Why we can't use Patreon, and talking about donations and doing more to support mod authors

[Psijonica]

RE: Bethesda believing they have a claim on all mods.

I can make a mod without using one single thing Bethesda created. I make my own content, every pixel and every polygon, then I use third party tools to implement them. So how is it Bethesda should profit from this? They should be paying me for increasing sales of their games. After all, I only have the largest all original mod out for Skyrim, and my franchise, Bob's Armory, has been so extremely popular for Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim that entire groups of sub mods have been created around it. Bethesda didn't make Bob's Armory. I did. So how is it they should get a cut? In some businesses, if you walk in demanding an implausible cut from someone's net gains, you get shot. Smells like organized crime to me.

 

Anyway, to the subject at hand.

I am personally not fond at all of the newly implemented donation changes. I get spammy pop ups all over the place asking for donations now, when that never happened before. And the offensive part is that these people did NOT create the content they are shoving pop ups in my face for. Why is it, when I have to download some random follower mod to make sure it isn't crediting someone else for my work (happens around 4 times a week actually), I get spammed with multiple donate pop ups, then find my work included without credits? My work is uploaded for FREE. So why should anyone be able to demand money for something I made?

 

I think the original system with the single donate button up where the track, endorse, etc. buttons are should be the limit. And the more I am spammed with donate buttons from people who did not create the work, but only downloaded it and re uploaded it, the more vehemently I feel about this. I don't have patience for people trying to profit off riding my, or anyone else's coat tails anymore.

You are the creator of Bob's Armoury? Then you are my hero. That was the best armour mod back in day. Thank you for that. I truly enjoyed it.

 

Ya I happen to agree with everything you are saying here. The pop ups are annoying. I still say that popular modders should be able to make money from ad-sense and advertising revenue from their download pages. It is really the only way to solve this nonsense.

[sunshinenbrick]

 

In response to post #28750109.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28749744.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

:ermm:

In response to post #28747764.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28740509.

 

 

 

Mr. Dave wrote: RE: Bethesda believing they have a claim on all mods.

I can make a mod without using one single thing Bethesda created. I make my own content, every pixel and every polygon, then I use third party tools to implement them. So how is it Bethesda should profit from this? They should be paying me for increasing sales of their games. After all, I only have the largest all original mod out for Skyrim, and my franchise, Bob's Armory, has been so extremely popular for Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim that entire groups of sub mods have been created around it. Bethesda didn't make Bob's Armory. I did. So how is it they should get a cut? In some businesses, if you walk in demanding an implausible cut from someone's net gains, you get shot. Smells like organized crime to me.

 

Anyway, to the subject at hand.

I am personally not fond at all of the newly implemented donation changes. I get spammy pop ups all over the place asking for donations now, when that never happened before. And the offensive part is that these people did NOT create the content they are shoving pop ups in my face for. Why is it, when I have to download some random follower mod to make sure it isn't crediting someone else for my work (happens around 4 times a week actually), I get spammed with multiple donate pop ups, then find my work included without credits? My work is uploaded for FREE. So why should anyone be able to demand money for something I made?

 

I think the original system with the single donate button up where the track, endorse, etc. buttons are should be the limit. And the more I am spammed with donate buttons from people who did not create the work, but only downloaded it and re uploaded it, the more vehemently I feel about this. I don't have patience for people trying to profit off riding my, or anyone else's coat tails anymore.

Simple. Bob's Armory is still derived from Skyrim. Without Skyrim, what is the mod? A collection of random bits you can't actually do much with.

 

Porting them to some other format means they no longer function in Skyrim.

 

It's not exactly hard to understand how derivative works work.

 

As for people stealing your stuff, report it. Nothing will happen if you don't and getting upset that it happens when you don't act on it isn't logical.

I agree with both sides of this arguement as the debate between IP and labour is one that needs to be had.

It does work both ways as it is reasonable to argue that ideas have been 'borrowed' from modders, by developers, over the years... and profit has been made from it.

A lot has to be said for non-financial compesation eg. gifts, official recognition and credit, promotion and sponsorship. A great deal of this revolves around mutual respect, for the idea and for the work that goes into realising it - these games are designed with the added value of modding in mind.

Unfortunately it seems that the monetary value has become the way in which people are coerced into showing 'respect' for things... hmmm... but this seems to be endemic the world over :confused:

I believe in free spirit of modding like you, but what some people believe is just downright illegal and they give far too much credit to Bethesda for no reason.

 

I as a modder do not want any monetary compensation for my work, but at the same time, I don't like the fact that some people imply Bethesda holds copyright over my work. They don't, that's a legal fact.

