#ip_rights_violations
1 messages · Page 43 of 1
Does all of the mods exist on steam? In that case just do a collection with them
No they dont all exist on steam
Or ask the mod owners for permission... Many of them will for non monetized aervers if they are still contactable
from my experience, they won't
IF they are still contactable and IF the mod is still maintained and IF the mod is still not on the workshop, the autor has his good personal reasons not to allow reuploads. not even private
That actually bothers me. I don’t understand why content creators would make something and then make it difficult to be used.
Whenever I make something I make sure to add the disclaimer that anyone can do anything with it, specifically because I’m of the mindset that I’m creating things to increase enjoyment of the game. Why restrict that?
If they don't agree with something or like the people / server who wish to use their content, it's their rights on who is allowed to use it. While I agree with your idea, that doesn't mean authors shouldn't be able to restrict who uses their content. If they don't like the steam terms for example, why would they put it on the workshop?
some like to have single release channel thats easy to manage
not many that has to be managed separately
I can understand the logic in a way. I guess I just struggle to empathize
there has been mods long before steam
and their use is fairly simple
download and extract to Armas folder and add to startup parameters
this "gib me everything ready wah wah wah" mentality is something I dont empathize at all
@fervent leaf
there is no restriction in usage or accessability of original mods on the steam workshop. create a mod collection, add the desired mod to it, run the game, have fun
but also this is #ip_rights_violations , lets keep to the topic
I understand. However my group has run into issue where we can’t control updates through collections so we had to ditch the workshop altogether, which is a shame since it is quite a nice system and integrates with the launcher well.
And I believe this is on topic to be fair. The discussion of IP right violations would seem to fit the theme here.
@fervent leaf What he may be referring to is “read the channel description”
Certain mod owners do explicitly say no Steam due to the dubious claims that Steam then own the IP
Do not make the mistake that some have and assume that just because they don’t explicitly prohibit it, that it must be allowed.
Then again. You can contact mod developers from the past occasionally. Got permission from one the other day to use elements of their mod
If someone releases content as apl-sa - such as source code/source files. Can someone take that and make their own content with it as long as its still under apl-sa and monetize/give monetization rights out for it?
No, the person who created a derivative still must attribute the original creator, the work still falls under his copyright by part (or full, depending on how it was remixed)
So if I released work just under aplsa and person B took source files then used it in a mod and packaged it up still under aplsa. Then person C comes along wanting to monetize person B’s work they wouldn’t have to bother me/come to me for permission to monetize would they?
As long as I just release it under apl-sa anyone can do what they wish under that license correct?
I think your ultimate answer lies in the hands of BI, and only BI, as it is their definition of 'authors' which is the problem. Technically, they are free to do as they wish, as long as they do indeed license it the same, and attribute your work (and keep your license), but they would be creating a derivative of your work, or something that at the least requires it (still falls vaguely under derivative IIRC, but it's all very grey).
But given that your copyrighted work is within their mod, of which you are author and are attributed, it would seem silly if BI didn't care for your opinion on monetization, when technically, the derivative is under your license (by part or full)
But regardless of what BI say about it, you can simply add an addendum that lets them do as they wish `you may grant monetization for any derivative or works using this' blah blah. Then they won't have to bother you regardless 😛
I doubt someone would dig that far back up the tree to reach me but I guess the blanket statement would be the best way to approach it, thanks for the info @dusk dew
👍 I'm sure Dwarden will have a better answer, after all, it's up to them bunch what happens
You can also say its APL-SA but you cannot monetize without permission or not at all. Anyone taking that product has to use the same conditions on the license
Also, it is sad that this still has to be said, but BI explicitly say that any mod you run on a monetized aerver must have the permission of the mod owners. Maybe if BI put that in the main sign up screen rather than a FAQ that many seem to not read or ignore it may make things clearer
Maybe BI could deal with most of the issues of the last four years by saying "Running A3 Life... no monetization". If not I might actually sell my soul and run one myself 😦
Cos the conversations we're having re: Life servers now... are the same as those documented on the BI forums in 2014...
Exactly the same
and then he apparently just restarted same scheme with another name @steady hare no guilt no rule following just grabbing the money from the looks of it.
I am guessing the RH M4s are still a no got for monetization?
https://www.bohemia.net/community/licenses/arma-public-license-share-alike
ok, so there is a lot of misunderstanding about what APL_SA means.
It is NOT a license to abuse your work.
It is NOT you passing ownership (and therefore commercial use rights) of your work to anyone who cares to take it
It is NOT for commercial gain, except for the parts owned and licensed by Bohemia, where they allow monetization within Arma.
APL_SA has several key parts that are worth remembering:
Section 1k clearly defines non-commercial use.
Section 2a1 parts a and b grant a license to the next generation (adapter) to adapt and use the work in a non-commercial arma only setting.
If someone wishes to monetize your work, even if it is part of someone elses subsequent APL_SA release, they must still seek permission from each adapter in the chain up to Bohemia. Bohemia has already agreed you can monetize THEIR part of the work, but each and every adapter in the chain must give consent also.
Section 2a5 confers restrictions on the downstream recipients (adapters). They must follow the chain of ownership, keep it publicly declared, and not restrict usage of their adaptation in any way that harms your license (section 3b3).
Section 3a is very clear about attribution - there must be a clear declaration of all parties who have contributed to the work, with links to their licenses.
Section 3b1 states that an adapter must apply a similar license to the adapted work
Section 6a - if the adapter fails to comply with the license (or any adapters license in the chain), they lose all rights to it.
Section 7b allows for the adapter t ogrant monetization rights (FOR ONLY THEIR OWNED PART of the work) separately from the license. They have no rights to allow monetization for parts of the upstream work (i.e. that they have adapted, in the chain of licenses that apply to the work)
I am asking, because I see PsiSyns Takistan server is on the monetized server list and I see RH M4 files (resigned as well) in their repository
Reading this monetization debate got me interested. So lets say Arma 3 clan has their own server. They run closed events for their members on a heavily
modded server.
Clan collects donations to keep its servers going. Is this scenario considered monetization with all its consequences ?
"donation" is a voluntary act
there is nothing received in return - ingame perks
if anything is received in return of a donation, it is called a sale
that means monetization applies and the money are not tax free
Well i guess whats recieved is a server to play on...
i have been part of a clan before, all members were chipping in towards the infrastructure costs, but they were chipping in as much or as little, or as often as they could
that was in A1 and A2 days, i see no ingame perks in the mix
Amount is probably irrelevant but technically each party that monetizes could just call it donations to the server and thus surpass rules ?
lol, nope, that is fraud and tax evasion
the moment i put a price on something you get in return, then it is a sale.
Aren't "donations" taxed anyway? Like donations have to actually go to charity (but that might be different country by country).
ok so set cost is what makes the two cases different
I think correct term is "tip".
it isn't the cost
well price
is what you get in return of a payment
but you do get a server for those donations (service)
if you restrict access based on payment then yeah that is monetization
yeah reserved/ or VIP slots goes under the same monetization rules
a. case A - there is clan/squad that has a few members - They have a of money each month that needs to be gathered to cover server costs - the server is private or public, it doesn't matter. then that is fine
b. I have a server - i limit the access to that server based on a 10$/month fee - that is monetization
.
"No, donations are still allowed. But remember – a donation is a gift without any counter value. If your donators receive perks or rewards for donating then we no longer consider it a donation and you have to apply for the approval."
as long as you are on BI monetization list, you need to get explicit permission from all authors
unless there is a license file attached to a mod that explicitly says it allows monetization (it needs to be textually written)
sharing server costs is something that has always happened - be it public server, clan/squad servers etc
taking money for accessing a server is a sale - there is a service provided in return of a payment
[12:07 PM] PointForward: Aren't "donations" taxed anyway? Like donations have to actually go to charity (but that might be different country by country).
depends on a country and there are some limits as well
[12:10 PM] Leeeeroyy: Ah ok, so for instance, if reserved/vip slots were to get removed, are you technically allowed any mod (besides ones that require extensive permission)
if the only monetization perk is VIP/reserved slot, and that gets removed and there is no ingame perk, then there is no monetization whatsoever, so there is no reason to be on BI's allowed monetized list
as long as a server/community is on that list, they need to abide by the monetization rules
which means you cannot use ANY mod unless there is written and explicit permission from the author
The monetization rules are quite simple.
