Mod seethe thread (formerly Nexus seethe thread)

[rusty_shackleford]

I was reading that reddit post thinking he was apologizing for republishing a mod from here or something, and it appears to all be over """stealing""" code from another mod?

why are modders like this

[loregamer]

unholy j*sus, took me a while to notice it was about Really Shadowheart mod. and the guy apologized to Kelocena of all ****?? what a ******* ****

The apology is pathetic, and they probably wrote “Cancel your Disney+, tax the rich, repeal the 2nd, vote blue” due to the Nazi allegations. Completely turbocucked

[loregamer]

Imma just steal both of their mods and implement it into EBR v1

[rusty_shackleford]

if libtards cancel their disney+ how are they going to learn to fight fascism?

[Demonic Fate]

> name is NoComply
> asks you to comply with his requests

Funny how things are.

So you're telling me I can fork his repo, make a tool out of it, then add +****** license to it?

Magnificent

Bad news:

This only works if the original was issued under a permissive, non-copyleft licence like the MIT licence.

You are not the copyright holder of that work, you are just a licence grantee and are bound by its restrictions. It just happens that for the MIT license, those restrictions are "include a copy of the MIT copyright notice, then do whatever you want", and 'whatever' explicitly includes sublicensing, as GPL or GPL+****** or whatnot. (And you do really need to include the note on the copy of his code inside your repo. That code will still be MIT license, but the new project as a whole will be GPL+******.)

Sadly, as far as I can see the Github repo never actually contaoned a licence grant (MIT or GPL or whatever), so legally nobody had any permission to do anything with it before he added the gay little note. That gay little note, not being a proper licence, would have to be enforced by he himself, but regardless the default state of a work of art is "no permission" so it doesn't help you/us.

Of course, all the above, good and bad, only applies if NoReply is the copyright owner of the tool. If it's considered like a BG3 mod, what he wants doesn't matter - he is acting purely on the sufferance of Larian who retain full control. But so are you, which means you can't relicense it either.

[rusty_shackleford]

This only works if the original was issued under a permissive, non-copyleft licence like the MIT licence.

You are not the copyright holder of that work, you are just a licence grantee and are bound by its restrictions. It just happens that for the MIT license, those restrictions are "include a copy of the MIT copyright notice, then do whatever you want", and 'whatever' explicitly includes sublicensing, as GPL or GPL+****** or whatnot. (And you do really need to include the note on the copy of his code inside your repo. That code will still be MIT license, but the new project as a whole will be GPL+******.)

Yes, it would not work if the original work you're modifying is copyleft as that must be licensed under its terms, whatever they may be.

---

After looking into it, it seems the only thing @loregamer "used" from the "original" was just …the database.
A database of strings. Strings that are owned by Larian.


Taking copyrighted strings and putting it into a database does not confer you ownership, NoComply.

[SoLong]

This only works if the original was issued under a permissive, non-copyleft licence like the MIT licence.

You are not the copyright holder of that work, you are just a licence grantee and are bound by its restrictions. It just happens that for the MIT license, those restrictions are "include a copy of the MIT copyright notice, then do whatever you want", and 'whatever' explicitly includes sublicensing, as GPL or GPL+****** or whatnot. (And you do really need to include the note on the copy of his code inside your repo. That code will still be MIT license, but the new project as a whole will be GPL+******.)

Yes, it would not work if the original work you're modifying is copyleft as that must be licensed under its terms, whatever they may be.

---

After looking into it, it seems the only thing @loregamer "used" from the "original" was just …the database.
A database of strings. Strings that are owned by Larian.


Taking copyrighted strings and putting it into a database does not confer you ownership, NoComply.

This is something that bugs me about these people. Mod ownership is a legal gray zone that you can fall out of anytime you include portions of the original work (like Larian's code in this case).

It seems that these mental midgets think that just because they put work into something, they own the results of that work, even if it is already copyrighted by someone else.

Custom textures or meshes can be copyrighted, I believe, as long as they are fully custom and don't include anything that used to be in the game. This is mostly because you generally can't copyright file formats.

But Jesus, I just checked the modding subreddit and I can't believe how ******* limp-dicked these people have become. I once thought that this was funny, but now it's rapidly sliding into tragedy.

Edit: I have been informed that in worthless Britbongistan, some file formats may be able to be copyrighted under specific circumstances.

[HereForTheFood]

I was reading that reddit post thinking he was apologizing for republishing a mod from here or something, and it appears to all be over """stealing""" code from another mod?

why are modders like this

Nexus modders are some of the most entitled fucks I've ever seen. How do you steal code for a mod you don't own, for a game you didn't develop, from a company who doesn't give a **** about you.

[sheet]

They want modding to be like fan fiction. Only their cool OCs allowed, do not steal

[loregamer]

This only works if the original was issued under a permissive, non-copyleft licence like the MIT licence.

Yes, it would not work if the original work you're modifying is copyleft as that must be licensed under its terms, whatever they may be.

Can I add it to Wabbajack Unlocked?
https://github.com/loregamer/wabbajack-unlocked

[CheesusCrust]

They want modding to be like fan fiction. Only their cool OCs allowed, do not steal

@rusty_shackleford we gotta copyright that quote at least summarizes this whole **** perfectly

[rusty_shackleford]

This only works if the original was issued under a permissive, non-copyleft licence like the MIT licence.

Yes, it would not work if the original work you're modifying is copyleft as that must be licensed under its terms, whatever they may be.

Can I add it to Wabbajack Unlocked?
https://github.com/loregamer/wabbajack-unlocked

nop

[loregamer]

Day ruined...

[Stack of Turtles]

This only works if the original was issued under a permissive, non-copyleft licence like the MIT licence.

Yes, it would not work if the original work you're modifying is copyleft as that must be licensed under its terms, whatever they may be.

Can I add it to Wabbajack Unlocked?
https://github.com/loregamer/wabbajack-unlocked

You can just erase the original license and substitute your own, what are they gonna do to stop you?

[rusty_shackleford]

Day ruined...

Not quite.
When you fork an open source project and make changes, you have a derivative work, your changes are yours as we know. And you own the copyright(to those changes).

This is, as far as I can tell, completely GPLv3 compatible and enforceable. May also be GPLv2/other copyleft compatible, but it's less spelled out because we're using something right from the GPLv3 text rather than an implied right.

b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or
author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal
Notices displayed by works containing it; or

Add this to the top of the file you make any changes in:

Code: Select all

    Copyright (C) 2025  MechaHitler1488, **** Deportation Specialist Foundation

If there's already a copyright notice, just add it below it.
If they remove the copyright notice, enforce your rights.

[rusty_shackleford]

and to libtards reading this, no we don't care if you add something offensive, that's the entire point you can't use it back against us

[Havitner]

You can just erase the original license and substitute your own, what are they gonna do to stop you?

It's only funny if it's legally binding.

[Stack of Turtles]

You can just erase the original license and substitute your own, what are they gonna do to stop you?

It's only funny if it's legally binding.

None of it is legally binding

[CheesusCrust]

I had to look this up. There's much, much more angsty modder drama behind this.

so getting a little back to iamyourdad's flop, this post was from 2 months ago, not a single "how dare you stealing and editing a mod" screeching. but they did remember it when Really Shadowheart drama happened, seeing these 4d old posts

[CheesusCrust]

monke






just replace "werewolf" with "******" and the mod becomes much better

[WesternWashed]

This only works if the original was issued under a permissive, non-copyleft licence like the MIT licence.

You are not the copyright holder of that work, you are just a licence grantee and are bound by its restrictions. It just happens that for the MIT license, those restrictions are "include a copy of the MIT copyright notice, then do whatever you want", and 'whatever' explicitly includes sublicensing, as GPL or GPL+****** or whatnot. (And you do really need to include the note on the copy of his code inside your repo. That code will still be MIT license, but the new project as a whole will be GPL+******.)

Yes, it would not work if the original work you're modifying is copyleft as that must be licensed under its terms, whatever they may be.

---

After looking into it, it seems the only thing @loregamer "used" from the "original" was just …the database.
A database of strings. Strings that are owned by Larian.


Taking copyrighted strings and putting it into a database does not confer you ownership, NoComply.

This is something that bugs me about these people. Mod ownership is a legal gray zone that you can fall out of anytime you include portions of the original work (like Larian's code in this case).

It seems that these mental midgets think that just because they put work into something, they own the results of that work, even if it is already copyrighted by someone else.

Custom textures or meshes can be copyrighted, I believe, as long as they are fully custom and don't include anything that used to be in the game. This is mostly because you generally can't copyright file formats.

But Jesus, I just checked the modding subreddit and I can't believe how ******* limp-dicked these people have become. I once thought that this was funny, but now it's rapidly sliding into tragedy.

Edit: I have been informed that in worthless Britbongistan, some file formats may be able to be copyrighted under specific circumstances.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it was all a moot point as long as you weren't SELLING someones work. Like I can't sell T-shirts with the batman logo on them because it's trademarked but no body can stop me from drawing a picture of a batman logo and giving it away. Is this not the case?

Like i get if you took a mod and posted it on Patreon and started selling it like it's yours but who gives a **** about something you're doing as essentially a charity?

[WesternWashed]

unholy j*sus, took me a while to notice it was about Really Shadowheart mod. and the guy apologized to Kelocena of all ****?? what a ******* ****

The apology is pathetic, and they probably wrote “Cancel your Disney+, tax the rich, repeal the 2nd, vote blue” due to the Nazi allegations. Completely turbocucked

I will never understand this new age obsession with supplicating yourself for the acceptance of people on the internet who don't give a **** about you.

the correct response to "yOu uSEd ma CoDE witHoUT ma PerMiSSiONs!" is "ya so? go eat a **** ******"

also anyone have a copy of the last really shadowheart mod? i've been meaning to try it

[Acrux]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it was all a moot point as long as you weren't SELLING someones work. Like I can't sell T-shirts with the batman logo on them because it's trademarked but no body can stop me from drawing a picture of a batman logo and giving it away. Is this not the case?

Like i get if you took a mod and posted it on Patreon and started selling it like it's yours but who gives a **** about something you're doing as essentially a charity?

Trademark and copyright are different things under US law.

In your t-shirt example - or even in giving it away, DC Comics (or whoever is the ultimate owner of the Batman logo) can come after you for trademark infringement, as that's specifically designed to protect brand identity. There's a famous example of Disney forcing a daycare center to remove murals of Disney characters from their walls, and I think Nintendo did something recently where Pokemon were being used to advertise a party. Basically, corporations will come down on this pretty hard to protect their identities. Copyright is about the words, phrases, images, and other intellectual ideas in a work. Both of these can be protected by "fair use" but fair use has limited applications. In the case of modding, almost every mod is going to fall under the concept of a "derivative work" and the copyright owner could shut it down if they wanted to. Usually they don't (mostly out of goodwill of the community), but they have the right not to allow it if they wanted.

It's modders stopping other modders from using their works that doesn't hold any water.

[Maximus]

Yeah, companies can come after you with buzzwords like "trademark / copyright infringement", but that is because they have money to do so. It's not like the government starts investigations because you gave away a drawing of the Batman logo or using the pokemon song in a party.
So laws, where only people with money can enforce them, are so stupid. So a random judge, (with maybe a random jury), all having a bad day in their human lifes, are going to judge you, because the failed human you have as a lawyer did all the wrong things, and the other party, have 10 law-firms, running circles around you, referencing a old case (Bob vs Bill, where Bill won because he was rich and didn't like that Bob painted his house in a too similar color to Bill's 3rd cousins' house), to crush you. Even if you had every reason to give that drawing away or play the song, like 100 new customers to their brand.

[SoLong]

Yes, it would not work if the original work you're modifying is copyleft as that must be licensed under its terms, whatever they may be.

---

After looking into it, it seems the only thing @loregamer "used" from the "original" was just …the database.
A database of strings. Strings that are owned by Larian.


Taking copyrighted strings and putting it into a database does not confer you ownership, NoComply.

This is something that bugs me about these people. Mod ownership is a legal gray zone that you can fall out of anytime you include portions of the original work (like Larian's code in this case).

