rusty_shackleford
Arcane
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2018
- Messages
- 50,754
modders don't understand how licensing works at all
And yet, on the nexus where the modder uploaded their mod:
Author's instructions
- The original models extracted from ARCH3D.BSA, as well as the contents of BLOCKS.BSA and MAPS.BSA that the json files were generated from, are all the property of Bethesda Softworks and your use of them are governed by the terms and conditions they have imposed.
- Daggerfall Unity and Daggerfall Modelling are both licensed under the MIT License.
- As far as my modifications to the models and json files here are concerned, I am licensing them under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
GOG attributed the author as required. Getting the author's permission to include the mod was a courtesy, not a requirement. If they didn't want people using their shit willy-nilly then that's their mistake. I don't know what licenses the other modders used, but a quick look at that thread indicates at least one of them is changing theirs. I'm not saying that it was necessarily the right thing for GOG to do, but claiming they "don't have permisson" is bollocks, and I hope someone called them out on it.
that's my one main takeaway from interacting with them for years. They can't grasp this simple concept. They all seem to think licensing is something you can just revoke at a moment's notice anything they get their feelings hurt, or can ignore when it benefits them.