Modding Ethics

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Its about time we had this out. IN PUBLIC... and start formulating the ground rules that prevent further serious problems from developing.

New modders shouldn't have to feel their way around in the dark as many of the reputable modders that contribute here have had to do in the past.

Originally Posted by Penelope_Grey

GWX uses several stand alone Mods as part of the overall package, with credit given...

Serious question: Did the GWX team go to each and every creator of the stand alone mods and ask for permission to use them in the GWX Supermod? Is it practical or even possible to do that?

EDIT: I am not trying to be funny and awkward, just I cannot see what the harm is in using what exists to make something else for people to enjoy? If credit is given and acknowledgement of origins where is the trouble? I genuinely don't understand how what is happening is so terrible.

It has always been the policy of the GW/GWX dev team to ask for permission for EACH mod made outside of the team to be included.

The vast majority of the core elements of GW/GWX were designed "in-house."

Where former (now inactive) SH3 modding members and permissions are concerned, emails and/or PM's were sent and several days allowed to pass... If no response was found, modlets were included and detailed credits documented in the GWX manual.

The only time this policy was consciously violated, I take direct blame for. Early on, prior to the release of GW version 1.0 well over a year ago... (our first release) We notified Der Teddy Barr that we were going to include the stand alone ship damage models he had released and properly credited them.

This caused a great deal of heartburn for DTB (naturally in retrospect I suppose) and resulted in a public apology posted in this forum by me... (now archived) I got flamed... and I suppose I deserved it, at the very least for a breach of ettiquett.

As a result, the entire ship damage model system was redesigned from scratch by vonHelsching, Ref, and AG124 over the course of several months.

Many of you have seen accusations made by Beery that we based our work on, or engulfed the "Real U-boat" mod. This is absolutely baseless and untrue. NOTHING modded directly by Berry was included. When confronted directly, Beery did not produce ONE detail... only accusations.

Indeed, and in no small way thanks to Pablo author and keeper of the GWX manual (referred to by us as "Das Buch" lol) I feel that currently, we have the best available documentation and crediting. It protects both GWX modders and external contributors to the GWX mod both past and present.

to be continued shortly...

[Spytrx]

I don't think the idea of the other thread being closed was for more threads of that nature to spring up elsewhere -

let's leave it where it is before a flaming war starts to ruin what has become a great home to many of us...

[danlisa]

Originally Posted by Spytrx

I don't think the idea of the other thread being closed was for more threads of that nature to spring up elsewhere -

let's leave it where it is before a flaming war starts to ruin what has become a great home to many of us...

This is not a thread to discuss the why's or wherefore's of the issue raised in the, now locked, thread but to rather find some agreement between all of us as to how any modder should proceed if he/she wish to produce a mod.

I think it needs discussing otherwise we shall see this situation again & again.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Originally Posted by Spytrx

I don't think the idea of the other thread being closed was for more threads of that nature to spring up elsewhere -

let's leave it where it is before a flaming war starts to ruin what has become a great home to many of us...

Well, I tell ya what. When you've spent two years creating and contributing (even if it is freeware!!!!) maybe you'll understand why it is that people feel close to their work... and that it truly is worth defending.

More than one person has felt that we... or others have been "unreasonable."

The fact remains that there are too many "unwritten rules" that modders sometimes have to feel their way around in the dark for.

... and the fact remains that some "modders" just don't give a crap.

No one wants to hold back modding in general. If you don't want big flame wars... clear rules need to be in place.

Clear rules have not been in place and the absence of the same breeds rust and mold... and lets any old joe just waltz in and say "I'll take that! Thank you very much!!!"

Didn't this happen with X1 versus Sergbuto? (Ummm... Yeah!)

Probably the most boring and tedious part of modding is making sure things are done the right way. Yes it is a PITA. It akes a little effort. However, if you are a non-modder who enjoys the labor of someone else... and want to thank a modder... Thank them by supporting an ethical process and an ethical evolution of modding.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

FYI, I have no problem at all with Penelope... She asked a good question.

[Penelope_Grey]

Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann

FYI, I have no problem at all with Penelope... She asked a good question.

Thanks, and I appreciated the answer. I didn't understand at first hence I asked but lately I am seeing the whole idea of how the modding and freeware principles should ideally work.

