D&D Monsters and CopyrightPictures vs 3D Models - What's the difference?Does making a mobile app using textures/content from a video game violate copyright?Does rebuilding a computer game from scratch infringe copyright?How does copyright law apply to reusing images from before the 1900s?Data copyright for public domain content or natural resourcesCan I recreate the Risk board game for personal use?
Is there a Scoville scale for coldness?
Printing to terminal while piping
Declining a paper review after accepting it and seeing the manuscript
At a conference, should I visit other people's posters during my poster session?
Is it safe to wear earplugs in flight?
Sudden cheap travel?
What is a word for "atom or molecule"?
Sleep for 1000 years
Why are Marx Generators built like that?
System of equation
Is paying for portrait photos good for the people in the community you're photographing?
What are the downsides of being a debt-free country (no foreign national debt)?
I keep rewriting the same section of my story. How do I move forward?
My boss asked what number would keep me happy?
Have spacecraft photographed each other beyond Earth orbit?
What are the disadvantages of using zener diode over a linear voltage regulator?
Arrange 5 non-attacking knights on a 5x5 toroidal board
How effective and viable would bronze full plate be?
Why is wired Ethernet losing its speed advantage over wireless?
Can we use a Cryptographic hash function to generate infinite random numbers?
Was a four year-old forced to sleep on the floor of Leeds General Infirmary?
Students using the same flawed online solution sheet as the grading TA
Do the Jovians in "Victory Unintentional" exist in Isaac Asimov's Foundation series?
I’m 18 years old and want to finance a £30,000 car
D&D Monsters and Copyright
Pictures vs 3D Models - What's the difference?Does making a mobile app using textures/content from a video game violate copyright?Does rebuilding a computer game from scratch infringe copyright?How does copyright law apply to reusing images from before the 1900s?Data copyright for public domain content or natural resourcesCan I recreate the Risk board game for personal use?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty
margin-bottom:0;
.everyonelovesstackoverflowposition:absolute;height:1px;width:1px;opacity:0;top:0;left:0;pointer-events:none;
We are making a college board game, and would like to know if we can use a few monsters from dnd to make our game. We don't use the same name as you do, just the images from online and the books.
copyright fair-use
add a comment
|
We are making a college board game, and would like to know if we can use a few monsters from dnd to make our game. We don't use the same name as you do, just the images from online and the books.
copyright fair-use
2
You should search the site before posting: law.stackexchange.com/search?q=game+copyright
– BlueDogRanch
Sep 30 at 14:54
34
You say "just" the images but the images are much more strongly protected than the names. Consider the amount of effort that goes into thinking up a name versus drawing a picture of the thing.
– David Richerby
Sep 30 at 22:47
2
You may be interested in reading about OrcPub (and OrcPub2) which was / is an online DnD character building tool and the various legal issues they have faced. Also, although I think you've posted your question in the right Stack Exchange site since it is legal based, be sure to check out rpg.stackexchange.com and boardgames.stackexchange.com if you haven't already.
– RyanfaeScotland
Oct 1 at 9:13
16
Please clarify: What do you mean with "a college board game"? Is it a project made for a class which is only meant to get you a good/passing grade? Or do you intent on making it a product?
– Mefitico
Oct 1 at 13:52
add a comment
|
We are making a college board game, and would like to know if we can use a few monsters from dnd to make our game. We don't use the same name as you do, just the images from online and the books.
copyright fair-use
We are making a college board game, and would like to know if we can use a few monsters from dnd to make our game. We don't use the same name as you do, just the images from online and the books.
copyright fair-use
copyright fair-use
edited Sep 30 at 23:49
bdb484
15.1k1 gold badge23 silver badges53 bronze badges
15.1k1 gold badge23 silver badges53 bronze badges
asked Sep 30 at 14:16
Louis LunnLouis Lunn
1271 silver badge3 bronze badges
1271 silver badge3 bronze badges
2
You should search the site before posting: law.stackexchange.com/search?q=game+copyright
– BlueDogRanch
Sep 30 at 14:54
34
You say "just" the images but the images are much more strongly protected than the names. Consider the amount of effort that goes into thinking up a name versus drawing a picture of the thing.
– David Richerby
Sep 30 at 22:47
2
You may be interested in reading about OrcPub (and OrcPub2) which was / is an online DnD character building tool and the various legal issues they have faced. Also, although I think you've posted your question in the right Stack Exchange site since it is legal based, be sure to check out rpg.stackexchange.com and boardgames.stackexchange.com if you haven't already.
– RyanfaeScotland
Oct 1 at 9:13
16
Please clarify: What do you mean with "a college board game"? Is it a project made for a class which is only meant to get you a good/passing grade? Or do you intent on making it a product?
– Mefitico
Oct 1 at 13:52
add a comment
|
2
You should search the site before posting: law.stackexchange.com/search?q=game+copyright
– BlueDogRanch
Sep 30 at 14:54
34
You say "just" the images but the images are much more strongly protected than the names. Consider the amount of effort that goes into thinking up a name versus drawing a picture of the thing.
– David Richerby
Sep 30 at 22:47
2
You may be interested in reading about OrcPub (and OrcPub2) which was / is an online DnD character building tool and the various legal issues they have faced. Also, although I think you've posted your question in the right Stack Exchange site since it is legal based, be sure to check out rpg.stackexchange.com and boardgames.stackexchange.com if you haven't already.
– RyanfaeScotland
Oct 1 at 9:13
16
Please clarify: What do you mean with "a college board game"? Is it a project made for a class which is only meant to get you a good/passing grade? Or do you intent on making it a product?
