mod 'ownership' and copyright protection

I'm curious:

If a company sells a software product, and as part of that software they permit (heck, even design it to be) modification of certain files, in order for the gaming community to 'tweak', expand and improve:

1) Isn't it implied that such modification of their files is for public free usage? That the files still remain proprietary, and making money from their software is illegal?

2) If I recall copyright law correctly, if person A modifies software (given that the owner of the software permits such) and presents it in a finished, tangible form, than that tangible finished form is copyright protected against person B copying it and selling it under their name. So why can an online company harvest and steal our modders works, claim it as theirs, sell it, and not be in violation of copyright laws?

Hmmmm . . . the comments here are underwhelming, to say the least.

[ASWnut101]

overwhelming, for me..........:p


and, I guess thats just how the system works, but I'm sure someone else *cough*tthefabob,dicumus(<:p DUCImus-sorry),brad(did he leave?)*cough*

[Ducimus]

Was that a typo, or did you have a freudian slip and call me a nasty name?


As per the topic, im not really sure what to say. It sucks really. Small time gaming schmuchks have been making (or tying to) money off the internet for awhile. I ran into it the first time, a loooonng time ago when i found out some level's i made for DukeNukem3d ended up on a commercially sold compliation CD at the local software store. Nobody asked me if they could use it, and nobody cared. It never occured to me that it was BS moneygrubbin until much later. At the time i was flattered.

One issue i think is that their odds of doing it, and getting away with it are high.

Seriously. I can make a mod, put my username on it, "made by Ducimus". Well, who the hell is Ducimus? What if their 3 or 4 other people on the internet who use the same userhandle? Which one made it? how do you prove that you did? My assumption is that since the username isnt real, neither is the disclaimer that you put into a readme, or at the least its easily negated. Other that i think usermods in general are considered by some a free resource, up for grabs. THey could concievably say, "we're only charging for the manhours it took to make this compliation Plus CD burning" or whatever; at a markup of course. The whole thing is shady. I think until modders start using RL info, the disclaimer is tantamount to a verbal agreement - worth the paper its printed on. And who here would use their RL info on the internet so freely?

Of course i am no lawyer, so i can be entirely wrong.

[ASWnut101]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Was that a typo, or did you have a freudian slip and call me a nasty name?

oopsy daisies! Ill go ahead and edit, maby.

As per the topic, im not really sure what to say. It sucks really. Small time gaming schmuchks have been making (or tying to) money off the internet for awhile. I ran into it the first time, a loooonng time ago when i found out some level's i made for DukeNukem3d ended up on a commercially sold compliation CD at the local software store. Nobody asked me if they could use it, and nobody cared. It never occured to me that it was BS moneygrubbin until much later. At the time i was flattered.

One issue i think is that their odds of doing it, and getting away with it are high.

Seriously. I can make a mod, put my username on it, "made by Ducimus". Well, who the hell is Ducimus? What if their 3 or 4 other people on the internet who use the same userhandle? Which one made it? how do you prove that you did? My assumption is that since the username isnt real, neither is the disclaimer that you put into a readme, or at the least its easily negated. Other that i think usermods in general are considered by some a free resource, up for grabs. THey could concievably say, "we're only charging for the manhours it took to make this compliation Plus CD burning" or whatever; at a markup of course. The whole thing is shady. I think until modders start using RL info, the disclaimer is tantamount to a verbal agreement - worth the paper its printed on. And who here would use their RL info on the internet so freely?

Of course i am no lawyer, so i can be entirely wrong.

anything cleared up, Albrecht?

[TteFAboB]

German man talk funny.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Albrecht Von Hesse

I'm curious:

If a company sells a software product, and as part of that software they permit (heck, even design it to be) modification of certain files, in order for the gaming community to 'tweak', expand and improve:

1) Isn't it implied that such modification of their files is for public free usage? That the files still remain proprietary, and making money from their software is illegal?

2) If I recall copyright law correctly, if person A modifies software (given that the owner of the software permits such) and presents it in a finished, tangible form, than that tangible finished form is copyright protected against person B copying it and selling it under their name. So why can an online company harvest and steal our modders works, claim it as theirs, sell it, and not be in violation of copyright laws?

1. We have had too many X1 threads around these forums over the past few months.

2. The SHIII forum is the place for this discussion.

Dan san,

Tak

[TteFAboB]

Oh great he says that now, after I've already made it into his black list by posting...

Look the other way while I edit my previous post will you?

[Takeda Shingen]

Your one-liners left after the edits are first rate.

EDIT: Alright, let's move this one. Now it's Gizz's and John's problem. I've got my hands full with mid-term elections and multiculturalism in Great Britian.

[Wulfmann]

Opinions aside try reading the user agreement you had to click “I agree” to install the game.
It specifically states you may not edit or change any file in the game. It further states they (UBI) own every file in the game.
Technically that means only someone that has been given permission by UBI soft (X-1/Comabt Planes) can edit, change or make an add on.

However, and this is IMO, the fact they left the game open to edit when they could have locked it indicates they were encouraging freeware modders to make improvements for prolonging the interest therefore increasing revenue as well as being able to claim ownership by the user agreement over such mods for any future use.

Well all of that is opinion (except the user agreement we agreed to, that is in writing) and it really would have been nice if UBI had stepped in and stated what could or could not be done with approved add ons even if it was not what we wanted at least we would have had something known as compared to SW and no comment from UBI and us never having anything but a constant argument that has no definitive conclusion.

Answer, Nada, Nothing , we don’t know and it seems likely UBI will never comment so we might never know.

Wulfmann