OGL and license for monster visual

[chomin]

Hello fellow companions,
in a light of current OGL 1.1 situation I would like to start a discussion concerning (visual) artworks of OGL monsters for commercial purposes.

To make it simple let´s forget about the planning OGL 1.1 (2.0) and start with the good “old” 1.0:
The license gives you the right to use / copy / modify everything inside the license. If we speak only about the monsters: in SRD there are just the monster stat blocks (in 3e SRD there is also a brief written description), but no visual reference of the monster. Of course there are tons of images over the internet, but no visual inside the SRD document.

So here is the thing: does the OGL license cover also the visual of the monster (its “design”) despite lack of visual reference in the SRD? ((Note.: The written description in 3e SRD can be a bit different story as from the written description you can “imagine” the monster visual)).

Example: Owlbear is in the SRD (OGL), and therefore is free to use. So I will google how it looks and create an original, but derivative artwork out of it (keeping the main owlbear design characteristics) and want to sell it. Everybody looking at my work can immediately recognize an owlbear.

There are tons of merchandise and miniatures using the visual of the OGL monsters (your Bestiary for instance), so I would be surprised if it is not allowed or bypassed in some way.

Let me know your thoughts and experience with that matter.
Thank you!

[Anguish]

A given product (Bestiary, for instance) will document what contents are product identity and can't be used without license. For instance, the trade dress of a book (and therefore art), and specific place-names and NPC names.

Typically monster descriptions are not product identity. That makes them typically fair game for you to create original artwork to match their description.

I am not a lawyer, but that is my understanding of how this has worked for decades now.

[chomin]

Hello Anguish, thank you for joining me and the opinion. :)
The thing is (as I am mentioning above) that in 5e SRD there is no written description of the monsters (nor an image), so I am not sure if it is that simple as you stated.

Maybe someone directly from Paizo can bring some light to this matter as they have direct experience with this?

[Anguish]

chomin wrote:

Hello Anguish, thank you for joining me and the opinion. :)

The thing is (as I am mentioning above) that in 5e SRD there is no written description of the monsters (nor an image), so I am not sure if it is that simple as you stated.

Maybe someone directly from Paizo can bring some light to this matter as they have direct experience with this?

My apologies. I didn't see anything referencing 5e in your original post. (And honestly I still don't.)

But given that's your interest, I don't think you're going to get a response from Paizo giving you legal advice regarding how to use their competitor's material properly.

Still, best of luck.

[David knott 242]

There is one way Paizo can be involved: When they created Pathfinder 1e, they realized that they needed art for the new book but couldn't use the art from WotC's D&D 3.5e books -- so they had new art for everything commissioned.

So if you want to use Paizo's art rather than WotC's, Paizo may have something to say about that, and it probably won't exactly match what WotC says about their art.

[chomin]

Anguish: Hello, I am not seeking a legal advice here. Just sourcing some experiences and opinions from other sides. And sorry that I did not mention 5e explicitly (I thought it was clear).

David knott: hello, as i am explaining in the starting post: I am not planning to use any of copyrighted images (from wotc or PF). My artworks would be my original & unique creations just based/inspired by images of monsters found on the internet.

[Dancing Wind]

chomin wrote:

My artworks would be my original & unique creations just based/inspired by images of monsters found on the internet.

Remember that new artwork "based on" other artwork can be considered 'derivative' from the original. Copyright gives the copyright holder the rights over derivative works as well as exact copies of the original work.

If your work is clearly derived from someone else's art, then you need their permission to use their artwork to make that derivative work.

[Anguish]

chomin wrote:

in 5e SRD there is no written description of the monsters (nor an image)

chomin wrote:

I will google how it looks and create an original, but derivative artwork out of it (keeping the main owlbear design characteristics) and want to sell it. Everybody looking at my work can immediately recognize an owlbear.

None of this has anything to do with OGL.

You're saying the description isn't in the SRD, so it's not covered by OGL. You're saying pictures exist of creatures via simple searches. You're saying you're going to create original art based on what someone else drew.

That's fine.

There are specific exceptions, for instance where an actor has applied protection to their likeness, but you're free to make your own version of the Mona Lisa monster.