About mod licensing and the latest thread

Public discussion of the forum software and other things run by Zandronum staff.
User avatar
Mobius
Forum Regular
Offline
Posts: 467
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:43 am
Contact:

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#21 by Mobius » Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:24 pm

Cutman wrote:I think it's a matter of respect. It's happened to me before, I uploaded a prototype build of a singleplayer/coop expansion for MM8BDM mainly to see if it was something people would like me to fix up and finish (and possibly integrate into the core game) but before I really got a clear answer on that, people were already modding their own versions of it and playing it online. It is quite demotivating and you will always sound like the enemy if you try to stop people being creative, but you just have to press on with your vision and keep updating.


That just means there was an untap market either you generated or facilitated that you could capitalize on. It also means people are willing to play it and further your project, but as you said you can only press on and perhaps even cultivate what people want that they seem to look for in such addons.
<+Thomas13> Mobius u r inferior, go outside and get beaten up

"Fool you couldn't roll on me if you were a condom" ~ Godlike


The trouble with loyalty to a cause is that the cause will always betray you

User avatar
Catastrophe
ZanStuff Reviewer
Offline
Posts: 2136
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#22 by Catastrophe » Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:30 pm

Mobius wrote:
Catastrophe wrote:
Because I firmly believe that if the author is working on a project, it should be a "do not touch" zone for addons. Once the author is done or gives up, then it's ok to me if someone starts making addons of it.


This may seem a bit redundant to ask but: why should it be off limits?


Because the author is still working on it. Let the man finish what he's doing.

User avatar
Mobius
Forum Regular
Offline
Posts: 467
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:43 am
Contact:

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#23 by Mobius » Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:50 pm

Catastrophe wrote:
Mobius wrote:
Catastrophe wrote:
Because I firmly believe that if the author is working on a project, it should be a "do not touch" zone for addons. Once the author is done or gives up, then it's ok to me if someone starts making addons of it.


This may seem a bit redundant to ask but: why should it be off limits?


Because the author is still working on it. Let the man finish what he's doing.


Many wads that are currently played are still works in progress. Wrath of Chronos has recently been getting updated which inspired Avernus to make a monster pack for more monsters. Repo-Man isn't "finished" with Zdoomwars and someone awhile ago made an itemreplacement wad so you get mana instead of ammo for weapons you can't use. This prompted him to add such a feature natively in Zdoomwars later releases. Not everything is about "respect" but functionality, and once upon a time making addons were acceptable and normal. Remember?

You and Slyfox trolled Captain Ventris with a GVH/Zombie Horde addon to Zdoomwars that triggered Ventris to blog about it. We use to laugh about this as an example of someone's inability to adjust to how Doom's modding is, and I don't bring this up to point out some laden hypocrisy by you. Let's actually ignore the trolling and examine the issue at it's core which is why I brought it up.

What changed?

What has changed over the years that modders must feel the need now to "secure" their work from addons that MAY or may not actually harm their project. You aren't making money off of it and your wad is essentially popular whether or not you made the addon so is it the playerbase? Is your wad only popular because of the addon or otherwise? Does this imply population and activity is not just a commodity but a resource, and indeed it is a form of wealth. So why should it matter if a license exist or someone made an addon? I'll tell you why:

Because now it's you worked on the project.

You want to seize and monopolize not how your mod works, but on how others play your mod. This upsets you and created the proponents for the "license" to begin with. I could understand someone hijacking your WIP mod and now you must compete with a framework you created, but this isn't that situation at all. This is almost finished work being patched and people are upset that others have found a way to play a game the way you didn't intend. This is nearly identical to how modding is now because the core philosophy of modding is to make the game play a way you desire. Doom vanilla did not intend to have the zdoom library we have today (though certain things we see now were intended), but they made the community open source for a reason. Essentially every mod, including yours, is conveying the idea that you are playing doom the way YOU want to so now the license proposes to stop people from doing exactly what mods do by nature. This is why I asked you this very question, because at the core you want to control how a person plays your game. This isn't a huge leap to accuse you of being a proponent of the license, but the license is a "logical conclusion" of the "protection" you wanted. You want to be the only one to modify a game at its fundamental level and anyone doing the same with your rendition of the game be damned. Literally anathema to Doom itself because modding is why Doom is even alive to begin with, and sharing that experience online is why Zandronum isn't Odamex. It may be a little disheartening, but it isn't the player's fault for trying to capture a market in demand for something specific. This is a failing on you for not implementing the idea into your game when the opportunity present itself. A smart modder would see the writing on the wall and develop to include or support these addons not stifle them

Also this wasn't specifically for you Cata, but for any proponent of the license.
<+Thomas13> Mobius u r inferior, go outside and get beaten up

"Fool you couldn't roll on me if you were a condom" ~ Godlike


The trouble with loyalty to a cause is that the cause will always betray you

User avatar
Ænima
Addicted to Zandronum
Offline
Posts: 3019
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:12 pm

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#24 by Ænima » Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:15 am

Dynamo wrote:
FascistCat wrote:PD: Too much overreacting to this topic :neutral:

I'm going to have to ask if to you the first part of your nickname is accurate, because at least I'm fairly sure you can't be a cat.

