UPDATED 14/06/18 - *** Rules for User Made Mods and Edits of PDS games ***

[Castellon]

Remember that we simply will not debate legal merits of the rules here, I know that may upset some but it is the way it is. Sorry truly.

In the 12 + years I have been here I have never seen a copyright issue arise from any User mod or AAR (which is another major area where people are concerned over the copyright rules) not even tangentially. The rules are there to protect us no doubt, but neither do we or have we hampered in the least someone that wants to say publish their AAR, in fact we may even assist with that.

 

[Castellon]

You could do as a couple other forum have done.

You have the main forum URL "http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/"

Adding the "http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/forum.php" leads you to these forum. You could code "http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/downloads.php" to lead to something akin to this:

Pressing on the links for the User Modification would then show a list of User Modifications, with name of mod, mod version, game version needed, required DLCs, upload date and how many times it has been downloaded.

Pressing on one of those mods, would open up another page just like a mod page in the workshop, where mods could introduce the mod, put pictures, changelogs and whatnot, and at the end of that window there would be a large download button, which needs to be coded to recognize if the person is logged in and has the required game registered. If it passes those checks, the button is clickable and allows for the download. If it doesn't, the button is greyed out.

But again the problem is bandwidth.

This is kind of what I have pictured, but the new forum software would allow it from within the games own forum. As it is not on the design doc now, I would not expect to see it on launch, but it is definitely something I am interested in pursuing.

 

[Castellon]

Sorry to butt-in for my own interests, but I have a question with regarding to copyrighted material. I made a lot of music in my time and all of it is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA. I granted VeF my permission to use my music under the terms of the said license, however the rights to my music are legally mine, at least for those countries that respect the Creative Commons system. Does this breach the quoted rule or only the User Mod is under the quoted rule and not its other components like original graphics, original music and so on?

We do not own your music simple because it was used in a User mod, by that logic we would own the rights to GoT because someone used it in a USer mod. You just cannot post a licence or CR notice.
You could have a credits list that says "Additional music by XXX" so that it is attributed. Careful about claiming "music by" though if the mod also includes music by other artists or Paradox licensed songs. You may be safer to name the actual song you wrote in those cases. But I am sure you get that.
We have just had problems in the past with people posting licences on user mods that lets say did not have a full understand of how they worked. These included claiming CR for assets that were ours and definitely not CC. Since we do not have the resources to review each mods claims in every aspect, we have a blank not allowed to include rule. Might be considered unfair, but it is what we currently need to have. These things get reviewed periodically, maybe we can make some boiler plates up.

 

[Castellon]

BTW I Now very much want to play B!B the game.

 

[Meneth]

I consider it a shame that Paradox continues to shoot itself, and its community, in the foot by having such a restrictive policy on the promotion and availability of mods outside this community.
I cannot think of any other indie developer/publisher with a similar policy, which is makes sense since the policy is so counter-productive.
Paradox' policy ensures that there won't be any external news coverage of any mod with the exception of those specifically given permission to break the rules.
That especially is shameful. That the rules not apply to certain mods purely because they were already breaking them when they were instituted is nonsensical. No legal system functions this way, and for good reason. It is not a fair way to enforce any rule, and it is even more grating when the rule is something that can make such a big difference to the size of a mod's audience.

I consider myself a supporter of most of Paradox' practices (which I'm sure I've amply demonstrated by my significant participation in the community), but rule #10, and the interpretation of rule #1 banning ModDB, is something I'm against both as a modder and as a member of the Paradox community.

 

[Castellon]

Seconded. This discussion really needs to be had (internally, within Paradox, as well).

Imposing arbitrarily-applied bans upon advertisement / coverage / hosting of popular mods, all of which only drive more revenue to Paradox, outside of Paradox's private, access-denied-for-all-that-don't-already-own-the-game forums:

• is counterproductive marketing policy
• is prohibitive of mods' growth
• punishes major modders (customers and contributors)
• punishes major mod users or potential users (customers)

Enforcing this arbitrarily only makes all four problems worse.

Arbitrary? just because you do not like the rules, it does not make them arbitrary. So lets look at what you say are the issues.
No One said you cannot advertise your user mod.
No one imposed a ban on coverage.
And a "ban on hosting popular mods" don't understand that accusation at all, There is only one mod that has opted out of the rules that I know of, and It has a very low play rate, I would not see how it would be considered a popular mod, but in either case the choice was his.

So I cannot see that any of the issues you raise are valid in this context, perhaps I am missing something here.
Now as for Grandfathering, I think I have explained my reasoning for that, again you may not agree with that reasoning and why we felt it was a fairer way to go, but that does not make it arbitrary either.

People in this thread have pointed out issues to me, the one I find most compelling is regarding concerns about how to host larger user mods, and I have definitely heard this concern and will try and work on a better solution to assist them, but there are no plans to change the existing strategies regarding access to user mods as they relate to the PD Studio games.

 

[Meneth]

And indeed, I don't see anything in the rules forbidding you from promoting a mod outside these forums. You are just required not to post download links outside them.

A mod cannot be effectively promoted outside these forums if it cannot be downloaded outside these forums. As mentioned, no reputable news source will link to a paywall for a mod's download.

 

[Castellon]

A mod cannot be effectively promoted outside these forums if it cannot be downloaded outside these forums. As mentioned, no reputable news source will link to a paywall for a mod's download.

I really am not seeing why you keep saying that.
I have already said make a website they can link to, have some screen shots, have testimonials of current users, have a change list. All you cannot do is have user interaction or a download link. You can link to your thread or sub-forum here for those two things.

