To all who have posted:

First of all, I would like to thank those who have given me the benefit of the doubt, and those who read my manual in some detail before forming any firm conclusions. It does make me sad that many of the objections I have read are not actually true, and some are not fair (and assume a sinister motive or a lack of ethics on my part). I also cannot understand why the original post has been locked. Nevertheless, I can also seem, to an extent, why your offense is justified.

You understand, I made this mod for the same reason that you all make mods—to share your vision of TES IV with others so that they can experience the same pleasure that you do with your game. My ego does not feature at all into this equation, other than for people to recognize how hard I worked to give you a better game.

First, I owe CorePC an apology. While I still think that your judgment was formed before having read the manual, and before having examined just what I was doing with ROM, neither did I know that you are in fact the current team leader of OOO. Had I know, I assure you that you are the first person I would have emailed many weeks ago.

However, some posters are wrong that I should have known about this forum, or kept up with the current developments in the modding community. You assume that it is impossible for someone simply to enjoy the hobby of modding. I remember finding this forum a while ago, but I never read it or even posted, and I admit that actually I forgot about it until one poster on TesNexus, who liked my mod, suggested that I make a post here in order to attract attention. The thought did not cross my mind, but I’m glad he recommended it. I’m still glad.

Instead, I got my contact information from the OOO Manual, which I have on my computer. The two top names in the file, along with their email addresses, were Oscuro and Dev_akm, so it was not unreasonable for me to think that I could reach them via that route. When they did not respond, neither did I think it was unreasonable that OOO was not being actively supported any more—since this was the very contact information given in their own Manual—or that it would be a big deal to allow players to download a version of OOO along with my own ROM.esp file.

This, however, leads to another error in some posts I have read. ROM is *not* just an edited OOO esm and esp pair. I agree, that would be plagiarism to edit the OOO files, then package them as my own.

I have not done that. ROM is its *own esp file.*

As I write in the ROM Manual, I deliberately chose to contain the vast majority of my changes in the ROM.esp file, not only for ease as a modder, but so that the player would see a clear distinction between OOO (and their intellectual property) and ROM. I did not want to mix the two, although I did want the benefit of releasing a mod that used the OOO.esm as a master. Hence, my design decision.

I repeat: ROM is nothing more than an overhaul mod that takes OOO as its master file.

The one problem with releasing it without OOO, however, is that I have done a lot of editing with the OOO files: both files have had a lot trimmed away where redundancies occur (that is, where ROM changes or replaces something from OOO). And some changes I put into the OOO.esm, because ROM was originally a set of numerous smaller mods (before I merged them into one large file), and it was convenient to have some universal data that all the dependent esp files could use.

Needless to say, it would be very difficult to restructure the mod so that players had to download OOO separately, install that, then install ROM. Not only is it easier for the general public, but it is also crucial to how ROM works—nearly all aspects of the game are changed, and any installation instructions for installing a full version of OOO (along with which optional files to include and not to include, etc)—that alone would have filled the 50 pages of my Manual! ROM is designed to fit with just one version of OOO, and that is the version that comes packaged in the installation file.

Another poster remarked that packaging a ROM-friendly version of OOO means that players won’t know what to do when updates for OOO are released. The answer to that is simple: they will not need them, because ROM is designed as a stand-alone overhaul, meant to replace all other overhauls for those that want to play it. Yet another poster remarked about FCOM compatibility. This is yet another poster who judged me without having first read my work. I specifically mention FCOM at one point, noting that in many ways it is probably a better mod than ROM, but that in ROM I tried to create a different vision. Anyone who plays ROM is not going to play FCOM, and vice versa. There is no issue here. The modding community is so rich because it offers you *choice*--literally thousands of choices. I am simply adding one more choice to allow people to play their game in a new way.

It should also be noted, contra many who are assuming the worst of me (for who knows what reason), I sent emails to all the authors of the mods bundled in ROM. Many got back to me, giving me permission. Many still have not gotten back to me.

But this raises a larger issue. If I had received a definitive “no”, then I think my actions would be completely indefensible. But to receive no answer at all—does this mean that a modder should never release their work to the public, just because someone who, for all anyone knows, simply doesn’t even care about Oblivion anymore and has moved on? Is that fair for me, or to any of the potential players? Should anyone be hamstrung in this way? *This game is not a lifestyle,* and I don’t think that it is unreasonable to assume that someone who made a mod three years ago would care if someone redistributed it while giving them full credit.

After all, if they did care—wouldn’t they have responded? (It should be noted that none of the emails I sent out were returned to me in error, meaning that the web addresses were still valid.)

If there were alternate routes of reaching these people, I apologize for not taking them. But it is not fair to assume that, because I love modding, I am integrated into the modding community and know all that is going on. To be honest, I did not think it was even a big deal to redistribute these works *because no money is being made or lost in the process.* I do not benefit in any way by featuring these mods in my work, except that they make the mod better, and shorten the player's mod-list without them having to know how to use Tes4Gecko or WryeBash. I targeted this mod to a general audience—after all, anyone skilled enough to use FCOM is probably already using FCOM, and will have no need for another overhaul mod.

And I continually point out the features that others have added, and do not pretend to take credit for anything I have not done. At the very least, my opinion was that being featured in this mod is a benefit to all those whose mods are integrated. It has already started to occur where players who have never heard of this or that mod are now exposed to it—for instance, I cannot tell you how many good remarks I get about Realistic Fatigue, and I am happily sending all of those people to Donovan Baarda because he deserves to know how good his work is. And I encourage everyone—right there on the downloading website—to visit all their websites as well and endorse their mods if they like the changes.

In short, I can see why many of you are upset, and that is understandable. But my position, I would argue, also has its own justifications, given the knowledge I had and given the simple fact that even though many of these mods are being redistributed without explicit permission (though none have yet denied this permission), the authors of these mods *only stand to benefit* by having more exposure to their work, and so that players can download these mods separately when or if they get tired of ROM.

In short, I viewed the modding community very differently than what it appears to be, and I am very disappointed. I expected a circle of people all bringing fantastic visions to life, and taking an enthusiastic interest in the work of their peers. I honestly meant it when I wrote, in my first post, that my expectation was that Oscuro would be *pleased* with ROM—that is, pleased at how he has inspired the “next generation” (if you will), and I only thought this because that is how *I* would have seen it. If someone redistributes ROM after trying to contact me and getting no reply, and after giving me full credit where that credit is due, I would not only have no hostility on my part, but I would be personally be “tickled” and proud that I had such influence!

I would have preferred to hear back from all the people whose works are bundled with ROM, partly to get permission, but partly because I would have enjoyed “meeting” these people whose works I admire so much. I say in the opening pages of my Manual that I learned TESCS script from many of them, and I am grateful for that. But in the absence of any response whatsoever, I find it unreasonable that a mod—especially one of this magnitude—should never be released in the circumstances under which I have released ROM.

I am open to making amends to all who I have offended, and I will take ROM down until I feel it is safe for me to repost it. I will leave the Manual up, so that all who are interested in this debate can see for themselves what I have done.

- Underground

Unfortunately, in the case of something containing custom resources, yes. Copyright law is not ambiguous in this area. ROM is a derived work of OOO. Legally you need explicit permission before you can proceed to release the modified body of work. Without that, you are not legally allowed to distribute the work.

Not to drop oil on fire but everything belongs to Bethesda and the rest is just modder courtesy. That is what is in the EULA isn't it?

I think the time of bickering should be over. Both the OOO team and Underground have shown that they are willing to find a solution. I'm sorry if you felt like the whole forum jumped on you, but even though there is legally very little a modder can do with his work out there on the web, we do try to follow certain modding ethics here. And yeah, sometimes there will be harsh words in doing that. We would have done the same for ROM if something similar happened, so it isn't personal.

That's true for things generated via the CS, it's in the EULA. But custom meshes, textures, and audio files fall outside of that and I think that's the primary sticking point. At least from a legal standpoint.

