Fallout 4 mods are all owned by Bethesda, according to the EULA

[Vagrant0]

First, what you see here is very generic legal stuff. Most of this usually exists just so that people can't sell off mods or altered game content.

 

Second, this is virtually the same agreement that was present with every previous game and version of the CK. Go fire up the one from Oblivion and read. It's the same basic permissions. Bethesda owns the rights to the content made within the CK as well as anything made from their assets.

 

Third, and most importantly, this does not cover newly created assets. New meshes, textures, sounds, ect are still owned by the person who made them, even if they are included as part of a mod. This is because these assets are not Customized Game Materials, since they are instead made from scratch and just formatted in a way that they can be used by the game.

 

 

Nothing to see here, move along.

[DrakeTheDragon]

Actually, I can't recall there ever having been a statement in this very specific wording in any of the EULAs before:

 

"All Customized Game Materials created by you are exclusively owned by LICENSOR"

 

This has always been a completely warped misperception of mod thieves and other ilk in order to try and justify their crimes and make authors belief they'd have no right to tell them not to take their work and redistribute it as they please, while Bethesda never before actually claimed "ownership" but always only "non-exclusive rights" to do with it as "they" pleased, and only Bethesda and nobody else, and it always only took a single message to the company for them to side with the author and come down over the thieves together.

 

But I agree, that's only the EULA for the game, and until the exact same wording is also used inside the EULA for the modding tools, once they're released, it has no actual meaning or effect on anything. And even if they'd go and imply that exact ruling on the contents created without a tool and released before the tools are made available, I still don't see them actually acting out on it.

 

They know they won't stand a chance in court, with a term directly violating copyright laws of multiple countries such as this. And they know as soon as they p**s off one author on a scale such as this, the message spreads, and before they realized it, there won't be modded content for FO4 anymore.

 

Sure it won't be a loss to them by far, but they're planning to go for it and even include "mods on consoles" into it for the first time this time around, and it'd definitely not be a beneficial thing would this endeavor be stopped cold in its tracks before it even started, just by alienating the entire mod makers' community with a stunt such as this and making them their enemy.

 

They aren't that stupid. And I honestly don't see anything like this ever coming. Though if they actually really do this time around... well, it isn't like it'll be a loss for me personally either, if they manage to kill themselves off for good. So I still couldn't care less. And neither should you.

[Moksha8088]

Nope. That's generic legalese you'll find on pretty much every single game.

 

The EULA for the CK is what governs mods with Bethesda's stuff. Wait for that to come out and then you'll know.

Perhaps they will rely on your mod making and when somebody accuses them of shipping buggy products, they can turn around and say, "We intend on patching it for the next 5 years through our unofficial patches".

[JianXintou]

Actually, I can't recall there ever having been a statement in this very specific wording in any of the EULAs before:

 

"All Customized Game Materials created by you are exclusively owned by LICENSOR"

 

This has always been a completely warped misperception of mod thieves and other ilk in order to try and justify their crimes and make authors belief they'd have no right to tell them not to take their work and redistribute it as they please, while Bethesda never before actually claimed "ownership" but always only "non-exclusive rights" to do with it as "they" pleased, and only Bethesda and nobody else, and it always only took a single message to the company for them to side with the author and come down over the thieves together.

 

But I agree, that's only the EULA for the game, and until the exact same wording is also used inside the EULA for the modding tools, once they're released, it has no actual meaning or effect on anything. And even if they'd go and imply that exact ruling on the contents created without a tool and released before the tools are made available, I still don't see them actually acting out on it.

 

They know they won't stand a chance in court, with a term directly violating copyright laws of multiple countries such as this. And they know as soon as they p**s off one author on a scale such as this, the message spreads, and before they realized it, there won't be modded content for FO4 anymore.

 

Sure it won't be a loss to them by far, but they're planning to go for it and even include "mods on consoles" into it for the first time this time around, and it'd definitely not be a beneficial thing would this endeavor be stopped cold in its tracks before it even started, just by alienating the entire mod makers' community with a stunt such as this and making them their enemy.

 

They aren't that stupid. And I honestly don't see anything like this ever coming. Though if they actually really do this time around... well, it isn't like it'll be a loss for me personally either, if they manage to kill themselves off for good. So I still couldn't care less. And neither should you.

Honestly, I think the major determining point here is not necessarily the "exclusively owned" but the "Customized Game Materials" - in law you have to read VERY carefully (I may study German/E.U. law but I'd wager this applies generally). I can see this going three major ways if it goes to court:

 

A) The court tells them to rewrite their EULA due to unconscionability (which I highly doubt since we're talking copyright law and I don't think unconscionability applies here to the same degree)

B) The court tells them to rewrite their EULA to be more specific (e.g. as to what constitutes "Customized Game Materials"

C) The court determines what "Customized Game Materials" entails.

