Thoughts on Console Addons and Community Response

Sharlikran · October 29

Console authors have released addons that closely mirror long-established ESOUI projects such as Skyshards, Lorebooks, Destinations, Map Pins, Treasure Map, and others. Some of these appeared within days of console addon support going live. Licenses and attributions have been stripped out or ignored. Variants now exist that reproduce the same functions and data under new names. A few even more heinous, even placing features behind gold donations or limiting functions via blacklists. Even YouTube reviewers are promoting these new versions while overlooking or dismissing the original PC authors.

These actions show a deep disregard for the creators who built the ESO addon ecosystem. The console environment lacks the collaborative ethics the PC modding community developed over a decade. Some authors are exploiting that absence of oversight to re-brand community work as their own, fragmenting the ecosystem and erasing its history. Even when the code is rewritten, the data—the years of curated coordinates, tables, and shared discoveries—still originates from the same community effort. Repackaging that work without credit is not creativity; it is appropriation made possible by loopholes and complacency.

I feel frustrated, disappointed. It’s painful to watch years of cooperative work—by Garkin, Ayantir, AsemblerManiac, SnowmanDK, myself, and countless volunteers—be treated as disposable. It’s exhausting to defend the principle that respect and attribution should be automatic, not optional. I’m angry that some in the community celebrate these imitations while the people who built the foundation are written out of the story. And I’m disheartened that integrity seems secondary to convenience. What was once a culture of collaboration now risks becoming a marketplace of repackaged effort.

I want accountability and restoration of respect. Console addon creators should collaborate with, not compete against, the projects that already exist. Platform holders must enforce licensing, require proper attribution, and prevent uploads that ignore explicit author permissions. Reviewers and influencers should correct misinformation and highlight the true lineage of the addons they showcase. Most of all, players need to understand that every feature they now enjoy on console was born from years of unpaid PC development.

I’ve accepted that most console users won’t care — that’s their choice. But as Einstein said, “The world is in greater peril from those who tolerate dishonesty than from those who commit it.” That tolerance is what allows imitation to replace integrity, and silence to become the loudest form of disrespect.

LunaFlora · October 29

so do you want add-ons to be removed even if there is no version uploaded by the original esoui author?

this post confuses me as i am simply happy to have add-ons on Playstation 5 and grateful to everyone who uploaded them.

Masteroshi430 · October 29

LunaFlora wrote: »

so do you want add-ons to be removed even if there is no version uploaded by the original esoui author?

this post confuses me as i am simply happy to have add-ons on Playstation 5 and grateful to everyone who uploaded them.

wow...

Sharlikran · October 29

No, I don’t want them removed. I’m just pointing out what’s been happening and why it matters to some of us who build these.

spartaxoxo · October 29

I think claiming the console community doesn't care without any basis is wildly unfair. Why and how would console players even know a piece of code is stolen? We don't have access to it. And console users had absolutely zero reason to visit the add-on community and learn who came up with what prior because add-ons were not on console.

Add-on authors were given time to develop the add-ons prior to their launch on console. This was done specifically so it would be ready for the feature launch on console. So, there was also no reason to be suspicious of there being add-ons immediately.

I uninstalled the only add-on I am aware of that was stolen. I got a notification from a different addon author, looked into it, saw how many were upset by it on ESOUI and uninstalled. If there was more than the one person outright stealing code, then I don't know who or what.

It's on add-on authors to report stolen code if they see their stuff stolen.

As for someone developing an addon with similar functionality, that's not anything nefarious. Competition is fair play. Console players wanted add-ons. If the original author didn't want to develop for console, it's completely fair for someone else to develop a feature with the same functionality as long as they don't steal.

I'm grateful for each and every addon developer. I don't want to install anything with stolen code. So please continue to let the community know when that happens.

Soarora · October 29

I get the gist from other posts on this topic that action is swiftly being taken to remove these addons that infringe on the original devs copyright, is that correct? It is disappointing to hear but it’s a tale that keeps repeating… “you don’t own it if you let other people see it” (not defending, I HATE that perspective). So, not surprising it happened.

Sharlikran · October 29

spartaxoxo:

I appreciate the way you put that — and you’re absolutely right that console players wouldn’t automatically know when something’s copied or uncredited.

I completely agree that competition and new development are healthy. The concern is that several long-standing authors had already shared that they were preparing console ports and simply asked for patience. Even those who hadn’t announced it publicly were still working on updates behind the scenes — they just didn’t feel the need to make constant progress posts. Yet, despite that, new variants of the same addons were uploaded anyway. It wasn’t done with stolen code, but it did overlook the ongoing efforts of the original creators.

Some of these addons have taken years of testing and community contribution from many users providing feedback — in any form, but as one example, map coordinates — to reach their current form. Within days of console support going live, versions with identical functionality appeared. That isn’t about theft. The original authors were already in the process of preparing proper ports, but some of those efforts take longer because console development has extra limitations.

One author woke up to find their addon uploaded under the same name — no contact, no credit, just a console version of something they had maintained for years. Another addon was uploaded even while its original author was still working on an official console port, simply because another project depended on it. The library name was already in use at that point, which prevented the original author from uploading their own version until much later. It eventually got sorted out, but only after unnecessary effort and frustration.

The same uploader even expressed interest in posting another addon I maintain, and a separate author mentioned wanting to create a console version of a different project I’m still revising — simply because someone asked them to. That kind of impatience, where others are encouraged to ignore an author’s stated wishes just to get a version sooner, erodes trust more than anything else.

One core library that many addons rely on is LibAddonMenu— which still isn’t fully implemented for console. This prevents some settings and options from working properly without throwing errors.

So it’s less about ownership and more about patience and acknowledgment.

Sharlikran · October 29

Soarora:

You’re right that some of the clear cases of infringement were handled, and I appreciate that action was taken.

What I’m referring to isn’t the obvious situations — those have been dealt with. The concern now is the gray area that remains: when long-standing projects are re-created while the original authors are still working on proper console ports.

Lykeion · October 29

Just like developing an addon, porting an addon also requires time and effort. Some addons have not been ported to console because their original authors believe that the timing is not yet right for a console release, as Sharlikran previously stated in the ESOUI forum. Addons need more time for adaptation or must wait for lib dependencies to ensure certain features work properly.

However, due to the open-source nature of ESOUI, there are a considerable number of addons on the console platform that were not uploaded—or even authorized—by their original authors. Among them are some that had unadapted features simply removed in order to make the addon available on console earlier, and worse, some that have added paywalls or malware (see https://www.esoui.com/forums/showthread.php?p=53060#post53060). This is a serious harm to the community.

What I want to emphasize is that the PC addon community has rarely suffered from such malicious behavior largely because ESOUI has responsible moderators maintaining it. Just like the developers who have long created addons for free, these moderators have performed high-quality, voluntary review work for years to keep the addon community functioning properly.

I believe that the prevalence of malicious behavior in console addons can largely be attributed to the closed-source nature of the console platform and the lack of an effective review system. Anyone can download an addon from ESOUI and upload it to ESO Mods under their own name—even embedding malicious code—while other players find it extremely difficult to inspect the code themselves.

I believe, if the console addon community is to remain healthy in the long run, the administrators of ESO Mods should do more than remove malicious addons after the fact.

Gabriel_H · October 29

Sharlikran wrote: »

Platform holders must enforce licensing, require proper attribution, and prevent uploads that ignore explicit author permissions.

While I agree passing an addon off as your own work is a serious faux pas, you are overplaying the licensing which is restriced to simply this:

"ZOS grants a limited license right for personal, private, non-commercial, non-transferable, and limited use governed by the Terms of Service, including the Add-on Terms of Use, to distribute Add-ons You create to other authorized users who have purchased the Game, solely for use with such users’ own authorized copies of the Game and in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, including the Add-on Terms of Use, and all applicable laws."