I think this falls under "Fair Use" in the Copyright laws. Underground is free to use OOO's resources as long as he cites them as being a large part of his work, without criticizing it. Since he has done this in his manual, he is in the clear.

Anyway, I don't think this mod is getting the attention it deserves. I have just switched to it, and I love it. For someone who has a crappy computer, and can't run a thousand different mods, this is a godsend. I love how you integrated the new armor, since I always thought it was dumb that the best armor is so evil.

No. That's not how the "fair use" doctrine works. Fair use allows you to use select quotations, excerpts, screenshots, etc as part of a commentary or teaching material. Not wholesale redistribution of the entire content in a derivative work package. The gory details of this are available at the http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html.

Underground is now aware of the ramifications I'm sure by reading the last thread. He doesn't need constant reminders.
He's explained the situation and also been very reasonable by taking the mod down pending discussions.

Let's not get carried away again, or we'll force the mods into another thread lock.

I'm glad Underground made this post as I've spent some time playing with this mod today (even repackaged it into BAIN format and started fiddling with bash tags to try and figure out how to get some other mods to work properly with it) and I think it's very, very good. I look forward to it's re-release and, hopefully, some close interaction between him and the OOO team to make ROM even better.

I'd just like to point out that "modding in a box" is possible, I recently returned after three years away, and had no idea who was running OOO. The thing I have under my hat that I have been tinkering with doesn't have a [wipz] thread because I haven't tracked down all the authors I need permission from, and I only know to do all this because I have been involved in other modding projects before.

I think it's clear that the intentions were benign, and that a lot of effort has been put into this mod. Additionally, I would like to praise Underground into the effort put into the documentation, and would like to temper the initial reaction to the release with the knowledge that there have been several "compilation" mod releases in the past months that have put up works wholesale without permission (nor credit).

Good luck on the discussions, and hopefully an arrangement can be met that allows the release while still respecting the original OOO's work.

Pretty classy post, Underground. Likewise, your decision to communicate with the current "caretakers", and to wait and see what happens.

:foodndrink:

Good news. cooperation is the way forward.

I hope that the good work done by Underground09 can be re released in a format that's acceptable to the OOO team and the other modders whose work he bundled into ROM.

Perhaps ROM could be released as a series of add on modules, e.g. it's tweaks to OOO are dependent on having the original OOO, the tweaks to Realistic Fatigue being dependant on the original RF etc.

I feel slightly guilty at the moment as I was an early poster in the locked thread. I pointed out that ROM bundled a number of mods as well as OOO, and questioned whether permission had been obtained. On reflection I wish I had mentioned that Underground had done a lot of work himself and this was not simply a mod compilation. There, I feel better now. :blush2:

I'd like to see this as a series of add-on modules as well. I'm still reading the ROM manual, but so far I like everything it changes.

We can call it ROOOM... :facepalm:

It would be dissapointing if this mod is not finally released because of some original modders never reply to the emails sent to them. That's something that I have never understood... While I fully agree that permission is a "must" before releasing a mod based on other modders' work, when it is clearly obvious that the original modder have better things to do than answering for a request about a mod of a game that he has no interest anymore, I don't see no reason to not use it if the original modder is included in the credits (I'm not talking about any mod specifically but about mods in general).

Which is probably a really good argument for that one thread not too long ago where the issue of how to handle contact with lost modders who didn't provide for this sort of thing. Yes, people move on. Yes, they lose interest in modding. Sometimes even in gaming period. That doesn't exactly change the issue.

If you tried using the same reasoning with the RIAA and a 30 year old song the artist doesn't care about anymore, you'd not get very far. Just because these are mods for a computer game shouldn't devalue the content.

As someone involved in open source software development, I have to say I am coming down on this side of this issue. That was probably obvious before. Arthmoor, I completely understand where you are coming from. Further, I still contend that Underground made a very poor effort where due diligence is concerned. I frequently have to track down the people that are actively developing software, and it is often times not the people that wrote the manual. This is not unusual at all! You must do your research. Underground failed there.

But there is one thing I think needs to be made very clear: the perceived quality of the work has nothing to do with this. Whether you think this is the best mod ever made or the worst piece of garbage you ever saw, it makes no difference. The ends do not justify the means.

I am not trying to beat a dead horse, or keep an argument going. But if there is a single modder out there that still is not happy about this, I'm just saying, "Hey, I hear you, and I completely understand why you feel the way you do."

I won't fan these flames any more, I promise. Just think about it.

Please note, I'm using "you" in a very general sense (any modder creating a derivative work), and I'm not responding to anyone in particular. This is just a general essay on mod ethics wrt contacting the author, and none of this applies to authors that make their wishes known in their readmes (I wish more authors would).

If the author of a resource (be it a mod, model, texture, etc) doesn't respond to contact attempts, the simple answer is not to use that resource. With a little hunting, you can generally find another resource that has either an author that responds to your request or a readme that explicitly states that it is free to use. You may not get exactly what you want, but you can typically get pretty close. Sometimes you even find something that's better than what you planned on originally.

This is nearly always the best course to take.

The slightly longer answer is that it depends on the circumstances.

The main decider of whether there is an issue with using a resource (be it a mod, model, texture, etc) is if the author and/or the public sees it as you taking the author's work instead of you using their work.

If your mod is basically a repack of an existing mod, you're generally going to make authors upset. This is a blatant case of taking work rather than using it, and is one reason why mod compilations tend to be frowned upon. If the author sees it as taking their work, the average user is going to think its the author's original work. They then expect the original author to support the potentially old version that you repacked along with any changes you made. This makes authors very grumpy.

Even if you make modifications to the repacked mod, you are treading on thin ice. The more modifications you make, the thicker the ice, and the less it looks like you're taking their work. There isn't a magic point though where it changes from taking someone's work into using it. Some authors think that if you changed a single item, you're in the clear. Some authors think if you used a single item from their resource, you're taking their work. The majority of authors think it's somewhere in between those two extremes, but nobody agrees on where the line is drawn.

That said, if your mod requires the other mod to be installed, but doesn't redistribute its resources, you're generally in the clear.

Sometimes it simply isn't possible to do what you want without changing the original resource and distributing it. This situation gets a bit trickier. If the author responds, and says "No", you're out of luck. If the author says "Yes", run with it. If the author doesn't respond, the longer and more thoroughly you've tried to contact that author, the more likely you'll be in the clear. Again, there's no magic point where you've suddenly tried long enough. I'm aware of people that have waited over a year to get in touch with an author before using their work, and then never used it because they never got in touch. They searched various forums, contacted people via PM that knew the author, sent out emails to every address they could find, etc. There are also those that make the request in the comments section of a site where the resource was released, wait for a week, then assume they've given it their best shot and release their work (hint, many authors don't actively look through comments, especially if its an old or extremely popular release). Like before, there's a middle ground but nobody agrees on what it is.

If you use a work without explicit permission, you should minimize any changes to the resource, and make it abundantly clear what you have and haven't done to the resource and how long and in what ways you've been trying to get in touch. You should be able to justify every single change that you've made as being essential. Always offer in your readme to take it down asap if the author suddenly responds with a "No" after all your efforts. Sometimes it takes an actual release before an author comes out of the woodworks and makes his wishes known. Basically, the more steps you proactively take to not step on any toes, the more likely you'll be in the clear.

If you do everything humanly possible, it doesn't mean you'll always be in the clear. The author may have made his wishes known in some other means that you aren't aware of. The author may have transferred the work to someone else in a PM that you aren't privy to. Then there are some people that view anything that remotely touches their work to be "taking" and respond quite vehemently to people that make their own mods that simply resemble that author's work. Sometimes there's a simple misunderstanding, and this being the internet, people go overboard with how they respond.

The bottom line is that authors mod as a hobby, and as a result tend to place a lot of pride and emotion into their work. That deserves respect. Even if it makes things a bit more difficult for you.

