Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Forum rules seem to contravene T2 and Rockstar's modding statement.

Best Answer Crokey, 21 September 2017 - 10:50 PM

 

R* are aware of the modding rules here, we're waiting for an update on their part and will update the rules once we got an reply back.

 
Why would they need to update anything? They released a public statement that made their views clear on this topic?

 


I think you misunderstood, we are awaiting an update from them; so as to gain more clarification and to ensure that we are providing clearer rules for our members.  We (as in GTANet) have had a good relationship with Rockstar going back years on this network and forum, we've had many a Hot Coffee, and we want to make sure that we've got crystal clear guidance, on what can and cannot be used and/or done.

 

As stated by uNi, once we've got word back, we'll update the rules appropriately; however, we cannot give a timescale on this.

Go to the full post


11 replies to this topic
LeeC2202
  • LeeC2202

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2015
  • United-Kingdom

#1

Posted 20 September 2017 - 03:29 PM Edited by LeeC2202, 20 September 2017 - 03:31 PM.

In the GTAV modification forum rules, this rule is posted.

 

Conversions from one Rockstar game to a GTA - Old or new this is allowed on any scale. You can convert models/textures from a game like Max Payne 3 to GTA V, Red Dead Redemption to IV, V to SA, VC to V, etc..

 

The recent OpenIV incident led to Take2 releasing a statement prohibiting any cross-IP modding, particularly of Rockstar IP from game to game. It's why Liberty City V was abandoned and why the RDR mod was closed down.

 

As it stands, the forum rule could be seen to be encouraging a form of modding that T2 and Rockstar explicitly prohibit. Are there typos in the forum rules and should they in fact say not allowed?

  • meimeiriver likes this

JuniorChubb
  • JuniorChubb

    Aqualish Spy

  • Van Society
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2015
  • United-Kingdom
  • Best Certified Crew 2016 [Van Society]
    GTAF Time Trials Most Improved Driver 2016
    Best Event 2015 [Van Society Meetups]

#2

Posted 20 September 2017 - 04:54 PM

I would guess it is just an oversight as the forum guidelines were probably written long before T2's recent hissy fit.
  • HalfOfAKebab likes this

LeeC2202
  • LeeC2202

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2015
  • United-Kingdom

#3

Posted 20 September 2017 - 05:43 PM

I would guess it is just an oversight as the forum guidelines were probably written long before T2's recent hissy fit.

Well that would be my guess as well and is exactly why I asked the question. There's a thing called plausible deniability and that's an incredibly useful defence in this kind of situation.

 

If you have a rule that says "You can do something wrong", then if something does go wrong, you are accountable. If you have a rule that says "You can't do it" and then fail to enforce that due to... excessive forum requirements, insufficient numbers of staff/moderators, yadda, yadda, yadda... you have plausible deniability, it's a layer of protection.

 

It gives you the chance to say "You're right, we should have been more vigilant and we will be in the future... we're sorry.". You don't get that option if the rules basically say "Yeah, go ahead, break those rules".

 

I'm pretty sure most people's reactions to this thread are potentially hostile and that's because they don't understand how things work. I do, I have been on both sides of this fence. I am a modder, I was (and to some extent still am) a game developer... and I ran my own games company. I tried to fight for the modders on 5Mods and lost but if I can find places where a nudge in the right direction, gets a site on the right side of a protective fence, then I will happily accept the hostility, if the site takes notice, understands why, and is pro-active as a result.

 

If I have to sacrifice my presence here, because people get annoyed at me pointing these things out, then so be it... If the community wins and has a better chance of surviving the scrutiny, I will happily take the hit.


JuniorChubb
  • JuniorChubb

    Aqualish Spy

  • Van Society
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2015
  • United-Kingdom
  • Best Certified Crew 2016 [Van Society]
    GTAF Time Trials Most Improved Driver 2016
    Best Event 2015 [Van Society Meetups]

#4

Posted 20 September 2017 - 06:28 PM

I would guess it is just an oversight as the forum guidelines were probably written long before T2's recent hissy fit.

Well that would be my guess as well and is exactly why I asked the question. There's a thing called plausible deniability and that's an incredibly useful defence in this kind of situation.
 
If you have a rule that says "You can do something wrong", then if something does go wrong, you are accountable. If you have a rule that says "You can't do it" and then fail to enforce that due to... excessive forum requirements, insufficient numbers of staff/moderators, yadda, yadda, yadda... you have plausible deniability, it's a layer of protection.
 
