New distribution permissions options for all files

[Zaldir]

Permissions are not showing up atm btw?

 

It's showing up, it's just moved from the bottom of the page to the options on the side. :)

[Shadowfen]

A suggestion regarding the credits and permissions drop-down boxes:

 

Could you please add another category for translation permission that is separate from general modification? I think it could be useful to be able to grant blanket permission for translations to be made of a mod without allowing other modifications as well.

[holbrook]

interestingly enough, looking at the top 10 most endorsed files of all time on fo3 nexus revealed that 6 out of 10 of them did not include permission details in the description, and often times lacked a readme altogether. of the 4 that did include details within it, there were mixed results with some allowing free use, and others not. if those that did list this information had mixed results (not to mention only 1 actually even gave permission), why wouldn't the "unspecified" files be expected to have mixed results as well; leaving the ability to "assume" nothing more than pure speculation which is completely unacceptable.

 

considering that out of 4 defined files, only 1 of them gave us permission to use their work; i think it would seem obvious that we have absolutely no reason to believe that the authors of the files that aren't defined would be any more likely to approve of us using their work either, nor would it be acceptable for us to believe it "doesn't matter" as time passes. you, alongside every other moderator would surely attest to spending plenty of time removing stolen work of which is reported by active users; isn't it only logical to think that the big reason you don't spend as much removing the stolen work of inactive users is simply because... well... they're inactive? rather than because they would for some reason feel differently about the misuse of their work than any of the rest of us presently here would?

 

now i won't know for certain unless i spend like 3 weeks or more looking at every mod ever created, but from where i sit, it looks entirely likely that what you called "most" is less than half, and what you called "cases of rare occurence" to be the majority of cases. that is... unless you meant you only consider it "rare" for the author to "have a problem with something that they're unaware of and don't know about", in which case i'd agree. it is afterall pretty hard and rare to be able to know what goes on behind your back.

 

if the generosity of the people who have shared their files in the first place is allowed to be betrayed, if rather than be thankful to the authors who continued to share their work (under the belief and impression that it would remain exactly as they had left it and intended) instead of pulling their files down before leaving us is allowed to be treated as "not good enough" by those who aren't happy unless they're allowed to get everything they want; perhaps i should ask a question posed by one of the members of your staff.

What would you think of a site that allowed people to do that with your work?

by now, i'm exceedingly aware of your ability to ignore my words, and perhaps the words of one of your moderators will not go much further... but what about the ability to ignore your own words?

 

i know how much you hate 1 line paragraphs and posts that require you to use your mouse wheel, but for the sake of not misquoting you, and to leave no doubt as to why hot air is going to be blown when you provided us the heater; i'm afraid i have no choice. so... what effect will a wall of text have when the bricks were made by you? will you come down on me for being the biggest pain in the *** you've had to deal with lately? will you clarify your words and policy to make them unquestionable? will this effort simply go ignored as well? i suppose i'll find out soon enough, and i risk pissing you off (further) knowing full well what it might afford me in the end, but it's time for me to stop doing the talking and let your own words paint the picture.

All the staff at the Nexus are extremely pro modders rights.

 

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.

 

A large number of mod authors like to be in direct control of the files they've created and any thanks, support or feedback generated from it.

 

...you cannot convert and reupload mods that you did not create yourself from Fallout 3 for New Vegas without permission from the original author...

 

...If you convert a file and upload it without permission... you are very likely to be banned from the network without warning.

 

that's your loss...

 

...you cannot use their content without the original author's permission.

 

Even if you can argue that copyright law allows fair-use of modders work without them giving permission(*though it doesn't*) it wouldn't change the fact you can't upload the file here without permission.

 

So no conversions without permission.

 

There are also pink warning boxes galore... and a new tickbox you have to agree to before you can upload... insuring the files you upload belong to you or that you have permission to upload them. There are no excuses now people.

 

Many mod authors give specifics about what permission they give to everyone in regards to modifying their work or redistributing it in their mod description or ReadMe but a lot don't... If the author has not provided this information then you must request permission from them. No information does not mean no permission needed, it means the reverse.

 

That means if you make something from scratch, such as textures, meshes, animations or scripts then these belong to you and you can do whatever you want with them. It means you get to choose how, where and when your files get distributed. It also means that other users don't have the right to do whatever they want with your assets unless you specifically say so.

 

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.

that... is quite simply flawless.

 

this however is where things get ugly... this is where you appear to be arguing with yourself. these are the contradicions in your words that began appearing for the first time as of 2 days ago, and regardless if this is "new policy" or it has "always existed", that gives plenty of cause for concern for any user on here. this thread has also made clear that i'm not by any stretch the only one who is concerned as to what it will mean to have you go back on your word, or what those words were. though i may be the only one dumb enough to not bite his tongue; yet.

No information does not mean no permission needed, it means the reverse.