Not to mention reputable communities accepting monetary support generally have monthly goals with description what costs what.
@steady hare in theory yes, but @soft egret would be the one to answer that for you
I believe Nkey has already stated he doesn't have a problem with it, but he won't give his explicit permission to use it on a monetized server. he has left that up to Dedmen
if monthly goals are reached and everyone gets a perk, that is still monetization btw
Hence why Psi couldn't use it and monetize.
@echo orchid didn't mean perk, just "we keep running without having to think about downsizing servers/whatever"
normal community stuff
that is all fine, and before monetization
that is how all servers have been running
there was a monthly fee associated with servers costs, and nothing else, the donated money were all directed towards covering these costs
He stated he didn't have a problem, but wouldn't give explicit permission.
Can't monetize without explicit permission
i do remember for 2 servers, one collocated and one rented there costs were around 100 pounds a month. People were chipping as much or as little as 5 to 50 pounds. The amount of collected money was visible, there was a red flag if it went under the monthly payment limit. As i said, some people choose to send some money each 6 months, some each month, some none whatsoever - they had limited cash flow or they had other things - there was no issue as long as collectively the sum was reached
right click - send message?
@echo orchid yeah, I'm looking at the breakdown, 112 EUR for 2 arma servers total, 6 EUR for TS server, some more for website and associated stuff... and non-arma servers which is not interesting anyway
yeah, which begs the question for communities that have a single server
and the monthly lower limit is 500 or 1000 USD
the fuck are they running, 1000 slot server?
or obviously a nice "rainy day fund" ... for the admin
^^ that
again, i think if you, your friends/clan mates etc
cannot afford a server
maybe you shouldn't rent one/collocated/host one to begin with
but people got used to get something in retunr for a "donation"
and that habbit was nurtured by server admins looking to make a buck on the side
I mean only "perk" I'd expect is that regular donators could be informed on potential changes like "OK guys, if each one of you starts donating $1 extra each month we can upgrade server to support X more players during prime time"
Which is not really a perk for the player anyway
for me for instance, besides the software license, i don't really like having monthly server payments. i for once would prefer to push 100EU at once and know that i am set for "server costs" for a longer period
but yeah
@echo orchid Purchase a dedicated server and host in-house 😉 😉
I mean that still costs money... Internet connection, electricity, ...
@grand oyster 😃 yeah the collocation one was around 1200EU, and the collocation costs was 35ish EU a month
but, it aged 😃
my internet connection is 600MB down, 300up, will be upraged in september to 1GB down, 500 up though
so that would work
That's the only bad thing about my place due to some idiot I'm on wireless modem only :/
the advantages of owning your own place (well, actually house)
i got a small fiberlink box 2m from my PC
but we going OT here
I wish I could get Fibre here without selling a kidney
All our ISPs are seemingly asymmetric
i pay 19EU a month for the fix line (i never use it), fiber and 125 iTV channels 😄
the upgrade from 600mbit to 1Gb is 1 extra EU per month
Fuck, better get back to work to be able to afford a house near a fiber line 😼
(also tiny hope that certain big A3 mod will get updated before I get home, but no inquiries on that don't worry)
Little #offtopic_arma 😄 @steep quiver I'll have to definitely consider that when I move out
I'm just online now again. I literally wasted half an hour on that guy helping him with his issues.. I shall never do that again. It was dumb from me in the first place to tell him about his mistakes. Should've just sent a mail to BI and leave it be.
He even told me he might just slightly modify TFAR so he is allowed to reupload it in his pack instead of having it as a dependency.
@steady hare At least with some that are currently up (Such as PsiSyn), he has showed some form of guilt No. He just lied to us. A week later he was owner/highly ranked member/moderator on a new life server that ran mods that don't allow monetization and they also monetized even without approval. He has no guilt whatsoever and didn't learn anything whatsoever.
if i was to use an older version of TFAR for something i'm working on, and with NKeys permission. Would i be allowed to monetise it? Sure you can monetize with permission. I can also give you the permission for any TFAR version. Even the older ones.
@steady hare better read the #rules you are spamming.
@steady hare and NKey said that he doesn't have a problem with it, does that count? "don't have a problem" is not "yes you can"
@echo orchid Where the hell do you live
Why is it that life server are so common to violate monetization rules...
Different maturity level.
A life RP gameplay draws young players
B young players dont quite understand value of money
C server operators can easily cash in from this
tldr : profit
also what mondy said
@steep quiver it's not only life. You only see life most often. Because they also have the most monetized servers.
But they can't even provide pay to win monetization. I'm too old for this probably.
Reverse, win to get paid thats an idea for an adult server...
Be good at scamming/ripping off young people == win -> get paid.
That's what the life servers are already doing 😄
Haha, take entrance fees per session. At Session end a winner is randomly selected. Pocket 50% of the fees.
Armaball
Sssh, you're giving them ideas
Guy wants TFAR permission. I ask him what server. He ignores my question. I ask him again. He ignores it again. I literally need to ask 3 times till he finally answers my question. Then I want a modlist.
all the mods are public
I ask him to just send me a copy-paste of his full modlist. He starts sending screenshots.
My first comment on one of his pictures. And this happens:
https://s.sqf.ovh/Discord_2018-08-03_21-35-13.png
I guess he doesn't want TFAR permission anymore all of the sudden ¯_(ツ)_/¯
ouch
ding ding ding...
they ripped CUP Terrains Maps for takistan
wrong chat, but fits anyway 😄
dbo wheelchair, isn't that the stolen wheelchair that is in every life pack?
yeah
Think so..
There was sfp_wheelchair and a common rename. Not sure if it was dbo
No that's not it
dbo is something different. the common wheelchair is from SFP
the rebranding, wasn't it eg_* something?
there is also a very common rename of the SFP wheelchair. That's not.. I really don't remember ^^
cg_wheelchair <--
right
Asked Trubb for it 😄
well, eg_
close enough 😂
Fooled me too when I saw it, cg_ is an instant "oh hey there" but this one was similar to ours but not completely the same which the rips are.
Turns out its wayyy older than expected but belonging to a creator that seems to have since departed the arma scene
How did they get permission from a author that isn't there anymore 🤔
#magic
where? bif account is dead since 2007
rather unlikely he would give permission though
he was more on armaholic
but he contacted me recently here on discord
We already have 5 mods that 100% have no permission. So not really unlikely that they don't have it for that
DeanosBeano#1098
Ah yeah. Discord didn't want to show me when I searched for Deano
He's not in this server anymore
yeah i added him as friend
@stoic beacon reminded me that DustyRoads has contact to him. They'll ask him for me tomorrow
Thanks
Uh... trying to read whether the text is Taloon (DayZ) or Talon (IRL)...? Difficult due to the low light and the tools I have available.
Which brings up the question (given the name change) of whether BI had permission to model the Talon 22 😉 And thus whether simply changing the name of something in game absolves someone of having to pay the IP rights holder 😃
To this too... https://www.rei.com/rei-garage/product/116322/osprey-talon-22-pack One thing I cannot tell is whether the end of the strap for the main storage is folded over and stitched like in real life but not in the DayZ model... cannot tell with my tools
Then again the "wave"? like effect at the sides of the back look just like BI's (ending closer to the bottom) and less like IRL
Sorry, those images do not enlarge for me... but looking more closely in the previous stuff and comparing to both the DayZ and IRL versions it seems like you have a winner!
I think you are right
its deffo ripped
Yes, I said I think you are right
Was just trying to work out whether someone else had modelled the Talon backpack too or whether it was a rip... many people do not know that it is a real backpack... that BI renamed Taloon... Like Zamak... sorry Kamaz
Agreed. Again... I could not get a good enough look with the basic graphics tools I had
this mod originally had stuff i thought was in rhs but couldnt find identical files in it
ended up finding something jucier walk right past me
Not exactly sure what BI can do to a STALKER mod hosted on moddb but...? While BI will be happy with the info and may be able to do something it may be better to clean our own house first though
...that is exactly what this channel is before
and misery mod got reported last year for having arma 2 weapons and their download links swiftly went down
Before STALKER comes after all the ARMA3 STALKER mods
they are also hosted on moddb so
it is up to the ip rights holder to defend their ip anyway, not bi, unless bi starts getting flack by said rights holders which maybe? has happened in the past, IDK, its not too rampant that other companies have gone after bi for masses of stolen content so
Agreed. With the new STALKER in the pipeline, maybe they will.
well stalker --> any other games porting has never been taken down, the new game yes may indeed warrent some dmcas
Also... the Taloon definitely seems to be only just dodging the edges of IP infringement that lesser mortals get sued for
I mean BI's one
they're not monetising,
they still are selling stuff (such as Reserved/VIP Slots) on their store.
They also sell a "Take-over a gang instantly" package which gives you full control over an in-game gang for £100
``` this is monetizing defined.
in fact the "take over a gang fee" is going beyond the allowed monetization i think, as it is offering unique player benefits, which afaik is not allowed, that is commercial use that breaks the A3 EULA
@steady hare reported weeks ago already. They are not monetized. But still monetize and use tons of mods they can't use
BI probably overlooked my mail
PsiSyn is btw also deeply involved with that thing
Who would've thought right?
report it again
deeply involved:
https://s.sqf.ovh/firefox_2018-08-04_12-13-39.png
Maybe he himself should be doing something against that then?
sounds like you should contact the police then 😄
Well not to put tinfoilhat on but they could all be the same person because internets.. Just saying.
Either way, they will get what’s coming to them.
huh?
don't even know how one would DDoS "TFAR"
like.. attack github? Or steam workshop?
Or Discord?
I don't have any TFAR "servers"
LOOOL
Nice, criminal charges, yay!
they probably just googled TFAR and attacked what first came up ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Now I am very curious which poor fucker they are ddossing
I swear sometimes I reckon the call of duty community has less drama! Have to admit tho, it does provide a good read every now and again, however idiotic it is lol
Interesting.
https://youtu.be/Klw43WnjmdQ?t=571
Nice little scheme they got going there.
Oh sweet, proof
heh the irony of one person involved in monetising content without licence calling out another. it's not really ip related more monetisation, make a report and send to email in topic.
The monetization is.
👆
You don't even need that.. They have a store. And don't have monetization approval.
just send them a fucking CnD letter
omfg what the fuck is going on there
bunch of children
Don’t forget the google drives
that is a DMCA
DMCAs are done by the authors.
the author of any of these mods/ their lawyers
BTW @mint edge You should email the infringements team at BI if you have not. This STALKER HD Model mod notes that it took content from Ninja_Nub [NOR]'s HD Models mod. Interestingly that one was taken down and the "creator" posted this "It got taken down due to a copyright thing, I used some models from dayz, and bohemia doesn't much like when people use models from their engine."
If you post stuff like that. Always say if you reported it to BI or if you expect someone else in here to do it for you
I have not. Was leaving the honours to Mike since he found them... If he hasn't or doesn't then I will
i find stolen arma shit like every week in atleast one mod in a game im playing at the time, so i just post it here because i honestly cant be arsed to report every single thing, odds are someone will either forward it or someone who handles it will see it
So PsiSyn just keeps getting slaps on the wrist?
https://psisyn.com/forums/store/category/9-psisyn-takistan/
And has RH, TRYK, Jonzie, HLC and more in the modpack.
Guess if they can get away with it anyone can.
Seems about right, currently
I has been said in this channel a few times, there has to be a clear permission for someone to use the mod while monetizing the server by the mod author.
Plus, the "no permission" part does not clearly state anything about monetization
Looks like they are using Acre
which is using just a GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Unless they have adopted one the BI licenses some were?
Didn't see it on the forums or Steam Page
The report for PsiSyn is already written and has gone out.
They shut down their malden server recently. They shut down their ONLY non rule violating server. So they can focus more on development of the rule violating ones
and they really seem to think that removing TFAR will get rid of all their problems.
heh, there reasoning "to cancerous" XD
Yeah.. I think the cancer is not in the players 🤔
Welp, one day maybe will get a life community that is willing to openly discuss working directly with modders and asking proper permissions.
I have two that do that.
Did PSI voluntarily leave or get the 🔨?
What do you think?
Neither. Forced himself to atleast pretend he left to pull his ass out of the crap
(i meant here)
Oh that.. Well. Just look at the last #rules and then you know if he could be here if he wanted to
I was curious as Repentz is still here 🤣
Has he joined again? I've banned him once
@tawny cairn < 🤔
And to comment that TRYK thing above. "You can use this in your community" doesn't say you can monetize.
The author pointing to that after being asked if he can monetize also doesn't mean anything
I'm sorry @steady hare but PsiSyn have been pulling this crap for far too long. Pretending they didn't know, whilst saying otherwise, then making another server with the same infringing content as the first.
You can only steal and then say sorry and then steal again, before someone puts and end to it.
As such, you are being removed as well. We don't need your cancer here.
He was trying to build up a new PsiSyn server that's actually legit. And asked for TFAR permission while he knew he still had mods for that server that are clearly violating.
They will never get a clean server running anyway
Unless they make everything themselves. And they have already shown they are trying everything possible to not have to go the legit route
I have no sympathy. You can only illicitly monetise and screw modders over so many times before someone takes action. My action is to prohibit any PsiSyn Administrators or developers from accessing this Discord or the Forums.
Do the crime, do the time.
I'd be quite happy to see Bohemia rescind their current monetisation policy.
@soft egret Did you mention HLC in your report?
Awesome, thanks.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1458210741&searchtext=todt
Todt still contain COD WW2 objects, lemme just get some images first
here is flak from the map
link to 3d site with same model from enemy front https://p3dm.ru/files/weapon/heavy_weapons/7966-flakvierling-.html
This user said he removed assets that were ripped but there's still some left.
It also seems he lies in the description saying that flak model is something completely else. http://www.cadnav.com/3d-models/model-10923.html
UPDATE: I have mailed the information and pictures regarding that STALKER models mod to Bohemia. It's in their hands now
Regarding PsiSyn... do they also have CUP Terrains Maps (Takistan) in their modpack? Cause they say Maps is not needed. IIRC, you do need CUP Terrains Maps for Takistan...?
They had it in the other day I was checking, they were instructing users to use CUP Core from Workshop
Yeah Core, but they say "CUP Terrains - Maps is NOT needed" which of course it is, isn't it for Takistan?
they ripped takistan from the maps pack and added it to their takistan modpack.
that's a nono
and already beeing handled
Just... why...? Why would you do that? And good to hear Chris...
I guess I'm just odd... I'd just have Maps as a Steam requirement...
Just so bloody obvious too... especially when they are under a microscope
like every other mod, too. but that seems to be too difficult
Bet they did not get permission from Cunico for the Hidden Items Pack v2 stuff either. That's not on Steam btw
they are not getting permissions from anyone xD
you can be almost 100% sure that they never asked permission if you read "modpack".
from my experience there are 4-5 "basic life modpacks" floating around that get copy/pasted from one server to another, even getting selled, and nobody using it has the slightes clue what is in there (admins)
@paper prawn Stalker?
That is, under conditions allowed to be used
If I remember correctly monetization is not ok with it
Not monetized... but the mod uses models ripped from another STALKER mod that was DCMA-ed by BI for using DayZ assets
BI enforce their own IP rights quite aggressively
i also remember reading an article / statement from the stalker devs allowing others to reuse their models in other games, but for the sake of the many gods, i can't seem to find it anymore
The STALKER mod is a models pack addon for the Call of Chernobyl STALKER mod. But uses DayZ models...
To quote FM ```With regard to STALKER:
GSC has made explicit its position regarding the legal status of mods, including the use of its resources with others games. You can find the original text under the link below. I am attaching a translation, as well.
Mods (modifications) of a computer game can be made by a person who has legally acquired a licensed copy of the game and exclusively for the purpose of its use on the hardware belonging to the person performing the modification or persons to whom the modification was given on non-commercial basis (such as freely over the Internet).
This means that the person who makes a mod for a computer game can use this modification exclusively on non-commercial basis.
