Morrowind 2011 Mod Collection Pulled After Complaints

Caiti Voltaire

New member
Feb 10, 2010
383
0
0
Starke said:
At the risk of contradicting Cait, from experience, I think the biggest failure here was that he didn't actually seek permission at all first. The Morrowind community (at least when I was still involved with it) was pretty friendly, but fiercely protective of its work. This is something that's perpetuated into the Oblivion and Fallout 3/NV communities. That said, there have always been a few "undiplomatic" individuals in the community, and stepping on their toes can't ever be a good idea.
Fiercely protective of their work? Honestly most of the decent modders just say "Do whatever as long as you give credit." Thats not really protective. Its the wankers - and there's many of them out their - that get their knickers in a twist about these kind of things that ruin it for everyone.

It basically ends up coming down to whom beats their chest louder in these arguments, and in the end no one wins, and the only person that really suffers isn't the authors, its the gamers that just want to enjoy these mods without having to jump through 20 hoops to do so.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Caiti Voltaire said:
Credit was given though. He didn't plagarise the work. I'm look at the credits now. It's there.

The issue here isn't that he didn't give credit, its that he didn't look for permission to use them. I think that's bad form to say the very least, since many of the associated mods explicitly say in their descriptions and readme that they can be used for whatever as long as credit is given.
Yes, I see plagiarism is a poor choice of a word now.
The rest of the post is accurate though, no need to explain it to me.
 

Wolfram23

New member
Mar 23, 2004
4,095
0
0
Void(null) said:
GothmogII said:
Fair enough, my mistake: It's okay for Bethesda to do whatever they like with stuff you create, and not anyone who is unaffiliated. (Like Mr.Smith)
Except that anyone who is not Bethesda trying to enforce some form of copyright claim on the work would be a challenge to Bethesda's ownership and therefor against the ToS.
Maybe Mr. Smith should go over the modders heads and ask Bethesda to put a stamp of approval on it.
 

Jaime_Wolf

New member
Jul 17, 2009
1,194
0
0
Starke said:
I'd take the second part a little further and more cynically, and suggest, "What he did wasn't illegal because it didn't affect me, and only benefited me, and how dare someone who was wronged make life the slightest bit inconvenient for me, no matter the ethics involved." ...that may have been too cynical of me, however.
I wasn't trying to be sensical, I was trying to save everyone the trouble of creating another ten pages of the same posts.

Personally, I side a little more with the second group. There's very little functional difference between this and just providing links to all of the files that were combined in the pack along with the instructions and I don't think that ANYONE would have grounds to complain if he had done that despite the fact that the end result would be indentical to the result of just providing the pack. Moreover, as many have already mentioned, it's not an issue of credit, they just don't want it in the pack at all. While that's not technically the same as saying "you're not allowed to link to the download for my mod without permission", it's functionally pretty similar, which is why this seems so silly to me. To me at least, the creators complaining are mostly just being indignant because it makes them and their work seem more important (which is nothing new in mod distribution arguments).

To be fair, I think he probably should have asked permission first, but even having ignored that step, I think the complaints remain pretty silly.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
Caiti Voltaire said:
Fiercely protective of their work? Honestly most of the decent modders just say "Do whatever as long as you give credit." Thats not really protective. Its the wankers - and there's many of them out their - that get their knickers in a twist about these kind of things that ruin it for everyone.
I guess I just ran into too many of the shitty ones in short succession, and it colored my perspectives...
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
Jaime_Wolf said:
Starke said:
I'd take the second part a little further and more cynically, and suggest, "What he did wasn't illegal because it didn't affect me, and only benefited me, and how dare someone who was wronged make life the slightest bit inconvenient for me, no matter the ethics involved." ...that may have been too cynical of me, however.
I wasn't trying to be sensical, I was trying to save everyone the trouble of creating another ten pages of the same posts.

Personally, I side a little more with the second group. There's very little functional difference between this and just providing links to all of the files that were combined in the pack along with the instructions and I don't think that ANYONE would have grounds to complain if he had done that despite the fact that the end result would be indentical to the result of just providing the pack. Moreover, as many have already mentioned, it's not an issue of credit, they just don't want it in the pack at all. While that's not technically the same as saying "you're not allowed to link to the download for my mod without permission", it's functionally pretty similar, which is why this seems so silly to me. To me at least, the creators complaining are mostly just being indignant because it makes them and their work seem more important (which is nothing new in mod distribution arguments).

To be fair, I think he probably should have asked permission first, but even having ignored that step, I think the complaints remain pretty silly.
The fact is, there are a lot of guides like this already out there. So there's a very shitty element of this where he wasn't doing anything new or creative, just taking credit, and alerting the media.
 

Caiti Voltaire

New member
Feb 10, 2010
383
0
0
Starke said:
Caiti Voltaire said:
Fiercely protective of their work? Honestly most of the decent modders just say "Do whatever as long as you give credit." Thats not really protective. Its the wankers - and there's many of them out their - that get their knickers in a twist about these kind of things that ruin it for everyone.
I guess I just ran into too many of the shitty ones in short succession, and it colored my perspectives...
I think one of the unfortunate things about the deal is that its going to make other mod authors leery about contributing to the community, for fear of having to deal with this kind of drama. Its nothing new, as some people have pointed out, but that it keeps happening continually erode both authors' and users' faith in the community.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
Caiti Voltaire said:
Starke said:
Caiti Voltaire said:
Fiercely protective of their work? Honestly most of the decent modders just say "Do whatever as long as you give credit." Thats not really protective. Its the wankers - and there's many of them out their - that get their knickers in a twist about these kind of things that ruin it for everyone.
I guess I just ran into too many of the shitty ones in short succession, and it colored my perspectives...
I think one of the unfortunate things about the deal is that its going to make other mod authors leery about contributing to the community, for fear of having to deal with this kind of drama. Its nothing new, as some people have pointed out, but that it keeps happening continually erode both authors' and users' faith in the community.
Yeah, I agree with you there.
Herman Zindler said:
GothmogII said:
Fair enough, my mistake: It's okay for Bethesda to do whatever they like with stuff you create, and not anyone who is unaffiliated. (Like Mr.Smith)
When you give up your moral rights to the material you create (as is stated in the EULA), Bethesda can do whatever they want, as you say. I'll grant that people who are unaffiliated with Bethesda (Mr. Smith) do not have the same permissions (he has the same powers as a creator of New Content as any other licensed user), but would add that the modders also lose their legal basis to defend what happens to their work...the option rests entirely with Bethesda.
The EULA grants rights to Bethesda they wouldn't otherwise have. You don't surrender rights to your work you usually would have (except you still can't sue Bethesda).
 

SextusMaximus

Nightingale Assassin
May 20, 2009
3,508
0
0
Glad he got banned etc. Those Mod workers worked fucking hard - it wasn't fair for him to compile them and take credit.

(Because yes, that is what he would have done)
 

DocBalance

New member
Nov 9, 2009
751
0
0
I'm downloading this now, just to spite the assholes who made him take it down. It's still quite possible to find it.
 

Holy_Handgrenade

New member
Feb 16, 2009
288
0
0
ChromeAlchemist said:
It's a pretty savage life being a modder, isn't it? All those hours into a project which may or may not get pulled, and now all that work down the drain (so to speak)...

Shame, it looks beautiful too.

EDIT: Never mind I just learned to read. On second thoughts since he's basically had no creative input and just meshed together a load of other people's work, I can't sympathise this time.
Do you know how much time it would take for him to "mesh them together" it's not just the process of re-releasing them as a bundle he had to compile them to one download and made sure they all ran together with minimal bugs. Which is hard because if you load up two mods that don't like each other it basicaly makes the game go go crazy.



EDIT:
Maze1125 said:
Catalyst6 said:
Popido said:
What. The. Fuck?

What the hell happened here? Was someone making money from this?
That's what I was thinking as I read this. Aren't mods, y'know, free? It's not like the guy was saying that he did all the work *personally*.
Being free doesn't give anyone right to rip it off.
For example, I might give away free postcards of my paintings at my art gallery. As a method for attracting guests to come see my paintings in full. That doesn't give anyone the right to produce enlarged version of those cards and display them on the street, even if they give me credit.

It's different, the mods aren't used for promotional use to attract people your postcard idea is.
 

Maze1125

New member
Oct 14, 2008
1,679
0
0
Holy_Handgrenade said:
Maze1125 said:
Catalyst6 said:
Popido said:
What. The. Fuck?

What the hell happened here? Was someone making money from this?
That's what I was thinking as I read this. Aren't mods, y'know, free? It's not like the guy was saying that he did all the work *personally*.
Being free doesn't give anyone right to rip it off.
For example, I might give away free postcards of my paintings at my art gallery. As a method for attracting guests to come see my paintings in full. That doesn't give anyone the right to produce enlarged version of those cards and display them on the street, even if they give me credit.

It's different, the mods aren't used for promotional use to attract people your postcard idea is.
How do you know they're not?
Some of the people might well have been using them for exactly those reasons, or similar.

Anyway, it's not even about the money, even if my gallery was free, I would want people to come and see my paintings at my gallery, and I would not want them to think they didn't need to because some guy took copies of my paintings without permission and showed them off with a load of other people's paintings somewhere else.
 

Maze1125

New member
Oct 14, 2008
1,679
0
0
TheMaddestHatter said:
I'm downloading this now, just to spite the assholes who made him take it down. It's still quite possible to find it.
Yeah, how dare people feel like they ought to be asked permission for their work to be used. Those bastards.
 

DocBalance

New member
Nov 9, 2009
751
0
0
Maze1125 said:
TheMaddestHatter said:
I'm downloading this now, just to spite the assholes who made him take it down. It's still quite possible to find it.
Yeah, how dare people feel like they ought to be asked permission for their work to be used. Those bastards.
Yes, because permission should need be be asked so someone can put your FREE mod in their FREE mod compilation. Especially when you make the mod publicly available for FREE.

Seriously. I'm a writer. I write stories. I'm looking into selling them, and I've even got offers. So don't think I'm just another twit who doesn't respect what a business is. But if I were to make one of my stories publicly available for free, and then someone put it into a compilation, and my name was put on the story, guess what? I have no right to get butt-hurt over it. I put it out there and said "Do whatever the hell you want as long as you give me credit", and they fulfilled that idea. I may not like the company my story is keeping in the compilation, but it's my fault for making it public, thus why I don't do freebie stories publicly.

If you are a mod-maker, and your fragile ego can't stand being part of an incredible compilation that is going to expose your work to more people than you could ever hope to get to alone, then you don't deserve the attention the compilation-maker was giving you.
 

sheic99

New member
Oct 15, 2008
2,316
0
0
Ironic said:
sheic99 said:
For once, I'm with the lawsuits here. He used the mods without the original owners permission. I can almost guarantee that if he contacted the creators first, this would never have happened.
I would rather have all the mods compiled into an easy package than find all of them myself. It doesnt generate any money for the modders, they're credited anyway. I think substantial work went into this finding mods that don't conflict, maybe not as much work as the sum of its parts, but enough to warrant it being a separate work in its own right.

If he contacted the creators first, they probably would've said no if the stance they're taking now is this extreme, also, people make mod-packs all the time, the only reason this one is being brought down is because its popular.
Mods are like a sculpture that was placed in a park by the city. Everyone walking by it can see and enjoy the sculpture, but that does not give any person the right to print a picture of that sculpture and reuse it's likeness in a commercial setting without the authorized consent of the original creator. It doesn't matter if the creator was credited or not, you need permission to use other people's work.
 

MasterCorran

New member
Jan 7, 2011
1
0
0
Instead of trying to argue who's in the wrong here, I think we should start to ask ourselves: what do we gain and what do we lose from this (for those of you who still play Morrowind anyway)?

What do we gain?

Other than paying proper respect to the original authors of those mods, I don't see any benefit whatsoever from this outcome. It's not like they would have lost anything substantial because of what Tyler did. Sure, they did put a lot of effort into making the mods themselves; there is no denying their contributions. But other than the recognition and fame in the modding community and self-gratification, what do they actually gain from it? Nothing that would have mattered or tangibly benefitted them in their lives. Recognition and fame are mostly superficial things that will fade away in time. As the saying goes, "Glory is no use to the dead."

The only thing we've gain from this is a lesson: always ask for permission before using someone else's mod, personal use notwithstanding if you don't want to get bombed on later.

What do we lose?

To the people who still play Morrowind, this news can be considered a big blow to them. Tyler took the trouble of compiling what he thought was the best of mods for Morrowind and configured them so they wouldn't clash or cause problems in the game. It's actually a boon for Morrowind gamers, especially the less mod-savvy ones, as he saved them the hassle of searching and downloading each mod individually in addition to doing the painstaking process of configuring the mods to work without issue. He even gave the modders credits (whether it was suffient or not, I'm not really sure) which is better than giving them nothing at all. There other people out there who don't bother to give credits at all and some even go as far as to remove any trace of the original author from the mod.


I'll admit that Tyler made a big blunder when he didn't ask the authors for permission first before he put their mods into his compilation but I think that Bethesda and the authors went a little too far with their punishment. Banning him and threatening him with legal action just seems too extreme especially when he explicitly expressed that he wanted to reach a middle ground where everyone is happy. To me, it's just an honest mistake on his part, one that any human being could have made.


Why didn't they just simply talk it out with him? He seems reasonable. Maybe some mods could have been removed from the compilation but at least the Morrowind gamers could have gotten a better game out of it. Now, they get nothing. All because of ethical technicalities.


And before we start to say that Tyler deserved it, let's take a step back first and realize that there are other people out there who are way worse than this guy. For instance, google the "Team Exile and Darth Balor" incident at FileFront and you'll see.