No. They (Bethesda) do own everything that is made using any tool that is derived from CK or the game assets. You own the right to participate in the usage of the game and creation tool.

While this is utterly true under current law (although regional law may still rule in the modder's favour) there is a HUGE amount of grey area.

My brother is a music producer so I have learnt a little about this from discussing (arguing) with him. If someone makes a song using Cubase then the only thing that differenciates between being able to make money off it or not is the licence agreement. The labour put into it is not owned by Cubase. This is where there is a difference between IP and labour.

This even goes so far as doing a 'remix' of a song, there are certain things that cannot be copyrighted... a 4/4 beat for example. Used by many but is a fundamental part of the industry. Now of course there is a lot of leg-room between this and blatently ripping off another song and claiming for your own... but its all down to paperwork and what stands in law.

Modding is different because it is a relatively new artform/career and not only has there been very few, if any cases, brought before a judge by now, there is equally little paperwork surrounding it. Furthermore the paperwork that supports either side of a case sometimes only goes as far as the money behind it can.

It is blatant that Beth has the IP for Skyrim and the tools to make things for it, however it is at least debatable to the claim that because of this they actually own a modder's IP when they think of some ingeneous idea that Beth never thought of, release it and then people buy loads of caopies of the game because of the mod...

Like I said, these are uncharted waters in many respect and the industry of virtual worlds is going to continue ripping the lid off this can of worms for many years to come until the 'unwritten' rules that are prevelant in other industries become part of the social psyche.

EDIT: Hell the developers and companies everywhere spend most of the year in court rooms wrangling over these things. Its not clear cut.

There is absolutely nothing "utterly true" or even "grey area" or "unwritten rule" about this. Go talk with your brother again. License agreements can not revert or change laws. Bethesda can not use a license agreement to claim copyright over something they don't have.

 

Unless you are using Skyrim's assets, or using assets derived from Skyrim assets, then you're not breaking Skyrim's copyright.

Unless you use characters, settings, or narrative that is a part of Skyrim's intellectual property, you're not infringing on their IP rights.

Unless you use "Skyrim" or other trademarks in your mod's name, you're not infringing on Bethesda's trademark.

 

These are facts. They're not something you can debate. There's nothing vague or unwritten about them.

The only thing that is vague is exactly how much a certain license agreement clause could be enforced. However it is not debatable that they can not override a nation's laws, including copyright law.

 

So the only thing we are not absolutely sure of, is whether modders are allowed to make money using something made with creation kit.

 

If the mod is not made with creation kit, they 100% can. If their mod is made with creation kit, whether they can monetize it or not, they still hold copyright over their own work. Bethesda for example, can not just download a mod and claim it as their own and sell it as DLC, because they don't own its copyright.

What is fact and what holds up in court are sometimes two different things. Sad but true.

That's another pure nonsense. Why don't you stop breathing then? You can't know whether breathing is legal or not unless you go to a court about it, so just to be sure don't breathe.

 

 

I would estimate that in the future it may very well be illegal to breathe unless a computer somewhere says you should be.

[Lisnpuppy]

 

In response to post #28750109.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28749744.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28747764.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28740509.

 

 

 

Mr. Dave wrote: RE: Bethesda believing they have a claim on all mods.

I can make a mod without using one single thing Bethesda created. I make my own content, every pixel and every polygon, then I use third party tools to implement them. So how is it Bethesda should profit from this? They should be paying me for increasing sales of their games. After all, I only have the largest all original mod out for Skyrim, and my franchise, Bob's Armory, has been so extremely popular for Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim that entire groups of sub mods have been created around it. Bethesda didn't make Bob's Armory. I did. So how is it they should get a cut? In some businesses, if you walk in demanding an implausible cut from someone's net gains, you get shot. Smells like organized crime to me.

 

Anyway, to the subject at hand.

I am personally not fond at all of the newly implemented donation changes. I get spammy pop ups all over the place asking for donations now, when that never happened before. And the offensive part is that these people did NOT create the content they are shoving pop ups in my face for. Why is it, when I have to download some random follower mod to make sure it isn't crediting someone else for my work (happens around 4 times a week actually), I get spammed with multiple donate pop ups, then find my work included without credits? My work is uploaded for FREE. So why should anyone be able to demand money for something I made?

 

I think the original system with the single donate button up where the track, endorse, etc. buttons are should be the limit. And the more I am spammed with donate buttons from people who did not create the work, but only downloaded it and re uploaded it, the more vehemently I feel about this. I don't have patience for people trying to profit off riding my, or anyone else's coat tails anymore.

Simple. Bob's Armory is still derived from Skyrim. Without Skyrim, what is the mod? A collection of random bits you can't actually do much with.

 

Porting them to some other format means they no longer function in Skyrim.

