Seems peoples mod work are being stolen & sold?

[sa547]

Also check out downloadmods.ru (Russian mod site), I recently found one of my mods on there. I was looking at the persons profile for all of there uploaded mods, most of the mods for Skyrim he uploaded looks like they came from here. If your curious do a Google search for your mods, might be surprised and mad at what pops up.

 

Edit: If you find your mod on that 2nd Life game, here is a link one of the members showed me to report it.

 

http://secondlife.com/corporate/dmca.php

 

Regarding that site, I hope they can understand English, although IP law is spotty in Russia:

 

Copyright holders http://downloadmods.ru/templates/downloadmods/images/spacer.gif

If you are the copyright holder of any material link (or links) which is available on this site and do not want to keep this information spread by users without your consent, we will be happy to assist you by removing the links.

This requires that you have sent us a letter (in PDF format) which indicated to us the following information:

1. Documentary evidence of your entitlement to material protected by copyright:

- Scanned document with a seal

- Or other contact information, allows to uniquely identify you as the owner of this material.

2. The text that you wish to place, accompanied by a removable media.

3. Direct links to pages that contain references to data that must be removed

After that, within 48 hours, we are guaranteed to remove you are interested link to the site.

Attention!

a) We reserve the right to publish on the site of any information published by our users.

b) We have no control over the actions of users that can be re-post links to information, which is the object of your copyright.

c) According to the Law on Copyright and Related Rights, a reference to any data (Information), by itself, is not subject to copyright law (although it may violate the "Terms & Conditions"). Thus, it is not necessary to send letters containing threats or demands, as no real grounds.

Mailbox for complaints

[email protected]

 

 

Personally, the problem with digital content is that once it's out into the public Internet, it's near impossible to take it back as copies of it will proliferate.

Edited April 1, 2013 by sa547

[Dart98Rock]

My Russian bro' told me that Russia pretty much don't have copyright laws (or just don't care). They are a pirate haven from what he said. Also they have a closed internet, means they can only go to Russian sites (unless the hack).

 

There is no way to take things that are uploaded on the internet back, to many copies on to many computers. My main problem with claiming that I am the owner of the mod, is the only proof I can show them is the mod description page here on Nexus. (unless I show them all my notes, .esp files, images, etc. from making it(which aren't legal documents so doubt do any good) The only way I have seen is to sign the mod is on the .esp file (when you load into the Creation Kit and type a description). (but any one can change that that has the Creation Kit)

[jet4571]

@jet You also missed the point of what was talked about - it was a general uproar. You talk like all these mods are based on bethesda material where the majority is actually based on non-Bethesda material to start with. The most popular mods are all based on material basically taken from other games to start with - be it armors, hair etc. Some use ripped textures from those games , some just use the inspiration of the original design - but still the majority isnt even based on any Bethesda vanilla material at all anymore. So crying about a misusage of ones work requires that you oblige the rules yourself to start with.

 

I did understand and read the issue. What I was stating is every mod maker here has rights to claim copyright infringement regardless if it only uses vanilla resources or made by the mod maker in 3dsmax or photoshop. If they used resources from another game then the copyright goes to the owner or is the copyright public sector?, if you know of copyright material being hosted here without permission for use then you should report it.

[dwiss]

Oh well - i really tried to avoid to quote a law text but maybe this makes it clearer why i dont understand the uproar and misusage of the word copyright so far:

 

Copyright is a form of legal protection for authors of original works, including literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, and other intellectual products. Publication is not essential for copyright protection, nor is the well known symbol of the encircled "c". Note the word original works - thats where this entire discussion went out of line imho as most is basically derivative work as mentioend in bullet list 2 later.

 

It generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:

1. Reproduce copies of the work.
2. Prepare derivative works based on the copyrighted work.
3. Distribute copies of the work by sale, rental, lease, or lending.
4. Publicly perform the work (if it is a literary, musical, dramatic, or choreographic work or a pantomime, motion picture or audiovisual work).
5. Publicly display the work (if it is a literary, musical, dramatic, choreographic, sculptural, graphic, or pictorial work -- including the individual images of a film -- or a pantomime).

As many are obviously not aware of - its the original work that owns the copyright and you cant even prepare derivative work without permission - thats where many think wrong and believe they can simply reproduce a slightly different model of a car or cloth etc - the copyright is on the patterns and not on the functional work. So even similarity is already a grey area. And if anyone tries to throw in an argument about fair use in media - that doesnt apply here as its not educational.

 

I can only repeat what i said in the beginning - i am not defending the behaviour that was starting the uproar nor am i happy about it. But a bit more knowledge about what they are doing themselves would be helpful before starting any works that might end up somewhere else.

 

@jet I am not the police nor am i a patent detective - i keep my own garden clean by requesting permissions from companies like Sega to use the wording 'Bayonetta inspired' when i create something that looks similar to their stuff. Thats why i know how long and tidious that can be just for a simple thing. And i simply doubt others are doing the same looking at the speed and similarity of things showing up.

[Dart98Rock]

dwiss how did you contact Sony for permissions? A mod I been wanting to do since I played Fallout 3 is based on real clothing that I am sure is copyrighted. One of the main things stopping me from making it is gaining permission from the company.

[dwiss]

@dart I contacted Sega in my case - not Sony. I started with the general department mailadress and then went via support to get pointed to the appropriate department. Just that mail-exchange took more than a week and the first answers where more than vague in fact.

[Dart98Rock]

Ah my bad thought I read Sony. Aight thanks dwiss, good thing I got a lot of things to do before I start modding again.

 

 

For all the mooders (like Zairaam) who's work is based on already copyrighted work (there must be a noticable difference to the mesh/textures, like Immersive Armors). I found a government page that can explain if you are able to claim copyright to your work. And if you want, how to file the copyright to receive legal documentation.

 

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf

Edited April 1, 2013 by Dart98Rock

[TheOutlander]

Sanja Guyot is actually violating the TOS of Second Life as well.

 

http://secondlife.com/corporate/tos.php

4.4 If properly notified, Linden Lab responds to complaints that User Content infringes another's intellectual property.

 

Intellectual property infringement on the Service is a violation of this Terms of Service, and you agree not to engage in such infringement. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged copyright infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances. We operate an intellectual property complaint process for complaints that User Content infringes another's intellectual property, the details of which are available in our Intellectual Property Policy. Linden Lab reserves the right to disable, delete or terminate, without notice, any user's Content or access to the Service if that user is determined by Linden Lab to infringe or repeatedly infringe.

So if you guys want this guy stopped, I don't think it would take much for you to make it so.

 

 

 

Edit: Bethblog twitter just notified me that they've reported Sanja Guyot.

[jet4571]

@Dwiss i am not talking about derivitive work just the agreement between Bethesda and CK users about usage of Bethesda assets and how ones own made assets are not Bethesdas. I did state that if you use assets from another source then that is dependant on the agreement between you and them. We are talking about 2 sides of the same coin and not in disagreement.

[dwiss]

@jet If you read the eula carefully from bethesda you will notice that you are not quite right about the assets - i quote:

If You distribute or otherwise make
available New Materials, You automatically grant to Bethesda Softworks
the irrevocable, perpetual, royalty free, sublicensable right and license under all applicable copyrights and intellectual property rights laws to
use, reproduce, modify, adapt, perform, display, distribute and otherwise
exploit and/or dispose of the New Materials (or any part of the New
Materials) in any way Bethesda Softworks, or its respective designee(s),
sees fit.

They automatically gain these rights when you publish your mod. Its the EULA that rules - i am not sure what you are refering to when you state 'agreement between Bethesda and CK users'.

Edited April 2, 2013 by dwiss