Proposed Policy Change - the Modiquette

[Gary Childress]

It seems to me that if an artist makes specific guidelines with respect to how their work is to be used, then several factors come into play.

1. The guidelines must be made explicit in the posting of the artwork in the DL database so that it is easy for others to see what the limits on usage are. (EDIT: Otherwise anything posted to the site would be, to a reasonable extent, initially considered relatively open for use by others, including the creation of derivatives.)
   
2. A large part of the enforcement of those guidelines must rest on the artist him or herself and/or other members of the community who spot a violation of an artist's explicit policies for use of his/her product. I don't think it's practical to expect the staff to actively sift through the hundreds of uploads to the DL databse to determine if a particular upload meets the particular requirements of an originary author. Nor is it practical to hold the staff responsible for any breach of guidelines. It would have to be a kind of "artist beware" policy.
   
3. However, once an infraction is detected then it would ultimately be up to the staff to negotiate a settlement with the parties involved according to both the guidelines already made explicit by the artist AND any official laws that apply. If the artist does not like the settlement then the art can be deleted and removed from the database by the artist in protest.
   
4. If an artist leaves the community and is no longer able to enforce his or her guidelines then the artist is free to delete his or her offerings if s/he is concerned that they may be misused.
   
5. In no instance will the breaching of any official copyright or other applicable laws be tolerated.

With that said, I've had some of my creations used in mods here on CFC. Sometimes I browse the scenario forum (I work with Civ III so we mostly have scenarios and not as much mods) just to see if a particular scenario is using anything I made only because I am enormously flattered when someone thinks that my creation is worth putting in their mod. I don't think I've ever been explicitly asked by anyone ahead of time whether it was OK to use my work in their mod (maybe once or twice at most I've been asked, I can't remember). In any case I really don't care nor expect someone to ask my permission to use something I created. I put it here partly because I want to share with everyone and I want them to share with me. I use other people's creations in my own personal mods. How can I expect them to openly share with me if I don't share as openly with them?

I've also had a couple derivatives made of my work, I think a couple people have made what we call "multi-units" out of a few of my units. Again I wasn't asked by them ahead but they were generous enough to credit me with having made the original. That is enough. What more can an artist want than to be celebrated and appreciated?

I've never had a genuine problem with any of the art I have released here at CFC. for the most part I try not to create the grounds for conflict. Most everyone has been very willing to give me credit when they use something of mine and yet I've never asked this of anyone. I think most people are cognizant of the give and take in human relations. If you want me to continue producing things you want to use, then it's a good idea to treat me well. If I want to be appreciated and celebrated, then I need to treat you well.

 

[azzaman333]

The one thing that confuses me more than anything in this thread is why someone would upload their work to CFC if they didn't want to share it in the first place?

 

[Gary Childress]

The one thing that confuses me more than anything in this thread is why someone would upload their work to CFC if they didn't want to share it in the first place?

It sounds to me like the major problem present here has to do with derivatives and not so much with sharing orignal creations.

It seems that most artists are willing to share but some aren't willing to see their work altered and therefore parts of it attributed to other authors, I suppose.

I tend to work off the notion that most anything that enriches the experience of the game is a good thing. When you put something you created in the commons you should be prepared for what will happen. If you want plenty of conflict and dispute in your life then putting a lot of rules and stipulations for use of your work is the way to accomplish that.

 

[Gary Childress]

@is612

You can name my Name, its No Problem for me.

Maybe i was a a "little" Bit rud, but how would you feel if your read, by accident, "there is a mod wich have some featers WE should copy and integrate them into our mod!" And without my permission!?
and it was not the first time that I read of these plans. maybe that was a reason more why I was upset... I have invested a lot of time in modifying models, Creating New Models, designing graphics, adding Code, all by my own! Im Not such a Big modteam as the c2c Croew. Im a "One man Show"...
I also think, it is a little bit strange when someone says, "we take his mod as a reference point because we find everything we are looking for ..." But everyone sees things differently ... yes, maybe all models are already available in the forum, but i have made the effort to seek it. why are you not just as diligently? all I want is, that I have the opportunity to decide what happens with my work. I would not be delegated by an upper Power.
and as I have understood many opinions, I'm not the only one who thinking so.

I think it's reasonable to honor your wishes, however, be prepared to reap the seeds you sow. The original authors of the models you used could always follow your precedent and revoke your privileges to use their models as well.

I'm curious, did you post anything explicitly alerting people to the limited use of your creation? Did you ask the original creators of the models you used whether you could use their creations?

 

[raystuttgart]

I think it's reasonable to honor your wishes, however, be prepared to reap the seeds you sow.

Well said.

Edit:
Could this "Witch Trial" finally be ended ?
It really leaves a bad taste ...

 

[Gary Childress]

Well said.

Edit:
Could this "Witch Trial" finally be ended ?
It really leaves a bad taste ...

By "Witch Trial" do you mean the community's reaction to Monaldinio or do you mean Monaldinio's reaction to what was done with his work? Or both? To me "Witch Trial" usually implies an instance of a large group persecuting an individual for his or her differing views. If it is the case that the community is persecuting Monaldinio then I apologize for contributing to it.

