On console mods, theft and Bethesda.net

[AFKRoger]

In response to post #39520310. #39520525 is also a reply to the same post.

acidzebra wrote:

Does anyone disagree that _in principle_ an author should be able to determine how his/her work is used? That an author should rightfully retain some level of control over his/her work? That it is not right for someone to take an author's work and pass it of as his own? I really hope these are things most people can agree on.

 

Now it is also true that _de facto_ the internet and very nature of digital information make it very hard to actually exercise said control. But authors still release their work on the internet, for free, for people to enjoy. You should appreciate that.

 

Community happens when authors express certain wishes about their work and those wishes are respected and observed by the rest of the community - you know, when people respect each other in general? Otherwise, what you have is just a bunch of leeches and not a community at all. You will likely lose a lot of potential mods in a situation like that, as authors feel disrespected and unappreciated and will stop sharing.

 

Personal views: I've set my mods (where possible) to the most liberal permissions. Take them, remix them, reupload them, share alike, go nuts. I'm not offering technical support on any of it, you're on you're own. Don't have a console, don't care. It'd be nice if you mention me somewhere if you do something with the mods, but I don't even care all that much tbh. But some mod authors feel differently. And while you may disagree with their views (I personally think it's a fool's errand to try and control stuff you put on the internet for free), if you appreciate their works and want to see more, you should probably respect their wishes, or they will stop contributing, and I'd rather lose a bunch of non-contributing leeches with big mouths than people who produce neat things for free.

Brabbit1987 wrote: Great post and 100% agree. Especially with your personal views. I also think it's a bit of a fools errand. A losing battle if you will.

I do feel people should respect their wishes though regardless, but we all know how well that has been going.

I completely agree, but I believe this issue more with the fact that's its happening with in the community not that is happening out in the wild.

Bethesda was always a part of the community.

[Organiccheeto]

I don't know if it's possible, but to cut down on mod theft maybe you can add a fail-safe to NMM and the download manually link that scans your system for the Fallout 4 first as a requirement for download. Just a thought. Again, I don't know if this is possible, as i am an amateur with any sort of programming.

 

[AFKRoger]

In response to post #39520795.

zanity wrote: It speaks VOLUMES that Nexus very INTENTIONALLY excludes an MIT licence option for mods posted here- ie.,

6: I give permission for anyone to use my mod in any way they wish - no credit required.

Why is the MIT like option missing. Because Nexus (as much of the rant shows) is about TELLING people how to think and act- rather than giving users TRUE freedom within reason. It is apparent Nexus thinks modding should be a GAME, where people are more interseted in power-plays and the search for 'fame' over simply helping to boost a community.

Bethesda doesn't repsect this site NOT just because the Nexus is comptetition- but because Beth is American, and Yanks understand the fundamental concepts of OPEN-SOURCE development. The open-source softwre movement could NEVER have originated in Britain, and that is a very sad fact.

If Nexus really wanted to move forward, it should introduce a promted development open-source licence ENCOURAGING mod sharing WITHOUT the need for explicit author permissions. Most open-source licenses are INHERITED, of course, which solves the 'problem' or 'abuse'.

Moving to one or more open-source licences for mods hosted here would eliminate most of the problems currently seen with console mods. I know this. Beth knows this. The controllers of Nexus know this. So why hasn't this happened? The answer is not a happy one.

PS the CLAIM that console modding is just like PC modding is so disingeneous, I cannot believe anyone makes it with a straight face. While 'difficult' language may be deployed by people arguing the issue- it is a FACT that the console owners themselves DEFINE consoles as a LOCKED platform where user rights are minimum, and third-party code and data subject to the most severe controls.

We are seeing mods on the consoles today NOT because Sony and Microsoft have changed their stance, but because MS is in a VERY diffcult market position given the much greater success of the PS4,and is therefore willing to do things in the SHORT TERM for market gain it most certainly will NOT allow in the long term. And by doing so, MS currently obliges Sony to follow suit. Both Sony and MS are currently more interested in the successful launches of their new console updates.

BUT both Sony and MS expect Beth to VERY QUICKLY convert mods into more paid, heavily curated DLC- and Beth has promised exactly this with its new iDTech engine that will be the basis of new moddable open-world games after the re-release of Skyrim. You see, neither MS nor Sony believe free user-created mods belong on consoles - even if they bend this principle for a LITTLE time in the midst of deadly competition between the two.

