- Joined
- Feb 9, 2019
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
- First Language
- Italian
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
Are Mimics from DnD copyrighted? I was thinking to add them in my a game. I'm asking because some monsters from that game are copyrighted
Mimic and Copyright
- Thread starter MagicFool64
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2014
- Messages
- 13
- Reaction score
- 6
- First Language
- English
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
I don't think you can copyright the concept of a 'mimic' as it is some kind of creation in possession of something. Just as you can't copyright an idea. A mimic could be anything from a book with teeth to a chest with a maw.
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 3,729
- Reaction score
- 4,682
- First Language
- English
- Primarily Uses
- RMMZ
I've moved this thread to General Discussion. Please be sure to post your threads in the correct forum next time. Thank you.
Ideas can never be copyrighted. You can only copyright the materialization of an idea in an artistic work. For more info check out my legal info thread (link in signature). You can find the link here:
The Creator's Legal Clinic: Advices and Explanations
Disclaimer: Knowledge and limits of responsibility First of all, let me say that all incoming advices and explanations are from me. My legal knowledge comes from currently being a Law student at a Canadian University with about one year left (at the time of writing, April 2019. I still got to...
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2018
- Messages
- 314
- Reaction score
- 285
- First Language
- English
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
Haha the one and only incredibly niche area of the law that I actually (probably) know more about than @MushroomCake28 how about that.
The important distinction here is that unlike Illithids or Displacer Beasts or Beholders, Mimics are not part of the content that WotC defines as "Product Identity" and thus fall under the Open Gaming License. This distinction was important back in the 3.X days and is important again now in the 5E era. This makes sense because D&D "owning" mimics would make about as much sense as it "owning" dragons. WotC is fine with you using OGL Content, they just don't want you using the monsters and other proper nouns they've earmarked
Look up '5E Product Identity' if you really want to see the content that WotC is telling you not to use, but I mean, again...no one cares about your RPG Maker game, if you ascribe to realism there is a hard limit on the number of people that are ever potentially gonna care about your RPG Maker game even if you finish it (statistically unlikely) AND it's great...and sometimes it's a good thing that no one cares about your RM Game. You could be using owlbears or a beholder or w/e and WotC is never going to sue you because WotC is never going to know, or care, about your RPG Maker game. (My lack of respect for intellectual property rights isn't an across the board principle, by the way: D&D specifically took several monsters that existed in mythology or were clearly based on mythical creatures, and tried to claim them as IP, which is wrong. Copywrong.)
Um also, yeah, does everyone remember how the makers of D&D sued From Software for including those terrifying Mimics that are like one of the top five most memorable things that kill you in the Souls games? Oh, that's right, they didn't.
(I don't mean to be rude but this is definitely one of the sillier questions I've ever come across on here. Considering that like every FF game had Mimics w/o it being an issue with TSR/later WotC. And the original Final Fantasy was based fairly directly on the original Dungeons & Dragons game.)
The important distinction here is that unlike Illithids or Displacer Beasts or Beholders, Mimics are not part of the content that WotC defines as "Product Identity" and thus fall under the Open Gaming License. This distinction was important back in the 3.X days and is important again now in the 5E era. This makes sense because D&D "owning" mimics would make about as much sense as it "owning" dragons. WotC is fine with you using OGL Content, they just don't want you using the monsters and other proper nouns they've earmarked
Look up '5E Product Identity' if you really want to see the content that WotC is telling you not to use, but I mean, again...no one cares about your RPG Maker game, if you ascribe to realism there is a hard limit on the number of people that are ever potentially gonna care about your RPG Maker game even if you finish it (statistically unlikely) AND it's great...and sometimes it's a good thing that no one cares about your RM Game. You could be using owlbears or a beholder or w/e and WotC is never going to sue you because WotC is never going to know, or care, about your RPG Maker game. (My lack of respect for intellectual property rights isn't an across the board principle, by the way: D&D specifically took several monsters that existed in mythology or were clearly based on mythical creatures, and tried to claim them as IP, which is wrong. Copywrong.)
Um also, yeah, does everyone remember how the makers of D&D sued From Software for including those terrifying Mimics that are like one of the top five most memorable things that kill you in the Souls games? Oh, that's right, they didn't.
(I don't mean to be rude but this is definitely one of the sillier questions I've ever come across on here. Considering that like every FF game had Mimics w/o it being an issue with TSR/later WotC. And the original Final Fantasy was based fairly directly on the original Dungeons & Dragons game.)
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2013
- Messages
- 31,365
- Reaction score
- 7,675
- First Language
- German
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
@MagicFool64
What all this comes down to is that you can only copyright things that you created on your own.
As a much better example TSR (the original company owning D&D) had to name one of their races the Halflings because the original name Hobbit was copyrighted by the original creator, Tolkien. And they couldn't copyright the name "halfling" either because that was not the original idea either, that would have been Tolkiens as well.
