DDP MY MODS ARE DOWN, COMMENCE ATTACK ON BETHESDAS MAIN PLATFORM

[ZyphFL]

I feel you guys, I know what it is like to work hard on a mod and log in to see someone has used part of your work or all of you work. For me the worst was when a 3d model, texture, or animation was copied and no credit given. It makes my blood boil.

 

The mod tool I used the most was called GUTS and it was for Torchlight 2. If I recall correctly it offered the ability to password lock mods so they could not be unpacked. Great feature. I think that would go a long way to fixing this obvious problem. However, I have to admit that Steam was really fast about pulling down stolen material, and the community of Torchlight 2 was very quick to report theft to Steam and the mod creator.

 

There is also more to this than just theft. Every thing you create is a potential resume item if you decide to seek work as a game designer. There is also the Nividia contest, if you work is being submitted by someone else you stand to lose a sizable payout.

 

The resume item is the big one to me. As an artist and game designer those items on my resume are very important to me. While I am where I want to be as a lead designer, my son had considered going to school for 3D modeling, what we made, and he created for mods went right in his portfolio. This could be the same for any mod designer out there. Theft of those items damages their claim to that ip, and could take away from their future.

 

I really hate that some of the mods I have used for months have gone privet, but I really can't blame those mod designers. It currently is the only method they have of protecting their hard work.

 

Mod Designers, thank you so much for the hard work you do. I have the game on the xbone, and the PC. Season pass for both also. Still I have not touched my xbone in a LONG time, and the mods I really want to use will not be going there. Even with that, I still can't see both sides, because I am a designer first, and a player second. Good luck all with finding a better way to protect your property. When a method is found, and your work goes public again please post it.

[OunceStripes]

 

 

 

Seriously..... stop with the whole *but the EULA says......* nonsense. Because that's exactly what it is. Nonsense. EULA = toilet paper. They have the same value where copyright laws are concerned.

 

 

This law office say the opposite: http://www.nyccounsel.com/business-blogs-websites/who-owns-photos-and-videos-posted-on-facebook-or-twitter/

 

They are saying nonsense too?

 

Well if that's really the case, Facebook and all the others would have been condemned to paid million dollars and this is never happened yet.

 

And by the way the License Agreement=The Law it's the basic. A License Agreement have force of Law.

 

 

Yes. Nonsense. Answer this:

 

why do you think Bethesda went with the *file a legal DMCA takedown order* method of reporting stolen mods?

 

Because they know their EULA is SO one sided, it couldn't possibly hold up against a legitimate claim of copyright infringement or DMCA order:

 

A standard form contract (sometimes referred to as a contract of adhesion, a leonine contract, or a take-it-or-leave-it contract) is a contract between two parties, where the terms and conditions of the contract are set by one of the parties, and the other party has little or no ability to negotiate more favorable terms and is thus placed in a "take it or leave it" position.

While these types of contracts are not illegal per se, there exists a very real possibility for unconscionability. In addition, in the event of an ambiguity, such ambiguity will be resolved contra proferentem against the party drafting the contract language.

 

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_form_contract

 

What is deemed *unconscionable*? Well, lets see:

 

Unconscionability (sometimes known as unconscionable dealing/conduct in Australia) is a doctrine in contract law that describes terms that are so extremely unjust, or overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the party who has the superior bargaining power, that they are contrary to good conscience. Typically, an unconscionable contract is held to be unenforceable because no reasonable or informed person would otherwise agree to it. The perpetrator of the conduct is not allowed to benefit, because the consideration offered is lacking, or is so obviously inadequate, that to enforce the contract would be unfair to the party seeking to escape the contract.

 

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unconscionability

 

Reading just the basic law and rulings of completely unrelated case law is not always the best way to prove your point :wink:

 

When you're talking about video game EULAs, you need to extend your knowledge *beyond* just the basic content language of the agreement. You also need to understand the underlying provisions that make them legally binding.

 

Read the EULA. It gives you NO RIGHTS whatsoever. It's so laughably one sided that I'm pretty sure it's more a running joke among Beth/Zeni's legal department, than anything meant to be legal or binding.