 

It's not exactly hard to understand how derivative works work.

 

As for people stealing your stuff, report it. Nothing will happen if you don't and getting upset that it happens when you don't act on it isn't logical.

I agree with both sides of this arguement as the debate between IP and labour is one that needs to be had.

It does work both ways as it is reasonable to argue that ideas have been 'borrowed' from modders, by developers, over the years... and profit has been made from it.

A lot has to be said for non-financial compesation eg. gifts, official recognition and credit, promotion and sponsorship. A great deal of this revolves around mutual respect, for the idea and for the work that goes into realising it - these games are designed with the added value of modding in mind.

Unfortunately it seems that the monetary value has become the way in which people are coerced into showing 'respect' for things... hmmm... but this seems to be endemic the world over :confused:

I believe in free spirit of modding like you, but what some people believe is just downright illegal and they give far too much credit to Bethesda for no reason.

 

I as a modder do not want any monetary compensation for my work, but at the same time, I don't like the fact that some people imply Bethesda holds copyright over my work. They don't, that's a legal fact.

:ermm:

No. They (Bethesda) do own everything that is made using any tool that is derived from CK or the game assets. You own the right to participate in the usage of the game and creation tool.

While this is utterly true under current law (although regional law may still rule in the modder's favour) there is a HUGE amount of grey area.

My brother is a music producer so I have learnt a little about this from discussing (arguing) with him. If someone makes a song using Cubase then the only thing that differenciates between being able to make money off it or not is the licence agreement. The labour put into it is not owned by Cubase. This is where there is a difference between IP and labour.

This even goes so far as doing a 'remix' of a song, there are certain things that cannot be copyrighted... a 4/4 beat for example. Used by many but is a fundamental part of the industry. Now of course there is a lot of leg-room between this and blatently ripping off another song and claiming for your own... but its all down to paperwork and what stands in law.

Modding is different because it is a relatively new artform/career and not only has there been very few, if any cases, brought before a judge by now, there is equally little paperwork surrounding it. Furthermore the paperwork that supports either side of a case sometimes only goes as far as the money behind it can.

It is blatant that Beth has the IP for Skyrim and the tools to make things for it, however it is at least debatable to the claim that because of this they actually own a modder's IP when they think of some ingeneous idea that Beth never thought of, release it and then people buy loads of caopies of the game because of the mod...

Like I said, these are uncharted waters in many respect and the industry of virtual worlds is going to continue ripping the lid off this can of worms for many years to come until the 'unwritten' rules that are prevelant in other industries become part of the social psyche.

EDIT: Hell the developers and companies everywhere spend most of the year in court rooms wrangling over these things. Its not clear cut.

There is absolutely nothing "utterly true" or even "grey area" or "unwritten rule" about this. Go talk with your brother again. License agreements can not revert or change laws. Bethesda can not use a license agreement to claim copyright over something they don't have.

 

Unless you are using Skyrim's assets, or using assets derived from Skyrim assets, then you're not breaking Skyrim's copyright.

Unless you use characters, settings, or narrative that is a part of Skyrim's intellectual property, you're not infringing on their IP rights.

Unless you use "Skyrim" or other trademarks in your mod's name, you're not infringing on Bethesda's trademark.

 

These are facts. They're not something you can debate. There's nothing vague or unwritten about them.

The only thing that is vague is exactly how much a certain license agreement clause could be enforced. However it is not debatable that they can not override a nation's laws, including copyright law.

 

So the only thing we are not absolutely sure of, is whether modders are allowed to make money using something made with creation kit.

 

If the mod is not made with creation kit, they 100% can. If their mod is made with creation kit, whether they can monetize it or not, they still hold copyright over their own work. Bethesda for example, can not just download a mod and claim it as their own and sell it as DLC, because they don't own its copyright.

What is fact and what holds up in court are sometimes two different things. Sad but true.

That's another pure nonsense. Why don't you stop breathing then? You can't know whether breathing is legal or not unless you go to a court about it, so just to be sure don't breathe.

 

I sure don't need a court to tell me some things.

[nivea]

I admit I do not fully understand the want/need to be compensated for making a mod, I picked up modding to have fun and to make some custom stuff for myself. Then someone asked me kindly if I would release some of the stuff I made for myself, and I thought sure why not let others have fun too. What great fun we all shall have.

 

I am grateful for every penny I am donated, it all goes towards video games and their DLC. I do not make enough money to buy games myself currently (I barely have enough for food lol), so the only way I am going to be able to buy another game to make mods (such as FO4) for is through the kindness of others. I do not feel entitled to any of that, I feel grateful and humbled that someone enjoys my stuff or even myself enough to donate.