They could copyright monsters they invented themselves for use in D&D (and have done so, although in some cases it might be questionable if the idea was really theirs first or if it was only a variant of a folklore story).
But the concept and idea of a "Mimic" is also much older and does not come from them. That is the reason why they had to place their version of it in "open content" - not because they decided to give it away, but because the idea was never theirs to begin with. Just check for example the many cases of japanese youkai who have the forms of household items of various types, those are centuries old.
What all this comes down to is that you can only copyright things that you created on your own.
As a much better example TSR (the original company owning D&D) had to name one of their races the Halflings because the original name Hobbit was copyrighted by the original creator, Tolkien. And they couldn't copyright the name "halfling" either because that was not the original idea either, that would have been Tolkiens as well.
They could copyright monsters they invented themselves for use in D&D (and have done so, although in some cases it might be questionable if the idea was really theirs first or if it was only a variant of a folklore story).
But the concept and idea of a "Mimic" is also much older and does not come from them. That is the reason why they had to place their version of it in "open content" - not because they decided to give it away, but because the idea was never theirs to begin with. Just check for example the many cases of japanese youkai who have the forms of household items of various types, those are centuries old.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2014
- Messages
- 4,078
- Reaction score
- 2,654
- First Language
- Greek
- Primarily Uses
- RMMZ
"Haha the one and only incredibly niche area of the law that I actually (probably) know more about than @MushroomCake28 how about that. "
How about no? Your post tells different.
"and thus fall under the Open Gaming License. "
@CrowStorm , proof and evidence on what you claim here? You can not end up to such a conclusion out of thin air. Dragons is a straw man argument really.
Dragon has ancient history lore. Thus it is in public domain. That is the reason. Is there anything similar and more solid than your words that can claim that mimics are in OGL?
Public domain by default overrides OGL and any other license. If WoC would even put dragon "under OGL licensing" i would reject the validity. The have ZERO authority to put such ancient concepts under any "license".
Shall someone put human breath on OGL too maybe? T
Example of evidence:
I state that the dragon concept is in public domain, since the origin of the first ones ever told are in ancient Greece, thus nobody can copyright the concept "dragon".
en.wikipedia.org
But! You can not use WoC dragon characters and lore of their world as being in public domain. THAT content belongs to WoC and they are free to manage it as they see fit.
By the way, Zeus was a shapeshifter and in mythology he transformed himself into several living creatures.
Some other gods of Olympus had similar powers.
Not to mention other creatures having more similar powers to a mimic. Take a look on Proteus.
en.wikipedia.org
@MagicFool64 I can tell that these fantasy concepts are too old (ancient actually) to be claimed as someone's intellectual property.
I got no clue though, on the implementation of the mimic concept to a treasure chest. I am not sure of its origin and I don't really know if WoC can claim it as their own.
On that part, I would like to request information if someone else knows better.
As a word it is Latin and Greek too. As a creature though I got no clue if it existed on any lore. Plus I think that mimics with the form of a chest is probably not 100% safe to use, except if someone counters my argument with solid evidence, which I would be delighted if it would happen.
P.S. (Reading @Andar 's reply I strongly trend to the fact that WoC has no authority at all to such concepts)
How about no? Your post tells different.
"and thus fall under the Open Gaming License. "
@CrowStorm , proof and evidence on what you claim here? You can not end up to such a conclusion out of thin air. Dragons is a straw man argument really.
Dragon has ancient history lore. Thus it is in public domain. That is the reason. Is there anything similar and more solid than your words that can claim that mimics are in OGL?
Public domain by default overrides OGL and any other license. If WoC would even put dragon "under OGL licensing" i would reject the validity. The have ZERO authority to put such ancient concepts under any "license".
Shall someone put human breath on OGL too maybe? T
Example of evidence:
I state that the dragon concept is in public domain, since the origin of the first ones ever told are in ancient Greece, thus nobody can copyright the concept "dragon".
Dragons in Greek mythology - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
But! You can not use WoC dragon characters and lore of their world as being in public domain. THAT content belongs to WoC and they are free to manage it as they see fit.
By the way, Zeus was a shapeshifter and in mythology he transformed himself into several living creatures.
Some other gods of Olympus had similar powers.
Not to mention other creatures having more similar powers to a mimic. Take a look on Proteus.
Proteus - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
@MagicFool64 I can tell that these fantasy concepts are too old (ancient actually) to be claimed as someone's intellectual property.
I got no clue though, on the implementation of the mimic concept to a treasure chest. I am not sure of its origin and I don't really know if WoC can claim it as their own.
On that part, I would like to request information if someone else knows better.
As a word it is Latin and Greek too. As a creature though I got no clue if it existed on any lore. Plus I think that mimics with the form of a chest is probably not 100% safe to use, except if someone counters my argument with solid evidence, which I would be delighted if it would happen.
