yes

If that's the case, I'm a little neutral on this topic. I will admit it will make me less likely to use the mod if I need to pay for it. But if a modder thinks their work is worth money, who am I to say it's not? Some mods can be official expansions for games from my experience.

Then there is the question: will it lead to a flood of cheap mods being made so people can make some quick money? Would the quality of mods drop because it becomes more business than a passionate project?

As long as the mod developer is the one benefiting, and no one is forcing them to charge, I see no issue with it really. I think it's nicer to just have a donation suggestion on download, but mod makers can make the choice.

I get not wanting to pay for mods, but presenting that as a kind of moral high-ground rings a bit hollow to me.

Paid mods are a real shame, chiefly because I can't see myself ever paying for them.
But for sure, some MOD creators are worthy of being paid.
I guess for me, it is just a mindset thing ... somewhat.
And I guess I am against those mods that are not deserving of being paid for, and there will always be opportunists trying to grab a buck if they can.

So it might be down to the mod.
I've certainly paid for some 3rd party mission packs in the past. And I've paid for discs crammed with mods. I haven't paid a lot for them or often, but I've certainly paid a bit.

That statement makes it sound as if the point being cited is illegitimate, but it isn't.

That's not legal, or ethical, for mod makers to profit off of someone else's intellectual property for which they have never been given any rights to profit off of it from the owners of that intellectual property.

Grifters is indeed an accurate term for those who do such illegal & unethical things. Parasites would also be an accurate term too.

So you agree these are derivative works [infringing on copyright], right?

There's a good reason why Nintendo has successfully C&D tons of mods even if they're vanilla improvements to the original game such as SSBB's Project M mod. If it isn't clear copyright infringement, the super legally grey area enables legitimate IP infringement talks about it.

With exception to those devpubs that supported or encouraged mods, any mods can be presumably copyright infringement on the original devpubs' work. And the reason why they don't go after those people is because it's a hassle and the original devpubs would rather put their resources into their next game or their own business.

You're more than welcome to support paid mods. Just make sure you know that it's a lot more complex than supporting modders who should be compensated rather than what you're advocating for - completely disrupting the current moral economy of modding. The legal greyness of volunteerism and parody/satire mods is precisely why mods can be so creative, fun, and left untouched by those trying to protect their infringed IP.

Intellectual rights opens up a whole can of worms.

Yes, they should be respected, but as we all know, games are often flawed, and all too often rushed to market before being properly complete etc etc. My respect certainly starts to lessen when it comes to flawed games.

So mods that address issues definitely have their place, and of course issues can be a wide field depending on the gamer. It can be from bug fixing right through to things we feel should be in a game, but aren't.

Paying for such mods, is problematical at best. It is one thing to provide a mod for free, and something entirely different to request money for a mod, that isn't officially sanctioned and where the mod developer has no claim to the intellectual property. Regardless though, there needs to be some kind of respect for those doing a service to the community, especially where those who have the intellectual rights, haven't stepped up to the plate and done what they should have themselves.

So payment can sometimes be seen as compensation, justly earned. That would be a community call though.

As far as I am concerned, if you create something and release it to the market, and have people pay for it, then you no longer have sole rights. Those who purchase your product have rights too. In essence they have bought into something, and refunds don't cover everything, and at your own risk doesn't either.

So in the end, mod developers have rights too.

I can imagine : nude / sex mods , texture packs and game trainers as payware .

Look, i will be honest with you - I have zero intererst in the pointless activity that is to discuss the finer points of law with an interwebs armchair lawyer. But good luck with your legal career.

But I guess, it would all be fine for you, if the same mods are provided to you for free, right?
Despite them still being made by someone ,who's not the IP holder of the game(s).

Out of curiosity: what term(s) would you apply to the gamers who use these mods (both: free and paid)?

I am not against paid mods because I simply prefer to spend my money on other things, but because the lack of money in the modding scene keeps far more free mods from getting encrypted and thus harder for others to fix if they encounter any incompatibilities with it and other mods, than when we have a monetized mods in the mix, as finding one's free mod having been added to a free modpack without giving any credit tends be a bit less annoying than if that free mod would end up in a monetized modpack.

In another words, if one wishes to be able to have as many mods peacefully coexisting in the same game session as possible, they should say no to monetized mods because sooner or later all mods get abandoned and then it is up to the gaming community to try to figure out a way to keep them playing nice with other mods.

I don't have any problem with paid mods per se, but I'd be interested to see just how they'd be facilitating this, and whether or not they will require the modder to get written proof they have the approval of the copyright holder(s) (and that includes packaging libraries etc) that they're not infringing on any legalities in doing so. If they don't, I could foresee issues not only for the mods being sold, but the platform which allows it to happen.

I recognise there's often a LOT of work which goes into some mods, and yes I believe if the modder wants to make a bit of coin for their work that it can be a fair arrangement. But up until this point most mods have avoided a lot of problems by sitting in grey areas and not charging for the modified materials. I've seen a few mod groups specifically telling their community & fans that they won't monetize not only because they didn't want to, but because if they did they'd get taken down.

Interesting for sure.

They should go the itch io route and just allow people to pay what they want when downloading.

Y'all, read the link in my top post. It covers a lot. Including it requires the developer to implement paid modding into their game, and developers automatically get a[n undue] cut of any mod revenue, etc. They also list Fortnite and Roblox as aspirational.