On console mods, theft and Bethesda.net

[NeoNord]

For GamerPoets and Dark0ne both, you are both obviously very passionate about what you believe in and both of you appear to be articulate in setting forth your thoughts. That said I have to tell you that passion can get in the way of clear thinking sometimes. First, Bethesda has no responsibility to "police" the mods. The policing that they do is to protect their reputation and promote sales for the most part. You seem surprised that they would put out CK and then let the modders do what they will with it. I suppose there are well intentioned folk who will say they have a responsibility to protect the poor consumer against any evils the modders might try to put over on the defenseless consumer. I strongly disagree, the consumer does not have to buy the game nor do they have to download any mod. That is the ultimate defense. Next, when a modder creates a mod, the modder is changing the product that Bethesda is marketing. In creating and including the CK, Bethesda is giving them a way to do this and share it with others. If the mod goes on Nexus do you think that is somehow different than someone uploading it to another site? They seem pretty much the same to me. The modification of various forms of art has a long history in the world be it a literary work, a form of visual art (painting, photography, film, digital images) or music. That does not make it right or fair or legal but it is universal nonetheless. Every time a no name band plays a cover of someone else's song they are essentially doing a similar thing and if they charge people money to hear, "their version" of the song are they committing a crime? Some would argue yes and that would make most professional musicians criminals. If they change the words but keep the music score , does that change things? I know everyone wants to feel special and especially so if you are passionately engaged in creative pursuits, but let's keep a little perspective. I currently use about 170 mods and have used the game since it came out. If I had to pay for all those mods would I have used them, for many the answer would be no, for others it would be "it depends on how much it costs".Would I still be playing the game sans mods, probably not. Does Bethesda benefit from enabling modification of it's game, I would argue yes. Do modders benefit from their mods being seen, downloaded and used by others? I would again argue yes. Do game players benefit from using the mods, again the answer is yes. The proof is, if there were no benefit for them, none of the three parties would do it. We can argue about the nature of the benefit for each and whether it is commensurate with effort or whatever else you want address but clearly all parties benefit. Sounds like a three way win to me.

[iXenite]

You can't just cherry pick from the article. Read the whole thing, it clearly states it's technically against copyright laws. It's just the companies do not act on it.

 

Just because companies don't do anything, does not mean it isn't against copyright. Again, read the whole thing. And if you did read the whole thing, then maybe you need to take reading comprehension classes because it clearly states it's against copyright. That is literally what the whole article is about.

 

Edit: I think where you and I disagree is mainly due to you misunderstanding what I am talking about. You keep saying it's an accepted "de facto" truth that it's legal. That is literally impossible because it's illegal. It's a "de facto" truth that it's allowed. Not that it's legal. Two very different things.

 

Just because the company allows it, doesn't mean it's not against copyright laws.

 

 

 

I never said it was legal in practice. That would be De Jure Standard (as in, according to law). I said it is De Facto (as in, in reality or by fact). Because no one (mostly) acts on the legal right to sue authors of FanFiction and artists of FanArt, thus it is De Facto law. Period. An overwhelming majority of copyright holders take zero legal action against Fanrt and FanFiction, therefore, the De Facto standard is that it is acceptable. That is how that word works.

 

Edit: Also, I did read the whole article. I could have also quoted a later portion that continues to reinforce my position, but I chose not to. My legal facts are correct regardless.

Edited June 23, 2016 by DaddyDirection

[popcorn71]

In response to post #39684490.

phantompally76 wrote: I don't have much more to add to this.....whatever it is. I just want to ask a question, and follow it up with a comparison. I'll begin of course by reminding everyone that I vehemently oppose mod piracy in any form, because idiots here like to gloss over that and act like I'm their enemy simply because I don't see eye to eye with the hypocrisy of this tirade against console pirates and Bethesda.

What is stopping console mod thieves from saying "I am simply preserving this mod before it disappears from the Nexus/Steam, because it would be a shame to lose all these mods".? Is that considered a weak and invalid argument for mod piracy in the eyes of this community?