The author of the mod retains authorship and exclusive rights on the mod. However, the resources used for development of the given mod belong to another person. As such, the mod does not wholly belong to the author of the modification, who does not have full control over it (such as for commercial use).
Our company allows non-commercial use of mods for our computer games. If you want to use mods developed for our games (such as from the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series) with another game, you have to turn to that game's developers for permission.```
That I did not know. Not relevant to the current report which is doing things the other way around. Good news for ARMStalker though
Happy to see that
As long as no Metro stuff& others are used.
That's correct.
@carmine folio It seems you've missed quite a few things. (scroll up)
@rapid wagon thanks. Didn't get an answer yet from Activision regarding todt.
Might drop them another mail with the newly discovered stuff
Those props were send to me by a friend as .max files I had no clue in fact they were COD.
Merc is an honest mistake during first cleanup.
In any case I think I will not burden you with my company anymore you gents are just too orthodox for my simple hobby approach to map making.
Good luck on your crusade .
Best regards.
👋 Have a good life elsewhere
Would it be possible that Activision also goes after BI because the infringements are for a mod for their game? in their games workshop?
@soft egret I am quite certain BI's legal texts state that people are responsible for their own content and bi will take down anything that they are beeing noticed about regarding ip - that is how basicly every file hoster etc deal with user content
And maybe it does not touch them at all - at most steam as hosting plattform could be asked for anything
BI does not host the files, thus is not distributing IP violating material
and steam has the mentioned rules in their agreements
DMCA's requests are the way of giving steam a notice to take down hosted content
Not a lawyer but this is the only thing that kinda makes sense to me
Would be a slippery slope for a game developer to legally hassle another for user content, so long as the formalities are met. Otherwise, well, what goes around, comes around...
^ Yes, that. Apologies if I was not clear. Was clear in the mail to Bohemia
o7
all, besides the trade mark of this gaz which can easily be removed from the texture, is the car model itself protected by copyright in a way that it cannot be used in commercial games? https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/free-gaz-tigr-3d-model/815184
any input welcome
it’s still not clear to me what part constitutes copyright infringment and what part (if any) is acceptable
Royalty Free License - Editorial Uses Allowed
Extended Uses May Need Clearances
@hushed fox
Use in games is "Extended Use"
understood
You can click on the "Royalty Free License" link and read up on everything
i was wandering if removing the trademark is enough or not
oh ok
thank you dedmen
ok so basically to use a model of an existing car like this one you need clearance from the producers
if private
if usa army, for instance, not
For every pre-made model you use you need permission first.
Some models explicitly say that you can use them. If they don't say anything about it, that's usually a no.
i understand that i need permission from the model maker. what i am trying to understand is how to get the “additional clearance”, or if i can do something (legal) to avoid needing it (for instance removing the brand image and substituting it with a non-existant one).
i guess i’ll pass.
thank you.
ah. No you can't
Removing or adding small parts to a model doesn't change the fact that the original model maker has the copyright on it
i’m not worried about the model maker
because i’ll buy or get permission
it’s more the original copyright owner (BMW, etc)
Afaik if you wanna use their emblem you really need to ask.
That's why many just remove them. It's usually not a problem in small non-commercial uses though.
But I'd always go the safe route. Maybe make a fake emblem that looks similar-ish to the original
ok, so if I get that GAZ model which is royalty free by the 3d artist BUT may need additional clearance from the original car manufacturer, and remove the emblem, I am ok?
that’s my question sorry if not clear.
i am trying to understand copyright obligations not for 3d artists (these are obvious) but in regards to original real life manufacturers
You need clearance for "Extended Use" by the 3D artist to use it in game. Not the car manufacturer.
Because that's what that site says. For the emblem you might need to ask the manufacturer. Unless it's somehow public knowledge that they allow it's use anywhere
ok thanks.
👁
For the BMW emblem why not use the substitute car maker that BI uses for that one civilian suv as that car is clearly a BMW.
You do understand @hushed fox that the price difference will be significant? It’s much like buying an educational license vs a commercial license.
yes i do.
again: sorry if not clear, maybe wrong example up there.
there are 3d models where artists sell full rights, but they are marked as “need clearance” because they depict real life models
I checked into one once before. The royalty free license was £250, the extended licence was near £5,000
i guess the safe answer is to stay aways from those
And remove them from the forum posts.
@burnt oak bmw was just an example, but good suggestion 😃
@fossil basalt lost you there... i need to remove something?
Did you make a forum post? It’s early and not had my coffee yet.
no, I didn’t 😃
@fossil basalt Streamline your coffee intake: french press collection on your nightstand
☕️
Has anyone contact to Yura Petrov? https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1197485239
@hushed fox "Royalty Free License" means you can exploit it commercially. The reason they added "extended uses may need clearance" is to avoid them getting sued for damages if you get sued by the trademark owner.
They are selling you "rights to use the work commercially" but withholding any warranty in relation to trademarked content
it's a robust practice seen on all good model markets
it's a good idea to check with each artist that your royalty-free license applies to commercial work, but on balance, the fact they say "royalty-free" means that the yexpect you to generate income, and the ywill ask for no part of that.
we have more than 100 models in unsung mod that fall into that category. If you look very closely at the weapons some may have "Colt" stamped on the receiver etc. But then the Bohemia UH-1 has BELL stamped on the pedals too.
for non-commercial releases it arguably falls into "fair-use" and no trademark owner is likely to bat an eyelid at your mod. as soon as you monetize or put a pricetag on it though, expect a C&D letter
@olive sparrow you exactly got the point of my original question.
which was not to discuss 3d model artist rights, but how to actually use a model of an existing manufacturer
i have a commercial (and environmental) law background
😃
maybe i was unable to convey my question clearly
so it looks that for a free arma mod: it’s “ok”, i.e. accepted even though strictly not legal
for a paying game: nay nay
basically, if you buy this model, you have the rights to exploit it, and you can release it as a free mod, but if you wish to monetize it, or make a dlc with it, you should modify any logo, and possibly some shape characteristics (if the manufacturer copyrighted shape)
like the front of a jeep, i guess
arguably, to be 100% safe, modify the logos to avoid any steam workshop DMCA takedown
well a jeep might be a korean war model, and so be out of copyright
i guess that’s why arma vanilla has all unconventional vehicles
and now, for example, a humvee
yeah although we use arma 2 models in arma 3, licensed to us by BI, and some of them have trademarks in them
ah
humvee is a very good example as they trademarked their shape afaik
well maybe bi did ask for clearance
no, i don't think they did 😉
but so far BELL has not sent us a C&D for using the arma 2 UH-1
after all it can be considered as positive for the trademark and for that reason, they close an eye and allow it
and if they did, we'd clean up those pesky pedals
hum
it's more that you're falling outside of their interest. they have commercial strategies for copyright enforcement, as it costs money to act.
i’m trying to find a military jeep or similar that could be used commercially.
yes that makes sense.
should be ok with many models, just remove any brands /logos
231k polys?
what game you want that for? not arma
the tools will crash when you import it
lol
i will reduce it
games that have a gaz
only “big” names
i guess they got clearance
kutejnokov is a good artist too, we've bought some of his models before
thank you again @olive sparrow it’s not the first time you’re being super helpful to me
i would just modify the shape a little (10%) andremove trademarks fro mthe steering wheel, hood, rear, and tyres
ok!
@stoic beacon btw someone else (now banned because of other #ip_rights_violations) asked Steam support directly. And they answered "you can upload anything but you have to take it down if the author asks"
I'm starting to understand where all the "Just ask and I'll take it down" people are coming from.
That's what you get for asking the "support department" about legal questions.
Same thing happened with BI recently where they answered stuff that legally can't be true.
So if I upload RHS, I'm good until they tell me to take it down. Then I take it down and I'm good. Then I just reupload it again and I'm good for the time PuFu needs to write the next DMCA?
Thank god for Optix. ^
@olive sparrow Thanks for the clarification!
steam support really sucks , they could be replaced by bots if they arent already
one more thing about licenses and turbosquid - not all licenses allow redistribution (even if they do allow commercial use), and a mod is just that
https://blog.turbosquid.com/royalty-free-license/
Redistributing or otherwise making TurboSquid products available to end-users.