Then whatever press is doing an article on you can link to the website.
Although I would say that it would be disingenuous of the journalist to say "we will not review your product because the link is to your sub-forum since it is a "paywall" " where as to use the product legally that they are reviewing it would not be a paywall as you would have a code included with the game, and there is no way to pay just for the code or access.
Mean while they would happily link to other commercial sites that bombard people with ads. But that is just me. A matter of perspective I suppose.

 

[Meneth]

I really am not seeing why you keep saying that.
I have already said make a website they can link to, have some screen shots, have testimonials of current users, have a change list. All you cannot do is have user interaction or a download link. You can link to your thread or sub-forum here for those two things.

Then whatever press is doing an article on you can link to the website.
Although I would say that it would be disingenuous of the journalist to say "we will not review your product because the link is to your sub-forum since it is a "paywall" " where as to use the product legally that they are reviewing it would not be a paywall as you would have a code included with the game, and there is no way to pay just for the code or access.
Mean while they would happily link to other commercial sites that bombard people with ads. But that is just me. A matter of perspective I suppose.

Being able to have such a site without a download/user interaction does alleviate the issue some, but the thing is that that generally either costs money to set up, or is plastered with ads. ModDB is neither, but sadly breaks the current overly restrictive rules. If you know of any decent alternatives I'd love to hear about them.

"Mean while they would happily link to other commercial sites that bombard people with ads. But that is just me. A matter of perspective I suppose."
What they care about is whether their readers can readily access the content. They cannot readily access the mod forum even if they do own the game, as they'll have to go register, and then register their game. It's tedious at best.

 

[Meneth]

Actually, it's ridiculously hard to get a copy of most mods if you only have a pirated version of the game haven't registered your copy of the game. Don't ask me how I know that.

It's ridiculously easy to get a copy of most major mods as long as you've got some clue where to look.
Less popular mods might be somewhat hard to get a hold of though.

(Quote edited with strikethrough to make clear this discussion has nothing to do with piracy)

 

[Castellon]

A reminder that discussion of Piracy in any form, it methods or means, is prohibited on this site.

 

[Meneth]

A reminder that discussion of Piracy in any form, it methods or means, is prohibited on this site.

I thought using mods had nothing to do with piracy, since the rules do allow distributing mods externally as long as they're not also distributed on these forums?

I've edited my post above slightly to make it clear the discussion is not related to piracy, just to the restrictive nature of this forum.

 

[Castellon]

I thought using mods had nothing to do with piracy, since the rules do allow distributing mods externally as long as they're not also distributed on these forums?

I've edited my post above slightly to make it clear the discussion is not related to piracy, just to the restrictive nature of this forum.

And now you are just trying to troll me,
(Also note though that I did not quote your post as the one that was discussing piracy)

 

[Meneth]

And now you are just trying to troll me,
(Also note though that I did not quote your post as the one that was discussing piracy)

My apologies for misunderstanding your post.

meneth, were you thinking of mods which don't have external sites and which aren't victoria II mods? (the victoria II user modifications sub forum is open to the public atm afaik). if so, i guess i just didn't know where to look

All major mods for CKII, EU4, HoI3, and Vic2 are pretty easy to get a hold of if you know where to look (though for the latter two anyone can access the mod forums anyway). Since nearly all of them are distributed via MediaFire, people with access to the forums end up posting the links outside the forums.

 

[Meneth]

It is not and has been not since the release of the game.

I have to assume you mean that it is indeed open.
The user mod forums are open to the public for Vic2, HoI3, EU3, and EU:Rome.

 

[Castellon]

You know I did see forums where you could see all its content, but unless you registered you could not access the download links. Maybe PI can do that to their forums. Let people see the Mod section, browse through the threads, but have to register their game in able for the forum to let them see the download links?

This might be possible if we can organize the hosting aspect first, then it would operate similar to the way I think the workshop works, which is you can view the workshop but not download things hosted on it unless you own the game? Not entirely sure about that as I seam to have gotten conflicting reports with some people saying you can DL though.
Anyway if they are straight attachments I could definitely restrict it even with the current software. Will have to speak with development to make sure we retain this capability in the new software. That way it leaves the option open if we get the hosting worked out. The thing is it is probably more import to them to restrict posting though, Although we could further refine that by sub-forum..

 

[Castellon]

If only attachments were not as restrictive as they are now. 10 MB is not even funny. Bandwidth and hosting capabilities are the problem.

Yes The attachment system is not designed for hosting large scale user mods, which is why I mentioned we would need to organize the hosting aspect first.

 

[Castellon]

I do not see this question asked before, so let me ask it. If for example someone makes an ad.fly link that goes to the mediafire, is that banned?

If you are posting the DL link Hot Linked , typed out, as an image, basically in anyway, then it is not allowed, outside of the user modding forum.

 

[Castellon]

They are switching to a software they develop themselves though.

Yes and No, We are using a purchased forum software as a base and having a third party heavily Modding it for us, then we need to mod it some more internally and place additional security.

 

[Castellon]

While ad.fly technically provides hotlinking to the Download outside of the modding forums, finding the adf.ly page without accessing the modding forums is as difficult as finding the download directly on mediafire. ((Adf.ly is basically just a Adsense banner between you and the download allowing someone (usually the modder) to make half a penny for anyone downloading the mod. Even for extremely popular mods that's probably like a coffee or two per week.)) Still not allowed?

If it is commercial then definitely not allowed. We are actually looking at ways our modders can make money, technical limitations are still in the way currently.