– Mefitico
Oct 1 at 13:52
2
2
You should search the site before posting: law.stackexchange.com/search?q=game+copyright
– BlueDogRanch
Sep 30 at 14:54
You should search the site before posting: law.stackexchange.com/search?q=game+copyright
– BlueDogRanch
Sep 30 at 14:54
34
34
You say "just" the images but the images are much more strongly protected than the names. Consider the amount of effort that goes into thinking up a name versus drawing a picture of the thing.
– David Richerby
Sep 30 at 22:47
You say "just" the images but the images are much more strongly protected than the names. Consider the amount of effort that goes into thinking up a name versus drawing a picture of the thing.
– David Richerby
Sep 30 at 22:47
2
2
You may be interested in reading about OrcPub (and OrcPub2) which was / is an online DnD character building tool and the various legal issues they have faced. Also, although I think you've posted your question in the right Stack Exchange site since it is legal based, be sure to check out rpg.stackexchange.com and boardgames.stackexchange.com if you haven't already.
– RyanfaeScotland
Oct 1 at 9:13
You may be interested in reading about OrcPub (and OrcPub2) which was / is an online DnD character building tool and the various legal issues they have faced. Also, although I think you've posted your question in the right Stack Exchange site since it is legal based, be sure to check out rpg.stackexchange.com and boardgames.stackexchange.com if you haven't already.
– RyanfaeScotland
Oct 1 at 9:13
16
16
Please clarify: What do you mean with "a college board game"? Is it a project made for a class which is only meant to get you a good/passing grade? Or do you intent on making it a product?
– Mefitico
Oct 1 at 13:52
Please clarify: What do you mean with "a college board game"? Is it a project made for a class which is only meant to get you a good/passing grade? Or do you intent on making it a product?
– Mefitico
Oct 1 at 13:52
add a comment
|
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
No. The images are copyrighted, and you are using them in a way that would leave you with virtually no argument for fair use. The factors for fair use are set out in 17 USC 107, and they indicate that the courts would reject your use:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether it is of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes: There's no indication that your use would be for nonprofit or educational purposes.
The nature of the copyrighted work: Works of fiction and art are highly creative works at the heart of the policy for copyright protection.
The amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: You are apparently copying entire images, though I suppose you could argue that each image is just one small portion of a larger book or website.
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: You are trying to create a board game, putting yourselves basically in direct competition with the makers of D&D.
I generally prefer a pretty liberal interpretation of what constitutes fair use, but this just has virtually nothing that would make me comfortable arguing in your favor.
6
This only applies if they distribute it. Making a board game with copyrighted images for personal use is (As far as I know) perfectly okay.
– Programmdude
Oct 1 at 0:42
13
You are mistaken. It is the act of copying that violates the copyright.
– bdb484
Oct 1 at 2:11
14
On the flip side: it would essentially be impossible to show damages for that home-made board game, and there would insufficient public interest to justify criminal prosecution.
– MSalters
Oct 1 at 7:40
8
@bdb484 : who would suffer those damages? If the game was distributed, then yes, every game someone gets from the OP is potentially one less game being sold by the copyright owner. But if someone is creating and playing it privately, what damages does the copyright owner suffer? Singing a copyrighted song in a forest where no one can hear it is still technically illegal, but who is damaged if no one can hear it?
– vsz
Oct 1 at 11:52
4
@bdb484 It would be easy to show use, yes, but not to demonstrate that the copyright owner suffered more than trivial damages (i.e. the value of buying the game/image) as a result of that use, because it was private personal use.
– ArtOfCode
Oct 1 at 11:53
|
show 10 more comments
Many D&D monsters and creatures are based on creatures occurring in folklore and myth, such a vampires and trolls. Those are in the public domain, and anyone may use them freely. But images published as part of D&D, or by independent artists, are subject to copyright, and may not be used without permission. As the answer by bdb484 says, there seems no plausible case for a fair use exception to copyright here.
Note also that the specific descriptive text used in the D&D Monster Manual and other publications is protected by copyright, and may not be copied or closely paraphrased. This is true even when the creature being described is one from traditional folklore.
New creatures or monsters invented as part of D&D would be fully protected by copyright. While the general idea cannot be protected, anything based at al closely on a published description is likely to constitute copyright infringement.
If you were to copy content from published D&D books, a copyright suit might force you to stop distributing your game, and leave you with sizable damages to pay, depending on the exact facts.
You would be wise to invent your own monsters, or create your own versions of traditional monsters from legend and folklore.
2
Most D&D monsters have alternate-source images on the internet so you could probably build your game using monster names from the MM and open source images from the net. As David said--stick to common monsters, I believe Mind Flayer was created by D&D, but not "Greater Devil", "Blue Dragon" or "Elf". Stay away from the MM text too--don't base your attacks, stats or description on the text from the MM. Note that the original MM stole 2 chapters from other sources, was sued and had to remove them. It works both ways!
– Bill K
Oct 2 at 21:33
2
@BillK Be sure that any such images are in fact under a license that allows the intended use, and that they were posted with the authority of the copyright owner. It is unfortunately common for people to take images and repost them, claiming to relase them under a permissive license, when they have no right to do so. In such a case, any reuser relying on such a license commits infringement.
– David Siegel
Oct 2 at 21:37
add a comment
|
As noted in other answers, no, you are not allowed to use these creatures under Fair Use. You could go back to their original mythological underpinnings (for those that have them), but you would have to take great care to make sure everything about them you describe comes from myth and not from D&D.