Because that is precisely what the Nexus is currently doing with mods off Filefront/Gamefront. Due credit is not always being given to the original authors of those mods, and authors' permission to upload them in the first place is definitely not being secured. You can't try to label piracy as "preservation" with one hand, and then lash out at overt piracy (which at the very least doesn't try to mask itself as something else) with the other.

And the only difference...the ONLY difference between those examples is that one of them generates potential website hits and ad revenue for the Nexus, and the other does not. Regardless, it is unequivocally hypocritical of this community to condemn one and praise the other.

I would say that the difference between what the nexus is doing with the Filefront mods and what the mod thieves are doing is that Filefront is dead and the nexus is not. A mod will not "disappears" off the nexus unless the mod author actively hides it, making it abundantly clear that the mod author does in fact want the mod to be inaccessible. If a mod website is dead then the mod authors have by definition already moved on and are uninterested/unable in maintaining (or removing) their mod.

It really just boils down to mod authors having the final say in how their work is distributed unless they have abandoned the mod entirely.

Still, I would hope that the nexus is respecting the wises of the authors who's mod are being converted and not converting over any files they have not been granted permission to convert.

[MarchinBunny]

 

You can't just cherry pick from the article. Read the whole thing, it clearly states it's technically against copyright laws. It's just the companies do not act on it.

 

Just because companies don't do anything, does not mean it isn't against copyright. Again, read the whole thing. And if you did read the whole thing, then maybe you need to take reading comprehension classes because it clearly states it's against copyright. That is literally what the whole article is about.

 

Edit: I think where you and I disagree is mainly due to you misunderstanding what I am talking about. You keep saying it's an accepted "de facto" truth that it's legal. That is literally impossible because it's illegal. It's a "de facto" truth that it's allowed. Not that it's legal. Two very different things.

 

Just because the company allows it, doesn't mean it's not against copyright laws.

 

 

 

I never said it was legal in practice. That would be De Jure Standard (as in, according to law). I said it is De Facto (as in, in reality or by fact). Because no one (mostly) acts on the legal right to sue authors of FanFiction and artists of FanArt, thus it is De Facto law. Period. An overwhelming majority of copyright holders take zero legal action against Fanrt and FanFiction, therefore, the De Facto standard is that it is acceptable. That is how that word works.

 

Edit: Also, I did read the whole article. I could have also quoted a later portion that continues to reinforce my position, but I chose not to. My legal facts are correct regardless.

 

You specifically said, and I quote "It is an accepted De Facto truth that FanArt and FanFiction are legal."

 

Let's define the word De Facto. I am pulling from a google search. "De facto is a Latin phrase that means in fact (literally by or from fact) in the sense of "in practice but not necessarily ordained by law" or "in practice or actuality, but not officially established", as opposed to de jure."

 

​Looking at the definition, the word pretty much means in practice, regardless of the law. So yes, in practice, you cannot get in trouble. But that still does not mean it's legal. I am talking specifically about copyright laws, not what people decide to ignore. It doesn't matter if companies do not decide to go after people for fan art. It is still literally against copyright laws whether you like it or not.

 

In other words, where I have a problem with what you are saying is when you keep saying it's legal. It being accepted, does not overrule the actual law itself. This is why, if a company wanted to ... yes, they could still go after you. Because this "de facto" rule ... isn't written in stone or anything nor does it actually change the law.

 

You can quote anything you want from that article, it does not prove your point, because your point of it being a de facto, does not change the actual law of which I am talking about.

 

Edited June 23, 2016 by Brabbit1987

[AnyOldName3]

In response to post #39684490. #39686550 is also a reply to the same post.

phantompally76 wrote: I don't have much more to add to this.....whatever it is. I just want to ask a question, and follow it up with a comparison. I'll begin of course by reminding everyone that I vehemently oppose mod piracy in any form, because idiots here like to gloss over that and act like I'm their enemy simply because I don't see eye to eye with the hypocrisy of this tirade against console pirates and Bethesda.

What is stopping console mod thieves from saying "I am simply preserving this mod before it disappears from the Nexus/Steam, because it would be a shame to lose all these mods".? Is that considered a weak and invalid argument for mod piracy in the eyes of this community?