 

But this has always been a passion not a job to me. I dont know how I feel about others wanting to be paid for their mods, commissions sure I get that I did live with a artist and she painted her own stuff for free (and put it up for others to view and enjoy) but then got commissioned and paid for other stuff.

 

I wish Beth would just let modders get ad revenue or something along those lines rather then a straight out payment from a mod user.

 

But then again I do understand others ARE making money off modders work, ads for Nexus, ads for Youtube ect. Bleh its all one big pile of f*#@.

 

*SIGHS* lol

[sunshinenbrick]

 

In response to post #28750109.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28749744.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28747764.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28740509.

 

 

 

Mr. Dave wrote: RE: Bethesda believing they have a claim on all mods.

I can make a mod without using one single thing Bethesda created. I make my own content, every pixel and every polygon, then I use third party tools to implement them. So how is it Bethesda should profit from this? They should be paying me for increasing sales of their games. After all, I only have the largest all original mod out for Skyrim, and my franchise, Bob's Armory, has been so extremely popular for Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim that entire groups of sub mods have been created around it. Bethesda didn't make Bob's Armory. I did. So how is it they should get a cut? In some businesses, if you walk in demanding an implausible cut from someone's net gains, you get shot. Smells like organized crime to me.

 

Anyway, to the subject at hand.

I am personally not fond at all of the newly implemented donation changes. I get spammy pop ups all over the place asking for donations now, when that never happened before. And the offensive part is that these people did NOT create the content they are shoving pop ups in my face for. Why is it, when I have to download some random follower mod to make sure it isn't crediting someone else for my work (happens around 4 times a week actually), I get spammed with multiple donate pop ups, then find my work included without credits? My work is uploaded for FREE. So why should anyone be able to demand money for something I made?

 

I think the original system with the single donate button up where the track, endorse, etc. buttons are should be the limit. And the more I am spammed with donate buttons from people who did not create the work, but only downloaded it and re uploaded it, the more vehemently I feel about this. I don't have patience for people trying to profit off riding my, or anyone else's coat tails anymore.

Simple. Bob's Armory is still derived from Skyrim. Without Skyrim, what is the mod? A collection of random bits you can't actually do much with.

 

Porting them to some other format means they no longer function in Skyrim.

 

It's not exactly hard to understand how derivative works work.

 

As for people stealing your stuff, report it. Nothing will happen if you don't and getting upset that it happens when you don't act on it isn't logical.

I agree with both sides of this arguement as the debate between IP and labour is one that needs to be had.

It does work both ways as it is reasonable to argue that ideas have been 'borrowed' from modders, by developers, over the years... and profit has been made from it.

A lot has to be said for non-financial compesation eg. gifts, official recognition and credit, promotion and sponsorship. A great deal of this revolves around mutual respect, for the idea and for the work that goes into realising it - these games are designed with the added value of modding in mind.

Unfortunately it seems that the monetary value has become the way in which people are coerced into showing 'respect' for things... hmmm... but this seems to be endemic the world over :confused:

I believe in free spirit of modding like you, but what some people believe is just downright illegal and they give far too much credit to Bethesda for no reason.

 

I as a modder do not want any monetary compensation for my work, but at the same time, I don't like the fact that some people imply Bethesda holds copyright over my work. They don't, that's a legal fact.

:ermm:

No. They (Bethesda) do own everything that is made using any tool that is derived from CK or the game assets. You own the right to participate in the usage of the game and creation tool.

While this is utterly true under current law (although regional law may still rule in the modder's favour) there is a HUGE amount of grey area.

My brother is a music producer so I have learnt a little about this from discussing (arguing) with him. If someone makes a song using Cubase then the only thing that differenciates between being able to make money off it or not is the licence agreement. The labour put into it is not owned by Cubase. This is where there is a difference between IP and labour.

This even goes so far as doing a 'remix' of a song, there are certain things that cannot be copyrighted... a 4/4 beat for example. Used by many but is a fundamental part of the industry. Now of course there is a lot of leg-room between this and blatently ripping off another song and claiming for your own... but its all down to paperwork and what stands in law.

Modding is different because it is a relatively new artform/career and not only has there been very few, if any cases, brought before a judge by now, there is equally little paperwork surrounding it. Furthermore the paperwork that supports either side of a case sometimes only goes as far as the money behind it can.

It is blatant that Beth has the IP for Skyrim and the tools to make things for it, however it is at least debatable to the claim that because of this they actually own a modder's IP when they think of some ingeneous idea that Beth never thought of, release it and then people buy loads of caopies of the game because of the mod...