There is another option, however. Many Dungeons & Dragons monsters are available for use under the Open Game License. This does not cover images (at least not Wizards of the Coast’s images; some artists have released images of D&D monsters under the OGL), but it does cover their names, their stats, the names of their abilities, and their general “character.” It also does not cover certain particular iconic monsters, which Wizards of the Coast reserved as “product identity.” This would be beholder, carrion crawler, displacer beast, gauth, githyanki, githzerai, kuo-toa, mind flayer (illithid), slaad, umber hulk, and yuan-ti. It also doesn’t cover myriad other monsters that simply were never released in a book that got open-game treatment. But all of these monsters, for example, may be used.
Correctly following and using the Open-Game License requires some care. Read it carefully, and in particular pay close attention to the requirements in Section 15.
Just out of curiosity, why only OGL, no SRD mention?
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 3:48
2
@nitsua60 Because the SRD isn’t really legally relevant. The SRD is just the original document that Wizards released under the OGL, but ultimately what you need to use any open-game content is the OGL, whether that’s the SRD or other open-game content (e.g. Pathfinder, maybe some 5e stuff?).
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 3:57
Ahh... okay. I'm probably not understanding the nuances of what exactly SRD(s) contain vs. OGL(s). Thanks!
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 13:12
@nitsua60 Basically, OGL is the licence that can be used to allow you to re-use and redistribute certain D&D content. The SRD is one particular document released under that license.
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 13:13
You can find D&D-related images published under OGL by third-party publishers (in fact I have some on my machine, including the OGL that was distributed with them), but not the images from official rulebooks AFAIK.
– Neil Slater
Oct 2 at 15:36
add a comment
|
If this is a class assignment to create a game that you have no intention of distributing or selling, then I think you qualify for fair use. Within the context of a college class, it should qualify as educational.
If you are creating a game aimed at the college marketplace that you intend to distribute and/or sell, then it is more complicated. Obviously you can't use the copyrighted images in your product without permission. But can you use the images in a product prototype or mockup that is shown to potential investors or focus groups? This would almost certainly not count as fair use, but if you are only doing private viewings, and you make it clear that those images are placeholders, you probably won't attract any trouble.
If you want to avoid any problems, then find a starving art student that would love to be paid to create images for you. There are sure to be plenty around.
add a comment
|
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "617"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45129%2fdd-monsters-and-copyright%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
No. The images are copyrighted, and you are using them in a way that would leave you with virtually no argument for fair use. The factors for fair use are set out in 17 USC 107, and they indicate that the courts would reject your use:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether it is of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes: There's no indication that your use would be for nonprofit or educational purposes.
The nature of the copyrighted work: Works of fiction and art are highly creative works at the heart of the policy for copyright protection.
The amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: You are apparently copying entire images, though I suppose you could argue that each image is just one small portion of a larger book or website.
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: You are trying to create a board game, putting yourselves basically in direct competition with the makers of D&D.
I generally prefer a pretty liberal interpretation of what constitutes fair use, but this just has virtually nothing that would make me comfortable arguing in your favor.
6
This only applies if they distribute it. Making a board game with copyrighted images for personal use is (As far as I know) perfectly okay.
– Programmdude
Oct 1 at 0:42
13
You are mistaken. It is the act of copying that violates the copyright.
– bdb484
Oct 1 at 2:11
14
On the flip side: it would essentially be impossible to show damages for that home-made board game, and there would insufficient public interest to justify criminal prosecution.
– MSalters
Oct 1 at 7:40
8
@bdb484 : who would suffer those damages? If the game was distributed, then yes, every game someone gets from the OP is potentially one less game being sold by the copyright owner. But if someone is creating and playing it privately, what damages does the copyright owner suffer? Singing a copyrighted song in a forest where no one can hear it is still technically illegal, but who is damaged if no one can hear it?
– vsz
Oct 1 at 11:52
4
@bdb484 It would be easy to show use, yes, but not to demonstrate that the copyright owner suffered more than trivial damages (i.e. the value of buying the game/image) as a result of that use, because it was private personal use.
– ArtOfCode
Oct 1 at 11:53
|
show 10 more comments
No. The images are copyrighted, and you are using them in a way that would leave you with virtually no argument for fair use. The factors for fair use are set out in 17 USC 107, and they indicate that the courts would reject your use:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether it is of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes: There's no indication that your use would be for nonprofit or educational purposes.
The nature of the copyrighted work: Works of fiction and art are highly creative works at the heart of the policy for copyright protection.
The amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: You are apparently copying entire images, though I suppose you could argue that each image is just one small portion of a larger book or website.
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: You are trying to create a board game, putting yourselves basically in direct competition with the makers of D&D.
I generally prefer a pretty liberal interpretation of what constitutes fair use, but this just has virtually nothing that would make me comfortable arguing in your favor.
6
This only applies if they distribute it. Making a board game with copyrighted images for personal use is (As far as I know) perfectly okay.
– Programmdude
Oct 1 at 0:42
13
You are mistaken. It is the act of copying that violates the copyright.
– bdb484
Oct 1 at 2:11
14
On the flip side: it would essentially be impossible to show damages for that home-made board game, and there would insufficient public interest to justify criminal prosecution.
– MSalters
Oct 1 at 7:40
8
@bdb484 : who would suffer those damages? If the game was distributed, then yes, every game someone gets from the OP is potentially one less game being sold by the copyright owner. But if someone is creating and playing it privately, what damages does the copyright owner suffer? Singing a copyrighted song in a forest where no one can hear it is still technically illegal, but who is damaged if no one can hear it?
