Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Ya know what.. you don't even understand what copyright means so I'm done here. I hope the moderators will help ya with that soon.
However I suppose as long as you're not reselling the assets and charging money for them then *probably* no one will actually care.
I don't think they were trying to resell/extract the models and try to sell them claiming THEY made them..
You clearly know nothing of Valve's history if you think they're the kind that cares about enforcing copyright law when their games including Counter-Strike, Team Fortress, and Dota 2, were all based on mods of other games. Why? Because unlike you, Valve actually sees the value of mods to the point that they could even commercialise them from turning them into fully-fledged games to nearly implementing paid mods for the Steam Workshop even. Ironically if they were to enforce copyright law traditionally, they wouldn't have been as successful as they are today because the three aforementioned games wouldn't have existed that have been generating so much money for them to this day.
Speaking of the Steam Workshop, Valve clearly does not care about how the mods for their own games are borrowing assets from other IPs they don't own. They just let people have their fun because that's the main point of modding. Letting people having fun is a good thing for humanity. Taking that fun away because of some arbitrary concept that is "laws" is not what we need for an ideal world when this petty so-called "crime" is just people extracting assets for modifying games they enjoy which ultimately harms nobody.
The only time that Valve or other game company are obligated to take down Workshop content is whenever they received a DMCA takedown request to do so.
Yet this thread is still up and open for discussion. You wonder why that is?
Clearly it's because the moderators do not care that you think this thread is "advocating piracy" since they don't think it is when the topic is only about extracting assets for likely modding purposes which people don't often consider a big deal compared to downloading full games illegally which developers and publishers do find problematic.
While that is true whether it's the modder's own original work or the included Valve's existing materials, Valve has historically allowed modders to use their assets from one Valve game to another as long as it's not commercialised without permission.
In fact, there's an overlooked section on the Steam Store where you can find mods for Half-Life 2 and Portal that may even include Valve's assets from their original games:
https://store.steampowered.com/mods/220/
https://store.steampowered.com/mods/400/
Not all of them are from the same developer, they all just use the same engine.
Valve did not have any part in developing Garry's Mod, they only published it on Steam, and it's highly unlikely any of the developers of Gmod even worked on the non-Valve games either.
Considering that you don't want other people to just have fun with copyrighted materials because you believe copyright laws matters more than human morals, yeah, it is nice.
Not the part of downloading games illegally which is what most people think of for piracy which can harm companies and especially indie developers. But when it comes to extracting assets for modding games, I don't see many people equating it to piracy but it is considered part of a grey legal area where the act is not entirely legal or illegal. However, that does not make the act necessarily bad if it's not harming anyone.
I'm just saying, you do not make a good representation for furries when you act like a goody two-shoes that gets miserable when people decide to have fun by just modding games with imported assets from other games.
People will rightfully think you're annoying, pretentious and draconian who hates fun.
This might even include people that share your interest in anthropomorphic animals.
Krystal and Renamon character models are often popular furry mods for games where they don't belong due to IP differences. Are you going to fling ♥♥♥♥ at your furry brethren and sistren because they love these characters enough to port these models in, just because of your hyperfixation of upholding the arbitrary copyright law?
What would that accomplish and how does that benefit you exactly?
Do you have a desire to control others and get a thrill when you take away other people's fun and put them in misery for "breaking the rules" when it's not even causing misery to the copyright holders nor causing any harm to anyone else?
What about the furry artists that are much more 'notorious' than the modders because a lot of them paywall their art that are straight up copyrighted character(s) of IPs they do not own, and perhaps likely perverting these characters in ways that the copyright holder may not like? Make a big deal out of it as you want, but those furry artists have made a lot of money because so many people supported them on Patreon, SubscribeStar, or whatever.
Clearly, lots of people do not care. Not even the companies care either, whether it's because they're unaware or they don't actually think it's a good idea to spend time and money on taking down some artworks or mods because they rather spend those resources on something more productive such as developing new games instead.
If extracted assets are not used for profiting or having their credit stolen, why bother?
If a mod doesn't interfere with a company's sales, why bother?
If anything, it'd actually incentivise people in buying their games even if it's only a niche minority so equating extracting assets to be the same as piracy (i.e. downloading/distributing full games illegally) just sounds ridiculous when it can actually help developers with sales.