 

[raystuttgart]

By "Witch Trial" do you mean the community's reaction to Monaldinio or do you mean Monaldinio's reaction to what was done with his work? Or both? To me "Witch Trial" usually implies an instance of a large group persecuting an individual for his or her differing views. If it is the case that the community is persecuting Monaldinio then I apologize for contributing to it.

I was talking about

A) Community and other modders questioning and "attacking" a single modder (Monaldinio) again and again.
B) The "majority" (modders that are willing to share with everybody) trying to force their will ("Sharing is a must !") upon the "minority" (modders that are not willing to share with everybody).

----------

Seriously, this will lead to nothing except endless arguments and discussions.

I personally believe that sharing is great, don't misunderstand me.
But getting personal or trying to force people to something is not.

Threads like this only create a bad atmosphere in an otherwise really great community.

As I said:
If somebody is uncooperative or unfriendly to you, simply ignore him.

As you said:
They will reap what they sow.

 

[Gary Childress]

Seriously, this will lead to nothing except endless arguments and discussions.

I didn't realize there was anything better to do on the Internet.

 

[raystuttgart]

I didn't realize there was anything better to do on the Internet.

Well maybe.

I just believe / hope that it is not in the interest of this community to create an atmosphere like in this thread throughout the forum
by continuing to publicly attack single people for their way of seeing things or to try to force the will of the majority upon a minority ...

 

[JosEPh_II]

2 things that have not been exposed or enlightened.
1. The Work in question was being discussed as a possible source for material by another Project (C2C). Nothing has Ever been used from that Work. (Nor will it be either now.) The material (Planetfall) that the Work in question got it's basis from (and in fact almost all of it's basis) already has given permission to use his work in the Project(C2C). But the Work in question never asked for Planetfall's author's permission to be used for the Work in question. Nor did the Work in question give Credit to anyone until this dispute began. Only after Moderator intervention did the Work in question give any credit.

2. The forum under which this discussion was being held has always Credited and asked for permission to use if the author is still active on the forum.

There is No witch hunt. So stop with that right now. That clouds the issue in itself.

The issue is selfishness. Nothing more nothing less in a community of free will and shared goal, to enjoy a product.

JosEPh

 

[raystuttgart]

The issue is selfishness.

Too much selfishness or let us maybe call it "Taking without being willing to give" is a bad thing in society
and it is a bad thing in a modding community.

Does every society or community expect people to not only act selfish ?
- Sure, otherwise the society or community could not work.

Does a society or community honorate if you do share and help others.
- Yes, usually it does.

But could you forbid selfishness (by law / rule) or would that even be a good idea ?
- I don't think so.

Does it help to publically accuse or argue with selfish people ?
- I don't think so.

Does anybody force you to become friends with selfish people ?
- No.

-------

So ok, let us have more philosophical discussions about "selfishness".
How bad it is or if it is your right as a free person.

But let us please stop discussing on a personal level.
(Simply talking about the "work in question" or the "unnamed person" does not really make it less personal.)

Let us continue to create good guidelines how modders should behave and cooperate to be a good and appreciated community member.

But I feel very uncomfortable about the discussion of forcing modders to share their work by some forum dictated rule.

-------

But I guess I start repeating myself ...

 

[Lplate]

Reached about page 4 of this thread and thought I might as well throw my tuppence in.

Firstly, there's been a load of attacks on the way that this has been/is being handled. My understanding is that this is only a policy proposal. It has not been made policy yet and this thread is open for the community to discuss it. Presumably, following these discussions, it may never become policy, or might become policy as is, or may become policy in a modified form. I think we'd get further if there was less attacks on the moderators for how this proposal was communicated and more debate/discussion on the actual issue.

I would not like the wording as currently drafted to be made policy. My preference would be to keep it at the guideline level.

If something similar is to be made policy, then I think it is essential that modders are allowed to specifically opt out of it, "Unless otherwise specified by the creator(s) . . .".

Personally, I've no issue with other modders using my material but then I'm only a minor modder. Every bit of modding I do is built on the work of a load of other modders, not to mention advice and help from the community about issues. However,

• I can easily understand how those who put work in would not like that work to be "corrupted" for a use contrary to their original intent.
• I can also understand how a modder might want to specifically exclude others from using their work in a mod for personal reasons.
• I think it is a fair position for a modder to develop a mod and provide it to others through the forum for use only as a game and not as fodder for another mod. Sure they are using community resources to develop their mod but they are providing the community with something in return.
• I can see how a modder might be disinclined to agree to the use of their work in someone else's mod, where that mod adds little other than a veneer and a new author name.

When creating a mod, modders may have to request the use of other copyrighted material from artists, companies, etc. To get this permission, they may have to clearly outline how they intend to use the material and agree to stipulations by the copyright holder. A modder may not be in a position to give permission for such copyrighted material to be used in other mods and then there is no way that they can surrender a non-existent right to CFC. This means modders need to be able to indicate that parts of their mods are not available for use in other mods (without subsequent modders going back to the original copyright holders).