Like I said, these are uncharted waters in many respect and the industry of virtual worlds is going to continue ripping the lid off this can of worms for many years to come until the 'unwritten' rules that are prevelant in other industries become part of the social psyche.

EDIT: Hell the developers and companies everywhere spend most of the year in court rooms wrangling over these things. Its not clear cut.

There is absolutely nothing "utterly true" or even "grey area" or "unwritten rule" about this. Go talk with your brother again. License agreements can not revert or change laws. Bethesda can not use a license agreement to claim copyright over something they don't have.

 

Unless you are using Skyrim's assets, or using assets derived from Skyrim assets, then you're not breaking Skyrim's copyright.

Unless you use characters, settings, or narrative that is a part of Skyrim's intellectual property, you're not infringing on their IP rights.

Unless you use "Skyrim" or other trademarks in your mod's name, you're not infringing on Bethesda's trademark.

 

These are facts. They're not something you can debate. There's nothing vague or unwritten about them.

The only thing that is vague is exactly how much a certain license agreement clause could be enforced. However it is not debatable that they can not override a nation's laws, including copyright law.

 

So the only thing we are not absolutely sure of, is whether modders are allowed to make money using something made with creation kit.

 

If the mod is not made with creation kit, they 100% can. If their mod is made with creation kit, whether they can monetize it or not, they still hold copyright over their own work. Bethesda for example, can not just download a mod and claim it as their own and sell it as DLC, because they don't own its copyright.

What is fact and what holds up in court are sometimes two different things. Sad but true.

That's another pure nonsense. Why don't you stop breathing then? You can't know whether breathing is legal or not unless you go to a court about it, so just to be sure don't breathe.

 

 

 

 

I would estimate that in the future it may very well be illegal to breathe unless a computer somewhere says you should be.

 

 

Of course I am exaggerating, or rather talking indirectly.

 

What I mean is that if a computer somewhere says 'this is the best thing to do', no matter who or where you are it may have dire (or fantastic) consequences for you. I could give a list of examples but I am hoping you can understand what I mean.

 

Anyway...

 

I knew a friend in uni who pretty much went funny through gaming and modding too much. I, myself have spent sleepless nights, gotten into arguments with my partner cuz I 'wasted my time', not being able to move the next day beacuse of RSI and staying in the same position for too long etc... etc... then I read of kids in S. Korea who have been hospitalised because of worn and torn ligaments due to excessive computer use and gaming.

 

Learning how to mod and making money out of modding could be a full-time intensive job, with a fair amount of risk and dedication that is required. However where is the guarantee that if one gets ill and can't update the mod, where is their money then? What about if one goes full on modding for a few years, the game stops being played or supported, do I get a redundancy package? I think not! These are all things that should be considered.

 

EDIT: Oops! Sorry about the re-edits.

 

EDIT2: When turning it into a (profit-based) business and involving courts of law, these things do matter. It is very complex as the governement also have a part to play in this. Modding is not yet an official profession and one would be classed as self employed anyway, so it is important that people understand the responsibilities and rammifications that result from that.

[Arthmoor]

In response to post #28747764. #28748164 is also a reply to the same post.

sunshinenbrick wrote:

 

In response to post #28740509.

Mr. Dave wrote: RE: Bethesda believing they have a claim on all mods.
I can make a mod without using one single thing Bethesda created. I make my own content, every pixel and every polygon, then I use third party tools to implement them. So how is it Bethesda should profit from this? They should be paying me for increasing sales of their games. After all, I only have the largest all original mod out for Skyrim, and my franchise, Bob's Armory, has been so extremely popular for Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim that entire groups of sub mods have been created around it. Bethesda didn't make Bob's Armory. I did. So how is it they should get a cut? In some businesses, if you walk in demanding an implausible cut from someone's net gains, you get shot. Smells like organized crime to me.

Anyway, to the subject at hand.
I am personally not fond at all of the newly implemented donation changes. I get spammy pop ups all over the place asking for donations now, when that never happened before. And the offensive part is that these people did NOT create the content they are shoving pop ups in my face for. Why is it, when I have to download some random follower mod to make sure it isn't crediting someone else for my work (happens around 4 times a week actually), I get spammed with multiple donate pop ups, then find my work included without credits? My work is uploaded for FREE. So why should anyone be able to demand money for something I made?

I think the original system with the single donate button up where the track, endorse, etc. buttons are should be the limit. And the more I am spammed with donate buttons from people who did not create the work, but only downloaded it and re uploaded it, the more vehemently I feel about this. I don't have patience for people trying to profit off riding my, or anyone else's coat tails anymore.

Simple. Bob's Armory is still derived from Skyrim. Without Skyrim, what is the mod? A collection of random bits you can't actually do much with.

Porting them to some other format means they no longer function in Skyrim.

