Mod Developers & Copyright

EULA does not extend that far, there is only a certain amount of things you can put in an EULA, or any legally binding contract, that will be found legally binding. EULA can only affect things DIRECTLY relating to the product. Meaning, if the content was not created WITHIN the game, the EULA if written in the USA has no legal standing on the content.

Edit: At this point I would like to state that I nor anyone here cannot take the place of a lawyer. Even if we did study law unless we are a lawyer retained by you, following any advice found here in this topic is ill advised.

 

Wow this thread kind of exploded. I do however like that people are throwing around suing people over their copyright. People do know that since these mods are not given permission to be monetized? That creates a huge issue in terms of trying to get a trial started. Copyright issues are strictly handled as civil court cases (at least mostly in terms of US courts), for a case to be accepted there has to be proof of damages against your work, and monetary damages are one of the few damages that will be accepted by a judge. Since you are not selling your mod for profit, and the person making a derivative work from your mod is not making a profit from it, you will be hard pressed to find a lawyer who will take your case and even harder pressed to find a judge who wont laugh at the case and throw it out immediately. Furthermore, I am incredibly happy that mods are hosted by Chucklefish, because that lowers the chance that someone will not be stupid and write an improper DMCA notification (which are almost always improperly written which makes writing a counter notification incredibly easy). It also means that it is in Chucklefish's hands to determine if something is a straight copy or a derivative work, which is great since I feel people will be more likely to mod than have to worry about someone freaking out that another is making a modded version of their mod or a mod that cribs a few ideas.

This is what I feared in the beginning of the thread, people getting too worried about their copyright over a mod that they are not going to be making money off of. More worried about a copyright than just modding for the sake of modding. It is stupid and poisonous for the community. If you don't want people poking at your mods and taking a look at them, maybe using an idea from them or making a derivative work, then don't release it publicly.

 

Permission for something to be monetized is a bit iffy in the sense you're trying to use it. As long as they're not trying to sell assets originally present in the base game, it's possible to monetize game mods without the original game maker's approval. Granted there may be issues slapping on the original game's trademarks, but there's nothing truly stopping anyone from monetizing mods other than respect for the original developers.

Technically speaking here, you can still force a cease and desist order. Additionally if you had your copyright registered, you could still sue for statuary damages and legal fees. HOWEVER, I do not wish to ever meet a person who goes that far to secure rights on a mod they give away freely.

 

No, they can't do that. They have no right to grant usage of my original content, in whole or in part. If I make, say a ship graphic out of parts of the original ships, then yes, that belongs to them still (Mostly, but for sake of the argument...) but if I make a brand new ship graphic, it is 100% mine and no one but me can say who can and can not use it.

 

They could if you agree to use their system. Such as if they had that as part of the license for using the mod repository, you are signing away rights. Or they could do something similar to Mojang's new EULA which does mostly the same thing (sure you might say that an EULA is not legally binding, which is still up in the air, but you'd still have to prove your individual case in court and at that point, if you are that angry over the whole thing, the community would be better off without you and you should probably keep your work private).

Either way, people can still use your artwork under derivative works if it really comes down to splitting hairs.

If you are more worried about what people might do with your mod than just, you know, making mods, then perhaps you shouldn't make the mod public. I would find it incredibly flattering if someone liked my work so much they wanted to expand upon it and that is a hell of a lot more positive experience for the whole community, encouraging the sharing and expanding ideas, then the scary route some communities take where there are mile long licenses everywhere and all people do is bicker and fight over stupid shit that in the end don't mean shit.

 

They can and they can't. In most cases, a digital signature is not enough to transfer rights of intellectual property. The process to transfer intellectual property between two parties is a bit more complex than that. However, they can restrict or remove your ability to use their services if you do not comply to an EULA.

 

OMG, that's my EXACT thought process!!! Why can't everyone think that way? It's always "It's my work you can't improve on it because I have such a huge ego and think everything I make is perfect!" with most people. You must credit the original author of course, but you should be allowed to improve it.

 

Look, it's great that you have your opinion about sharing YOUR work, but that is subjective to you and anyone that shares those opinions. However, constructing a strawman to represent anyone who doesn't agree with your opinion is generally not an acceptable tactic to use. The reason everyone doesn't think the way you do is because they're express individuals, asking that itself shows a lack of concern for others' feelings.

Different people perceive ownership differently, this also includes how they feel about things they create. Some people find satisfaction in sharing their mods and allowing others to modify said mod, and yes even I enjoy using this method of mod creation from time to time. However some people find mod creation to be a very personal experience. Modmaking is like an art, you can't discredit a mod maker for feeling like they need to protect their creation. They very much own any original creation they've put into their mods, and asking them to simply dissolve their ownership of their Intellectual property is fairly short sighted.

What I'm saying here is, rather than discussing actual rights and ownership, this has dissolved into bashing of content creators. This thread has villianised any mod creator wanting to be able to protect their own creations as selfish braggarts rather than celebrating the fact they've taken their time to create content for the community. How much they want to share their creation is completely up to them.

What I'm saying is, please start taking other people's feelings and rights into consideration before discrediting them.

 

I'm so sorry if it came across that way. I just couldn't think of any other way to describe the other opinion other than ego and selfishness. If you really think about it, let's say one guy says "Oh my garsh! I just discovered a new way of making shaders more realistic in computer graphics, but the secret's behind it must belong to me only and no one else must know them at all," It just seems very counterproductive to me. When people love and actually care enough your stuff enough to improve it, they are not trying to hurt you, so why do people punish them for it? It's just something I don't understand. My examples here are probably flawed because of my misunderstanding, so sorry if they are.

 

It has absolutely nothing to do with that. Its purely a matter of respecting peoples rights and wishes with their creations. Most people will agree to allow use of their creations if you just ask for it. Its when you don't ask, or are forced to allow free use that it becomes a problem.

Sure, some people are egotistical, but if someone doesn't want you using their creations, then you should respect their wishes. If you can't understand this, then you are no better then a thief yourself.

 

I don't wish to insult them, but if they don't like to share their ideas with the community, that's their problem. I just don't see how people would get insulted if people love their ideas enough to improve upon them. If you say it like "I am going to sue you because you love my stuff enough to improve upon it," it sounds stupid. Let's just call the argument a tie and move on. We don't want the thread to get off topic and get locked. Let's agree that there are two thought processes and that not one is better than the other.

 

You apologize, but then you still continue to build up the strawman. It's not selfish to be entitled to your own work. When someone creates a piece of work they don't generally expect someone to modify it without their permission, this is the same thing. They already had the generosity to share the mod with the community. The truly selfish thing would be to expect entitlement to take their work and use it without their permission.

The same argument could be used for those who take art and modify it without express permission of the art's creator. If you truly cared and loved a piece, you should also then respect the wishes of the person who created it. Even if they are not trying to cause harm, they have violated the creator's right to their own material, many take great offense to this. If the individual wanted to help improve a mod, they should at least ask for permission from the creator, failing that give suggestions. There is never a reason to take without asking first, that's called stealing.

I'm not here to criticize you on your beliefs, however the way you are portraying things really poisons the well for anyone that may not be comfortable about openly sharing their works. I am not opposed to the view that openly sharing work and allowing open modification of works can be very benefiting to a community. I myself have worked on numerous open projects in the past and have had great fun with it, but I also understand that many people who create often times find their works to be quite personal. Try to understand it like this: taking and modifying something from an artist that holds their works on a personal level is like taking an object with extreme sentimental value and modifying it without their permission. Once you do that it's no longer theirs in a way.

 

At the same time, mod developers need to respect other mod developers protected right for both derivative work as well as fair use derivative work (see Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc. v. Nintendo of America, Inc. for fair use derivative work in regards to modifying copyrighted code and Sega Enterprises, Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc for both the decompiling of code and reproduction of code), as long as those making derivative work/fair use derivative work give proper credit where it is do. Yes, it is mostly about respect, but it goes both ways in this case.

 

Well, I really happy to know, that some members of Starbound community do think the right way.

You're completely right. And so, if they don't want to share their work, they shouldn't post it anywhere. Because if they post it, then anyway somebody, somewhere will use it as basis for his/her own mod. And some of such "users" will even argue with original content creator, that it isn't based on his/her content.

I can create something very similar from zero, that will really look like as another mod from different author. Why it will be very similar? Because we used same idea to create mod.

