Jump to content

Photo

Uploading converted Fallout 3 mods without permission


  • Please log in to reply
130 replies to this topic

#41
TheVampireDante

TheVampireDante

    Domnitorul armatei strigoi

  • Moderators
  • 26,975 posts
This is how I see it as far as converted and imported mods go:

1. Always ask original author for permission.
2. Check file readme text for 'free use'* being granted (Usually with credit to the original author).

If you ask a mod author for permission, and they say NO. End of story - leave it and move on.
If you do not receive a reply, assume the above answer and do not continue.

Some mod authors will allow convertions or 'ports' of their work, but require that they get 'co-ownership' of the new mod. This is fair enough, and they are entitled to it (it is their work after all).

If the author is absent from the community (retired, moved on, unknown) then whatever their permissions were at the time of their last appearance is what you go with.

If permissions for use were allowed, fine - but still send them an email. They may respond, even if just to acknowledge your message.
If permissions for use were not granted at time of leaving\disappearence - those terms are still in effect. Do nothing with that\those mod(s).

*Free use - author has stated that people can do whatever they wish with the content they have provided. As long as they stay within legal use (do not use for profit, etc...)

If there is\was no indication of permissions listed, whether to allow or disallow - assume that permissions were not granted and do not use the mod, or content.

*********************

Another thing to beware of:

Many mods use assets from multiple modders and mod authors (meshes, textures, sounds, scripts, etc). If a particular mod has content from multiple people, and one of them objects to their work being ported - then either leave their content out entirely (if possible) or ask them politely to reconsider. If they still say no. Leave it at that and use only the items you have permissions for.

Obvisouly, if the mod you want to port over is a retexture, but the required original is disallowed - the whole project is not viable. Again, a drop it and move on situation.

#42
rkelly

rkelly

    Faithful poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts

We are not talking about taking a mod and making changes to create a new mod. Just about porting it as it is from FO3 to NV. Every mod uses resources from Beth and many use resources from other mods. Most modders don't mind as long as the mod is different from what they produced, AND you give credit. Beth encouraged us to make new content by releasing the GECK to begin with. What I am seeing is people in too big of a rush to allow a modder enough time to make their own port, and then thinking they are now a mod author because they were able to port a mod.

There is no problem with porting a mod you like for your own use. Only in porting, then publishing the mod at TheNexus as your own work. Instead of copying someone elses work why not make your own mod? It's a lot more difficult than just porting someone elses work.

Not everyone has the game yet. The release date for Asia is November 4th - over a week away. In order to keep the load down on their servers Steam and Beth staggered the release in different locals over at least 2 weeks. So our Japanese, Korean, Chinese and other Asian modders haven't even seen the game yet.

Then, many of our better modders are not full time gamers, but actually have a life outside of games. They are university students who have classes, exams and I hope a social life, or working people who have a job and maybe a family to support. They may not have but a few hours a week to put into modding. So be a little patient.


so how do the moderators and admins feel about the way i described bringing a fo3 mod to NV? the esp file patch way of doing it which means no meshes or textures or scripts or sounds or esp file from the original mod on fo3 are being ruploaded to nvnexus. the reason i ask is because only the redistribution of models and textures and etc have been addressed.

#43
rkelly

rkelly

    Faithful poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts

I think this whole argument is rather 'artsy' and juvenile. Authors don't have some magical rights to their mods; they put them out there and then they are in the public domain, graphics aside. This wasn't "their" fallout to begin with, they are modifying a game without explicit permission from Bethesda in ways the developers never intended. Likewise, people should be free to mod mods in ways the authors never intended. Certainly, some people would be offended by that, but thats only because they have an unrealistic sense of ownership of something that was never theirs to begin with. This is also what rating systems are for. A bad mod will not get good ratings and will be ignored. Now, I have no plans to do this, and this goes against popular cultural sentiment in the modding 'community' but speaking morally, the sentiment is incorrect.


They do have rights over their creations, the textures and models are their work, they are nothing to with Bethesda. Some people seem to be under the impression that anything shared freely becomes public property, it does not. Seriously how hard is to ask before reuploading someone elses work?


so using that logic the esp file patch idea would basically be the only way to go about it.

#44
rkelly

rkelly

    Faithful poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,736 posts

The original author dont say anything about distribution or edit.


If the ReadMe doesn't state 'open source' or 'permission required' always assume you CANNOT upload the files (including reworked esps). Just because an author didn't state you can't use the work in your own, doesn't mean YOU CAN either.

edit: beat me to it. :teehee:


the esp files unless made by the original mod maker cannot be claimed as there property if some one else made one 100% from scratch as the compatibility patch to bring the mod from fo3 to nv. or so i have heard at the beth forums. the original mod maker can ONLY claim the esp he or she or team made, models, textures, scripts, sounds and etc that they eitherr made or had permission to distribute. the esp file patch idea wouldnt fall under that if the esp was made from the ground up by another modder. but this would be a grey area for some and the same as theft for others.