Beth's current lack of enthusiasm with 'fixing' console modding has everything do do with the fact that Beth knows that mods on the existing, ancient, obsolete engine is a can of worms not worth the time, effort or money to fix. The new iDTech engine is built from the ground up to support curated mods that Beth has 100% distribution control over- and it is THESE mods that Beth is preparing to support properly.

The Apple app-store is Beth's model.

PPS the statement that the use of a tool allows the tool maker to control items made by a tool using a EULA is so wrong in law, it is literally unbelievable that anyone is still promoting this NONSENSE. Beth ONLY gets to share distribution rights over your mod if your mod contains BETH IP, regardless of what tools you used to make the mod. No so-called license gets to alter this FACT.

And evn if BETH holds a distribution right because your mod contains Beth IP, both your permission AND Beth's is required to publicly distribute the mod. Beth alone CANNOT ever distribute your mod, or give others the right to do the same, unless you give them IMPLIED permission by doing something like uploading it to Beth.net.

Mods are already licensed between Bethesda and the Mod Maker, I don't recall the exact license but it says it in the article. I don't believe Nexus Mods actually has any say in the matter. Just that in order to exist it must Enforce DCMA laws or suffer legal wrath.

Really Nexus Mods has provided a sort of place where the mods can be created and shared, and be somewhat protected. Essentially being a Massive Storage, CDN, Babby Sitting Service, and Place to facilitate a growing modding community over the past 14 years.

It is up to the mod author to allow others to use their work no NEXUS MODS. Its also up to the mod author license the mods under another license (If they can even legally do that) if they so choose.

As for modding on consoles being free that will never be. You have to pay a monthly fee just to be allowed to connect the consoles online to download the mods. As per any additional money being required I can't say but if they wanted money on top of that I would think the whole console modding idea would go down the toilet very quickly. But who knows.

[AFKRoger]

In response to post #39521135.

Organiccheeto wrote: I don't know if it's possible, but to cut down on mod theft maybe you can add a fail-safe to NMM and the download manually link that scans your system for the Fallout 4 first as a requirement for download. Just a thought. Again, I don't know if this is possible, as i am an amateur with any sort of programming.

The download link would be easily circumvent able, and the NMM fix would be circumvent able as well. (Though, it already needs to know where FO4 is just to know where to put the mods.)

Its impossible to complete stop online theft of any kind.

In terms of computer security in general online and other wise the only way to protect data from theft would be to take your pc, dig a 40 ft whole in the ground, though in a bunch of c4, dynamite, bleach, e.t.c. make it go boom, and fill the whole. (I'm sorry I just love saying that)

The best you can to secure any data is make it more trouble to steal then its worth. However, that wont work here as the data needs to be accessible freely as they don't want to prevent people from using their mods they just want to be given credit for their work.

Even then they realize its impossible to prevent mod theft, I think all people are asking for right now is for Bethesda to take official stance against mod theft instead of inadvertently encouraging it.

[creedofheresy]

In response to post #39478620. #39478950, #39478990, #39479360, #39480785, #39481460, #39481565, #39482090, #39482190, #39482470, #39482645 are all replies on the same post.

Kira8002 wrote: I've been using this website for 8 years I guess, and I never bothered coming out of the woodwork to express my opinions or whatever, but I guess now it's a good time. Here it goes:

Dark0ne, you are naive.

People gathered at Nexus for convenience and simplicity's sake. If things start getting too complex or full of drama (like this buzzwords filled post of yours), then we'll just move somewhere else, and this WILL happen to Nexus if you keep making mistakes like this. Your post will divide the community even more than console mods ever would.

We users and content creators own you nothing, you are entitled to nothing. If we see that this site isn't worth the trouble anymore, we'll just pack our s#*! and go.

everstitan wrote: then go and don't come back, right wing trumpeter

PonceMonster wrote: As much as I want to punch you in the face right now... Robin is love, Robin is life.

imbadatgames69 wrote: Wall just got 10ft higher, Pedro.

GarnetSan wrote: What do you mean by "things start getting too complex"? Also, being in charge of a website and releasing a statement to the comunity explaining the issue it has been having recently and explaining the small changes are going to be happening to the website so as to benefit the whole comunity is NOT drama. It's called being responsible towards your community.

