Sims 3 Modders and Second Life Designers Go Head-To-Head Over the Ethics of Converted Content

Janine "Iris Ophelia" Hawkins' ongoing review of gaming and virtual world style

In Second Life, when someone takes an item that someone else created and redistributes it without their permission it's called theft. Plain and simple, no matter how they got their hands on it or what they planned for it, whether they sold it or gave it away, credited the original designer or claimed it as their own. Yet when it comes to other virtual fashion communities, things can be a bit more ambiguous.

Conversions are a popular segment of The Sims 3's custom content scene. Modders take user-created content for The Sims 2, for example, and update it so that it can be used in the newer game. They may even fix some issues and improve the quality of the original, often abandoned piece of content. The same can be done with official content from other games as well, making it accessible in worlds where it otherwise wouldn't be. Sometimes that content is behind a donation/paywall for its original platform, but it's not being sold for the platform they're converting it to so there's no risk of hurting the original designer's earnings. It's harmless.

... Right?

I'll admit as a fan of Sims mods myself I didn't think much of these content conversions, but a recent schism between Simmers and SLers has me thinking twice. Here's why:

It started simply enough when Suetabulous Yootz, the designer behind SL brand Beetlebones, noticed her work on a Sims 3 modding blog. The modder was crediting her, along with several other Second Life designers, but the screenshots being shown definitely were not from Second Life. Word spread and indignant creators quickly uncovered a variety of blogs and tutorials for converting virtual goods from Second Life to custom content for The Sims 3, using content without permission and hitting a very serious nerve.

The two communities butted heads. Designers reached out to modders, and SL blogger Xanthe wrote a particularly good post about why, exactly, SLers were quite so upset at Simmers, even though there is so much overlap between them. Eventually several of the conversion modders stepped back, removed the infringing Second Life-based content, and posted civil and sympathetic responses. Shmoopie Sims, one of the Sims 3 modding blogs involved, shared this after deleting their SL conversion-related posts:

To any creators I have offended I am deeply sorry. You’ll have to understand that when I created the tutorial and converted somethings it was not done with malicious intent but to introduce new content to the sims. I equivilated it to when someone converts something over from a different game like skyrim or bioshock infinite. These are all different games with different purposes and did not see the sims interfering with anyone’s sales because they are played for two different reasons. However these are not my creations and I cannot decide what they’re used for so I encourage anyone else with conversions to please take them down out of respect for their original creators. 

This argument certainly wouldn't hold up in court (most game companies don't like having their assets picked apart and redistributed either) but it's hard to be mad at someone who seems quite so sincere. Fellow Simmers who still didn't quite grasp what the problem was were quick to complain, but the modders involved have held their ground.

Though the SL-to-Sims conversion tutorials shared on several different sites have since been removed, they all included an amount of respect for the original creator and their work that you don't find among brazen thieves. They urged others to credit the original Second Life designers for their work and not to sell anything or put it up behind a paywall. As far as they were concerned, their hands were clean; they were simply bringing something to a new market for others to enjoy, without being any kind of commercial competition to the original creator and their business.

Meanwhile, these arguably well-meaning tutorials also noted that asking a designer for permission would usually take a very long time... So why bother? They pointed to SL viewers used by content thieves to copy and resell items, as well as leading people to the KingGoon Copybot Forum, a notorious hub for Second Life content thieves. Even though their intention was to use the content with credit in a non-commercial, non-competing format, they were doing so using all the trappings of the copybotters and content thieves that plague the world of Second Life fashion, and that no doubt compounded the injury felt by the affected designers.

Simmers have also eagerly pointed out that many Sims mods (among other less-than-original things) often make their way into Second Life shops. Though that's a fair enough point, it's something that many SL fashionistas work hard to fight, and more to the point it's not something that a legitimate creator like Suetabulous Yootz should be held accountable for. In the end the Sims modders chose to respect the wishes of the original Second Life designers, and that's what counts.

Understandably I'm now having second thoughts about my fondness for all the Sims 2 conversions in my own collection of Sims 3 custom content. Though it's still commonplace in The Sims community, who's to say how the original creator of that Sims 2 hairstyle would feel about having someone else redistributing their hard work on a different (albeit related) platform? And what about converting assets from commercial games? While doing that for Second Life it often motivated by a desire to profit off of someone else's work, when it comes to The Sims 3 it's more likely a desire to play as your favorite game character or show your fandom pride.

What do you think: Are SL conversions a special case, or are all conversions just as problematic? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Tweet

Iris Ophelia (@bleatingheart, Janine Hawkins IRL) has been featured in the New York Times, and has spoken about SL-based design at the Fashion Institute of Technology in Manhattan and with pop culture/fashion maven Johanna Blakley.

Comments

[Elrik Merlin]

IMO, the starting point should be that you should ask the original creator. If you can transfer something from SL, for example, then you can easily ask the creator. If you get a "no", then you don't do it.

The idea of being able to transfer content into different environments was not included in permissions-handling in SL for example, and no doubt other environments too. Thus whatever rights to have to an element in SL, say, you have to assume that that's as far as it extends – to SL only.

It might take time, it might be tedious to ask, but it's generally possible and even easy. So ask first and be prepared to have a dialogue.

That would be my advice. You need to make all reasonable efforts to locate the creator. If you cannot locate them, then it's another discussion.

[Indigo Mertel]

I am not familiar with how The Sims works. Is content in The Sims sold?

[zzpearlbottom]

For me is as simple as this, with Ll new Tos any i would build on Sl i would love to see it around other platforms, as I will never let LL be the only owner of my works!

[Adeon Writer]

Indigo: no. Modded Content in the sims is just like modded content in any game: single player only (if it's multiplayer, only you see it), and you just download the files and out them in the right folders to make them appear in your game.

[The Tier Is Too Damn High Party]

Hard work? Sorry, but imo a majority of SL clothing, etc. I see around are derived from rl designers. There is nothing "original" about them. Creators' concern about artwork, photography and builds, etc., is understandable, but clothing and hairdo's? Not so much.