Nexus permissions rules (Compilation Patch)

[KalChoedan]

Hi guys, I wondered if you wanted to follow up on the discussion we were having on this over on the Bethsoft official boards - it's probably more relevant a discussion here anyway.

 

First of all I want to make it clear that I have been a huge fan and supporter of the Nexus sites since their inception. I certainly don't mean to offend anyone but I am trying to give constructive criticism - just because I <3 you guys so much :)

 

So in short, I think that the Nexus is making a big mistake with the policy on permissions. I completely understand your motivation - to protect modders, and I also understand that you don't want to get involved in the "drawing of the line". However I believe that if you are going to have permissions then you need to draw that line and I hope I can convince you of that.

 

What I'm concerned about is that by not making a distinction between the types of mods that require permissions to use and ones that do not (but a credit would be polite) you are creating a situation where people are actively being discouraged from giving credit to any other author if that author's work so much as inspires them in the creation of their mod. Obviously this is completely contrary to the spirit of the community (and indeed your own intentions I'm sure!)

 

To take Zenball's Compilation Patch as the catalysing example here, the current rules make it completely acceptable for Zenball to have released his compilation providing he took all the credit for it (with the exception being, as always, any non .esp assets.) That this would be far less work for him is obvious. That he in fact gave credit to everyone underscores what a good guy he is. It's possible someone might have complained about plagiarism, but given even examining the code in the editor couldn't reveal who was telling the truth, how could you possibly ever make a fair decision? Or perhaps another way; instead of (too?) honestly releasing it as the "Compilation Patch", instead Zenball releases the exact same file only he calls it Zenball's Unofficial Patch, and simply turns the "credits" section in the existing readme into a list of which mods not to use alongside his mod "because ZUP already includes those fixes". Would you be insisting he get explicit permissions from the authors of the "conflicting mods"? Aside from his marketing, he wouldn't have done anything different.

 

I hope this makes it clear why the current policy makes no sense and is even counterproductive.

 

I also mentioned on the Beth forums that I was concerned about possible legal "hot water". I am in no way a lawyer so of course my concerns could be completely baseless, and several people poo-pooed what I had to say, so take this however you like. Copyright and intellectual property law is a funny area though. Of course the Nexus is a private site, and you can have whatever rules you want, but remember that the files you host are predominantly Bethesda's intellectual property, legally speaking, and if the permissions control panel was somehow construed as granting permissions over someone else IP... I'm just saying, I could be way off base, but it's something I would be concerned about if I were you (as if you didn't already have enough to do.)

 

So there you go, I hope that didn't come across as aggressive or rude or anything, I am really just trying to help out here.

 

EDIT: added link to beth forum thread

Edited November 10, 2010 by Kal_Choedan

[WastelandAssassin]

so what are you suggestion here?? i'm sorry, but i guess i didn't really understand what you are saying

 

from what i understand of what you wrote, you are saying that the Nexus should be the one deciding which mods you can use, and which you have to ask permission for??

because if you look at the mods here, the authors do say if people can use the assets of the mod without permission, have to ask for permission, or no way that it can be used

and it's not something for the site to decide, as each modder has his right with what he creates and wishes to share here

 

if i didn't understand your point (which i am almost sure i didn't understand) please take the time to explain it to me

[KalChoedan]

Original discussion is on the Bethsoft forums, here. That should help clarify things, WastelandAssassin.

 

Basically what I'm saying is that the system is set up such that if a modder chooses to release their work on the Nexus, if that work is even so much as inspired by anyone else's work that's already on the Nexus, they are tangibly better off if they do not give any credit. That clearly isn't what the system was designed to do. It works really well for things where plagiarism would be obvious e.g. new meshes, textures etc, or where there are entirely new scripts/worldspaces etc for someone versed in the relevant tools. But for anything smaller than that, the system fails, and it fails in a way that harms both the modder (whose time gets wasted) and the community (who may lose access to something they want.)

[Dark0ne]

To take Zenball's Compilation Patch as the catalysing example here, the current rules make it completely acceptable for Zenball to have released his compilation providing he took all the credit for it (with the exception being, as always, any non .esp assets.) That this would be far less work for him is obvious.

 

So you think that going in to the GECK and editing other people's scripts (including taking out any of their comments/quirky edits they made) is easier than making a "one message fits all" request for permission Private Message that you copy and paste to people who already created the work to ask if you can use it in a fix compilation? REALLY?