 

 

Personally, I kinda doubt it will come to that given the points you mentioned and the last point Vagrant0 made. It doesn't have to hurt them financially to hurt them, either. Bad PR can be enough to have an effect.

Edited November 7, 2015 by JianXintou

[HeyYou]

It's all basically meaningless, until someone actually takes it to court, and things get clarified. A 'strict' reading of the EULA (skyrim CK) would seem to indicate that ANYTHING you put into the game using the CK, beth gets full rights to, whether it is wholly created by you, or not. So, if they really felt like it, they could use whatever assets, in another game, or whatever, and not even have to mention your name. But, once again, it's all about interpretation. Until a judge says otherwise, that is what I assume it to mean.

 

I really don't think beth would be stupid enough to try and take 'exclusive' ownership of anything released in a mod though..... Not that that minor distinction would effectively make any real difference at all. Of course, it might just be legalese so they can put mods on consoles. A workaround for 'official content', or some such. After all, they would 'own' it, so, they could release it to consoles.

[WursWaldo]

Bethesda doesn't want things they can make on their own. They do not care about meshes or textures BUT the 'it's always been this way' crowd should reread the FO4 EULA. By implication and extension Bethesda owns anything that is made to work with their software. That is new to a Bethesda EULA.

They are setting the ground work for mods being used for consoles and I believe they will take ownership of any content uploaded to Bethesda.net, similar to what STEAM does now with Skyrim mods. That is why Bethesda has changed the verbiage of the EULA.

[JimboUK]

Bethesda doesn't want things they can make on their own. They do not care about meshes or textures BUT the 'it's always been this way' crowd should reread the FO4 EULA. By implication and extension Bethesda owns anything that is made to work with their software. That is new to a Bethesda EULA.

They are setting the ground work for mods being used for consoles and I believe they will take ownership of any content uploaded to Bethesda.net, similar to what STEAM does now with Skyrim mods. That is why Bethesda has changed the verbiage of the EULA.

 

Mod thieves are going to love this, how can the creator order at takedown when they don't actually own the work?

[JianXintou]

I'm gonna wait and see which interpretation of the wording they will actually put to action.

[WursWaldo]

 

Bethesda doesn't want things they can make on their own. They do not care about meshes or textures BUT the 'it's always been this way' crowd should reread the FO4 EULA. By implication and extension Bethesda owns anything that is made to work with their software. That is new to a Bethesda EULA.

They are setting the ground work for mods being used for consoles and I believe they will take ownership of any content uploaded to Bethesda.net, similar to what STEAM does now with Skyrim mods. That is why Bethesda has changed the verbiage of the EULA.

Mod thieves are going to love this, how can the creator order at takedown when they don't actually own the work?

But there is another statement in the FO4 EULA that says modders must own or have licensed or legal right to the modified content they upload. That is also new, like they took it directly from the Nexus upload agreement. Thievery is a concern along with modders uploading content they made with non-commercial licensed programs like the home or student versions of Photoshop or the student version of 3dmax.

 

I notice here at Nexus people are getting very emotional about some aspects of these types of discussions. The fail of monetized mods 6 months ago, the new EULA is worded differently and more restrictive, a new file format that cannot be opened, Pete Hines and Todd Howard dodging direct questions about the future of modding. The timing and circustances are very suspect. :confused:

[JimboUK]

 

 

Bethesda doesn't want things they can make on their own. They do not care about meshes or textures BUT the 'it's always been this way' crowd should reread the FO4 EULA. By implication and extension Bethesda owns anything that is made to work with their software. That is new to a Bethesda EULA.

They are setting the ground work for mods being used for consoles and I believe they will take ownership of any content uploaded to Bethesda.net, similar to what STEAM does now with Skyrim mods. That is why Bethesda has changed the verbiage of the EULA.

Mod thieves are going to love this, how can the creator order at takedown when they don't actually own the work?

But there is another statement in the FO4 EULA that says modders must own or have licensed or legal right to the modified content they upload. That is also new, like they took it directly from the Nexus upload agreement. Thievery is a concern along with modders uploading content they made with non-commercial licensed programs like the home or student versions of Photoshop or the student version of 3dmax.

 

I notice here at Nexus people are getting very emotional about some aspects of these types of discussions. The fail of monetized mods 6 months ago, the new EULA is worded differently and more restrictive, a new file format that cannot be opened, Pete Hines and Todd Howard dodging direct questions about the future of modding. The timing and circustances are very suspect. :confused:

 

 

Modders having to own the content befoe uploading is a good thing, maybe it's in response to all the thievery that went on with Skyrim mods on the Workshop.