It's not exactly hard to understand how derivative works work.

As for people stealing your stuff, report it. Nothing will happen if you don't and getting upset that it happens when you don't act on it isn't logical.

 

 

I agree with both sides of this arguement as the debate between IP and labour is one that needs to be had.

 

It does work both ways as it is reasonable to argue that ideas have been 'borrowed' from modders, by developers, over the years... and profit has been made from it.

 

A lot has to be said for non-financial compesation eg. gifts, official recognition and credit, promotion and sponsorship. A great deal of this revolves around mutual respect, for the idea and for the work that goes into realising it - these games are designed with the added value of modding in mind.

 

Unfortunately it seems that the monetary value has become the way in which people are coerced into showing 'respect' for things... hmmm... but this seems to be endemic the world over :confused:

gezegond wrote: I believe in free spirit of modding like you, but what some people believe is just downright illegal and they give far too much credit to Bethesda for no reason.

I as a modder do not want any monetary compensation for my work, but at the same time, I don't like the fact that some people imply Bethesda holds copyright over my work. They don't, that's a legal fact.

People who can read the EULA properly aren't saying Bethesda has copyright over your work. They're saying what the EULA says. That they have a license to effectively do what they want with your work and you can't sue them for it. Yes, I boiled that down quite a bit, but the language of the agreement is pretty clear.

The CK is a program with a specific purpose. It allows you to modify existing IP, with the company's blessing. In exchange, you've agreed to allow them to benefit from your work if they choose to. It's not that difficult to understand. Derivative works. Look it up.

If someone were daft enough to challenge the EULA in court, they'd lose, and it would be a very damaging event all around. Yes, EULAs have been upheld in court cases before, despite many of us not liking that.

[sunshinenbrick]

Double post.

 

:wallbash:

[gezegond]

In response to post #28747764. #28748164, #28752529 are all replies on the same post.

sunshinenbrick wrote:

 

In response to post #28740509.

Mr. Dave wrote: RE: Bethesda believing they have a claim on all mods.
I can make a mod without using one single thing Bethesda created. I make my own content, every pixel and every polygon, then I use third party tools to implement them. So how is it Bethesda should profit from this? They should be paying me for increasing sales of their games. After all, I only have the largest all original mod out for Skyrim, and my franchise, Bob's Armory, has been so extremely popular for Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim that entire groups of sub mods have been created around it. Bethesda didn't make Bob's Armory. I did. So how is it they should get a cut? In some businesses, if you walk in demanding an implausible cut from someone's net gains, you get shot. Smells like organized crime to me.

Anyway, to the subject at hand.
I am personally not fond at all of the newly implemented donation changes. I get spammy pop ups all over the place asking for donations now, when that never happened before. And the offensive part is that these people did NOT create the content they are shoving pop ups in my face for. Why is it, when I have to download some random follower mod to make sure it isn't crediting someone else for my work (happens around 4 times a week actually), I get spammed with multiple donate pop ups, then find my work included without credits? My work is uploaded for FREE. So why should anyone be able to demand money for something I made?

I think the original system with the single donate button up where the track, endorse, etc. buttons are should be the limit. And the more I am spammed with donate buttons from people who did not create the work, but only downloaded it and re uploaded it, the more vehemently I feel about this. I don't have patience for people trying to profit off riding my, or anyone else's coat tails anymore.

Simple. Bob's Armory is still derived from Skyrim. Without Skyrim, what is the mod? A collection of random bits you can't actually do much with.

Porting them to some other format means they no longer function in Skyrim.

It's not exactly hard to understand how derivative works work.

As for people stealing your stuff, report it. Nothing will happen if you don't and getting upset that it happens when you don't act on it isn't logical.

 

 

I agree with both sides of this arguement as the debate between IP and labour is one that needs to be had.

 

It does work both ways as it is reasonable to argue that ideas have been 'borrowed' from modders, by developers, over the years... and profit has been made from it.

 

A lot has to be said for non-financial compesation eg. gifts, official recognition and credit, promotion and sponsorship. A great deal of this revolves around mutual respect, for the idea and for the work that goes into realising it - these games are designed with the added value of modding in mind.

 

Unfortunately it seems that the monetary value has become the way in which people are coerced into showing 'respect' for things... hmmm... but this seems to be endemic the world over :confused:

gezegond wrote: I believe in free spirit of modding like you, but what some people believe is just downright illegal and they give far too much credit to Bethesda for no reason.

I as a modder do not want any monetary compensation for my work, but at the same time, I don't like the fact that some people imply Bethesda holds copyright over my work. They don't, that's a legal fact.