#45
Kendo 2

Kendo 2

    Leper with the most fingers

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,541 posts

the esp files unless made by the original mod maker cannot be claimed as there property if some one else made one 100% from scratch as the compatibility patch to bring the mod from fo3 to nv. or so i have heard at the beth forums. the original mod maker can ONLY claim the esp he or she or team made, models, textures, scripts, sounds and etc that they eitherr made or had permission to distribute. the esp file patch idea wouldnt fall under that if the esp was made from the ground up by another modder. but this would be a grey area for some and the same as theft for others.


So an author spends a month on a heavily scripted mod and someone comes behind him, spends five minutes in the New Vegas GECK to patch it and that's okay? It ain't in my book. If an esp/esm contains unique features someone made it that way.

The esp issue has already been addressed years ago when Montana made his adult companion scripts. HIS intellectual property and they cannot be used without his permission. The Nexus staff backed him.

#46
OiramX5

OiramX5

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 175 posts
Kendo2
I think there's a contradiction here, no?
Both sides can not take the author's opinion, is what I think.

Sorry ,I dont get it about the "beat me to it"

ladydesire
So you are saying the even the author have be talk or not about the permission ,in the description of the file ,the forum nexus assumes he hasnt give the permission,why?
So this site can speak in place of modders?
This is a decision only the author, is not it?
Or the site have the right of choose in his place in this cases?
This does not violate the rights of the author's choice?
Why does the site have the right to choose by the author?
Because host the files? Or distribute?
This in terms of services that the site has the right to choose by the author in this cases? (IF right ,forget what I saying)

I think in this cases have to be neutral ,if ,for example ,the uploader made the conversion to NV ,with credits and etc ,but without permission because in the original files the original author dont mentioned if he give permission or not ,so no ones can know what the author think about ,both of the sides(Nexus and the Uploader) ,then leave the file as being, and only delete when changing the description of the original file by the ORIGINAL AUTHOR, and not ban the uploader who made the change before there happen the change in the description.

Edit: Now I read again what I wrote and think ,both sides cant do nothing about that ,I think is a max thing of the site Nexus can do is just delete the file ,because ban the uploader is just valid only when he has violated the copyrights ,and he doesnt do that because the author dont talk anything about this in the file ,and in this cases cant be judge.

Edited by OiramX5, 25 October 2010 - 11:03 PM.


#47
Vagrant0

Vagrant0

    relic of a by-gone age

  • Premium Member
  • 10,492 posts
The problem is that many FO3 assets are being uploaded without permission or even attempting to get permission. Yes, we all want to see better bodies, cool weapons,a and all that stuff in NV, but what people are really doing is just alienating the creators of all that cool/important stuff by going around behind their back. In the past 24 hours I've had to remove no less than 6 uploads because of assets which were reportedly stolen.

I'm going to have to suggest, if not outright insist, that fans of mods refrain entirely from making conversion or compatibility patches for those mods. Let the responsible authors figure out what they want to do with those files before jumping in... If you can't wait, make the conversion for yourself and keep it to yourself. The more people press the issue, the more of a hard line we, as staff, will have to start adopting in regards to this issue.

#48
Dark0ne

Dark0ne

    Webmaster

  • Admin
  • 21,492 posts
I have already spoken about this. This wasn't a debate topic; this was me saying "these are our rules and if you don't like them then find somewhere else".

We've always tried hard to protect the authors here because without them there would be no Nexus, no modding. If someone makes unique work on the site then it is theirs to give or take as they wish.

#49
holbrook

holbrook

    Enthusiast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 147 posts
@ladydesire

i don't think tactcom is suggest that rips be ok after 6 months, i believe he's just alluding to that eventually there will come a point that we can say "you know... we've waited long enough, and we've given them enough time to show up if they were going to".

while there are many solutions that don't include stealing someone's mod, i believe the key point is that "we shouldn't even be worrying about this yet".

when a time comes that we have reasonable doubt that the original authors will convert or update their files; as he said "i think it's fair to evaluate a solution".

that could mean an enabling or compatibility file, or even (yay) new content.

for instance, we have many capable people in this community; perhaps a lot of them are waiting to see what other people will do before they begin working themselves.

for instance, maybe someone is willing and capable of making a high quality body mod, but they're going to wait and see if there are plans for type3 to be converted, improved, or have a brand new followup before he/she invests the time.

after a long enough time passes to give reasonable doubt that we'll see it happen, the solution might be "then i will create mine instead".