It gives you the chance to say "You're right, we should have been more vigilant and we will be in the future... we're sorry.". You don't get that option if the rules basically say "Yeah, go ahead, break those rules".
 
I'm pretty sure most people's reactions to this thread are potentially hostile and that's because they don't understand how things work. I do, I have been on both sides of this fence. I am a modder, I was (and to some extent still am) a game developer... and I ran my own games company. I tried to fight for the modders on 5Mods and lost but if I can find places where a nudge in the right direction, gets a site on the right side of a protective fence, then I will happily accept the hostility, if the site takes notice, understands why, and is pro-active as a result.
 
If I have to sacrifice my presence here, because people get annoyed at me pointing these things out, then so be it... If the community wins and has a better chance of surviving the scrutiny, I will happily take the hit.

Im pretty sure what happens on GTAF doesn't warrant any negative attention from games developers, I am not part of the modding community on here but I would guess (again) that it is a small group of people sharing ideas and mods without profit or mass distribution of copy written material.

I don't think T2 gives a flying fig what people do privately, it is mass distribution of branded/owned material, third party profiteers and people influencing online gaming that they oppose. The 'bedroom' modders have just been caught up in the paranoia.

No need to sacrifice yourself though, you make a valid point and if it is an oversight some people might be glad you pointed it out. I have had similar thoughts about the Car Duping thread but there is a lot of grey area in gaming do's and don'ts. I would however add that imo a PM to one of the mods would have been as effective without risking any hostile reactions.

LeeC2202
  • LeeC2202

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2015
  • United-Kingdom

#5

Posted 20 September 2017 - 07:47 PM Edited by LeeC2202, 20 September 2017 - 07:48 PM.

You would be surprised about what publishers and developers care about. Read up on Nintendo's history, they're pretty indiscriminate when it comes to shutting things down. One man projects, fan projects... all are targets, no matter how much money is involved (and it's usually no money)... as were the Premier League in the UK several years ago. They shut down an option file swapping service on a Pro Evolution website because it was distribution of licensed content. No money ever changed hands, just the content.

 

I mentioned this in another thread but whilst it might seem like innocent sharing, it's not quite that simple. Distribution of IP becomes representative of the company who owns that IP, it has the danger of becoming part of that company profile and that's a high business risk. How does an observing public know that a bad conversion of company owned IP, isn't by the company themselves? How does a company defend the cost of future IP-related dlc, if it has already been released by modders? There was an incident a few years back with an online Super Hero game, where people were making licensed comic characters from the character generator and that crossed the line. Licensing is such a deep and complex matter, companies always care, I can guarantee it.

 

And then you have the people charging money for mods... if that mod is made from Rockstar IP, then it's a concern.

 

Trust me, I have sat in the meetings where these things are discussed... very little goes under the radar. It doesn't take much effort to get a couple of staff as members on a few websites, to keep track of what is happening. It wasn't quite so easy back in the 80's because there was no internet as such, it was all BBS so it was harder to track but equally harder to share.

 

Anyway... I will let this thread go now, it's a potentially volatile subject but one that I hope the site takes seriously.


Crokey
  • Crokey

    Builders Like Erections

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2003
  • Belize
  • Best Official Gang 2016 [Zaibatsu]
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2016
    Worst Tits 2016
    Worst Tits 2015
    Worst Tits 2014
    Best Poster [Sports] 2016
    Best Poster [Sports] 2015
    Best Poster [Sports] 2014
    Last ever poster in a public area on the old forum
    Best Llama 2016
    14K Doggo/Catto-Chop Winner 2017

#6

Posted 20 September 2017 - 09:03 PM

I'm currently seeking clarification on this issue as it is a valid point you raise, and we'll respond in due course.
 

If I have to sacrifice my presence here, because people get annoyed at me pointing these things out, then so be it... If the community wins and has a better chance of surviving the scrutiny, I will happily take the hit.

 

Not at all, we welcome feedback... if it's constructive ;)

  • JuniorChubb likes this

uNi
  • uNi

    Feroci

  • Administrator
  • Joined: 14 May 2004
  • United-Kingdom
  • Best Official Gang 2014 [Feroci]

#7

Posted 21 September 2017 - 02:25 AM

R* are aware of the modding rules here, we're waiting for an update on their part and will update the rules once we got an reply back.
  • JuniorChubb likes this

LeeC2202
  • LeeC2202

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2015
  • United-Kingdom

#8

Posted 21 September 2017 - 10:31 AM

R* are aware of the modding rules here, we're waiting for an update on their part and will update the rules once we got an reply back.

 

Why would they need to update anything? They released a public statement that made their views clear on this topic?