Because that is precisely what the Nexus is currently doing with mods off Filefront/Gamefront. Due credit is not always being given to the original authors of those mods, and authors' permission to upload them in the first place is definitely not being secured. You can't try to label piracy as "preservation" with one hand, and then lash out at overt piracy (which at the very least doesn't try to mask itself as something else) with the other.

And the only difference...the ONLY difference between those examples is that one of them generates potential website hits and ad revenue for the Nexus, and the other does not. Regardless, it is unequivocally hypocritical of this community to condemn one and praise the other.

popcorn71 wrote: I would say that the difference between what the nexus is doing with the Filefront mods and what the mod thieves are doing is that Filefront is dead and the nexus is not. A mod will not "disappears" off the nexus unless the mod author actively hides it, making it abundantly clear that the mod author does in fact want the mod to be inaccessible. If a mod website is dead then the mod authors have by definition already moved on and are uninterested/unable in maintaining (or removing) their mod.

It really just boils down to mod authors having the final say in how their work is distributed unless they have abandoned the mod entirely.

Still, I would hope that the nexus is respecting the wises of the authors who's mod are being converted and not converting over any files they have not been granted permission to convert.

Based on my (albeit limited) understanding of copyright law, the Nexus would have had to buy out FileFront's licences to distribute the files (which would potentially have been dirt cheap as they'd gone bust already) if they were to rehost them without manually contacting every single mod author about every single file. If that's what happened, as far as the original author is concerned, the Nexus is now FileFront, so nothing's changed except a URL, and it's possible that, depending on how it's done, they may have the same ability to control the files as they did before.

This is based on conjecture, but if it's right, then it explains how the situations are different, and if it's wrong, then I don't know enough about this to participate in this discussion, and can safely be ignored. :)

[phantompally76]

In response to post #39684490. #39686550, #39687780 are all replies on the same post.

phantompally76 wrote: I don't have much more to add to this.....whatever it is. I just want to ask a question, and follow it up with a comparison. I'll begin of course by reminding everyone that I vehemently oppose mod piracy in any form, because idiots here like to gloss over that and act like I'm their enemy simply because I don't see eye to eye with the hypocrisy of this tirade against console pirates and Bethesda.

What is stopping console mod thieves from saying "I am simply preserving this mod before it disappears from the Nexus/Steam, because it would be a shame to lose all these mods".? Is that considered a weak and invalid argument for mod piracy in the eyes of this community?

Because that is precisely what the Nexus is currently doing with mods off Filefront/Gamefront. Due credit is not always being given to the original authors of those mods, and authors' permission to upload them in the first place is definitely not being secured. You can't try to label piracy as "preservation" with one hand, and then lash out at overt piracy (which at the very least doesn't try to mask itself as something else) with the other.

And the only difference...the ONLY difference between those examples is that one of them generates potential website hits and ad revenue for the Nexus, and the other does not. Regardless, it is unequivocally hypocritical of this community to condemn one and praise the other.

popcorn71 wrote: I would say that the difference between what the nexus is doing with the Filefront mods and what the mod thieves are doing is that Filefront is dead and the nexus is not. A mod will not "disappears" off the nexus unless the mod author actively hides it, making it abundantly clear that the mod author does in fact want the mod to be inaccessible. If a mod website is dead then the mod authors have by definition already moved on and are uninterested/unable in maintaining (or removing) their mod.

It really just boils down to mod authors having the final say in how their work is distributed unless they have abandoned the mod entirely.

Still, I would hope that the nexus is respecting the wises of the authors who's mod are being converted and not converting over any files they have not been granted permission to convert.

AnyOldName3 wrote: Based on my (albeit limited) understanding of copyright law, the Nexus would have had to buy out FileFront's licences to distribute the files (which would potentially have been dirt cheap as they'd gone bust already) if they were to rehost them without manually contacting every single mod author about every single file. If that's what happened, as far as the original author is concerned, the Nexus is now FileFront, so nothing's changed except a URL, and it's possible that, depending on how it's done, they may have the same ability to control the files as they did before.

