Question about copyrighted material

[seekingthesun]

The irony is that there was an IP violating mod that took stuff from new vegas, it was deleted off nexus today but it's still up on Bethesda's horrible mod interface in-game

[zanity]

I see a lot of mods on Nexus that add stuff from many different non-Fallout (even non-Bethesda) sources, like Star Wars (lightsabers, Vader armor, etc.). I was just wondering how this works, what with copyrights and all that. Do these mod authors get permission to use those or...? I'm just wondering, because I'm in the planning stages for a quest mod I'd like to try tackling and I'd like to include an easter egg or two from some of my favorite games, but the last thing I want is to get into a scuffle over copyrights. :mellow: Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks!

Very few people ask permission for ANYTHING- most assume they will fly under the radar, and they are usually correct.

 

Some things you should NEVER do, like take exact copies of data sources you KNOW the owners do not want copied. Your own version of a thing, however, is usually likely to be fine, unless you insist on winding a corporation up. Want a light sabre- well George Lucas certainly didn't invent them (or anything else in Star Wars)- but the corporation most certainly owns the NAME. So make your 'light sabre' but call it something else (which is what Lucas did with each idea he stole from earlier sources to create the original movie).

 

If your mod SAYS what it is copying, you are asking for trouble (some saddos just love to press that 'report' button under any excuse). Did Gerge Lucas list the sources he used as inspiration for Star Wars in the credits? Of course not. If your design merely looks a bit like something famous, but you do NOT name it, well there will be plenty of other things your design looks a bit like as well- so where's the infringement?

 

Of course, screaming that your mod infringes a famous property draws attention to it for good (user views) and bad (ban). A lot of modders cynically choose to take the risk for the added publicity/downloads. But I would advise you to do as Lucas, Tarantino, and so many famous artists in the past have done- to be SILENTLY 'inspired' by earlier works.

[zanity]

The irony is that there was an IP violating mod that took stuff from new vegas, it was deleted off nexus today but it's still up on Bethesda's horrible mod interface in-game

er- Beth doesn't allow mods on Nexus for game A to use in-game assets from Beth game B. However, as OWNERS of assets in both game A and B, Beth can certainly allow such mods on their own site.

 

Nexus bans mods using cross game in-game assets (for clear copyright reasons- owners of FO4 do NOT have the right to use assets from NV unpurchased). Nexus bans the 'porting' of mods without the permission of the original mod author (for reasons of POLICY, not law).

Edited May 3, 2016 by zanity

[zanity]

The standard is if the work is transformative, instead of derivative. It also depends on whether the work is commercialized or not.

A complete NONSENSE. A 'transformative' work *IS* a 'derivative' work by definition. The law on copyright has NOTHING to do with 'commerce'.

 

Copyright in most modern nations is AUTOMATIC for protected forms of creation. 'Transformative' is a LEGAL test that determines how much of the original work is in the 'new' work. With music, for example, legal experts literally measure how much of one 'song' may be in another to determine if an actionable infringement has occured.

[ShinraStrife]

 

If you are seeing mods that look like game rips/ports, they are not allowed and should be reported to the staff, using the report button/feature. With that said, there are a number of mods for Fallout 3 and F:NV (that I am aware of), that add content from Star Wars, Star Trek, Doctor Who and the Riddick films, that are "scratch built", either by the uploader, or contracted out by the author. These things fall under the headings of "Fan Art" and, I believe, "Fair Use". If your easter egg is "hand made/scratch built" specifically for your mod, you should be fine.

"SHOULD BE REPORTED"???? And why exactly is that- do we live in a police state?

 

If a CORPORATION (or its PAID agents) wishes to report a mod for infringement- well good for them- but why on Earth would an ordinary user of Nexus do such a thing. And the majority of people who DO report mods do so with a profoundly FAULTY understanding of the law (like those who try to get Nazi imagery 'banned' on Nexus.

 

"mods that look like game rips/ports, they are not allowed"??? Under what law would that be, exactly? Copying actual assets without permission is a clear violation of copyright, but a 'parody' or 'homage' that uses famililar but different assets sits in a GRAY area that is often legal in many nations of the West. In the USA, for instance, the 'rules' of a game CANNOT be copyrighted. In the USA, typefaces cannot be copyrighted. Those that love to use the 'report' button frequently have no idea of how the laws protecting IP actually work.

 

It gets more complicated when you understand that the owners of IP like Star Trek and Star Wars have actually encouraged NOT-FOR-SALE unofficial third-party derivative works to grow the cultural importance of the IP, and thus its profitability. Look at the success of the recent (very mediocre) Star Wars movie, and connect the dots to how much George Lucas previously encouraged fans to craft their own Star Wars materials.

 

Nexus moderators only need to be pro-active over certain kinds of possible infringement- like radio stations using very recent music, or FO4 mods using game assets from previous Beth titles (which Beth themselves have firmly stated must not happen).

They should be proactive in removing ALL copyrighted material since all it takes is one company filling a DCMA takedown for Nexus to go bye bye.

[DoctaSax]

They should be proactive in removing ALL copyrighted material since all it takes is one company filling a DCMA takedown for Nexus to go bye bye.

A bit dramatic. A DMCA is really just a notification that you're hosting something you shouldn't. Sites can perfectly survive a DMCA as long as they take down the content it reports.