Arthmoor wrote: People who can read the EULA properly aren't saying Bethesda has copyright over your work. They're saying what the EULA says. That they have a license to effectively do what they want with your work and you can't sue them for it. Yes, I boiled that down quite a bit, but the language of the agreement is pretty clear.

The CK is a program with a specific purpose. It allows you to modify existing IP, with the company's blessing. In exchange, you've agreed to allow them to benefit from your work if they choose to. It's not that difficult to understand. Derivative works. Look it up.

If someone were daft enough to challenge the EULA in court, they'd lose, and it would be a very damaging event all around. Yes, EULAs have been upheld in court cases before, despite many of us not liking that.

It's not a matter of EULAs being upheld in court or not, it's a matter of exactly what clause of an EULA has been upheld. There might be a clause that says you can not sue them. That would be upheld in court most likely. Then there might be a clause that says you agree to commit acts of crime if they instruct you to. Obviously that wouldn't be upheld in court. You can write absolutely anything you want in your EULA, no matter how stupid it is, so you can't just generally say EULAs in general have been upheld in court, therefore they are now effectively the law, or over the law, or whatever.

In general, like the example above, it is very very unlikely that an EULA that states something that is against the law in a country, would be upheld by a court in that country.

But even if we blindly assume that all of the EULAs are fully enforceable regardless of the content and the context, there's still the fact that you can totally mod Bethesda games using tools besides creation kit. Reverse engineering is protected by law so you can really reverse engineer any software and modify it, including bethesda games.

And finally, you're still misunderstanding what a derivative work is. Whether a work is derivative or not has absolutely nothing to do with the tools that are used to create it. A digital artwork is not a derivation of Adobe Photoshop. A drawing is not a derivation of a pencil. A work is only derivative if you take another copyrighted work (work, not tool) and build on it. And building on it specifically means that your work "contains" the other work. If you have a song that has a bit of another song in it for example. If your song was merely "inspired" by another song, it's not derivative because it does not contain the other song.

To say whether a mod is a derivation of skyrim, you have to download the mod file (that is, the compressed zip file or 7z file or whatever) and look to see if there are any of Bethesda's copyrighted content in it. In case of "Mr. Dave"'s work, he claims that he has made all his assets from scratch. If that claim is true (I haven't checked) then his mod file does not contain anything copyrighted by Bethesda, and is therefore not a derivative work.

If on the other hand I open a Skyrim armor, make some edits, and then package it in my mod, my mod would be a Skyrim derivative work because the armor contained in is copyrighted by bethesda.

Edit: "People who can read the EULA properly aren't saying Bethesda has copyright over your work."

The reason I said this was because of your comment on mods being derivative works. A derivative work's copyright IS owned (at least partly) by the copyright holder of the work it was derived from, so that was what you were implying. Edited September 17, 2015 by gezegond

[simtam]

Well, I remember the case of armors being discussed somewhere, and it boiled down to Skyrim providing some sort of skeleton of armor, and body proportions which probably have to be considered when designing an armor for Skyrim. Whether it constitutes creative piece of work subject to copyright protections in eyes of court judges, it's hard to say. I, for one, won't be be trial-mongering on this.

 

Of course Bethesda does not own the mods, unless we define "own" as "they could use the mods whatsoever and are protected from infringement lawsuits, but only from modders, hence - not really".

[sunshinenbrick]

 

In response to post #28747764. #28748164, #28752529 are all replies on the same post.

 

 

 

sunshinenbrick wrote:

In response to post #28740509.

 

 

 

Mr. Dave wrote: RE: Bethesda believing they have a claim on all mods.

I can make a mod without using one single thing Bethesda created. I make my own content, every pixel and every polygon, then I use third party tools to implement them. So how is it Bethesda should profit from this? They should be paying me for increasing sales of their games. After all, I only have the largest all original mod out for Skyrim, and my franchise, Bob's Armory, has been so extremely popular for Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim that entire groups of sub mods have been created around it. Bethesda didn't make Bob's Armory. I did. So how is it they should get a cut? In some businesses, if you walk in demanding an implausible cut from someone's net gains, you get shot. Smells like organized crime to me.

 

Anyway, to the subject at hand.

I am personally not fond at all of the newly implemented donation changes. I get spammy pop ups all over the place asking for donations now, when that never happened before. And the offensive part is that these people did NOT create the content they are shoving pop ups in my face for. Why is it, when I have to download some random follower mod to make sure it isn't crediting someone else for my work (happens around 4 times a week actually), I get spammed with multiple donate pop ups, then find my work included without credits? My work is uploaded for FREE. So why should anyone be able to demand money for something I made?

