Instale o Steam
iniciar sessão
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chinês simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Tcheco)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol — Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol — América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polonês)
Português (Portugal)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar um problema com a tradução
Modding isn't illegal. It's not even a grey area. The developers give you the Creation Kit specifically to create mods.
Modding is technically copyright infringement.
However a copyright holder has a right to not enforce it, in the case of most video game companies that allow mods.
But if Bethesda decided one day they wanted to ban mods, they can. The sites hosting the mods would have to take them down or risk being sued.
Not that I believe this will ever happen, just my point is that inherently modding is copyright infringement that the copyright holder can enforce.
https://mttlr.org/2012/11/gaming-mods-and-copyright/
"mods exist in a consistently shifting legal grey area, subject to the vagaries of developer whimsy."
"The application of MAI Systems to modification litigation essentially makes all modifications infringements of copyright, as they are code-based adjustments to an existing computer program that are stored both in RAM and in a fixed form (the programming language itself). This means that mods are “legal” only insofar as game developers suffer them to be so; the moment a developer finds a mod distasteful, it can be found to infringe copyright."
"Mods, no matter how well-respected or validated by developers, can also be found to infringe copyright through statute. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., v. Reeves, 2010 WL 4054095 (C.D. Cal. 2010) originated as an action against the defendant for infringement of Blizzard’s copyright through violation of World of Warcraft’s monthly fee structure. Reeves and her compatriots reverse engineered the code for the world from their legally purchased copies of the game, and made it available on private servers to people looking to play without paying Blizzard’s monthly fees. While the action never produced a judicial decision (as Reeves never answered or appeared in court, resulting in a default judgment for $88 million in damages), in calculating damages, the court noted that Reeves’ website “enable[s] . . . users to access Plaintiff’s copyrighted works and circumvent Plaintiff’s protective measures.” Blizzard at 3. This has the practical effect of invoking Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which makes illegal circumvention of technological copyright protection systems."
Lewis Galoob Toys vs Nintendo shows that game modifications are absolutely not inherently copyright infringement.
It's a predictable issue and it's well known what causes it