i might be giving the line "evaluate a solution" too much due though~

but yeah... why are people so torn on conversions? i want new mods :(

--------------------

@Oiram

i couldn't understand all of your post this time, but when an author neglects, forgets, or does not include permission in the description it means they do not give permission. in that case you must ask for it, you're not unlikely to get it, and it's not likely to take too long.

the people i have asked in the past have told me yes every time, and some have taken weeks to reply but i did get it.

also, a tutorial that shows people how to convert files is great. not only does it accomplish allowing people to have conversions for new vegas; it also is a great starting point for people to learn.

as you'd expect; the best thing to do is to leave instructions with your files, but the problem is that people either aren't following those instructions, or are assuming they have permission when left blank. our assumptions need to be that we do not when it is blank.

tutorials though, that specifically cover getting fo3 mods to work for nv is a good idea. no one gets hurt by that, but it will help many.

--------------------

@lastofthelight

Authors don't have some magical rights to their mods

correct you are, there's nothing magic about it, but we still have them. the magic is that users think they have rights to an author's mods when it isn't given.

they put them out there and then they are in the public domain, graphics aside. This wasn't "their" fallout to begin with, they are modifying a game without explicit permission from Bethesda in ways the developers never intended.


some might really take that the wrong way, but you are correct that the content bethesda made is not ours. the changes we create are our property though, as you agree with graphics etc; keep in mind that an esp file ONLY saves the modder's alterations.

when it comes to something like changing a number from 1 to .5; we can't say "THAT'S MINE, DON'T YOU DARE MAKE ANY .5's!"

text and numerical data is a little different in how strict it is, our .esp files are what is considered our property.

the issue here isn't about porting infinite ammo mods though; it's about people porting meshes and textures for the most part. things like clothing, body mods, custom weapons (and i mean like ak-47's, not mini nuke shotguns).

now scripts and so forth are not without protection either; though it would be complex to get into, but say we made a special (and i mean "significant" changes to) piece of armor using the default.

i can't stop you from using the same default pieces i did, and i can't stop you from creating something that looks very much if not exactly like mine. instead, you simply can't use my mod's files or data as the starting point, or rather as the "shortcut".

where you're absolutely wrong though, is that bethesda DID give us explicit permission to mod. they have encouraged it and even provided us the tools to do so since morrowind; possibly even earlier than that.

it's important to not that just because they gave us the ability to, they don't give us ownership; just as modders allow users to play with their mods, but no ownership.

but not only does bethesda encourage it, they also take note of it- and many of the mods we saw for fallout 3 have been incorporated into new vegas.

that might very well be the best example for me to illustrate this to you. for fallout 3 we had a mod called iron sights which allowed you aim down the barrel of any gun as if you were holding it, rather than it staying at the bottom right of your screen at all times even when aiming.

now bethesda didn't come up with that idea, but when the implemented that system into their game they started from scratch; they had to considering most of the weapons are new. because they created basically the same result but from scratch (unless they worked with the guy that made the mod and i just don't know it) they are not violating anyone's rights to their work.


Likewise, people should be free to mod mods in ways the authors never intended.


if you understand what i've just explained, you'll now see why this is wrong.

a modder cannot say what you're allowed to do with bethesda's work which they allow you to mod freely, the modder can only say what you're allowed to do with their work. that includes meshes, textures, sounds, and even .esp files.

there exists no way of using an .esp file from fo3 in new vegas anyway, so you would have to create your own anyway. the catch is that creating your own esp file is often either not enough to successfully port a file, or the differences between the two games will require more than just the "same changes".

---------------------

@madae

i know you feel proud of yourself, i know you feel like you did nothing wrong, and i even know the author later said it was fine and dandy.

i also know that you did so without permission, and you merely "lucked out" when all is said and done. not only because the author said it was ok at a later date, but because anyone could have reported it between the time you posted it, and the author did ok it.

sure enough your methods for that example are moot at this point, but if you think that continuing to do this is acceptable and always going to have a happy ending when people find out you've taken their work; you're mistaken and i wish you happy trails~

despite why i reply to others, i'm not trying to convince/explain much of anything to you though; you already have your mind made up that you believe you're somehow justified in doing what you please, when you please, without consent.

like i said before; i'm just surprised you were willing to come on here and call attention to the fact that you break the terms of service by admitting to ripping someone's work without permission right in front of what is now 2 moderators and the site admin.

...in a thread that the site owner specifically made to tell you "we'll ban you for doing this" no less.

to that i say "bravo sir, good show".

carry on.

Edited by holbrook, 25 October 2010 - 11:08 PM.


#50
Kendo 2

Kendo 2

    Leper with the most fingers

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,541 posts

The more people press the issue, the more of a hard line we, as staff, will have to start adopting in regards to this issue.


Bravo! Give 'em hell. Don't take any guff from the swine, and all of that. :thumbsup:




IPB skins by Skinbox
Page loaded in: 0.929 seconds