Edit 1: The issue has been resolved, but I still need a hand http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1192165-relz-fcom-convergence-and-ufcom/page__st__40__p__17735340#entry17735340

I did read through the forum stickies, but would like to get confirmation. And for the record, I'm not talking about adding my personal touches to a mod, but rather fixing hundreds upon hundreds of wild edits. The mod is so much fun though, it's worth the trouble, lol. However, the mod is old and the author long since gone, so I am unlikely to ever get permission. This means I am not allowed to release it, right?

That's generally the case, yes. AFAIK you can release patches fine though, that's what I did with the Kvatch Rebuilt weather patch. So you can redistribute a plugin that modifies some of the original mod and is dependent on it, but you can't fix up the mod and distribute that, or distribute a replacement plugin. That seems right to me, at least.

I thought it might be something like that. Unfortunately in this case, the only changes I'm making are fixes, and the mod in question is actually a modifier itself :rolleyes: Ah well, cest la vie. Thanks for the info mate.

I don't know when this changed, but back when I modded for Morrowind, unless the author specifically stated in the readme not to alter and release their material, we always took this approach:

1) Try to contact the author. Exhaust all reasonable options, PM on the forum, email, etc...no need to track them down IRL

2) Give it a little time, but if the author can't be contacted, patch away, just give credit where credit is due.


This was always the policy for my mods, and seems totally reasonable. I always thought it was ridiculous when somebody made an obvious improvement to a mod, like providing a missing texture, or mesh, or something, and somebody else would wag their finger claiming it was against the "rules" to release a patch without the author's permission. There are always a few Nazis in every bunch.

I understand what you're saying, but I think it's also the principle of the thing. How do you define 'all reasonable options?'. Bear in mind I agree with you, but allowing such a system would be a logistical nightmare for moderators.

As far as I know, moderators have no control over what is released. There's no law or "rule" involved, just ethics. For ethical questions I always think it's best to use plain-old-common-sense. Would you get angry if you made a mod, then cut communication with the community, and somebody later released a patch to fix your mistakes?

I was thinking more of the moderators for download sites like Nexus and Alliance. However, the Oblivion modding community is large enough (albeit slowly shrinking), that even allowing a generous grace period for communication could lead to trouble. That said, I still agree with your sentiments I would love to give this mod more public notice once it's properly clean. It adds a ton of original & balanced caster items, plus giving a graphical and usefulness boost to the stock robes and hoods of OOO.

You're absolutely right. Bethesda does not get involved in this. That is why there is nothing about it in the stickies.

There are those who feel that it is wrong to alter a modder's work in any way, shape, or form without specific permission to do so. We had many bitter fights on this subject between, say, the years 2003 - 2005. I'd say that nowadays most modders agree with Illtempered: use courtesy and common sense.

I say go for it. Release it, and email/PM the original author to tell them you are doing so, since they can't be reached. Then, just give them the full credit they deserve. Make it a patch if that makes you feel better, but for many, the fewer ESP's the better. People can always merge that patch into the original if they want to anyway. This is just a game after all.

(=

If the corrections are mainly dirty edits etc. that would not require anything more than the release of a new .esp -- I would think there would be no problem releasing a fixed .esp file with the cleaning done that still required downloading the original mod to get all of the other parts of the mod (ie. any meshes\textures etc.) figure that way there is no doubt who made the original mod and then when releasing the fixed .esp you could explain what was done and the original modder still gets the same number of downloads as they would without the release and if you ever do hear from them then you could perhaps get them to just add the .esp to the original download.

Wyrd, Illtempered, I'll take your advice into consideration. Though I've only just begun the work; the mod comes in 3 flavors of original, full Frans, & OOO. Each with hundreds of wild edits and stuff I'm not sure about the purpose of, since I can't probe the author's brain, lol. So maybe in a few months, unless I can recruit some volunteers :whistling: Release or not, totally worth the work for me since the mod adds considerable depth to the lack-luster casting gear of Oblivion.

And another really big one in 2008 (no further details on this, though).

If you want to release it, I say give full credit to the author and go ahead with full notice that you will adhere to the wishes of the author if he makes them known.

Oh, and please provide a link in the TES4Edit list thread so I can direct people to download that version, as well.

At the risk of stretching out a wrapped up conversation, Kaira you will be the first to know But like I said; 3 flavors, multiple hundreds of items each, & 1 professional amateur. So maybe 2 months?

