Are all mods illegal??? Seriously!!! - Page 2

joea · 09-09-06, 12:21 PM

Well having read Wulfmann's reasonable reply to my thread (and Steve was right authorise is commonwealth spelling :p) I think this is a good thread. I also see why he used my initial and not my name, I understand no offense intended.

As long as the tone is kept civil ... why can't we hash this thing out.

What was said about UBI turning a blind eye to say officially illegal mods as good business sense is actually logical. I wish there was a way, calmly and without hysteria (which I was also part of I'll admit) explain to them how uncredited mods taken without permission to use in an authoris(z)ed payware package leaves a bad taste in the hardcore community.

Now while it is true most of the sales come from casual players, but it is the hardcore community that drove the essentials of what we have in sims with mod potential. Things like dynamic campaigns, manual TDC and all that stuff come from us. So maybe it is up to us to in a polite way stand for some morality and common sense in modding? :hmm:

The Noob · 09-09-06, 01:00 PM

Okay, you're right. I just couldn't think of the Fact that anyone who Plays this game isn't at Subsim.com already...

Wulfmann · 09-09-06, 01:28 PM

After dozens of threads on this that were at best sand box fights I am impressed by a more civil and intellectual series of constructive responses of the topic.

First, I believe we can all agree despite what the read me said and/or infers Ubi has made a number of statements that encourage making mods even requesting them.

That leads me to believe this is a standard read me cover all bases to be used when we can apply it user agreement.

However the fact they have instigated it in the agreement gives them at least some advantage.
What I mean is unless someone can prove and is willing to do so in a court of law UBI can exercise its right to claim any file it owns that has been modified still belongs to them and not the modifier.

This control seems to allow them to ax any mod they consider detrimental to future releases like a Pacific Mod but aside from that I can not remember them making any complaint about any mod.

Then, of course, the fact they have a user’s agreement that retains the ownership of modified files allows them to authorize use by X-1.
If I read this right X-1 could have gone bananas on using whatever they wanted but (in the new Med release) only made a few additions that may have actually been unintentional.
I know they have hired or acquired mods from people here that asked it be unannounced.
Is it possible a few honest mistakes were made?
Is it possible, don’t get mad now, we’re doing really good, but if the read me has merit can you see UBI allowing X-1 to use SH3 files it owns and if that means the modified versions then couldn’t X-1 legally use any and all files including Greywolves and or NYGM?
As morally wrong as this would be and I know they have no such plans the fact might be they could have been really mean if they wanted.
Or, am I mistaken????
I am not asking for right and wrong opinions or WWJD as we all know these free mods made the game much better and using them without permission is plain wrong.
Let us keep that as a basic premise that any unauthorized commercial use of any free mod would wrong.
However, what is the legal opinion?
Forget WWJD and ask what would Johnny Cochran do!
Wulfmann

joea · 09-09-06, 02:32 PM

Well Johnny would ask for a glove fitting first. :p

Seriously, first off we need to look into what may have been borrowed, stolen, etc. Serg made a rather long list, which included some "maybes" and "need further investigation." The one ship included as a placeholder may have indeed been a mistake, especially if as you say CP is one or two guys (I think). This really needs to be cleared up.

Second, look at what mods have been made and what in the sim is open to being modded. Maybe look at other sims too, best example is the grand old MSFS which has a similar EULA but has spawned some amazing addons including some which extend the sim in new ways not even thought of, and may are payware too.

CWorth · 09-09-06, 02:36 PM

As far as I know there never has been a legal precedent set when it comes to legal standings for mods made for games.

There is no black and white laws that can be looked up and researched that will say what can and cannot be used or done with mods.

This is all pretty new ground in legal terms for use of software and mods made for said software.The only way I can see this ever being settled is to directly go to a copyright attorney and get his opinion on the matter.Because until actual laws are in place and carved in stone then this kind of debate will always continue and no one will really know what truly is right or wrong in the legal sense.There will always be that fine hazy line.

P_Funk · 09-09-06, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CWorth

As far as I know there never has been a legal precedent set when it comes to legal standings for mods made for games.

There is no black and white laws that can be looked up and researched that will say what can and cannot be used or done with mods.

This is all pretty new ground in legal terms for use of software and mods made for said software.The only way I can see this ever being settled is to directly go to a copyright attorney and get his opinion on the matter.Because until actual laws are in place and carved in stone then this kind of debate will always continue and no one will really know what truly is right or wrong in the legal sense.There will always be that fine hazy line.

That is likely to stay hazy for one reason. The average gamer isn't going to be able to afford nor want to shill out the cash to take a case such as this to any court. This is the fact that corporations rely on when it comes to dealing with these small time modders. Many corporations have in the process of making a game ordered modding groups to halt creating a mod for a game which essentially makes something similar to the game they are creating. MGM was doing this when it was making it's Stargate game, sending letters to mods telling them to cease and desist because they were infringing on their intellectual property rights. I think these cases would have been defeated but no one was going to take it to court. That MGM cancelled the game is just funny side note.