He's just a facist who loves cats.

Image
Image ­ ­
­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­
Doom64: Unabsolved: Doom64 and Diablo2 had a baby


ZandroSkins
: a pack made by our community
Squad Radio: a WASD-powered chat menu, add your own sounds
AeniPuffs: neat blood and puff effects

User avatar
Combinebobnt
SNS Team
Offline
Posts: 1480
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#25 by Combinebobnt » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:36 am

what wad did the triggering here?: complex doom? bagel horde? -cut- to the real reason why this terms and agreements stuff is 'needed', or don't because this idea is retarded. It's impossible to enforce outside of abusing tspg admin or whatever, so why this should or should not be doesn't even matter (tried so hard?). Next time Fused, instead of trashing your thread because you know what you want won't happen, use mr. brian and trash these awful ideas.

This licensing stuff was a nice meme until now where it's trying to be reality...

User avatar
Catastrophe
ZanStuff Reviewer
Offline
Posts: 2136
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#26 by Catastrophe » Fri Feb 17, 2017 3:01 am

mobius wrote:You want to seize and monopolize not how your mod works, but on how others play your mod. This upsets you and created the proponents for the "license" to begin with.
Yup, pretty much.

mobius wrote:Doom vanilla did not intend to have the zdoom library we have today (though certain things we see now were intended), but they made the community open source for a reason.
I argue that this falls in line with my viewpoint where Doom was pretty much "let go" so it's fine to tinker with it. Personally, I'm fine with people modifying my stuff since I haven't worked on anything in a while. Complex on the other hand didn't have that leisure. It was never "let go", the guy was pretty much forced to either quit his own project or compete with another iteration of his own work. No modder should ever have to deal with that; it hurts the modding scene.

User avatar
Seiat
 
Offline
Posts: 29
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 1:45 pm

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#27 by Seiat » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:00 pm

I think licensing a mod is absurd considering everything modded here is for the most part based off doom anyways. Sure there's more to it then that, but who cares if someone wants to do a spin-off or add-on with your days/months/years of work? I'd be honored someone saw a project of mine as worthy of the effort(which happened, and I was). Even if it's different because I was gone for a long while, the principle is the same. I heard in IRC that IC was revived, even if it was only for a brief time I was happy that people played my old mod again. Thanks for resurrecting IC while I've been away guys!! :)

Others diving into your projects can also give the original author insight into bugs or issues that were previously overlooked, forgotten about, or beyond the author's knowledge. So it can be potentially beneficial to the creator. Honestly I don't see why it's a big deal. Some may feel it's discouraging, but even in the case of raw resources... if ya put it on the internetz, it's the risk ya take.

Now I'm not caught up with much but in the case of Complex doom it looks like a sorta grey area. Seems like a dick move to make a new thread based on an active ongoing project.. still, folks who actually pay attention already know who the original author of a mod is, and therefore know where to place their regards for it. Licensing just doesn't seem worth it at all. Ultimately, permissions and credits are where it's at.... speaking of which, check out the fancy new avatar, thanks to artwork from AzakaChi-RD-17 at DeviantArt.

User avatar
nax
 
Offline
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 4:06 am

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#28 by nax » Fri Feb 17, 2017 5:10 pm

I don't think mod licensing is needed. At least on TSPG we already have rules based around directly modifying someone's mod (ie actually changing the original .wad or .pk3 instead of using inheritance and making an addon). Addons are not stealing content unless they're literally repackaging original content from a different mod. We have a weird system where it's a partly open modding scene with a few provisions that make life easier for modders, but overall it works. Adding more protections would likely stifle the addon creators who later go on to become modders themselves, and removing protections would likely cause less modders to create content for zandronum knowing no one will care if newbie Z copy pastes huge swathes of code and animations that took days and mashes it with some other mod and claims ownership.

An active licensing system will add more protections but cause a net loss in activity. So no.

User avatar
Mobius
Forum Regular
Offline
Posts: 467
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:43 am
Contact:

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#29 by Mobius » Sat Feb 18, 2017 12:08 am

Catastrophe wrote: Yup, pretty much.


Good. I respect your honesty and wish that more addons are made in the future if a project of yours is popular enough to warrant it.

