Retired Mod Authors and Leaving Nexus

[Fkemman11]

Well, Fkemman, it seems like you have made your decision as to the reasons and have answered your own questions.

I didn't mean to imply that those could be the only reasons for mod authors to retire. Those are just the reasons that I have found the most when looking at mods pages or in a forum somewhere. The actual truth is that more are probably banned long before they ever get to a point where they think they're just not going to share game modifications on Nexus. But, for those that do get to that point and make that decision, why does it have to be permanent? Couldn't they feel differently about things at a later time and decide to start uploading new mods again? That is the question in my mind. It's like anything in life that you are passionate about at one time, get burned out and stop for awhile, and then come back to it with renewed energy. So why ever say "I'm gone forever. Goodbye!"? It just sounds a little silly to me.

 

For, instance I will not ever say anything like "Hey guys, I'm retired from making mods. It's been nice. See ya'll!". Because I know- for myself- that it wouldn't be true. Just because I am bored to death with playing a game and modding it today, I know that next week or next month, I might come back to it and find a whole new appreciation for the game or something in it.

 

Now here is what I was getting at to begin with. Let's say I determine that playing video games, making mods, or uploading and supporting mods is actually interfering with other things in my life and I feel that I need to stop it altogether. I mean the whole thing. Stop playing games, stop making mods, and stop sharing new ones or supporting existing ones. Because if I'm still playing the games, then I would in all probability want to mod them and then you are back at it all again. That sounds an awful lot like a bad habit or an addiction that I needed to "beat", doesn't it? Just like drinking or smoking?

 

So, is modding an all consuming addiction that causes some people to feel they need to quit or stop? Does it become an obsession for most that start it? Would they even realize it if it did? :happy:

[RGMage2]

I can only speak for myself, but I would have to say at times it has been an addiction. In the Oblivion days when I was most obsessed with modding, the grass in my yard grew very long and there was almost always a mountain of dirty dishes on my kitchen counter. I had to set alarms for myself to remind me to stop and eat, and even then I would just hit the dismiss button and keep on going.

 

I doubt if it would effect everyone in that way, and I imagine you could get a good idea of how it would effect you just by taking an honest look at your video gaming habits. I'm the type of gamer that when I find a new game that I really like I find it very difficult to pull myself away from it, and I play it to the exclusion of almost everything else until I get it out of my system. When I was younger there would be times when I would buy a new game while on lunch break, start playing it while eating dinner at home, and then show up for work the next day barely able to function because I was up all night playing my new favorite game. So it's not a surprise that I found modding to be addictive.

 

I have read posts from other modders who were leaving, claiming it was having a negative effect on their employment or their social lives (T3NDO comes to mind), so not that unusual, but it isn't everyone.

[Lisnpuppy]

Anything that gives one pleasure (initially anyway) and an escape from a reality that maybe one doesn't enjoy can be addictive. The United Nations I think has named gaming addiction as a thing. Some people can step back for a time and regroup, while others can't. Sometimes is takes a longtime to recognize your addiction because it won't necessarily have immediate ill effects on your life. I myself, came to love gaming and use it to distract me from my ill health at times, to distract me from physical pain and depression. Its a form of self medicating in many ways.

 

I have some experience with drug and alcohol addiction and really all addictions at least on the outside, are similar in many ways. My Father is a recovering alcoholic (25 years now) and I also worked in substances abuse facilities for a time.

 

Some people can make adjustments to their lives when they see that their "poison of choice" is getting the better of them. They can step back, take a break or whatever to get back to that happy balance. Others find their addiction so consuming that they have to make serious and permanent changes in behavior and access. They have to toss all the bottles out of their house, rid themselves of old friends because they party, take a different route to the grocery store so they don't go by the liquor store. They have to get rid of it all.

[RGMage2]

That might explain why some authors take all their mods down when they leave. As long as your mods are here at Nexus you might feel they are pulling you back. But if you take it all down - no download stats, no endorsements, no comments, then there is nothing to come back to, and that could be a good thing for some people.

[Arthmoor]

 

"EULAs are legally enforceable"

I'll exit this thread here, because again I find myself trying to argue with near-total ignorance.

 

There's only one person I see here doing this, and it isn't Reneer.

 

You appear to be confused on the issue of property rights though. What you are describing would all be valid for physical property - you either own it or you don't. Those same rules are not what Intellectual Property (IP) are governed by. Basically anything protected by copyright is IP. That means only the author of such a thing gets to say how that IP is dealt with in the public arena. Without any sort of contract in place, you basically wouldn't even have the right to play a copy of a game you bought. That's where EULAs come in. They are copyright licenses. That license then spells out the terms of how you are allowed to use the IP you now have a copy of. One of those use cases is whether or not one has permission to create works based on the original IP.

