Using Other People's Works

[jet4571]

Back to subject, when using someone elses mod as a resource do not act like a spelling nazi and correct the description for it. it's just plain rude.

 

Off topic if you come across a spelling nazi hit the report button, spelling nazi's are trolls and trolling is against the rules here. best to let a moderator make the call on if it is or isn't if emotions are running high, you are high, or whatever.

[Ghogiel]

spelling nazi's are trolls

You're trolling Nazis with your apostrophe abuse.

[jet4571]

Trolling Nazis.. lol... yeah the poor apostrophe doesn't want to be associated with that group.

[Cyberlazy]

While I don't want people correcting my spelling in a post, I am glad when people correct my spelling in a mod or a mods discription. It allows me to fix the error!

 

Please do not report people complaining about typos in my mods.

Edited June 5, 2012 by Cyberlazy

[kibblesticks]

While I don't want people correcting my spelling in a post, I am glad when people correct my spelling in a mod or a mods discription. It allows me to fix the error!

 

Please do not report people complaining about typos in my mods.

 

 

It's "description".. :biggrin: sorry, sorry! I couldn't resist!

[Cyberlazy]

So, back on the topic at hand...

I noticed lots of mods say "Modification permission: You must get permission from me before you are allowed to modify my files to improve it"

Does that include compatability patches?

Some people here are saying however that you can release patches without premission, since it does not actualy use the content of the mod and requires the origional mod be downloading from the authors page to use.

 

Can we get a confirm from a moderator? Can we officaly be allowed to make (And release on the nexus) compatability patchs between two mods without needing permission?

When does a compatability patch become an 'improvement'? Or does that permission only mean that I can't take the mod, improve it, then release the entire version that would not require the authors origional download? (But could release a patch that needs his mod)

 

As a mod author, I find it rather annoying to have to ask permission before working on a patch, some authors are just.. gone.

Often its a very simple patch too, Like just a recipe to change my mods item in to there mods equivilent item, or converting the recipes to use my mods version of the item instead.

Edited June 14, 2012 by Cyberlazy

[ghastley]

So, back on the topic at hand...

I noticed lots of mods say "Modification permission: You must get permission from me before you are allowed to modify my files to improve it"

Does that include compatability patches?

Some people here are saying however that you can release patches without premission, since it does not actualy use the content of the mod and requires the origional mod be downloading from the authors page to use.

 

Can we get a confirm from a moderator? Can we officaly be allowed to make (And release on the nexus) compatability patchs between two mods without needing permission?

When does a compatability patch become an 'improvement'? Or does that permission only mean that I can't take the mod, improve it, then release the entire version that would not require the authors origional download? (But could release a patch that needs his mod)

 

As a mod author, I find it rather annoying to have to ask permission before working on a patch, some authors are just.. gone.

Often its a very simple patch too, Like just a recipe to change my mods item in to there mods equivilent item, or converting the recipes to use my mods version of the item instead.

 

In many cases, a mod can be updated to avoid the need for a patch, so you should always contact an author and notify them of incompatibilities first. They may decide to change the mod to eliminate the incompatibility, and that option saves having an extra esp.

 

There's also the problem (for them) that your patch may depend on a specific version of their mod, and cause issues if the user runs a different one. Then they start getting complaints about new problems introduced by a patch they didn't write!

 

I'd say no, don't ever do that.

[Arthmoor]

It's always been my understanding that a compatibility patch isn't covered by the "you must get permission" rule because you're not distributing an actual modified version of their mod. You're building a bridge between their mod and some other mod. Like all the ones we did for UL mods in Oblivion, or like all the ones I did for Open Cities in Oblivion.

 

If there were ways I could dodge the issue by making my stuff compatible without having to make a patch, I did. That isn't always possible though, and it's impractical to have to seek permission when you're making something that explicitly requires some other download before it's even useful. Especially if it's some 6 year old thing the author abandoned 5 years ago.

 

Though the moderators can certainly correct me if this understanding is incorrect.

 

You cross the line into improvements, IMO, when you're patch to satisfy the technical issues begins doing things like rewriting dialogue or moving content to entirely new locations. In those cases, yes, you'd best see if the authors are OK with that.

[jet4571]

Arthmoor is correct, a compatibility patch that does not change the original intent of the mod its made for, nor contains anything from the mod itself for assets is acceptable. Buttt... on the other hand you need to give full rights to that mod author and make none for yourself which should be acceptable if they return and integrate the patch into the mod itself making the patch file obsolete they can delete it.

[HeyYou]

So what about the modders that specifically state they DON'T want any compatibility patches made for their work? (and we have indeed seen at least one of those......)