Catastrophe wrote:I argue that this falls in line with my viewpoint where Doom was pretty much "let go" so it's fine to tinker with it. Personally, I'm fine with people modifying my stuff since I haven't worked on anything in a while. Complex on the other hand didn't have that leisure. It was never "let go", the guy was pretty much forced to either quit his own project or compete with another iteration of his own work. No modder should ever have to deal with that; it hurts the modding scene.


He wasn't forced to quit the project if it was just addons. He was forced to compete with the addons that he could have cooperated with and decided that he had the spine of chicken teriyaki and folded like so many sheets of paper. That is no one else's problem but his and creating a license policy that could effect Zandronum is not only absurd but outright mental. This was never an issue until Complex Doom. Why is it an issue now?
<+Thomas13> Mobius u r inferior, go outside and get beaten up

"Fool you couldn't roll on me if you were a condom" ~ Godlike


The trouble with loyalty to a cause is that the cause will always betray you

User avatar
Razgriz
Forum Staff
Offline
Posts: 526
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 5:15 am

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#30 by Razgriz » Sat Feb 18, 2017 12:17 am

Hey you probably should read Daedalus's post here where he says really he wasn't even competing since the takeover happened after he left. Also I don't get how you make a mod with the idea that doom was "let go" but you want special licenses on your mod at the same time.

User avatar
jdagenet
 
Online
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 8:08 am
Contact:

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#31 by jdagenet » Sat Feb 18, 2017 12:20 am

Mobius wrote:This was never an issue until Complex Doom. Why is it an issue now?

Because people don't like the idea of their mod being edited by someone else that ends up getting more players than the initial thing that they created on the Doom engine. They'd rather have the modding scene be an authoritarian Russian government where the only thing that goes is what the author says.

User avatar
Mobius
Forum Regular
Offline
Posts: 467
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2012 3:43 am
Contact:

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#32 by Mobius » Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:10 am

Razgriz wrote:Hey you probably should read Daedalus's post here where he says really he wasn't even competing since the takeover happened after he left. Also I don't get how you make a mod with the idea that doom was "let go" but you want special licenses on your mod at the same time.


So it's even better than Catastrophe's narration of the story. Daedalus was happy it prospered despite the argument in that thread. So what exactly is at work here?

Why is Complex Doom a vehicle for a remote and small niche of modders wanting to protect their wad? So let's surmise this:

  • Licensing was not to protect Complex Doom. This is a lie.
  • It is to protect modders.This is a lie.
  • The author was forced to quit, which is a lie.
  • Certain people (Fused and Catastrophe) wish to vault their project from outsiders.

I see this being a bit more insidious than genuine misinformation since a licensing policy was proposed to be enforced by Zandronum and servers therein. I don't ever believe anything someone says if they must insist on either chronic misinformation or outright lying. This proposition, Catastrophe -- that you are for, stops others from modding and has nothing to do with protecting someone's interest while they are making the project. So what is it?
<+Thomas13> Mobius u r inferior, go outside and get beaten up

"Fool you couldn't roll on me if you were a condom" ~ Godlike


The trouble with loyalty to a cause is that the cause will always betray you

User avatar
Catastrophe
ZanStuff Reviewer
Offline
Posts: 2136
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:44 am

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#33 by Catastrophe » Sat Feb 18, 2017 2:52 am

There's no hidden agenda. I have nothing to gain from this since I don't even mod anymore. So just to quote myself,
there should be some protection for modders to not let their project get pretty much hijacked by imbeciles while the author is still active (see complex doom).
By "some protection" I don't mean licensing wads. More so a guarantee that if the above situation occurs, action gets taken by staff/admins/whoever. Currently as it stands there's not much you can do if this happens outside of TSPG imo.

My apologies for misinterpreting Complex Doom's situation.

User avatar
Konda
Forum Regular
Offline
Posts: 333
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#34 by Konda » Sat Feb 18, 2017 4:13 pm

Well, if your mod is truly "hijacked", that means that everyone is playing the hijacked version instead of your own, which means that the modded version is more interesting than your original mod. More interesting as in more interesting for Zan's playerbase. Imo, the more versions of your mod there are, the more choices people have in what they want to play. Adding some sort of protection against addon mods or spin-offs of your mod is in a way restricting the player's freedom of choice in what they can play.

As seen with complex doom, it seems that Zan's players are in the mindset of "more = better" when it comes to mods (although this is not always true). But that's what they like, and if they want to play your mod with complex monsters or legendary weapons, let them play it. It's not your mod that is getting "ruined", it's players who are playing a different version of your mod. And if people don't come back to your original mod, then too bad. You have players to blame for having a bad taste. In the least you should be grateful that people appreciated your ideas that came with the original mod enough to expand upon them. When they play the modded version of your mod, they'll always refer to you as the original creator.