– vsz
Oct 1 at 11:52
4
@bdb484 It would be easy to show use, yes, but not to demonstrate that the copyright owner suffered more than trivial damages (i.e. the value of buying the game/image) as a result of that use, because it was private personal use.
– ArtOfCode
Oct 1 at 11:53
|
show 10 more comments
No. The images are copyrighted, and you are using them in a way that would leave you with virtually no argument for fair use. The factors for fair use are set out in 17 USC 107, and they indicate that the courts would reject your use:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether it is of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes: There's no indication that your use would be for nonprofit or educational purposes.
The nature of the copyrighted work: Works of fiction and art are highly creative works at the heart of the policy for copyright protection.
The amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: You are apparently copying entire images, though I suppose you could argue that each image is just one small portion of a larger book or website.
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: You are trying to create a board game, putting yourselves basically in direct competition with the makers of D&D.
I generally prefer a pretty liberal interpretation of what constitutes fair use, but this just has virtually nothing that would make me comfortable arguing in your favor.
No. The images are copyrighted, and you are using them in a way that would leave you with virtually no argument for fair use. The factors for fair use are set out in 17 USC 107, and they indicate that the courts would reject your use:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether it is of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes: There's no indication that your use would be for nonprofit or educational purposes.
The nature of the copyrighted work: Works of fiction and art are highly creative works at the heart of the policy for copyright protection.
The amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: You are apparently copying entire images, though I suppose you could argue that each image is just one small portion of a larger book or website.
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: You are trying to create a board game, putting yourselves basically in direct competition with the makers of D&D.
I generally prefer a pretty liberal interpretation of what constitutes fair use, but this just has virtually nothing that would make me comfortable arguing in your favor.
edited Oct 3 at 14:06
answered Sep 30 at 15:12
bdb484bdb484
15.1k1 gold badge23 silver badges53 bronze badges
15.1k1 gold badge23 silver badges53 bronze badges
6
This only applies if they distribute it. Making a board game with copyrighted images for personal use is (As far as I know) perfectly okay.
– Programmdude
Oct 1 at 0:42
13
You are mistaken. It is the act of copying that violates the copyright.
– bdb484
Oct 1 at 2:11
14
On the flip side: it would essentially be impossible to show damages for that home-made board game, and there would insufficient public interest to justify criminal prosecution.
– MSalters
Oct 1 at 7:40
8
@bdb484 : who would suffer those damages? If the game was distributed, then yes, every game someone gets from the OP is potentially one less game being sold by the copyright owner. But if someone is creating and playing it privately, what damages does the copyright owner suffer? Singing a copyrighted song in a forest where no one can hear it is still technically illegal, but who is damaged if no one can hear it?
– vsz
Oct 1 at 11:52
4
@bdb484 It would be easy to show use, yes, but not to demonstrate that the copyright owner suffered more than trivial damages (i.e. the value of buying the game/image) as a result of that use, because it was private personal use.
– ArtOfCode
Oct 1 at 11:53
|
show 10 more comments
6
This only applies if they distribute it. Making a board game with copyrighted images for personal use is (As far as I know) perfectly okay.
– Programmdude
Oct 1 at 0:42
13
You are mistaken. It is the act of copying that violates the copyright.
– bdb484
Oct 1 at 2:11
14
On the flip side: it would essentially be impossible to show damages for that home-made board game, and there would insufficient public interest to justify criminal prosecution.
– MSalters
Oct 1 at 7:40
8
@bdb484 : who would suffer those damages? If the game was distributed, then yes, every game someone gets from the OP is potentially one less game being sold by the copyright owner. But if someone is creating and playing it privately, what damages does the copyright owner suffer? Singing a copyrighted song in a forest where no one can hear it is still technically illegal, but who is damaged if no one can hear it?
– vsz
Oct 1 at 11:52
4
@bdb484 It would be easy to show use, yes, but not to demonstrate that the copyright owner suffered more than trivial damages (i.e. the value of buying the game/image) as a result of that use, because it was private personal use.
– ArtOfCode
Oct 1 at 11:53
6
6
This only applies if they distribute it. Making a board game with copyrighted images for personal use is (As far as I know) perfectly okay.
– Programmdude
Oct 1 at 0:42
This only applies if they distribute it. Making a board game with copyrighted images for personal use is (As far as I know) perfectly okay.
– Programmdude
Oct 1 at 0:42
13
13
You are mistaken. It is the act of copying that violates the copyright.
– bdb484
Oct 1 at 2:11
You are mistaken. It is the act of copying that violates the copyright.
– bdb484
Oct 1 at 2:11
14
14
On the flip side: it would essentially be impossible to show damages for that home-made board game, and there would insufficient public interest to justify criminal prosecution.
– MSalters
Oct 1 at 7:40
On the flip side: it would essentially be impossible to show damages for that home-made board game, and there would insufficient public interest to justify criminal prosecution.
– MSalters
Oct 1 at 7:40
8
8
@bdb484 : who would suffer those damages? If the game was distributed, then yes, every game someone gets from the OP is potentially one less game being sold by the copyright owner. But if someone is creating and playing it privately, what damages does the copyright owner suffer? Singing a copyrighted song in a forest where no one can hear it is still technically illegal, but who is damaged if no one can hear it?
– vsz
Oct 1 at 11:52
@bdb484 : who would suffer those damages? If the game was distributed, then yes, every game someone gets from the OP is potentially one less game being sold by the copyright owner. But if someone is creating and playing it privately, what damages does the copyright owner suffer? Singing a copyrighted song in a forest where no one can hear it is still technically illegal, but who is damaged if no one can hear it?
– vsz
Oct 1 at 11:52
4
4
@bdb484 It would be easy to show use, yes, but not to demonstrate that the copyright owner suffered more than trivial damages (i.e. the value of buying the game/image) as a result of that use, because it was private personal use.
– ArtOfCode
Oct 1 at 11:53
@bdb484 It would be easy to show use, yes, but not to demonstrate that the copyright owner suffered more than trivial damages (i.e. the value of buying the game/image) as a result of that use, because it was private personal use.
– ArtOfCode
Oct 1 at 11:53
|
show 10 more comments
Many D&D monsters and creatures are based on creatures occurring in folklore and myth, such a vampires and trolls. Those are in the public domain, and anyone may use them freely. But images published as part of D&D, or by independent artists, are subject to copyright, and may not be used without permission. As the answer by bdb484 says, there seems no plausible case for a fair use exception to copyright here.
Note also that the specific descriptive text used in the D&D Monster Manual and other publications is protected by copyright, and may not be copied or closely paraphrased. This is true even when the creature being described is one from traditional folklore.
New creatures or monsters invented as part of D&D would be fully protected by copyright. While the general idea cannot be protected, anything based at al closely on a published description is likely to constitute copyright infringement.
If you were to copy content from published D&D books, a copyright suit might force you to stop distributing your game, and leave you with sizable damages to pay, depending on the exact facts.
You would be wise to invent your own monsters, or create your own versions of traditional monsters from legend and folklore.
2
Most D&D monsters have alternate-source images on the internet so you could probably build your game using monster names from the MM and open source images from the net. As David said--stick to common monsters, I believe Mind Flayer was created by D&D, but not "Greater Devil", "Blue Dragon" or "Elf". Stay away from the MM text too--don't base your attacks, stats or description on the text from the MM. Note that the original MM stole 2 chapters from other sources, was sued and had to remove them. It works both ways!
– Bill K
Oct 2 at 21:33
2
@BillK Be sure that any such images are in fact under a license that allows the intended use, and that they were posted with the authority of the copyright owner. It is unfortunately common for people to take images and repost them, claiming to relase them under a permissive license, when they have no right to do so. In such a case, any reuser relying on such a license commits infringement.
– David Siegel
Oct 2 at 21:37
add a comment
|
Many D&D monsters and creatures are based on creatures occurring in folklore and myth, such a vampires and trolls. Those are in the public domain, and anyone may use them freely. But images published as part of D&D, or by independent artists, are subject to copyright, and may not be used without permission. As the answer by bdb484 says, there seems no plausible case for a fair use exception to copyright here.
Note also that the specific descriptive text used in the D&D Monster Manual and other publications is protected by copyright, and may not be copied or closely paraphrased. This is true even when the creature being described is one from traditional folklore.
New creatures or monsters invented as part of D&D would be fully protected by copyright. While the general idea cannot be protected, anything based at al closely on a published description is likely to constitute copyright infringement.
If you were to copy content from published D&D books, a copyright suit might force you to stop distributing your game, and leave you with sizable damages to pay, depending on the exact facts.
You would be wise to invent your own monsters, or create your own versions of traditional monsters from legend and folklore.
2
Most D&D monsters have alternate-source images on the internet so you could probably build your game using monster names from the MM and open source images from the net. As David said--stick to common monsters, I believe Mind Flayer was created by D&D, but not "Greater Devil", "Blue Dragon" or "Elf". Stay away from the MM text too--don't base your attacks, stats or description on the text from the MM. Note that the original MM stole 2 chapters from other sources, was sued and had to remove them. It works both ways!
– Bill K
Oct 2 at 21:33
2
@BillK Be sure that any such images are in fact under a license that allows the intended use, and that they were posted with the authority of the copyright owner. It is unfortunately common for people to take images and repost them, claiming to relase them under a permissive license, when they have no right to do so. In such a case, any reuser relying on such a license commits infringement.
– David Siegel
Oct 2 at 21:37
add a comment
|
Many D&D monsters and creatures are based on creatures occurring in folklore and myth, such a vampires and trolls. Those are in the public domain, and anyone may use them freely. But images published as part of D&D, or by independent artists, are subject to copyright, and may not be used without permission. As the answer by bdb484 says, there seems no plausible case for a fair use exception to copyright here.
Note also that the specific descriptive text used in the D&D Monster Manual and other publications is protected by copyright, and may not be copied or closely paraphrased. This is true even when the creature being described is one from traditional folklore.
New creatures or monsters invented as part of D&D would be fully protected by copyright. While the general idea cannot be protected, anything based at al closely on a published description is likely to constitute copyright infringement.
If you were to copy content from published D&D books, a copyright suit might force you to stop distributing your game, and leave you with sizable damages to pay, depending on the exact facts.
You would be wise to invent your own monsters, or create your own versions of traditional monsters from legend and folklore.
Many D&D monsters and creatures are based on creatures occurring in folklore and myth, such a vampires and trolls. Those are in the public domain, and anyone may use them freely. But images published as part of D&D, or by independent artists, are subject to copyright, and may not be used without permission. As the answer by bdb484 says, there seems no plausible case for a fair use exception to copyright here.
Note also that the specific descriptive text used in the D&D Monster Manual and other publications is protected by copyright, and may not be copied or closely paraphrased. This is true even when the creature being described is one from traditional folklore.
New creatures or monsters invented as part of D&D would be fully protected by copyright. While the general idea cannot be protected, anything based at al closely on a published description is likely to constitute copyright infringement.