This is based on conjecture, but if it's right, then it explains how the situations are different, and if it's wrong, then I don't know enough about this to participate in this discussion, and can safely be ignored. :)

Nexus could be gone tomorrow as well. The perceived permanency of the repository does not change the definition of piracy.

The point is, as you stated yourself, it boils down to the wishes of the mod authors having the final say. Many of the authors on Filefront don't even know their mods have been uploaded here, and they are definitely not having their say. And as far as I'm concerned, "We'll remove mods if the authors ask us to" is not a valid defense against the moral and ethical dilemma this hypocrisy entails.

Frankly, it's absolutely no different than stealing merchandise from someone's home while they're away on vacation, and then agreeing to return said merchandise only after they have been caught and charged, then claiming they were doing the homeowners a favor by saving it from a fire that has yet to happen. That is still theft, and redistributing files without the expressed permission of the mod authors BEFOREHAND is still piracy.

Blindly assuming that mods on Filefront have been abandoned just because they were on Filefront is naïve and troubling. If mod authors want their work to be preserved, by and large they will make sure that happens themselves. They don't need a self-appointed trustee to come along, decide those authors have abandoned their mods without any sort of systematic and quantifiable criteria, and redistribute their mods without the least consideration for the authors' wishes, and without securing their permission beforehand. That is mod theft and piracy, and it is no different than what the trolls are doing on Bethesda.net.

We're going to have to come to terms with this, sooner rather than later. If we're so worried about piracy and modders' rights, we need to practice what we preach.

[Ethreon]

In response to post #39684490. #39686550, #39687780, #39688170 are all replies on the same post.

phantompally76 wrote: I don't have much more to add to this.....whatever it is. I just want to ask a question, and follow it up with a comparison. I'll begin of course by reminding everyone that I vehemently oppose mod piracy in any form, because idiots here like to gloss over that and act like I'm their enemy simply because I don't see eye to eye with the hypocrisy of this tirade against console pirates and Bethesda.

What is stopping console mod thieves from saying "I am simply preserving this mod before it disappears from the Nexus/Steam, because it would be a shame to lose all these mods".? Is that considered a weak and invalid argument for mod piracy in the eyes of this community?

Because that is precisely what the Nexus is currently doing with mods off Filefront/Gamefront. Due credit is not always being given to the original authors of those mods, and authors' permission to upload them in the first place is definitely not being secured. You can't try to label piracy as "preservation" with one hand, and then lash out at overt piracy (which at the very least doesn't try to mask itself as something else) with the other.

And the only difference...the ONLY difference between those examples is that one of them generates potential website hits and ad revenue for the Nexus, and the other does not. Regardless, it is unequivocally hypocritical of this community to condemn one and praise the other.

popcorn71 wrote: I would say that the difference between what the nexus is doing with the Filefront mods and what the mod thieves are doing is that Filefront is dead and the nexus is not. A mod will not "disappears" off the nexus unless the mod author actively hides it, making it abundantly clear that the mod author does in fact want the mod to be inaccessible. If a mod website is dead then the mod authors have by definition already moved on and are uninterested/unable in maintaining (or removing) their mod.

It really just boils down to mod authors having the final say in how their work is distributed unless they have abandoned the mod entirely.

Still, I would hope that the nexus is respecting the wises of the authors who's mod are being converted and not converting over any files they have not been granted permission to convert.

AnyOldName3 wrote: Based on my (albeit limited) understanding of copyright law, the Nexus would have had to buy out FileFront's licences to distribute the files (which would potentially have been dirt cheap as they'd gone bust already) if they were to rehost them without manually contacting every single mod author about every single file. If that's what happened, as far as the original author is concerned, the Nexus is now FileFront, so nothing's changed except a URL, and it's possible that, depending on how it's done, they may have the same ability to control the files as they did before.

This is based on conjecture, but if it's right, then it explains how the situations are different, and if it's wrong, then I don't know enough about this to participate in this discussion, and can safely be ignored. :)

phantompally76 wrote: Nexus could be gone tomorrow as well. The perceived permanency of the repository does not change the definition of piracy.