 

 

 

Ok let me explain to you why your point is partially invalide here. In real application of this EULA, most of the user don't own their mods by any copyright, and Zenimax don't make any money on it. In my country and many others states this EULA is just plain illegal BUT if you have a dispute with them you have to make a recourse in US, so basically no one, even in US will take action (except in case of class action) against Zenimax to enforce their rights. Then next there are those lines:

 

D. No Fees for Use. In exchange for the Editor being provided to you free of charge, You agree that You will not charge or require, directly or indirectly, a fee or other consideration for others to download, install or use Your Game Mods, including without limitation selling, licensing or other commercial distribution or commercial exploitation (e.g., by renting, licensing, sublicensing, leasing, disseminating, uploading, downloading, transmitting, whether on a pay-per-play basis or otherwise) of any Game Mods without the express prior written consent of an authorized representative of ZeniMax

 

 

They expose this like a deal with us. You can use their software and website free of charge in exchange they don't charge us for the use of their materials. That's why this isn't that simple you think of. The one sided situation is not that clear.

 

And the Contra proferentem is generally about ambiguity of term, hidden term and term that prevent recourse.

 

This EULA like many others can indeed be breakdown by the Contra proferentem but only in case of recourse in court of justice and for specific case where the plaintiff has a formal copyright on the material of the dispute, if isn't the case you have to prove your allegation. Here is the problem in 90% of the cases you will lose for that reason.

 

This EULA has indeed some erratic terms but most of the time they are here to prevent legal issues. They don't want to take over the intellectual property of a tier, they just want to avoid any obligation around it.

 

In theory they can do a lot but they don't want this, in the other hand you can indeed enforce your rights but in practice most of the time you can't do anything against them because you can't afford it on many levels.

Edited June 8, 2016 by OunceStripes

[tartarsauce2]

the best thing to do is form a vindictive vigilante hatemob to spam report any known mods on beth.net and make threads about it at the same time, and thunderclap rolling thunder that stuff, and have people with consoles etc trawl through the various mods and form a discussion group with the discussion open and evidence available so that decisions to hit are well and why

operation "awfully shocking war on mod theft freedom"

besides, if you want you could always go after the person behind the account if you really wanted, in this case, it's not something like a "greedy soulless corporation overcharging and not wanting to deal with market corrections via the black/grey market and freebooting" it's literally "persondudebro who makes a thing and is personally vested in it wanting recognition for their work and not interested in being on a particular platform to begin with"

thing is, the people who are unleashing beth.net probably are thinking of using the console plebs to get at you, to force the issue of going onto beth.net anyways
I hadn't of thought of that possibility until reading the situation as it stands and likely trends

Edited June 8, 2016 by tartarsauce2

[Reneer]

That granting of rights isn't exactly legal and would go buh bye in court faster than a prisoner peeing on the judge. They can put anything in a EULA they want regardless of being legally binding or not. If you port the Wolf School(default) armor from Witcher 3 to FO4 that doesn't make it Bethesda's property regardless of what the EULA says. Triss armor? Yennifers? If you made a box out of a standard primitive in the student version of 3DS Max it doesn't make it Bethesda's property and they can sell it. If they ever tried to enforce that part of the EULA they would be stating that they own copyright material from many other corporations and some of them have the funds to totally screw Zenimax over such as Autodesk and they will be pounced on and sent straight to bankruptcy. The only reason for those clause's in the EULA is so Bethesda can steal concepts from mod authors and put those in the next game or DLC and possibly emulate the look of items. They do not even need that since it would be derivative work but CYA.

Contracts grant / revoke rights all the time. And you don't simply say "this part of the EULA is unenforcable" without, you know, going to court and having the court decide. Furthermore, in regards to copyright and what is / is not Bethesda property, the EULA says this:

ZeniMax respects the intellectual property rights of others, and requires that those who use its Services do the same. ZeniMax will terminate the Account of any user who is responsible for any or repeated acts of intellectual property infringement. You may not, and by using the Services You agree not to, use the Services to transmit material: (i) that is copyrighted, unless You are the copyright owner or have obtained the permission of the copyright owner to transmit it; (ii) that reveals trade secrets, unless You own them or have the permission of the owner to so transmit them; or (iii) that infringes on any Intellectual Property Rights, as defined below, of others or violates the privacy or rights of publicity of others. For purposes of these Terms of Service, the term "Intellectual Property Rights" means, collectively, rights under patent, trademark, copyright and trade secret laws, and any other intellectual property or proprietary rights recognized in any country or jurisdiction worldwide, including, without limitation, moral rights and similar rights.