If you were to copy content from published D&D books, a copyright suit might force you to stop distributing your game, and leave you with sizable damages to pay, depending on the exact facts.
You would be wise to invent your own monsters, or create your own versions of traditional monsters from legend and folklore.
edited Oct 2 at 13:21
Philipp
1,2534 silver badges14 bronze badges
1,2534 silver badges14 bronze badges
answered Sep 30 at 16:42
David SiegelDavid Siegel
28.4k2 gold badges48 silver badges100 bronze badges
28.4k2 gold badges48 silver badges100 bronze badges
2
Most D&D monsters have alternate-source images on the internet so you could probably build your game using monster names from the MM and open source images from the net. As David said--stick to common monsters, I believe Mind Flayer was created by D&D, but not "Greater Devil", "Blue Dragon" or "Elf". Stay away from the MM text too--don't base your attacks, stats or description on the text from the MM. Note that the original MM stole 2 chapters from other sources, was sued and had to remove them. It works both ways!
– Bill K
Oct 2 at 21:33
2
@BillK Be sure that any such images are in fact under a license that allows the intended use, and that they were posted with the authority of the copyright owner. It is unfortunately common for people to take images and repost them, claiming to relase them under a permissive license, when they have no right to do so. In such a case, any reuser relying on such a license commits infringement.
– David Siegel
Oct 2 at 21:37
add a comment
|
2
Most D&D monsters have alternate-source images on the internet so you could probably build your game using monster names from the MM and open source images from the net. As David said--stick to common monsters, I believe Mind Flayer was created by D&D, but not "Greater Devil", "Blue Dragon" or "Elf". Stay away from the MM text too--don't base your attacks, stats or description on the text from the MM. Note that the original MM stole 2 chapters from other sources, was sued and had to remove them. It works both ways!
– Bill K
Oct 2 at 21:33
2
@BillK Be sure that any such images are in fact under a license that allows the intended use, and that they were posted with the authority of the copyright owner. It is unfortunately common for people to take images and repost them, claiming to relase them under a permissive license, when they have no right to do so. In such a case, any reuser relying on such a license commits infringement.
– David Siegel
Oct 2 at 21:37
2
2
Most D&D monsters have alternate-source images on the internet so you could probably build your game using monster names from the MM and open source images from the net. As David said--stick to common monsters, I believe Mind Flayer was created by D&D, but not "Greater Devil", "Blue Dragon" or "Elf". Stay away from the MM text too--don't base your attacks, stats or description on the text from the MM. Note that the original MM stole 2 chapters from other sources, was sued and had to remove them. It works both ways!
– Bill K
Oct 2 at 21:33
Most D&D monsters have alternate-source images on the internet so you could probably build your game using monster names from the MM and open source images from the net. As David said--stick to common monsters, I believe Mind Flayer was created by D&D, but not "Greater Devil", "Blue Dragon" or "Elf". Stay away from the MM text too--don't base your attacks, stats or description on the text from the MM. Note that the original MM stole 2 chapters from other sources, was sued and had to remove them. It works both ways!
– Bill K
Oct 2 at 21:33
2
2
@BillK Be sure that any such images are in fact under a license that allows the intended use, and that they were posted with the authority of the copyright owner. It is unfortunately common for people to take images and repost them, claiming to relase them under a permissive license, when they have no right to do so. In such a case, any reuser relying on such a license commits infringement.
– David Siegel
Oct 2 at 21:37
@BillK Be sure that any such images are in fact under a license that allows the intended use, and that they were posted with the authority of the copyright owner. It is unfortunately common for people to take images and repost them, claiming to relase them under a permissive license, when they have no right to do so. In such a case, any reuser relying on such a license commits infringement.
– David Siegel
Oct 2 at 21:37
add a comment
|
As noted in other answers, no, you are not allowed to use these creatures under Fair Use. You could go back to their original mythological underpinnings (for those that have them), but you would have to take great care to make sure everything about them you describe comes from myth and not from D&D.
There is another option, however. Many Dungeons & Dragons monsters are available for use under the Open Game License. This does not cover images (at least not Wizards of the Coast’s images; some artists have released images of D&D monsters under the OGL), but it does cover their names, their stats, the names of their abilities, and their general “character.” It also does not cover certain particular iconic monsters, which Wizards of the Coast reserved as “product identity.” This would be beholder, carrion crawler, displacer beast, gauth, githyanki, githzerai, kuo-toa, mind flayer (illithid), slaad, umber hulk, and yuan-ti. It also doesn’t cover myriad other monsters that simply were never released in a book that got open-game treatment. But all of these monsters, for example, may be used.
Correctly following and using the Open-Game License requires some care. Read it carefully, and in particular pay close attention to the requirements in Section 15.
Just out of curiosity, why only OGL, no SRD mention?
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 3:48
2
@nitsua60 Because the SRD isn’t really legally relevant. The SRD is just the original document that Wizards released under the OGL, but ultimately what you need to use any open-game content is the OGL, whether that’s the SRD or other open-game content (e.g. Pathfinder, maybe some 5e stuff?).
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 3:57
Ahh... okay. I'm probably not understanding the nuances of what exactly SRD(s) contain vs. OGL(s). Thanks!
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 13:12
@nitsua60 Basically, OGL is the licence that can be used to allow you to re-use and redistribute certain D&D content. The SRD is one particular document released under that license.
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 13:13
You can find D&D-related images published under OGL by third-party publishers (in fact I have some on my machine, including the OGL that was distributed with them), but not the images from official rulebooks AFAIK.
