fluffysheap

Sorry, this just isn't right. If you wish to go by the letter of the law, you ought to know what it says. In general, only works themselves are covered by copyright. The names of such works are protected by trademark, not copyright (https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html). This is why you see Disney, for example, registering names of characters, upcoming and current movies including in many cases working titles, iconic props e.g. "light saber," etc. as trademarks. Your example of Star Trek is also covered by trademark (https://trademarks.justia.com/731/07/star-trek-73107055.html). Logos, while they are artistic works that are also covered by copyright, generally need to be trademarked to have legal protection with regards to identifying a specific company or product. If you look closely you'll see trademark notices everywhere, for example, in the footer of any Wikipedia page. This is because names are protected only by trademark, not copyright. Otherwise, anyone could create their own website and call it Wikipedia. While these websites are from an American perspective, generally speaking trademark law is similar enough between countries, and protected by international treaties, so that you can pretty much apply it anywhere. While copyright does not require registration, trademark does. Simply creating something gives you automatic copyright - not trademark. That doesn't mean it's good practice to misrepresent your product as someone else's. I couldn't find forum rules about this, but of course, it wouldn't be a good idea to do it. Rules or not, I'd expect moderators to shut down a thread that tried to create confusion with an existing, actively developed mod. Anyone should make a distinction between their version of something and the original if it might cause confusion, as is frequently done by "<mod name> continued" or whatever other distinguishing names. That's just good practice, because confusion benefits nobody. However, there's no legal force behind it, and, in absence of trademark, no minimum standard for what constitutes drawing such a distinction. A great example of the sort of thing that happens in the software world is the history of EMACS. EMACS was originally written in the 1970s by Richard Stallman and Guy Steele and the source code was in the public domain. A fork of it was created by James Gosling (yes, the Java guy) who called it Gosling EMACS, which he could do because there was no trademark on the name and the code was public domain. Stallman copied some of Gosling's code back into the original fork. A proprietary software company, UniPress, produced a proprietary version based on Gosling's code, and even asked the original authors to stop distributing their versions, although legally they had no right to do this. It's good that they tried, though, because Stallman went on to create the GPL afterward. Of course, EMACS is still here, and UniPress isn't. Later, after adoption of the GPL, Lucid Emacs split off from EMACS, and it was also necessarily licensed under the GPL. Lucid WAS a trademarked name because it belonged to a software company called Lucid. However, Lucid went bankrupt, and while people wanted to continue using and modifying the code (explicitly permitted under the GPL), nobody knew what would happen to the name, so they changed it to XEmacs, which still exists today. There are probably twenty other forks of EMACS, many of which use variations on the name. I think this whole thread is, in large part, a result of what Richard Stallman warned about when he opposed calling Free Software "open source." Open source doesn't say anything about the moral rights to use the software. It just says you can see the source, and it allows people to erroneously conclude that there's something somehow wrong, or worse illegal, about redistributing or modifying it, because of the relentless propaganda campaign waged by organizations such as the RIAA/MPAA. Free software tells you exactly how the software is intended to be used, modified, and distributed: Any way you like, so long as you do not infringe on the rights of others to do the same thing. While KJR is GPL, and thus explicitly covered by not only the legal but moral argument, the same thing is true of Creative Commons licensed works. Creative Commons licenses are specifically designed to allow anyone to make and distribute modifications, at any time, for any reason - so long as they follow CC's similar but not identical rules; CC-BY is roughly equivalent to the MIT or BSD licenses, whereas CC-BY-SA is roughly equivalent to the GPL. Anyone who doesn't want to grant these rights can use a CC-ND license, or a proprietary license, which doesn't permit the distribution of modified versions. In all cases, the original licenses speak to the author's intent when they published their material. It's inappropriate to put words in their mouth by making assumptions about what they really wanted or should do. The question has already been answered.

I figured out the problem. It's technically possible to modify the tech tree definitions with ModuleManager, however ETT uses Yonge's Tech Tree Plugin which in turn reconfigures the tech tree actually used in game and effectively bypasses changes made through ModuleManager. At least I know what is happening now.

Background: I want to change the tech nodes that certain parts are in using ModuleManager to modify the ETT Tech Tree. ETT Tech Tree is in GameData/ETT and contains the following file EngTechTree.cfg: TechTree { id = TEDGeneratedTree label = TED Generated Tree RDNode { ... there are a lot of these } RDNode { id = experimentalScience nodepart = experimentalScience title = Experimental Science description = Explore novel fields of science that we didn't even know were there_ cost = 95 pos = -1950,1850,-7 icon = RDicon_science-experimental anyParent = False hideEmpty = False hideIfNoBranchParts = False scale = 0.6 Parent { parentID = engineering101 lineFrom = LEFT lineTo = RIGHT } Unlocks { part = AccelerometerFGA part = dmRoverMat part = dmSeismicPod part = dmSeismicHammer part = dmUSImagingPlatform part = sensorAccelerometer part = StnSciExperiment1 part = StnSciExperiment2 part = KA_SolarCollector part = MKS_Antenna part = MKS_ScanOMatic part = dmImagingPlatform part = NH_Sci2 part = Telescope part = hc_scicam part = ca_accelerometer part = SEP_PSE part = SEP_CCIG part = SEP_LRRR part = dm_antenna } } } I created the following tech.cfg file and put it in GameData/FluffyMod: @TechTree[*]:HAS[#id[TEDGeneratedTree]]:AFTER[ETT] { @RDNode[*]:HAS[#id[experimentalScience]] { @title = Modified Node @description = Modified Description @Unlocks { !part[dmRoverMat] } } } By my figuring, this should find the desired node by its ID "experimentalScience", change its title and description (to prove the mod is working) and remove the line "part = dmRoverMat" from this node. However, nothing happens. If I modify EngTechTree.cfg directly, it works. dmRoverMat is a science part added by DMagic Orbital Science. I tried both with and without the '[*]'s in the node selectors, doesn't matter. I was able to change the properties of planets with Kopernicus using a similar .cfg, so I'm pretty sure my .cfg files are at least being loaded. I'm using 64-bit KSP 1.3.1 on Linux, ModuleManager 3.0.4, and DMagic Orbital Science 1.3.11. My complete list of mods is: ETT EVAEnhancementsContinued EvaFuelCont KerbalAlarmClock KerbalEngineerRedux OuterPlanetsMod ResearchBodies RoverScienceCont ScienceRevisitedRevisited DeadlyReentry StationScienceContinued CustomAsteroids DMagicOrbitalScience TriggerAu-Flags CustomBarnKit BetterTimeWarpCont CommunityResourcePack FinalFrontier ModuleManager YongeTechTreesPlugin-Revived Kopernicus ModularFlightIntegrator CommunityTerrainTexturePack ContractConfigurator REPOSoftTech-Agencies Toolbar FerramAerospaceResearch KerbalFlightData UKS UniversalStorage2 USI-Core USI-EXP USI-FTT USIKolClassSuits USITools USI-LS FirespitterCore CommunityCategoryKit Konstruction GroundConstruction-Core AT-Utils ConfigurableContainers-Core TextureReplacerReplaced KEI ToolbarController ContractConfigurator-KerbinSpaceStation JanitorsCloset FilterExtensions PreciseManeuver KramaxAutopilotContinued KerbalConstructionTime StageRecovery KRASH MagiCore CustomAsteroids-Pops-Stock-Inner CustomAsteroids-Pops-Stock-Stockalike HyperEdit