142
Bethesda is once again adding support for paid mods to Skyrim
(www.gamesradar.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2023
142 points (96.1% liked)
Games
32538 readers
808 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
The issue Valve had with this was that they weren’t willing to do the basic vetting needed to ensure a mod’s content is legitimately owned. For a full game, made from scratch in Unity, that’s not necessarily easier to verify, but the bar for entry (and to making something interesting for viewers) is high enough that a developer can be harshly penalized for breaking it. And of course, it has still happened, wherein a little Superman game is found to have been completely stolen from someone who put it out for free.
When you have a big complete game like Skyrim, and one mod only needs to do something silly like put Thomas the Tank Engine’s face onto a greathammer, it’s a low bar for entry for something some people might actually want, as opposed to shitty Unity asset flips. Still, the storefront needs to be sure that THAT developer owns Thomas’s face (they don’t) and that they put the work into applying it (they might have just pulled files from some obscure Nexus Mods entry and hoped no one noticed).
Ownership verification is tough. I seriously doubt they’re actually putting the time in.
But do they need to for the copyright case? Aren't most pages on internet, like "Here is where you can sent us a DCMA request, we will take it down after checking it".
Then they don't need to vet it until there is a request, still that is work not gonna lie but they don't have to check every single upload stuff, plus they probably would have a report system or similar if the issue isn't copyright but idk that somebody uploaded something illegal somehow.
Of course maybe I am missing something and there is some laws that require active monitoring of each uploaded stuff.
You're not totally wrong; they could operate that way, wherein victims of theft would report what people have re-uploaded as their own. But the problem is, this puts the onus of policework entirely on mod operators, who have their own lives and livelihoods. Imagine you wrote a mod as a hobby for four years, spent some time abroad, came home, never heard about the mod workshop stuff, and then discovered that your mod blew up in popularity under someone else's name. Plus, Valve would need to moderate and figure out who is telling the truth (lest a bad actor make a fake claim on a legitimate mod seller). That kind of situation is often unrecoverable.
You can even read stories about the wars that photographers have over this kind of thing - photos are the kind of thing people pass around like candy, even though some amazing ones take tons of expertise and effort for the photographer to take; they often struggle to get websites and magazines to pay the ad revenue they're due for each time they're shown. It's much like the mod workshop would have been - a very "low friction" environment for reuploads.