Judging by your profile, no file pictures added, 0 endorsements, 7 posts, etc. I'd say that you are on nexus only to see what you can get from this community, which is absolutely fine, you are in your right to do so and it's within the guidelines of the community.

But the fact that you say that this post will divide a community in which you have not taken any part... is naïve.

Correcting your statement, this comunity does owe Dark0ne something, which is the ability to share content between ourselves so as to enjoy it. He is entitled to his own opinion and on his right to be the one to inform the community on which steps the website is going to take to prevent a very serious issue that affects it which is intellectual property theft.

If you think that trying to protect property from authors whose work you have been enjoying for eight years is "too much of a hassle" for you, then you can, as your said, pack your f*#@ing s#*! and go.

madpaddy wrote: THIS.... ( Judging by your profile, no file pictures added, 0 endorsements, 7 posts, etc. I'd say that you are on nexus to see what you can get from this community ).

8 years and you haven't given 1 endorsement not contributed a single thing, sorry but your words are as empty as your profile.

Nas00 wrote: Pack your s#*! and go then.

P.S: shut the door on your way out.

sp4rkfist wrote: Good bye then, it's not like you are an active user at nexus despite your join date.

juiceb1tch wrote: Aiite seeya.

Nogrim313 wrote: read the actual article dumb ass.

ArsenicTouch wrote: Next time you have a thought, just let it go Kira8002. It's clear you didn't even understand the point he was making before you started shooting your mouth off. Don't forget to let the door hit you on the way out.

Oh no, please don't leave and take the 0 mods you made away from us! Anything but that! We'll lose so much! What will we do with one less condescending snobbish uppity little bandwidth leech amongst the userbase?!

GTFO and take your BS with you, troll.

[SixT4]

In response to post #39514525. #39514985, #39515670, #39515755, #39515875, #39516010, #39516150, #39516205, #39516265, #39516385, #39516625, #39516800, #39516940, #39516945, #39517040 are all replies on the same post.

SixT4 wrote: Welp, I guess I better throw any hopes of making my own mods from scratch out the window and onto the concrete. All I need as incentive to create is knowing I'd be doing something good for people- I don't need some bundle of "rights" and a draconian legal regime enforcing them. It's a shame to see a modding community support the same system that empowers game companies to step all over mod authors, and makes innocent things like fan art a criminal offense with fines over $100,000.

Loving what I did is how I started to draw, and how I started my journey to become a computer programmer- and seeing how so many people doing those two things are so obsessed with copyright rather than doing good, I'm starting to be driven away.

boomerizer wrote: Finally, someone here with a line of genuine human logic.

SixT4 wrote: I was just gonna thank you for your other post, boomerizer. :U People are bringing money into this, when many mod authors aren't asking money to download their mods. If I wasn't a broke college student, I'd definitely pitch in some money to say thanks and show I care. Also, I'd agree with what you said about redistribution; I've had a few of my drawings redistributed a while ago, and it hasn't bothered me any- they gave me credit. ;P If someone was trying to claim it, sure- I'd be mad. When it comes to software-related things like game mods, I can see a few reasons why some mod authors wouldn't want their work tinkered with- people could add viruses, screw it up and make the original author look bad, etc. I can also understand some restrictions on redistribution for support issues; I've seen plenty of people elsewhere asking for support for a really outdated version of something; it looks stressful. XP But rather than forbidding distribution and modification, why not just allow them within a set of rules? I'm actually curious on why people don't just make rules instead of forbidding something outright...

doomy19 wrote: @sixT4 Imagine you had just created a beautifully crafted new outfit for fallout 4, and upload it expecting (justly im sure), that all of those downloading it are going to love it. Now imagine that the outfit, which is very unique and original and is tied to your name and reputation as a modder, gets pulled from the nexus by some smartass who then proceeds to open 3dsmax and adds a big nazi swastika to your original and unique outfit, or cuts off the bottom of the outfit and makes it a skirt, or makes a super skimpy version of your outfit and reuploads it to other sites under your name. Im sure you would be just fine with all of this happening right?

Brabbit1987 wrote: @doomy19

XD Nothing like that as far as I am aware is happening. So your point is ... pointless.

However, to answer such a question, I would be mad if that happened of course. It's an entirely different situation than this.