If you are redistributing something that includes actual 3D product files, the TurboSquid files must be part of a larger creation and not in an open format that others can be downloaded. Most game engines, such as Unity and Unreal, handle this automatically. In general, to prevent your end-users from obtaining TurboSquid products, you should use proprietary formats that cannot be extracted, exported, or decompiled without reverse engineering.```
Pbo would class as proprietary format thus making Ur redistribution fine though wouldn't it? especially u make it such that to get a model out they have to use an extractor etc
It's not the raw 3d model files. That's to stop people just leaving the model in original form
I mean the model becomes .p3d, then placed in a pbo
^^
So I'd deem it a proprietary format 🤣
Yeh. That's why they mention how ue4 etc handle all that
that cannot be extracted, exported, or decompiled without reverse engineering.
Doesn't apply to PBO. BI and many others provide tools to extract them
Would obfuscation of both the pbo and .p3d sort of remedy that?
Uhh.. Doesn't change the actual file format. And the file format itself can usually be extracted
.p3d works as long as it is binarized
i think you misunderstood the intention of their license there. what they are saying is you cannot buy this model for commercial purposes which include the intention to sell it to other people to use as a 3d model in the same way that it is being sold to you. otherwise you could buy it and then re-sell it cheaper than turbosquid many times over.
so you can incorporate it into a game and sell that, but you cannot upload it to a store and re-sell it as a "3d model for sale"
in every instance whe nyou consider a license or a contract, it is always helpful to consider, "what is their aim? what are they protecting against?"
as this context shines a lot of light on what might otherwise bethought of as dubious wording
Exactly - good to go with BI tools. Binarized addon then would need reverse engineering to get the model out in the form it has be sold to the mod maker.
i think YOU misunderstood the intention of their license there.
who is you in that sentance?
You, clearly
PuFYOu
weird, considering, opposed to some other here, i actually bought models before for different projects, never really for game modding, so i am well aware how to read a license...
not sure where the misunderstandment is
redistribution is something i had to consider several times when working with multiple studios and we had to pass back and forth some models and scenes
i meant dedmen
when in doubt buy it again
exactly, buy it for every download on your mod page 👍
soo I just noticed this while looking for new mods.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1469122038&searchtext=
And they are awaiting approval from BI for monetization according to their "donation" thread
https://takistanrevolution.mistforums.com/thread/donation-info-446814
Mods they use on the server (though not all of them reuploaded into that mod) are like RHS, CUP, NIarms, task force radio
Among the Repacked mods are BWI mod, Jonzi, "mm_buildings", tryk
Just throwing it out there, have not done anything
I should make a bot that grabs the approved servers list every day and notifies me about new ones
that way I can report them on their first day after being approved 😄
I'll just wait till they got approval. And then take them down again.
To throw BI the "you didn't even check at all" right into their face.
@burnt oak
thx, i left a comment on the item site. we'll see what happens next
Man.. This was a good opportunity to check if BI really verifies servers before approving them
just delete the comment
I wrote it above
FUCK... i misread this
Also he knows that he cannot use the mods. Before seeking approval you have to read the rules anyway. And they say that.
comment deleted
no need to warn people about it. If they want to not read/ignore the rules then a warning won't help anyway
Apparently BI doesn't verify a server before they get approval. I'd guess all they do is ask if the server owners have permission and the server owners lie to them. @soft egret Task force radio has to be in a seperate folder and not repacked in another one right? Did you make any exceptions for Eisenschmiede Gaming?
that repack thingy only applies for workshop reuploads
And I only enforce that rule when I feel like it
In fact he has three workshop entries (2 for his Takistan RP-thingy both with the same stuff):
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198080904782/myworkshopfiles/
One has already a pending DMCA
Surely this, on their donations page would violate BI's rules: Donator Store - "DONATOR STORE DO NOT OFFER GEAR INACCESSIBLE TO NON-DONORS" Donator Stores are located at the two Donator locations on the map. One is on the Souther Side, and at this location donators can access rebel weapons and gun store, as well as truck shops and car shops that are typically spread around the map. The Northern location does not have rebel weapons which is exclusive to the South side of the map, in order to not give donators an unfair advantage.Since they are offering an easy way to get gear which is an in game advantage...?
Correct. You cannot have vendors which are accessible to donors only
They intentionally keep it vague though.
Gear with custom skins that others can't get? that's cosmetic
I love this: "The Northern location does not have rebel weapons which is exclusive to the South side of the map, in order to not give donators an unfair advantage." ... Uh, so all the donators stay on the south of Takistan or just use that store...
Server like that won't last long anyway... admins probably all have access to God Mode (cancer!) and any players they get will leave asap after donator and admin abuse...?
"DONATOR STORE DO NOT OFFER GEAR INACCESSIBLE TO NON-DONORS" == Gear that players who do not donate cannot buy, but can get off AI, loot or (most likely) killing donators
Also they should check on the legal definition of donations... and in what circumstances you can say you will not refund a donation: "Refund Policy: The packages that you purchase here are intangible goods. We have a strict no refund policy. Your donations do NOT have a refund policy for what you have bought for the server."... "purchase" ... "bought for" are not terms associated with a donation
they are selling weapons which have skins on them, they are not taking a weapon you already have and giving it a new skin this is not cosmetic only
obtaining a gun through a real money transaction no matter what it looks like is still purchasing an item which is functional to the point of being a "p2w" mechanic
same with selling cosmetic armor pieces or cosmetic cars
because it has the word "cosmetic" in it doesn't fucking mean your ONLY getting a new texture on something, it means your actually getting that something that has the texture, I.e selling someone a car for 5$ that comes with a unique skin
it's a no brainer lol
unless they clearly state AND show they are not spawning in a vehicle with the texture for you to use, they are in violation if my understanding of the rules is correct so if a store lets you drive a car to it then "repaint" it, that should be perfectly within the scope of the rules
but if you are donating and receiving a car with the skin in question, that is not allowed
That gets into big fat gray squishy talk though
Like what defines competive, ect.
I do see your point though
Guy posts in 7 year old OFP thread on BIF that's about debinarizing p3d's, that the method that was posted there 7 years ago doesn't work with DayZ 0.63 p3d's.
I smell incoming #ip_rights_violations
necropost of the year
PSISyn's "Australia Life mod" video has something quite familiar. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/378747201729462277/476689792604569621/unknown.png
PsiSyn has Australia life? Since when? Or is it unmonetized?
Dedmen can't read today. Yeah. Nothing out of ordinary. Their "developers" are stealing stuff everywhere ^^
Well if it's on their steam workshop modpack it's a no no.
Ahhh.. Anzus Gaming.
Yeah. Reports for them are already written. Not sure if I sent it out already. I'll add that info to it. Can you tell me from which game that model is?
"Lollipop chainsaw"
i wonder who ports these things , probably taken from gmod that ripped it
It runs on Unreal Engine, from what I've heard. That's easy to rip
Ah they already got their monetization approval revoked. One of their admins contacted me and wanted help fixing his issues last week
lol
What a coincidence that PsiSyn is AGAIN playing on a server full of ripped stuff and mods that they don't have permission to monetize.
That guy sure seems to have some bad luck choosing his servers to play on...
if no one bothers to send a damn C&D this will continue to happen
send a C&D, and report for tax evasion
pretty sure that will clear things out in an iffy
@rigid otter you are developer on there. Do you know when they plan to clean up the mess?
gotta get that gta 5 content https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/468550158464974868/476695070116937750/unknown.png
Will never understand why people don't just play life stuff in GTA. Feels way better suited..
Because adding content like cars is a lot harder in gta then in arma. here oyu just load tha pbo and tada. in gta you might need to merge files manually and the likes. also gotta pack all of the mods into one giant pack file so it loads ingame
Okey yeah.. People who just steal all their content together without asking for permission probably wanna take the lowest effort route they can
in a game where the main assets is cars....
In Arma, its alot easier to do what you want compared to GTA
and they usually try to fly under the radar
it is possible their are 100's of Servers that have such "content" and are off both Steam and BI Forums, they might have their own websites and use Teamspeak and/or Discord to distribute their modpacks
They are playing life in gta 🤔 With even more ripped stuff... I've recently talked to a guy who obviously ripped models. He said that he asked the Author of the GTA Mod to use his Model, the Author said yes, so he assumed it would be okay. Even tho the models were taken from Forza and the GTA Mod Author even states that...
