Etiquette in regards to uploading modified versions of other users maps?

[Han Solo 43]

After a bit of a hiatus, I've come back to SimCity 4 and decided to start a new region. I have two maps in contention, both of which were downloaded from the STEX, and both of which I have been modifying with a mix of GIMP, SC4TerraFormer, and SC4 Mapper. The goal being to make each map more playable. Is been a fair amount of work... I'm talking tens of hours worth of work for each map, which got me wondering whether any other users would like to play my modified versions of the maps.

If I have made significant modifications to a map downloaded from the STEX, what is the etiquette around me potentially re-uploading them (with credit to the original mappers of course)?

NOTE: both creators of the maps in question, haven't been online for several years. So I can't just ask their permission.

[CorinaMarie 29,893]

7 hours ago, Han Solo said:

If I have made significant modifications to a map downloaded from the STEX, what is the etiquette around me potentially re-uploading them (with credit to the original mappers of course)?

Sounds like a labor of love to me.  

I'm chatting live with CB in our private online room and we both want to simply say Yes, since the original creators are long gone. Then, ofc, this would be setting a precedent for others (which could be a really good thing). We believe the key aspect would be What amount of alteration constitutes a new work?

One idea might be instead of uploading it under your own account, we as staff added to their existing entry with whatever you'd write about the enhancements giving credit to yourself in the description. This would alleviate any concern about gaining rep on the back of someone else's base work. (Both the original map and your edited version would be available under the Download button.)

OTOH, it's similar in concept to re-lotting another's work. That's ok because one must list the model as a dependency. However, that can't be done practically for a map. Download the original then overwrite it with mine. 

So, for now, we will definitely be in favor of allowing you to share your work. However, we'd like to see a wee bit of discussion for which is the best way to go about it.

-Cori & CB (doing the admin thing) 

[Han Solo 43]

Sorry for it taking me a while to reply but between the British Grand Prix, the World Cup, and my sister visiting, I've barely been online long enough to write a well thought out post.

On 03/07/2026 at 4:27 AM, CorinaMarie said:

I'm chatting live with CB in our private online room and we both want to simply say Yes, since the original creators are long gone. Then, ofc, this would be setting a precedent for others (which could be a really good thing).

I'm glad to hear that you and CB are in favour of it, assuming it is implemented correctly. 

On 03/07/2026 at 4:27 AM, CorinaMarie said:

We believe the key aspect would be What amount of alteration constitutes a new work?

I asked myself the same question when I first started mulling over the idea of uploading modified maps. The conclusion I came to is that I don't think it's possible to come up with an all encompassing set of criteria that will solely include good faith efforts, whilst excluding the kind of low effort or abusive uploads that shouldn't be on the STEX. I think that moderation will be required. I also think that the amount of alteration isn't necessarily a fundamental criteria.

There are alterations that take a minimal amount of effort, expertise, time, software tools, and perhaps most importantly, artistic creativity. For example, simply rotating a map by a multiple of 90° takes a bare minimum of effort, time, just two pieces of software, and zero creativity. So by that metric, I'd argue that such uploads probably shouldn't be allowed. If another user wants to rotate a region, it's a simple job that can easily be described in a tutorial. This might also be a pretty good yardstick by which to judge the justification for and value of an upload.If another user can create an exact replica of a modified work, simply by starting with the same original work then following a set of instructions, without needing to make artistic decisions or to use skill with a brush tool, then I think such works probably shouldn't be allowed.

There is a counter argument to that though. There are instances were lower effort uploads perhaps should still be allowed. What if the simple alteration is widely desirable? For example, what if a map has been uploaded to the STEX years ago, the original creator is no longer active, and for what ever reason, it's upside down or mirrored when compared to the real world, or perhaps it has some other mistake that is easy to correct? If it means saving a large number of users the time to perform the same minor alterations, or if it means objectively fixing or improving the original mappers work, perhaps cases such as these should be the exception that proves the rule? It is somewhat of an edge case though.

As to the question of more "significant alterations". In order to answer that question, I think the most simple solution would be to let the creator of the modified work argue their case. Then the decision of whether it should be uploaded would be at the moderator's discretion. I envision either a single thread for modified maps, where a user submits their work for approval along with a description of what changes they have made, or perhaps as user such as myself could create their own thread. I was thinking about creating a project thread to document my work. Then when I'm ready to upload a modified work, I could "@" you or CB?

I think I could clearly demonstrate that if modified works were to be allowed, my efforts should fall into that category. The list of changes I have made to each map is extensive. They've required a lot of time, not least because of the repeated exporting and in-game testing and checking. But also because I exercised creativity. I've created new terrain in both GIMP and SC4Terraformer, as well as manually correcting and retouching various issues. A process that is all but impossible to replicate simply by following instructions.

On 03/07/2026 at 4:27 AM, CorinaMarie said:

One idea might be instead of uploading it under your own account, we as staff added to their existing entry with whatever you'd write about the enhancements giving credit to yourself in the description. This would alleviate any concern about gaining rep on the back of someone else's base work. (Both the original map and your edited version would be available under the Download button.)

I think this is a fine line to walk... I don't want to gain unfair credit off another’s work, which is why I do wonder whether even having a link to my work placed in their upload page is the best solution... it all depends on how it's done I guess. There's also the fact that I can't deny that I do want some credit for my portion of the work. Perhaps such uploads should have their own upload page but there should be certain requirements such having their own "modified maps" category, the name making it clear that it's a modified map or at the very least, a disclaimer at the top of the description with the name of the original mapper and a link to the map in question.

At the risk of this reply dragging on or me writing myself in circles, I'll leave it there for now.

[CorinaMarie 29,893]

@Han Solo 

Very well presented. I'm convinced that a case by case basis it prolly the best way as you've outlined to then upload the derived work under your own name (while providing a linky to the original).  

For this:

10 minutes ago, Han Solo said:

For example, what if a map has been uploaded to the STEX years ago, the original creator is no longer active, and for what ever reason, it's upside down or mirrored when compared to the real world, or perhaps it has some other mistake that is easy to correct?

This, IMO, would be a clear case of adding it as a second option to their original work under their name (while adding credit to you for the minor work performed).  

 

12 minutes ago, Han Solo said:

Then when I'm ready to upload a modified work, I could "@" you or CB?

Posting in this topic will be sufficient since I'm following it and I get beeped that way. Ofc, if it's in a different thread then "@" beeping is fine.

[Han Solo 43]

10 minutes ago, CorinaMarie said:

Very well presented. I'm convinced that a case by case basis it prolly the best way as you've outlined to then upload the derived work under your own name (while providing a linky to the original).

I'm glad to hear it was worth the effort! I can't tell you how many times I wrote a draft only to delete it.

10 minutes ago, CorinaMarie said:

This, IMO, would be a clear case of adding it as a second option to their original work under their name (while adding credit to you for the minor work performed).

That sounds like a great solution to me.

11 minutes ago, CorinaMarie said:

Posting in this topic will be sufficient since I'm following it and I get beeped that way. Ofc, if it's in a different thread then "@" beeping is fine.

Perhaps this thread could be used as a proof of concept of what I mean?... I really would like a showcase thread of my own, where I can talk about the changes I have made and as a result, hopefully generate a bit of a knowledge base for other users.
 

[CorinaMarie 29,893]

7 minutes ago, Han Solo said:

I really would like a showcase thread of my own, where I can talk about the changes I have made...

Oh, sure! That's fine too. That's why I gave both answers. Whichever way you are ready to do it is fine by me.