Copyright and the Games Industry
A recent post at the Press Start To Drink blog examined the relationship the games industry has with copyright laws. More so than in some other creative industries, the reactions of game companies to derivative works are widely varied and often unpredictable, ranging anywhere from active support to situations like the Chrono Trigger: Crimson Echoes debacle. Quoting:
"... even within the gaming industry, there is a tension between IP holders and fan producers/poachers. Some companies, such as Epic and Square Enix, remain incredibly protective of their Intellectual Property, threatening those that use their creations, even for non-profit, cultural reasons, with legal suits. Other companies, like Valve, seem to, if not embrace, at least tolerate, and perhaps even tacitly encourage this kind of fan engagement with their work. Lessig suggests, 'The opportunity to create and transform becomes weakened in a world in which creation requires permission and creativity must check with a lawyer.' Indeed, the more developers and publishers that take up Valve's position, the more creativity and innovation will emerge out of video game fan communities, already known for their intense fandom and desire to add to, alter, and re-imagine their favorite gaming universes."
Intellectual property is a bankrupt and indefensible notion. Scratch a weasel word, find a thief.
I'm getting fed up with these two concepts. There is only one kind of Plagarism... cheating. If you didn't do the work on your paper, then you're cheating. If you didn't provide sources, you better have research. If you don't have research, your paper is baseless and should be given a failing grade.
Copyright is the idea that you control the copies of your creation. Obviously, nobody wants to spend thousands of hours creating something then letting someone else (a corporation) sell it without royalties. Or letting people download it for free off the internet. (Hey Pirates, you think you aren't stealing? Well why don't you download a random assortment of bits. Oh that's right, because you want somebody else's *work*).
However, Copyright has turned into this idea where as soon as you make a "Dark cloaked figure who kills people for a living" you can go bully anyone else for doing something like it. No, it lets you own your words. Not something like your words, your words only.
Trademarks protect against people making Harry Potter books or Mickey Mouse movies. There is no need and purpose for copyright to cover that issue.
IP is not a failed idea. Our system is what's broken (or more likely, those who are in charge of the system).
I think two things affected the modding community: one is, as you said, definitely the tightening reins in an attempt to monetise additional content post-release. The other, which I think had begun to take effect well before the propagation of paid-for DLC, is simply the spirally complexity and cost of game development. The chief time expenditure for any major mod has always been asset creation (while I fully admit what separates good mods from bad is still overall game design). In the past, a couple of talented individuals could roll out a mod in a couple of months that looked as polished as the original game. Now as engines allow for far more detailed graphics, high quality asset creation takes significantly longer. Thus the dev cycle for mods has increased just as for the original game. For a handful of bedroom coders, putting together larger teams has generally been found impractical so the result is that the best-looking and most promising mods still have smallish teams and end up in limbo for years, during which many falter and disappear. The alternative is a cheap-looking mod which is unlikely to garner significant interest.
"Yes, Virginia, there is a Great Cthulhu..."