Firstly, I think this matter has been discussed in detail, and I truly believe it falls under fair usage. I having not used this mod can not say for sure, but one otherwise unusable image, which can not even be reprinted in it's current format, and is packaged in a large array of other images seems to suggest that under the 3rd condition listed in this thread, it is still viable. This image is not the main focus of the mod and so is used in a low content way. It has also been pointed out that the author in question worked on many similar themes, even in video games, so it could even fall under proper context.

Second, it does bother me that it was uncredited but I am actually willing to give benefit of the doubt here and say it was likely a mistake made by the modder, not an intentional act. As stated before, there is apparently a thread in which it is mentioned they are contacting the author. There is proof that this was being done properly, or at least that there was an attempt to do so. It might be they simply forgot to update the readme. Why go to all that trouble if you truly do not care? In my experience those who actually try to make contact for permission are respectful of the author's wishes. It is unfair of us to assume the work is therefore stolen. We have no true evidence to support this, and that is the right of the author to decide if it was indeed stolen, not ours.

I am not saying I support reuse of images, but this by far not the worst case out there, and what with it even having signs of being well thought through before use, I think the context this is being discussed in may be out of line somewhat. It seems to have become an accusation, rather than a point of clarity and achieves nothing.

I hope that in light of how well discussed this is, the age of the problem, and the nature of this thread, we can take the higher road and put this topic behind us now.

Way I see it: Who cares, really. There are times when you should care of course, but you have to look at the details of the usage first (Or beforehand).


It's a non-profit mod that I seriously doubt the artist/author/whoever would even care about if they did figure out about it.

I can understand if the mod was claiming the art as their own, but if not I'd say it's in a gray zone.
If credit is missing it can be added.

Just keep in mind this kind of thing, I've seen dozens of mods/maps from many authors for different games, heck I've made, and published, mods/maps that contain all sorts of content from all sorts of places that I know none of us got permission for, and years later it's all still there. I just haven't really seen anybody really going after a cheesy little mod (Or UT map) that has their picture or song in it. It's kind of not really worth the time.

Honestly in this case the worst that could happen is they ask for the mod to be removed. Very unlikely. But you run the risk.

Nothing to get stressed over or restrict yourself from using. Just use what feels right.

Just keep in mind that you run a risk every-time you use such material.

Noted Mr. Wyrd, but you are making a few generalizations here yourself.

One, in that I am ignorant of copyright law. I'm far from it, because as a commerical artisan and a person who has had to make logotypes for persons and businesses, it is I who sends the copyright forms to the government and often have to inform the client or patron whether their image skirts the laws existing.

On the action figure front, again, it was not of Parkinson's works, but Brooks, and it fell into the ken of representational figurative works, that are for personal private use. Much like making a scuplture of a personality for, I reiterate, your own home, private, non-commerical use. Its application is very much like making a portfolio work of a Morrowind character in two dimensional media to gain entrance into a college. It shows your skillset in a media only, and since it is not for commerical useage at all, it is in the realm of a personal drawing of personal taste. If the letter of the law were as strict and not open to elasticity as as it is, do you really think that all those animators and such who parody living icons and celebrities in the negative such as Robot Chicken, South Park, and the like would not be liable? Their works are far more damaging than a person who prints out an image to frame and hang on their wall without thought to any monetary exchanges. Yes, there are challenges, as witnessed from the issue regarding the comparative likenesses between Harry Potter, and Timothy Hunter of Neil Gaiman's creation who was admittedly first. They spoke, they laughed, they agreed that they were both probably inspired by other writers, and they moved on. It shall always depend on the circumstances and usages.

Moderator: Flaming deleted. Do not accuse other members of flaming or bad motives.

Pseron Wyrd's characterization of the practicalities of copyright law was correct in both its overall thrust and in its details.

In answer to Eirik, note that parody is generally (not always, hardly anything in copyright law is "always") fair use; thus parodies such as much of what South Park gets away with are fair use even though their use is commercial. Casual or incidental quoting, even if the amount of material quoted is miniscule but recognizable, even if the author is long dead, and even if the use is not commercial at all, may not get away with fair use.