[Spytrx]

Originally Posted by Kpt. Lehmann

When you've spent two years creating and contributing (even if it is freeware!!!!) maybe you'll understand why it is that people feel close to their work... and that it truly is worth defending.

this is the kind of assumption that lead to bad feelings - you don't know anything about me and you already talk down on me? Or do you feel you are higher standing than me because you have posted here two years? I have to remember that...

Originally Posted by danlisa

This is not a thread to discuss the why's or wherefore's of the issue raised in the, now locked, thread but to rather find some agreement between all of us as to how any modder should proceed if he/she wish to produce a mod.

I think it needs discussing otherwise we shall see this situation again & again.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the matter in question happend on another board? So you can discuss and make rules and regs all you want, if these things happen elsewhere you have no control over it - and discussing it here (with accusations and name calling) doesn't help matters much either but spoils a good board.

I have been SMod on another board for many years and saw it destroyed (literally) by such things. If you want to create rules (or just list them), then do so but without referencing to quotes and such like, that is all I am saying...

Oh, and if it needs discussing - shouldn't that be in the relevant forum rather than here?

[Kpt. Lehmann]

Originally Posted by Spytrx

this is the kind of assumption that lead to bad feelings - you don't know anything about me and you already talk down on me? Or do you feel you are higher standing than me because you have posted here two years? I have to remember that...

Correct me if I am wrong, but the matter in question happend on another board? So you can discuss and make rules and regs all you want, if these things happen elsewhere you have no control over it - and discussing it here (with accusations and name calling) doesn't help matters much either but spoils a good board.

I have been SMod on another board for many years and saw it destroyed (literally) by such things. If you want to create rules (or just list them), then do so but without referencing to quotes and such like, that is all I am saying...

Oh, and if it needs discussing - shouldn't that be in the relevant forum rather than here?

@Spytrx, No I am not "Talking down to you." In fact I think your view of me is simply colored from a previous difference in view... and I feel this fuels your desire to counter me.

This is entirely the best place I think to address modding ethics. This is a mods workshop after all.

Regarding "feeling close to the work" ... that is not an "assumption" as you say... but the pure and simple truth. Any artist or designer would naturally feel this way after a great deal of time and personal sacrifice to see a thing through.

I'm sure you'd feel the same way. I recognize that you've been other places before... but you have not been here for this story to unfold. No offence, but you joined us last month did you not?

I think that referencing prior problems... including our own... is entirely appropriate. It is why I opened with a mistake that I personally take responsibility for.

The fact remains that permissions should be sought wherever possible... especially concerning "active" modding efforts and projects built by modders that call this place home... and have passed through its halls before.

This is not an unreasonable concept.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I have to go to work unfortunately... Hopefully, the moderators will see the need for this discussion... or it will only be doomed to repeat.

[danlisa]

Agreed.

My hope or wish is that we can find some common ground/ground rules that we can all abide & work to rather than rehashing old news.

Thanks for clarifiying that Kpt. I was 100% sure it was the case but couldn't say so on my own volition.

Pssss, Pen, don't feel singled out, eh?

[Kpt. Lehmann]

I believe it to be wholly and completely unethical for one person or team of persons to totally subsume and include a mod package. (especially when still currently and actively supported by its original creators)

Things might have been a little different if Carotio just made a tweaks package to go on top of GWX using JGSME... However, Carotio includes the entirety of the base GWX mod... and appears to depend on the GWX title to draw users.

(...And he wonders why we just might have a problem with that... or why HanSolo78 might have a problem with the same happening to the War Ace Campaign. I think a wooden man would have a problem with that.)

I also feel that lazy crediting is a slap in the face. Case in point: The "Ultimate" sound mod for SH4 "By Gunther Hessler/Hunky_Punk." The individual in question simply lifted a great deal of the sound files from GWX and plunked them into SH4 after crediting the AOTD group... making no mention of the people listed in the GWX sound credits or the GWX mod itself.

Proper crediting is at times a real pain in the a$$. However, if you can release a mod... you can spend a bit of time writing in those whose work came before if you add to their file(s). Even if you don't like the guy... it only takes a moment's pain to do the right thing.

[Chock]

First I'd like to point out that I think GWX is great, and I do use it, and on the subject of mods, if I post any mods, I regard it as fair game for anyone to do with them as they will. If they credit me, great, if not, I'm not that bothered. For all I know, there might even be some stuff I did in GWX, I've never been that bothered to find out.