With all that said, I'd also be pretty pissed if my mod got "hijacked" and had its gameplay and balance all messed up, but I wouldn't toss salt at people who hijacked it, nor would I try to limit what players can play by having some sort of "protection" around my mod. If that's what people want, then so be it. I'd either continue with my own vision of my mod provided there were still people who cared, or I'd move on to something else and be thankful that my mod was appreciated by players.

Anyway, original complex doom is by no means dead. There is still a group of people (including me) who enjoy original complex doom without the legendary monsters and other addons that usually get shipped with lca on servers. There is a small server cluster hosting only original complex doom, along with a little "balance patch" that takes away powerful weapons from players after a certain number of rounds on easier mappacks. Not everyone thinks adding a lot of shit to a mod makes it better. Same goes with GVH. If having more shit always meant more fun, everyone would be playing multiverse, but despite that lod is still being played.

User avatar
Lollipop
Frequent Poster Miles card holder
Offline
Posts: 932
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2012 10:34 am

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#35 by Lollipop » Sun Feb 19, 2017 10:35 am

Well, this sure got interesting in the two days I didn't read the forum.

In this mess of addon ethics, I would say that if I made a mod, it would probably not get everyday updates, or even monthly updates. If someone decided to make an addon I would just play it if I liked it tbh, and pester people on servers for their opinions on things regarding further development. If someone would want to take over my mod, then I would like to be contacted about it at the very least in order to talk things over first. If I had definitively stopped working on my mod, then I would either pick it up again myself, give it over or cooperate with the person in its further development. If I gave it over I would probably simply demand that it was labeled a derivative work and labeled with a subname, just like the different GvH versions are, so I can later pick up my own version of the mod if I so desire without name conflicts. Also depending on what the author would want to do with my mod, I would maybe recommend developing an addon file instead of making direct file changes, as that is in my opinion almost always valid (I can't think of any concrete caveats currently), where I would give full editing permissions (as if the original file would be edited). That approach would allow the addon author to just update his/her addon to be compatible with any updates I would make to the main mod, whereas a derivative work would require a source merge every time.

IDK, maybe not being a nuisance to other is a good rule of thumb in general and instead focus on cooperating on finding the best solutions and approaches, perhaps?

PS.
@Catastrophe that would explain why your mods feel like they have such linear playstyles (those I tried). The way you want the players to play is the only viable way to play? Maybe your own playstyle?

User avatar
mifu
Topic author
Forum Staff
Offline
Posts: 854
Joined: Tue May 29, 2012 10:34 am

Re: About mod licensing and the latest thread

Post#36 by mifu » Mon Feb 20, 2017 3:21 am

Well i did mention to people that i agree if a certain code of ethics was made. So here we go. First though i need to explain why licensing wads is a bad idea anyways, despite that most people in here have already explained why its a bad idea, id like to explain why we cant take action on most things regarding this.

1.) Fact is we cant license mods anyways without some legal thing haunting us. Fact is most mods use resources from other mods or games. Im sure this point was explained already but the other reasons are
2.) We cant control where its uploaded (unless your talking tspg) and if we start blacklisting those servers who host said mod without an reason as to why at least (which was being suggested here) well I may as well ask Tor for a port name change because we really wouldn't be zandronum now would we?
3.) The fact that most mods use other resources anyways we would be basically saying make your own god damn content from scratch. For a community that reuses resources for mods, this would not work and spells out doom for the modding community.

The only defence you really have here is name and shame and contacting any wad archives (TSPG, dogsoft etc) to ask them to remove it from their site. With TSPG i suppose we got it good here. All you need to do and let one of the staff know and somethings done. It should not be up to the zandronum staff to deal with this at all considering the fact that back in the day we made it so server admins had to deal with almost everything now in regards to their server. The best you could do here is tell the server admin of said cluster to stop hosting the wad.

The community has done so well to police this themselves. The best we do is remove the wad links of the posts if its found that it has content that was not really credited for on forum posts (or lack of permission etc) but thats it.

Anyways quite simply, If your making a mod or addon and you dont want to be an asshole follow these steps!

1.) If you are using resources (sprite,music,code or the whole damn thing) that were not made by you, please credit them in your WAD or readme.txt files. Ask permission first if their readme files or where ever they have included this
2.) If you get told you cant use their resource, then respect their wishes to avoid being that guy
3.) Remember its a respect thing and mod/resource authors can say no if they dont want you to make it or reuse their stuff

I cant enforce this but quite simply if you dont follow these steps, you become an asshole and the community will end up taking care of it anyways and you might get one of these bad boys

We all know reputation is everything and it applies to modding too.


Return to “Staff Discussions”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest