Well, I posted my rant, and since chances are that I won't last the night,
here's a copy for y'all:
<---------------->
1) The person depicted in the "rape" story was not necessarily 14 years
old. She was 14 *seasons* old. Now in a normal world, this could mean
anything from 3 and a half (4 seasons a year!), to a whole lot older. I
think it's safe to assume from the generalized descriptions that the
character is not 3 and a half, but to assume that it's the story of the
rape of a minor is reading a whole lot into the story. Fact is, it tells
me a whole lot about how the "higher ups" think - as Freud said, sometimes
the cigar IS just a cigar! 14 seasons could mean 14th level - and judging
by the effectiveness of the poison she used, I'd have to say she was at
least that!
2) Double standards, Verant. Or does GM Zatosia have special permission to
be particularly gruesome? Frankly, if I were you, I'd be sending that GM
in for some counseling, or be worried about another Columbine in your own
offices.
3) Intellectual property: If you truly want to force the issue, Wizards of
the Coast would be more than happy to discuss the issue of intellectual
properties with you. Names are not the only thing that can be considered
intellectual property, and frankly, you've stolen a LOT from WOTC
properties. Also, prosecuting ONE instance, while ignoring or encouraging
literally thousands of others is discrimination in the most basic
sense. You are choosing who to prosecute, and only applying the rules
where it suits you. This is not fair to anyone concerned. If you are going
to ban someone for use of "copyrighted materials", then you need to jump on
a lot of cases - not just this one that happens to offend your sensibilities.
4) Derivative work: You are ENTIRELY off-base calling those stories
"derivative works." Who is your lawyer? Lionel Hutz???
(
http://www.cordery.freeserve.co.uk/lionel/)
From the U.S. Copyright Office, Library of Congress, Circular 14:
(
http://www.freeadvice.com/gov_material/copyright-office-derivative-works-circular-14.htm)
<<A “derivative work”—that is, a work that is based on (or derived from)
one or more already existing works—is copyrightable if it includes what the
copyright law calls an “original work of authorship.” Derivative works,
also known as “new versions,” include such works as translations, musical
arrangements, dramatizations, fictionalizations, art reproductions, and
condensations. Any work in which the editorial revisions, annotations,
elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original
work of authorship is a “derivative work” or “new version.”>>
Thus, these stories, while making references to characters in a copyrighted
work, are not, in fact, derivative works, unless you count GM Zatosia's
heroin-addict nightmares.
In short, this was an unfair ruling, completely discriminatory, and far
more inflammatory than the stories ever were.
When are you going to learn to live and let live, instead of burning
everyone woman with a wart and a black cat?
Talies the Wanderer