The right of mod users

[windpl]

 

I remind you that game EULA come first, and it states that mod author dose not own shit. You can't claim copyright violation on something that shouldn't exist. So all that "legal" talk is just pointless.

 

 

If that is the case how legal is monatize of mods by users then ?? earning stuf that is not yours how does that make sense now ?? Well that is not true that user don't own anything if the stuff is created with blender then the users who created it is protected by blender Eula and if bethesda take claim of that then they will have to fight this off with the blender community and they will lose this. the same goes for 3dmax. bethesda don't own shit if they take this away from users who used third party tools to create this in the first place.

 

We users are protected by blender Eula..

 

 

I do not know to which case you reefer too. Selling mods is illegal. Last case of paid modding was a total different cup of cake. Eula was modified to allow it, and it worked on different monstrous abomination of sell. In basic modder weren't selling shit, Bethesda did (or valve) and this wasn't even a thing, it was service that could be cancelled plus Bethesda or valve did not take any responsibility for it and by law stand point it shouldn't even been born. I also remind you that you should be able to sell off games from your steam, it is not sold as service - but as all we know we can't and we wont be able in foreseen future. And i side tracked, to point valve or Bethesda did deal with blender so blender got it cut.

[Impulseman45]

From someone much older and wiser in the ways of the world.

 

Look, Its very simple. Anyone that has made an actual 3D model that is not based on game assets, but is still plugged into the game has the right to pull their mod down or decide if someone can us it or not. The mod in question is not part of Skyrim. It was custom work, it belongs to the owner, period.

As to why, I have a feeling it all goes back to a certain depiction in one of your pieces of "art" depicting a certain very well known fictional under age character engaging in sex with adults...

 

First off, you have to be very careful when depicting fully copyrighted characters. Many very good artistes have been hit with DMCA take downs over depictions of copyrighted characterizations. Especially those dealing with sexual content. 

 

Second your art can not cross the lines of what is considered legal and decent. This piece crossed both lines. I am sure the mod author felt it in his best interest to put a stop to this activity ASAP. I would personally do the same, and I do believe most mod makers that make nude bodies do stipulate that certain depictions can not be publicly made with them. That has been a standing point from back in the Morrowind days. The mod maker does not want to have to deal with the legal backlash over their work depicting illegal activities. Period!

 

So it is you, that has to consider this when you are doing what you are doing. Most of your work is interesting, some of it doesn't phase me. But when you did that certain piece, I knew you had gone to far. If you lived in the USA you might be in some real legal trouble over such a piece of art. A depiction of child porn, no matter how much you want to claim its just art, is still child porn. And the piece you made really crossed the line. So I don't blame the mod author at all for telling you to cease and desist. He has every right to change his usage policy, and make it retroactive if his work is being used to make illegal content. He must protect himself from legal action just like anyone else.

 

So you may be complaining about being told not to use the mod in question, you brought this on yourself for the depictions you made with his assets. And yes any mod maker can change the rules of usage and make those rules retroactive. Every big corporation does this all the time. So you can't simply claim that because you are using an older version that preceded that new rules it is not covered. That is wrong and if you keep using those assets you will become a content thief and very possibly get that DMCA notice that is waiting in the wings.

 

Just my 2 cents. And please, don't bash me on this. Go to his site and have a look back down the list and you can find the piece of art in questions if its still there. It does cross the line of what should be seen in the public.

[Ixum]

If this truly is the case I do not get why he wouldn't just let me know and I can have that one vid removed. I can't really recall which one it would be since I have close to a thousand vids, of which maybe half or a third uses SAM

[darkconsole]

my mods used to have a EULA that stated you had to have a butt in at all times while your game character had one in. it was really hard to enforce though, and it turns out the only lawyer willing to take the case wasn't actually a lawyer he just played one on the internet.

[Impulseman45]

OK, I will just state the one. Its the one depicting Geoffrey form Game Of Thrones getting taken by the various guards. Until just recently the real actor was a minor, so even the fact you had created a character that looked like him could get you into trouble. You have to admit everyone knows that he is supposed to be a 15 year old boy playing a very bad King and so that is the reason it crosses the line. I am not a prude in any way and although the work is pretty well done, its the subject matter that is at issue. Look I know that in some countries the age of consent is somewhat fluid. But most of the western world now days treat anyone under the of 18 a minor and any depiction of sex with someone that is under that magic line, is crossing the line. I am also aware that this is just a modern day view, and that in past and ancient times such activity between men of those ages was considered totally normal and in some cases a right of passage into manhood. Anyone wanting to rebuke that statement needs to go back and do some serious historical checking before posting on this subject. But that is not the world in witch we live. This may or may not be the point at which he made the choice. The point is that he did make that choice and unfortunately you do need to comply with his wishes. I also think that he was was possibly seeing it that almost all references the the SAM body were starting to point in your direction. Not something you set out to do, but your art has a following and it it has spread far and wide and he might be taking issue with that. But in the end its is his choice.  I know its a blow to your art, but in the end it might make you a bit more aware of how things work and were not to go with some of things you make. Yes it might be considered a form of censorship, but sometimes you need to do some self censoring to get by in the world. Besides, there are other bodies you can use, and in fact you could learn to make your own. That way no one can take it from you. In the end it might not have all the features you had before, but it might be enough for you  to continue to work. I mean in the end it was just one person taking an assets away. It not like Bethesda came along and told you to stop using Skyrim to make pornographic art. Technically they could do that. But so far they have never gone after anyone for this use of the game. I might even be able to give you a few pointer on how to create your bodies for the game. I have made animals and NPC's really are not that different. So it can be done. And I might be able to point you to a few other sources along the way. Give me a PM here if you want to converse further outside the open chat.

[Ixum]

OK, I will just state the one. Its the one depicting Geoffrey form Game Of Thrones getting taken by the various guards. Until just recently the real actor was a minor, so even the fact you had created a character that looked like him could get you into trouble. You have to admit everyone knows that he is supposed to be a 15 year old boy playing a very bad King and so that is the reason it crosses the line. I am not a prude in any way and although the work is pretty well done, its the subject matter that is at issue. Look I know that in some countries the age of consent is somewhat fluid. But most of the western world now days treat anyone under the of 18 a minor and any depiction of sex with someone that is under that magic line, is crossing the line. I am also aware that this is just a modern day view, and that in past and ancient times such activity between men of those ages was considered totally normal and in some cases a right of passage into manhood. Anyone wanting to rebuke that statement needs to go back and do some serious historical checking before posting on this subject. But that is not the world in witch we live. This may or may not be the point at which he made the choice. The point is that he did make that choice and unfortunately you do need to comply with his wishes. I also think that he was was possibly seeing it that almost all references the the SAM body were starting to point in your direction. Not something you set out to do, but your art has a following and it it has spread far and wide and he might be taking issue with that. But in the end its is his choice.  I know its a blow to your art, but in the end it might make you a bit more aware of how things work and were not to go with some of things you make. Yes it might be considered a form of censorship, but sometimes you need to do some self censoring to get by in the world. Besides, there are other bodies you can use, and in fact you could learn to make your own. That way no one can take it from you. In the end it might not have all the features you had before, but it might be enough for you  to continue to work. I mean in the end it was just one person taking an assets away. It not like Bethesda came along and told you to stop using Skyrim to make pornographic art. Technically they could do that. But so far they have never gone after anyone for this use of the game. I might even be able to give you a few pointer on how to create your bodies for the game. I have made animals and NPC's really are not that different. So it can be done. And I might be able to point you to a few other sources along the way. Give me a PM here if you want to converse further outside the open chat.

 

I based King Joffrey on the show character, as is evident in the way my character looks. He was 19 at the time of his death (the show made them all a lot older than in the books). http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Joffrey_Baratheon The actor was 22 at the time he left the show.

[Impulseman45]

Well the show was on for 6 years so I may have not quite got the ages right. But My understanding that in the TV show he was still under age. He was supposed to be just a year or so older than Sansa and she was 14 when she went to Kings Landing. It is beside the point, in the book or in the show he still comes very much across as an immature child. Take is as you want.

 

The main point is that Vector has the right to ask you to stop using his art and you do have to comply or risk getting hit with a DMCA. That is the fact. If you get a DMCA it is going to effect all your art that uses his meshes, from the beginning up to the point he asked you to stop. If you do as he requests what you have can stay up and you just need to find a new source of meshes. So its an all or nothing at this point. Do you risk going a head and using an older version of his meshes and take the chance to loose everything, or just move on. But I would make doubly sure that what every you do in the future and whatever meshes you use make sure that they do not have any hidden rules about the use of them. Like making sure that they do not have a problem with them being used to publicly depict sexual acts that some may find offensive. Many people that make nude meshes do have such policies in place to protect themselves in the event that they may get used in an undesirable way. That is why I mentioned learning to make your own meshes so this will not be a problem. You do have allot of talent and it really should not be a stretch for you to come up with your own creations and then get them converted to Skyrim. I am sure that there are people right here on the site that would be more than willing to help you port your own creations into a working Skyrim mesh. The same goes for Fallout 4. Several people have already made multiple bodies for the game so its not really that hard. It is just the time it is going to take you to come up with a body of your own, or someone else that has and is willing to give you carte blanche, full freedom,  to do what you want with it. As I said before I wish you luck and hope you do take all this to heart. I will not be saying any more on the subject. I think everyone pretty much knows were this stands and the direction you need to take to continue your work.

[pinky6225]

 

 

 

 

 

I remind you that game EULA come first, and it states that mod author dose not own shit. You can't claim copyright violation on something that shouldn't exist. So all that "legal" talk is just pointless.

 

Well AFAIK only the esp/esm is bethesda's property, every other asset (meshes, textures, etc) is property of the mod author.

 

 

That dose not change anything.

 

 

Not to derail the topic, but doesn't that mean the whole debacle over people "stealing" (pc) mods and uploading them to Bethesda.net becomes moot?  If "mod authors does not own shit" then they cannot make Beth remove their (mod author) mods from Beth's own site.  No?

 

 

 

 

Asking out of curiosity.

 

 

To my knowledge even beths EULA has not been tested in court and as you have to accept the license agreement prior to use and the method of returning if you don't accept the license agreement is invalid (yet to hear of a single retailer that will take back a opened PC game and give a full refund because you didnt accept the license agreement - not sure how steam handles that situation or other electronic delivery merchants) i dont think it would stand up if ever tested

 

[Khlas]

I don't really agree with this kind of thread, but nor I agree with vector's decision. His reaction is a bit exagerated and too much. He made like three fiasco in the ladymoiraine forum and I'm really, really tired to see subjects about this.

He has the right to do what he want with these mods, but I don't think he has the right to ask people to do something that he can't have control. It's just being pretentious to be honest.
 

[MadMansGun]

i may be late to the party but...

GOOD FUCKING GRIEF!!!, why upload anything at all if you don't want anyone to use it?

[FelixGoldenHeart]

Warning

 

Guys.

 

This thread is being watched.

The mod authors can do what he/she wants. Period.

 

Avoid to post aggressive sentences and keep the tones low.

Or the thread will be closed for good.

 

So I'm confused mate. Are you suggesting that mod authors can do as they please, but not mod users? That's a little double standardish, don't you think? Once it hits the internet, it's there forever. To try and fight people off your creation with things like copyrights and such is a little absurd. Good luck to those trying to do that lol.

[Ixum]

if it is really not about me telling VP that I do not like his methods of distribution but more an issue of my content, we - as a community as a whole -  are accepting censorship. It is a slippery slope, and I know it is convenient for ppl who do not like m/m content to rally against my issue, but pls think about it. As someone pointed out it was all about underaged content, I refuted that, I do check the subjects I portray, I am not in favour of the kind of content that was implied.

[shane4244]

 

Warning

 

Guys.

 

This thread is being watched.

The mod authors can do what he/she wants. Period.

 

Avoid to post aggressive sentences and keep the tones low.

Or the thread will be closed for good.

 

So I'm confused mate. Are you suggesting that mod authors can do as they please, but not mod users? That's a little double standardish, don't you think? Once it hits the internet, it's there forever. To try and fight people off your creation with things like copyrights and such is a little absurd. Good luck to those trying to do that lol.

 

What's confusing? You create something you may do as you wish with it.

 

You use another's creation then outside your own personal use you should respect the creators wishes.

 

It's not complicated it's being a decent person or not being a decent person simple.

[shane4244]

if it is really not about me telling VP that I do not like his methods of distribution but more an issue of my content, we - as a community as a whole -  are accepting censorship. It is a slippery slope, and I know it is convenient for ppl who do not like m/m content to rally against my issue, but pls think about it. As someone pointed out it was all about underaged content, I refuted that, I do check the subjects I portray, I am not in favour of the kind of content that was implied.

 

"Censorship" gets thrown around too much. This is one person who does not wish for his content to be used in such a way. Not a communtiy keeping you from posting your content there is a difference.

[Guest]

...

 

So I'm confused mate. Are you suggesting that mod authors can do as they please, but not mod users? That's a little double standardish, don't you think? Once it hits the internet, it's there forever. To try and fight people off your creation with things like copyrights and such is a little absurd. Good luck to those trying to do that lol.

Let me explain. Probably I was not clear enough.

 

People that create contents (mod authors) can do whatever they want with their contents.

People that use this content (mod users) are free to use them for their personal use, but have to respect the author wishes for changing/republishing/distributing/etc. these contents.

People here (everybody) is free to express his/her point of view.

People here (everybody) should not be a Jerk. (Rule 1 and Rule 2)

 

People that act like jerks, by accusing blatantly other people (authors or users) get their posts removed. Or get warning points in case of not respecting the verbal warnings.

 

 

 

And I am not accusing you specifically, @FelixG0D.

 

When I post something like this, it is an invitation to everybody inside the thread to keep the tones low.

[Ixum]

 

if it is really not about me telling VP that I do not like his methods of distribution but more an issue of my content, we - as a community as a whole -  are accepting censorship. It is a slippery slope, and I know it is convenient for ppl who do not like m/m content to rally against my issue, but pls think about it. As someone pointed out it was all about underaged content, I refuted that, I do check the subjects I portray, I am not in favour of the kind of content that was implied.

