Imagine trying to sell a mod for a game that many believe should remain free—that's exactly what happened when a developer attempted to profit from a VR mod for the much-discussed Cyberpunk 2077. While the practice of charging for mods has generally been frowned upon in the gaming community, there are always those who venture to monetize their creations. Nowadays, many creators turn to platforms like Patreon, where they can provide access to their mods for supporters who contribute at certain subscription levels.
Take, for instance, a developer known as Luke Ross (though that may not be his real name). He has been quite successful—allegedly earning a significant income—from developing VR adaptations for games that lack native VR support. Until recently, Ross had a working mod for Cyberpunk 2077. However, this changed when he decided to reach out to CD Projekt RED, the game's developer, with an offer to license his VR mod. Unfortunately for him, rather than receiving the lucrative contract he might have anticipated, he was met with a DMCA takedown notice.
This incident highlights a broader concern within modding communities: the fear that any hint of monetization could lead to widespread copyright strikes and removal requests. Most game publishers, including CDPR, explicitly state in their Terms of Service that no third party is allowed to profit from their intellectual property.
CD Projekt RED’s Terms of Service contain a dedicated section on “Fan Content,” and the very first rule under the subheading "The Golden Rule" clearly states that any commercial use of their games is prohibited. The policy goes further to clarify that while they allow reasonable donations for fan content, creators cannot put their work behind paywalls or charge for it.
While we’re not legal experts, this guideline seems straightforward on the surface. In spite of this, Ross has defended his actions by claiming that his software operates as a general VR application, supporting a variety of games across different engines without utilizing any of CDPR's code or assets. He likens the situation to hardware monitoring software like RivaTuner, arguing that just as it doesn't infringe on copyrights by displaying performance statistics, his mod shouldn't be seen as a violation either.
However, this comparison raises eyebrows. Many forms of fan-created content, even if they don't use direct code or assets from a game, can still fall under the definition of "Fan Content" as outlined in CDPR’s Terms of Service. Moreover, RivaTuner is freeware focused on a specific function, whereas Ross's mod offers a tailored VR experience for a particular title. A more apt comparison might be made to Boris Vorontsov’s ENB Series, which is also a free post-processing tool that requires customization for different games.
In an interview with IGN, Ross described his mod's capabilities, saying, "My software supports 40+ games and various completely different engines, which makes creating a version that specifically supports only Cyberpunk 2077 a non-trivial task." This statement interestingly undermines his claim that the software is generic, as the need for specialized code tailored to Cyberpunk 2077 suggests otherwise. Additionally, the fact that users are willing to pay based on the mod's support for this specific game adds another layer to the discussion.
There are broader issues worth considering here, such as whether modders should be allowed to earn money from their creations and whether End User License Agreements (EULAs) and Terms of Service are excessively restrictive or possess a solid legal foundation. These are important questions that merit thoughtful discussion. However, approaching a company to try to sell them a product that appears to directly defy its intellectual property rights seems somewhat naive. Ross's disappointment over CDPR not initiating contact or negotiations raises an intriguing question: what did he expect? After all, he wasn’t in the strongest position to negotiate.
Ultimately, this situation has taken a turn for the worse for Ross; since his mod was removed from Patreon, VR fans have begun sharing it freely online. "In a sense," he remarked to IGN, "CDPR already got what they wanted." This incident not only showcases the complexities of modding but also opens the floor for debate on the principles of intellectual property rights in the gaming world. Should developers allow modders to profit from their hard work? What do you think about CDPR’s stringent policies? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments!