 

Baring in mind if we have a sneaking suspicion that an author has copied someone else's work we'll ask them if they've "stolen" the work or used it without permission. If they lie about it and we investigate and find them to be lying then they're gone, no questions asked and no reasons given. So any non-crediting of work needs to be properly done else all their "hard work" is going to get undone very quickly.

 

There are three ways you can do this sort of compilation on the Nexus.

 

1. Do all the fixes yourself, from scratch, and release it as your own work
   
2. Get permission from all the people who have made "small" fixes and include them in one downloadable archive
   
3. Just create a file page that contains a text document or description with individual file links to all the pertanant fixes currently available where no permissions are necessary as you're linking to their work rather than using their work
   

 

All of these make sense.

[DeadMansFist849]

Dark0ne, I hate to be annoying, but #3 doesn't make sense, since we're not supposed to make blank file pages...

[Dark0ne]

We can make exceptions. For example if you check the site rules you'll notice we don't actually accept compilations at all. I gave Zen special dispensation to continue to host his compilation here so long as he got the proper permissions. Ergo if Zen were to change to a linking system I'd allow it.

[DeadMansFist849]

Ah, OK, thanks for explaining that :)

[KalChoedan]

So you think that going in to the GECK and editing other people's scripts (including taking out any of their comments/quirky edits they made) is easier than making a "one message fits all" request for permission Private Message that you copy and paste to people who already created the work to ask if you can use it in a fix compilation? REALLY?

 

If only everyone was available 100% of the time and responded immediately to their PM's! I think the amount of time that this particular file has been unavailable should at least be suggestive of how much of the modder's time actually has to go into obtaining these permissions; unfortunately with a bugfix mod it is only going to get worse as more and more fixes come to light. By comparison, I can compare two files in FNVEdit and strip out anything that might give away plagiarism in a matter of minutes at most, at least when it comes to the sorts of files being included here, and I'm far from an expert.

 

The exact size of the burden placed on the modder is is only part of the issue though. Right now it makes more sense for Zen to either just host it elsewhere or to re-brand it the ZUP as I mentioned above and include a list of conflicting mods (or at least acknowledgements.)

 

If Zen had never called this a "compilation" in the first place I doubt this would ever have arisen, and that's just silly.

[Dark0ne]

You said "far less work" to start with, now you're changing it to far less time. The two aren't interchangeable.

 

He could have called it something completely different if he wanted, but as soon as someone realised he was using other user's work without permission and we got wind of it the exact same result would have happened. We weren't born yesterday.

[KalChoedan]

I don't know what else I can say to convince you Dark, if my original post hasn't convinced you then I don't know what will. You don't seem to be suggesting that anything I've said is wrong, but it's also clear that you don't agree!

 

You said "far less work" to start with, now you're changing it to far less time. The two aren't interchangeable.

 

I was using the two terms interchangeably; "far less onerous" is probably most accurately what I meant, though. Think about it: you'd have the editor open anyway to do whatever merge you were doing, the files we are discussing are all really really small, it would only take a couple of extra seconds to check for uniquely identifiable comments. It seems obvious to me that having to seek, track and document explicit permission every time you fix a bug that someone else may have fixed first (and hosted their fix on the Nexus) is going to be more work, more time and more onerous, however you slice it.

 

I don't know if you have actually looked at the file in question in an editor; I have in detail and I can assure you there is no way you would have been able to tell whether the 2 being changed to a 1 was a 1 "stolen" from someone else's file, or whether Zen only read someone else's 1 and then changed his own copy of that 2 to a 1. Born yesterday or not there is literally no way you would be able to make any kind of fair decision, and so it all just sort of falls apart. As far as you would be able to tell, either modder could be lying. If you err on the side of caution and pull the file just in case you open yourself to abuse by trolls, and what's worse, how could the author of the pulled file ever prove they were innocent? If you leave the file up you could be enabling a thief - and how could the complainant ever prove they are being plagiarised? There is no possible positive outcome from this scenario - nobody wins whatever you do.

 

Like I said I completely understand your motivation for this, you are trying to do your best to protect modders rights. But I think in implementing a system that is far more restrictive that Beth's own requirements you are making a huge mistake. Part of the reason that this modding community is so succesful is that Bethesda are so unrestrictive in their policies towards modding. This does more harm than good.