Looks like the Ghostrunner developers also have an issue with paid mods running off their IP.
End corporate personhood. IP laws have become malign corporate distortions of reasonable artist protections. No company should be allowed to ‘own’ anything, but certainly not IP. A company has no intellect, thus cannot have intellectual property.
As for this case in particular, selling a mod is absolutely not infringing on the IP of the game it is attached to any more than selling a clip on bookmark/magnifying glass/book light (a tool attached to a piece of media to grant the user a useful extra functionality/greater ease of use when interacting with that piece of media) infringes on the IP of the author.
CDPR really likes to shoot themselves in the leg, meanwhile Dota and DayZ 🤑
I don’t understand this at all.
rockstar did the same thing to the VR mods that were made for GTA games.
the guys are developing mods that are going to make me want to purchase and play the game. why is that a problem?
I don’t understand intellectual property
In this case it’s cause the modder is charging money for the mod, I think CD Project Red even offered to allow it to exist if he stopped charging before this, so I would argue this is on the modder
I don’t understand what difference it makes to CDPR. if the guy makes a few bucks developing mods for the game, then he can spend more of his time developing the mod, and making mods for other games. right? in what way is it harming CDPR
Not exactly, they made him remove the RDR 2 vr mod. the GTA is still up on github.
this is a terms of service issue, but they’re using dmca (copyright) to enforce.
he technically has a case for selling, but defending it would be too expensive. LR also isn’t socially adept so he’s self-sabatoged himself too.
I don’t understand intellectual property
I’m asking from a place of curiosity, not a place of judgement. Have you ever created anything? A piece of art, poem or prose, a film, a program, etc?
I am an artist who is VERY anti-IP law. The system as it exists is evil and does far more harm than good. IP is not some holy grail that deserves protection when it can be so easily abused. I would rather have no IP law than the current system, but I’ll settle for reforms.
Evil is a really strong word that I’m not sure I can get behind here.
yes
Do you mind sharing what it was/is?
I have no idea what your question is getting at. I am a published artist but I pay my bills with unrelated W-2 work
I said from the get go that I was asking from a place of curiosity not judgement. I wasn’t “getting at” anything. It interests me to know what your stance is and how it might be informed. Congrats on being published, that’s pretty cool.
if I could sustain myself with art by charging a few bucks like the mod developer in this article is doing, then I would
Copyright makes no sense. As long as there is a correct citation, it’s kosher as far as I’m concerned.
“This song was originally created by @turdnugget” should be the point of copyright and not the current rent seeking behaviour of the ruling class.
I will extend the same question to you.
Plenty of music, still think copyright is stupid.
Attribution, 100%, copyright itself is stupid.
Now I extend the same question to you.
I mostly write but have wanted to make a game for a while.
When will people learn to do these kinds of things anonymously?
This seems like a good idea, but a related question I’ve been wondering about is, what is the best way to anonymously run a software project facing this type of threat model, when you also want that software to be accessible to people? Does anyone know about any tips or resources for this? Is there some kind of darknet github? How do you do social media or collect donations/payment? Also, are there any good examples of projects that did this right?
I’m not an expert, but I2P and Tor should allow people to host things anonymously.
Monero can be used as an anonymous payment method.
This guy is not doing any favors for the modding community.
So does anyone have a version of this we can download still?
I don’t get why modders shouldn’t be allowed to ask for money. Do players just want people to work for free? Why should the game developers get to set the rules when mods often contain no content/IP from the game devs?
Because in most cases they can only do the thing they do, because another company invested millions in order to make, release, promote and support the game. Without their work, the modders would have nothing to mod. Because working out a licensing deal with every modder to split the revenue is a lot of work and most mods won’t get played much anyways, it isn’t worth the hassle. So in order to accommodate the community and keep their game active for longer, the terms are modding is allowed and even encouraged. But the other side of the bargain is that the mods can’t be sold. And usually the company reserves the right to outright ban mods using legal means. For example when people mod in far right extremism the company doesn’t want to get associated with.
Now there is a gray area where people donate to modders or even pay outright for modders to build certain things. This is usually just fine, as long as the mod is also available for free. People aren’t paying for the mod, they are paying for the dev time, which is totally fine.
But this modder specifically put access to his mods behind his Patreon. Sure technically you could subscribe for a month, get the mod and then stop the subscription. But that’s legally still a pay wall and in practice the mod needs to be updated often to keep working.
So it’s pretty simple in this case, the modder was asked to stop putting the mods behind a pay wall, he didn’t, so he got a cease and desist. Usually I’m all for the little man and against the large companies, but in this case the terms were pretty clear and the modder violated them.
Now we could have a more general discussion about how and if modders should be compensated for their time. But I feel that’s a bit beyond this single case.
Just because the terms are clear doesn’t mean the terms are fair.
Your argument is that his work relies on the work of others. But many people’s jobs rely on others, with or without their consent. Someone who works at a travel agency relies on nice destinations existing to send people to. Tour guides don’t need consent from an architect to stop and point outside their building.
Note that people will still need to buy the game to play the mod.
They do need permission from the building owner to bring people inside to look at it though. And that usually involves paying them.
Yes but in this context, the building owner is the person who bought the game.
I don’t get why the game publishers don’t just fucking employ the guy to do it officially if they’re going to get pissy about it.
He made a VR mod for the game and they are suing him? Kiss my ass. He is the true cyberpunk.
Luke Ross and his mods suck.
Idk the real cyberpunk move would have been putting it up and taking donations which if I understand correctly CD Projekt was going to allow him to still do.
They just didn’t want him straight selling it. Which is pretty fair honestly. He should have just made it up for donations and I bet if he had done that he would have gotten a pretty decent amount of donations all at once because it was getting so much publicity.
He’s selling a VR mode for the game.
How much VR does the mod even give? Like is it just being able to look around in complete 3D or do you also have the ability to manipulate the world with your hands? I have found many options to do the former and they don’t cost a dime, but I have yet to see anyone mod in the capabilities of being able to do more than simply move your head around to look at the game world.
Fuck all the DMCA trolls, that guy isn’t hurting any of their profits. He made dozens of games work in VR that never had a VR option, which nobody else has done for those games. It’s not unfair for him to make money from his unique work when the demand is there.
If he had a generic mod that happened to support Cyberpunk 2077 / that other game that got him DMCA’d, I’d agree. But he’s using that IP, name, etc. to market his product and sell it - the publisher is well within their right to not want to be associated with that.
A DMCA (copyright) troll has a much different connotation than what these two publishers are doing.
“Using the name” would be a trademark violation, not copyright, and that’s not a claim I’ve heard made. It sounds like he’s very clear that it’s his project.
This is exactly DMCA trolling. If he is not using or sharing any IP (game assets, logos, images, charters, code, etc.) in his mods, then he’s not violating their copyright. Making a program that interacts with their IP is not a copyright violation, because he did not distribute any of their IP.
Unless I’m missing something. I haven’t been following this, but it does seem like a perfect example of DMCA abuse.
Even if he’s sharing video footage of the mod working with their game, that’s likely protected. (I think it’s called “Fair Use” in the US?) Nintendo is a massive DMCA troll about that, claiming anyone sharing Let’s Play footage of their games is copyright violation, and throwing out DMCAs like Halloween candy.
Which is why the DMCA is bad legislation; there are no penalties for abuse by copyright holders, and the cost to fight a DMCA takedown notice on the courts is prohibitive. There need to be harsh penalties for companies abusing the system to target content that a reasonable person would say is clearly protected use. Without that, the end result of the DMCA laws were clear, right from the start.
We need digital sovereignty so creators can host their content on local-law abiding servers that ignore America’s corrupt, bullshit DMCA takedown system, and whose monetization can’t be shut down by American payment processors.
He kind of does, doesn’t he? His software supports 40+ games, it’s not just Cyberpunk. There’s no Cyberpunk content in his mod, it’s just software that manipulates other software. It seems insane that people are supporting this as a legit DMCA takedown, and that the response has been to pirate his software like that is somehow now justified by him allegedly violating CDPR IP. I don’t get it at all. If he was distributing a modified version of their game that would be one thing but it’s software that allows users to modify a variety of different games they have a license for, which is obviously something else entirely.
He did violate their IP, just not with the mod itself but the advertising / his posts - at least in my uneducated opinion.
Take these examples:
https://archive.is/xKCtk https://archive.is/bfg53
He’s using their IP to advertise his commercial product - a paid mod that supports their game. This use of IP generally isn’t considered fair use. It’s not the fact that it supports the game that’s a violation, it was the advertising that was more my point.
And then as DMCAs generally go, companies overreact (like Patreon) and overreach. I don’t think CD Project Red could reasonably have done anything if all this was was a footnote that his mod supports CP2077 and the advertising was happening via content creators plugging it - or otherwise off Patreon. But because he happens to use their IP to advertise directly, this was the outcome.
I’m not a lawyer though, there is probably more at play here.
That makes zero sense. DMCA the offending videos/images then. You can’t extend DMCA to related things that don’t infringe. That makes absolutely no sense.
I can’t load those links so I’m not sure what you are referring to but broadly speaking, I don’t see the issue with using a trademark in the context of advertising that your product is compatible with another product. It’s not fundamentally different than an advertisement for an iPhone case using Apple trademarks to convey that it’s a compatible product when it’s not made by Apple. Additionally, this seems incorrect because from everything I have seen they specifically refer to the software as being in violation of their IP. I haven’t seen anything where they suggest his use of their trademarks in advertising is the issue.
no fuck off paid modders, if you want money go make your own software or follow the rules
Eh? They did make their own software.
Would you be fine with a DMCA for BigPicture Beta or Virtual Desktop because they “interact” with various video games?
What about TeamViewer?