Stuff like that: ```Original Car Author: Forza Horizon 3
Custom Parts: Lord Neophyte
Please donate for more mods and Zmodeler program license so i can get u more awesome carmods :)
Standard license, approximately $4.50/mo. so every Dollar is needed for get a new license ever month... ```
degenerates gonna be degenerate
too many people want that quick reward on someone else's hard work
and game providers like steam need to step up and work at making it harder for people to get away with it, as opposed to their current IDGAF attitude
I would just love if there was a system of Two Strikes you are out
after that, you cannot post anymore stuff to the Steam Workshop for the game you did it on
and if you get two games' workshops bans
you get banned from ALL workshops
I think there should be a game ban along with the workshop ban
as you're clearly not doing the community any favours
does not matter who hands it as long as there were real punishments
clean up what mess @soft egret ?
@rigid otter probably all the mods that are used without permission?
which ones?
why is it that everyone here is so passive aggressive in their messages?
I don't have the list, I cant tell you
i've been told they got permission for everything that is currently used
Well, doesn't seem like that's the case
there was two fucktards running it a while back and they crashed it into the ground and somebody else revived it who is currently running it
but ok, i'll reply back when i can have a rough idea of what they don't have permission for
Maybe you should ask him to make sure he has permission, before BI will contact the owners again and moneitziation approval is removed once again
that was the first thing i asked him when i joined
to my knowledge he messaged BI and paused monetization voluntarily when he discovered content he didn't have permission for in the modpack. it was removed as soon as he discovered it
Frank knows he doesn't have permission for everything. But after a week the stuff wasn't cleaned up. I though you might be informed about ongoing things
I went to donate on ANZUS and Frank said he isn't taking donations for perks right now due to him pausing monetisation
He explained that he is relatively new to the mod seen and wasn't aware of the strict rules/regulations behind it as he was given the ANZUSGaming Mods by the old owner of Australia Life
I just said he wasn't taking donations for any perks
The frank kid seemed really genuine and just wanting to have a fun community for people to play on and said he spent 10+ hours writing emails to a lot of people to get the permission
I know what he has done is not right but give the kid a break..
hes had many
.He showed me his boehmia sent items and there is like 10+ messages
@faint nacelle I like to read this chat on the bus to work and I have never seen him treated like the noob he is
Yeah he seemed genuine to me too.
I literally watched the kid spend 1.5 hours helping someone fix their TFR
That much time for one player.. idk he doesn't seem like your average person that runs a server
I have been in the life seen for years
@carmine folio you are frank as linked in your discord profile, you know ban evasion is against tos right?
What
See what I mean, people making up stuff to try cause issues.
screenshots do not lie.
Editing stuff is relatively easy man.
I watched a stream yesterday where people tried to fuck frank over the whole time...
You're 100% one of them
Constant ddosing, lies etc
Very very immature.
yep, cos im that good at photoshop.
Okey.. Frank is loosing a ton of reputation from me now.
You better leave before a moderator gives you the shoe.
lol
@fossil basalt please?
@fossil basalt It's a fake screenshot.
I am happy to discord call
You can find franks voice everywhere
Pretty pathetic attempt @heavy moon
not really, i checked your profile to see who you were, opened the linked steam account and got presented with franks profile, math is not difficult.
Why are you trying to ruin the kids reputation? What did he do to you?
you did nothing to me frank, but you are abusing the ip rights of several community authors and had already reuploaded game content to the workshop,. so just stop masquerading behind a fake account and clean your life up, literally.
[...] clean your life up[...]
Many levels to that. Nice.
People who employ cheap Witten tactics don't stay here for long
@soft egret Then get rid of Uro he is clearly the problem... the screenshot is clearly fake.
Man you are dense 😄
haha this guy is hillarious.
You could get through with that. But first you have to proove that this is not the real Uro
Come down to general_voice
Your account joined this server 2 hours after Frank got banned. And your discord account was connected with his steam account. So bugger off now
I am out of here, very pathetic you ruining peoples fun.
Faked screenshot lmao..
Why would anyone fake a screenshot with a steam account name from months ago on it? If you are gonna fake it anyway why not use the current steam name.
PsiSyn is rubbing off some of his character on Frank it seems
Btw BI didn't process my PsiSyn report yet that I sent on the weekend :u
nah it just seems whenever one of those types appears, the aftermath is a bunch of random people adding comment to debate they were not party of prior to any events.
anyways appreciate the swift response @fossil basalt
🍿
https://discordapp.com/channels/105462288051380224/105792634995388416/476468897164558346
Guess who sent me a friend invite on steam today.
He has a VAC ban. And is excluded from trading currently. Which is shown as a red message beside his name on the friend request.
Btw he created a new workshop item yesterday https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1469122038
8 in his steam reupload alone that he can't monetize. Not even counting the dependencies
He has a CUP reupload in his friends-only items.
This modpack is the core content for centerlink gaming's Takistan Life server.
Not all of the content of this modpack are made by us, and this modpack is a compilation of multiple different mods.
Community Teamspeak: centregaming.ts3.cloud
Community Website: www.centrelinkgaming.mistforums.com
Well his first Takistan life server was apparently a fail.. So he's just making another one. GG
Oh and PLRP too.
And another CUP Terrain reupload for his PLRP server.
He is on his 3rd Takistan RP server now. Since march 2017.
First one around April 2017. Second one Nov-Dec 2017.
Newest one now.
as long as kids throw money at his shit he will keep going.
pre-order the right to play on it :3
It's not Arma monetization if the Arma server doesn't exist and it's just a scam
¯_(ツ)_/¯
@heavy moon I could tell it was fake as it had the wrong shoes on 😄
Lol rereading the above, I already suspected the kid was Frank before Uro called him out. Damn how can people be this ******. My apologies for not being exactly on topic here.
This was actually the most entertaining thing in here since a while. Guy pretending to be someone else, and defending his actual him
You’d be surprised how common that is. Also, having multiple members of a community join the Discord to defend some thief who’s been banned.
(Joining in rapid succession that is)
griller Yesterday at 4:33 PM
I went to donate on ANZUS and Frank said he isn't taking donations for perks right now due to him pausing monetisation
grillerYesterday at 4:33 PM
I just said he wasn't taking donations for any perks
seems like the right thing to do as he has no monetization...
oh wait...
https://i.imgur.com/AqiA7jh.png
https://i.imgur.com/jXrjMiX.png
https://i.imgur.com/JwMdkV4.png
how odd. time to put the 🔨 down?
send an email to the address in the channel topic
@serene kiln always make sure to get the windows date onto the pictures. Or atleast have dates in filename
i will do @heavy moon although, any reports i make to the email never seem to lead to anything, or no reply
I already have a conversation going with their legal department concerning anzus gaming. I'll just throw this stuff into there
Btw your screenshots aren't enough. nothing forbidden on there
They can accept donations without getting anything back. Which is what your screenshots show.
But if you just clicked a couple donations lower...
https://s.sqf.ovh/firefox_2018-08-09_09-07-02.png
@soft egret have done..
just but a few, its never ending
https://i.imgur.com/PsLnc6S.png
https://i.imgur.com/eVI0M2i.png
https://i.imgur.com/YnGHANa.png
https://i.imgur.com/N8gOqxV.png
https://i.imgur.com/5x3lE9G.png
https://i.imgur.com/2eqTbXp.png
https://i.imgur.com/5h2jK2E.png
Yeah I also have a dozen screenshots now.
Server you want "donation" on .... yeah
For reference he stopped monetization at 2nd August. And I have 3 confirmed "donations" that got back donator ingame perks since then. And over a dozen donations that are asking for donator perks. Hundreds of dollars.
Can I DMCA workshop items that just use my mod as a dependency?
$300 in 2 days, although to paraphrase 'all the money goes into upkeep'
Must be some world class server system they got there 😉
Wow.. I just went through all the PMs I got over night. Literally 3 people PMing me about the fact that AnzusGaming is still selling donator perks.
2 People of which I never had contact with before 😄
A fool and his money ...
