showler Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 Not how TOS work. Are you making a moral argument? Because in that case I'd like to know why the second modder gets punished? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest deleted34304850 Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 watch how he derails the conversation away from the original topic. its masterful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WileCoyote68 Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 Not how TOS work. Are you making a moral argument? Because in that case I'd like to know why the second modder gets punished?I don't even want to go into the moral reprehensibility of the procedure. This lacks any criticism. Terms of service are not the ultimate law. See Sky. They had to adapt some key points of their ToS by court order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsharaMeradin Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 The author granting permission can revoke permission if the one using the assets breaks the "terms" established between the two of them. Said terms need to be documented and retained for staff to review should the original author make a request to remove the mod using their assets. Example:The original author says that the other can use the assets provided they credit them for their work and link back to their mod. The other agrees to do so. When that mod is released if there is no mention of the original author having done the work or no link is provided, the original author can revoke permission and request the staff to remove that mod. The most recent change in Nexus policy does not affect this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenncave Posted July 27, 2021 Author Share Posted July 27, 2021 Not how TOS work. Are you making a moral argument? Because in that case I'd like to know why the second modder gets punished?The second modder is using something that they do not own and only have permission to use. Punishment? I think not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WileCoyote68 Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 The author granting permission can revoke permission if the one using the assets breaks the "terms" established between the two of them. Said terms need to be documented and retained for staff to review should the original author make a request to remove the mod using their assets. Example:The original author says that the other can use the assets provided they credit them for their work and link back to their mod. The other agrees to do so. When that mod is released if there is no mention of the original author having done the work or no link is provided, the original author can revoke permission and request the staff to remove that mod. The most recent change in Nexus policy does not affect this.You're barking up the wrong tree. The initial situation has changed drastically because of the changes that have been made. If it had already been like that at that time, the author would not have granted any permissions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0z2y Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 Not how TOS work. Are you making a moral argument? Because in that case I'd like to know why the second modder gets punished?The second modder is using something that they do not own and only have permission to use. Punishment? I think not. I don't see him punishing the other author. He simply don't want any of his work/assets in Nexus anymore - which they did by the banned note.He even says that he has no issue with the permission granted before if the mods using his stuff are moved out of Nexus. Not taking sides here, just my 2 cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
showler Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 The second modder is using something that they do not own and only have permission to use. Punishment? I think not. They would be forced to remove/change their mod despite living up to the terms of the permission. How is it not punishment? The mod in question was literally called a "modders resource". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battousai124 Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 The fundamental situation has changed, like so:Initial situation:"You may use my assets in your mod. As I have the ability to delete them, should I choose to do so for whatever reason, at any point in time, I expect you to follow that lead."Current situation:"As I am no longer able to delete my mods on a case by case basis, I have requested that ALL my mods are removed from nexusmods, this unfortunately also includes the use in your mod, please respect my decision." There is no ambiguity or confusion here, just a change in situation that has to be followed on legal, moral and ethical grounds. Everything else is unacceptable. The same goes for WeaponSmith Extended for example, I have noticed that a mod has been hidden by the original author, which s/he gave permission for, and I have attempted to find out, if the author would like to change the permission given. I have not gotten a response yet, but I will act in favor of the original author, until I receive a response to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
showler Posted July 27, 2021 Share Posted July 27, 2021 Initial situation:"You may use my assets in your mod. As I have the ability to delete them, should I choose to do so for whatever reason, at any point in time, I expect you to follow that lead."Except that was not the terms of the permission given (if it was, the second modder would actually be in violation) and time-travel doesn't exist, so.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts