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

[Wagonlitz]

To preface, Anything I say in this post below should only be considered my personal comment and does not necessarily reflect that of Paradox.

I went through the whole registration process, what a hassle to get paid as well, they basically want your first born and you have to register with the IRS and they will withhold up to 30% for US income tax, and they only pay by bank transfer which as anyone that gets those can tell you the bank takes it's cut as well, that is usually a flat fee so not bad on large transfers but I doubt most people will be making millions on their mods. it can also take up to 45 days to get paid. , They also have a DMCA system for copyright strikes, which I imagine will be abused in much the way it is on youtube.

So they want non Americans to register at the IRS? Doesn't look thought through and I doubt the IRS are happy about that.
And you are saying they will ban steam accounts if there is enough (non documented) copyright claims? Again looks idiotic.

 

[myzael]

Yeah, that sounds strange. Even if it wouldn't affect M&T (as we either use non-copyrighted material or create our own) this still is quite not well thought out. I cannot imagine the AGOT mod actually costs HBO or whatever revenue. Quite the opposite I think.

 

[Naselus]

I cannot imagine the AGOT mod actually costs HBO or whatever revenue. Quite the opposite I think.

That's not the point really; if you allow anyone to make even a tiny amount of money off your IP then it becomes much more difficult to prevent more severe transgressions later. I rather doubt HBO would care about claiming their cut of 25% of $1 on a couple of thousand mod downloads. But what they would be concerned about is it being cited as precedent for a more blatant cash-in. Consider the hoo-ha between Bethesda and Mojang over Scrolls; Bethesda didn't really care about or want to sue Notch for making a card game that happened to have 'scrolls' in the title, but DID want to have an example of actively defending their trademark on record in case of more serious infringements later (i.e., someone creating an open-world FPRPG called 'The Older Scrolls', and then when Zenimax comes knocking saying 'ah, but you DIDN'T prevent this other game with a similar title!'). The same goes for HBO and GoT. HBO knows full well that the various GoT mods for different games actually just serve to advertise it, but if they let anyone make money off it without reference to themselves, then it becomes harder to prevent others doing so.


As to the mod shop, I'm actually cautiously optimistic. Modders spend hundreds or thousands of hours producing what is effectively DLC for major games and should be allowed to charge for it if they see fit. Strict regulation can limit the risk of scammers, as can the refund policy. The majority of people over at the Steam forums seem mostly pissed off about now having to pay modders for their work, which is at best unreasonable and at worst deeply entitled; if it's not worth paying for then why do they want it so badly?

 

[Turjan]

... Bethesda didn't really care about or want to sue Notch for making a card game that happened to have 'scrolls' in the title, but DID want to have an example of actively defending their trademark on record in case of more serious infringements later...

With this I agree. Companies can pretend not to notice if someone uses their trademarks in some free fan mod. However, as soon as there is money involved, they basically must sue, or they risk losing their trademark.

 

[loup99]

I wonder if the CA modders will start becomming mini-versions of CA themselves. Would not suprise me, with that franchise. Happy that we have this place, and happy that those things won't happen to mods or DLC here.

 

[gigau]

As to the mod shop, I'm actually cautiously optimistic. Modders spend hundreds or thousands of hours producing what is effectively DLC for major games and should be allowed to charge for it if they see fit. Strict regulation can limit the risk of scammers, as can the refund policy. The majority of people over at the Steam forums seem mostly pissed off about now having to pay modders for their work, which is at best unreasonable and at worst deeply entitled; if it's not worth paying for then why do they want it so badly?

My personal opinion regarding MEIOU and Taxes for EUIV : even given the option, i wouldn't like to put it for sale. I mod for the pleasure of modding, and to share some fun with what i believe to be the best gaming community.

On the other hand, would Paradox allow for a donation (as in it is up to the player to choose to give or not) to help us support stuff, organise team meet-ups,... that i would welcome gladly.

 

[loup99]

My personal opinion regarding MEIOU and Taxes for EUIV : even given the option, i wouldn't like to put it for sale. I mod for the pleasure of modding, and to share some fun with what i believe to be the best gaming community.

On the other hand, would Paradox allow for a donation (as in it is up to the player to choose to give or not) to help us support stuff, organise team meet-ups,... that i would welcome gladly.

This is a good standpoint in my opinion. +1 for all major/medium PDS mod projects. And then, things like Darkest Hour or For the Glory are different type of projects, and not conflictng with that in my opinion.

 

[Naselus]

My personal opinion regarding MEIOU and Taxes for EUIV : even given the option, i wouldn't like to put it for sale. I mod for the pleasure of modding, and to share some fun with what i believe to be the best gaming community.

On the other hand, would Paradox allow for a donation (as in it is up to the player to choose to give or not) to help us support stuff, organise team meet-ups,... that i would welcome gladly.

