jet4571 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 One caveat, Once the permission is given, and the mod is uploaded, you cannot take the permission back. Some modders don't want their work associated with certain kinds of content and refuse for that reason. This is when you are giving permission you must make sure to tell them they can use it as long as it isn't used in a ***** type of mod. Like if you made a nice pair of boots and you hate skimpy armors, you mention it cant be used for a skimpy armor set. or if I had a problem with naked woman in pictures, I would state on my painting resource that it can be used just no nude paintings. I didn't say that because I quite like naked woman lol. Just be sure to specify what you do not want it associated with in the permission. If they do associate it then there was no permission granted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edg3k Posted June 16, 2012 Author Share Posted June 16, 2012 Thats not something I'd be to worried about, I hate skimpy mods. It was just an aesthetic mod that I was hoping to get access to. Upside to this, I've started working on a similar idea since he/she doesnt seem to want their work to continue (it seems) so something good may come of it, now to work out AI packages... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowDragyn Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Thats not something I'd be to worried about, I hate skimpy mods. It was just an aesthetic mod that I was hoping to get access to. Upside to this, I've started working on a similar idea since he/she doesnt seem to want their work to continue (it seems) so something good may come of it, now to work out AI packages... That would've been my suggestion; just recreate the idea behind the mod yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edg3k Posted June 20, 2012 Author Share Posted June 20, 2012 Thats not something I'd be to worried about, I hate skimpy mods. It was just an aesthetic mod that I was hoping to get access to. Upside to this, I've started working on a similar idea since he/she doesnt seem to want their work to continue (it seems) so something good may come of it, now to work out AI packages... That would've been my suggestion; just recreate the idea behind the mod yourself. Reason I was trying to avoid that is because it involves a lot of ai package stuff and I dont understand it at all! Well I understand the basics but patrols and times are beyond me right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ka3m0n Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) I've been researching permissions and came across this old thread. If this is still the status quo, then something needs to change. Summary of thread:Modder: "Can I repost an old mod that I've patched? The author won't respond."Nexus: "No. Lack of response is an implied "No". You must obtain explicit permission to avoid a potential lawsuit." I'm the author of GEMS so I am, perhaps, uniquely aware of the alarming rate that great mods are becoming obsolete simply because they need patching in order to be compatible with the newest version of Skyrim and the author is MIA. The truth is, many mod authors stop supporting their mod when they stop playing the game. There needs to be some sort of legal clause added to the Nexus upload agreement or mod permissions change that stipulates if there has been no site activity from the mod author for x months and he or she does not respond within x months to 3 private message requesting explicit permission to repost a patched version of their mod, then implicit permission is given to repost a patched version so long as a link to the original mod and full credit is given. This clause can also include a provision whereby the original mod author can respond at any time and demand that the modified version be removed from the Nexus and the new mod author must comply. By adding this provision to the user agreement (or as an additional permission item on the mod permissions page), this will maintain the rights of the author, prevent any potential lawsuit for violation of copyright and allow the Nexus to better achieve it's goal...which is to provide excellent mod resources by and for the community. Please make this happen. We are losing a lot of good mods at an increasing rate and there are people who are willing to fix them if you'll just allow it. P.S. For anyone who continues to feel that such a clause would be insufficient to mitigate the risk of lawsuit, I challenge them to find a single case where someone has sued for violation of copyright on a non-commercial game mod that had been offered freely to the public and the plaintiff was awarded a settlement. Monetary settlements are awarded based on the estimated potential loss of income suffered, which, in this case, would be none. I can't imagine a scenario where someone would spend thousands of dollars to hire a lawyer and go to court in order to sue someone because they reposted their free game mod with corrections. If that truly is a concern, then change the agreement or permissions clause to negate it. EDIT: crossed out the suggestion of changing the TOS to focus the conversation on a change to the permissions. (read on) Edited November 28, 2012 by Ka3m0n Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrakeTheDragon Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Any such threateningly drastic change to the ToS, like restricting or waiving authors' rights on upload as you depicted it, will require a majority decision to get implemented.Judging by past discussions of the matter you will never get the majority of mod authors to agree with this. From my point of view it's a slap into the face of authors even suggesting it. But I'm a little on the protective site when it comes to other authors and my point of view is generally irrelevant.Prepare to get massive fire from other sides soon though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanusForbeare Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) It makes me wonder how the rules pertain to posting publicly available information about the internal workings of someone else's mod, though. I agree with DraketheDragon, I wouldn't want people re-posting my intellectual property without my consent, but I wouldn't be as adverse to someone who's patched the mod for their own use sharing information about how they went about it (assuming, of course, that I had been unreachable for a while). It's still a touchy subject, but at least you'd still be getting 100% of the credit/downloads/endorsements for your work. Edited November 27, 2012 by JanusForbeare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RGMage2 Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 There needs to be some sort of legal clause added to the Nexus upload agreement or mod permissions page that stipulates if there has been no site activity from the mod author for x months and he or she does not respond within x months to 3 private message requesting explicit permission to repost a patched version of their mod, then implicit permission is given to repost a patched version so long as a link to the original mod and full credit is given. This clause can also include a provision whereby the original mod author can respond at any time and demand that the modified version be removed from the Nexus and the new mod author must comply. What you are suggesting, from the perspective of a mod user, may seem like a sensible solution to what you perceive to be a problem, but from the perspective of a mod author IMO it would be unacceptable. If the Nexus currently had a TOS similar to what you are suggesting, then it is quite likely that some of those mods you believe to be GEMS would never have been uploaded here, because some of the authors would have chocked on the TOS. If you doubt that, then think about Steam Workshop; some modders will not upload there because of their TOS. I would also point out that just because a mod author has not been heard from for 3 or 4 months does not mean they have abandoned their mods. And if a modder has already stated their restrictions in their readme, then why should they have to respond to a personal message when they have already given thier answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natterforme Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 This is why I only port armors and weapons and update mods if the terms of use/readme say its okay to do so long as I give credit. Everything else is just to much of a hassle and I dont want to worry about problems in the future. Also, I make a point of contacting everyone I wish to work with before even starting a mod or a patch. It just saves time. -Natterforme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IsharaMeradin Posted November 28, 2012 Share Posted November 28, 2012 A change in the TOS is not needed. Rather an option could be added to the permissions section that if a mod author so chooses, they can indicate that their work be permission free after X number of days without login on their part. Granted that does bring up other issues such as: how many days; who gets to decide how many days; will there be a minimum or maximum number of days; will it be displayed or hidden till the time comes; and many other things to consider I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts