Maps and Mods Councillor Elections

[keyser]

Hey, i've gotta a similar question than biass but for mods.

How would you legislate about the owner/creator rights about them ?
As for now, you need to have the approval of the mod maker to be able to create a new version of it. This lead to issue (that happened already), when the mod maker left the community, or when his opinion has been impersonated. Ending up with stalled progress.
And what about forcing mod maker to use free licence (eg GPL) in the new mod being created ?

[Darkym]

Hey, i've gotta a similar question than biass but for mods.

How would you legislate about the owner/creator rights about them ?
As for now, you need to have the approval of the mod maker to be able to create a new version of it. This lead to issue (that happened already), when the mod maker left the community, or when his opinion has been impersonated. Ending up with stalled progress.
And what about forcing mod maker to use free licence (eg GPL) in the new mod being created ?

Hey, thanks for the great question.

In my mind maps and mods are quite different in this regard, since you can have mods which just change the color of a button or something like the nomads, but you don’t really get that spectrum with maps. For maps I see three main cases: updating mods, using assets from a mod (be it to improve them or add something new to them) and merging mods (e.g. UI party).

Here’s how I would tackle these issues:

For updating mods to be compatible with newer versions of FAF, the original modder should be the one to make this, however if they grant access to others that of course is also fine. Now, if the original modder has seemingly gone AWOL (is not responding to messages etc.) then a request to update the mod should be made on the modding forum, and if within one month the original modder does take sufficient action in some way (i.e. reply with a clarification/update the mod) then it is acceptable for some other member to update the mod, and the first working updated version will be used.

Using assets from a mod to one’s own creative desires is quite tricky. Naturally it would lead to new content (yay!), but it could also leave some modders feel like they got cheated out of their creation, leaving them with a feeling of betrayal (boo!). Now I just so happened to have read the epic open letter form to Ze_Pilot, so I can see the importance of ‘openness’ to the FAF top brass (and honestly as someone that avidly surfs the net I think that’s a good thing), but letting anyone just use assets from your mods could also quickly lead to an oversaturation of similar mods as well as the aforementioned ‘cheating’ of original modders. The solution? Well considering all that, I think mods which are actively being developed (e.g. Strogo’s priorities) should not be open for anyone to just fumble around with, unless granted specific permission by the original modder. Mods which have been around for ages but see little to no current development (e.g. those massive unit mods) should be open for all to mess around with. Essentially this would create a system like the copyright laws, whereby old material can be messed around with/attempted to be resurrected, but things in the now are entrusted to their creators. How to determine if a mod is no longer getting active support? I’m sure we can all feel it, but that won’t cut it, so I propose modders ‘resigning’ (!= not giving up!) when they leave work on it and let their creations flourish in the community’s hands. For mods for who’s creators are no longer active and as such won’t be seen ‘resigning’, well I think it’s pretty freaking obvious then that they are no longer getting developed :^). But I am very open to suggestions here!

Lastly for merging mods, I think you should just be allowed to go ahead and do it. Modders can lie to themselves and claim that the bundle only got as many downloads because of their mod (giving them an ego/dopamine boost > more content > yay!). I can see issues in bundles being unstable as the time modders take to update their mods could take varying degrees of time, but that's an inherent flaw to bundling, and not something over which the system should be thrown in the garbage.

My main concern with mods is really the advantage it *can* give to players and the overall lack of knowledge your average player has about UI mods. That’s why I would really like a system to show what mods people in your game are using at the very least.

[Cuddles]

For ref:
Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), once a web host finds/is notified of infringing material on their site, they are obliged to remove it or they must face liability for copyright infringement.
https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wik ... tent_Usage

To be perfectly frank, we piss our fellow community members off from time to time. This is not worth the risk of someone coming back with a grudge, I have a suspicion a precedent for this has already been set.

[tatsu]

.

[Darkym]

For ref:
Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), once a web host finds/is notified of infringing material on their site, they are obliged to remove it or they must face liability for copyright infringement.
https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wik ... tent_Usage

To be perfectly frank, we piss our fellow community members off from time to time. This is not worth the risk of someone coming back with a grudge, I have a suspicion a president for this has already been set.

From what I've read FAF is an open source project. Uploading mods onto an open source project surely don't have copyright protection for them, or do they? Either way thanks for pointing that out, I will try and look into it more, and if a precedent has been set for this then of course thats a complete different story.

[tatsu]

there should be a complete document to explain the situation once and for all. we've done so in several threads already leading up to the mandatory-Steam patch and repeating it this thread wouldn't help either. this document should probably be a collaborative effort. I suggest a google docs.

[Geosearchef]

From what I've read FAF is an open source project. Uploading mods onto an open source project surely don't have copyright protection for them, or do they? Either way thanks for pointing that out, I will try and look into it more, and if a precedent has been set for this then of course thats a complete different story.

They do. Everything is copyrighted, even if you license it. In some legislations it's even impossible to waive away the copyright (e.g. in germany, where the server is located). For anybody to use/modify the code of the mod it would have to have a license. (e.g. GPL)

[Morax]

The BlackOps mod is a perfect example of this issue, Darkym. It's a showing of how people really need to check and ensure things are used with permission rather than assuming.

It's common sense to me, and in general good manners, to ask before using anything in life, so why is this different?

[nine2]

Morax is teaching us manners. The end is nigh

[Darkym]

From what I've read FAF is an open source project. Uploading mods onto an open source project surely don't have copyright protection for them, or do they? Either way thanks for pointing that out, I will try and look into it more, and if a precedent has been set for this then of course thats a complete different story.

They do. Everything is copyrighted, even if you license it. In some legislations it's even impossible to waive away the copyright (e.g. in germany, where the server is located). For anybody to use/modify the code of the mod it would have to have a license. (e.g. GPL)

Brutal :( Guess we have to move servers to China then kappa. Then I guess Keyser's question doesn't really leave much room for my own ideas and we've simply got to accept that for mods to progress we have to follow careful legal procedures. As Map and Mod councillor I would communicate with modders how they could possibly license others to work with it as easily as possible, letting mod makers choose who exactly gets to build on their work. And I would police that derivatives of mods are inline with GPL requirements/would help modders ensure this as well (e.g. a guide). But for that to happen I would like to get/confirm FAF's legal disposition.