An that's a noble sentiment, and one I share - hell, I won't even take donations. If people gave me money, I would feel that I owe them; I would lose the complete creative control I enjoy presently. Currently, people can (and, over on SA, do) say whatever they like in response to changes or design decisions I make; I don't need to care, since I owe them nothing. I mod for me, and I let other people download it if they want to. When I want to stop, I can just walk away; no-one is losing out because I can't be bothered to finish or don't want to continue. Moreover, if I earn no money, there's an innocence which might otherwise be lost. If I see a cool feature from another mod, I can ask permission to include it and then stick it in my own work. If I was charging for it, that becomes much more complicated, very quickly (and if THEY are charging for it, even more so).

However, I think modders should have monetization options if they want them. Even the largest Paradox game mods are relatively small beans, after all - if we're very, very successful we get 20-30,000 users, and most mods here will be played by less than 1,000 people. But consider the major Skyrim mods, or (going back) Darth's mods for the Total War games; these were played by hundreds of thousands of people, had modding teams of 50-100 people, and in some cases actually encouraged people to buy the game in the first place. It's a bit like freedom of speech - I may not choose to say certain things, but I support the right of other people to say them even if I personally disagree with it.

The real issue for me is preventing scam mods, or mods which promise things which they cannot possibly deliver - often without even realising it. Even the best of us comes to a new game without the slightest idea what can or cannot be done, and checking is often low priority when drawing up plans for a new project. Highly experienced modders have fallen into this pit, and it's all the worse when an inexperienced modder attempts to begin. How many mods have been proposed and then quietly forgotten on these very forums due to authorial inexperience or overambition? And how much rage would it generate if those modders were taking money before they realise their project is doomed?

 

[loup99]

However, I think modders should have monetization options if they want them. Even the largest Paradox game mods are relatively small beans, after all - if we're very, very successful we get 20-30,000 users, and most mods here will be played by less than 1,000 people. But consider the major Skyrim mods, or (going back) Darth's mods for the Total War games; these were played by hundreds of thousands of people, had modding teams of 50-100 people, and in some cases actually encouraged people to buy the game in the first place. It's a bit like freedom of speech - I may not choose to say certain things, but I support the right of other people to say them even if I personally disagree with it.

The real issue for me is preventing scam mods, or mods which promise things which they cannot possibly deliver - often without even realising it. Even the best of us comes to a new game without the slightest idea what can or cannot be done, and checking is often low priority when drawing up plans for a new project. Highly experienced modders have fallen into this pit, and it's all the worse when an inexperienced modder attempts to begin. How many mods have been proposed and then quietly forgotten on these very forums due to authorial inexperience or overambition? And how much rage would it generate if those modders were taking money before they realise their project is doomed?

What you mention as the real issue, is not one lone issue to me. So while agree with your first paragraph, I do not with the rest. Another issue would be modders doing the same thing, or doing different things, but one taking pay or one not. Or mods stealing content without permissions. Another issue would be modders not doing what they promised and leaving with the money. Another issue would be modders doing stuff like AGoT for CK2 that could potentially conflict with universes and their copyright. Another issue would be with the community that would become too competitive. Another issue would be with permissions and usage of other work. Another issue would be with piracy or law-conflicts with lawyers. Another issue would be modders doing bug-fix patches and taking payment. Another issue would be micro-mods that could claim right to very small tweaks. The list can be made infinite with the current system introduced by Steam.

If freedom of speech conflicts with another or many fundamental value(s), it will not take the upper-hand.

 

[gigau]

It is for all those reasons that i would only consider donations.

 

[Naselus]

What you mention as the real issue, is not one lone issue to me. So while agree with your first paragraph, I do not with the rest. Another issue would be modders doing the same thing, or doing different things, but one taking pay or one not. Or mods stealing content without permissions. Another issue would be modders not doing what they promised and leaving with the money. Another issue would be modders doing stuff like AGoT for CK2 that could potentially conflict with universes and their copyright. Another issue would be with the community that would become too competitive. Another issue would be with permissions and usage of other work. Another issue would be with piracy or law-conflicts with lawyers. Another issue would be modders doing bug-fix patches and taking payment. Another issue would be micro-mods that could claim right to very small tweaks. The list can be made infinite with the current system introduced by Steam.

If freedom of speech conflicts with another or many fundamental value(s), it will not take the upper-hand.

I don't want to get tied into the steam thing here - I'm talking more generally in this thread (in the other I talk about Steam's approach specifically). I'm also not sure I'd rank IP law as being as fundamental a value as freedom of speech, but that's a philosophical discussion for elsewhere I suspect

Many of the issues you're citing here are also issues with a donation model - for example, AGOT would be just as screwed by taking donations as they would from selling the mod outright, because HBO would hit them with a C&D letter and there's simply no money to try and fight it. All copyright-infringement mods would basically have to be free, which is a shame because they're often some of the best (GoT mods in particular always seem to turn out very well, and usually reach feature-completion too - even for Mount and Blade, which I personally found truly horrific to mod).

Theft etc can be countered with suitable regulation, of course, but regulation itself costs money - and that money is much less likely to be found in a donation model than a profit-split sales approach. Bug-fix mods have limited lifespan; why pay for a bug-fix mod when Paradox are likely to patch the issues themselves? Likewise, the logic of the market would pretty much kill micro-mods; no-one's going to pay through the nose for a mod which changes 1 or 2 values, and modders hold no copyright on anything (it's all technically owned by Paradox). As such, these are largely non-issues - they can be fixed with sufficient policing.