The community has pretty consistently considered "never" long enough. You don't get permission, you can't use it - no matter how much it would help, no matter how great your work would be, no matter how thoroughly you tried to contact them. Redistributing (modified or not) copies of another person's mod without permission is flat-out not allowed, and it is disrespectful to mod authors to expect otherwise. Open source is all well and good, and I applaud those modders who release their work - but it is not necessary, nor is it the default. We err on the side of caution - on the side of making sure no one's wishes regarding their own work is disrespected.

This is a community fueled by the efforts of those who voluntarily devote countless hours to improving everyone's game, for absolutely no compensation at all. The very least we can do is respect their work. The day this community stops doing that is the day I stop being a part of it, personally.

I want to first preface all my future statements by acknowledging that many people have a right to be upset, and that I have taken ROM down precisely out of respect for those people. The process forward will involve myself and the OOO team, as well as all other modders whom I have not heard back from. I am fully willing to make amends, and any arguments I make here will not touch that fundamental decision.

To press the issue, though, I have to say that I see here a dichotomy that really falls under personal preference. Some people here seem to interpret this sort of thing according to the “letter of the law,” that is, a literal and strict application. You see one person redistributing another’s work without express permission, and conclude that it is unethical enough to warrant such a mod never being distributed. I think that is extremely logical; far from feeling like I was under attack by “hyenas”, I think that many of the criticisms I am receiving are very well thought out. And I can definitely see how I would have done things differently.

But not all are agreeing with that hard-line, and I admit that--while I will abide it out of respect--I still am disappointed, and I did not see the world of computer game modding quite so severely. I did not imagine it infused with such a spirit of gravity. But my opinion requires an explanation.

DragoonWraith—whom I know only because his name is on virtually every “Discussion” page on the TESCS wiki (and from whom I learned a lot!)—interprets such redistribution as a lack of respect for the original modder. A lot of people here do. But I am stunned to read that! My way of thinking was, and is, completely the opposite. In a circumstance where full credit is given in a spirit of enthusiasm for a good game, I admit I am having a hard time viewing the distribution of gaming modifications in the same light as one might view distribution of some other product. I do not diminish all the hard work that you all do--or even the hard work that I did--by admitting that, at the end of the day, I still view this as just a gaming endeavor. What is off-putting to some posters and to myself is that a spirit of enthusiasm and encouragement seems not as prevalent as a spirit of legal severity and jealous nit-picking, which stifles the very reason why these mods should exist. Many people, like myself, just like playing a fun game. I perceived my action of posting this mod as if I were saying, “Hey guys, look what I came up with using the tools you made! How awesome is that!” To interpret that as a *hostile act* against the original author, a lack of respect—I still admit I cannot understand that. It seems completely upside down to me and lacking all perspective. I see it *precisely* as an act of respect. I suppose that is where our main difference lies.

One person posted that, if mods were allowed to be redistributed in the absence of express permission—even if full credit were given and an attempt was made to reach the author—then no one would ever want to release any mods, out of fear of getting ripped off. I think that is a very sad and cynical view, and that such a person misses the point entirely about producing creative work. This kind of creativity should never be about ego, and if you are afraid of releasing a computer game modification--or any other free work of art--because someone *might* rip you off—well, I don’t know what to say to that other than that my mind does not work that way.

To “never” release a mod to the gaming community because, even if hypothetically, one key person never responded because he no longer cares—well, that is the proper action to take in many spheres of human activity. Vegtabill added that in his line of work, things function precisely that way. But my perspective is that, at the end of the day, I viewed a community that revolved around games as something different. I admit that, while many of your arguments are valid, I do not share your perspective. I do not mean that it is immature to take this kind of activity seriously—again, look at myself—but that even while devoting much of your time to this corner of the world, I think it is also possible not to forget the very reason why we’re all here in the first place.
- Underground

To clarify what I was saying, I had to do the research because if I did not, my company could be sued. Lawsuits like that can bring a company to its knees.

