Banned from Nexus

[Misplaced Reality]

 

But that is the entire point. can you imagine someone work really hard on blender. makes stuff from the ground up and some thief comes along and says hey nice mesh i am sure you would not mind me taking this and then just puts his name only on the credits part. then when someone reports this person and original creator comes along sees this that is why they place in the credits no upload or include in other mods.

 

if this part is clear and someone will still put the part in their mods then that is thieving. And that is happening allot on nexus these days that is why there are so many banned for stealing.

 

 

I think with a license we can ensure that derivative work has proper citation towards the original authors, to ensure that the community is more open instead of having to worry about each and every possibility. Sticking on your mod "Do not re-upload" or "Do not make derivative" or have a few names randomly mentioned isn't the way to go.

 

You will see more of what I mean once I will make a thread about the license.

[Kendo 2]

When I first started modding Oblivion I made all of my content open source.  "Sure go ahead, use it in your own mods."  Then this guy at Nexus took the 'Kendo Girl' mod, repackaged it in an OMOD form and uploaded it.  No one downloaded my original work.  They downloaded HIS and he accepted all the praise for 'his hard work' without batting an eye.  I worked on that mod for almost two months.  He spent 10 minutes repackaging it.  The Nexus staff did nothing.

 

When I first started modding FO3 I made all of of my content open source. "Sure go ahead, use it in your own mods."  The same thing happened.  People took the things I had made  and pretended they were the ones who created it.   THEN Fallout New Vegas was released and people were blatantly STEALING (IMO) my mods and submitting them as original works.  This happened to a lot of FO3 modders and to the Nexus Staff's credit, they did handle those situations...until this girl hijacked Type3 and uploaded it as 'Beware of Girl'.  She didn't make any of the meshes (she doesn't know anything about meshes or rigging). She didn't make the textures, she sampled Exnem's FO3 textures and pasted them onto Luchaire's Type3 textures.  'Modest texturing skills' INDEED with her super-duper fake hi-rez stupidity.  She copied elements from two 2048x2048 textures and then resized the end result to 4056x4056.  SORRY, that isn't hi-rez/hi-detail.  That's just a big blurry image.  Anyway, I exposed her to the Nexus Staff.  I showed them what she had done and the PMs between dimon99 and myself.  They DID NOTHING.  All they did was make her edit the upload page and give credit to the people she had STOLEN the work from.

 

Then she stole from me after I had made it a point to tell her she did not have have permission to use any of my FO3 content for New Vegas.  She did it anyway and when I PMed her again, she read the message and didn't respond.  I gave her three days and then I reported her.  After a lot of back-and-forth with the staff they banned her....for less than a week.  All told she is one of (if not the biggest) content poachers and thieves on Nexus yet she is still there and people are still being fooled.  When I uploaded the 'Official Type3 Release for New Vegas' I was trolled and slammed in the upload thread.  'Beware of Girl is the original Type3', 'Why would anyone use this, you STOLE IT!', etc.  And the Nexus Staff let those posts stand.  They only went away after Nexus abandoned the upvote/downvote software.

 

After all of this I started making ALL my work non-resource.  This is the internet and some people feel that little things like honesty and integrity are miniscule when compared to on-line praise, bullshit Nexus Fame and being a kudos whore.  I don't have a problem with people who actually like my content using it as resources in their own mods.  Take a few meshes, take a few textures, use a script, etc.  That's fine, BUT I do take issue with people just hijacking mods.  I have completed mods (good ones too) where the original authors never responded to my PMs.  Those mods sit and rot because I don't have the required permissions to upload them.  As vile and evil as I'm often portrayed, I don't do that and I don't give a pass for people who do.  IMO, it isn't right.

 

NOTE: this post is NOT a slam against anyone here.  I'm just posting my opinion as to open-source vs not-open-source.  Dark0ne has serious issue with mods not being open source.  He thinks they all should be and since he runs a game forum that means the more bullshit mods people pile in the more pop-ups downloaders have to look at.  That is money in his pocket.  Modders are THE RESOUCE for him; a totally expendable resource.  No matter who gets banned or the quality of work they did, it comes down to numbers.  100 views of a good mod are the same as 100 views of a bad one.  Dark0ne's opinion counts for shit.

 

For right now, everything I'm uploading to LL can be used as Lover's Lab resources.  I don't have a problem with that.  BUT I DO NOT want my content going to Nexus in any way, shape or form.  I don't care how much work another modder put in to it, I DON'T WANT IT THERE. 

[Guest airdance]

Kendo 2

   I agree with you 100%.  If someone wants to use your code that much, let then negotiate with you personally.  It is your code and your work and should be respected.

BTW, I do love your work. 

[D_ManXX2]

Kendo 2 what you describe their sound like the exact same thing that happened to Aliensloff Probably why nothing is on nexus from her anymore. That is pretty said really since that why so many modders driven away and probably never releasing any new stuff online anymore. Unless it's a screen shot.

[Misplaced Reality]

Idea: watermark every DDS texture you use.

 

God, no. I hope you are joking.

[Lagoon0654]

Scenario:

Nexus Buys out LoversLab.

 

 

 

Imagine the chaos.

[Jase1983]

i got banned from the Nexus for posting a bit of boob 3 days after i signed up, thank god for proxys and fake emails i now have a new account, i think the mods are very power hungry on that site though

[D_ManXX2]

 

Idea: watermark every DDS texture you use.

 

God, no. I hope you are joking.

 

 

Why ??

That could at least prove said modder stole the file form someone else. So you don't even have to prove you made it.

 

Sometimes a modder gives permission to 1 modder but others will then use the assets from that modder and forgets to ask the orginal creator to use that asset too, This will at least prove that part so no one can later claim that file as there own.

[Lagoon0654]

Problem with watermarking is that it can be removed easily with set of brushes and patching tools.

 

Unless you were meaning watermark it via digital signature.

[Misplaced Reality]

Watermarking is a bad idea. And I am not joking. Consider this an ultimatum. Drop the idea altogether. Because it would be reaching the most ridiculous levels of stupidity that a mod author could ever get. This is really viable only if you are selling something, and you aren't nor can sell mods legally. So, I think it would be ridiculous and preposterous for a mod author to start watermarking just to be able to say  "Ha! I made it, I made it!" when the issue can be solved in so many freaking ways that aren't as ridiculous.

[Rayblue]

Deleted, since you thought angrily it doesn't work, but it's habit for me to leave at least an identifying signature on tangible works.

 

Now the problem with digital works is that they can be duplicated many times over, altered and modified to the point it's barely recognizable compared to the original. I've seen too many insane examples of this, with flamewars erupting over not just the rightful creator/ownership of mods, but also other forms of digitized fanworks -- hell, there are some dorks fighting over 3D models made using Google Sketchup.

 

[Misplaced Reality]

Deleted, since you thought it doesn't work, but it's habit for me to leave at least an identifying signature on tangible works.

 

Now the problem with digital works is that they can be duplicated many times over, altered and modified to the point it's barely recognizable compared to the original. I've seen too many insane examples of this, with flamewars erupting over not just the rightful creator/ownership of mods, but also other forms of digitized fanworks -- hell, there are some dorks fighting over 3D models made using Google Sketchup.

 

We are talking about mods. If we all modders start being overprotective then we will prevent people from being able to share the said mod, make derivatives and let the community expand. The more you force people to avoid making derivatives the more you are harming a community, that for sure is surviving but risks into ending up like Nexus, where on the slightest say from the author a derivative can be removed for whatever reason.

 

I won't stop stressing, a license, is all you need. Besides that bragging rights are something that will harm the community at the expense of entitlement.

 

Imagine for example, if xp32's animated hair didn't allow derivatives, and if you made any hair with physics then your mod would be removed, and you would find yourself both banned and shunned. That would mean a whole range of possibilities and creativity would be shot down, thus decreasing the possibilities, the mods and general interest that many people from different walks of life might have. And modding isn't about a limited box of the author, I respect the fact that someone puts work into a mod, their heart, their passion, into releasing something it is understandable not to want the mod copied over Nexus, or Loverslab.

 

But in all honesty, chasing down derivatives, especially those that give proper credit, and without giving them a possibility to exist does more harm to everyone as a whole, preventing any conversions also may harm the community indirectly.

[Rayblue]

Frankly, it's easier to author a house mod (because it mostly uses vanilla textures and meshes, unless you add in custom objects), than you would with a weapon, armor or a body mod.

 

I retract the "ideas" I said earlier.

[D_ManXX2]

I think you are taking this way out of proportion. how do you suggest we handle things like kendo 2 pointed out ?? i don't really see how your suggestion will be even better then making the modder water mark their assets. And i don;t really see how you can deny a modder from using a water mark if he she wants too.

 

This is not about selling but hunting those idiots who stole someone else his work and claimed it as his own. i am not talking about modder giving someone else permission to use his assets in his own mods. That part should have been clear already.

[Misplaced Reality]

Frankly, it's easier to author a house mod (because it mostly uses vanilla textures and meshes, unless you add in custom objects), than you would with a weapon, armor or a body mod.

 

I am just trying to say that bragging rights meanwhile have a place to allow the original author to ensure that people are informed that a mod is a derivative, or that uses content that was initially developed by someone else, when they are pushed too extremely to the point that no derivatives or conversions are applied they will keep holding the community within a box that shouldn't be there.

 

There are ways to ensure people give proper credit, but to start watermarking mods, to start doing all sorts of things to prevent people from using the mod altogether defeats the purpose of there being a mod in the first place. What's the point of creating a mod with all your passion and work when you want to spend most of the time taking down anyone who used your mod to create something else?

 

What if UNP, CBBE suddenly didn't allow derivatives, and all the derivatives were taken down, including all the re-textures?

 

 

I think you are taking this way out of proportion. how do you suggest we handle things like kendo 2 pointed out ?? i don't really see how your suggestion will be even better then making the modder water mark their assets. And i don;t really see how you can deny a modder from using a water mark if he she wants too.

 

It is better because watermarks will prevent people from making derivatives which in turn help the community build further and develop new ideas based on older ones. What I want to ensure is proper credit towards the authors, not to allow the authors to hammer out derivatives because they decided that they have the final word on any content.

 

I am not taking this out of proportion, we risk going down, slowly, and miserably if people don't relax down when it comes down to an author's rights and how derivatives, and conversions are handled.

 

 

This is not about selling but hunting those idiots who stole someone else his work and claimed it as his own. i am not talking about modder giving someone else permission to use his assets in his own mods. That part should have been clear already.

 

It doesn't matter, watermarking mods, texture files, models, is the final step. It is the non-return point from which people will just sit and bicker about who made the mod and how mods are removed because they are not "allowed" derivatives. It would be sending the modding community back to the dark ages where people would have to share mods in the dark of bigger communities because of this logical fallacy of permission-asking that isn't ensured to work, and of the sudden switch that derivative work is taboo and somehow harms the author when proper credits are given.

[Lagoon0654]

This is why I'm so glad I make nothing but shitty mods using in-game sources.

 

Someone steals my idea, well it's like someone stealing my identity; they can only improve it.

[D_ManXX2]

The point of no return has already been set when people  started taking stuff from others and claimed it as his own this was the real reason of downfall for many modders previously.

 

If stuff like that did not happen i am sure many modders would not even be that uptight right now.

 

besides it is not just nexus, even loverslab has rules regarding this part, about stealing someone else his work luckily i have not seen this behavior here yet, like was on nexus.

[Misplaced Reality]

This is why I'm so glad I make nothing but shitty mods using in-game sources.

 

Someone steals my idea, well it's like someone stealing my identity; they can only improve it.

 

Any mod can be improved to fit everyone's views. Just a fast search through screenshots of games can show you how people can put effort to take different mods to give an unique feeling and result, and perhaps even your mods can play a role in that. And watermarking will prevent a lot of the customization that mods are supposed to provide towards the player.

 

Imagine if you have this cool piece of armour, tried to re texture it to suit your tastes and by the moment you try to do that an author's name pops up and ruins the armour as a whole, discouraging the other modder to further be interested into doing something, like creating new mods based on other mods.

 

 

The point of no return has already been set when people  started taking stuff from others and claimed it as his own this was the real reason of downfall for many modders previously.

 

If stuff like that did not happen i am sure many modders would not even be that uptight right now.

 

besides it is not just nexus, even loverslab has rules regarding this part, about stealing someone else his work luckily i have not seen this behavior here yet, like was on nexus.

 

What I am trying to say is that there is no need to be uptight since things can be handled better, but heading down to a direction where you force people to experience what your mod offers without any possibility of further modification only worsens things, it doesn't improve them. The easiest way to handle such people that claim others stuff (without any modification, simply re-distributing) as their own, then it is as simple as removing the said mod, and if that fails then it means the community where the mod is hosted by all means, should be avoided more and more.

 

However re-distribution that gives proper credit to the original author shouldn't be frowned upon. (And that ensures that original authors get the credit)

[D_ManXX2]

I am sure if someone has right understanding when asking said modder,  i am sure he would remove that watermark so others can improve it even more.

 

if it was not meant to updated by others then your screwed.

 

It will encourage modders to seek permission first. and upload second. right now it upload and let;s hope said modder does not mind me changing it witch is the wrong mind said to begin with.

 

 

btw this not about any vanilla asset we seen so many people changing vanilla asset only bethesda has the rights to those.

 

This is all the work done by modders on their own using tools like blender or 3dmax. who creates stuff from the ground up.

[Misplaced Reality]

I am sure if someone has right understanding when asking said modder,  i am sure he would remove that watermark so others can improve it even more.

 

if it was not meant to updated by others then your screwed.

 

It will encourage modders to seek permission first. and upload second. right now it upload and let;s hope said modder does not mind me changing it witch is the wrong mind said to begin with.

