Absolutely. The assumption is that Ubisoft, or any other company which licences a game for use tolerate mods because, as you point out, mods cannot be used without purchasing the original game and could well serve to add to a game's longevity.
Since Ubisoft's lawyers have never come a-knocking on the doors of the modders ( I understand that there's even constructive dialogue between the Dev Team and some modders ) the other assumption is that Ubisoft are happy to have their games modded and are content to turn a blind-eye to those parts of the license which deal with modifying, transmitting etc.
That said, if we set aside the essential "illegality" of modding a game, as the developers seem content to do, the basics of intellectual copyright apply to mods and additions not created by Ubisoft. I don't think it's ever been tested in court, but the question as to who owns the intellectual property involved in a mod could be hard fought by both the madders and the original developers. Since modding is not done for personal profit and the developers seem content to allow it to happen, there's a good chance a court would find that the modders own the intelelctual copyright of their own work.
As you say, it's moot, but I do believe we all ought to behave within the spirit of the law and acknowledge the "ownership" modders have over their work.
|