Fallout 4 Xbox One Mods "Stolen" From PC Modders
- Thread starter Steven Bogos
- Start date
Most people are only going to want a game on one platform. Nobody really wants to be making something that doesn't work, and they can't test whether it works on whatever platforms they don't have. I know I wouldn't want to release untested mods for the xbox.
It's honestly unsurprising that the script extenders are being used as stop-gap DRM to prevent bad ports.
It's honestly unsurprising that the script extenders are being used as stop-gap DRM to prevent bad ports.
Protest against a closed and moderated environment. I wouldn't port mine, neither. Bethesda/Zenimax did something curious some months or a year ago in cooperation with Valve. In my opinion, they can go fuck themselves if they want control to that degree in terms of monetization. It's still too early for me.Rommel102 said:
Not able to test it on an xbone? Not having the time? Not wanting to do it? Working on other mods? Just a few optionsRommel102 said:
No time or patience to support other platform, crashing and corrupt saves issues that can extend to all the games files, lower fps rendering the game unplayable and other technical/limitation issues?Rommel102 said:
I wouldn't even be surprised if one of these mods ended up causing the console to catch fire and every "console peasant" telling its the modders fault and that they are spreading viruses to the consoles.
Here's the trick. You really can't steal something that never belonged to you. That's the pisser.. Modders are technically making illegal use of someone else's IP and creation kit. It's the curse of modding and believe me this goes on a fair deal in the modding community, yusually they don't because they're afraid of being called on it but since we're talking console...well if you were a PC player you'd know the mod was stolen but youlikely wouldn't be playing on the console would you.mad825 said:
Now if only there was some program by which modders could enter their works under the umbrealla of protection the IP holders hold over licensed DLC, and perhaps be allowed to seek legitimate financial turn around from it; oh wait there was such an attempt made last year and the playerbase killed it dead.
So lesson to modders, your loyal community fans don't care whether you are credited for your work or paid for it or who's name is on it, so long as they don't have to pay a flipping pence for it.
If you looked on the F04 reddit, you'd see that many modders were already quite jaded about the console users due to page after page on their mod's feedback sections being filled with demands for console ports when Bethesda hadn't even released support for console mods yet. It sucks that a vocal minority could ruin this, but if a PC modder doesn't want to deal with that shit, I can't really fault them.
Well, if Bethesda is in charge of the mod shop, or whatever it's called, and officially taking a stand against ripped-off content, then filing a DMCA shouldn't even be necessary: They should just have a Report button that anyone can use. If you see a mod that you know is stolen, even if you're not the creator, you can click it and type in a brief message pointing them to the original. The DMCA was really created as a last resort for cases where whoever's hosting the content doesn't give a fuck and will only respond to legal threats -- which is what a takedown notice is; you're literally threatening to sue them. It really pisses me off when companies treat it as anything other than a last resort for dealing with unscrupulous businesses.LegendaryGamer0 said:
It's really frustrating as a solo developer or part of a small group to have to spend even a small portion of your productive time seeking out abuses of your work and issuing DMCA notices which might or might not be heeded (as, heaven knows, you probably don't have the resources to move legal wheels should the perpetrator ignore you).
And that's if your work is for-profit.
To be a mod maker and have to waste time simply to prevent others from taking advantage of your work, which you may well have made with no expectation of remuneration for your time and toil... That's really egregious.
I know it's not realistic, but I can't help but wish Bethesda themselves would do something to make it easier to shut down abuses. That only the authors themselves can do so, and only through a formal DMCA complaint (which is itself fairly laborious and time-consuming) makes it incredibly likely that the vast majority of these abuses will never be stopped. As it stands it counts on either a likely PC-centric mod developer noting their content on the XBox service, or a third party being sufficiently aggravated on their behalf that they go through the trouble of tracking down the author and notifying them.
If this becomes a broadly visible problem, I foresee a surge of PC mods that intentionally pad out their size just beyond the XBox One's mod limit.
And that's if your work is for-profit.
To be a mod maker and have to waste time simply to prevent others from taking advantage of your work, which you may well have made with no expectation of remuneration for your time and toil... That's really egregious.