While I'm sure you took the trouble to contact a lot of modders if it was hoped that their work was to be included, I seriously doubt anyone phoned up Peter Gabriel and got his permission to use the intro to Sky Blue on the loading screen, so there is a copyright issue with GWX before you even get to the simulation part that goes way beyond upsetting a modder. Similarly, I doubt Wolfgang Peterson or Bavaria Studios got a call, and there are most definitely some sounds from Das Boot in GWX too.

Originally the SH3 devs tried to get permission to do this (with Das Boot) for SH3 in its early stages, but the cost was prohibitive (seemed like a short-sighted decision to me actually, since it would have amounted to a huge plug for further Das Boot DVD sales, but there you go).

So from this I can only assume that 'It has always been the policy of the GW/GWX dev team to ask for permission for EACH mod made outside of the team to be included.' is not exactly true.
Not trying to be funny here by the way, just pointing out that there are wider issues, than if 'submodder666' or whoever gets their work snaffled.

On the subject of sending emails and PMs to modders to ask permission for inclusion of their mod, a failure on their part to respond should not be taken as a blanket permission from them that you are good to go. As I've pointed out, anyone can do what they like with anything I mod and post on the 'net, but that's just me, and I always stick a read me in there pointing out that some of the stuff I've used might ultimately belong to UBISOFT or whoever.

I think if people make stuff available, they kind of forfeit the right to treat it as 'their ball' which no-one can tamper with, but I do think using the copyrighted work of people outside of the original game files, which do not fall into this category is not a very good idea and ultimately weakens the main point you make, which as I say, is fine by me.

[GoldenRivet]

It has been my experience with years and years of flight simulator modding that when anyone creates a mod for flight simulator there was never any hard feelings if that persons mod was taken and slightly changed or improved or tweaked and then reposted as a new mod AS LONG AS credit was given to the original modder.

Lehmann is right, there are too many fuzzy lines out there and not enough codes of conduct to cover everyones actions.

eveyone here has contributed well thought out responses to this thread so far, i hope we can keep it that wayt.

Though i noticed many similarities between RealUBoat and GWX they are two completely different animals suited to two completely different play styles, i have used both mods extensively. was there inspiration drawn from Real Uboats for the creation of GWX? maybe there was and myabe there was not.

All i know is that there are only so many ways to draw a stick figure and have it come out looking NOTHING like the other guy's stick figure - if that makes sense? or what i guess im trying to say is that since SH3 is based on historical events and everyone is shooting for some level of historical accuracy these mods are going to come across with tons of similarities.

Im not really sure where this started... i like GWX, i like RUB, i have only run a cross a couple of mods that while being neat ideas didnt suit my play style and with that said i was under the impression that all of the modders pretty much got along (and i still think for the most part that is the case) BUT I think the modders of these sub sims might stand to learn a bit from the modders of things like Microsoft Flight Simulator, and that is...

Unless the readme file says otherwise any other modder can tweak your mod to make a different one as long as the original modder is HEAVILY thanked and credited for it... If that is not what a modder desires - place it in the readme file (No person(s) may modify this mod without the express written permission of *insert name*) for example.

[ILL USE GWX IN THIS EXAMPLE NOW] though i think another neat idea that might serve to chop off the head of the "hey thats MY mod" snake might be to lose the howling wolf intro to GWX and place like a 20 second clip black screen with white text "The entire GWX team would like to thank all of the subsim modders and community for their continued support. Special thanks go to the following:" and then list every person and their association with every mod incorporated into the game.

just my two bits worth.

[JScones]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

It has been my experience with years and years of flight simulator modding that when anyone creates a mod for flight simulator there was never any hard feelings if that persons mod was taken and slightly changed or improved or tweaked and then reposted as a new mod AS LONG AS credit was given to the original modder.

Lehmann is right, there are too many fuzzy lines out there and not enough codes of conduct to cover everyones actions.

I'm gonna rant on the SH3 to SH4 "conversion" (for want of a better word) trend that seems to be happening at the moment.

I've noticed with the many conversions of units from SH3 to SH4, numerous modders are quick for the glory, but slow to recognise the source. A few people come to mind.

In other words, I agree with you. If I released something and someone added it to a bigger package, even tweaked it, I wouldn't mind. I wouldn't even expect to be asked for permission. However, if the credits merely read "Converted by me, oh, and BTW, thanks to the GWX team", I wouldn't be happy, especially when the full credits are in the GWX manual for all to see. I mean, in six months time that ship I worked on for three months becomes remembered as merely "the ship X converted to SH4".

Now, whether the underlying files belong to Ubisoft is irrelevant (in a purely crediting context). The fact is someone from the community (objectively) "improved" them. Their contribution should be remembered along the way from taking "SH3: the mediocre subsim" to "SH3: the great subsim".

Also, some people make snide remarks when guys like Sergbuto or the Kpt try to address this lackadaisical behaviour. These guys should be supported by the community, not ostracised. And it's usually only the non-modders that get on their high-horse and blame these guys for "ruining it for everyone". To them I say, "come back after you've sweated on making a mod only to see it credited as 'Converted to SH4 by X'". Ironically, it's the snide remarks from the few that stop the many "real" modders from continuing. One can only then convert so many units, if you know what I mean. Simple narrow-minded thinking.

Perhaps even more concerning to the original modders (although it should be the players that are concerned) is that it's not just the credits that are given lazy treatment, it's the "conversion" as well - in some instances only half the job is done. Did anyone not think that the original modders may have ideas for importing their models, with the attention that is deserved, into SH4? Nup. Easier just to hammer it in and get it out "because they can".

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Though i noticed many similarities between RealUBoat and GWX they are two completely different animals suited to two completely different play styles, i have used both mods extensively. was there inspiration drawn from Real Uboats for the creation of GWX? maybe there was and myabe there was not.

All i know is that there are only so many ways to draw a stick figure and have it come out looking NOTHING like the other guy's stick figure - if that makes sense? or what i guess im trying to say is that since SH3 is based on historical events and everyone is shooting for some level of historical accuracy these mods are going to come across with tons of similarities.

Many people seem to forget this VERY valid point.

Various people have "claimed" GWX files as theirs. I'm sure people have also claimed parts of RUb, or NYGM, or WAC as theirs too. Simple fact is, if we asked twenty people here to tell us when, say, 7 Flotilla started operations, all twenty would go straight to uboat.net and come back with the same answer. Why? Because history is static - it can't be changed. So just because one mod has an IX with 22 torpedos and another mod comes along with the same, it doesn't give anyone the right to accuse the second mod of "mod theft" on that basis alone.

Originally Posted by Chock

On the subject of sending emails and PMs to modders to ask permission for inclusion of their mod, a failure on their part to respond should not be taken as a blanket permission from them that you are good to go.

My preference is to contact them as per their preferred channel outlined in their readme file. I always state my wishes in the affirmative. In other words, "We're planning on adding this to GWX, with full credit to you of course, pls let me know if that is not acceptable". If this is done via the modder's preferred interaction channel, then I have no problem using the mod if they do not respond. I must admit though, that every such email or PM I have sent has been responded to with a positive "go for it!".

Originally Posted by Chock

I think if people make stuff available, they kind of forfeit the right to treat it as 'their ball' which no-one can tamper with...

I agree. Once it's out there you can do nothing about it, and it would be naive to think that you could continue to control its use.

However, from a social perspective, some sense of moral decency from subsequent users would be appreciated, and that is what I see as being argued here. Or if not, then it's what I'd like to see as being argued here.

Originally Posted by Chock

While I'm sure you took the trouble to contact a lot of modders if it was hoped that their work was to be included, I seriously doubt anyone phoned up Peter Gabriel and got his permission to use the intro to Sky Blue on the loading screen, so there is a copyright issue with GWX before you even get to the simulation part that goes way beyond upsetting a modder. Similarly, I doubt Wolfgang Peterson or Bavaria Studios got a call, and there are most definitely some sounds from Das Boot in GWX too.

This is a good point, and one which would certainly undermine any "we ask everyone for permission" argument (for the record I am against the use of copyrighted material for this exact reason). But, we seem to be combining numerous different moral issues here. I would like to see credit improvements first from the minority of "offenders" before tackling copyright infringement, which opens a totally different can of worms going right back to the basic "can we even mod these files?" (and indeed results in a new thread on the topic every few months or so with no resolution, but copious amounts of personal flaming and "bush-lawyer" sproutings.

[WilhelmSchulz.]

With all thoes who say once you release a mod its out of your hands, I agrie but... It may be legaly ok but socialy its a diffrent matter. I agrie with LScones, all communitys have unoffical social guidlines. Modding included. And with the increasing # of thoe who dont care and want all the Glory for themselvs thoes become strained. One of the top rules(possibly #1) is m my book(and Im shure evryones) is "Give credit where credt is due". And the ones who break that are only dergrading themselvs.