[Druuler]

 

If you are seeing mods that look like game rips/ports, they are not allowed and should be reported to the staff, using the report button/feature. With that said, there are a number of mods for Fallout 3 and F:NV (that I am aware of), that add content from Star Wars, Star Trek, Doctor Who and the Riddick films, that are "scratch built", either by the uploader, or contracted out by the author. These things fall under the headings of "Fan Art" and, I believe, "Fair Use". If your easter egg is "hand made/scratch built" specifically for your mod, you should be fine.

"SHOULD BE REPORTED"???? And why exactly is that- do we live in a police state?

 

If a CORPORATION (or its PAID agents) wishes to report a mod for infringement- well good for them- but why on Earth would an ordinary user of Nexus do such a thing. And the majority of people who DO report mods do so with a profoundly FAULTY understanding of the law (like those who try to get Nazi imagery 'banned' on Nexus.

 

"mods that look like game rips/ports, they are not allowed"??? Under what law would that be, exactly? Copying actual assets without permission is a clear violation of copyright, but a 'parody' or 'homage' that uses famililar but different assets sits in a GRAY area that is often legal in many nations of the West. In the USA, for instance, the 'rules' of a game CANNOT be copyrighted. In the USA, typefaces cannot be copyrighted. Those that love to use the 'report' button frequently have no idea of how the laws protecting IP actually work.

 

It gets more complicated when you understand that the owners of IP like Star Trek and Star Wars have actually encouraged NOT-FOR-SALE unofficial third-party derivative works to grow the cultural importance of the IP, and thus its profitability. Look at the success of the recent (very mediocre) Star Wars movie, and connect the dots to how much George Lucas previously encouraged fans to craft their own Star Wars materials.

 

Nexus moderators only need to be pro-active over certain kinds of possible infringement- like radio stations using very recent music, or FO4 mods using game assets from previous Beth titles (which Beth themselves have firmly stated must not happen).

 

No, we do not live in a police state. Nexus policy and ToS forbid the uploading of rips/ports, unless they are from companies that have specifically stated that using their assets was allowed (eg - CD Projekt regarding the Witcher franchise). It does not matter if a representative of a game company is or is not looking for stolen content among the mods on the Nexus, Dark0ne himself does not want them on the Nexus. He is taking a pro-active stance regarding this so he does not have to deal with the legal and financial troubles that would arise should the lawyers of some game company get wind of such a breach, especially regarding Bethesda Game Studios. Dark0ne's house, Dark0ne's rules.

 

And it is not just FO4 mods that cannot use other Bethesda game assets. Bethesda has stated that under no circumstances can assets from any of its games be used in mods for any of it other games.

[seekingthesun]

 

The irony is that there was an IP violating mod that took stuff from new vegas, it was deleted off nexus today but it's still up on Bethesda's horrible mod interface in-game

er- Beth doesn't allow mods on Nexus for game A to use in-game assets from Beth game B. However, as OWNERS of assets in both game A and B, Beth can certainly allow such mods on their own site.

 

Nexus bans mods using cross game in-game assets (for clear copyright reasons- owners of FO4 do NOT have the right to use assets from NV unpurchased). Nexus bans the 'porting' of mods without the permission of the original mod author (for reasons of POLICY, not law).

 

Only Bethesda doesn't own New Vegas, their publisher does. Honestly I wish that Obsidian would take over the series, they're so much better at writing. I think it's far more likely that Bethesda is just incompetent at policing their mods section. There's radio mods on there that use music that they clearly don't have the rights to. Nexus has way more freedom to do things that Beth does because it's not official

Edited May 4, 2016 by seekingthesun

[JTL2]

 

....Copying actual assets without permission is a clear violation of copyright, but a 'parody' or 'homage' that uses famililar but different assets sits in a GRAY area that is often legal in many nations of the West....

 

 

Ah, the lovely "grey areas" of US and International Copyright law.

 

I use to work in an office building which housed a Copyright Law Firm. One day in the elevator, I asked him about "parody" and "homage". He basically said, "Yes, a grey area is technically legal. But be prepared to defend it in court. And remember, the IP probably has better, more expensive lawyers than you do, and often it'll come down to that." In other, we was saying, "Don't do it."

 

In the world of parody, "Weird Al" Yankovic always gets permission from the song writers and performers before doing a parody of their work. Not because he has to, legally, but because to him, it's a professional courtesy. When his album, "Straight Outta Lynwood" was released, the label for his parody "You're Pitiful" fought him over it. He had the blessing of James Blunt, so instead of fighting in court to release it on his album, he released it online for free.

 

My point is, even if you're "Weird Al", don't expect you just because you call it a parody, or a court somewhere said parody was okay, that the IP's lawyers won't come after you. But in this case, since you're pretty much a nobody with no money, they'll go after the Nexus. And, as was mentioned by many others, Nexus TOS overrules any and all interpretations of copyright law we may have.

[seekingthesun]

 

The standard is if the work is transformative, instead of derivative. It also depends on whether the work is commercialized or not.

A complete NONSENSE. A 'transformative' work *IS* a 'derivative' work by definition. The law on copyright has NOTHING to do with 'commerce'.

 

Copyright in most modern nations is AUTOMATIC for protected forms of creation. 'Transformative' is a LEGAL test that determines how much of the original work is in the 'new' work. With music, for example, legal experts literally measure how much of one 'song' may be in another to determine if an actionable infringement has occured.

 

No, that's the litmus test on fair use. And yes fair use rules are different for commericalized applications. A professor can play music in a class for educational purposes.