– Neil Slater
Oct 2 at 15:36
add a comment
|
As noted in other answers, no, you are not allowed to use these creatures under Fair Use. You could go back to their original mythological underpinnings (for those that have them), but you would have to take great care to make sure everything about them you describe comes from myth and not from D&D.
There is another option, however. Many Dungeons & Dragons monsters are available for use under the Open Game License. This does not cover images (at least not Wizards of the Coast’s images; some artists have released images of D&D monsters under the OGL), but it does cover their names, their stats, the names of their abilities, and their general “character.” It also does not cover certain particular iconic monsters, which Wizards of the Coast reserved as “product identity.” This would be beholder, carrion crawler, displacer beast, gauth, githyanki, githzerai, kuo-toa, mind flayer (illithid), slaad, umber hulk, and yuan-ti. It also doesn’t cover myriad other monsters that simply were never released in a book that got open-game treatment. But all of these monsters, for example, may be used.
Correctly following and using the Open-Game License requires some care. Read it carefully, and in particular pay close attention to the requirements in Section 15.
Just out of curiosity, why only OGL, no SRD mention?
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 3:48
2
@nitsua60 Because the SRD isn’t really legally relevant. The SRD is just the original document that Wizards released under the OGL, but ultimately what you need to use any open-game content is the OGL, whether that’s the SRD or other open-game content (e.g. Pathfinder, maybe some 5e stuff?).
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 3:57
Ahh... okay. I'm probably not understanding the nuances of what exactly SRD(s) contain vs. OGL(s). Thanks!
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 13:12
@nitsua60 Basically, OGL is the licence that can be used to allow you to re-use and redistribute certain D&D content. The SRD is one particular document released under that license.
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 13:13
You can find D&D-related images published under OGL by third-party publishers (in fact I have some on my machine, including the OGL that was distributed with them), but not the images from official rulebooks AFAIK.
– Neil Slater
Oct 2 at 15:36
add a comment
|
As noted in other answers, no, you are not allowed to use these creatures under Fair Use. You could go back to their original mythological underpinnings (for those that have them), but you would have to take great care to make sure everything about them you describe comes from myth and not from D&D.
There is another option, however. Many Dungeons & Dragons monsters are available for use under the Open Game License. This does not cover images (at least not Wizards of the Coast’s images; some artists have released images of D&D monsters under the OGL), but it does cover their names, their stats, the names of their abilities, and their general “character.” It also does not cover certain particular iconic monsters, which Wizards of the Coast reserved as “product identity.” This would be beholder, carrion crawler, displacer beast, gauth, githyanki, githzerai, kuo-toa, mind flayer (illithid), slaad, umber hulk, and yuan-ti. It also doesn’t cover myriad other monsters that simply were never released in a book that got open-game treatment. But all of these monsters, for example, may be used.
Correctly following and using the Open-Game License requires some care. Read it carefully, and in particular pay close attention to the requirements in Section 15.
As noted in other answers, no, you are not allowed to use these creatures under Fair Use. You could go back to their original mythological underpinnings (for those that have them), but you would have to take great care to make sure everything about them you describe comes from myth and not from D&D.
There is another option, however. Many Dungeons & Dragons monsters are available for use under the Open Game License. This does not cover images (at least not Wizards of the Coast’s images; some artists have released images of D&D monsters under the OGL), but it does cover their names, their stats, the names of their abilities, and their general “character.” It also does not cover certain particular iconic monsters, which Wizards of the Coast reserved as “product identity.” This would be beholder, carrion crawler, displacer beast, gauth, githyanki, githzerai, kuo-toa, mind flayer (illithid), slaad, umber hulk, and yuan-ti. It also doesn’t cover myriad other monsters that simply were never released in a book that got open-game treatment. But all of these monsters, for example, may be used.
Correctly following and using the Open-Game License requires some care. Read it carefully, and in particular pay close attention to the requirements in Section 15.
edited Oct 2 at 15:59
answered Oct 1 at 3:19
KRyanKRyan
2701 silver badge8 bronze badges
2701 silver badge8 bronze badges
Just out of curiosity, why only OGL, no SRD mention?
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 3:48
2
@nitsua60 Because the SRD isn’t really legally relevant. The SRD is just the original document that Wizards released under the OGL, but ultimately what you need to use any open-game content is the OGL, whether that’s the SRD or other open-game content (e.g. Pathfinder, maybe some 5e stuff?).
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 3:57
Ahh... okay. I'm probably not understanding the nuances of what exactly SRD(s) contain vs. OGL(s). Thanks!
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 13:12
@nitsua60 Basically, OGL is the licence that can be used to allow you to re-use and redistribute certain D&D content. The SRD is one particular document released under that license.
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 13:13
You can find D&D-related images published under OGL by third-party publishers (in fact I have some on my machine, including the OGL that was distributed with them), but not the images from official rulebooks AFAIK.
– Neil Slater
Oct 2 at 15:36
add a comment
|
Just out of curiosity, why only OGL, no SRD mention?
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 3:48
2
@nitsua60 Because the SRD isn’t really legally relevant. The SRD is just the original document that Wizards released under the OGL, but ultimately what you need to use any open-game content is the OGL, whether that’s the SRD or other open-game content (e.g. Pathfinder, maybe some 5e stuff?).
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 3:57
Ahh... okay. I'm probably not understanding the nuances of what exactly SRD(s) contain vs. OGL(s). Thanks!
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 13:12
@nitsua60 Basically, OGL is the licence that can be used to allow you to re-use and redistribute certain D&D content. The SRD is one particular document released under that license.
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 13:13
You can find D&D-related images published under OGL by third-party publishers (in fact I have some on my machine, including the OGL that was distributed with them), but not the images from official rulebooks AFAIK.