No one will be sued over this, fortunately. But you have to try to understand that the principles remain the same. You say it's not about egos. I agree. But it most certainly is about respect. At the end of the day, modders don't have teams of lawyers that will come after you. They know darn well there really isn't a lot that will happen. They count on you to respect them, you see?

I get what you are saying about your view of respect. But in my view, you took a shortcut to get there, and that's not something you just look past.

You are doing the right thing. Keep going, and this really will work out.

Underground,

It might help with your perspective to realize that in some cases resources created for game modding have turned into an actual paying job in the field for a few people. Imagine the damage it might do to someone else who is trying to do the same if they put their resources up, only to have someone else come along and incorporate them en-masse into their own mod. Even if proper credit is given in a detailed readme, someone at a company looking to hire the original creator might be confused and draw the conclusion that they stole them from the second person and are trying to pass work off as their own.

Hiring managers aren't always known for spending lots of time on researching things like this. They have too much to do already. So if they've reached an incorrect conclusion as the result of a situation like this, it may well cost someone a job, and has the potential to hurt their reputation in the field.

Game mods do have value in the real world, and it pays to keep this aspect of things in mind.

That said, you're on the right track to correcting this situation, so I for one wish you luck in getting it all sorted out.

Yes, and that fact is very much appreciated.


I don't think anyone is saying the mod should never be distributed. If it can be fixed, or a satisfactory agreement can be reached, there will be no problem, methinks.


OK, a few things.

One, for a modder who is still working on a mod, unofficial copies of their mod (modified or not) being available for download present a very serious headache. If you don't know where it is, you don't know to update it, you get angry e-mails from people who downloaded it elsewhere and have an out-of-date issue. You run around trying to figure out why someone is still having a bug you thought you fixed - only to learn that they're using a version of the mod that shouldn't be available anywhere.

In the case of mod compilations (which ROM is... and then some. But at the base it's a compilation with your own tweaks applied on top), this is especially problematic - people can't (easily) update to new versions that you might release. Aside for mod compilations' sullied history (almost always done without permission, and often without credit being given to those its due - which I realize you did not do), it's a very significant problem.

Therefore, the default is to assume that the modder does not want the mod re-uploaded. Most modders want to control distribution - for credit, but more important for their own sanity. Unofficial uploads, mirrors, and forks result in having to deal with e-mails of bugs, complaints, etc etc, that have nothing to do with your work but with someone else's. There basically is no modder ever who relishes the thought of dealing with bug reports - they're complicated, difficult, and time-consuming, due to the complex nature of a heavily-modified Oblivion game. Tracking down bugs, glitches, and conflicts is bad enough when it's only your own work you have to worry about. If you're also getting complaints about what others have done - that does not make a modder happy.

Modders should state what they'd like done with their mods. They should give notice when they're leaving the community, and state what they would like done with their mods. Ultimately, neither happens regularly. When it doesn't, we have to go back to that default - that they don't want anyone else messing with their mods.

And what I think is a major point: every mod that has been released to this community was released under those assumptions. To change them now, especially when we cannot contact the original authors, would be grossly unfair.

So yes, respecting modders' work requires that we not re-use it without permission. Even if they've left, even if we've tried to contact them, even if they probably wouldn't mind - unless you can say for certain that they definitely won't mind, that's just not your call to make. Until a modder releases their work for re-use, to assume it would be disrespectful.

You think your situation is bad? Well, story-time! In addition to having my name on nearly every Discussion page on the Wiki (by the way, I really do appreciate the note there about that; made me happy to see it appreciated), I'm also currently one of the longest-standing members of the Oblivion modding community, having joined this forum years before the game was even released and modded Morrowind a bit (there are a handful of others who are also part of the old-old-old-guard, plus from what I understand quite a few of the people I used to mod Morrowind with are still in the Morrowind forum, modding it). Therefore, I can remember what very few people on this forum can, which would be a website called Euro-RPG.

Euro-RPG was, in its day, the #1 Morrowind mod host. It was popular for a number of reasons (but the main one was that your mod was available for download as soon as you uploaded it), and it hosted thousands of mods (it's worth noting that it was not as large as TES Nexus, however). There were many, many mods that could only be found there - including many that were extremely popular.

Then, one day, for whatever reason (and the possible reasons are myriad; server costs, real life affecting the admins, whatever), Euro-RPG shut down. It was gone - and so was every mod on it. TES Source (the precursor to TES Nexus) went down, a long time back, but luckily Dark0ne managed to retain the mod database, and recreate the site as TES Nexus, complete with every mod on it. That didn't happen with Euro-RPG. The database was lost.

A great many of those mods didn't include information on what should happen to them if such a thing should happen. And the authors of far too many could not be contacted. The result? Those mods were never publicly available again. People who had downloaded them previously still had them, of course, but the community agreed - no one could re-upload them without permission. It was a tough time for the community; a huge blow. The Oblivion modding community has never faced anything like that, but ultimately, this community is an extension of that one.

And the importance of respecting modders' rights - even when we suspect, but cannot know for sure, that the modder would rather we didn't - has been a foundation of this community from before this community started. Whatever your opinion on the matter, really, I think it's rather clear that changing our basic assumptions about how modders' work should be treated is something we simply cannot do without notifying the authors, which in many cases is impossible.

This is also why modders should explain how they want this situation handled. Some modders do specify "if I've been gone for X months, and you e-mail me and I don't respond for Y weeks, feel free to do what you wish with the mod" is something I have seen in many readmes - but probably more from Morrowind, when people remembered the Euro-RPG fiasco, then for Oblivion, most modders of which have never heard of Euro-RPG.


Bingo. This is exactly right.


Agreed.

Been debating over whether to weigh in here. I think most of the heavy subjects have been covered, and I'm not among those whose mods you used, so there's no personal interest. Reading your post above, there are two things I think you have overlooked. The first, DragoonWraith has covered: your inclusion of OOO's files with OOO's filenames will inevitably generate technical support hassles for the OOO team, no matter what your readme might say. People will skim readmes, if they even open them. People will not keep track of where each file came from. People will Google the filename and find the official thread. The OOO team, who are quite helpful folks, will tear their hair out trying to figure out what's wrong. Note that I'm an optimistic guy who tries to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, frequently including near-limitless second chances: this isn't bile or cynicism! It's just how people work.

Now, the other thing might seem more minor, but I think it's worth keeping in mind...

You are wrong. Period. This, too, is just how people work.

That would have been me:



That's of course a bit exaggerated, but I did that to drive home a point I find self-evident - but apparently is considered quite obscure by some. And I don't think it's sad/cynical really either. What's sad/cynical is rather to break the arrangement if knowing about it. Of course, it can be frustrating for modders wanting to use particular resources, but as a principle it's both fundamental and rather beautiful IMO. It's one of those things where the best for the community is also the best for a single individual, i.e. in this case a mod user who perhaps doesn't care much about EULA's, mod ethics etc. Even from his or her "egotistical" POV ("I just want to play the mod") it's clearly advantageous to stand up for the modders rights, as the fact that he/she can enjoy those mods in the first place relies on this in my opinion rather logical ground rule. I mean, it's not some esoteric judicial mumbo-jumbo we're talking about - it's basically about respecting other peoples work. How can that be considered sad, cynical or egotistical? It's rather the very opposite IMO. The thriving Oblivion mod community is in itself a living proof that this arrangement is working out very nicely.

Also, it breaks down to Ethics 101 rather than Mod Ethics 101 IMO. Would you appreciate if someone did the same thing to ROM as ROM did to OOO (a sudden release with no prior knowledge of it, heavily altering the ROM masters while keeping their names and making the mod dependent on those etc)? I somehow doubt that. So it boils down to "Do Unto Others..." really IMO.

We have a saying in Sweden that translated into English would go something like: "Don't saw off the tree trunk you're sitting on". Goes for both modders and mod users IMO.