Just out of curiosity, and because it's always fun to resurrect a dead threat, but what do you do about mashups?

I know that today, the Beastie Boys could never release Pauls Boutique, due to new restrictions on sampling. However, in modding for TES games, it seems to be fairly common to take a mesh from here, a texture from there, etc.

I'm working on what I believe to be a fairly unique mod, and I find I need fairly unique meshes. I haven't mastered Blender, so I use nifskope and bits and pieces from other meshes and textures.

http://img218.imageshack.us/i/ravenwood332.jpg/

This sewing machine, for example, is pieced together from bits of two different mods, and a pipe from stock Morrowind that I manipulated to act as the arm for those thread spools. I can't quite remember where the original machine came from, but it was clearly a mash-up of stock bits and something else (gods only know from where). The table was a third-party Oblivion model that I downgraded. I keep a copy of the original archives on an external hard disk so I can pull the credit information, but in some cases, a single model might have multiple credits.

http://img269.imageshack.us/i/ravenwood189.jpg/

This is another mash-up I did to create a computer terminal. Care to guess how many meshes I pulled pieces from? I'll give a hint - it was more than 5.

Also, to maintain a fairly consistent landscape, I've completely redone every tree, rock, or water mod I have used. In some cases, I had to alter/correct collision data. In others, I needed to fix texture problems with the UV map. All of the terrain models have gotten new textures - most of which came from replacers. Same with furniture. I've had to redo practically every piece I've downloaded with new UV maps and textures. In some cases, I've actually had to fix the piece. Then, there is the retexturing to maintain continuity. (For example, my jail has very 'bureaucratic' wood grain furniture, even though the individual pieces came from different mods or stock meshes, to make it looks similar to the station in Hill Street Blues)

Practically every model I'm using has been altered in some meaningful way, and there are a lot of them. I haven't done a count so far, but I'm looking at hundreds of these altered meshes in the final mod.

Then, there is the scripting. I wanted to add ASE support to my mod, but it quickly became apparent that it was going to be a disaster. First off, ASE assumes that your interiors are interiors, not interiors acting like exteriors. So, I figured out, more or less, how the thing worked, and recreated it for my mod. I nuked almost all of the original code in the process of stomping mod-specific bugs. About all that is left of the original mod, other than the concept, and the code for handling lightning effects, are the sound files.

The plan right now, since I have a lot of models that are mashups, or are heavily altered, is to credit the modders whose work I used period. I will break it out for some mods that are used almost in their entirety, like Barabus' clocks and fireplaces, or Kat's gowns (which she gave me permission to use at my request) Otherwise, I'll have to write a novel after I finish the mod explaining the relationship between models and modders. I have restricted myself to mods that allow such usage, or gotten specific permission, but at a certain point; specific credits are going to be darn well impossible.

Then, to top it off, just because a resource pack says you can freely use it, doesn't mean you can. I'd have to look, because the resolution is kind of low, but some of the images from a previously linked site look eerily similar to images in one of the texture packs I'm using... Sheesh!

Haha so true. There's a mod on PES somewhere - the name escapes me at the moment - that is using icons ripped directly from World of Warcraft. I posted a warning about it in the comments, but was completely ignored. I doubt Blizzard would care about such a little thing either way honestly. But if they did it could have some seriously gruesome repercussions.

I believe when it comes to copyrighted material it is best to tread safely, and not break any laws. If it is public made material -not copyrighted - though the creator's permission should at least be sought after if at all possible.

Copyrights do wear off eventually, but I have no clue about how long it takes or if it only applies to certain products.

Recordings are not. Mechanical reproductions might be - there was a precedent set when pianola rolls were first tested in court.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#Obtaining_copyright:



The term http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_intellectual_property is nonsense, anyway.



That makes "digital 3D mesh created from a 2D picture of a 3D object" an interesting one, doesn't it?

True, and some copyright owners are very negative about any form of fan art. Take Disney. They have been aggressive about shutting down fan sites and such. So make a mod based on Disneyland, might get you in trouble.
But Blizzard is very relaxed about fan art, and mods as well. They actually have in an online faq that TCs and such based on their games is OK.