– Neil Slater
Oct 2 at 15:36
Just out of curiosity, why only OGL, no SRD mention?
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 3:48
Just out of curiosity, why only OGL, no SRD mention?
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 3:48
2
2
@nitsua60 Because the SRD isn’t really legally relevant. The SRD is just the original document that Wizards released under the OGL, but ultimately what you need to use any open-game content is the OGL, whether that’s the SRD or other open-game content (e.g. Pathfinder, maybe some 5e stuff?).
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 3:57
@nitsua60 Because the SRD isn’t really legally relevant. The SRD is just the original document that Wizards released under the OGL, but ultimately what you need to use any open-game content is the OGL, whether that’s the SRD or other open-game content (e.g. Pathfinder, maybe some 5e stuff?).
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 3:57
Ahh... okay. I'm probably not understanding the nuances of what exactly SRD(s) contain vs. OGL(s). Thanks!
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 13:12
Ahh... okay. I'm probably not understanding the nuances of what exactly SRD(s) contain vs. OGL(s). Thanks!
– nitsua60
Oct 2 at 13:12
@nitsua60 Basically, OGL is the licence that can be used to allow you to re-use and redistribute certain D&D content. The SRD is one particular document released under that license.
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 13:13
@nitsua60 Basically, OGL is the licence that can be used to allow you to re-use and redistribute certain D&D content. The SRD is one particular document released under that license.
– KRyan
Oct 2 at 13:13
You can find D&D-related images published under OGL by third-party publishers (in fact I have some on my machine, including the OGL that was distributed with them), but not the images from official rulebooks AFAIK.
– Neil Slater
Oct 2 at 15:36
You can find D&D-related images published under OGL by third-party publishers (in fact I have some on my machine, including the OGL that was distributed with them), but not the images from official rulebooks AFAIK.
– Neil Slater
Oct 2 at 15:36
add a comment
|
If this is a class assignment to create a game that you have no intention of distributing or selling, then I think you qualify for fair use. Within the context of a college class, it should qualify as educational.
If you are creating a game aimed at the college marketplace that you intend to distribute and/or sell, then it is more complicated. Obviously you can't use the copyrighted images in your product without permission. But can you use the images in a product prototype or mockup that is shown to potential investors or focus groups? This would almost certainly not count as fair use, but if you are only doing private viewings, and you make it clear that those images are placeholders, you probably won't attract any trouble.
If you want to avoid any problems, then find a starving art student that would love to be paid to create images for you. There are sure to be plenty around.
add a comment
|
If this is a class assignment to create a game that you have no intention of distributing or selling, then I think you qualify for fair use. Within the context of a college class, it should qualify as educational.
If you are creating a game aimed at the college marketplace that you intend to distribute and/or sell, then it is more complicated. Obviously you can't use the copyrighted images in your product without permission. But can you use the images in a product prototype or mockup that is shown to potential investors or focus groups? This would almost certainly not count as fair use, but if you are only doing private viewings, and you make it clear that those images are placeholders, you probably won't attract any trouble.
If you want to avoid any problems, then find a starving art student that would love to be paid to create images for you. There are sure to be plenty around.
add a comment
|
If this is a class assignment to create a game that you have no intention of distributing or selling, then I think you qualify for fair use. Within the context of a college class, it should qualify as educational.
If you are creating a game aimed at the college marketplace that you intend to distribute and/or sell, then it is more complicated. Obviously you can't use the copyrighted images in your product without permission. But can you use the images in a product prototype or mockup that is shown to potential investors or focus groups? This would almost certainly not count as fair use, but if you are only doing private viewings, and you make it clear that those images are placeholders, you probably won't attract any trouble.
If you want to avoid any problems, then find a starving art student that would love to be paid to create images for you. There are sure to be plenty around.
If this is a class assignment to create a game that you have no intention of distributing or selling, then I think you qualify for fair use. Within the context of a college class, it should qualify as educational.
If you are creating a game aimed at the college marketplace that you intend to distribute and/or sell, then it is more complicated. Obviously you can't use the copyrighted images in your product without permission. But can you use the images in a product prototype or mockup that is shown to potential investors or focus groups? This would almost certainly not count as fair use, but if you are only doing private viewings, and you make it clear that those images are placeholders, you probably won't attract any trouble.
If you want to avoid any problems, then find a starving art student that would love to be paid to create images for you. There are sure to be plenty around.
answered Oct 1 at 21:20
MohairMohair
4552 silver badges6 bronze badges
4552 silver badges6 bronze badges
add a comment
|
add a comment
|
Thanks for contributing an answer to Law Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2flaw.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f45129%2fdd-monsters-and-copyright%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
You should search the site before posting: law.stackexchange.com/search?q=game+copyright
– BlueDogRanch
Sep 30 at 14:54
34
You say "just" the images but the images are much more strongly protected than the names. Consider the amount of effort that goes into thinking up a name versus drawing a picture of the thing.
– David Richerby
Sep 30 at 22:47
2
You may be interested in reading about OrcPub (and OrcPub2) which was / is an online DnD character building tool and the various legal issues they have faced. Also, although I think you've posted your question in the right Stack Exchange site since it is legal based, be sure to check out rpg.stackexchange.com and boardgames.stackexchange.com if you haven't already.
– RyanfaeScotland
Oct 1 at 9:13
16
Please clarify: What do you mean with "a college board game"? Is it a project made for a class which is only meant to get you a good/passing grade? Or do you intent on making it a product?
– Mefitico
Oct 1 at 13:52