 

 

Rockstar Games believes in reasonable fan creativity, and, in particular, wants creators to showcase their passion for our games. After discussions with Take-Two, Take-Two has agreed that it generally will not take legal action against third-party projects involving Rockstar’s PC games that are single-player, non-commercial, and respect the intellectual property (IP) rights of third parties. This does not apply to (i) multiplayer or online services; (ii) tools, files, libraries, or functions that could be used to impact multiplayer or online services, or (iii) use or importation of other IP (including other Rockstar IP) in the project. This is not a license, and it does not constitute endorsement, approval, or authorization of any third-party project. Take-Two reserves the right to object to any third-party project, or to revise, revoke and/or withdraw this statement at any time in their own discretion. This statement does not constitute a waiver of any rights that Take-Two may have with respect to third-party projects.


Just to emphasise my point about Nintendo, it seems they are at it again. https://www.engadget...ine-mod-videos/


JuniorChubb
  • JuniorChubb

    Aqualish Spy

  • Van Society
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2015
  • United-Kingdom
  • Best Certified Crew 2016 [Van Society]
    GTAF Time Trials Most Improved Driver 2016
    Best Event 2015 [Van Society Meetups]

#9

Posted 21 September 2017 - 11:44 AM

Anyway... I will let this thread go now, it's a potentially volatile subject but one that I hope the site takes seriously.


I think you are overeating to a reaction that has not taken place...

I have only seen one post that has been removed (unless mods have been on a deleting frenzy) and the mods seem happy to hear your feedback. :)

LeeC2202
  • LeeC2202

    Mark Chump

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2015
  • United-Kingdom

#10

Posted 21 September 2017 - 12:41 PM

 

Anyway... I will let this thread go now, it's a potentially volatile subject but one that I hope the site takes seriously.


I think you are overeating to a reaction that has not taken place...

I have only seen one post that has been removed (unless mods have been on a deleting frenzy) and the mods seem happy to hear your feedback. :)

 

 

Sadly, it's me that ends up being the volatile component, so not an overreaction as such, just past experience. :( I usually end up closing my accounts on forums as a preventative measure, hence my earlier comments. Not something I am proud to admit but... that's life, as they say.

 

So I will leave this in the hands of those in control. I have done the part my conscience makes me do, the rest is up to someone else. I will un-follow the topic just to allow things to resolve themselves in their own time.

  • JuniorChubb likes this

Crokey
  • Crokey

    Builders Like Erections

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 05 Aug 2003
  • Belize
  • Best Official Gang 2016 [Zaibatsu]
    Most Desperate Campaign Poster 2016
    Worst Tits 2016
    Worst Tits 2015
    Worst Tits 2014
    Best Poster [Sports] 2016
    Best Poster [Sports] 2015
    Best Poster [Sports] 2014
    Last ever poster in a public area on the old forum
    Best Llama 2016
    14K Doggo/Catto-Chop Winner 2017

#11

Posted 21 September 2017 - 10:50 PM   Best Answer

 

R* are aware of the modding rules here, we're waiting for an update on their part and will update the rules once we got an reply back.

 
Why would they need to update anything? They released a public statement that made their views clear on this topic?

 


I think you misunderstood, we are awaiting an update from them; so as to gain more clarification and to ensure that we are providing clearer rules for our members.  We (as in GTANet) have had a good relationship with Rockstar going back years on this network and forum, we've had many a Hot Coffee, and we want to make sure that we've got crystal clear guidance, on what can and cannot be used and/or done.

 

As stated by uNi, once we've got word back, we'll update the rules appropriately; however, we cannot give a timescale on this.

  • SA's Most Wanted and JuniorChubb like this

meimeiriver
  • meimeiriver

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2017
  • Netherlands

#12

Posted 24 October 2017 - 06:49 PM

In the GTAV modification forum rules, this rule is posted.

 

Conversions from one Rockstar game to a GTA - Old or new this is allowed on any scale. You can convert models/textures from a game like Max Payne 3 to GTA V, Red Dead Redemption to IV, V to SA, VC to V, etc..

 

The recent OpenIV incident led to Take2 releasing a statement prohibiting any cross-IP modding, particularly of Rockstar IP from game to game. It's why Liberty City V was abandoned and why the RDR mod was closed down.

 

As it stands, the forum rule could be seen to be encouraging a form of modding that T2 and Rockstar explicitly prohibit. Are there typos in the forum rules and should they in fact say not allowed?

 

Good catch. Yes, it would probably behoove the powers that be to change their ToS accordingly.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users