I don't know when that changed, because it has always been that you could not rerelease a modder's work without express permission, in both Morrowind and Oblivion modding communities. There are very good reasons for this, and to call those who support this system "Nazis" is extremely disingenuous. Reported.


I don't agree with your perception of the situation, Pseron: in my experience, many, many modders expect to be expressly contact about any redistribution of their work. That has been the default assumption in this forum for... well, as long as I've been here. Obviously, you've been here longer, though.

lol...please. Report away.

The OP has a very interesting question, and there is potential for good discussion here. Let's try to keep it as devoid of melodrama, whether that be in the form of outlandish comparisons to real-life historical villains, or indignant cries of "reported!", as possible. Thanks.

It's been hashed out many, many times, as has been said. Basically, what it comes down to is that the default assumption under which the mods were released was that they would only be redistributed with permission from the author, and we, as a community, do not have the right to ignore that assumption for any reason. The author must give permission.

There's really... not much else to say.

Common sense to me would dictate that it is better to release a patch rather than release a fixed version whenever possible, and make a good effort to contact the author prior to releasing it. If also stick a disclaimer stating that the original author has the authority to tell you to deupload your patch should it be there wish.

But in circumstances when a full rerelease is needed, well, what Thomas said. Taking a position that nothing can be done without the original modders explicit permission can become a bit counterporductive to the community; IMO opinion provided proper effort is made to contact the author and proper credit is given there is nothing wrong with uploading a fixed version of a mod.

Of course, even if the author does give permission for anyone to edit their mods, it doens't mean they won't get upset (cough cough)

Says you. I've been here almost as long as you, and I've never been under the assumption that there was a "default" opinion. It's your opinion. People like you are just more outspoken, so maybe there are more posts that support it, but I don't remember a vote.

I don't agree with this being a hard and fast rule either. There are an awful lot of mods made in 2006 and the author is long gone. If every reasonable attempt has been made to contact the author and no response has been received in a month or so, I think that establishes the mod as being abandoned and someone else should be able to pick up the mod, with due credit to the original author. I would ask that the person who is picking up the mod list the methods that they used to contact the author. Basically I think the person looking to take over the mod should create a thread asking for the community's permission. They list the details of the mod and the methods they've used to contact the author. It's entirely possible that another community member will know the author and be able to offer another method of contacting him or her.

I remember several polls, actually; they seem to have been pruned. Arguments like this have come up repeatedly in the past, and frankly, I'm not interested in going through it again.

The community is better served by protecting modders' rights than it is by any update, no matter how necessary or how popular the mod. It's simply an extension of regular copyright law (yes, I know that the law does not apply directly to mods due to the EULA; that does not mean that the reasons why such laws exist are not relevant) to say that the creator of a work has supreme rights to it, rights which are not waived simply by silence.

Silence does not equal consent, in this or any other case.

To continue with the use of your anology:

Copyrights eventually revert to public domain, despite corporate big bucks political clout which has extended many copyrights of late.

It seems to me, at least, a discussion of a cautious and respectful equivalent version of public domain for mods is very appropriate in this specific forum.

However, as strictly a mod user myself, I do have my own dog in this race. And I would dearly love to see some of the older mods cleaned, pyffied, debugged, and polished.

As for silence, isn't the only thing it truly equals........... is silence?

And while saying all this, I do admire your and others adamant efforts to defend the rights of mod makers.

If I were to leave the community, unable to be contacted, I would expect that someone who still wanted my mods would take them up in my place. If I'm not around to say yay or nay, then they belong to the community for which I made them. But then I've never been a 'take my toys and leave' kinda gal. :lmao:

That's fine: that's your right as a creator of an artistic work to dictate.

But it is no one's right to dictate that to another person.

As for public domain, those typically don't come into play for a long time, even before corporations started pushing the limits out to protect valuable properties (Mickey Mouse being the most notorious example). It's a decent argument, but I'd counter with the idea that since any mods currently released did not get released with the understanding of them becoming public domain after X amount of time, even if the community came up with such a timeline it would not affect older mods that have already been released.


It is my understanding that TES Nexus and PES have also always chosen to not allow this kind of thing, at least when it was pointed out to them.

You know I see your point I really do but to play devil's advocate here: If someone leaves and doesn't bother to take the time to remove all their mods, as in vanishes but leaves their mods up for download, one can infer that they don't mind, don't care, are no longer invested in them. I'm all for protecting a modders rights to defend their work but as with anything, there's a point where it's just become didactic and pointless. :lmao: In my opinion of course, which I'm sure you're about to vociferously disagree with. LMAO Go on. I can take it.