Plagarism does not appear in the ToS or ToU. That's because ZOS retain the intellectual property rights:

"All Services and all intellectual property rights in the Services are owned by ZeniMax or its licensors and are protected by United States, other jurisdictions, and international copyright, trade dress, patent, and trademark laws, international conventions, and other laws protecting intellectual property and related proprietary rights. With the exception of the licenses granted to You in the first paragraph of this Section 3, this Section 3 shall survive the termination of these Terms of Service. ZeniMax may, in its discretion, make available to You one or more application programming interfaces and associated documentation (each an "API") to allow You to access, create, download, enable, use, or associate Content (excluding Game Mods), that modifies or otherwise provides enhanced features to the user interface ("Add-ons") for a Game. The API and Add-ons are Software for purposes of these Terms of Service and are subject to these Terms of Service and the Supplemental Terms applicable to the API and the Add-Ons."

Sharlikran · October 29

Gabriel_H:

ZOS ultimately owns the platform and their own API. I’m not disputing that

The issue isn’t about claiming ownership of ZOS’s property; it’s about preserving the trust and cooperation that made the addon ecosystem possible in the first place..

Gabriel_H · October 29

Sharlikran wrote: »

Gabriel_H:

ZOS ultimately owns the platform and their own API. I’m not disputing that

The issue isn’t about claiming ownership of ZOS’s property; it’s about preserving the trust and cooperation that made the addon ecosystem possible in the first place..

Which I completely agree with, but using terms such as "theft" and "stolen" just simply don't apply. A lot of code out there improves upon ZOS' own, but still uses that original code as a basis.

Sharlikran · October 29

Gabriel_H:

I agree — and just to clarify, the words “theft” or “stolen” weren’t used in my original post. They came up in later replies to others.

Dolgubon · October 29

Sharlikran wrote: »

spartaxoxo:

I completely agree that competition and new development are healthy. The concern is that several long-standing authors had already shared that they were preparing console ports and simply asked for patience. Even those who hadn’t announced it publicly were still working on updates behind the scenes — they just didn’t feel the need to make constant progress posts. Yet, despite that, new variants of the same addons were uploaded anyway. It wasn’t done with stolen code, but it did overlook the ongoing efforts of the original creators.

At some point, if you are not releasing a console version of your mod, someone else releasing a (original) mod which does the same thing just has to be considered that exact healthy competition. Personally, I'd argue that at almost half a year of them being live, and more of it being known they were coming, at this point if any new addons are released, it's simply competition.

Gabriel_H wrote: »

Sharlikran wrote: »

Platform holders must enforce licensing, require proper attribution, and prevent uploads that ignore explicit author permissions.

While I agree passing an addon off as your own work is a serious faux pas, you are overplaying the licensing which is restriced to simply this:

"ZOS grants a limited license right for personal, private, non-commercial, non-transferable, and limited use governed by the Terms of Service, including the Add-on Terms of Use, to distribute Add-ons You create to other authorized users who have purchased the Game, solely for use with such users’ own authorized copies of the Game and in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, including the Add-on Terms of Use, and all applicable laws."

Plagarism does not appear in the ToS or ToU. That's because ZOS retain the intellectual property rights:

"All Services and all intellectual property rights in the Services are owned by ZeniMax or its licensors and are protected by United States, other jurisdictions, and international copyright, trade dress, patent, and trademark laws, international conventions, and other laws protecting intellectual property and related proprietary rights. With the exception of the licenses granted to You in the first paragraph of this Section 3, this Section 3 shall survive the termination of these Terms of Service. ZeniMax may, in its discretion, make available to You one or more application programming interfaces and associated documentation (each an "API") to allow You to access, create, download, enable, use, or associate Content (excluding Game Mods), that modifies or otherwise provides enhanced features to the user interface ("Add-ons") for a Game. The API and Add-ons are Software for purposes of these Terms of Service and are subject to these Terms of Service and the Supplemental Terms applicable to the API and the Add-Ons."