But how does one police 'intentions'? If I claim t intend to do something with a mod, and then don't, was I always intending to cheat or did I just fail in my aims? It's impossible to quantify it. That's why I find the scam risk the biggest problem; it's very hard to show it really is a scam (we can see just how hard simply by looking at Early Access, or IndyGoGo - how many broken promises and how much rage?).

 

[Antonine]

There's a phrase which, although intended for commercial transactions, should apply here as well: caveat emptor (buyer beware).

If we're talking donations and you choose to donate money to a newbie to modding who's only got a post full of ideas and nothing concrete then that's your decision and your lookout if the mod never happens. It's a gift, not a purchase and if you feel upset if the mod doesn't happen then you can complain about it but nobody's liable for anything.

If I was able to donate I'd donate to maybe one or two well established mods that I play a lot and which I love - I certainly wouldn't donate to a mod that wasn't established and which didn't do what it says on the tin.

On a tangential note, another (online, multiplayer, text based) game I play gets around the legal problems of donations by using the term "gift" and a legal disclaimer instead. Because that's really what we're talking about here - we're not talking about donations to a charity or a cause, we're talking about one way gift transactions which come with no reciprocal obligation or liabilities. Once you've given someone something you can't change your mind or take it back even if you end up regretting your choice.

Perhaps something like that might be a solution for monetising mods? And even with something like AGOT, I don't see how gifts to a tipjar for the individual modders to split between them would legally count as commercial exploitation of copyrighted material (and surely the copyright in this case belongs to George R. R. Martin rather than HBO?).

 

[Wagonlitz]

There's a phrase which, although intended for commercial transactions, should apply here as well: caveat emptor (buyer beware).

If we're talking donations and you choose to donate money to a newbie to modding who's only got a post full of ideas and nothing concrete then that's your decision and your lookout if the mod never happens. It's a gift, not a purchase and if you feel upset if the mod doesn't happen then you can complain about it but nobody's liable for anything.

If I was able to donate I'd donate to maybe one or two well established mods that I play a lot and which I love - I certainly wouldn't donate to a mod that wasn't established and which didn't do what it says on the tin.

On a tangential note, another (online, multiplayer, text based) game I play gets around the legal problems of donations by using the term "gift" and a legal disclaimer instead. Because that's really what we're talking about here - we're not talking about donations to a charity or a cause, we're talking about one way gift transactions which come with no reciprocal obligation or liabilities. Once you've given someone something you can't change your mind or take it back even if you end up regretting your choice.

Perhaps something like that might be a solution for monetising mods? And even with something like AGOT, I don't see how gifts to a tipjar for the individual modders to split between them would legally count as commercial exploitation of copyrighted material (and surely the copyright in this case belongs to George R. R. Martin rather than HBO?).

Martin may very well have sold the rights to exploit AGOT on every format except books to HBO.

 

[jursamaj]

(it's all technically owned by Paradox)

That's not true. By the Berne convention, even without attaching a copyright claim, anything new published is automatically copyrighted to the publisher.

 

[Naselus]

That's not true. By the Berne convention, even without attaching a copyright claim, anything new published is automatically copyrighted to the publisher.

Except, as noted by the law grad in the other thread, the Berne convention doesn't apply to software (it's for books, music and TV shows), and even if it did mods are a derivative product and so still wouldn't be covered.

 

[Castellon]

As there is now a rather large thread on the Steam selling of Mods (In the Paradox General discussion forum), let keep that topic in that thread and keep this one for questions/clarifications of our rules. I do not want to miss those kind of rule comments (That may require a response form me) lost amongst the other.

 

[tompalmer]

As for making money of Modding, we are still looking for ways to make this work on a consistent and fair way for all modders.
For those that say it cannot hurt anything, watch I think it was in the interview Angry Joe has with Fred and Shams and listen carefully to the hints they give about what happened when HBO came poking around regarding a certain Mod. TV and film companies tend to be very protective of their IP and tend to have large legal departments.

I'm really disapointed that Paradox didn't tell us anything. It would be nice to have some communication with modders. At least noticing them for important things.
App stores and Google, Steam, etc .. Share news to their developpers, it would be cool to have something like that.

I don't ask for the name of the next DLC or secret things like that, but what you are working on for modding tools and things like that.

 

[Castellon]

I'm really disapointed that Paradox didn't tell us anything. It would be nice to have some communication with modders. At least noticing them for important things.
App stores and Google, Steam, etc .. Share news to their developpers, it would be cool to have something like that.

I don't ask for the name of the next DLC or secret things like that, but what you are working on for modding tools and things like that.

What is it you are disappointed we did not tell you about?

 

[tompalmer]

If you have been contacted by HBO, at least the mod theam should have been notified imo.
If not, misunderstanding.

 

[Castellon]

It appears to have been handled without having to involve you, or change the way you do things, when dealing with lawyers is that not the best result.
In my experience anything else tends to cost you lots of time and money at the very least.