THE_MASK · 09-09-06, 08:15 PM

Grey wolves should be looked at by UBISOFT as the

unofficial Official update and given support by UBISOFT .

Sir Big Jugs · 09-10-06, 04:14 AM

What if all individual modders would look at Seawolves, and find their own mod from there. Then we'd make a downloadable "Free Seawolves", which is exactly like the payware one?:p

NeonSamurai · 09-10-06, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P_Funk

Many corporations have in the process of making a game ordered modding groups to halt creating a mod for a game which essentially makes something similar to the game they are creating. MGM was doing this when it was making it's Stargate game, sending letters to mods telling them to cease and desist because they were infringing on their intellectual property rights. I think these cases would have been defeated but no one was going to take it to court. That MGM cancelled the game is just funny side note.

Well in that case i belive the law is somewhat black letter, since the mods are based off a movie/tv series, and the content of which falls under intelectual property rights. Modding a game where the mod is based off something that is not intelectual property (historical events etc) is far more hazy, and the only chance the company would have legaly to stop it is to either own the game engine being modded, or get the owning company to try put a stop to it. Even still there is little if any black letter law (or pre existing cases) in such cases.

Also the big problem as was said is with most of these liscensing/end user agreements, is they have never realy been put to the legal test. Though the clauses which infringe on basic rights would almost certainly get thrown out.

Rcsubs · 09-23-06, 05:06 PM

Hello Group,

I am new to this group, but from what I have read it looks like UBI owns any mod that has been made for the game and it does not matter who did the work.

So as I was reading I got to thinking, since you seem to have the talent gathered to make mods for these sims, why don't you all get together and make a complete new WWII sim and make the game so anyone playing can play either side and command any naval ship. Think of how many people would be interested in a game like that and how much you could make in sales...............

If you do, I would suggest that you keep it all on the Q T.

Just a suggestion,

Darrell

Sailor Steve · 09-23-06, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sober

Grey wolves should be looked at by UBISOFT as the

unofficial Official update and given support by UBISOFT .

But others feel exactly the same way about NYGM.

And others about U-Boat War Ace.

What to do, what to do...:hmm:

AG124 · 09-23-06, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rcsubs

So as I was reading I got to thinking, since you seem to have the talent gathered to make mods for these sims, why don't you all get together and make a complete new WWII sim and make the game so anyone playing can play either side and command any naval ship. Think of how many people would be interested in a game like that and how much you could make in sales...............

Such a project already exists, and is showing much potential. However, its development is proceeding slowly because of a lack of developers with programing skills.

http://www.dangerdeep.net/

MothBalls · 09-23-06, 05:25 PM

I derailed my train of thought.

Sailor Steve · 09-23-06, 05:27 PM

There you go!

Of course, which versions? As soon as it's out there will be more improvements to one or all.

Still, a great idea.

What to do, what to do...:hmm:

Dowly · 09-23-06, 06:23 PM

I´d hate to see TGW as a payware addon. The whole mood of the dev team changes when they go from freeware to payware. Good example is Day of Defeat mod for Half-life. First it was freeware and everything was fine, the modders made it because the loved to make it. As soon as Valve 'bought' the modders, they started to make it for money and it shows in the game. Tho, they it was still available for free, but you get my point.

09-09-06, 01:28 PM	#18
Wulfmann Ace of the Deep Join Date: May 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 1,010 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	After dozens of threads on this that were at best sand box fights I am impressed by a more civil and intellectual series of constructive responses of the topic. First, I believe we can all agree despite what the read me said and/or infers Ubi has made a number of statements that encourage making mods even requesting them. That leads me to believe this is a standard read me cover all bases to be used when we can apply it user agreement. However the fact they have instigated it in the agreement gives them at least some advantage. What I mean is unless someone can prove and is willing to do so in a court of law UBI can exercise its right to claim any file it owns that has been modified still belongs to them and not the modifier. This control seems to allow them to ax any mod they consider detrimental to future releases like a Pacific Mod but aside from that I can not remember them making any complaint about any mod. Then, of course, the fact they have a user’s agreement that retains the ownership of modified files allows them to authorize use by X-1. If I read this right X-1 could have gone bananas on using whatever they wanted but (in the new Med release) only made a few additions that may have actually been unintentional. I know they have hired or acquired mods from people here that asked it be unannounced. Is it possible a few honest mistakes were made? Is it possible, don’t get mad now, we’re doing really good, but if the read me has merit can you see UBI allowing X-1 to use SH3 files it owns and if that means the modified versions then couldn’t X-1 legally use any and all files including Greywolves and or NYGM? As morally wrong as this would be and I know they have no such plans the fact might be they could have been really mean if they wanted. Or, am I mistaken???? I am not asking for right and wrong opinions or WWJD as we all know these free mods made the game much better and using them without permission is plain wrong. Let us keep that as a basic premise that any unauthorized commercial use of any free mod would wrong. However, what is the legal opinion? Forget WWJD and ask what would Johnny Cochran do! Wulfmann __________________ "The right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed upon, if only to prevent tyranny in government" Thomas Jefferson,; Constitutional debates

09-23-06, 05:06 PM	#25
Rcsubs Seaman Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 34 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	How about a new WWII navy sim?? Hello Group, I am new to this group, but from what I have read it looks like UBI owns any mod that has been made for the game and it does not matter who did the work. So as I was reading I got to thinking, since you seem to have the talent gathered to make mods for these sims, why don't you all get together and make a complete new WWII sim and make the game so anyone playing can play either side and command any naval ship. Think of how many people would be interested in a game like that and how much you could make in sales............... If you do, I would suggest that you keep it all on the Q T. Just a suggestion, Darrell

09-23-06, 05:25 PM	#28
MothBalls Ace of the Deep Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 1,012 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	I derailed my train of thought. Last edited by MothBalls; 09-23-06 at 08:51 PM.

09-23-06, 05:27 PM	#29
Sailor Steve Eternal Patrol Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: High in the mountains of Utah Posts: 50,369 Downloads: 745 Uploads: 249	There you go! Of course, which versions? As soon as it's out there will be more improvements to one or all. Still, a great idea. What to do, what to do...:hmm: __________________ “Never do anything you can't take back.” —Rocky Russo

09-09-06, 12:21 PM	#16
joea Silent Hunter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: At periscope depth in Lake Geneva Posts: 3,512 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	Well having read Wulfmann's reasonable reply to my thread (and Steve was right authorise is commonwealth spelling :p) I think this is a good thread. I also see why he used my initial and not my name, I understand no offense intended. As long as the tone is kept civil ... why can't we hash this thing out. What was said about UBI turning a blind eye to say officially illegal mods as good business sense is actually logical. I wish there was a way, calmly and without hysteria (which I was also part of I'll admit) explain to them how uncredited mods taken without permission to use in an authoris(z)ed payware package leaves a bad taste in the hardcore community. Now while it is true most of the sales come from casual players, but it is the hardcore community that drove the essentials of what we have in sims with mod potential. Things like dynamic campaigns, manual TDC and all that stuff come from us. So maybe it is up to us to in a polite way stand for some morality and common sense in modding? :hmm:

09-09-06, 01:00 PM	#17
The Noob The Old Man Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: de_dust2 Posts: 1,417 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Okay, you're right. I just couldn't think of the Fact that anyone who Plays this game isn't at Subsim.com already...

09-09-06, 02:32 PM	#19
joea Silent Hunter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: At periscope depth in Lake Geneva Posts: 3,512 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	Well Johnny would ask for a glove fitting first. :p Seriously, first off we need to look into what may have been borrowed, stolen, etc. Serg made a rather long list, which included some "maybes" and "need further investigation." The one ship included as a placeholder may have indeed been a mistake, especially if as you say CP is one or two guys (I think). This really needs to be cleared up. Second, look at what mods have been made and what in the sim is open to being modded. Maybe look at other sims too, best example is the grand old MSFS which has a similar EULA but has spawned some amazing addons including some which extend the sim in new ways not even thought of, and may are payware too.

09-09-06, 02:36 PM	#20
CWorth Grey Wolf Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Gettysburg PA Posts: 845 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	As far as I know there never has been a legal precedent set when it comes to legal standings for mods made for games. There is no black and white laws that can be looked up and researched that will say what can and cannot be used or done with mods. This is all pretty new ground in legal terms for use of software and mods made for said software.The only way I can see this ever being settled is to directly go to a copyright attorney and get his opinion on the matter.Because until actual laws are in place and carved in stone then this kind of debate will always continue and no one will really know what truly is right or wrong in the legal sense.There will always be that fine hazy line.

09-09-06, 08:15 PM	#22
THE_MASK Ace of the deep . Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 9,226 Downloads: 901 Uploads: 73	Grey wolves should be looked at by UBISOFT as the unofficial Official update and given support by UBISOFT .

09-10-06, 04:14 AM	#23
Sir Big Jugs Grey Wolf Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Helsinki, Finland Posts: 895 Downloads: 59 Uploads: 0	What if all individual modders would look at Seawolves, and find their own mod from there. Then we'd make a downloadable "Free Seawolves", which is exactly like the payware one?:p

09-23-06, 06:23 PM	#30
Dowly Lucky Jack Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Finland Posts: 25,053 Downloads: 32 Uploads: 0	I´d hate to see TGW as a payware addon. The whole mood of the dev team changes when they go from freeware to payware. Good example is Day of Defeat mod for Half-life. First it was freeware and everything was fine, the modders made it because the loved to make it. As soon as Valve 'bought' the modders, they started to make it for money and it shows in the game. Tho, they it was still available for free, but you get my point.