 

In the case of modding Bethesda games, the EULA for the CK spells out the terms under which we are allowed to create works based on their IP. Reneer has already quoted all of the relevant parts. They allow us to make mods based on their games so long as we agree not to sell them. It's a pretty fair system, and the only one legally allowing mods to exist at all. Without that EULA, nobody has the legal right to mod their games and could be sued at any time for doing so anyway. Even if they made us pay for the CK and that payment was a ridiculous amount of money, they could still make the legal demand that we not sell our mods.

 

And just in case you feel tempted to try the Microsoft Word analogy, Word lets you write generic documents independent of any prior or future work. The CK does not allow such things. Mods cannot stand on their own, Word documents do, so Microsoft cannot forbid you from using Word to write a best selling novel.

[TheMastersSon]

 

 

"EULAs are legally enforceable"

I'll exit this thread here, because again I find myself trying to argue with near-total ignorance.

There's only one person I see here doing this, and it isn't Reneer.

This is utterly ridiculous. Read this thread from the start and tell us who claimed legal ownership of mods "transfers to Bethesda" as part of the CC. That was the start of my confusion, an entire page was wasted just trying to get straight facts on that single issue.

 

As for your larger point, mine is simply that publishers can make whatever demands they wish in their EULAs, what can be legally demanded in our courts is a proven and rather drastic subset of those demands. Not most but nearly all limitations and restrictions in EULAs that have been legal challenged have failed these challenges. Not all, just almost all.

Edited February 26, 2018 by TheMastersSon

[HeyYou]

 

 

 

"EULAs are legally enforceable"

I'll exit this thread here, because again I find myself trying to argue with near-total ignorance.

There's only one person I see here doing this, and it isn't Reneer.

This is utterly ridiculous. Read this thread from the start and tell us who claimed legal ownership of mods "transfers to Bethesda" as part of the CC. That was the start of my confusion, an entire page was wasted just trying to get straight facts on that single issue.

 

As for your larger point, mine is simply that publishers can make whatever demands they wish in their EULAs, what can be legally demanded in our courts is a proven and rather drastic subset of those demands. Not most but nearly all limitations and restrictions in EULAs that have been legal challenged have failed these challenges. Not all, just almost all.

 

Examples please? We already have examples of EULA's that were upheld.

[TheMastersSon]

HeyYou, it's why I'm backing out of this discussion. You're asking me to do the homework to defend the last half century of case law in the U.S.

 

And what's your actual point, that private ownership rights of property in America are somehow contingent on terms made by any private entity, whether it's a corporation or even in private contracts of sale? I mean nothing personal to anyone by this, but the legal understanding levels here are (predictably imo) very close to zero.

 

My favorite quote on this issue is from almost 10 years ago, a response to the same abysmal claim that EULAs constitute enforceable civil law. This one was from Germany but it applies here also:

 

"EULAs are not per se invalid in Germany. However, you cannot become a slave, since slavery is illegal."

 

And after five pages of discussion nobody has answered my initial challenge: a single example of the above, other than in current software and entertainment media EULAs.

Edited February 27, 2018 by TheMastersSon

[Reneer]

And what's your actual point, that private ownership rights of property in America are somehow contingent on terms made by any private entity, whether it's a corporation or even in private contracts of sale? I mean nothing personal to anyone by this, but the legal understanding levels here are (predictably imo) very close to zero.e above, other than in current software and entertainment media EULAs.

Your point is that mod authors should be able to sell their work, but the EULA prevents this, but there is no legal basis for it to do so, right? Well, there is a major problem with your argument, and it is the rights granted by copyright. Our mods are derivative works based on Bethesda's IP - without the base game, most mods would be relatively useless. And without Bethesda giving us authorization to create mods for their games, we would be violating their right to solely prepare derivative works. In granting us an authorization to create derivative works, they are wholly within their right to state that we cannot sell our derivative works.

 

Relevant quote from the U.S. Copyright Office's Circular 14:

Right to Prepare Derivative Works

Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, an adaptation of that work. The owner of a copyright is generally the author or someone who has obtained the exclusive rights from the author. In any case where a copyrighted work is used without the permission of the copyright owner, copyright protection will not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully. The unauthorized adaption of a work may constitute copyright infringement.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Reneer

[TheMastersSon]

Your point is that mod authors should be able to sell their work, but the EULA prevents this, but there is no legal basis for it to do so, right?

No. I'm saying Bethesda's CC terms (quoted earlier) are either incorrect or absurdly misleading. In our country and current EULA nonsense notwithstanding, it is illegal for anyone to tell you what you can do with your own property. This basic fact of life will become more apparent now that the Senator from Sony, Orrin Hatch, who has had a major hand in this imposed fascism from the start (e.g. DMCA etc) is finally retiring.

 

Bethesda's CC language explicitly states mod authors own both their work and its underlying IP. This is perfectly legal, what is not legal is telling mod authors they own their work, but only contingent on Bethesda's own EULA terms. It is indeed slavery: Bethesda are saying it's fine for you to work voluntarily to mod their games, as long as they are the only ones who control any financial reward for your work. IMO it's one of several fundamental problems with introducing money into the modding community.

Edited February 27, 2018 by TheMastersSon