Learn your lesson : Don't sell mods.
post
When will people learn to do these kinds of things anonymously?
This guy wanted to make money from this mod and put it behind a paywall, that's the only reason it got taken down.
This seems like a good idea, but a related question I've been wondering about is, what is the best way to anonymously run a software project facing this type of threat model, when you also want that software to be accessible to people? Does anyone know about any tips or resources for this? Is there some kind of darknet github? How do you do social media or collect donations/payment? Also, are there any good examples of projects that did this right?
I'm not an expert, but I2P and Tor should allow people to host things anonymously.
Monero can be used as an anonymous payment method.
I feel like there are also other potential reasons to want to publish software anonymously though, even if monetization is not the goal. For instance, to keep it game related, there have been plenty of noncommercial fan projects that get shut down mainly just because the companies that own the IP are run by assholes.
How comes paid mods work out fine in sim racing then?
Assetto Corsa has tons of paid mods, along with tons of free mods, and the game developer Kunos is one of very few profitable game devs in sim racing. Why haven't paid mods ruined the modding scene and bankrupted the company?
It's not about bankrupcy, it's about setting rules about their property. Some rights are enshrined in laws; derivative works are fair use. are mods fair use? nobody knows. but not if you charge for it, that requires licensing. no one wants to see precision laws being written about this, so everyone has to play by the developer's rules. realistically that guy wants money from CDPR assets and CDPR said no you can't do that.
Kunos giving modders the right to use their name freely does not mean CDPR has to. That's what holding an IP means, you set the rules. and CDPR says if you use our name it cannot be paywalled media.
The parent comment says: “Paid for mods have never, will never, and can never. Be a good idea or healthy for a modding community.” So how does this follow from what you wrote? Sounds like it depends on the particular dev and game whether paid mods are a good idea or not.
Because they exist in a grey area of copyright. It's not precisely defined, and so it's a honor system.
Paid mods, simply by existing, threatens the honor system. You keep touting Kunos and profits. what relevance is profits in this? Honoring CDPR's wishes and applauding Kunos' leniency still work in this system. What is not is someone pointing at that generosity and demand that it is the default. Those paid mods threaten to put other game modders existence into legal jeopardy because people who keep arguing just because one company is generous other companies must also give away their rights.
now that it is involving dmca if pursued further it's write new laws or court case.
So your answer to why paid mods can't exist is because CDPR made it so.
Paid mods, simply by existing, threatens the honor system.
Those paid mods threaten to put other game modders existence into legal jeopardy
Threaten what exactly? They don't ‘threaten’ jack if CDPR say they're okay with mods. You use circular logic in your argument.
I don't think you have a clue about the relevant law if you're saying things like "derivative works are fair use". They absolutely aren't which is exactly the reason game devs can exert such strong control over mods generally. Fair use would not necessarily limit commercial use either if it applied here.
In the case of the VR mods they are making the argument that this is not really a derivative work of the games in question at all because it is a generic framework that supports numerous games similar to how an emulator runs all the games of a platform and can present them differently from the original hardware. We won't get to see how that argument would do in court probably because the modder can't afford to go to court with these huge companies.
I wouldn't really say it's about "property" either. Copyright and all these related rules are a completely man-made concepts unlike real property which has a pretty intuitive basis in our reality where only one person can hold a physical item at a time.
now you're making me think of a future with a "Silk Road" for game mods. Very cyberpunk.
So does anyone have a version of this we can download still?
I don't understand this at all.
rockstar did the same thing to the VR mods that were made for GTA games.
the guys are developing mods that are going to make me want to purchase and play the game. why is that a problem?
I don't understand intellectual property
In this case it's cause the modder is charging money for the mod, I think CD Project Red even offered to allow it to exist if he stopped charging before this, so I would argue this is on the modder
I don't understand what difference it makes to CDPR. if the guy makes a few bucks developing mods for the game, then he can spend more of his time developing the mod, and making mods for other games. right? in what way is it harming CDPR
He always had the option of using a donate option instead of locking it behind a paywall. CDPR tried getting him to go that route and he basically told them to pound sand so here we are.
Property rights get all sorts of goofy when money is involved. If homey had released the mod for free and just had a patreon or whatev on the side, no one would care, but because he was charging for it, CDPR is obigated to vigorously defend their copyright.
There's a legal aspect where if you don't defend your intellectual property you may lose it.
You also don't want to set a precedent because if you let some rando do it, why not let a company do it? Why not let Google do it?
Modding implies toying with someone's IP, and the basic premise is that you can't paywall the resulting product. There's a lot of leeway and you can ask for donations, offer private beta to your patrons etc... it can definitely be cash-flow positive but a straight up paywall is a violation of the social contract that governs the modding scene.
if you don't defend your intellectual property you may lose it
Another day, another instance of someone confusing copyright with trademarks.
Not exactly, they made him remove the RDR 2 vr mod. the GTA is still up on github.
this is a terms of service issue, but they're using dmca (copyright) to enforce.
he technically has a case for selling, but defending it would be too expensive. LR also isn't socially adept so he's self-sabatoged himself too.
I don't understand intellectual property
I'm asking from a place of curiosity, not a place of judgement. Have you ever created anything? A piece of art, poem or prose, a film, a program, etc?
I am an artist who is VERY anti-IP law. The system as it exists is evil and does far more harm than good. IP is not some holy grail that deserves protection when it can be so easily abused. I would rather have no IP law than the current system, but I'll settle for reforms.
Makes me think of all the day care places with Disney characters painted outside the walls…
I agree with this.
That said, the prohibition of paid mods should be a cultural matter, not a legal one. It shouldn't be illegal, but we as a gaming community should refuse to engage with them as poor practice
Evil is a really strong word that I'm not sure I can get behind here.
Do you mind sharing what it was/is?
I have no idea what your question is getting at. I am a published artist but I pay my bills with unrelated W-2 work
I said from the get go that I was asking from a place of curiosity not judgement. I wasn't "getting at" anything. It interests me to know what your stance is and how it might be informed. Congrats on being published, that's pretty cool.
I will extend the same question to you.
I mostly write but have wanted to make a game for a while.
No, I'd like to do that myself. Mostly need the time and sufficient motivation. Most of my time is eaten up GMing multiple ttrpgs a week right now.
I think that's the easy bit. For me at least.
Any sort of artwork is expensive to commission though. And if you're born without a shred of artistic talent in your entire being, you ain't doing it yourself.
So I've got some very broad strokes vision of a game I want to build and I haven't expanded on it further because I know I can't afford to make it.
If I do decide to make it, I'd have to hire someone to do 3D modelling* at the very least. I don't see a world where that's feasible without copyright, because then I'd just be paying someone's salary (or commissions) and be out of pocket for it.
* No, don't worry, I'm not thinking of yet another photorealistic-ish looking 3D game. More like something in the style of the 3D Zelda games or like some of the (MMO)RPGs of the 00s.
So, what if I wrote a book and got it published, but it didn't sell well. Some big company copies it, puts a lot of effort in promoting it and it becomes a bestseller. I don't get any of the money for it, but they cite me as the original author. How is that fair?
So how is that fair then?
In sim racing, Assetto Corsa has tons of paid mods, and simultaneously its developer is one of very few profitable companies. How come Kunos aren't bankrupt from paid mods existing?
End corporate personhood. IP laws have become malign corporate distortions of reasonable artist protections. No company should be allowed to 'own' anything, but certainly not IP. A company has no intellect, thus cannot have intellectual property.
As for this case in particular, selling a mod is absolutely not infringing on the IP of the game it is attached to any more than selling a clip on bookmark/magnifying glass/book light (a tool attached to a piece of media to grant the user a useful extra functionality/greater ease of use when interacting with that piece of media) infringes on the IP of the author.
I don't get why modders shouldn't be allowed to ask for money. Do players just want people to work for free? Why should the game developers get to set the rules when mods often contain no content/IP from the game devs?
top 93 comments