 

Derivative work means you're basing your work on something. Ripping and then modifying something to "improve" it then distributing it on your own is plagiarism. There's a huge difference between basing your work on something and ripping it directly.

Oh, base things on another thing all you want. There's no way to be 100% unique in this day and age, hence "nihil novi sub sole". However, a creator has rights to their OWN works. There is a point where you modify something where it's no longer the original work anymore. Everything is based on inspiration some where, I'm not going to argue that. Also lets not even get into parody and transformative works. However this argument is strictly victim blaming, by that logic, people shouldn't share anything EVER if they want their rights to their IP stolen. It means nintendo should stop making games, and disney should stop making movies. It's not about people being afraid of derivative works, it's plagiarism that's the concern.

I think the argument is getting skewed, they were intending to say: "Don't take my art". Which you should always expect someone's right to their own property. I wouldn't steal a person's art just the same as I wouldn't steal from a person's house. Everyone has the right to protect their creations from being stolen by others. They're talking about directly taking assets and just using them derivatively. I really think people are confusing eachothers' points and it's what's attributing majorly to the toxicity in the thread.

However, lets say you and I are making a mod. I make my mod first, then you make your own from your own ideas. That I'm totally fine with. Hell I'd even consider merging the mods together and collaborating, if not that then providing ideas and sharing concepts to make both mods the best they can be. Lets say I had a mod, you had ideas to make it better and decided to do it your way with your own original content: I might get a little offended, but in the end I would be flattered I *inspired* someone into doing something. I would still want to lend ideas to your mod.

What I would NOT be okay with is if you directly ripped my mod, made no attempt to change any of the art or design. That would be stepping over the line. I don't mean if you took code snippets from my code, no I can't stop that, you have the right to use any code as you see fit if it's not obfuscated. I mean directly taking the mod and claiming it as your own. That's plagiarism and everyone should be against that.

However, I don't understand the point of "Mod competition". Two similar mods are not competing with each other, that mindset is selfish and corrupt. I think that two mod makers making similar mods should consider collaboration, or idea sharing to improve both mods so users in the end still have a wealth of variety to choose from. Mod makers should all be working to the same end (improving the base game) not working against each other.

 

Huh, maybe there is a huge misunderstanding. From my understanding of the posts that you seem to be arguing against, people are fearful that certain mod developers might stand up to prevent derivative work. I don't think anyone is claiming the right to directly rip off a mod. Most of this fear comes from other communities (mostly the MC one) where even respectful derivative works will get you shunned from the community or slapped with a poorly written DMCA.

I don't think anyone is actively arguing for the right to outright plagiarize work, but are arguing that the community should be open and allow for (actual) derivative work. As I said, there are a lot of toxic communities out there that simply flip their lid at the prospect of an "unauthorized derivative" or the notion of a "mod-mod" and some of us have had endured in such environments where said mod developers that contributed to such a toxic environment where put upon a pedestal, stifling and chocking creativity and generally changing the core of modding to just mod to modding being some kind of weird ego meta game. I love Chucklefish, how open they made their game to the community, and I love the majority of the community and I would love to see the modding community here grow into something healthy that maybe other communities can go look at and ask themselves "Where the hell did we go wrong".

 

You may have made it seem like you were arguing that. Probably because you could have easily overlooked parts of the other side's argument. That or you misread or didn't understand the context. No big deal, We all make reading errors. It's better to know we're all on the same page.

(quoting you just to bring this up, not responding to you, feel free to correct me if I'm taking you out of context please)

What lazarus was against was people taking their work directly and modifying it without their permission then re distributing, that's plagiarism. The understanding was the graphic would be their work 100%, that means no one can use it unless they modified it until it is absolutely unrecognizable, or when they modified did not distribute to anyone else (fair use).

I don't think anyone is going to be upset with derivative work if it doesn't impede on anyone's right their own intellectual property, especially if they're credited. In most cases, if we're talking about just making a mod based on or based on another person's mod, you don't even NEED to credit them, but giving credit where credit "is due" both helps the original mod maker, and makes the creditor look like a far more honest and trustworthy person.

 

Thinking the right way? Really? So its your way or we are all idiots? Please.

