The moment you slap a Price Tag on it, it’s no longer about “Passion”. I’m okay with the modder having like a Patreon or whatever donations mechanism they’d like. But don’t lock your mod behind it. I can’t stand that nonsense.
Good. Mods must forever remain a passion project and not something incentivized by money.
Tell that to Bethesda.
I dream of a world where people can follow their passion without having to worry about where their next meal will come from.
Team Fortress was a mod. Counterstrike was a mod. DotA was a mod. Really depends on what they can do with dedicated effort rather than just simply a passion project.
VR mods, they aren’t really worth it IMO, I even resent the game devs who charge for separate VR releases that they usually don’t even end up maintaining across different VR hardware. IMO the problem with VR is that people try to do too much with it and try to Wii-ficy the experience, and this is at the hardware level given how usually you can’t even use your keyboard and mouse, having to resort to the VR controllers they came with for a much slower and less fluid experience.
Yeah, and these mods were so good that they became their own games.
If you want to do that, you’re a game developer. So license (or develop) an engine, and also pay for all the non-permissively licensed other code you use.
Congratulations, you’re now on a solid base for charging money for your game.
So in other words, “Mods must forever remain a passion” is false, which was the point I was addressing. But it doesn’t even have to be a game, like say, Virtual Desktop, Wallpaper Engine, 3D Mark, etc.
edit: I go on to describe what the developer was actually doing, apparently, so it would not have gone “very differently” as I suggested. Welp, it is CD Projekt RED. They talk the talk, but the devil is in the details with them [See Devotion].
If this developer had released a software tool named, say, VRossify, and it was released as a VR launcher that offered VR for multiple games that didn’t have it, the discussion could be very different. He could sell this and provide the plugins that mod support for each particular game freely. Instead, he released them as paid mods for what the developers are likely also considering, a dedicated VR release.
He tied himself to one particular IP each time while trying to monetize it, and that’s basically a sure way to guarantee a loss if it ever got to trial. Ain’t no host that’s going to ignore a DMCA notice in such a clear cut case of IP violation IMO.He’d have to make it clear that it is providing its own platform and not just use it as a excuse to profit off of notable game releases. He could do things like focus on Unreal Engine games, which would net him a good amount of support for games that could benefit from VR.At the end of the day, though, it’s up to each developer, and he might have to remove games on request from the support of said software tool. Then it might be up to a third party to provide a plugin for said platform, or just replace it entirely if its too basic. At this point,~~ given his attitude I assume he has burned bridges with CD Projekt RED~~ (these are the guys who after Devotion have not allowed future Red Candle Games on GOG even when they’ve notably been on Steam, EGS, and Humble Bundle),
but if he had had foresight to present it that way first, it might not have gone the way it has(edit: Na, they decided to be assholes anyway. Guess there wasn’t enough horse bestiality in the mod.)
if i make a game, its gonna be open source. Modders can charge for their mods all they want, as long as they are open source. Earn the fruits of your labor, modding queens and kings, AGPL ftw. Just like elementary os can charge for its binaries, they earn that right
Good
I don’t understand how this is legal action? If the project does not contain copyrighted material itself, then how in earth is CD Projekt Red able to take it down? A modder should be able to decide themselves if they charge money or not for a mod, as long as no copyrighted (or other protected) material is included.
I don’t understand how this is legal action?
Well just the use of the trademark would probably be enough to file a DMCA takedown. But beyond that modding the game entails using its modding tools, which have an EULA, which stipulates no paywalls for mods.
Technically the modder has legal recourse, they could argue fair use and file a counter-notice. Then CDPR would have to sue in front of a court. But given the financial and legal risks it seems unlikely a counter-notice will happen.
Honestly the only real chance is to come to some kind of agreement with CDPR, which they seemed to heavily telegraph is possible in their public message (“we never allow monetization of our IP without our direct permission and/or an agreement in place”).
I see, I didn’t think about the modding tools here. I always thought such clauses in the EULA are there for “good manners”, and not something that can be used in court in example. Lot of stuff in EULAs in general are not legally enforceable.
Yeah true, but actually proving that in court costs time and money. And once you get a DMCA takedown notice you are forced to fight it or comply.
DMCA notices are just a strongly letter from an attorney, that they record sending to you for when they really sue you should they choose to do that
Software DRM legal threats preceded DMCA takedowns, but DMCA takedowns make them easier to execute.
That does not answer the core question I have. The project itself seems to be a mod and not violate any copyright, as far as I know. So assuming that, how is it legal to take it down? Companies the hoster of the mod, not the modder itself (also applicable to videos on YouTube in example) will take anything down without hesitation and questions asked, if it is a DMCA request. That does not mean its legally correct at that time and must be investigated.
So my question is, how a end user agreement can be a reason to DMCA, if the modder itself does not agreed to the EULA in example. How is it, that a company can decide if and how a product from a hobbyist is monetized, if it is not their product?
In example, do you think YouTube should be able to shutdown all third party YouTube players, because they sell the software? That would be a similar situation with this DMCA takedown.
I’m telling you what the law has historically been, not arguing with you about what it should be.
I see, but that is not what I was asking. I know that DMCA makes it easier to takedown, because the companies (like the website that hosts the files) has to take it down immediately no questions asked. I know that, my question is how this is legally right to do in this case. I am not arguing if it should be, I am asking how this is even a takedown that is requested? Because the EULA of a company is irrelevant, as it is not part of the mod itself.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management
DRM technologies[4] include licensing agreements
The ones you agree to when you install the game, like CD Projekt RED’s EULA.
https://store.steampowered.com/eula/1091500_eula_0
I assume this part, at least it’s the first one that gives them an excuse:
Don’t create, use, make available… software that interact with or affect our Games and/or Services in any way (including any unauthorised third party programs that collect information about our Games and/or Services by reading areas of memory used by our Games and/or Services to store information).
The DMCA allows the hosting service to be exempt from any legal damages if they follow up on DMCA takedowns. It would take winning or losing a lawsuit to determine how valid or invalid the argument is, not winning or losing an Internet argument, so I can only point out why it’s possible.
There are a lot of people abusing DMCA takedowns on YouTube, have you not heard about it before? Look up copyright trolls DMCA on YouTube if you want more info on it.
There are a lot of people abusing DMCA takedowns on YouTube, have you not heard about it before? Look up copyright trolls DMCA on YouTube if you want more info on it.
This is what I am actually asking. Does CD Projekt Red abuse the DMCA system here?
Depends on your take on the law I cited.
It doesn’t need to be legal: Patreon, like Valve and any other big company, deem request from other companies as top priority over any commoner.
Patreon think “we may have extra business with CDProjeck, but mod authors are nobody that need to work for free at best”.
So they know who need to be sacrificed.
They should hire this guy.