The point is, as you stated yourself, it boils down to the wishes of the mod authors having the final say. Many of the authors on Filefront don't even know their mods have been uploaded here, and they are definitely not having their say. And as far as I'm concerned, "We'll remove mods if the authors ask us to" is not a valid defense against the moral and ethical dilemma this hypocrisy entails.

Frankly, it's absolutely no different than stealing merchandise from someone's home while they're away on vacation, and then agreeing to return said merchandise only after they have been caught and charged, then claiming they were doing the homeowners a favor by saving it from a fire that has yet to happen. That is still theft, and redistributing files without the expressed permission of the mod authors BEFOREHAND is still piracy.

Blindly assuming that mods on Filefront have been abandoned just because they were on Filefront is naïve and troubling. If mod authors want their work to be preserved, by and large they will make sure that happens themselves. They don't need a self-appointed trustee to come along, decide those authors have abandoned their mods without any sort of systematic and quantifiable criteria, and redistribute their mods without the least consideration for the authors' wishes, and without securing their permission beforehand. That is mod theft and piracy, and it is no different than what the trolls are doing on Bethesda.net.

We're going to have to come to terms with this, sooner rather than later. If we're so worried about piracy and modders' rights, we need to practice what we preach.

Filefront doesn't exist anymore. It was done with their accord. It's like leaving your house for vacation only to come find it gone (if Nexus didn't save the files), or intact and ready to use (current situation where files are saved). I see 0 hypocrisy here, but plenty of short sight from you.

[phantompally76]

In response to post #39684490. #39686550, #39687780, #39688170, #39688440 are all replies on the same post.

phantompally76 wrote: I don't have much more to add to this.....whatever it is. I just want to ask a question, and follow it up with a comparison. I'll begin of course by reminding everyone that I vehemently oppose mod piracy in any form, because idiots here like to gloss over that and act like I'm their enemy simply because I don't see eye to eye with the hypocrisy of this tirade against console pirates and Bethesda.

What is stopping console mod thieves from saying "I am simply preserving this mod before it disappears from the Nexus/Steam, because it would be a shame to lose all these mods".? Is that considered a weak and invalid argument for mod piracy in the eyes of this community?

Because that is precisely what the Nexus is currently doing with mods off Filefront/Gamefront. Due credit is not always being given to the original authors of those mods, and authors' permission to upload them in the first place is definitely not being secured. You can't try to label piracy as "preservation" with one hand, and then lash out at overt piracy (which at the very least doesn't try to mask itself as something else) with the other.

And the only difference...the ONLY difference between those examples is that one of them generates potential website hits and ad revenue for the Nexus, and the other does not. Regardless, it is unequivocally hypocritical of this community to condemn one and praise the other.

popcorn71 wrote: I would say that the difference between what the nexus is doing with the Filefront mods and what the mod thieves are doing is that Filefront is dead and the nexus is not. A mod will not "disappears" off the nexus unless the mod author actively hides it, making it abundantly clear that the mod author does in fact want the mod to be inaccessible. If a mod website is dead then the mod authors have by definition already moved on and are uninterested/unable in maintaining (or removing) their mod.

It really just boils down to mod authors having the final say in how their work is distributed unless they have abandoned the mod entirely.

Still, I would hope that the nexus is respecting the wises of the authors who's mod are being converted and not converting over any files they have not been granted permission to convert.

AnyOldName3 wrote: Based on my (albeit limited) understanding of copyright law, the Nexus would have had to buy out FileFront's licences to distribute the files (which would potentially have been dirt cheap as they'd gone bust already) if they were to rehost them without manually contacting every single mod author about every single file. If that's what happened, as far as the original author is concerned, the Nexus is now FileFront, so nothing's changed except a URL, and it's possible that, depending on how it's done, they may have the same ability to control the files as they did before.

This is based on conjecture, but if it's right, then it explains how the situations are different, and if it's wrong, then I don't know enough about this to participate in this discussion, and can safely be ignored. :)

phantompally76 wrote: Nexus could be gone tomorrow as well. The perceived permanency of the repository does not change the definition of piracy.

The point is, as you stated yourself, it boils down to the wishes of the mod authors having the final say. Many of the authors on Filefront don't even know their mods have been uploaded here, and they are definitely not having their say. And as far as I'm concerned, "We'll remove mods if the authors ask us to" is not a valid defense against the moral and ethical dilemma this hypocrisy entails.

