Proposed Policy Change - the Modiquette

tom2050 said:

You have not defined what a Post constitutes... I'll tell you right now a Post does not constitute resources and information outside of CFC.

People do not like being forced to say that all the hours of work they put into something is suddenly public domain. I like the community joining together, and most do, so why get up on some kind of dictator seat and try to force what is already being done for the most part?

I ask companies if I can use their work, and if they say yes, I proceed according to any guidelines they gave me. Is it public domain? Not really. I was given permission by the company to make a derivative work of their work (which might be considered copyrighted work for all I know).

So who are you to say that a derivative work (which permission was given to me) is suddenly public domain? I don't think CFC wants to get into that mess.

Click to expand...

that's exactly my intention, exactly what I mean! For me it does not matter anymore, but for others. what's the problem, to ask someone if you can use his or her work? if you know the Autor. And wEhen he say no...then it means no...
But to deny the freedom to say yes or no,from the beginnig is against each law in Europe, which deals with this thematic...

Sorry for my english, i cant explain myself as i want...-.-

Monaldinio, don't worry about your English.We can forgive a little problem with grammar. You are making yourself understood with no problem.

leif erikson said:

It would be far more helpful to provide input on what we should say or do.

Click to expand...

indeed.

embryodead said:

Frankly, it was fine before - a set of unwritten rules, written guidelines, and if errr.. something hit the fan, it was treated on a case-by-case basis. As I understand, during the recent incident there was a demand for a formal rule on this.

A simple GPL-like rule like that, permits copying, rebranding, takeovers and commercial use, and BlueMonkey is right that it has happened before. It happened to me in the past which is why I brought it up earlier.

So the problem at hand is someone adding to a mod created by other people, and then refusing anyone to re-use his additions, which made people on all sides angry. If there really is a need for a formal rule, maybe it could be more narrow/precise, so as to deal with works derivative of CFC published material, without stepping into a plethora of other issues.

For that matter, it would be helpful if the core of the problem was outlined for everyone, because it wasn't clear from the beginning why and what is happening, and I think people (myself included) were/are jumping to wrong conclussions.

Click to expand...

Thank you

So "angry creators", what are your propositions to prevent someone to use your work without letting you use his ?

. So the problem at hand is someone adding to a mod created by other people, and then refusing anyone to re-use his additions, which made people on all sides angry. If there really is a need for a formal rule, maybe it could be more narrow/precise, so as to deal with works derivative of CFC published material, without stepping into a plethora of other issues.

Click to expand...

Simone -> Monaldinio!


sorry if I annoy other people, diseegard the spirit of this forum! but only because, as it is currently handled, it does not mean that I agree with it.
if 8 out of 10 people jump out of the window, I dont jump too...

For those concerned about the location: there was nothing nefarious planned about that, it was just the thought that it should all be done in one thread and that every C&C forum should get a notive in form of a redirect to that thread. Site Feedback as a more logical place instead of one C&C subforum was simply overlooked. However: it is correct to put it in Site Feedback, not so much since that gives it more exposure to other modders (which it does not) but since its more of a common territory. So this is moved there.

Please continue with your feedback, it is much appreciated regardless of direction,

ori said:

Please continue with your feedback, it is much appreciated whether regardless of direction,

Click to expand...

I think the rest of the post is licenced

Let me just state again that some of us create everyhting from nothingness, so it all does belong to us, and it should stay this way. I am happy to share my work, but only under certain conditions, namely (to restate them) that it is not used commercially, and that it is not altered in any way and then posted again for use. No-commercial use, no-derivatives should be the licence for it, and it will if it comes to that.

Kyriakos said:

I think the rest of the post is licenced

Click to expand...

Thanks corrected the mis-edit.

As I stated we appreciate any feedback.

Note: non-commercial use was overlooked in the initial post, regardless of whether this or anything else is implemented we do agree that any such policy should only cover non-commercial use. In fact it I personally would also believe it should only cover work by other modders here that rerelease their work here in turn for using resources published in these forums.

It seems a fair price of admission that that which is uploaded to CFC can be freely used by others participating in the community, without them having to seek explicit permission (remembering that it's not a matter of removing the element of permission; it's just ensuring permission is implicit). If a mod creator is using the services of CFC for free, as a platform through which to develop and promote their work, it is only fair that conditions apply, namely that others are granted permission to use the work in question, in the spirit of the community. On the other hand, if a mod creator does not wish to grant automatic permission for the use of their work, but rather would prefer to more closely control how their work is used, so using a third party site to host said work, they should not receive automatic permission for the use of the work of others at CFC. This avenue should be open to mod creators; they should be able to opt out and upload their work elsewhere, retaining control of who can and cannot use their work. But if they choose to opt out of the spirit of the community in such a manner, they should not enjoy the very benefit they refuse to extend to others. If a mod creator wishes to deny access to their creations for use in other mods, access to the creations of others should be likewise denied to them for use in their mods.