This is, generally, false. Since you reference the ToS, I'd like to direct your attention to one particular line:

> Each Game Mod is owned by the developer of the Game Mod, subject to the licenses granted by the developer to ZeniMax as set forth in the Editor EULA. (https://account.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/terms-of-service, Section 2. D)

Now, addons admittedly don't 100% fit the definition of a Game mod as defined in the TOS, as it defines a Game Mod as 'content created using an editor provided by ZOS', and no such editor exists or is used. But the lack of editor means they have even less claim to addons.

Also, in contrast to mods for games such as Skyrim, addons often will not use any of ZOS's intellectual property, or at the very least far less of it than a Skyrim mod. This is because addons are just code. So the only IP they'd be using is if they copy some code from the source code of the ESO user interface, which isn't super common. (Unless you consider the names of the functions IP themselves. Which you might, but it doesn't change the overall fact that addon authors DO own their code)

As another supporting argument: Previously, the advice that support gave when a stolen addon was reported to them, was that the reporter should submit a DMCA. That is, support advised users to submit a legally binding declaration that they own the content. This is the official ESO support, and I doubt they would advise users to commit perjury. (This has now changed; support will now actively investigate and act on claims of stolen content without requiring a DMCA)

As such, Theft and Stolen are the correct terms for code which is directly taken from another addon.

Gabriel_H · October 29

Dolgubon wrote: »

Sharlikran wrote: »

spartaxoxo:

I completely agree that competition and new development are healthy. The concern is that several long-standing authors had already shared that they were preparing console ports and simply asked for patience. Even those who hadn’t announced it publicly were still working on updates behind the scenes — they just didn’t feel the need to make constant progress posts. Yet, despite that, new variants of the same addons were uploaded anyway. It wasn’t done with stolen code, but it did overlook the ongoing efforts of the original creators.

At some point, if you are not releasing a console version of your mod, someone else releasing a (original) mod which does the same thing just has to be considered that exact healthy competition. Personally, I'd argue that at almost half a year of them being live, and more of it being known they were coming, at this point if any new addons are released, it's simply competition.

Gabriel_H wrote: »

Sharlikran wrote: »

Platform holders must enforce licensing, require proper attribution, and prevent uploads that ignore explicit author permissions.

While I agree passing an addon off as your own work is a serious faux pas, you are overplaying the licensing which is restriced to simply this:

"ZOS grants a limited license right for personal, private, non-commercial, non-transferable, and limited use governed by the Terms of Service, including the Add-on Terms of Use, to distribute Add-ons You create to other authorized users who have purchased the Game, solely for use with such users’ own authorized copies of the Game and in accordance with and subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, including the Add-on Terms of Use, and all applicable laws."

Plagarism does not appear in the ToS or ToU. That's because ZOS retain the intellectual property rights:

"All Services and all intellectual property rights in the Services are owned by ZeniMax or its licensors and are protected by United States, other jurisdictions, and international copyright, trade dress, patent, and trademark laws, international conventions, and other laws protecting intellectual property and related proprietary rights. With the exception of the licenses granted to You in the first paragraph of this Section 3, this Section 3 shall survive the termination of these Terms of Service. ZeniMax may, in its discretion, make available to You one or more application programming interfaces and associated documentation (each an "API") to allow You to access, create, download, enable, use, or associate Content (excluding Game Mods), that modifies or otherwise provides enhanced features to the user interface ("Add-ons") for a Game. The API and Add-ons are Software for purposes of these Terms of Service and are subject to these Terms of Service and the Supplemental Terms applicable to the API and the Add-Ons."

This is, generally, false. Since you reference the ToS, I'd like to direct your attention to one particular line:

> Each Game Mod is owned by the developer of the Game Mod, subject to the licenses granted by the developer to ZeniMax as set forth in the Editor EULA. (https://account.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/terms-of-service, Section 2. D)

Now, addons admittedly don't 100% fit the definition of a Game mod as defined in the TOS, as it defines a Game Mod as 'content created using an editor provided by ZOS', and no such editor exists or is used. But the lack of editor means they have even less claim to addons.

