it's not denying them control of distribution, even though it is allowing its use outside of what it was created for. since the author remains the sole distributor of the source files, they are able to stop distribution at any moment which will stop both fallout 3 and new vegas usage. he also wasn't talking about editing their scripts, but rather creating his own .esp that would simply allow a fallout 3 download of someone else to work in new vegas; a compatibility patch in essence.
it's still of course a bit underhanded in certain situations, and definitely has the possibility to infringe another person; but the theft element has at least been removed and control of the files remains where it should.
the big reason i think it would be frowned upon is because people are jumping the gun. it's been less than a week and people are already making such a fuss over not having every mod in the world converted over. -__-
you would think that considering the game JUST came out, that 6 gigs of NEW content would keep them occupied long enough for the 5 meg addons we've ALREADY seen and experienced to be properly ported to new vegas over the course of a few weeks. apparently not, everyone is in such a rush they don't care who they trample to get what they want.
@ no one in general
to all the people who are upset to find out they can't steal someone's work, edit it, and then upload it again under their own name...
if the release of these files is the only thing you claim that matters to you, why is it so important to you that YOU be the one to release these ports anyway?
also, why did it take less than 4 days before you started having panic attacks that these mods aren't ever going to be updated for new vegas? whether by someone with permission or by the creators themselves.
i mean really... less than a week goes by and you already feel justified in taking away from the people who had given to you to begin with?
that's not exactly a "class act".
well fook is a particular mod... it's based on users working and creating mods together under one banner, and if not created for that purpose it's included 'with permission'. the other part of what you're describing seems to merely be one person making their mod compatible with someone else's.
at no point in either situation is there a lack of permission when using other's files, or an overstepping of bounds when making your own files that will work when used with someone else's.
the second part you mention is something already covered. for the most part it's "fine" to make a file that "enables" someone else's, but considering how early we are into modding new vegas (so early that among all the mods currently available there might be 1 or 2 at most which are actually new content, the rest of which are all conversions themselves) it has seemingly been deemed that this is not acceptable, because...
a) we have no way of knowing with our lack of telepathic powers that the author won't or doesn't intend to release the mod themselves and merely hasn't done so yet.
b) if you did release an esp to work with a fallout3 download, it puts the author in a rotten position when and if they do decide to officially port their work over themselves. can you imagine how crappy it would feel to want to share you work with people only to find out someone has taken the ability to enjoy it away from you?
c) if that happens, and they upload anyway then the database now has multiples of the same file (and could be much higher than 2 if more than one person made a "patch"), which is confusing to users downloading/searching for files on the nexus. they can neither manage the file, easily keep track of it, or receive it's comments. if they choose to read the comments, they'll have a high possibility of wanting to vomit as people repeatedly thank someone else for THEIR work.
there will surely be a point in which this is a fairly reasonable solution, but the game hasn't been out even a week yet, and doing this currently is most likely to result in little more than a library which is convoluted with several versions of numerous files and little differences between them.
most would probably agree that it's best to have a little faith considering new vegas nexus is just starting out; not everyone stood in a line for a midnight release. there are tons of people who want to and intend to play the game that just haven't had the chance to buy it yet or had time to sit down with it. there are also those who would like to play it before investing too much time in mod'ing it. after all, what's the use in a game you don't play?
oh, and copyright laws are a little more complex than that =p
for instance, it would be fine to use the image of the mona lisa after a certain amount of time (time already long past) without needing davinci's or its current owner's approval, but no matter how many years pass you'll never get the little mermaid for free without disney's approval.
i think with a bit of permission seeking, asking if people are coming back for new vegas, and a little patience though, we'll all be pretty satisfied soon enough.
I converted and uploaded a mod that I did not ask for permission to do, but the original owner eventually chimed in and said thanks for the work since he didn't have the time to do it himself.
that's what i call being nothing less than fortunate. everyone and every situation is going to be different. if he/she was the type who didn't take kindly to your meddling, you likely would have lost your account. with every risk there is a chance for success, but i'm surprised you'd admit to having broken the ToS in this particular thread regardless of the outcome. i'd call that "risk number 2". =p
What I don't understand is that if the file is already up on the Fallout 3 Nexus, why is it such a big deal to put it up here too? The work was already being freely distributed, and the engine is exactly the same - for all intents and purposes, these mods pretty much already work for New Vegas.
why is it such a big deal to download it from the fallout3 nexus and spend 2 minutes tweaking the file?
what's the worst that can happen? we have more users getting their feet wet and learning how to work with and create mods?
of course i guess that could be bad if it just ends up creating more people who think they can do whatever the hell they please with other people's work. i guess risks are everywhere~
It should be enough to say something like "I did not create this work, this is the person that did, credit goes to him and the original owner(s) of the file". I'm not claiming that any of the work is mine...
it's like driving a french flag into the ground and saying "for mother russia!".
regardless of the "credit" that exists somewhere in the description and most people overlook, the file exists under your name and everyone sees that. you can sing the russian anthem all you want, but at the end of the day it's still france's flag in the ground. it would be much the same even if you could submit it under THEIR account without their knowledge. it's their property, its their responsibility, it's their choice.
leave them to it.
if you have this burning desire to work with mods, why not spend it creating your own?
I also think a ban for this type of thing is way to harsh
when you created your account you clicked on a button that says you have read, understand, and agree to follow the terms of service for this site.
as the terms of service states, "We have a strict zero-tolerance policy for the breaking of our terms and people can and will be banned from the site without warning if they ignore them. Remember; ignorance is not an excuse."
you, me, and everyone else here has either read this, or has lied about reading it. whichever happens to be the case; there is no question that if we become banned from this site, it's our own fault, and we could have prevented it.
considering most of these people may not come back to do the work themselves. Does that mean the work they did in an identical game can no longer be used even with credit given to them?
no, altering the files for personal use is fine, redistributing those files (or any edits of them) is the offense.
If there is a problem, they should come back and tell the person that uploaded it that they would like to see it removed - only then do I think a ban should be considered if the person in question doesn't comply.
they shouldn't have to come back just to tell us what we already know. we don't have permission unless they expressly gave it to us, why would we need to hear that a second time?
they don't have to tell you that you don't have permission 'before' let alone 'after
' you've committed an offense against them, you have to seek AND obtain permission first in order to 'not' cause an offense.
it's not "ok" to take things from people and only leaving them the option of saying "it's not ok" after you've already caused damage, and "if" they find out about it.
it's "not ok" from the start.
besides, by what logic does it make sense that the person stealing someone else's work does not need to ask permission to do so, but the person who owns the property HAS TO ASK
the person who stole THEIR WORK
to take it down?
also... you complain about how if an author isn't active on the site anymore then you can't ask permission, but you validate going ahead and uploading it anyway. well, what if the author wants his stolen work taken down but the person who ripped their work is the one who isn't active on the site anymore? your previous logic would suggest that you validate taking it down even if they're gone, and i can't imagine how anyone would validate instead that the offender's offending file cannot be taken down without the offender's permission, so...
at best it either turns into a nightmare for moderators trying to deal with constant squabbles and drama due to people taking work without permission, or it becomes a game of "whoever is active on the site at the moment is the one that gets their way".
the way things currently work though, offenses are few and excuses are nil. it works, and it works well. realistically, the amount of mods that won't be updated by the author, ported by someone who actually does have permission, or that we won't see a new equivalent of are few and far between. if we don't see type3 released on the new vegas nexus, do you really think we won't see four or five other naked female body-mods show up? do you think the clothing mods won't be converted to the most popular of those models?
I'm not making money off of this file, and I'm certainly not claiming that it was my work. I'm only giving the option for players to enjoy the work someone else completed and obviously wanted to see used.
the author was not making money off it either, but despite allowing you to use their work for free, and despite them wanting to see it used, it is THEIR right to choose how it is distributed, and in what manner it is used. if you can't respect the intentions or their work or the rights for it that they alone possess, then you will never understand why you're supposed to ask permission before going outside of those intentions or trying to take those rights on as your own.
Well ,I just ask if you really read what I said... Anyway I will not waste more time arguing here, is a headache to write in English, just hope this time I have made clear my opinion.
i can appreciate the burden it presents for you to speak in english or read my/our replies when it is not your native language, so i can't blame you if it has become too big of a hassle or annoyance to continue the discussion.
however... i am very literate (and as people are now no doubt aware, verbose), and i have read every word you wrote without fail; taking into account that english is not the easiest language for you to express your thoughts in, well before writing a single word of my own.
for the sake of clarity i won't respond like before, we'll look back at break each point down one at a time, quoting what i'm referring to as i do so.
so... did i really read what you said? am i distorting your words and meanings? let's see...
I dont see any problem in the uploader/modder do the conversion from the FO3 to FONV if in the post it be the credits for the original author, with permission or not from author
but maybe happen the author even answer back when is asked about this (This happens sometimes) ,and if someone already do that before the author made it ,is less work for him
It is impossible that some authors do not like that at all, it's less work for him
the entire concept of "it's less work for the author so i'm doing him a favor", is nothing more but an assumption.
the author also has no guarantee that you are (or anyone else is) able to be trusted with handling the conversion proficiently and up to the authors standards. if someone botches a conversion it could very easily cause more work and headaches for the author later; that's no favor to them or anyone else on here. considering that by your suggestion, he/she's likely to end up with multiple files on multiple accounts with a slew of confused or upset users of the mod; i'd say it's best to assume that if he/she wants a "favor" from someone, they'll ask for one.
And maybe happens the original author is very busy and dont have much time to do the mod(or enter in the forum for answer)and post the mod will take much time ,in comparison if another person with time to do the same mod.
that's something that has happened successfully many times in the past, and many authors are happy to have help from or "pass the torch" to someone else that they trust and let them take care of some or all of the workload. however, this is also something that cannot merely be "assumed" as being what they will want. also, the success of this working in the past is based on communication with and approval
of the original author.
who do the conversion have the obligation of do the credits for the original author ,warn the author about the conversion and offer the control of file ,but post the mod ,with permission or not
the problem is that those who do conversions do indeed have obligations like you say, but the obligation is not with "credit", it's "permission".
this is nothing more than stealing and then offering to return someone's stolen property "if" they happen find out you took it. even if control over the uploaded file does end up in their rightful hands, how are the damages caused by your actions supposed to be undone? are they supposed to just smile and be content despite that they didn't get to release their mod in the way that they wanted, and with the possible changes they may have intended?
as i said early on though, this is not simply about what you want, what you think other people will want, or what a 3rd party will say is "allowed". much (if not most) of this is based upon copyright laws, which vary and can have an effect several different levels of law including international (important because nexus hosts users from all over the world), the united states (because of bethesda), and the united kingdom (because of the owner of this site).
the concept here is identical to what happened with "morroblivion", though you may not be familiar with it. what was created for one game is not something to be treated with a concept of relativity, but exclusivity unless the creator authorizes its use for another game or platform. no matter how similar two things (games) may be, it cannot be assumed that their similarities makes taking content from one game and implementing it into another an acceptable action.
This way is more practical and fast than asking permission for a simple conversion ,and I doubt the original author will be bother about this.
it certainly would be faster if the community had free reign when it came to converting files, but it's only "practical" when you look at it under the beliefs that "it has to be done", "it will be done", and "when it is done, it will have been done correctly and up to standards".
2 of those are simply untrue and the other is little more than wishful thinking.
the reason i stated that there is zero practicality in your idea is because these are not the truths we are dealing with. what we ARE dealing with is the fact that it is not practical in the least to tell tens of thousands of users that they can all feel free to take over and upload someone else's work (leading to multitudes of people all doing the same conversions); nor is it practical to expect that even half of the people that would attempt to do so will have even done an acceptable job of it.
all you would get is a mess of chaos.
I agree in ask permission if the modder will change something from original mod ,like always been.
and like it has always been; we always have to obtain permission when converting a file from one game to another, no matter how similar they are to each other. just as the case has been for morrowind files converted to oblivion, oblivion files converted to fallout, and vice versa.
And you distorted what I actually talked about it, and I have commented on conversions, NOT changes to files.
Second, what I said was that it is just a simple conversion from one game to another, WITHOUT changing anything in the original file
strictly speaking, the point you're overlooking is that a conversion IS
a change. whether it changes the code, the names, the skeleton, the mesh, the textures, or anything else. if nothing needed to be altered, it wouldn't be called a "conversion", and there would be no reason to re-upload it to begin with. if nothing needed to be changed, people would just download the file from the fallout3 nexus.
despite all of this, the absolute base principle in these rules and laws does not revolve around "change" or "credit", it is in the "distribution
" of someone else's property.
if you don't have the right to distribute, then all other points, logic, and reasoning are without the slightest ability to hold water.
being polite is "common sense"
being respectful is "common sense"
not making assumptions is "common sense"
but copyright is "common law
maybe you believe this type of property is somehow different than others or less important, maybe you believe this kind of activity is harmless, and maybe you believe that this course of action is best route for everyone including the authors, but the ability make that decision isn't only not yours; it's not true.
we have no right to supersede another person's decision on their work in any way what so ever.
it's that simple.
sometimes the original author is abandoned the site ,like one modder I have see is not login about a year ,so what do?
Dont do the conversion and hope the original author doesnt have died...?
absolutely and exactly correct.
whether they died, got sentenced to jail for the next 30 years, are hibernating in alaska until february, stopped replying to their email, stopped using the site, hasn't read your message yet, or is outright ignoring you and won't even bother to write back the word "no"; none of these things change the fact that you have not received permission from them.
it's a disappointment to have that happen, but it remains the case none the less.