"Sharing" is a broad term. I like to share my creations, but I don't always like pothers taking it and messing with it and uploading it somewhere without asking me first. That is a breach of my intellectual rights over the asset. You are thinking very one-track here.

Some people share their creations as is. Others share them as fair game (also called resource packs). If you can't respect that, then you will drive people away from modding because they can't protect their work. Protecting your work doesn't mean disallow others to use it, as ive said before, several times, permission is all you need to obtain in order to use something. If they say no, move on, if they say yes, great, no problem to be had.

 

There are always two sides to every coin, but lets not get too snippy. That said. there's no right or wrong way to think, or at least outside of obvious dementia.

And kids, what do we call it when we *force* someone to "Share"? It's like "Borrowing" without asking. I would also like to lend out the fact most pirates use the term "Sharing". However, I think the basis of this entire argument is that one side is arguing one thing, and the other is arguing a completely different point. I don't think anyone here agrees with stealing or plagiarism.

To make this simple. Lazarus78: Do you agree with "fair use" and that derivitive work that does NOT directly take from their reference point is okay? (Nothing novel is being taking, only ideas, no art/assets/etc. No Unfair use of anyone's IP).

And to those who want things to be shared (Enzer_DeLeo, WarStalkeR): You *ARE* against intellectual property theft and plagiarism correct? What you want is for ideas to be open, and to let ideas be in "open" for anyone to make suggestions to. NOT extending to the required dispersal of intellectual property rights (art, storyline, etc)?

 

Pretty much. I am not of the mind that plagiarism should be allowed, but a persons right to make derivative works, or use fair use, or to expand upon an idea, should be protected just as much who has created what I guess you would call an "original work". You would be surprised just how often this is not the case and how often the right to make derivative work is brushed off and people are accused of theft, despite it being an actual derivative work.

Here is an example I thought of: Mod developer A writes a mod that has a new ship graphic. Mod developer B is making a mod with multiple ship graphics. Mod developer B sees Mod developer A's ship (we will call this the underlying work). He really likes the design of the ship, but dislikes the interior layout/colors/a few other sections. Mod developer B makes a reproduction of the underlying work, he makes multiple changes to this work so that it matches the rest of the ship designs in his mod, making this transformed work bear his personal personality on what has become a derivative work. Mod developer B then compiles his mod, uploads it, and in the mod's information notes that that particular ship is a derivative work of mod developer A.

Under derivative work and fair use derivative work, this would be legal and protected under law just as much as underlying work is protected by copyright law. As a reminder, the painting L.H.O.O.Q. is a direct reproduction of the Mona Lisa that Marcel Duchamp penciled a mustache and beard on top of. In this case, the modification of the underlying work is slight, but it is still a big enough change to be considered bearing Mr Duchamp's personality.

Often what I see happen in other communities is that Developer A will refuse Developer B's protected right for a derivative work, and that is when the major break downs happen. Developer B continues to make his derivative work, Developer A becomes irritate, brands B as a thief, sends a DMCA that refuses to acknowledge B's right to derivative work (and if B has any understanding of the law, will probably send a counter-notification), or in cases of work being hosted on forums, contacts forum admins to get B's work removed. Developer B was completely in his right to make his mod, but is now being outcast. He removes himself from the community. Other developers see this and are now hesitant to make their own mods "What if developer C doesn't recognize my right as well?" "My right to make derivative works is being repressed by the forums as well", etc etc etc. What you end up is a community that becomes hesitant and fearful to release their work, and slowly a "witchhunt" mentally begins to form withing certain members of the community, slowly building it into a hateful and toxic place. This may seem a tad extreme, but I point to the majority of the MC modding community, I point to many issues that have happens over the years at the Nexus ("Gate-Gate" comes to mind) and how it is now boiled to the point where mod developers can actively ban users from both making comments on their mod as well as downloading the mod, people are actively afraid to give criticism to mods on the nexus in fear that the mod author might feel slighted and ban the user from downloading the mod. Starbound's community is still growing, it hasn't set itself upon a course. A lot of us are just hoping that it doesn't start walking down a path that doesn't encourage modding.

In my example, as long as both developer A and B are civil, and B gives proper credit to A in his derivative work, there should be no issue for the two to exist together and be respectful of each other. This is how modding should be.