Skyrim - What We're Working On

[skavenhorde]

I have no idea what's going on here. My 2 cents worth is that I think it's an ok idea. To me this Steam Workshop is just another place to find mods. More than likely I'll still get them from Nexus anyways.

 

[kalniel]

Exactly my point - mods will go elsewhere and Workshop will end to be a bleak shade of Nexus, elricm.com or planeteldescrolls. If you see that and I see that than why Beth is launching it?

Er I don't see it. I've explained several times how as a modder I think this Workshop is a good thing - why would I go elsewhere?

*if* they took the decision not to allow my mods then I might go elsewhere, but I can't see any reason why that would happen.

 

[Harlequin]

"Your" inventions? Based on their intellectual property, art assets and engine? It's not as simple as you are making it sound.

Shoots, scores at the buzzer and that's the game.

On a serious tone you are correct. There is a bit of entitlement going on here by some of the modders, then again this happens with every game. Bottom line it is beths game and they will do with it as they please.

 

[skavenhorde]

Ever see how serious the modders take their Sims creations? Now they're scary.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Dhruin is unfortunately right. Mods fall under copyright law in the US as derivative works:

http://tinyurl.com/bqenvng

Sad. But in my opinion it is still me who has a concept in his head which is merely executed by tools !

With that kind of argument you can easily transfer any carpenter's works into becoming properties of the makers of tools like sawing blades and such, too !

I'm glad that I do live in Germany.
And now I understand why the U.S.-based companies are so keen of getting their IP-related laws installed in other countries, too.

 

[mazur49]

*if* they took the decision not to allow my mods then I might go elsewhere, but I can't see any reason why that would happen.

Let me use an example. You make a new Superman armor for Skyrim and post it via Workshop. Next day someone from Marvell sees it and sends letter to Beth-Valve with a demand to remove the mod due to copyright infringement. Probably this case will not stand in court if Marvell really sues Beth (fair use clause) but litigation expenses are going to be huge if you compare them to real value of the mod itself. Economically it's more rational to remove your mod and avoid possible confrontation with Marvell. If Beth decides otherwise (to fight for your mod and all other potentially infringing mods) it will become a permanent resident of local court and will spend money for lawyers instead of making new games.

 

[Bedwyr]

Sad. But in my opinion it is still me who has a concept in his head which is merely executed by tools !

With that kind of argument you can easily transfer any carpenter's works into becoming properties of the makers of tools like sawing blades and such, too !

I'm glad that I do live in Germany.
And now I understand why the U.S.-based companies are so keen of getting their IP-related laws installed in other countries, too.

Er no, that's not the best analogy and I think you're extending things too far. Tools aren't copyrightable except in very very specific cases (usually they fall under brand/trademark law… for instance the famous Windsor&Newton series 7 brushes I like fall under trademark). It'd have to be a tool created by another well-known carpenter who made a well-known and unique piece of carpentry that had to use that tool. You using that tool to make something is then arguably derivative but even then I'm not sure how that would hold up in court. The real reason a GECK, Creation Kit, what have you is derivative is because you are using existing copyrighted assets to make your art. The models, textures, statistics, scripts, sounds, animations, and so on are all unarguably copyrighted things. You've got permission to copy their work so that you can make your own work, but legally it falls under the Derivative law. Don't want to fall under that law? Then you cannot use a single piece of Bethsoft's art and even then it might have to stand alone from the game (ie not a plugin).

My opinion? I like that rule. It'd really chap my hide to see someone take this Superman concept I created back in 1930 something and then go making more money than me with his spin on it. That was my idea he swiped.

 

[kalniel]

Let me use an example. You make a new Superman armor for Skyrim and post it via Workshop. Next day someone from Marvell sees it and sends letter to Beth-Valve with a demand to remove the mod due to copyright infringement. Probably this case will not stand in court if Marvell really sues Beth (fair use clause) but litigation expenses are going to be huge if you compare them to real value of the mod itself. Economically it's more rational to remove your mod and avoid possible confrontation with Marvell. If Beth decides otherwise (to fight for your mod and all other potentially infringing mods) it will become a permanent resident of local court and will spend money for lawyers instead of making new games.

I don't see any problem with the above. I don't want other IP in my Skyrim either. The same thing would happen at the Nexus too, or any other hosting site.

 

[Corwin]

...er, the main problem would be that Marvel don't have the copyright for Superman!!

 

[mazur49]

…er, the main problem would be that Marvel don't have the copyright for Superman!!

Yes, it's DC actually.

 

[mazur49]

I don't see any problem with the above. I don't want other IP in my Skyrim either. The same thing would happen at the Nexus too, or any other hosting site.

Superman Suit

http://tesnexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=38077

 

[jhwisner]

A couple things about mods like the superman mod -

Neither Bethesda nor Steam/Valve would be directly liable even were such material considered infringing work. Title II of the DMCA, known as Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act, protects them from just such liability as long as they follow the guidelines set forth and respond to take-down requests as required.

The item itself is not even obviously an infringing work and could be argued not to be infringing either copyright or trademark for a number of reasons:

1) While a derivative work they are likely exempt from copyright infringement because of the transformative nature of the derivative work. The ability to run around Cyrodil or Skyrim dressed like super-man certainly was not availible before such mods and certainly would not be availible in their absence. While the importance of this benefit is debateable, it is unarguably transformative.

2)The item non-commercial, does not detract from the market value of the original, and appropriates very little of the original work. According to USC 17 107 this weighs heavily in favor of it being considered fair use against claims of trademark and copyright infringement.

Specifically with regard to trademark:
1) The actual source is of the material is represented honestly so there is little chance of confusing it as genuine nor is there any misrepresentation
2) The rights holder does not offer any product which this might be mistaken for or dilute the market for - content addons for unrelated 3rd party games.

3) The creator of this work does not do anything beyond the use of the material that could be seen to suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder - rather they make it clear this is not the case

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

The problem is to me that - in my point of view - that "carpentry tool" example in't too far fatched.
It isn't for me, because I'm not detail-focused in examples, but instead I'm thinking in nets and see patterns everywhere.

One o these patterns is the try to get seeds of otherwie "normal" plants patented. Copyrighted, so to say (although a patent is - detailed view - different than a copyrght).
The problem in this is that these "otherwise normal" plants have been the result breeding. These plants are insofar "special" in that their genes are the product of a special, long-term breeding.

But - if a company like Monsanto (evil ! evil ! evil !) get's patents of bred plants (like Tomtos in my example I took from my newspaper), why, then shouldn't loal farmer get a patent, too ? Or Joe Public ? Even Joe Public should be able to breed plants !

And this goes even further : Monsanto is sueing farmers whose fields are located close to fields with Monsanto's genetically engineered seeds. They sue them, because they say that these farmers owning the fields close by had actually "stolen" seeds from them ! - What they don't want to hear is that their geneticall engineered seeds were transported into the other fields by the transport of Pollen by Bees. And oher insects.

And they go even further : They plan to get a patent on genticall engineered plants/seeds.

What, if they spread out into the orld by chance ? Or by an employee who does so driven by a company's secred genda ? THEN they could cover with that ptent ALL PLANTS IN THE WORLD which have these genes mixed in ! That's a certain kind of world domination. And what I've heard of Monsanto, they REALLY aim towards that ! - See the pig example on that.

This is the pattern I see. You'll most likely *always* be able to counter-argument me in dtailed view. Becauser I only see the patterns, not the details.

But i do see them. And one of these patterns is that "intellectual property" is like thoughts bing sold an becoming the property of companies (always companies, of course; has anyone ever heard IP becoming the property of a pivate living person ?).

To me, it's in the end like a form of vampirism or parasitism : Companies buy thoughts of other humans. Bcause they don't seem to be able to create thoughts for themseles.

That's why an "Meta-Being" like EA is only living because it buys up other companies with their ideas - thoughts - embedded in them : Origin, Westwood, Bioware …

I only see patterns. I only see "the big picture". Never the detail.



Edit : And I definitively need a new keyboard soon ...

 

[mazur49]

@Alrik
Details sometime are not less important than the hole picture. Your neighbours from Switzerland prove that there could be more than one approach to solving problem of copyrights in digital age.
http://www.ejpd.admin.ch/content/ejpd/de/home/dokumentation/mi/2011/2011-11-30.html

 

[xSamhainx]

I just want them to fix the dual wield functionality, I want to be able to hotkey to superior swords to #1, and as a bonus have them STAY HOTKEYED. That's all that I care about

 

[Dhruin]

The problem is to me that - in my point of view - that "carpentry tool" example in't too far fatched.

Alrik, it stretches the metaphor to absurdity. C++ is a tool. Skyrim is a creative production that is the sum of the work of hundreds of artists, writers and designers based on work stretching back 15 years.

But i do see them. And one of these patterns is that "intellectual property" is like thoughts bing sold an becoming the property of companies (always companies, of course; has anyone ever heard IP becoming the property of a pivate living person ?).

Yes. every. single. day. You discussed it yourself, in this very thread. A musician or author claims copyright - that's intellectual property. You wanted ownership of your mods - that was asking to claim your intellectual property!

Most companies are formed to protect individuals. I used to own a company, because the company structure afforded me legal protections. Many people on this forum would own companies. They aren't inherently evil - they aren't inherently anything.

 

[badmofo]

...I only see the patterns, not the details.

Like crop circles?

Big companies - in my experience of them anyway - are slow moving and imperfect machines that are often incapable of pulling off small internal projects let alone devious, world domination type deals.

 

[Thaurin]

I'm not saying they are releasing garbage for the pc. I know they wouldn't do that.

I guess that's were there's been a miscommunication--because from some of the comments about the game, you'd think that Bethesda did release garbage for the PC. Remember that one article calling it barely functional crap, or whatever? That's probably just anger-fueled overreaction, of course. But I kind of take issue with that, especially when I don't really seem to have much trouble with the game at all... except the crashes.

By the way, I love it when a game comes with seamless support for both keyboard/mouse and gamepad. But Deux Ex: Human Revolution does it way better. You can pick up the gamepad or keyboard at any time and the game adjusts itself to use that. No configuration setting required. I can explore laid back on the couch and use the more precise keyboard/mouse in combat.

Unless at some point before release they decide to make changes to take advantage of each individual system. I think this is where the pc version falls short.

Right, and now we arrive at the heart of the matter. Of course they have a stage or whatever for every platform they release on in which they do this. If really is not in their best interest to release something that will not be well-received by the majority on whatever platform. Even if it's the supposedly 10% of their market. So I must assume that the majority within that platform see no big problems with the state in which is was released.

I certainly don't.

 

[BillSeurer]

I guess that's were there's been a miscommunication—because from some of the comments about the game, you'd think that Bethesda did release garbage for the PC. Remember that one article calling it barely functional crap, or whatever? That's probably just anger-fueled overreaction, of course.

It may also be far too many people thinking that hyperbole is clever.

 

[Thaurin]

It may also be far too many people thinking that hyperbole is clever.

Yeah, or some people are so disappointed by Skyrim not being just a little more geared towards PC use and customization, that they lash out. I mean, it really isn't that bad. Or bad at all, really.