of yours added into some of the book's narrative fiction.

[Alzrius]

With funding now over $4,000, there's only a little over a day left to sign up! Get in now while you still can!

[Greylurker]

.....If I ever run a campaign based on the Monster Girl Encyclopidia I may need this

just saying If..... it's always best to be prepared

[Terquem]

Greylurker wrote:

.....If I ever run a campaign based on the Monster Girl Encyclopidia I may need this

just saying If..... it's always best to be prepared

I swore off EVER starting another PbP game on these forums

Then I see this post, and I don't know what you are talking about, so I go look it up

Google search leads me to Monster Musume

An hour later and I am ready to explode with ideas

This is the greatest thing I've ever seen!

*SQUEEEEE*

[TriOmegaZero]

Well, you're better off having found MonMusu instead of the other one. :P

[Terquem]

Ohhhhh, tell me more

which "other one"??????

[Rysky]

Monster Girl Encyclopedia, NSFW

Or Tri could have meant the original My Life With Monster Girl shorts, also NSFW.

[TriOmegaZero]

That first one. But I'm a fan of both.

[Rysky]

Me too ^w^

[Alzrius]

There's something wrong with me that every time I look at the Monster Girl Encyclopedia, the first thing I think of is wondering what their Pathfinder stat blocks would look like.

(A lot of them are for monsters that already appear in the Bestiaries, admittedly, but those don't quite match the descriptions in the MGE.)

[Alzrius]

Also, only thirty minutes left to join the crowdfunding!

[Rysky]

Alzrius wrote:

There's something wrong with me that every time I look at the Monster Girl Encyclopedia, the first thing I think of is wondering what their Pathfinder stat blocks would look like.

(A lot of them are for monsters that already appear in the Bestiaries, admittedly, but those don't quite match the descriptions in the MGE.)

No that's kinda a given I would say.

[Greylurker]

Rysky wrote:

Alzrius wrote:

There's something wrong with me that every time I look at the Monster Girl Encyclopedia, the first thing I think of is wondering what their Pathfinder stat blocks would look like.

(A lot of them are for monsters that already appear in the Bestiaries, admittedly, but those don't quite match the descriptions in the MGE.)

No that's kinda a given I would say.

Oddly enough I actually find the ecology and backstory of the MGE world to be really interesting.

The cycle of Destruction and rebuilding that the Gods forced humanity into.
The system they made using the previous Overlords and Heroes to enforce it.
The big Lie the Gods have fed the world
The Ecological nature of Monsters vs. Humans.
the Mana to Demon Mana cycle.

There is some facinating world building there
....plus the other stuff

You could set a pathfinder game in that Setting during one of the previous overlords and it would be a lot of fun.

(not that the current overlord wouldn't be fun....just different kind of fun)

[Hello? Yes, this is Bard.]

Is it wrong to want to throw this a bone?

[Lord Fyre]

Rysky wrote:

Monster Girl Encyclopedia, NSFW

Or Tri could have meant the original My Life With Monster Girl shorts, also NSFW.

How have I not heard of this?!

[Terquem]

Would a thread discussing the building of a campaign setting that incorporates the basic mythology of the encyclopedia be acceptable on these forums?

I'd want to talk about

Character classes unique to a campaign centered on these themes

Reasons for capturing, or "identifying" these monsters

Building a party of these monsters for some campaign purpose

[Greylurker]

Terquem wrote:

Would a thread discussing the building of a campaign setting that incorporates the basic mythology of the encyclopedia be acceptable on these forums?

I'd want to talk about

Character classes unique to a campaign centered on these themes

Reasons for capturing, or "identifying" these monsters

Building a party of these monsters for some campaign purpose

If the conversation remained relatively PG I imagine it would be ok. To be honest I've just started working on a setting using some of the MGE background as a base, myself. Although what I'm making is set during the times of the previous Overlords, back when monsters were vicious meat eating things.

[Alzrius]

So with the rules starting to be previewed, I have to say that I'm intrigued by the Appearance and Attractiveness scores.

While they're slightly more complicated than just rolling up a new ability score, the merger of inherent personal factors (Appearance; which is also lampshaded by saying that this part is universal due to the work of one of the deities of lust) and variability depending on each individual viewer's personal tastes (Attractiveness) is a brilliant take on the perennial problem of using a numerical score to represent looks. I'm really impressed!

[Here4daFreeSwag]

Terquem wrote:

Greylurker wrote:

.....If I ever run a campaign based on the Monster Girl Encyclopidia I may need this

just saying If..... it's always best to be prepared

I swore off EVER starting another PbP game on these forums

Then I see this post, and I don't know what you are talking about, so I go look it up

Google search leads me to Monster Musume

An hour later and I am ready to explode with ideas

This is the greatest thing I've ever seen!

*SQUEEEEE*

Lord Fyre wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Monster Girl Encyclopedia, NSFW

Or Tri could have meant the original My Life With Monster Girl shorts, also NSFW.

How have I not heard of this?!

So "Touch Fluffy Tail"? (totally NSFW either) ;)

PS. Good to have some free outlines and stuff from this 5e Kickstarter in question. ;)