Same concept, this is just a “mod” instead of an executable. Which hilariously this could easily be.
why should we follow the rules set out by game developers? The mods contain no copyrighted content, so legally the game devs don’t get a say, and nor should they. Should the creator of the gameboy screen light have made it for free? Should electricians have to check if the original construction crew for a house approves before changing the wiring?
The existence of modding communities is predicated in being communities first and foremost, not jobs or money making schemes. This behavior poisons the well, creating a toxic community that makes the mods inaccessible to those not willing to be nickel and dimed after already purchasing the game.
only because capitalism is toxic overall. But why apply this as a double standard for modders? Fan artists can do commissions. And communities which are not fandoms rarely have a stigma against money trading hands.
Don’t rely on making money off of paid mods that require use others IP and then throw a giant tantrum garnering more Streisand attention to yourself that you’re making money off of paid mods using other people’s IP by publicly throwing a tantrum disrespecting the wishes of a reasonable request by the developer that says “Don’t make a paid mod for our game but here’s an alternative so you can still make money but still respect our developers’ desire to keep mods free.”
Just a thought.
The RealVR mod does not include any files from the copyrighted games, therefore does not use anyone else’s IP. It obviously makes reference to the games’ copyrighted content, in order to inform the public of what games it works with. Basically the same concept as an aftermarket addon to a device that is not licensed by the original equipment manufacturer, similar to something like a non-Apple accessory for an iPhone.
Here’s the thing, he and the other modders that are doing this are very much so running a fine line here. They’re modifying the game’s code, sure it’s in memory, but it’s their code they’re modifying to get things to work. It’s not just relying on using existing API calls that are open for them to use. Just because they’re not modifying the files on disk vs modifying in-memory doesn’t mean they’re not using their IP, they certainly are and there’s precedent that this type of action falls under the DMCA.
Take in point that Riot and Bungie and many other companies have DMCA’ed and sued cheat makers and hey those guys were also just selling mods for their games. They also weren’t selling any files from their copyrighted games either they were just selling a framework to inject their software into their games. So question is are you also saying that Riot and Bungie are also DMCA sue-happy people who are Debbie downers that are preventing coders from making money?
Your simplistic, it’s just a phone case, isn’t analogous here.
Don’t get me wrong, IP law is tricky and IANAL but again, when a company politely asks you to respect their ToS and not sell a mod using their IP and you throw a tantrum and manage to piss off your community, well good luck buddy.
On the other hand, I see modders getting burned out and practically abused by the gaming community.
As much as I love free game mods, some of these mods are massive multi year efforts that are practically a game themselves.
I can’t begrudge them wanting to make a couple bucks. I don’t like it…
I do donate to some mods that I particularly love, but I can’t realistically donate to every mod I use.
Except the entire the reason he got DMCA’d was because he was using c2077 modding tools to create said mod… So either you’re wrong, project red is wrong, or someone else is lying.
If what you said was true then none of these companies would have nothing to stand on, it’s simply its own standalone project that happens to work with these games… Except I think we all know that’s not the truth.
I think you really don’t know what you’re talking about. The mod is not unique to Cyberpunk, it supports several dozen other completely unrelated games with the same installer. I played Dark Souls III and Elden Ring on it, and it was pretty fuckin’ rad. So I’m pissed that these DMCA trolls are killing something awesome. But I still have my copy of the mod so I can continue to use it on the games that don’t get substantially changed with updates anyway.
I don’t think you know either, neither of us can confirm with certainty that he did not use Project Reds tools to built his integration. Key word being integration there.
It might be a completely standalone Installer so that he can keep you trapped in his ecosystem and on a subscription based service, but that has no relation at all to whether or not his program makes use of the tools project red offers to allow these integrations.
If they touch project reds tools at all to give you a good vr experience, then as much as it sucks, they are beholden to project reds rules. More obviously I’m bias as fuck and hate the idea that someone would force others to pay for a mod, especially one adding such a massive QoL feature to beloved games. But hey, if it comes out that he didn’t touch any of said tools at all, then he’ll be fine anyways. The dmca notices will go away and he’ll be free to continue being a drama queen about something else :).
I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. a guy develops a mod that makes more people want to play the game that it depends on. he wants a few bucks so he can keep developing mods. He’s not hurting the sales of the product that his mod depends on.
nothing is stopping someone else from developing a free alternative
“Hurtig their profits” isnt rhe point
Earning money on an IP he doesnt own, is the point…
I’m not a fan of paid mods personally and would probably never buy them, but I also think these copyright claims are crappy and seem baseless to me. What he sold was his own original code. He should be free to sell it and let people decide if they want to spend money on it. That may break the ToS of these companies, but ToS are not laws.
Agreed.
I understand the IP issues around marketing but not the entitlement of people who think it’s okay to demand that they be given it for free.
The developer still has to eat and live. If they choose to work for money that’s literally one of the most universal things that people do on this planet. It’s ridiculous and immature to demand otherwise.
