Comment on Starfield players pirate the DLSS mod after the developer locks it behind paywall
sirfancy@lemmy.world 1 year agoWay to strawman me and ignore my points 👍 I do not want people working for free. I am firmly pro-union and pro-fair pay and all of that. They don’t have to work for free. They can monetize it the way every other mod does it by having a Patreon that you can subscribe to or donate to support them. Plenty of mods do this already and this is the generally accepted way to do it due to the reasons I mentioned before, which I will now spell out for you because you ignored them:
- If you have a problem with the mod, it doesn’t work how you want, you have no recourse if you paywall it the way they did.
- It is generally unethical and a bad look to make money using other’s IP as a base without their permission. Bethesda has potential legal recourse for this, as they’ve broken EULA. Section 3 - B, D, G, and 4. Section 4 is especially interesting because it states you agree to not have a monetary interest in the game or its content. By paywalling a mod, you are relying on the game not having DLSS to make money. Full stop. That’s the point of the mod. While the various paragraphs in Section 3 do say that modding of any kind is prohibited, this kind of thing is usually not enforced (as is very apparent with Skyrim or Fallout 4). Until money is involved. This is why a donation button is distanced far enough away from this kind of thing. A donation button is supporting the developer, and legal waters get a little grayer. For this mod, you are paying for the mod. That’s pretty black and white, and that’s exactly why it is frowned upon to go that route with mods.
ABCDE@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Because they didn’t monetise it the way you want, doesn’t mean it’s not okay.
sirfancy@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Ignoring all of my comment again. Classic. See ya.
ABCDE@lemmy.world 1 year ago
No, I’m just not looking for an essay, I’m responding to what I am interested in.