---
For me the main thing is respect. You respect the work that others have put in. If they give permission to use their work provided you just give them credit, great. If they withhold that permission for whatever reason they see fit, then you respect that decision and don't use their work. If you ask for permission to use someone else's work and it is refused, you gracefully accept the refusal.
In the absence of other specific information, it is assumed in line with the existing guidelines that you can use another CFC modder's work. If you use someone else's work, give them credit.

 

[raystuttgart]

@Lplate:
Great post.

 

[Takhisis]

I insist that we be able to upvote posts, but no, they refuse.

 

[Gary Childress]

2 things that have not been exposed or enlightened.
1. The Work in question was being discussed as a possible source for material by another Project (C2C). Nothing has Ever been used from that Work. (Nor will it be either now.) The material (Planetfall) that the Work in question got it's basis from (and in fact almost all of it's basis) already has given permission to use his work in the Project(C2C). But the Work in question never asked for Planetfall's author's permission to be used for the Work in question. Nor did the Work in question give Credit to anyone until this dispute began. Only after Moderator intervention did the Work in question give any credit.

2. The forum under which this discussion was being held has always Credited and asked for permission to use if the author is still active on the forum.

There is No witch hunt. So stop with that right now. That clouds the issue in itself.

The issue is selfishness. Nothing more nothing less in a community of free will and shared goal, to enjoy a product.

JosEPh

It sounds to me like Raystuttgart may have a valid point. It does sort of sound like a bit of a witch hunt. There's really not much that can be done if someone wants to withold the rights to use their work. Right or wrong, hypocritical or not, all the booing and hissing in the world probably won't change a "no" to a "yes", especially now that the artist is ticked off. So it probably doesn't serve much purpose to continue debating the incident. (as tantalizing as it may be...)

To get the thread back on track...As far as forum policy or rules or whatever, regarding art found on CFC, I propose the following:

1. Unless otherwise stated, any art work uploaded or offered to the commons is assumed to be free to use in a non-commercial, recreational manner including the creation of derivatives.
   
2. Giving credit where credit is due is not mandatory unless stipulated otherwise by the artist, however, it is highly encouraged under all circumstances.
   
3. If an artist wants to limit the use of his creations, it should be up to the artist to make said limits clear and known to the community. Putting such information in a readme file contained in the DL file would be recommended as well as posting the guidelines in the description field in the DL database.
   
4. The majority of the burden for policing any guidelines would rest on the artist him or herself or other members of the community to report any violations of explicit guidelines to the staff.
   
5. Once an infraction is reported then it would be up to the site staff to deal with the situation in fair and reasonable manner.
   
6. If an artist leaves the community and is no longer able to enforce his or her guidelines then the artist is free to delete his or her offerings if s/he is concerned that they may be misused.
   
7. In no instance will the breaching of any official copyright or other applicable laws be tolerated.
   
8. An artist is always free to delete anything of their own for any reason.

 

[Delta_Strife]

I could live with those rules Gary.

 

[Plotinus]

Here's one possibility to consider.

We've been talking about modifying the Modiquette and then making it part of the site rules. Some members have pointed out that that's a bit unfair, given that the Modiquette as originally devised was written and discussed only by Civ 4 modders, so they've had a lot longer to think about it.

An alternative, then, is to leave the Modiquette as (and where) it is, as a "gentlemen's agreement" specific to the Civ 4 C&C forum. The proposed new rule from the OP of this thread - or whatever we agree on as the final version - regarding the use of other people's mods could then be considered by itself, as a rule to make part of the site rules (for everyone), and ignore the rest of the Modiquette for these purposes.

I hope that's clear. Would that make sense to everyone?

 

[raystuttgart]

An alternative, then, is to leave the Modiquette as (and where) it is, as a "gentlemen's agreement" ...

Sounds good.
Guidelines ("Gentlemen's Agreements") are always a good thing to have.
Much more is probably not needed.

 

[Gary Childress]

Here's one possibility to consider.

We've been talking about modifying the Modiquette and then making it part of the site rules. Some members have pointed out that that's a bit unfair, given that the Modiquette as originally devised was written and discussed only by Civ 4 modders, so they've had a lot longer to think about it.

An alternative, then, is to leave the Modiquette as (and where) it is, as a "gentlemen's agreement" specific to the Civ 4 C&C forum. The proposed new rule from the OP of this thread - or whatever we agree on as the final version - regarding the use of other people's mods could then be considered by itself, as a rule to make part of the site rules (for everyone), and ignore the rest of the Modiquette for these purposes.

I hope that's clear. Would that make sense to everyone?

Hi Plotinus,

My apologies but you've lost me a bit. Just to be clear: Is this the proposed new rule from the OP of which you speak?

Any Mod that is developed using CivFanatics resources or is supplied by one of its authors through links in the forums or Downloads database is free to use, without permission, as long as credit is given.

If so, then would that be to say, technically speaking, that it is OK to use an author's work freely so long as credit is given, regardless of whether the author gives such permission or not?

 

[Kyriakos]

Any Mod that is developed using CivFanatics resources or is supplied by one of its authors through links in the forums or Downloads database is free to use, without permission, as long as credit is given.

Utterly unacceptable. Might as well use the work without any credit either, shows how little respect is had for the creators.