Also, in contrast to mods for games such as Skyrim, addons often will not use any of ZOS's intellectual property, or at the very least far less of it than a Skyrim mod. This is because addons are just code. So the only IP they'd be using is if they copy some code from the source code of the ESO user interface, which isn't super common. (Unless you consider the names of the functions IP themselves. Which you might, but it doesn't change the overall fact that addon authors DO own their code)

As another supporting argument: Previously, the advice that support gave when a stolen addon was reported to them, was that the reporter should submit a DMCA. That is, support advised users to submit a legally binding declaration that they own the content. This is the official ESO support, and I doubt they would advise users to commit perjury. (This has now changed; support will now actively investigate and act on claims of stolen content without requiring a DMCA)

As such, Theft and Stolen are the correct terms for code which is directly taken from another addon.

You ignore that where AddOns are in the ToS and ToU they are specifically not referred to as Game Mods. Where addons are discussed, being the passages I quoted, it is clear the intellectual property remains ZOS', hence the ban on commercialising them.

Sharlikran · October 29

Gabriel_H:

The commercial-use limitation isn’t really the point of this discussion. That clause simply prevents addons from being sold — and no one here is suggesting otherwise.

Section 2 D makes clear that the developer retains ownership of their creation, subject to ZeniMax’s overarching license. Addons may not technically fall under the “Game Mod” definition, but the principle still applies: authorship matters.

This isn’t about commercialization or corporate rights. It’s about community integrity. When console versions are created and uploaded with no regard for the original authors or maintainers — many of whom are actively preparing console ports themselves — it isn’t fixed by adding a line of credit later. The disregard happens in the decision to release a parallel version built on the foundation of another creator’s long-standing work, knowing full well it disrespects the norms of the addon community.

Ilumia · October 30

The addons rely on competent authors spending their freetime to write and maintain their addons. This means that when anything happens that negatively affects their work, the entire community will lose the wprk these authors are doing for us.
I truly get the impatience, I love playing modded games. It gives me a chance to adjust, improve and personalize my gaming experience. I have multiple times postponed playing or replaying a game by half or whole years to get mods that would greatly improve my playthrough. It can be frustrating of course. But the modder is doing it for free, paying with their time. This means motivation from approval and recognition plays a larger role. And at the very least that others do not steal their work, and/or make it harder and more complicated. If someone chooses to release an addon on console with the same function as an addon on pc, then they can of course do that. But if they steal from the other addon they are obviously doing something wrong, and if they name it the same thing as the pc addon, they are also doing something disrespectful. In many games you will find that the author that doesn't come first with a function will name the mod/addon with their name + the function in the mod title. That's a nice way of doing it, so the authors that are working on porting from PC still has their original addon name available, and do it even if there's no port planned, it's just proper manners - and don't bloody steal their work.

All we can do is be patient and ask what the community can do in return for the modders, and how conditions for these authors can improve.
I am incredibly grateful for their work, the addons I use vastly improves my eso experience, so thank you dear addon authors.

daim · October 30

I totally agree.

ZOS should take responsibility and make sure every single addon is contributed accordingly at their addon platform.

This behaviour is killing the addon community. Those guys coding have given us countless of hours of their personal time to give us free addons and should in the minimum be respected and acknowledged of their hard work.

You can't just take someone's stuff and claim it yours, that's a theft.

H3rBie · October 30

@Sharlikran I see your point, but like already said, for me as a console player, there is no easy way to check if the used code is "stolen" or not. Anyway, personally I try to use just addons from creators that I know.

I don't really know how the system works in detail. But here an idea that came up to my mind. Would it be a way to go if the ESOUI communtiy creates a list of ESOUI approved console addons and creators may add a link to that list in the description.

Most of the players may not care, or even know what ESOUI is but it would be a way to reach the ones who care and also a way to bring the topic to the console community in a wider range.

Like I said, I have so idea what effort that would be and if it's worth it. It's just an idea from someone who can't code and has no knowledge how the creator community works, but I'm someone who cares, who is grateful for all your work and wants original authors to get the credits/support they deserve.

