on the question of copyright: we do, in fact, violate bioware's copyright each and everytime we publish a mod - however, as indicated above, bioware have already given us permission (or more precisely, reserved the right to refuse us permission) to publish mods. they could, of course, issue cease-and-desist notices at any point, either to individuals, to whole fora or the the entire
BG2 modding community, as a number of other publsihers have done, but they don't. as such, we have
implied (and limited) permission to modify bioware content, until such time as they instruct otherwise.
also, on copyright: unlike patent law, copyright is assigned automatically upon publication, without any submission of paperwork. so, SirBB, you have some degree of copyright in yr own mods, and could issue cease-and-desist letters to ppl making modifications against yr will. (i say
some degree, cos i'm uncertain of the extent to which copyright of modified material extends, given that the original material remains property of bioware).
as for public domain: unless mods are issued under copyleft/ FLOSS licences (FLOSS being the current acronym for open source), i'd hazard a guess that they're not public domain at all, cos exisiting copyright laws would apply.
then they do have to be included in any adaption of their work and do have to be willing collaborators (even tho that has the effect of giving them the right of veto over any adaption of their work).
It still smacks of a double standard to me.
it might strike you as a double standard, but it isn't. we have, as i'e said, implicit permission to mod bioware content - and insofar as we have that permission, we dont need to ask for further permission to modify content.
similarly, it is valid to presume permission to modify content published by authors who are AWOL and uncontactable - altho as SirBB says, there is a good faith requirement that the person seeking to alter the modded content at least
try to contact the modder prior to altering their material.
however, it
isn't valid to make this assumption with material published by authors who are still available for content; both because there is the copyright question, and because modding is, as i said, a form of open source publishing (
ie, collaborative work) (the fact that most mods aren't published under FLOSS/open source licences doesn't deny that they share other features of FLOSS work practices).
i'm not sure how much weight i would put on the copyright question, given that there is a possibility that bioware, as the original authors, could claim all modded content as their own should push come to shove and their shoving took place in a sympathetic jurisdiction. additionally, enforcing a copyright claim would be far more work than pretty much any modder i can think of would care to engage in - with the possible exception of a certain infamous script troll who shall remain nameless.
i would, however, put a lot of weight on the collaborative work aspects of modding, which require all partners in the work to be in agreement as to the direction of the work, and similarly requires that any partner can leave the project at any point should they be unhappy with it - meaning, as i previously posted, that exising mod authors have an effective veto over alterations to their content. enforcing these rights is relatively easy, and frequently done (viz: the debates about the form of the various BP flavours, and the necessary acocmodations needed to be made by various mod authors) (and viz: that unnamed script troll, who eventually, despite their high-grade troll skills, was forced out of
BG/
BG2 modding; in part due to their arrogation of other ppl's work).
it's not entirely as clearcut as this, as SirBB implies - the question of fixing unaddressed bugs in mods could well be considered modding (even if the author is still present, an unaddressed bug could well be claimed to be abandoned content - with the implied right to modify without further approval) or it could be considiered hacking (
ie, unwanted modification of material, or modification of material against the wishes of the author) - altho it's best addressed on a case-by-case basis. which simply means contacting the author for permission;
ie, assuming the author is present, until you've got sufficient evidence to the contrary.
so:
bioware content can be modded, as permission can be validly implied.
other content cannot be modded unless permission has been explicitly given, or can be validly implied.
... and indeed, it isn't a difficult progression at all.
and finally:
Mind you, in theory, working with the mod author should produce better results.
In practice, you get a lot of the sort of patty-cake that goes on in the Crossmod Banter Pack.
i thought that was due to ppl's inner mary-sue getting a public outing?
Or will I be banned, excluded and condemned for all eternity? 