I know it's not realistic, but I can't help but wish Bethesda themselves would do something to make it easier to shut down abuses. That only the authors themselves can do so, and only through a formal DMCA complaint (which is itself fairly laborious and time-consuming) makes it incredibly likely that the vast majority of these abuses will never be stopped. As it stands it counts on either a likely PC-centric mod developer noting their content on the XBox service, or a third party being sufficiently aggravated on their behalf that they go through the trouble of tracking down the author and notifying them.
If this becomes a broadly visible problem, I foresee a surge of PC mods that intentionally pad out their size just beyond the XBox One's mod limit.
I've been a console gamer most of my life from Nintendo back when I was a young one. In the past two years I've learned to play on PC and transitioned many of my games to the PC. I just used mods on a game for the first time month before last. I don't make mods myself.
With that background in mind let me say that I'm with the modders on this one. If they want to share their treats they can and should be enabled to do so - if they don't, they don't end of story. Whatever their reasons - be they noble and just like not being able to ensure quality and thus not wanting to put out a toy that will break people's games unwittingly or ignoble and selfish like wanting to spite the other "tribe" of gamers they don't associate with - what they do is theirs and not for other people to force them to distribute against their desire to do so.
With that background in mind let me say that I'm with the modders on this one. If they want to share their treats they can and should be enabled to do so - if they don't, they don't end of story. Whatever their reasons - be they noble and just like not being able to ensure quality and thus not wanting to put out a toy that will break people's games unwittingly or ignoble and selfish like wanting to spite the other "tribe" of gamers they don't associate with - what they do is theirs and not for other people to force them to distribute against their desire to do so.
Adam Jensen said:
There are many genuine reasons why someone may not want to port something to another platform. Off the top of my head: The modder may not have time, want to do it but do it at a later time more convenient to themselves, have moved on to making other mods (maybe even for a different game), they might need to obtain permission from other contributors to the mod, the mod might be difficult or impossible to port because of extra requirements like SKSE or performance issues, the mod might not adapt well to use by a gamepad, they might not want to have to deal with the minority of Xbox players that "[send] death threats and harassing messages", heck they might not have an Xbox One to test their port and feel uncomfortable releasing a port without thoroughly testing it first.Rommel102 said:
As to why a modder may not want to give permission to someone else to port or maintain the upload on their behalf, I think Petromir summed it up well:
I think it is disingenuous to argue that the modder is acting in a "pathetic" manner when it is infact the other person who uploaded the mod without permission (and in most cases, taking the credit) who are breaking the law. Equally I am puzzled why the Xbox gamers in question feel they have a "right" to the mod, regardless of the wishes of the author. That would be like arguing that a band you like who played a gig in the next town over should come to your town and play for you purely because they did it for the next town over, and its not that hard to get in a bus and come to your town. Yes, its not that hard for them to comply, but that's not the point, they have their own lives and their own reasons for doing things - why do you think you have a right to have them play in your town?Petromir said:
Another very elegant example that saphirekosmos posted earlier is also very pertinent:
I also urge you to read the rest of their post, as I agree with it in its entirety and it further refutes your points.saphirekosmos said:
In any case, regardless of whether you think the modder is morally in the clear or not, which I would personally say largely depends on the modder's reasons for not porting the mod, the law is on their side, which leads me on to...
Yes, it is copyright infringement, and yes modders do have rights in their mods. I cannot imagine how you could conclude the opposite. Copyright is automatic in all nations that subscribe to the Berne Convention [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention] (which most nations of the world do). It gives exclusive rights to the original creator of an independently created artistic or literary work, the definition of which has been held on numerous occasions to include computer software and the assets used therein. These rights can be sold, transferred or licensed by the original creator but, importantly, they cannot be forcibly removed from them against their will, except as a penalty in a legal or bankruptcy proceeding. Bethesda did not make any of these mods, so they are not the original creator of the work. They do have rights over content that a mod might interface with or otherwise transform, and this gives them some leverage in dictacting terms as to what mods can and cannot do as the modder needs their permission to use their assets. They give permission to use these assets to users of the Creation Kit in the Creation Kit EULA [http://store.steampowered.com/eula/eula_202480][sup]1[/sup], with a few standard caveats (non-commercial, not illegal and for use only in conjunction with the relevant game being the three main ones).Adam Jensen said:
Bethesda could have demanded transfer of the copyright in the independently created parts of the mod as a condition of this permission and then license the work back to the mod author, but they did not. Instead the EULA gives Bethesda a license to do whatever they like with the mods that are created. As it is a license, and not a transfer of rights, this means essentially that (assuming no other contracts have been entered into) Bethesda and the original author, and only those two, have the right to make decisions about how a mod is used or distributed. However, the people illegally uploading copies of mods without the mod author's permission are not Bethesda or the Mod Author, therefore they have no legal right to do so.
You are only permitted to distribute the New Materials, without charge (i.e., on a strictly non-commercial basis) (except as set forth in Section 5 below), to other authorized users who have purchased the Product, solely for use with such users? own authorized copies of such Product and in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement and all applicable laws. 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. You also waive and agree never to assert against Bethesda Softworks or its affiliates, distributors or licensors any moral rights or similar rights, however designated, that You may have in or to any of the New Materials.
As discussed above, no, modders are not stealing content from Bethesda or the Creation Kit as the EULA permits their use of it. The EULA also does not extinguish the modder's rights in their own independent creation, which are the parts of the mod which they made themselves, or the transformations they made to existing assets. It does give Bethesda a license to use the mod and its assets, but it is not Bethesda who uploaded these mods, so that does not apply or make it OK.MonsterCrit said:
I concur with Bat Vader. I am a PC gamer, but I also own more consoles than I can easily remember, and I certainly don't hate anyone purely over their preferred choice of gaming-box, and it would be completely illogical to do so. Further, I have never met anyone who seriously professes to "hate" or look down on console gamers for no reason other than the fact they are console gamers.Bat Vader said:
[1] The link is for the Skyrim CK EULA, as I was unable to find an easily accessible copy of the Fallout 4 CK EULA without actually installing it, but I highly doubt it differs in substance.
Where's the line though?
To use an already supplied example, if you make a blue box with the public toolset, then say "people who own orange shoes can't play with my blue box."
Then I come along and go gee, I like the blue box though. The tools are available so I create the same blue box and say "anyone can use this blue box!".
Some time later you decide the blue box was your idea and dmca my blue box.
Yes, obviously not everyone is recreating mods and there are heaps of reuploads. But if you create a mod with a public tool set but only for group a, do you really get to control that idea? Because that's the eventual path of dmcas.
So, where's the line?
To use an already supplied example, if you make a blue box with the public toolset, then say "people who own orange shoes can't play with my blue box."
Then I come along and go gee, I like the blue box though. The tools are available so I create the same blue box and say "anyone can use this blue box!".
Some time later you decide the blue box was your idea and dmca my blue box.
Yes, obviously not everyone is recreating mods and there are heaps of reuploads. But if you create a mod with a public tool set but only for group a, do you really get to control that idea? Because that's the eventual path of dmcas.
So, where's the line?
Perhaps they have lost the right to complain on moral grounds (arguable), but they certainly havn't lost the right to complain on legal grounds.RaikuFA said:
Two independently created works are considered completely seperate for the purposes of copyright law, even if they are similar, provided that you can indeed prove that your "similar" one was not created using any assets or information derived from the original, except possibly for the basic concept, which is OK because concept/systems/game-rules cannot be copyrighted: this is why tetris clones that don't use any tetris music, art or names are legal, because the basic games rules are not under copyright.Elijin said:
Having said that, it can be difficult in some cases to prove that your work doesn't derive from the original in any way, and it gets more complicated when you start chucking patents and trademarks into the mix (patents, in particular, do allow you to legally protect some types of system and concept from being copied by others), though I left those out because I highly doubt that the sorts of mods we're talking about here are going to have patents or trademarks filed by their authors.
Here's the thing. In my scenario, the changes are only going to be under the hood. If I've seen a mod which isn't available on my platform, I'm going to do my best to re-create it as exactly as I can.nickpy said:
So it will be close to identical.