Frankly, it's absolutely no different than stealing merchandise from someone's home while they're away on vacation, and then agreeing to return said merchandise only after they have been caught and charged, then claiming they were doing the homeowners a favor by saving it from a fire that has yet to happen. That is still theft, and redistributing files without the expressed permission of the mod authors BEFOREHAND is still piracy.

Blindly assuming that mods on Filefront have been abandoned just because they were on Filefront is naïve and troubling. If mod authors want their work to be preserved, by and large they will make sure that happens themselves. They don't need a self-appointed trustee to come along, decide those authors have abandoned their mods without any sort of systematic and quantifiable criteria, and redistribute their mods without the least consideration for the authors' wishes, and without securing their permission beforehand. That is mod theft and piracy, and it is no different than what the trolls are doing on Bethesda.net.

We're going to have to come to terms with this, sooner rather than later. If we're so worried about piracy and modders' rights, we need to practice what we preach.

Ethreon wrote: Filefront doesn't exist anymore. It was done with their accord. It's like leaving your house for vacation only to come find it gone (if Nexus didn't save the files), or intact and ready to use (current situation where files are saved). I see 0 hypocrisy here, but plenty of short sight from you.

That's a good point, and I'm sure all the legalities have been ironed out. But just because it's legal doesn't make it right. I think we all know that.

There is plenty of historical precedent for piracy sanctioned by the law. They call it privateering. But it's still piracy, and it's still hypocritical to condemn piracy while actively engaging in it yourselves, whether it's legal or not.

[SirArtorios]

To those who work on mods and upload it to Bethesda.net, i am a console gamer and i appreciate you uploading your mods for us to enjoy, but to the stealing mods issue, we simply look at the mods you create( or stolen mods from others who want credit) read the description and download it, most of us wont go and verify it as it is much of a hassle our belief in it stems off of if it shows links to actual proof and or if it doesn't have a paypal page(one of the top reasons to steal) but if it doesn't and it asks for a paypal most of just don't believe it.

 

your efforts aren't in vain and we do have gratitude, BUT you should blame the people who steal mods, Not those who download it, some people ddproductions83 and Other which i will not name expect people who regularly don't check on these things( OOOOoooo a new mod! i'm gonna download it thanks!(inset mod author here). and to some who have not heard bricking is a thing... and its the production of those incompetent ignorant angry modder's blaming people who just want to play a game. My gamertag is sir artorios and i like many others, do not support stolen mods, and thank those who make mods possible on xbox

[popcorn71]

In response to post #39684490. #39686550, #39687780, #39688170, #39688440, #39688495 are all replies on the same post.

phantompally76 wrote: I don't have much more to add to this.....whatever it is. I just want to ask a question, and follow it up with a comparison. I'll begin of course by reminding everyone that I vehemently oppose mod piracy in any form, because idiots here like to gloss over that and act like I'm their enemy simply because I don't see eye to eye with the hypocrisy of this tirade against console pirates and Bethesda.

What is stopping console mod thieves from saying "I am simply preserving this mod before it disappears from the Nexus/Steam, because it would be a shame to lose all these mods".? Is that considered a weak and invalid argument for mod piracy in the eyes of this community?

Because that is precisely what the Nexus is currently doing with mods off Filefront/Gamefront. Due credit is not always being given to the original authors of those mods, and authors' permission to upload them in the first place is definitely not being secured. You can't try to label piracy as "preservation" with one hand, and then lash out at overt piracy (which at the very least doesn't try to mask itself as something else) with the other.

And the only difference...the ONLY difference between those examples is that one of them generates potential website hits and ad revenue for the Nexus, and the other does not. Regardless, it is unequivocally hypocritical of this community to condemn one and praise the other.

popcorn71 wrote: I would say that the difference between what the nexus is doing with the Filefront mods and what the mod thieves are doing is that Filefront is dead and the nexus is not. A mod will not "disappears" off the nexus unless the mod author actively hides it, making it abundantly clear that the mod author does in fact want the mod to be inaccessible. If a mod website is dead then the mod authors have by definition already moved on and are uninterested/unable in maintaining (or removing) their mod.