P.S. (Reading @Andar 's reply I strongly trend to the fact that WoC has no authority at all to such concepts)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2018
- Messages
- 314
- Reaction score
- 285
- First Language
- English
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
Um...everything I said was self-evident, obvious, or both. Also it's "Wizards Of The Coast" or WotC pronounced Wotsee, not "WoC" whatever that is (Warlocks of Color maybe?). There are a ton of RPGs and videogames with mimics and no one has ever sued or threatened to sue anyone for it: burden of proof's not on me, if you can find a mimic-related lawsuit, dispute, or IP argument by all means share.
WotC does not care what you do with mimics. WotC acknowledges they do not own mimics. So whether you're FromSoftware or a tiny indie dev making an RPG Maker game that statistically, based on the track record of the engine, has a 0.03% of being publicly released, fill your game with mimics till the cows which are also mimics come home.
WotC divides its IP into "Open Gaming Content" and and "Product Identity". Mimics clearly fall in the former category, as do dragons and yes, since you mentioned it, the rules for suffocation i.e. breathing are also OGL.
At no point did I suggest that WotC could like...patent...dragons...or whatever the heck it is you seem to be arguing about.
WotC does not care what you do with mimics. WotC acknowledges they do not own mimics. So whether you're FromSoftware or a tiny indie dev making an RPG Maker game that statistically, based on the track record of the engine, has a 0.03% of being publicly released, fill your game with mimics till the cows which are also mimics come home.
WotC divides its IP into "Open Gaming Content" and and "Product Identity". Mimics clearly fall in the former category, as do dragons and yes, since you mentioned it, the rules for suffocation i.e. breathing are also OGL.
At no point did I suggest that WotC could like...patent...dragons...or whatever the heck it is you seem to be arguing about.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2014
- Messages
- 4,078
- Reaction score
- 2,654
- First Language
- Greek
- Primarily Uses
- RMMZ
"Um...everything I said was self-evident, obvious, or both. "
Errr no?
"There are a ton of RPGs and videogames with mimics and no one has ever sued or threatened to sue anyone for it: burden of proof's not on me, if you can find a mimic-related lawsuit, dispute, or IP argument by all means share. "
That's not how arguments work. At the same manner, nobody can actually see with their very eyes your brain. That doesn't mean you don't have one or that it doesn't exist. Thus for the time being, if mimic is a safe thing to use or not, stays as an open problem.
"At no point did I suggest that WotC could like...patent...dragons...or whatever the heck it is you seem to be arguing about. "
And neither did I. But you used dragons as a straw man argument to support your argument on mimics.
So, my argument was on someone telling that: "Since something is on OGL it's ok to be used and..." let me stop you right here.
It's not OGL that gives the green light for dragons to be used, thus claiming so, gives false authority to someone.
THAT was my argument. Dragons are in public domain.
Errr no?
"There are a ton of RPGs and videogames with mimics and no one has ever sued or threatened to sue anyone for it: burden of proof's not on me, if you can find a mimic-related lawsuit, dispute, or IP argument by all means share. "
That's not how arguments work. At the same manner, nobody can actually see with their very eyes your brain. That doesn't mean you don't have one or that it doesn't exist. Thus for the time being, if mimic is a safe thing to use or not, stays as an open problem.
"At no point did I suggest that WotC could like...patent...dragons...or whatever the heck it is you seem to be arguing about. "
And neither did I. But you used dragons as a straw man argument to support your argument on mimics.
So, my argument was on someone telling that: "Since something is on OGL it's ok to be used and..." let me stop you right here.
It's not OGL that gives the green light for dragons to be used, thus claiming so, gives false authority to someone.
THAT was my argument. Dragons are in public domain.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 3,729
- Reaction score
- 4,682
- First Language
- English
- Primarily Uses
- RMMZ
Let's not derail the thread too much. The important thing that OP needs to take from this thread is that the concept of a mimic can not be copyrighted. We all agree on that, no need to add more.
@MagicFool64 The concepts and ideas can't be copyrighted. So yes, you can use mimics in your game. Just don't copy their image of the mimic (since the art is copyrighted).
@MagicFool64 The concepts and ideas can't be copyrighted. So yes, you can use mimics in your game. Just don't copy their image of the mimic (since the art is copyrighted).
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2019
- Messages
- 9
- Reaction score
- 0
- First Language
- Italian
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
Thank you guys
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2012
- Messages
- 3,341
- Reaction score
- 21,535
- First Language
- British English
- Primarily Uses
- RMMV
I think Wizards of the Coast have a list of monsters they actually own, and which you aren't allowed to use in your own creations. I think Beholders are in there, as well as a few other things.
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)
Latest Threads
Latest Posts
Latest Profile Posts
Holy stink, where have I been? Well, I started my temporary job this week. So less time to spend on game design... 
Cartoonier cloud cover that better fits the art style, as well as (slightly) improved blending/fading... fading clouds when there are larger patterns is still somewhat abrupt for some reason.
