this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2026
173 points (97.8% liked)

PC Gaming

13275 readers
803 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Looks like the Ghostrunner developers also have an issue with paid mods running off their IP.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah exactly. It's crazy that people think it's OK for game developers to have a say in what mods you can apply to your own legally purchased game.

[–] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 2 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

They don't say anything against applying or installing the mod to the game, at least not in this case, but against making money with their IP. This should not be mixed together.

[–] jaselle@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Let's be clear: 3rd party mods do not in general contain 1st party IP. So no, I reject the idea that the modder was making money "with" their IP, unless there's something I don't know about this mod specifically. This is a perfectly legal and morally clear niche, and the game devs are overreaching.

For instance, the creators of phone cases don't need permission from the creators of the phone. I also have 3rd party controllers for my switch, 3rd party game cartridge holders. I fixed my phone using an iFixit kit (3rd party). In none of these instances were the third party required to get 1st party approval.

[–] DarkMetatron@feddit.org 1 points 25 minutes ago

All your examples are physical objects that are owned and physically manipulated or extended, not software that is not owned but always only licensed (yes, even when you buy a physical medium, the software is only licensed), and subject of very complex trademark, copyright and intelectual property laws. Its like saying I can safe look directly at the moon that means i can safe look directly at the sun because both looking like lights in the sky. You can and should not, and things that look a lot like each other don't have to follow the same rules.

Oh and try to fix your physical John Deer tractor with anything not bought from John Deer (and even that is only possible to do in the US since 2023) you will very soon see the limits of 3rd party.

Btw the creators of phone cases and controllers and such need the permission when they use the trademarks and registered names owned buy other companies. You may be allowed to create unofficial accesoirs but you have no right to the trademarks to put them on your product or in your advertisements.

[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

It’s making money with their labor. Work is valuable, and deserves pay no matter what