 

I think the original system with the single donate button up where the track, endorse, etc. buttons are should be the limit. And the more I am spammed with donate buttons from people who did not create the work, but only downloaded it and re uploaded it, the more vehemently I feel about this. I don't have patience for people trying to profit off riding my, or anyone else's coat tails anymore.

Simple. Bob's Armory is still derived from Skyrim. Without Skyrim, what is the mod? A collection of random bits you can't actually do much with.

 

Porting them to some other format means they no longer function in Skyrim.

 

It's not exactly hard to understand how derivative works work.

 

As for people stealing your stuff, report it. Nothing will happen if you don't and getting upset that it happens when you don't act on it isn't logical.

I agree with both sides of this arguement as the debate between IP and labour is one that needs to be had.

It does work both ways as it is reasonable to argue that ideas have been 'borrowed' from modders, by developers, over the years... and profit has been made from it.

A lot has to be said for non-financial compesation eg. gifts, official recognition and credit, promotion and sponsorship. A great deal of this revolves around mutual respect, for the idea and for the work that goes into realising it - these games are designed with the added value of modding in mind.

Unfortunately it seems that the monetary value has become the way in which people are coerced into showing 'respect' for things... hmmm... but this seems to be endemic the world over :confused:

gezegond wrote: I believe in free spirit of modding like you, but what some people believe is just downright illegal and they give far too much credit to Bethesda for no reason.

 

I as a modder do not want any monetary compensation for my work, but at the same time, I don't like the fact that some people imply Bethesda holds copyright over my work. They don't, that's a legal fact.

Arthmoor wrote: People who can read the EULA properly aren't saying Bethesda has copyright over your work. They're saying what the EULA says. That they have a license to effectively do what they want with your work and you can't sue them for it. Yes, I boiled that down quite a bit, but the language of the agreement is pretty clear.

 

The CK is a program with a specific purpose. It allows you to modify existing IP, with the company's blessing. In exchange, you've agreed to allow them to benefit from your work if they choose to. It's not that difficult to understand. Derivative works. Look it up.

 

If someone were daft enough to challenge the EULA in court, they'd lose, and it would be a very damaging event all around. Yes, EULAs have been upheld in court cases before, despite many of us not liking that.

It's not a matter of EULAs being upheld in court or not, it's a matter of exactly what clause of an EULA has been upheld. There might be a clause that says you can not sue them. That would be upheld in court most likely. Then there might be a clause that says you agree to commit acts of crime if they instruct you to. Obviously that wouldn't be upheld in court. You can write absolutely anything you want in your EULA, no matter how stupid it is, so you can't just generally say EULAs in general have been upheld in court, therefore they are now effectively the law, or over the law, or whatever.

 

In general, like the example above, it is very very unlikely that an EULA that states something that is against the law in a country, would be upheld by a court in that country.

 

But even if we blindly assume that all of the EULAs are fully enforceable regardless of the content and the context, there's still the fact that you can totally mod Bethesda games using tools besides creation kit. Reverse engineering is protected by law so you can really reverse engineer any software and modify it, including bethesda games.

 

And finally, you're still misunderstanding what a derivative work is. Whether a work is derivative or not has absolutely nothing to do with the tools that are used to create it. A digital artwork is not a derivation of Adobe Photoshop. A drawing is not a derivation of a pencil. A work is only derivative if you take another copyrighted work (work, not tool) and build on it. And building on it specifically means that your work "contains" the other work. If you have a song that has a bit of another song in it for example. If your song was merely "inspired" by another song, it's not derivative because it does not contain the other song.

 

To say whether a mod is a derivation of skyrim, you have to download the mod file (that is, the compressed zip file or 7z file or whatever) and look to see if there are any of Bethesda's copyrighted content in it. In case of "Mr. Dave"'s work, he claims that he has made all his assets from scratch. If that claim is true (I haven't checked) then his mod file does not contain anything copyrighted by Bethesda, and is therefore not a derivative work.

 

If on the other hand I open a Skyrim armor, make some edits, and then package it in my mod, my mod would be a Skyrim derivative work because the armor contained in is copyrighted by bethesda.

 

 

This is all remains to be seen.

 

Tis true that the assets created, voice acting, models, textures so forth and so on are not owned by Bethesda (unless it represented the 'franchise' of course...) However, the moment you feed anything into the Creation Kit or EDEN they would argue that it is there creation because they 'own' that world, including pencils, mountains, stories... the lot.

 

Now I am not saying it is right, and I would also would like to find Bethesda's stance on how they see the use of things like Havok and all the tools they use to create the game in the first place... who actually owns what??? It all comes down to paper and lawyers, as with most things.

 

For the moment just be glad you are vigilant enough to question such things. The future of where these rabbit holes might take us are anyone's guess.