Looks like the Ghostrunner developers also have an issue with paid mods running off their IP.

  • Thorry@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Because in most cases they can only do the thing they do, because another company invested millions in order to make, release, promote and support the game. Without their work, the modders would have nothing to mod. Because working out a licensing deal with every modder to split the revenue is a lot of work and most mods won’t get played much anyways, it isn’t worth the hassle. So in order to accommodate the community and keep their game active for longer, the terms are modding is allowed and even encouraged. But the other side of the bargain is that the mods can’t be sold. And usually the company reserves the right to outright ban mods using legal means. For example when people mod in far right extremism the company doesn’t want to get associated with.

    Now there is a gray area where people donate to modders or even pay outright for modders to build certain things. This is usually just fine, as long as the mod is also available for free. People aren’t paying for the mod, they are paying for the dev time, which is totally fine.

    But this modder specifically put access to his mods behind his Patreon. Sure technically you could subscribe for a month, get the mod and then stop the subscription. But that’s legally still a pay wall and in practice the mod needs to be updated often to keep working.

    So it’s pretty simple in this case, the modder was asked to stop putting the mods behind a pay wall, he didn’t, so he got a cease and desist. Usually I’m all for the little man and against the large companies, but in this case the terms were pretty clear and the modder violated them.

    Now we could have a more general discussion about how and if modders should be compensated for their time. But I feel that’s a bit beyond this single case.

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      12 hours ago

      So computer games in general should not exist, because they rely on an OS that other people invested millions into?

      • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        The licence involves with the os, the tooling, the development environments explictedly allow for these things.

        You can not be this fucking stupid can you?

        If you make something you get to dictate how others use it, if you choose to have it be free and open that’s your choice. Just as it is if you wish for it to be restricted. It’s common fucking courtesy to not steal.

        Modders cant make what they make with out the assets and game. They are using someone else’s property.

        For example thats the entire fucking crux of things like say OpenMW vs Tamriel rebuilt. One is a standalone product that doesn’t reuse assets or has any dependencies on Bethesda assets. While the other reuses them all over the place.

        OpenMW could charge for their product. It’s worthless with out the game, but still is entirely a functional standalone thing. The other literally can’t function with out someone else’s assets.

    • jaselle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Your argument is that his work relies on the work of others. But many people’s jobs rely on others, with or without their consent. Someone who works at a travel agency relies on nice destinations existing to send people to. Tour guides don’t need consent from an architect to stop and point outside their building.

      Note that people will still need to buy the game to play the mod.

      • justastranger@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        20 hours ago

        They do need permission from the building owner to bring people inside to look at it though. And that usually involves paying them.

        • jaselle@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Yes but in this context, the building owner is the person who bought the game.

          • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            15 hours ago

            It would be like the architect who drew the plans for your home getting a court order to seize your home because you installed extra cabinets that were not on his plans.

            • Magiilaro@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 hours ago

              In germany we have the “Architektenurheberrecht”.

              Architectural copyright (Architektenurheberrecht) protects an architect’s original intellectual and creative achievements, including designs, plans, and completed buildings, provided they possess a sufficient level of originality (Schöpfungshöhe).

              Architects can, and have, use this to deny changes to such buildings or claim injunctive relief, removal of the infringement, or financial damages.

              Installing extra cabinets would most likely not be enough to seize the house, but if he can convince a judge that it will sufficient change his art he could get a order to have them removed and the original space restored again.

              Not sure if this is germany only, but it shows that every bullshit is possible when it comes to laws.

              • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                18 minutes ago

                I’m surprised and also not really.

                It’s exactly the same line of thinking where someone else is given more rights over a thing than the person who owns it.

            • jaselle@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Yeah exactly. It’s crazy that people think it’s OK for game developers to have a say in what mods you can apply to your own legally purchased game.

              • Magiilaro@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 hours ago

                They don’t say anything against applying or installing the mod to the game, at least not in this case, but against making money with their IP. This should not be mixed together.