He contacted me and told me I got it all wrong. They are not giving out perks they are waiting till they can monetize again and will give them out then.
But why does staff say "your perks have been added" in past perfect then? And when I asked him about what he wanted to gain with his ban-evasion account yesterday he stopped responding
@soft egret I would assume for what they showed on their forums, that their server can not be monitized at all. I saw exclusive access to arma gear items, which nut just a cosmetic such as a vehicle skins. And for that amount of money "donated" i doubt it stops there
So he is basically ignoring all warnings and continues to do what he wants
GREED is what all this is about. THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE OR ANYBODY ELSE'S RIGHTS OR PROPERTY. As long as they know they can get away with it - they will continue. Bohemia havent done anything to solve this in the last four years, so why would they stop? They can make hundreds of $ a week and they know there is literally nothing you can do about it. Only legal action, or full removal of mods will change this situation, otherwise nothing will change and this greed will spill over into DayZ, Arma4 and any other bohemia game where these great community mods can be used.
It’s why I support the revocation of monetisation (on BIs part). As in no one can monetise.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1471144979&searchtext= has uploaded and even edited mods that are included in there
also
this steals off of PLP Urban Packs
even the description
guy from first link already noticed by himself
The best part imo is:
Notes:
Any unauthorized modification of the released files is not allowed without any written permission by Sofian.
mustn't lose faith in humanity
and he deleted comments that were telling him he stole content
well his map is shit so lol @ him
The top part maybe isn't that important but look here. https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/468550158464974868/477266886787203083/unknown.png
I am not sure how these obvious Forza rips go by but the fact there's so many of them bothers me. Is there some kind of license for the game where you need to credit and it's fine? I don't believe so but this guy seems to try to hide the fact these are ripped in a way.
@rapid wagon nope, just report them to their legal dpt. forzafb@microsoft.com
They cannot monetize Lakeside (because they are too lazy to fix their problems)
They've shut down their only non rule breaking server.
Their takistan server got a monetization violation report last week.
What would a PsiSyn do now? Shut down the Lakeside server because it isn't generating any money. And pull up a new server quickly before Takistan goes down.
These people are always up for surprises
Ofcause as nice side effects.. All the players gotta pay for premium membership on that new server again.
So to anyone that plays on PsiSyn servers who reads this. Stop getting yourself scammed please.
Damn, this is worse than microtransactions in NBA 2K...
Is it really making BI enough (in sales I guess?) to not enforce this stuff too much or are they like understaffed?
I don't think they see it in a monetary or player count sense. I think they see the whole thing as a headache.
I think PsiSyn is making more money with this than BI.
People buy Arma once. But re-buy premium everytime PsiSyn starts up a new server
And BI doesn't check that they are actually following the monetization rules when they start. So it takes a couple weeks till someone makes a list of all the violations and BI takes them down. The weeks where they make the most money
I mean if they see it as a headache... 🤷 There's acure
But that probably kinda confirms the understaffed guess
https://psisyn.com/forums/ Well... I'm trying my best to contain my rofl
Nice how he calls out hacker and bug problems.. But the Monetization violation issues were apparently not a problem.
Interesting timing.. They should've gotten a Mail from BI this week telling them that they need to remove most of their Takistan servers mods.
They actually kept the money donated/monetized and decided to shutdown their services? What a theft......
I heard Repentz closed his paypal to prevent people from backcharging
Not like we all knew it was all just a scam to generate as much money as possible.
They probably saw this coming, IP rights claims incoming, monetization "issues", they probably figured out "let`s squeeze last dollars from our user and then screw them over"
Anyone who had perks on the PsiSyn servers can contact their team to get those perks on the new server.
It's nice when they admit to wrongdoing voluntarily isn't it.
Makes me think though.. If that server is so closely connected to PsiSyn that everyone can get their perks back there..
Is it also so closely connected that the scam scheme just continues there?
I have no doubt they'll be doing same shit there.
Just looking at the website... My name is tagKnife, Most of you might know me from PsiSyn as website manager. I will be helping to manage the website here.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if they just moved all the shit on new branding with another person as point of contact as psisyn is nuclear now.
Their primary mod pack for new server.
https://i.gyazo.com/512ffcb2aca689a7cfb40950b9497f7c.png
https://i.gyazo.com/981be04192d9d42030c9ceaec63fa36c.png
XD
That's a bad start 😄
Good luck for pulling half of their mods back out when they try to get monetized 😄
I have a small feeling this resurrection will not last too long
Same people running it. Just trying to hide the actual owners/money makers. Guess they think we are really that gullible lol
I find it ironic that they use bunch of kickass' mods
How many reports have you sent BI about their Servers? They know exactly which mods not to use and they are still doing the exact same thing. I'm speechless....
How hard can it be to set up a clean Server?
it would require to make their own content, which costs time and money
but this is not abotu spending money, nonono
Will make sure to put them at the top of the scrutiny pile.
honestly if BI wants to give me a salary, I'll work solely on this stuff
would love a job that I enjoy 😛
Get in the queue
BI should get more competitive on job market for devs before they hire monetization control dpt
Why should they? They actually have a very good business model for where they are located.
Does anyone know if AnzusGaming did gain monetization permission yet?
They asked at the dbo horses thread for permission stating they have been approved:
https://i.imgur.com/qIxidnU.png
"We take donations for perk in-game such as cool looking car and vehicle skins"
Don't you love it when you donate and get something in return for it
It's just like... buying something, isn't it?
Except of course nothing is being sold here, if the amount of money was to go too high surely it wouldn't require to be taxed, it's donations afterall, just a lucky coincidence that they get cool new stuff at the same time, truely a lucky coincidence
Yeah its kinda strange isnt it?
Also I just checked: https://www.bohemia.net/monetization/approved/arma3
And didnt find their "community" there, so if anyone is in contact with DeanosBeano you may want to let him know, not that it would stop those guys from putting it on their server anyways I guess -.-
Real talk: I can't find their name on the approved for monetization list
Also I just realized that you know have to select a game while navigating to the approved for monetization list
So looks like DayZ will have the same issues lol
As long as there is no workshop...there's hope I guess.
I'm sure there will be
Did KA Weapons ever become legit?
no
👌
@cinder ridge AnzusGaming got their monetization approval revoked because of violations
So yes.. they "have been approved" but they aren't anymore. And they are even still monetizing even though they don't have approval. And they are still running the mods that they cannot use.
Best thing about a mod with manual compatibility is that I can deny mods with stolen content 🙏
Thanks mate! You were the last mod we needed to get approval for to submit to Bohemia to get our monetization unpaused woohoo!
Lol. Yeah. And what's with the other couple mods they didn't get permission for? Just remove them or pretend they got permission?
@soft egret you never heard of the term fake it until you make it? Or maybe its better suited as “Fake it and hope no one notices”
I'm correct in saying that getting access to a "donator shop" is in violation of BI's monetization, correct?
Not sure. If it doesn't have a gameplay advantage then not
Depends on whats offered I guess, if its exclusive vehicles or weapons then yes. But if it were like skins for your weapon/vehicle/clothes then no
If it's the only store in a big part of the map and only donators can access it and other people have to travel far away then I'd call that a gameplay advantage
That too
Didnt expect them to get permission that fast, I guess I'll let the author know what kinds of people he just gave permission to...
Hiya lads, I'm looking for a little advice regarding IP rights. It's not mod related, but related to a community website for an Arma 3 group
I created a website in my own free time for that community, as I was apart of their command structure, and earlier today I made it known that I would be leaving, ironically because I felt things were a touch toxic. I made it known that I would be taking my website files with me, as I was the creator and I no longer wished for them to use it. With that, I downloaded my files off their web server, replacing it with a default error page. Not 20 minutes after doing said action, my files were reuploaded. My question is, if I created the website (everything bar avatars, which I left on the file server), am I the IP owner?
yes you are
like any other source code
And If you didn't put a license onto it which allows them to use it. They can't
Fantastic, thank you. I'd definitely appreciate any advice over what to do as the situation matures
Question, does the likes of images fall under the same rules?
Anything you create does.
