Game Mods - Can You Sell A Mod...

... based on the Quake4 Engine?

would it be legal to add your own content and scripts and sell a mod that required the player to own a license to the game... or would JC blast me to smithereens with his BFG and lawyers...

--Mike

Gunman was just a mod for Half-life, and they sold that.
But for the life of me, I cannot remember if you needed the original product to play it.

But My feeling is, You can sell it, because the mod is your work. (It is Isnt it)

In fact isnt it the same as asking if you can sell a game that uses windows.

I just checked the box, no mention of needing half life. I guess they licensed the engine.

yeah, i'd have no problem requiring the player to have Q4... i'm just unsure as to what the legal ramifications of that are...

and of course, the wishes of J Carmack... i mean, i'd surely have to respect the guys take on it...

--Mike

They might have done, Its one of those games I lost when I moved House :(
Im sure there is a mod for HOMEWORLD 2, in development that is going to be sold, just as a MOD. (ie without engine)

you guys got any links...

thx

--Mike

I dont think they do have to respect J Carmacks wishes here. I think that If there is a loadin third party MODS option, then he cannot turn round and say. "Sorry lads I ment third party mods I approved of"

@Red, Im one of those people who doesnt keep links. Just googles for everything :0

Cavat: Obviously if you want your product to have links from any Q4 official pages, then his wishes might be respected

yeah, looks like Gunman was released by Sierra... must be a licensing thing in there somewhere... i'm googling...

--Mike

I don't see why not. You could sell add-ons for blitzmax that require blitzmax so long as you don't sell blitzmax along with it.

For Half-Life, you would either need to buy the rights to the engine or make the mod successful enough that Valve would buy the rights of the mod from you to sell it as a standalone game (like CS).

I would imagine Quake4 would fall under the same idea.

I'm farly sure that game editors usually come with a license saying that you aren't allowed to sell anything you make from their editing tools.

Also, I guess if you sell a mod for a game, you are effectively trading off that game's name, intentionally or not. This, basically, means you are using someone else's property to promote your software.

In cases like Gunman, the publisher may approach the mod maker about a commercial version. That's pretty much what happened with CounterStrike.

@"This, basically, means you are using someone else's property to promote your software"

This means I cannot put runs in WINDOWS, because Im trading off Microsofts name?

To put a bit of perpective on this PEOPLE BUY weapons for diablo????????? You can if you want to sell your copy of Q4. You can sell a mod, (if its your own work)

I must admit tho, that if the editor does come with a "you cannot sellit" license, you do have to pretend you wrote your own editor.

@K, thats only true if you want to sell astand alone product.

Was there not a big stramash a couple of years ago when a guy tried to sell a mod for Freelancer?

Also if yoo are selling a mod, yoo have to use the name of the game the mod is for and that will be copyrighted/trademarked so using the name ie: Quake 4 could be sick-bird-of-prey. :)

I do not know how it works in the US or indeed even in England as Scottish law does have some differneces to both.

It''s an interesting subject though, I might look into it further....

Cheers

Garion

H&K you think this, you think that but you know and confirm nothing. If you have no facts, don't go spreading gospel.

You aren't allowed to sell a mod based on the quake engines without a prior license. Check out the id homepage and look up licensing.

I am stateing the point of view that it doesnt matter what the Lience says. You then saying look your wrong, doesnt make my point of view any more or less correct.
It is my point of view.

BUT, Probalby the most applicable court case to date is;



http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2157

I realise this is blizard, and not ID, but it will be a test case.

Now who do you think is right? Becasus this case is about a clause which is the the relevent clause in Ids Licenses. I belive in this case blizard are wrong. You may think otherwise.

I think tho that what would most pursuade me that I didnt need any permission to sell some data that could be loadedin to Quake 4 is



http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2157

I look forward to your list of cases where people have been sucessfully sued.

Meh, I thought this thread was going to be about selling forum mods on ebay to be used as personal slaves/gimps/bitches... :P

Instead of comparing it to Windows, which probably has a license the lets you make software for it. How about comparing it to a console. If you figured out how to make a game for the Playstation without using their SDK, then made a great game and sold it. Could Sony win the case against you?

That said. It's probably best to check with id beforehand. You might win if the case in court, but can your really afford a legal battle with id or any big company for that matter?

I dont know, Probalbly the PSP will have a test case at some point. The problem with using the Playstation as an example is that the media would need to be Physical. (ie you would need to sell a cd), and the distribution problems you would get without there permission whould make making a lot of money unlikly.

I agree, that the best bet is (If you think you have a Killer Mod), to approach them.
But the permission is just the same as when you ask "May I", on the metro when you want someone to move their bags. If they say no you still move them anyway :0

BUT without Ids permission you cannot say ID or Quake on any of the product marketing. (Tho see law case above).

Why not drop id a mail and you get the correct answear.

> I look forward to your list of cases where people have been sucessfully sued.

Only one I can think of is the playstation or Nintendo cartridge maker that lost it's lawsuit, but that is a slightly different situation.

I can't even think of any example where someone has tried to sell a mod without the backing of the original game owners, so a legal track record would be hard to find.

@AlienForce, Asking ID would just get there official line, which is no. But you can still ignore them saying no. (WHICH I WOULDNT RECOMEND).
The problem isnt about if you can realese it, but rarther if they say no, you cannot even say that it is a mod for Quake. So selling it would be a nightmare anyway.

@Dynaman Thats why this blizzard court case is important, (I know its about a guide, and not a mod) -And probalbly if it looks like blizzard are about to lose, they will settle out of court, so as not to set president.

Also, I had asumed that since Red posted the question here, (rather than just googleing it - Which if you do shows its Illeagal to even make a map let alone sell one), that he wanted opionions.

>Also, I had asumed that since Red posted the question
>here, (rather than just googleing it - Which if you do
>shows its Illeagal to even make a map let alone sell >one), that he wanted opionions.

True enough, which gives me enough info to answer the following question

> or would JC blast me to smithereens with his BFG and lawyers...

Yes he would have to. If he did not then he would lose the right to do so. The old if you don't protect a patent / trademark / whatever then you lose it.

I'm not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, yada yada yada

See, everyone says that but if you read the quote from John, it mightnt have been so. Also, I dont think they would "Blast Him to smithereens", its just a threat, (A very effective threat), but still just a threat.

The only time any of these cases realy goes for the suer (Litigater?) is when some Iconic image has been used in the Mod. (Ie Paramount with StarTrek)

If you could make a mod, without it "Looking like" Quake, and you didnt metion quake in any way or form, (Including on the product), they could try to sue you. But it would fail. Unfoutunatly....... (Could go on about the cost of litigation).. so mostly people backdown under the threat of a lawsuit.

H&K in no way can be held responsible for any banckrupcy resulting from action taken on the opinion :o