 

"Censorship" gets thrown around too much. This is one person who does not wish for his content to be used in such a way. Not a communtiy keeping you from posting your content there is a difference.

 

 

Well the implied censorship was cos of assumption of underaged sex wich was refuted. So where does this claim stand? It is still out there inspite of factual evidence so, I believe we have a case of fact denial. As to the wishes of the mod creator, where does he draw the line in his demands? Seems to be based on nothing atm but personal taste, not legality and that is my big issue with this whole thing.

[FelixGoldenHeart]

Good luck in your endeavors, whoever is reading this. I'm feeling the need to be an asshole so, I'm leaving the thread now before I say something stupid and get myself banned. Least I was able to voice my opinion a bit, unlike on the nexus where I was insta-perma-banned. Not that it kept me off that site though lol. Cheers.

[Guest endgameaddiction]

Good luck in your endeavors, whoever is reading this. I'm feeling the need to be an asshole so, I'm leaving the thread now before I say something stupid and get myself banned. Least I was able to voice my opinion a bit, unlike on the nexus where I was insta-perma-banned. Not that it kept me off that site though lol. Cheers.

 

[shane4244]

 

 

Well the implied censorship was cos of assumption of underaged sex wich was refuted. So where does this claim stand? It is still out there inspite of factual evidence so, I believe we have a case of fact denial. As to the wishes of the mod creator, where does he draw the line in his demands? Seems to be based on nothing atm but personal taste, not legality and that is my big issue with this whole thing.

 

 

Yea that's what I said by what I've read so far it seems he/she didn't like the way the mod was used. It's completely personal so I'm not sure what the issue is?

 

I don't know why everyone is so hung up on the legalities of it. It's more about rather you respect the mod authors wishes or not. Do or do not it's your choice.

[darkconsole]

 

You use another's creation then outside your own personal use you should respect the creators wishes.

 

It's not complicated it's being a decent person or not being a decent person simple.

 

the problem is that vp told him his licence is "revoked" and the licence states if it is revoked you have to delete all your copies and never use the mod ever again. vp thinks he can tell you what to do in your house. this is not a matter of what ixum is doing to republish the mod content, imho.

 

Not to mention retroactive application of a EULA which is not how software versioning and licensing works.

[Ixum]

 

 

 

Well the implied censorship was cos of assumption of underaged sex wich was refuted. So where does this claim stand? It is still out there inspite of factual evidence so, I believe we have a case of fact denial. As to the wishes of the mod creator, where does he draw the line in his demands? Seems to be based on nothing atm but personal taste, not legality and that is my big issue with this whole thing.

 

 

Yea that's what I said by what I've read so far it seems he/she didn't like the way the mod was used. It's completely personal so I'm not sure what the issue is?

 

I don't know why everyone is so hung up on the legalities of it. It's more about rather you respect the mod authors wishes or not. Do or do not it's your choice.

 

 

Well there needs to be some of that. I am not a fan of censorship. LL is the only site that removed my jesus preset for racemenu, nexus kept it up, cleaned my thread. I am confused. Which one is the more progressive community?

[shane4244]

 

 

You use another's creation then outside your own personal use you should respect the creators wishes.

 

It's not complicated it's being a decent person or not being a decent person simple.

 

 

the problem is that vp told him his licence is "revoked" and the licence states if it is revoked you have to delete all your copies and never use the mod ever again. vp thinks he can tell you what to do in your house. this is not a matter of what ixum is doing to republish the mod content, imho.

 

 

Thanks for the claification. Everyone knows that's not possible. He can do whatever he wants with his private copy in his own home and can not be forced to delete it. 

 

What I don't understand is why we are still talking about this if it's not about Ixum republishing his mod. This thread is not going to change VP's mind.

[Guest]

Hello @Ixum, as soon as the "rules" are respected, then here you can do really whatever you want. No limits.

 

Now, being a jerk is not accepted. (Not your case.)

But here you cannot really do something related to politics and real religions. Probably the "Jesus Crist preset" was removed for this reason. (Not sure about that, I have to check the records.)

Other items not accepted: piracy, and child pornography.

 

 

Then if you want to do a mod where a NPC uses a really inopportune language, and you dismember it still alive, and then eat pieces of it, do it.

And actually there are some mods like this here similar.

[shane4244]

 

 

Well there needs to be some of that. I am not a fan of censorship. LL is the only site that removed my jesus preset for racemenu, nexus kept it up, cleaned my thread. I am confused. Which one is the more progressive community?

 

 

I'm assuming the reason it still remains on the Nexus is because they can keep the topic more civil because they will just start banning people where here you have to really behave badly to get banned. In most cases the thread just simply gets locked. So I would say LL is a little more progressive in that respect.

 

[Guest endgameaddiction]

Rules are meant to be broken.