Firstly I said that was my opinion... just express what I think, if you agree or not, this is not my problem.
likewise- did you think that i was not doing the same? or think that whether you agree with, understand, or choose not to follow the rules is somehow going to end up becoming my problem?
it was merely apparent to me that you do not understand the reasoning for the way things are done. i chose to explain why they are to the best of my ability, and to offer my own opinions as i do; not just for your benefit, but for anyone else who reads, wonders, or questions it. truth be told, i'm not sure why i bother to reply, i just felt the urge~
what happens after i hit the submit button is out of my hands. maybe someone reads it, maybe no one does; maybe everyone agrees with me, and maybe everyone thinks i'm crazy but gives me a +kudos anyway for having the longest post they've ever seen.
what I said was that it is just a simple conversion from one game to another, WITHOUT changing anything in the original file and OBLIGATION to give credits and control file to the original author, and I AGREED on asking permission to change anything in the file .It is impossible that some authors do not like that at all, it's less work for him and be with the file on your control ,as if he himself had made the conversion
you've mentioned doing these conversions without permission but where the author could regain or be given control of the file again several times now. this is a very strange notion though, and i guess the reasoning for that isn't jumping out at you.
you cannot give someone control, return control, or have someone reclaim control again without one very important thing happening first; they have to first lose control
of their property. "returning/giving control of the file back to the author" is nothing more than a very pretty way of saying "i took control away from you, but you can have it back now that i have what i wanted
if this kind of thing were allowed you're also either forgetting or not seeing another important fact.
if a person is allowed to upload someone else's file without their permission; even if the author did have the ability to edit it or chose to take it down at a later date (after it's already caused problems), there is nothing to stop another user from simply uploading it again as many times as they like because they don't require permission to do so. what you have happen here, is that no matter how many times an author is able to change or remove a file that someone else uploaded; because you won't honor their ability to say "no" until after the offense exists, anyone in the world is still free to upload the author's files again, and again, without permission.
in case you weren't aware of the definition, THAT is NOT control
Anyway, since you are so full of rules, why not make a rule, which is the User that is more than 3 or 4 months without logging in, the account will be deleted and the files will be entitled to free modifications, since it is considered abandonment of the original author.
does it really strike you as a good idea to delete the accounts of the people who PROVIDE
you with the content you're so hung up on having? all the while treating their work with utter disregard and a lack of respect merely because they might have taken a break from the game, or because they're simply not available at your beck and call like some sort or servant when you have a request or a misplaced sense of entitlement?
maybe it's best to not answer that...
instead, why don't we make a rule in which the user who is generous enough to share the work they've created with the rest of us (even thought they didn't have to) retains full rights of their property
regardless of whether they stop using the site, quit playing the game, or die on mars in a freak fishing accident; come hell or high water. wherein even if they did get banned and all their files were deleted, no one who still lacked permission would be able re-upload the files because their property
still remains their property
, and they retain full rights, say, and control over all aspects when it comes to editing, modifying, converting, uploading, or distributing (dare i say it again?) THEIR PROPERTY
oh wait... we already have that rule, and it's works wonderfully.
on the other hand, even IF your rule were instated, it would still change nothing for the current situation. why? because when people made accounts on nexus, and when they chose to upload those files, they made an agreement according to the terms of service.
they agreed that the files they uploaded were not infringing copyright.
they agreed that if their files contained work which did not belong to them, they either had permission or were ready to suffer the impending consequences of choosing to upload anyway.
they agreed that "our work" is "our own", and was assured that this site will protect our work and does not tolerate theft or ripping of someone else's property.
they agreed that they read the terms of service in full (also when registering), and agreed to follow them.
in short, changing the rule to your current suggestion would only affect future files. the old ones you wish to convert now would remain protected and/or possibly even hidden. any files you saw from that point on would only exist if the authors agreed to the new rules, and i'd expect we'd see very few who were happy to share their efforts under that stipulation.
you know what's ironic though?
if any author ever wanted their files to be free for others to edit, modify, build upon, or just wanted to leave the file open to conversions for other games, especially in the case of the author's absence during that time... they've always been able to. all they ever had to do was include those words in their description of their work or in the readme file. all this time that authors have always had the option to do exactly what what you're requesting when it comes to their own files. believe it or not, we even have a word for that...
care to venture a guess as to what it means when they don't include that text?
Edited by holbrook, 25 October 2010 - 12:59 PM.