... and if this post is complete bs, just forget it

MISTFORMBZZZ · October 30

Im agreeing , if addons are getting copied to console, credits should be given, just because of thats decent behaviour.

But on the other hand, we console players have been neglected on this for 10/11 years so we just use what we can use.

Just happy and greatful we finally have addons and also happy that people are bringing pc addons to console.
So i will use them, credits or not

Sharlikran · October 30

Ilumia:

I really appreciate the way you put that — especially your point about naming and respect. When a remake gets praised for “making the game easier” while doing exactly what the original already did, it unintentionally discredits the years of work that built the foundation in the first place. I really appreciated that about your comment.

Thank you.

Sharlikran · October 30

H3rBie:

Not nonsense at all — that’s actually a really thoughtful suggestion. You’re absolutely right that most console players wouldn’t have an easy way to tell which addons come from the original creators, so a simple reference link to verified ESOUI versions could help bridge that gap.

And I completely understand your point about just using what’s available. That’s fair. It’s ideas like yours that can help make the system clearer for everyone without putting blame on players.

Gabriel_H · October 30

Sharlikran wrote: »

Gabriel_H:

The commercial-use limitation isn’t really the point of this discussion. That clause simply prevents addons from being sold — and no one here is suggesting otherwise.

Section 2 D makes clear that the developer retains ownership of their creation, subject to ZeniMax’s overarching license. Addons may not technically fall under the “Game Mod” definition, but the principle still applies: authorship matters.

You are misunderstanding the legalese that ZOS is using. "Ownership" is ZOS' way of passing ALL liabilty to the author (and subsequent user), while the intellectual property rights keep all the benefits in ZOS' control. TLDR: The author doesn't own it, so it cannot be "stolen" - which was my entire point.

My origianl point has then been taken and called "false" by pointing to parts of the ToS that has nothing to do with AddOns.

Sharlikran wrote: »

Gabriel_H:
This isn’t about commercialization or corporate rights. It’s about community integrity. When console versions are created and uploaded with no regard for the original authors or maintainers — many of whom are actively preparing console ports themselves — it isn’t fixed by adding a line of credit later. The disregard happens in the decision to release a parallel version built on the foundation of another creator’s long-standing work, knowing full well it disrespects the norms of the addon community.

I never said otherwise. I was pointing out the "licensing" argument does not apply. The author doesn't own the license - ZOS do. You need a better argument.

Sharlikran · October 30

daim:

I really appreciate what you said — especially about respect and acknowledgment.

Even when the code is completely new, releasing a reimagined version that mirrors an existing ESOUI addon while presenting it as entirely one’s own still undermines the ecosystem we’ve built. It gives the impression that years of community effort can just be replaced overnight, and that’s deeply discouraging to the authors who made these tools possible in the first place.

spartaxoxo · October 30

If it's a completely new add on that uses it's own code and doesn't copy the work or title of the original author, then that's just competition imo. Console players have waited 10 years for certain functionality. It shouldn't be a surprise that they weren't going to wait any longer now that add-ons were added. I would hope that the people who developed competing add-ons for console weren't doing it out of disregard for PC creators but instead of wanting to help their own communities.

I would bet most developers of add-ons are decent folks who want to help their own communities. I also hope these people are tackling these things their own way rather than making clones. But I wouldn't know because I don't have access to the PC add-ons.

The vanilla game has some gameplay designs that are so frustrating that players take it upon themselves to fix it the moment they're allowed to do so. This includes generous people who kindly share their work with those that don't have the ability to fix it themselves.

I am grateful for both groups of addon developers. Both the PC ones that paved the way, and new console developers that understood their communities and how starved we had been for fixes to longstanding issues. 10 years is a long time to wait. It honestly shouldn't have even come to this because a lot of this stuff should have been base game functionality in the first place.

Sharlikran · October 30

MISTFORMBZZZ:

I completely understand where you’re coming from — even a friend of mine who plays other modded games like Baldur’s Gate said the same thing: if it makes the game easier to play, most players will just use it.