HadToRegister wrote: Just because you're not aware of it happening doesn't mean it's NOT happening.

boomerizer wrote: @doomy,

I would trust the users to be smart enough to look at the original mod before messaging me. And if they didn't, I would point it out, and leave it at that.

"I didn't put the swaztika there. Look at my mod <provide link> then look at the uploader of the mod you downloaded..... no match? Thanks, have a nice day."

Brabbit1987 wrote: @HadtoRegister

If I am unaware of it happening, then that means it's not a very big problem. If it has happened once, I don't consider that an issue. That would be that specific mod developers issue, and they would have to settle it with whom ever decided to be such a douche.

doomy19 wrote: @Brabbit1987
Whether it has or hasn't happened YET is meaningless in a toxic regulatory environment where it can and will happen if steps aren't taken to prevent it. Such steps were easy to take when there were only a few major modding sites with good regulatory oversight such as the nexus and steam workshop where multiple reports or a PM could get the desired effect. However this does not seem to be the case now with bethesda as per the original post.

SixT4 wrote: @doomy19 If it got pulled by some jerk and was made as an insult, then yeah, I'd be pretty mad- especially under my name, as that would be deceiving to both the community and to me. Hang'em high, for all I care- but that's only one scenario. If someone made a serious modification made to look like a Mecha-Nazi for Fallout 4, I'd be fine, as long as they stated it wasn't the original and the original was made by me; to each their own (I have 2 friends who are WWII buffs, they might think that'd be cool). Sure, not everyone thinks that way- and again, to each their own; I'm just trying to say I peacefully disagree with the "it's my property" train of thought. Other people can think differently all they want- I just don't want to be involved.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @doomy19
Whether it can happen is irrelevant. I can go outside and be stabbed by a person in a pikachu costume with a wooden fork.

You also can't decide something "will" happen if it hasn't really happened yet. I can say the sky will fall today, but that doesn't make it true. If it starts to become a problem and people start stealing mods and changing them in such a way, then we will deal with that problem once it arises, until then .. it's not a problem.

As for regulation, yep .. and it's likely only going to get harder as things continue down this path of console modding.

doomy19 wrote: @SixT4 Well there's really nothing to disagree with, it IS their property, according to U.S. intellectual property laws (DMCA) and also according to the Zenimax TOS agreement... by advocating that people take it just because they want to, you are basically advocating breaking the spirit of the law even if it can't be punished realistically.

Brabbit1987 wrote: @doomy19

Yes, it is technically against the law. But so is fan art .. what is your point? These are laws that are rarely followed because it does more harm than good. It's just overly stressful for the little that can be gained by going after such minor issues.

If we where to follow copyright laws to a T ... do you have any idea how many mods here already break those laws?

doomy19 wrote: @Brabbit1987 Guess i should leave the doors to my house unlocked and my windows open since i like a nice breeze and my house has never been burglarized...

Brabbit1987 wrote: @doomy19

Your house may never have been, but there is plenty of evidence of others houses having been. So it's a problem, and thus it stands to reason ... maybe you should lock your door.

It's not a matter of whether or not it happens to only you, it's a matter of whether or not it's happening overall.

If there was a ton of mods being taken and being changed into some nazi stuff and reuploaded under the mod authors name, then yes .. that is an issue. That isn't happening though.

@doomy19 Being "The LAW^TM" doesn't exempt it from being anything other than being illegal. :B It can still be unreasonable, it can still be extreme, and it can still be wrong. Since it seems this discussion is going the "legal" route, I'll say this- I live in the US, where I have the right to an opinion and the freedom of expression, as well as to speak out against laws that aren't just as peaceful protest; so yes, there IS something to disagree with and I have every right to do so. If the law was right just because it was the law, we wouldn't have any more copyright laws in the US other than the Copyright Act of 1976, because it would've never had to be changed because it would be instantaneously right because it was the law- thus, the DMCA would've never existed; being an extension to the Copyright Act of 1976. Obviously that's circular logic and things aren't that black-and-white. The DMCA is an extension of US copyright law, it isn't the legal definition of copyright in the US. A broken one at that- a few months ago (I think in April?) the US Copyright Office asked the public basically "What's wrong with the DMCA?" Several thousands of explanations and complaints were sent within the first hour, mostly about the takedown process and anti-circumvention measures. :B The DMCA is very controversial- with good reason. It's more of a witch hunt than valid due process; all you need is "good faith-" not a jury by court or even evidence at that. Most people who disobey copyright do it not to be jerks, not to be selfish, but because God forbid you draw a character you like that everyone knows who made it to show your appreciation rather than toss wads of cash at its creator. Copyright criminalizes simple, innocent acts of appreciation, and needs some serious repair for it to actually "promote progress of science and the useful arts" rather forbidding doing just that.