It seems that these mental midgets think that just because they put work into something, they own the results of that work, even if it is already copyrighted by someone else.

Custom textures or meshes can be copyrighted, I believe, as long as they are fully custom and don't include anything that used to be in the game. This is mostly because you generally can't copyright file formats.

But Jesus, I just checked the modding subreddit and I can't believe how ******* limp-dicked these people have become. I once thought that this was funny, but now it's rapidly sliding into tragedy.

Edit: I have been informed that in worthless Britbongistan, some file formats may be able to be copyrighted under specific circumstances.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought it was all a moot point as long as you weren't SELLING someones work. Like I can't sell T-shirts with the batman logo on them because it's trademarked but no body can stop me from drawing a picture of a batman logo and giving it away. Is this not the case?

Like i get if you took a mod and posted it on Patreon and started selling it like it's yours but who gives a **** about something you're doing as essentially a charity?

To simplify it, they think they can take someone else's copyrighted work and do whatever they want without asking for permission, but if someone else wants to use their work without asking, they shouldn't be allowed.

The problem here isn't that these people are giving the mods away for free, it's that they try and slap conditions on the use, claiming they get to do this because it is their mod.

[Stack of Turtles]

Yeah, companies can come after you with buzzwords like "trademark / copyright infringement", but that is because they have money to do so. It's not like the government starts investigations because you gave away a drawing of the Batman logo or using the pokemon song in a party.
So laws, where only people with money can enforce them, are so stupid. So a random judge, (with maybe a random jury), all having a bad day in their human lifes, are going to judge you, because the failed human you have as a lawyer did all the wrong things, and the other party, have 10 law-firms, running circles around you, referencing a old case (Bob vs Bill, where Bill won because he was rich and didn't like that Bob painted his house in a too similar color to Bill's 3rd cousins' house), to crush you. Even if you had every reason to give that drawing away or play the song, like 100 new customers to their brand.

Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone for anything.

[Magick]

Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Bravo.

Wait, how did he bring himself to type in that horrid, horrid word to test it?
Now HE's a waycistist!

SO funny imagining them sat there typing every variation of "******" with various capitals etc. Steaming more from the ears every time.

Such ********. Wow.

[Maximus]

Yeah, companies can come after you with buzzwords like "trademark / copyright infringement", but that is because they have money to do so. It's not like the government starts investigations because you gave away a drawing of the Batman logo or using the pokemon song in a party.
So laws, where only people with money can enforce them, are so stupid. So a random judge, (with maybe a random jury), all having a bad day in their human lifes, are going to judge you, because the failed human you have as a lawyer did all the wrong things, and the other party, have 10 law-firms, running circles around you, referencing a old case (Bob vs Bill, where Bill won because he was rich and didn't like that Bob painted his house in a too similar color to Bill's 3rd cousins' house), to crush you. Even if you had every reason to give that drawing away or play the song, like 100 new customers to their brand.

Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone for anything.

IF (and that is a BIG if) you have the money for it...

[Stack of Turtles]

Yeah, companies can come after you with buzzwords like "trademark / copyright infringement", but that is because they have money to do so. It's not like the government starts investigations because you gave away a drawing of the Batman logo or using the pokemon song in a party.
So laws, where only people with money can enforce them, are so stupid. So a random judge, (with maybe a random jury), all having a bad day in their human lifes, are going to judge you, because the failed human you have as a lawyer did all the wrong things, and the other party, have 10 law-firms, running circles around you, referencing a old case (Bob vs Bill, where Bill won because he was rich and didn't like that Bob painted his house in a too similar color to Bill's 3rd cousins' house), to crush you. Even if you had every reason to give that drawing away or play the song, like 100 new customers to their brand.

Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone for anything.

IF (and that is a BIG if) you have the money for it...

How much money do you think it costs?

[Maximus]

Anyone can file a lawsuit against anyone for anything.

IF (and that is a BIG if) you have the money for it...

How much money do you think it costs?

For a pleb using the pokemon song at a party, and Nintendo is suing you? They will drag the lawsuit into infinity, so it will cost you everything you have, and will earn in your lifetime.
Mind you that they will drain you, so you have to settle / admit fault to be able to end the lawsuit.