If you're accepting the benefit of the services provided by CFC as a venue for the promotion and storage of your work, you accept the conditions that come with it. If the spirit of the community is one of collaboration, rather than of jealously guarded proprietary interests, then it would seem natural for one of those conditions to be the right of others to use your work. It's part and parcel of using CFC.

As a side note, when changes are made, or even mooted, that might impact on members' RL rights (e.g. privacy policy or intellectual property policy), it's probably best to make an as transparent as possible site wide announcement, so people have an opportunity to protect themselves as they see fit.

/$0.02

A forum wide announcement was put in place with my last post.

Ah, hadn't seen that before making my post.

Also, would it be worth having a notice of CFC's licence/right to assign whenever someone uploads a file (assuming this is not already done)? The boilerplate in 'your agreement with us' might theoretically inform people of their rights, but it would seem more in the interests of transparency to actually make sure people know at the relevant point in time.

This seems like trying to fix an unbroken fence, really. Why would it be necessary to be forced add a credit if it's already done just out of respect?

Because the honor code isn't a 100%, but rules usually are.

There are two parts to this policy:
1) Spell out what should be obvious for using other people's creations (i.e. give credit).
2) State that consent for re-use of one's creations (and one's additions to other users' creations) by other users of this forum is implied by posting them here.

Now either of these regulations may or may not be necessary to implement in the proposed form or another. However we felt that we should at the very least propose to regulate these explicitly mostly due to problems that emerged on this front recently.
For the give credit where due part I don't believe there is much controversy.
I think the controversy is about the proposal on how permissions for re-use of both completely new creations and work improving/expanding/adding to previous work published in these forums are to be handled (i.e. that we would assume that such permission is granted for non-commercial re-use in mods by other members of this forum).

Isn't it pretty simple ?

If the mod creator(s) does not explicitly state anything different, he does allow reuse of his work.
And of course credits should be given.

Also, you cannot make binding rules for mods and modders.
All you can do is to make suggestions and give guidelines.

Here is how we handle this topic:
(Excerpt from our policies.)

You are very wrong to assume that most creators agree for derivatives of their work to be made. I for one surely do not, unless i agree otherwise on a case by case basis. Making 3d graphics (or any graphics for that matter) takes time, and it is nearly ludicrous to ask of people who spend that time to just hand the work over to cfc to do as the people that run it please.

---- -----

Gedemon said:

So "angry creators", what are your propositions to prevent someone to use your work without letting you use his ?

Click to expand...

I'd love to make a long winded post about the tact of your "angry creators" statement, but I'll abstain...for now.

I see no reason making any changes to the policies that have already been existent. The previous honors system had been working fine for many of us - a few disruptions every now and then should not mean that any arbitrary enforcement of a forumwide policy is a necessity. It's bound to happen because people are simply going to be people.

I don't see this as a "conspiracy" of sorts, but that your staff did not even bother to make the announcement in other sections of the CFC board comes off as demonstrating how much (or how little) regard you put upon the rest of us. Whether you like it or not, a lot of the life of the community comes from mod and graphics makers and the way this was not well-broadcasted is pretty much a slap in the face.

just to be clear this thread was placed in every creation and customization section - there was no "not even bothering" about this.

ori said:

just to be clear this thread was placed in every creation and customization section - there was no "not even bothering" about this.

Click to expand...

Then why was a thread posted in August was posted only yesterday in the Civ3 C&C?

I'd like to bring up another issue which has come up recently. The section on modmods begins

Some mods get so big and have so many fans that some decide to mod it further. This is again in the spirit of this community. But please be cautious: A mod is big work. The original modder put lots of time, thoughts and heartblood into his masterpiece. Some people might have a specific idea about what they want to do, what they want to create. And some might not like it if you turn it into something else. So please ask before you modmod. It's the only instance in this forum where permission is really required. It's a matter of heart, please respect if somebody says "No".

Click to expand...

However, the specific case is that I do not like the direction that the Civ 4 mod Caveman2Cosmos is going and want to make a fork going in a different direction. C2C for those who don't know is not developed by any one person. We've had over a dozen direct contributors (including myself now for almost a year), and precursors like RevDCM, ROM, and AND had more as well. However, the team leader of C2C wants to say that I can't make my own mod based off of C2C and take it in it's own direction, even though he has only made a (relatively, C2C is over 2.3 GB, so it is actually quite big by most mods standards) small contribution to the mod.

Now the way I look at it the policy in the quote applies well to mods that are made by one person who does almost all of the work. That is exactly the opposite of C2C, where many people are doing parts of work here and there.

I think that this needs to be brought up for discussion. I asked The_J about it and he said that I was probably right, but I would like to get input from other staff on this.