[smdursoii]

@Dark0ne

 

The most enjoyable part of reading your essay's is how incredibly level headed, well thought out, logical and reasonable each and every statement is. Thank you for all your incredibly hard work in maintaining this community and especially for protecting the rights of mod authors/users. Thank you.

[Garfunklestein]

In response to post #39519705.

DPnavpoc wrote: If a mod author does not want his/her mod going to consoles, they could make it somehow dependent on F4SE. I have a few TB's of space on my computer so if you mod authors want to make your mods over 2gb, I will be ok with it. Just spit balling here. :)

This is such a toxic and elitist attitude. Look, stealing mods is bad, and until Bethesda locks down on it, then yes, go into caution mode and hide mods, make files dependent on F4SE, but when it does come to an all clear, and you still have DRM on a mod, know that I'm not going to support or download such hateful garbage.

[OmalleyPike]

I agree with most of this, and have some personal observations:

 

1. We should treat console mods with the same respect as the PC mods, alike to race-free immigration. There's no need to shun console mods, since they are a good idea, but it's not without it's faults.

 

2. The whole DMCA thing is pretty crappy. The problem with the DMCA is that, in order to be covered, you need to have registered with the DMCA. This opens problems since a lot of modders probably haven't registered, or maybe don't even know about DMCA registration, meaning that proprietors of stolen content could potentially register themselves on DMCA, therefore meaning the content is *legally* theirs.

 

3. Bethesda.net seems to me to be a pretty bad idea, or at least they shouldn't have released it in it's current state. My problem with it is, that I don't feel the need to use it. I get that feeling about the Steam Workshop sometimes, but not because it's not where the modding community is, but I just find the site un-optimized and mods could be found quicker by going to a modding forum. Then again, I feel the whole steam site could be better.

 

4. Personal opinion, but if I was Bethesda I would have worked with the modding community so it does not require to migrate to a new service, but instead integrate it with the Nexus. I know this probably takes longer, as well as costs more, but a lot of these problems could have been avoided while giving users a good system from the get-go given that the core structure is already made.

 

5. Console mods: I feel like these may get official implementation from Sony / Microsoft, but I don't think that would be a good thing since it also opens the opportunity to charge for use of the service. I don't know if the current system requires a PS+ / XB Live subscription, but still, it's bad if they could. Ex. Bethesda, paid modding.

[GamerPoets]

In response to post #39467495. #39507160, #39508060, #39508150, #39509035, #39511705, #39513590, #39513965, #39514025, #39514065, #39514440, #39515975 are all replies on the same post.

GamerPoets wrote: This is something that I shared in a different forum/site and while that topic was slightly different it was still brought about because of the topic here. I thought I'd paste what I wrote here for those of you who care to read it.
------------------

This is a generalized statement. I have no problem talking directly to individuals if I feel that I need to lol, so don't think that I'm beating around the bush. I just felt the need to share my thoughts on the subject at large. If I didn't respect everyone's comments thus far I wouldn't take the time to type this. There are some people that I have a lot of respect for who are posting in this topic, who have done a lot to help me on my modding journey and I wanted to share my thoughts with them.

What I feel this all comes down to is this...

Creative property in any form (music, television, paintings, mods) is one or more people devoting a large amount of their life (whether it's hours, weeks, months or years) to something that they believe in one way or another.

Regarding mods and nexus and other sites, there should definitely be some sort of check box or something that says "yes, allow others to use my mod as they wish" "no, you cannot upload it elsewhere" " after this amount of time you can... blah blah blah" or whatever.. you know? I also feel that once someone uploads a mod that shouldn't be able to just pull it away from those who use it by removing it (I'll say why at the end of this book I'm writing lol) But none of that exists yet as far as I know so it's a moot point.

So..

To guess at what someone else is feeling about this subject, if they have not said anything either way about it, (before disappearing or not) or to think that they "should" feel how you do on the subject (whether they actually do agree or not) is selfish, un-thoughtful and borderline narcissistic among other things. Words have definitions and regarding this situation to take someone else's work (and don't be fooled, because whether it is "fun" or not it is "work") is to be those words and that type of person. (The type of person that most people in this community want nothing to do with and to not be a part of. Which is the only reason why people like me even consider to continue being a part of it and to put so much effort into what we do. There is enough BS in "real life" that I don't need it to ooze into my passions or hobbies and many feel that way, too. The reason that many stick around the community, and continue to create mods and to support it, damn sure isn't the replay-ability of Skyrim for 5 years+lol).

Summary of all that: If you don't know how someone feels it's not your place to assume (that's with anything in life)...continuing on =)

If someone says that credit is enough then cool, credit them and do as you wish. But if someone states that they want their mods only on nexus then they should be respected. You don't know what creating that mod did for this person. It could have been their way to get through a tough time in life. It could have been something that they poured every piece of themselves into creatively to prove to themselves that they could do it. It could be a simple form of therapy or just a hobby. Perhaps the mod author has something against the other sites. Perhaps the mod author has a strong personal connection to nexus and they want to give back to it for whatever nexus "gave" to them personally when they needed something to be given to them. It's not your "right" to guess or to even be allowed to know how they feel unless they care to share their reasons with you.

When someone pours as much effort into their creative works as many mod authors do, taking their mod and uploading it elsewhere is like me taking anything that you have worked hard on, that you hold dear to yourself, and tossing it around in the mud like it's no big deal. ...Yes, that's exactly what it's like to some people and it's not your decision to say that they shouldn't feel how they do about it. As a human being you should respect their efforts and the fact that they made it public for anyone to use at all. More importantly, you should respect their feelings and your potential lack of understanding about them.

On the other hand, when someone makes a song and sells it (just an example) and puts it on the radio there are large amounts of people who will fall in love with it. Once you have created something and given it to the world it is no longer 100% the creators. It's just not. There's no two ways about it. When you allow someone else to develop an attachment to something (minor or large, emotional or whatever) that you have created you have entitled that person to be able to listen to it, watch it, or use it, whatever it is as often as they care too or need to. If the initial requirements were for that person to pay for it upfront so be it. If the wishes of this person were for you to only play with these works on a specific version of a game, then that is what they are. You don't need a law to tell you how not to be an A-hole. If you have the desire to bring that mod to a "new level" then "you" "need" to do the work and put that same care and effort into as the original creator did to both respect and honor it and not just "bootleg their CD" and give it out elsewhere... because when you do that you go from being a supporter who deserves you're own piece of what you fell in love with, regarding their work, to a hustler (which I know a great deal about in "real life" lol). A hustler who may not have only ruined this experience/passtime/hobby/passion/whatever that a mod author (person) once needed but you have potentially robbed them of their passion by tainting it with selfish actions. Who know's what creating these mods really allowed this person to get through in life. And if they are being a dick to others... have you heard how horrible people in comments can be and how annoying? I didn't create a video called "The (bad placed here word lol) Song" for nothing. Perhaps this experience has already been ruined for them and they only keep their mods up on nexus out of respect for some or with hopes of regaining the feeling that they once had for this community.

As I stated at the beginning of this long wall of text... "it comes down to this"... to be a decent human-being and to understand what it means to be one.

If anyone doesn't understand that (and the majority of what I have wrote) they have a lot to learn about this very short life that we are living. Not everyone who creates a mod views them as "trading cards".

Sure, modding is about having fun and sharing that fun with other people... TO YOU, that is what modding is =) ... and mostly to me = )... but that doesn't mean that our, my, or our thoughts and feelings allow us to take something that we didn't create and to do what we wish with it. Mods may be pass-times and ways to not be bored for some but for others they are life saving acts of creativity or monuments of personal growth.

-----------
after typing this all out there was a comment that had been written in between and I liked what was said as it helped to define the point even further

Anonymous Poster: "All I’m saying is...I do not think Leonardo da Vinci has a right to say that no alterations of the Mona Lisa can be made. I think it is ethically acceptable for these to exist, even if the author does not want them to."