It really just boils down to mod authors having the final say in how their work is distributed unless they have abandoned the mod entirely.

Still, I would hope that the nexus is respecting the wises of the authors who's mod are being converted and not converting over any files they have not been granted permission to convert.

AnyOldName3 wrote: Based on my (albeit limited) understanding of copyright law, the Nexus would have had to buy out FileFront's licences to distribute the files (which would potentially have been dirt cheap as they'd gone bust already) if they were to rehost them without manually contacting every single mod author about every single file. If that's what happened, as far as the original author is concerned, the Nexus is now FileFront, so nothing's changed except a URL, and it's possible that, depending on how it's done, they may have the same ability to control the files as they did before.

This is based on conjecture, but if it's right, then it explains how the situations are different, and if it's wrong, then I don't know enough about this to participate in this discussion, and can safely be ignored. :)

phantompally76 wrote: Nexus could be gone tomorrow as well. The perceived permanency of the repository does not change the definition of piracy.

The point is, as you stated yourself, it boils down to the wishes of the mod authors having the final say. Many of the authors on Filefront don't even know their mods have been uploaded here, and they are definitely not having their say. And as far as I'm concerned, "We'll remove mods if the authors ask us to" is not a valid defense against the moral and ethical dilemma this hypocrisy entails.

Frankly, it's absolutely no different than stealing merchandise from someone's home while they're away on vacation, and then agreeing to return said merchandise only after they have been caught and charged, then claiming they were doing the homeowners a favor by saving it from a fire that has yet to happen. That is still theft, and redistributing files without the expressed permission of the mod authors BEFOREHAND is still piracy.

Blindly assuming that mods on Filefront have been abandoned just because they were on Filefront is naïve and troubling. If mod authors want their work to be preserved, by and large they will make sure that happens themselves. They don't need a self-appointed trustee to come along, decide those authors have abandoned their mods without any sort of systematic and quantifiable criteria, and redistribute their mods without the least consideration for the authors' wishes, and without securing their permission beforehand. That is mod theft and piracy, and it is no different than what the trolls are doing on Bethesda.net.

We're going to have to come to terms with this, sooner rather than later. If we're so worried about piracy and modders' rights, we need to practice what we preach.

Ethreon wrote: Filefront doesn't exist anymore. It was done with their accord. It's like leaving your house for vacation only to come find it gone (if Nexus didn't save the files), or intact and ready to use (current situation where files are saved). I see 0 hypocrisy here, but plenty of short sight from you.

phantompally76 wrote: That's a good point, and I'm sure all the legalities have been ironed out. But just because it's legal doesn't make it right. I think we all know that.

There is plenty of historical precedent for piracy sanctioned by the law. They call it privateering. But it's still piracy, and it's still hypocritical to condemn piracy while actively engaging in it yourselves, whether it's legal or not.

...I think releasing a few mods your self might help you understand why people are so upset at this. I have spent literally thousands of hours working on mods over the last 10 years and it has defiantly given me a different perspective on things.

Lets assume that your augment about mod preservation is valid for a moment. If the was nexus suddenly shut down, I really wouldn't mind if some third party reupload all my old Oblivion mods or even my Skyrim mods so long as they A) respected the terms put foreword in the mod permission and description and B) if I ever asked them to remove the files they respected my wishes.

On the other hand, if some jerk just came along and reupload one of my mods WITHOUT RESPECTED THE TERMS CLEARLY PUT FOREWORD IN THE MOD PERMISSION AND DESCRIPTION and than refused to take the mod down, and then re-reupload it after it was forcibly taken down, and all for no other reason then because they were impatient or didn't like THE TERMS CLEARLY PUT FOREWORD IN THE MOD PERMISSION AND DESCRIPTION or even to preserve the mod in the highly unlikely event that the Nexus goes belly up, I would be EXTREMELY PISSED.

There really is no comparison between the filefront situation and what these thieves are doing, and to claim there is, that is an extremely weak argument. Edited June 23, 2016 by popcorn71