I know you, LunaFlora, spartaxoxo, and others genuinely appreciate the authors bringing addons to console, and that means a lot. My concern isn’t with players using what’s available — it’s with how some long-standing projects are being adapted without consent or even being asked, and when authors are asked but decline because they’re already planning their own ports, those wishes aren’t always respected.

I recently released Destinations, and I’ve spoken with the author of Map Pins, who’s experiencing the same issue. Their requests for removal haven’t been honored, which is discouraging when the work they’ve maintained for years is recreated so casually.

That’s really the heart of it — not blaming console players, but asking for a little more awareness and patience so the people behind these projects can bring their work to console the right way.

Sharlikran · October 30

Gabriel_H:

I understand your interpretation, but this really isn’t about debating legal phrasing or who technically “owns” what. None of us here are lawyers, and turning the discussion into a contest over terminology only pulls focus from what actually matters.

Regardless of how ZOS structures its licensing, the addon community has always functioned on trust, respect, and collaboration. When long-standing projects with years of shared work are quickly mirrored or cloned without coordination or consent, it disregards that foundation — not in a legal sense, but in a moral one.

If others believe that’s acceptable, that’s their choice — the community can decide for itself what kind of standards it wants to uphold. But for those of us who have been part of this ecosystem for years, it’s hard to see that kind of behavior as anything other than dismissive of the people who built it.

allochthons · October 30

As another console player who used what was available, but wants to respect the work the original PC creators have done, a list of 'approved' ESOUI add-ons would be greatly appreciated. I have no idea how many others would actually care, but I do. And obviously a few others here do as well. But I also appreciate that asking for such a thing is putting even more work on the ESOUI members.

I've been tangentially involved with open-source projects, and maintaining that integrity is very important to me.

I would also like to emphasize that for console players, the ESOUI ecology is pretty opaque. We haven't been steeped in it for a decade, so please be a bit patient as we figure it out.

Sharlikran · October 30

spartaxoxo:

Thank you — I really appreciate the way you put that. You’re absolutely right that it shouldn’t have come to this.

Unfortunately, some of the competing console addons were developed and uploaded without consent or collaboration with the original PC creators. I understand that most console players, and even some developers, wouldn’t know the difference — and that’s not their fault.

I also agree that many of these features probably should have been part of the base game by now. But that’s what modding has always been about — expanding the game we love and sharing that work with others. It’s why I’ve been involved with Bethesda and ZeniMax projects since around 2012 — it’s always been about improving the experience for everyone who enjoys the game.

If you’re curious about my background with ESO and other Bethesda projects, I’ve written a bit about it here.

Gabriel_H · October 30

Sharlikran wrote: »

Gabriel_H:

I understand your interpretation, but this really isn’t about debating legal phrasing or who technically “owns” what. None of us here are lawyers, and turning the discussion into a contest over terminology only pulls focus from what actually matters.

Regardless of how ZOS structures its licensing, the addon community has always functioned on trust, respect, and collaboration. When long-standing projects with years of shared work are quickly mirrored or cloned without coordination or consent, it disregards that foundation — not in a legal sense, but in a moral one.

If others believe that’s acceptable, that’s their choice — the community can decide for itself what kind of standards it wants to uphold. But for those of us who have been part of this ecosystem for years, it’s hard to see that kind of behavior as anything other than dismissive of the people who built it.

Well, some of us deal with this kind of language on a daily basis but that is neither here nor there. Again: I don't disagree that this shouldn't be happening, and again my only point has been to demonstrate that authors cannot "license" their creation because they don't own the license, nor is someone passing it off as their own "theft" or "stealing". Is it immoral? Yes, but that is where the line stops.

Sharlikran · October 30

Gabriel_H:

Thank you for sharing your perspective — and for standing by it with such equanimity. I genuinely respect that.

Even if we don’t fully see eye to eye, I’ll stand by my view that telling long-time addon authors they “don’t own the license” minimizes years of work and dedication. It’s hard to imagine anyone who’s invested that kind of time feeling otherwise.