So your example of Bethesda claiming copyright on another company's work when you upload that copyrighted work doesn't fly either. You would be the one in trouble for uploading that content, not Bethesda, because you are the one asserting that you own the copyright to the work and no one else (or you have their permission). It's how other companies like YouTube don't get in trouble when people upload copyrighted material to their servers.

 

Then you get to the question of is a EULA a binding contract? Last time I checked that requires a signature and a notary public or equivalent witness to said signature. Simply clicking the bugger off "Ok" or "I Agree" button is not a signature no more than the old school open this and you agree BS it used to be on the CD cases. EULA's are not binding contracts regardless of what any corporation wants you to believe and they so much want you to believe they are. Get invited to a private beta test and they want an NDA, that NDA better have a notary public stamp on it or they wont give you the stuff to test. Binding contract. you don't need a notary every time you say bugger off to the EULA but that's supposed to be a binding contract? Yeah doesn't work in court.

Last time you checked you were wrong.

 

See ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg (Seventh Circuit) which found that shrink-wrap licenses were enforceable and Arizona_Cartridge_Remanufacturers_Ass'n_Inc._v._Lexmark_International_Inc. (Ninth Circuit) (URL shortened because forum doesn't like the original URL) which found that a license agreement on a physical box is enforceable. Furthermore Bowers_v._Baystate_Technologies,_Inc. (Federal Circuit) demonstrates that license agreements can preempt fair use and can expand the rights of copyright holders further than the law strictly allows.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Reneer

[micalov]

Also to everyone crabbing about the malicious crap, well, some damn moderator step in, because by uploading to a PC only hosting site, a PC version of my mod, am I uploading anything malicious by making it toggle a message and quit consoles? Not in my book, or any lawyers I can think of, but would love to hear a weigh in with official weight, Because quite frankly if that's the case can you delete my recent AIO and restore a prior version then set it back to hidden?

 

Not to mention if that's your definition of malicious IE it harms consoles even knowingly, then HALF MY MODS SHOULD GET ME BANNED, because right now, I know they will break console saves, corrupt them over time etc. So if that's the definition we are going with, where it includes having mods knowingly on this site that will hurt console if someone STEALS MY WORK. Well then... Micalov, your wish has come true, hit it brother. Cause I sure AF am not fixing all of them individually for PC's that run them 100% fine... mostly... at night... mostly...

Jesus this thread is a complete poop storm but that is something for another post and whether you should be banned is not relevant here the main point is the Nexus does not support console modding, if it breaks someones console it is not our issue the same as if it breaks someones pirated version of the game, not our issue.

 

We have had mods in the past that would kill the player upon loading because they did not change a 1 to zero in the INI like the readme and description stated as an anti didn't RTFM check.

 

That is my understanding of the rules anyway and obviously only Dak0ne, Paul or SirSalami can speak for the site and confirm if its not the correct stance.

[MasterMagnus]

Good to see a mod finally weigh in after 22 pages.

 

Whether DDP is serious or just yanking people's chains. It's kind of off-putting to people who might actually want to use your service. Or at least that's the way I see it.

[Zaldir]

Well then something fun came out of this I guess.

 

Huh, that was a really well done video on the matter from an outside perspective. I do like The Know, but I did not think they would be this knowledgeable about the matter. :thumbsup:

[Evincere]

Why is adding code into your mod that causes a pop up and then crashing to launcher until you uninstall it on consoles a bad thing? If you're stupid enough to download a mod that has no description or pictures, then honestly that s#*! is on you 100%. Don't download shady s#*!. And this concept doesn't just apply to Xbones. You don't click shady ass internet links or ads do you and then act surprised when you get infected with malware? At this point it's the only way to protect your s#*!, unless you want to bind it to f4se, but I hear that's easy to remove. If someone steals my s#*! that I own irl, you can be damn sure I would do something about it. Preferably of the spiteful, dramatic kind.

