Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ogaburan]

No, i think you are right.

I'll leave the OP unmolested as well then, other then removing the link.

[kerghnox]

Could you clarify this a bit better? Does this mean IP mods are not allowed? And does this mean all other portrait mods should be deleted? Let's face it, it's unlikely they obtained permission from every single artist. And I doubt Square Enix gave permission to use Front Mission portraits. This also means DA needs a new logo.

Personally, I've never seen a dev get in trouble for allowing these kind of mods before, but you make the rules.

[Vayra]

Could you clarify this a bit better? Does this mean IP mods are not allowed? And does this mean all other portrait mods should be deleted? Let's face it, it's unlikely they obtained permission from every single artist. And I doubt Square Enix gave permission to use Front Mission portraits. This also means DA needs a new logo.

Personally, I've never seen a dev get in trouble for allowing these kind of mods before, but you make the rules.

For IP mods and portrait packs, you would need to either get permission to use the art, use public domain/abandonware art, or do your own art - this hasn't changed. This ruling is in line with the previous removal of the Galatia Complete music mod for including unauthorized content, for example. 

[Harmful Mechanic]

This is par for the course when you rely on borrowed or 'stolen' art; sure, maybe you fly under the radar, but when you stop flying under the radar, or when you move from a modding community where it's not worth anyone's time to call you on it vs. one where other modders and the dev take an active hand, there isn't any sane defense (you can argue that the laws ought to be different in the abstract, and maybe they should, but the dev's interest¹ is in avoiding trouble with the laws as they are now).

The only way to ensure you can do literally whatever you want with an asset is to make sure you... own the rights to the asset. Everything else is some degree of hoping not to get caught or face any consequences.

¹Even though we're past the days of individual music pirates being prosecuted, that didn't stop because it stopped being against the law; it stopped because it was impractical and bad PR (and PR, not legality, is the reason IP mods are mostly left alone). But if you run a forum and you routinely allow flagrant and actionable copyright violations... you might be worth going after.

[rashiakas]

Am confused. Why is this http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12493.0 tolerated, while this here isnt.

[Tartiflette]

As it has been pointed out already, everyone was fine letting this mod slip until the author started modifying other mods without asking for permission first.

[fewd]

The mod didn't get taken down because it modified other mods, it got taken down because it contained copyright-infringing content as in he did not have permission from the IP owners of the portrait images. I thought Alex was pretty clear on this. And same should apply to every mod then, no?

[kerghnox]

For IP mods and portrait packs, you would need to either get permission to use the art, use public domain/abandonware art, or do your own art - this hasn't changed. This ruling is in line with the previous removal of the Galatia Complete music mod for including unauthorized content, for example. 

So IP mods are generally fine, I understand that now.

The mod didn't get taken down because it modified other mods, it got taken down because it contained copyright-infringing content as in he did not have permission from the IP owners of the portrait images. I thought Alex was pretty clear on this. And same should apply to every mod then, no?

It should, but no one else was forced to remove or change their portrait mod. This is the only portrait mod that somewhat fits the game: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10836.0 According to the reasoning given earlier, it should be deleted because it uses portraits from Front Mission 2. Portrait mods are basically banned now. Well, unless there's a mad man out there who is willing to draw everything or get permission from dozens of artists.

[Alex]

Locking this thread; please keep in mind that discussing moderation decisions on the forum is against the forum rules.

To clarify, however: it's not feasible either for me or for the moderators to go through every mod and figure out who has or hasn't rights to what. Aside from it not being feasible, that's also not how I want to spend my time. But if there's an obvious issue and it's brought to my attention, then of course I'll take care of it.

There *have* been a number of cases where these sorts of mods - that is, mods using other games' visuals or someone else's music - did in fact do it the right way and obtained permission from the relevant artists. I don't think the assumption that if the mod uses something from another source it's automatically a problem is justified.

Numerous people have also reached out to me about using Starsector assets in mods for other games. So, yeah, this sort of thing happens the "right" way a fair bit.