Some concerns about the community

[RGMage2]

 

 

 

I honestly do feel there is something we as a community can do about it though. For one, we could encourage the site owner to implement the suggestion I made about letting mod authors hide their mods much like how youtubers can hide videos, except from people they give a direct link to the thing to.

 

Let's say that Nexus actually did something like that. How long do you think it would take before a large number of mod authors would hide their mods and only share links with other mod authors. Do you really believe it is in your interests as a mod user to be cut off from downloading mods. And if you don't think that would happen, then you need to think again.

 

 

 

I don't like seeing people bullied

And yet that is what you are trying to do. This appears to be part of a campaign to rally support here against the lady and drive her off of Nexus.

[AGreatWeight]

 

 

 

I don't like seeing people bullied

And yet that is what you are trying to do. This appears to be part of a campaign to rally support here against the lady and drive her off of Nexus.

 

 

There does appear to be an obvious agenda from this user. Basically, they want Nexus to remove the mod author (the user in question has stated this on at least one other thread here) Unfortunately, it appears that blind loyalty to the youtuber in question is clouding this users judgement.

What the user fails to understand is that Nexus will continue to remain impartial regarding this issue (with respect to both the modder and youtuber (who is also a user of this site, although it must be noted not a particularly active participant) in question) regardless of what happens outside of the Nexus.

[Arthmoor]

... I don't like seeing people bullied...

Neither do I, which is why it would be really nice if MxR would stop inciting his fans into doing exactly that to the mod author.

[Nilanius]

 

 

 

 

I don't like seeing people bullied

And yet that is what you are trying to do. This appears to be part of a campaign to rally support here against the lady and drive her off of Nexus.

 

 

There does appear to be an obvious agenda from this user. Basically, they want Nexus to remove the mod author (the user in question has stated this on at least one other thread here) Unfortunately, it appears that blind loyalty to the youtuber in question is clouding this users judgement.

What the user fails to understand is that Nexus will continue to remain impartial regarding this issue (with respect to both the modder and youtuber (who is also a user of this site, although it must be noted not a particularly active participant) in question) regardless of what happens outside of the Nexus.

 

 

My only agenda as you put it, is that I feel the stuff that the mod author did, was reprehensible. And as I stated in the original post, I watch a lot of other mod reviewers. So what if she or someone like her decides to do the same stuff to them? Censorship is not a good thing for the community. And one has to ask themselves. Who's the actual bully? The good folks who download a mod, think it's cool and thus review it, or the mod authors who decide "I don't want my mod in a spotlight of any kind" and thus try following the path of Digital Homicide vs Jim Sterling. DH by the way had their case thrown out and Jim won. People are sick of such behavior from companies. And when mod authors start trying to do the same thing, it's going to tear a rift in the community itself.

 

And I myself, know what a lot of MXR's subscribers are like, a lot of folks end up as bad as the community can be on say... battle.net. I like to think I am one of the nicer ones, who actually care about the community as a whole. MXR wasn't causing problems in the community. Brodul doesn't. None of the reviewers cause problems in this community. In fact they do this community a service by looking at the mods, giving their opinions, and with all their videos, their reviews are always positive. Because they do filter what mods they will review. If a mod is really really bad, it just doesn't get reviewed. So on the one hand, you've got reviewers doing the community a good service. You've got millions of mod users watching them, coming onto nexus and downloading mods and even in the course of all that, they also might even end up finding another mod on nexus they had missed and in exchange the mod authors get endorsements and in a few cases where they have a donation, a little something extra from the community members that can afford it.

 

Then you have 1 overly hostile mod author going after reviewers because she doesn't want people talking about her mods. And that, she cannot do. As I said, when a mod is out in public and downloaded by the public, that public has every right that is protected, to comment, review, and even criticize the mod on whatever platform they choose. It can be on youtube, can be twitter, blog, website, even going to a grocery store someone can talk to their friends about it. If someone puts a mod out that they don't want people talking about, then that mod author has no business releasing mods to begin with plain and simple. All behavior like that does, is causes a rip within the community. It is a rip that has the community itself angry. I goto reddit, youtube comments, even on discord, and I've seen the majority of conversations on these platforms, being against that sort of behavior.