 

A related story: when I was younger, my childhood friend who I knew since kindergarten was visiting my house and stayed overnight. I woke up to her rooting around in my bag and out of the corner of my eye, saw her taking one of my barbies. I did nothing and went back to sleep. The next few days, I pretended to have no knowledge of her theft. When she left to go back home I never brought it up either. Then the day came where she asked if I wanted to stay over at her place, so I accepted. On the last day of my stay, shortly before my parents were going to pick me up I started going through her things and found the Barbie that she stole from me, and I then started ripping off its limbs. I used a sharpie to X out the eyes and then gave her a nice stitched up smile, and then placed the head next to her bed with a little note saying "I know what you did :)" and then left. We never spoke again. :3

 

tl;dr my respect for DDproductions has actually increased.

[HomicidalGrouse]

Edit: For clarification, I am not in any way shape or form endorsing the porting of content by people that are not the mod authors or directly affiliated with the mod authors. In other words, I am not endorsing mod piracy at all. I oppose mod piracy.

 

 

This is my view on the "poisoning" of mods and other nonsense that has been proposed to sabotage mods in the name of anti-piracy. It is also my general thoughts on how this whole disaster could possibly be "fixed". I will acknowledge ahead of time that it is not perfect.

 

Gabe Newell once said: “One thing that we have learned is that piracy is not a pricing issue. It’s a service issue. The easiest way to stop piracy is not by putting anti-piracy technology to work. It’s by giving those people a service that’s better than what they’re receiving from the pirates.”

 

For Gabe Newell and Steam/Valve it was a matter of ensuring games would reach markets quicker than they used to, thus, limiting the need to pirate the games you want to play. In addition to that, it was also a matter of pricing and sales. You can get games for less money than retail stores, and you get updates to your games that are harder to obtain on stolen copies.

 

For mod authors, the solution should be the similar. Pirates cannot support the mods. They lack the understanding to provide any customer service beyond uploading the pirated content. If a mod is something that can be ported then it should be ported.

 

If it is something that obviously wouldn't work on consoles or is forbidden by Bethesda, then it will be taken down anyway. This has already been proven to be true. Bethesda does not want mods that break their rules and will remove mods when they are reported, and has done so already.

 

If this approach is adopted, the people using the pirated versions will come to use the real versions over the pirated ones. Why? Because it is the superior version. It has the mod authors blessing, and official support for any bugs the mod may have (and they will have bugs). This has been proven by Valve to work, and it should work for mod authors too.

 

Another quote from Gabe Newell that is very applicable:

 

“The point was, the people who are telling you that Russians pirate everything are the people who wait six months to localize their product into Russia… So that, as far as we’re concerned, is asked and answered. It doesn’t take much in terms of providing a better service to make pirates a non-issue.”

 

Anyway, that is essentially my thoughts on this. I think it is a good solution. At least it is a lot better than trying to give the Nexus a bad name by attempting sabotage, joking or otherwise. Feel free to disagree.

 

I just wanted to quote this and bring it forward as it states my general views on this situation perfectly.

 

The truth of the matter is console mods aren't going anywhere. We, as mod authors, (I know I only currently have one basic mod available, shut up :p ) need to accept that fact.

 

I always held the Nexus community to a higher standard. Especially after the whole paid-mods fiasco, but now I'm just facing this site with a swelling sense of disappointment. There's a huge difference taking a stand and defending your principles, and just being malicious.

 

The amount of vitriol I see on this site, reddit, and youtube surrounding "console gamers" and dumping the entirety of blame on them, whether it's for the actions of thieves, or the mere fact that Bethesda had the nerve to give them mods, is mind boggling to me. There's a lot of bad blood going around and for what? Because we choose to play video games on different hardware?

 

If you want to remove mods. Fine. Do what you have to do. If you want to stop making mods for consoles. Fine. Do what you have to do. But this discussion of maliciously trying to corrupt saves and the like of other gamers (the majority of which likely don't know when they're downloading something that's stolen anyway) really rubs me the wrong way.

 

Every single person in this community was new to modding once. I urge everyone to remember that.

[MasterMagnus]

Well said.