----------------
Me: I like the Mono Lisa statement. You're right and people DO modify the Mono Lisa all of the time. However, they aren't allowed to simply paint over the original copy. They have to either recreate it from scratch and make adjustments as they go or use a photocopy of some sorts, but still, it's not the original version... not to mention that Leo has been long dead and his emotional attachments to his work are probably justifiably assumed to no longer be what they once were... however, we still do everything that we can to protect and honor the original... what a sexy lady she is lol

Goodnight.

jace14 wrote: if bumps are allowed in this forum, here is a bump

CaladanAnduril wrote: Str8 to the point ! Bravo !

boomerizer wrote: I second this bump.

And to further, it's not that I don't appreciate the modders that create the work.
I just don't hold any real care about the origin. Only that the mod that I see is available for use. I don't know many modders by name. Even for the mods that I absolutely love-- Skyrim ones, specifically. I know Azar but that is only because each mod ends with "by Azar". Beyond that. I don't know who made Falskaar. I don't know who made Forgotten City. I don't know who made Better Shaped Weapons. But I absolutely love these mods for Skyrim.

For Fallout 4, I use NCR Veteran Ranger Armor, Patriotic Shield and Commonwealth Cuts. I don't know the names of the modders. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate that they are available to me. Two of those three mods aren't available on Xbox though. And that makes me a sad panda.

That said, NCR Veteran Ranger armor WAS at one point available in a mod pack (Spawn Items) that allowed a user to spawn items from the game, as well as included others' mods, including NCR VRA. The author of Spawn Items did not credit the mod author of NCRVRA and to me, I can't really see why they are upset because once uploaded to the internet, you should want your work distributed. ( I mean does it really matter WHO downloads it? Just that someone is enjoying it?)

I mean, I don't know the name of the cook that makes my gourmet burgers at BT's or Five Guys or wherever I order my burgers from. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate the burger delivered to me by the waiter/waitress. We thank the waiter/waitress when the food is brought to us, but the person that actually MADE the burger goes thankless.

Think that makes any more sense? I mean, seems relevant to me..

arenthefox wrote: My eyes hurt from staring at this post, but I agree with everything. Of course, you said it a lot better and nicer than I'd ever be able to.

Kalell wrote: When someone creates a mod I like I always check to see what the username of the person is when I go back to endorse the file. I've made a few mods myself and I know how much time and effort goes into making them. Checking to see what the authors name is is the least I can do in return for them sharing their work, and it will help me recognize anything else they do in the future. I'm not sure why anyone wouldn't want to know the name of someone that worked really hard on something they liked and uploaded it for people to use for free.

boomerizer wrote: For the same reason I don't bother with the credits at the end of a TV Show, Movie, or Game.

PinkSamantha wrote: "When someone pours as much effort into their creative works as many mod authors do, taking their mod and uploading it elsewhere is like me taking anything that you have worked hard on, that you hold dear to yourself, and tossing it around in the mud like it's no big deal. ...Yes, that's exactly what it's like to some people and it's not your decision to say that they shouldn't feel how they do about it. As a human being you should respect their efforts and the fact that they made it public for anyone to use at all. More importantly, you should respect their feelings and your potential lack of understanding about them."

Couldn't say it better myself.

And, uh... Mono Lisa? As in, Non-Stereo Lisa? I hope it's just a typo.

But seriously, thank you very much for the opinion.

PinkSamantha wrote: edit: damn, double post. If Robin, Dante, SirSalami or any staff is around, would you mind to remove this post? Thank you very much and sorry for the trouble.

Kalell wrote: So you just don't care to know who the people are that make the entertainment you enjoy, so long as they are allowing you to use it? In the case of media that you pay for I understand that, but recognition is the only thing mod authors get.

PinkSamantha wrote: @Kalell
Just ignore him.
And thanks for the opinion. Completely agreed with you.

boomerizer wrote: Well, in the case of TV and Movies, its more or less "I don't know this person." Like, do I really need to know who the gaffer is?

I like paying attention to voice actors, in games. Thats about the extent of my attention to credits. I don't really look at coders, QA testers, artists etc. Nobody knows who they are, except them, and the people that they worked with. Your average consumer isn't going to know them, and isn't going to go Google searching the persons life story.

Doesn't mean they aren't appreciated in assisting in bringing us this entertainment. Sound quality wouldn't be very good if the gaffer didn't hold that stick up for hours at a time.

Likewise, with Mods, I presume my download and continued use of the mod would be appreciation enough.

Dolby 1.1