 

if the author didn't want their content being used in other mods then they should have stated so in their description or ReadMe.

I'm going to respectfully ignore any complaints about making it painfully obvious what can get you banned!

 

I'm not going to officially rule one way or another on the matter of using resources from other users who have since become inactive in the community and have not provided any hint of how they would like their files to be used by others.

It also means that other users don't have the right to do whatever they want with your assets unless you specifically say so.

 

when they became inactive and did not reply to permission requests, and a considerable and fair amount of time had passed without response, then using the author's resources became acceptable.

There hasn't been any change in policy at all.

...the gold rush style race there's been to get a lot of the great mods from Fallout 3 converted over...

 

these cases tend to be very rare...

...the authors generally don't tend to come back

 

I've yet to see a complaint from someone who's actually had a bad experience with this...

the only people who really need to complain about this are the ones who feel wronged by it. So please, step forward wronged masses.

 

the only people who really need to complain about this are...

 

...users who have since become inactive

 

...inactive and did not reply

 

...the authors generally don't tend to come back

 

...making it painfully obvious

 

If the author has not provided this information...

 

You can't know... and the only way you will know is if...

 

All the staff at the Nexus are extremely pro modders rights.

 

and you can prove it...

 

Edited November 1, 2010 by holbrook

[XTR3M368]

If this is such a bad place, is so poorly run and the owner is a hypocrite like you are trying to "paint" with your blob brush of text, why are you even here? Why not go somewhere else where everyone is perfect? If you can't trust them to host your files...why stay?

 

 

[holbrook]

oh sure... why bother cutting your grass when we could all just move to antarctica.

 

as much of a big deal as i might seem to be making over what some people regard as being "nothing", my oh so scary and long paragraphs should not be exaggerated to mean i think poorly of the nexus due to one conflict, or consider the owner to be a hypocrite because of one instance of contradiction.

 

the lack of calling something "smart" does not mean i find it "stupid". it is because i like this place that i have concern for what happens in it, and it is because i want- and plan to stay here that i take interest in what occurs on this site. if that is too much for you to grasp, so be it.

 

doing the right thing rarely makes you popular; it doesn't make me a troll to have opinions contrary to yours, it also isn't a crime to actually "have something to say" when speaking. sure i would love to have simply come on here and said "yay this is awesome" and let that be the end of it, but i have more on my mind than 3 sentences could adequately express. some might call that a good thing, but i won't fault you for thinking otherwise.

Edited November 2, 2010 by holbrook

[Dark0ne]

Holbrook I've read what you have to say (the paragraphs were more readable this time!) and will simply say our policy is our policy. As I've said many times now in this thread it's been our policy for 9 years now and there's not once been an issue with it. Indeed, the only issue has arisen from me clarifying the policy and people unaffected by it then complaining about it. Indeed anyone who has been affected by it can step forward and I'll happily discuss the issue with them and do everything in my power to do right by them, but I'd appreciate no further discussion on the matter for now. You're beating a dead horse.

 

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

 

RE: bug issues with some of the permission settings not being remembered I'll take a look at it tomorrow. It's not some conspiracy to try and get you to admit some false guilt; it'll just be a coding oversight or typo.

[holbrook]

well, the effort in sentence structure wasn't in vain at least, but regardless; as you've requested i will leave things lie. you've heard me out on the issue, and i couldn't reasonably expect anything more than that.

 

please offer your horse my apologies.

 

p.s.

 

i would still very much so be interested in hearing whether or not you think something like... http://home.insightbb.com/~ljhinc/images/misc/flaguse.jpg ...would be worth your effort to implement or significantly help the "distribution permission" information become more clear and readily understandable to others.

Edited November 2, 2010 by holbrook

[documn]

I'm still iffy on this. However, it seems to me that it would go a long way if "the policy" was clearly defined, the policy was put into the terms of service or wherever else it's appropriate, and if the staff stuck to the policy. Then we could decide for ourselves whether or not the nexus is the right place to upload our mods. I mean sure, maybe the nexus has never had a mod author go MIA and then reappear later and ask for any derivative mods to be taken down, but I think it would be reassuring for many mod authors the policy was made perfectly explicit.

 

On a personal note, I don't think that kind of strict treatment is necessary. I think a little human judgement would be good, so I don't mind if you do things on a case-by-case basis.

 

EDIT: Ach, three new posts while I typed this one. Holy crap I'm slow.

[caitivoltaire]

Im a little confused by this change. Aren't ESPs created by the TES construction set technically the property of Bethdesa anyways? I recall reading that in the legal documentation.

 

I can't say that I know the specifics of anything regarding Fallout though.

[buddah]

ESP Files created in the CS belong the Bethesda, however scripts are usually written in Notepad/wordpad and put in game in the CS. So you should assume that scripts are not Bethesda';s property. Also if the meshes/textures/sound/animations.effects used are original by the creator, they are his intellectual property.