 

Why, should I send an e-mail to Bethesda each time I feel like modifying Whiterun asking them for permission? How does this work? Derivatives should be able to made freely, without permission, as long the content from the original mod is properly credited ensuring the author's authenticity, and as long the said derivative in itself brings something new to the table.

 

There shouldn't be a need to ask permission to make derivatives, the problem comes down to giving the proper authors their respective credit and ensuring that people are aware that what they are using contains material that is a derivative.

[Lagoon0654]

Any mod can be improved to fit everyone's views. Just a fast search through screenshots of games can show you how people can put effort to take different mods to give an unique feeling and result, and perhaps even your mods can play a role in that. And watermarking will prevent a lot of the customization that mods are supposed to provide towards the player.

 

Imagine if you have this cool piece of armour, tried to re texture it to suit your tastes and by the moment you try to do that an author's name pops up and ruins the armour as a whole, discouraging the other modder to further be interested into doing something, like creating new mods based on other mods.

 

 

Well I was just making a shitty sarcastic post..

But I'll be a little serious this time;

 

 

I have, and always have, modified other peoples work to my needs. Be it a CK/GECK edit, or actual re-texture.

But I never release said modifications, and if I happen to post an image showing such, I'll credit the original authors.

 

(Mind you I've been asked a lot by others if I would give them my re-worked textures. Answers always no)

 

 

 

If I see an authors signature/watermark on a texture, I simple copy the portion as a new layer as to not  disturb it.

If the watermark is placed on the armor itself, well I just say hell with it and keep the file unchanged.

 

It's just how I am. I've been sued by an artist because they happened to catch wind I altered their artwork to fit into a message board avatar. Though that's unrelated and the artist was just out for blood it seemed.

 

 

But as I said, if the signature is on the used portion of the armor then I don't deal with it. Not because I'm afraid of anything, I just leave it as is.

[Misplaced Reality]

 

Well I was just making a shitty sarcastic post..

But I'll be a little serious this time;

 

 

I have, and always have, modified other peoples work to my needs. Be it a CK/GECK edit, or actual re-texture.

But I never release said modifications, and if I happen to post an image showing such, I'll credit the original authors.

 

(Mind you I've been asked a lot by others if I would give them my re-worked textures. Answers always no)

 

 

 

If I see an authors signature/watermark on a texture, I simple copy the portion as a new layer as to not  disturb it.

If the watermark is placed on the armor itself, well I just say hell with it and keep the file unchanged.

 

It's just how I am. I've been sued by an artist because they happened to catch wind I altered their artwork to fit into a message board avatar. Though that's unrelated and the artist was just out for blood it seemed.

 

 

But as I said, if the signature is on the used portion of the armor then I don't deal with it. Not because I'm afraid of anything, I just leave it as is.

 

 

It is your own decision whether to share derivatives, I am arguing that derivatives and conversions should be made freely without relying on an authors permission, as long the author is given proper credits, and it is ensured that people understand who created parts of the derivative mods.

 

I want to ensure that future development is encouraged and that will exist, because permission asking or that if an author changes their mood it could mean death penalty to many derivatives on any of the big communities is unacceptable. Real work happens when someone makes a derivative mod or a conversion and it has to be respected just the same way as the original work.

 

I also appreciate that you are giving a serious answer.

 

[D_ManXX2]

Why, should I send an e-mail to Bethesda each time I feel like modifying Whiterun asking them for permission? How does this work? Derivatives should be able to made freely, without permission, as long the content from the original mod is properly credited ensuring the author's authenticity, and as long the said derivative in itself brings something new to the table.

 

Check the EULA as long as you don't sell any of vanilla asset you can still release any deriative work from it. a modder is different he did not make a EULA and made with blender so it his property only. not Bethesda.

 

I could make a clean animation in blender and sell it and Bethesda can do nothing about it because it was mine to begin with.

 

btw i think i been taking this way off-topic, i almost forgot it was being banned from nexus thread.

[Misplaced Reality]

 

Check the EULA as long as you don't sell any of vanilla asset you can still release any deriative work from it. a modder is different he did not make a EULA and made with blender so it his property only. not Bethesda.

 

I could make a clean animation in blender and sell it and Bethesda can do nothing about it because it was mine to begin with.

 

 

It doesn't change my opinion. Derivatives and conversions should be allowed to exist, without requirement of permission as long the original author is credited. Just because you own something it doesn't mean you have to prevent others from developing something newer based on that.

 

Creation Kit EULA: http://store.steampowered.com/eula/eula_202480

[Lagoon0654]

At the end of the day, the whole copyright deal just wears me out.

 

lol. If i ever did make a mod from complete scratch, well I'd be like what reality wants; I'd allow permission as long as I just get a simple line of thank you/credit.