 

So how can this situation be resolved? Easiest would be to simply have the one that began the entire mess, in this case, the single mod author, reverse the strike on MXR's channel, and offer that mod author a way to privatize their mods in the future so reviewers can't find them. If one person causes problems in the community that has the community crying foul, especially when it's over someone exercising their right to free speech in reviewing that persons work, you don't go after the reviewer who was in the right. You go after the one that caused the trouble to begin with and try to get them to stop the actions that has a significant chunk of the community up in arms. Some say it happened weeks ago, yet where are the court case numbers? We have MXR on his videos saying "some of you said I should fight it, but then this happened" and then you have that mod authors closest friends saying "Happened long long ago".

 

The fact is, the mod was a free download mod. He was being paid for his review not the mod he was reviewing. So there was 0 damages to the mod that could not be sold to begin with. When do I take mod authors sides? In cases where someone stole a mod authors work and slapped their own name on it. Like the story I read about a mod author finding his mod being sold in second life. That there, is wrong and the original mod author has my support. When am I against a mod author? When they try telling people 'here's my mod but you aren't allowed to talk about it on social media'. Youtube is a social media. She has a chance to save some face, by simply dropping the copyright strike. Hell let the video go back up. She already took the mod down. So the video's link will just direct people to a "file deleted" page. Highly doubtful she will ever put it back up. That would go a long way towards starting to rebuild her own reputation. I say starting, she would have a huge hill to climb, and it would be very slippery. So if she intends to just leave the community, then reversing the copyright strike on him, will at least let her leave on a more positive note at least. But in the end, it is all on the mod author if they want to do the right thing and calm the anger, or continue making people angry.

 

And I've ran guilds on MMO's. If someone was a member of the guild I ran, and they shined a rather nasty spotlight on themselves within the community, I know that reflects bad upon the guild I was running. And I'd send them packing out of the guild soon after. Skyrim's mod community is very much like an MMO, with Nexus being one of 3 guilds people goto for mods. The other 2 is an adult one which I wont mention the name of as I don't know the rules for it, and steam workshop. But as such, mod authors are in essense, part of the guilds they distribute their mods on. Same MMO rules apply. Me, I am just a mod user, who finds most mods through video reviews. When I found romance in skyrim to be lackluster to all the other elements of skyrim, I looked on youtube, found skyrim romance mod through MXR, and became a subscriber that day. Youtube soon after suggested other skyrim mod review channels, which I am also subscribed to. Found such wonderful mods like Skyrim Unbound, which I do feel is the best alternate start mod right now next to live another life. Tactical Valtheim I found through MXR, always felt them 2 towers could of been a far better hold border, and what it does, is exactly what I love.

 

So when is it okay to go after a youtubers channel? Well if they review someones mod but then have someone else's name on it, and an entirely different link to get it, they probably do not realize the mod got pirated, in that case, don't copyright strike them, give them a heads up, and they will likely pull the video, remake with the correct information or in a followup video mention what happened, while correcting the actual link in the offending video. And it would be somewhat acceptable, if the mod was featured in a lets play video, as the mod in that case, isn't being reviewed, commented on, or criticized.

 

But I have to ask this one question: What happened to the just making mods for fun? If people want to make money programming, why focus on modding for a game, when they can spend all that time, MAKING their own game. This I feel, is the question that should be asked. We mod users, assume mod authors are saying "here I made this for fun and for you to enjoy." So one has to ask. Why all of a sudden, all the hate on reviewers? Why all the talk of lawyers and injunctions? That is a cancer that attacks "I make mods for fun". Mod theft is a problem. But people reviewing mods in videos, is not mod theft. Telling people "you can't include my mod in a youtube video" fine, no lets play. But you can't legally go after reviews, without turning a huge chunk of people against you. So I do feel mod authors, and this site needs to ask that one single question:

 

"What happened to just making mods for fun?"

[Deleted82156User]

You are not listening to people tell you the FACTS of the case. Instead you are blindly following a Youtuber who set out to incite riot in this community because he considers himself above the basic rules that everyone else must follow.

 

Mod users and mod authors alike are expected to follow the permissions stated by each mod author when downloading any mod, YouTubers are users when they download mods too and they MUST follow the permissions as everyone else. They are not exempt. One Youtuber decided he was and he has now learned that he is NOT. The mod author is NOT going to leave or be run out of this community. Mxr's users are a minuscule drop in the ocean of this community as verified when the owner of this site put up statistics showing just how little traffic comes from YouTube to Nexus.

Edited April 8, 2017 by Guest

[DoctaSax]

Showcasing a mod for the purpose of reviewing it is, as far as I know, a case where you can legitimately invoke fair use. I highly doubt if a modder saying it's not allowed for their mod affects that. Ofc, after the legal threats and what not, it just became a matter of who backed down first, so we'll never know how that would've been ruled. Considering it's the first I've heard of anybody disallowing YT reviews of their mod, I can't agree with the idea that the reviewer disregarded a 'basic rule' here. It's not basic if it's newfangled and imo, silly.

[RGMage2]

 

- snip -

 

I respect what you have posted, but I also disagree with some of it.

 

While it is true that the mod author in question has the power to do some of the things you suggest, it is also true that MxR has the power to do some things that could bring this controversy to an end. MxR could reach out to the mod authors and just say "Truce" and "I get it that some authors don't want video reviews. I don't agree with it and I think I am within my rights to do what I do, but I will respect your wishes in this regard." And he could provide a reliable way for mod authors to get in touch with him so that misunderstandings could be avoided. And he could stop stirring the pot with this old issue, pretending to be currently under threat of legal action when he is not. And he could stop with the dog whistle and milking this controversy for more views and revenue.

[Deleted82156User]

Showcasing a mod for the purpose of reviewing it is, as far as I know, a case where you can legitimately invoke fair use. I highly doubt if a modder saying it's not allowed for their mod affects that. Ofc, after the legal threats and what not, it just became a matter of who backed down first, so we'll never know how that would've been ruled. Considering it's the first I've heard of anybody disallowing YT reviews of their mod, I can't agree with the idea that the reviewer disregarded a 'basic rule' here. It's not basic if it's newfangled and imo, silly.

 

The Terms of Use stated on any software is NOT 'silly' and people who have that attitude find themselves facing situations like Mxr just did and loosing (by backing out), just like Mxr did. While the case did not go to court Mxr found himself facing a very real legal threat and had a wake up call. Mods are legally owned by the modders as is legally stated by Bethesda and modders have every right to set Terms of Use and downloaders ARE obligated legally to follow those regardless of what they might think and consider themselves entitled too.

 

There is nothing 'newfangled' about it, this community has always expected users and other mod authors to adhere to the written permissions on mods and that has been the case for the last 12 years that I have been here.

 

'Fair Use' is something that must be defined by the court in each case, it is NOT a legitimate legal defense for taking and using copyrighted material. You cannot shout 'Fair Use' and expect the copyright holder to back off, you have to go to court and prove that your usage constitutes 'Fair Use' and good luck because there is no absolute legal definition of 'Fair Use'.

Edited April 8, 2017 by Guest

[AGreatWeight]

Showcasing a mod for the purpose of reviewing it is, as far as I know, a case where you can legitimately invoke fair use. I highly doubt if a modder saying it's not allowed for their mod affects that. Ofc, after the legal threats and what not, it just became a matter of who backed down first, so we'll never know how that would've been ruled. Considering it's the first I've heard of anybody disallowing YT reviews of their mod, I can't agree with the idea that the reviewer disregarded a 'basic rule' here. It's not basic if it's newfangled and imo, silly.

 

To be deemed fair use requires fulfilling four requirements when a case is being considered.

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

With MXR's video being monetized, he'd have blatantly failed at the first requirement.

[JimboUK]

I'm posting in a personal capacity, not as a member of staff.

 

 

Snip.

 

You've been here two years and contributed nothing to the community yet you feel qualified to lecture other people on said community, as you're relatively new around here let me explain how this community works and has worked since the early Morrowind days before this site even existed. Respect for others is what this community is based on, when an author asks someone not to do something with their work they don't do it, they respect the wishes of the creator, at no point does the law come into it. MxR was asked not to include that mod in the video, the answer he gave should have been "OK", not "meh fair use", he stepped outside the bounds of what's been acceptable in this community leaving the author with two choices, accept what happened or fight it, she chose the latter, was she right to? well that's a matter of opinion and I'll keep mine to myself.

 

As for kicking the author out of the community, pitchfork waving mobs don't make the decisions, they never have.