Thanks Rock
The only issue that comes up is if you create something in a partnership or mutually beneficial agreement
ie modding team
workload is shared etc and all contribute to a larger goal
I get ya, well I was the only contributor to the vast majority of content on that server, bar the likes of myBB forum software
it gets very woolly once you get into that area though
Yea I'd imagine so; just glad there wasn't anyone else who was a confident web dev in that group haha
As long as you recieved no benefit or payment for the "service" you are the IP owner under law.
Received neither; bar the idea they might try to buy the files off me in the future won't be holding my breath
Thanks for the advice Rock, I appreciate it
np
I've managed to get them to remove my files now, let's see if it holds out. It's times like these I understand the frustration people like Pufu or whoever go through when regular attempts are made at ripping their models
Welcome to the club
Out of curiosity, what is the best way to take more "official" action. I read on the UK Gov website that mediation would be the first step after trying to reach a conclusion yourself, how does that work?
1 - Contact the other party - politely worded letter, email etc (always do communicate in a verifiable way reduces the he said she said)
2 - If 1 fails get a 3rd party involved. Lawyer or other impartial representative
3 - If that fails issue a full DMCA/Takedown request
Although 3 starts with a simple Cease and desist letter it can escalte
but under EU law most service providers react quite quickly since they dont really want the hassle
That's fair enough, thank you very much for spelling it out, IP laws etc can be confusing when looking at them for the first time
Yeah I guess it could - I assume at that point it's reached a stage where they will be expected to pay compensation or something? Cover costs etc
It cost me £4250 the last time i sued someone. I got £4100 back via settlement. I could have taken all the way through the courts. I would have won but may not have gotten the money back as the courts have guidelines in place for penalties. Some of these are actually quite low. And you are expected to shoulder some of the costs.
I have legal IP insurance now for the commercial work. Costs me £230 a year and everything is covered upto £5,000,000 😃
Jeez, well hopefully it's not too common to get to that kinda stage, I reckon most will simply cut their losses when they are faced with the possibility of legal action
Most do
Some do fight it when decent money is involved
99% of the time im happy to get the infringement removed and have the satisfaction of everyone knowing they are thieves
But im a twat like that 😃
Hahaha fair enough mate
It's the people who create the high quality content like yourself who suffer it the most lol
My first foray into IP law was due to an FS2004 addon set i made. Released it for Free. (This was in the early internet era with dial up so people still bought mods on CD). Within 2 months a certain "studio" (I still cant publically name for legal reasons) release an Airbus Collection made up of all my models they had just repainted selling for £19.99
They sold over 130,000 copies worldwide
Jesus
I sued. It went to court and because i couldn't afford to keep going they won out.
Thats so stupid
Thats the only time ive lost an IP case. I wasn't prepared and ever since I'm 100% on my rights
They just kept delaying the case, pushing for me info running up the legal bills.
Thats kinda shitty not gonna lie
Yup
And to add insult to injury they counter sued me and issued a gagging order
hence i can't publicly name them
Oh wow, what pricks
That expires in 2 years
Oh.. spicy
Yea it has, not a massive gaming scene anymore
They did several years later remove the Airbus pack amid bad press but never admitted any wrong doing. But they sold "their IP" to another company who now hawk it as freeware.
Sigh. Another reason why the status quo of society can always bully the little guy/gal by simply filibustering the process through law fees to the point of poverty, no matter if they're right or wrong.
Do they have small claims court in Europe?
They will probably get away with that thanks to "Fair use (parody)". Unless of course they've actually nicked parts of other games
Oh boy, seems like IFA3 liberation stole another thing. Though, this time from Metro! https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/468550158464974868/477910559141003286/unknown.png
Given that the developers of Cuisine Royale are the devs of Enlisted - for which it was made, not sure why it would be a problem...?
The idea of a Battle Royale mode for a game is an idea.... if you use mechanisms from another game then you are stuffed legally but just doing a battle royale style mode or games is fair as far as I understand the issue?
@rapid wagon The textures differ a little bit and the one from metro doesn't have the Anti-Air sight mounted
@drifting scaffold it is quite certainly still the same model (Arma lighting is different and the port looks like its done rather poorly so shading is off) and taking models (ripping) form other games and importing them into Arma is a big NO NO
Oh I totally forgot about lighting, point withdrawn
The AA sight is obviously not from the same model. The AA sight is not textured (or have equal texture) and is seen other weapons. I already contacted Gajin and Deep Silver
the rust spots and normalamp on the ammo box are dead giveaway
Oh you should see the plane that has the exact same texture as in war thunder.
Well im not supprised seeing how much ripped models float around (and how little most people care)
well I am doing my job and cleaning whatever I can because the workshop deserves to be clean.
👌
Sorry gents it has just occurred to me I posted that cuisine royal link the completely wrong discord 😂 my bad lads sorry
Glad you did though... looks like a lot of fun and is free right now 😉
is using open sourced models frowned upon/against Ip rights? (granted you give credit to author)
if there terms say you can use them in a game then no but if there is no terms or it states not to be re published yes its a IP issue.
Best practice is to get an email from the site creator but you you still run the risk of IP if the site you download from stole the models in the first place
@potent onyx It is quite common for people to steal other's work, then slap a GNU copyleft license Or no license, in the hopes that it will make their theft legal. IT WON'T. Don't do it, the odd are its most likely someone else's creation that's had its license stripped from it.
blessed be milsim guys, never actually saw a single monetized server.
That’s because we play for fun and camaraderie, not monetary gain.
..and donations are there only to cover server costs
never got a penny from anyone.
I`ve been in 2 big communities that had a few public server, plus a "milsim" one. We were only having a donations option that was used to cover server costs (2 dedicated boxes). A few donated money, a few "donated" towards the community through making missions, making scripts, etc
Don’t be fooled tho! Where Milsims lack drama with money and IP rights, they more than make up for it in politics loo
Almost 7 years with my group and not a single issue with politics. I think the most heated discussion was about dark beer vs lager.
Try looking at the likes of British milsim, seems to be the most political sector of milsims; coups, arguments and falling outs seem to be a regular occurrence sadly
Chances are he's in a British group 🤣
We have one channel on our community's discord where discussion about politics and similar stuff is allowed
And it works, people actually contain it and still can play with each other.
And we also don't monetize so no IP issues too. It's not hard.
Not so much a discussion on politics, but more on ettiquette and political correctnes... (the barrier between reinactment and fun)
wrong #channel ^^
We have been about for 5 years now and have no politics issues at all. The group is completely stable, most people in it go back 4 years or so. Run by a Brit (me) but EU wide. Don't keep the arseholes is how we do it!
as Pufu said, wrong channel
#offtopic_arma 😉 😉 nudge nudge
A question regarding ace optionals: the Steam WS EULA explicitly forbids a third party to upload other people's stuff, but the ace team have not uploaded their full range of optionals, only their RHS compats.
I would prefer to not have to rely on a third party (who doesn't care for IP rights/WS EULA?) to upload the optionals as it means I have no control over when the files are updated as opposed to eg. an arma3sync repo.
I've tried and failed to find firsthand information from the ace team regarding if they allow third parties to upload the optional addons, does anyone know if they do?
they do
but it still violates the WS eula
better just ask them if they can upload the other compats too
most optionals should be uploaded in the ACE upload tho
The optional addons are contained in @ace/optionals/ but need to be handled manually by each and every user unless explicitly loaded as a separate addon afaik (?)
Which means it's a bit of a hassle to have 30+ of varying technical proficiency dig into their file systems to find these files.
They use a GPL license but as you said WS EULA definitely overrides that so I guess I'll be contacting them to put in a request, thanks!
One reason that it is nice that the ACE team allows you to upload (and it in fact does not break the workshop EULA given ACE's license) is that in order to remove some functionality, you have to remove the PBOs. For example, in order to use ACE3 with Exile you have to remove the medical PBO... in order to use ACE3 without any stamina/fatigue in a survival mode game you have to remove the advanced_fatigue PBO. Without being able to upload to Steam, the only real choice would be not to use ACE...
That said, it is always good to ask
Note ACE3's license has Additionally to the conditions of the GPL, you are granted the right to redistribute any combination of the .pbo-files of the finished product without having to share your source code, as long as you do not modify the source code of the individual modules.So you do have permission to upload to Steam and thus do not break the EULA
Do note this though re: ACE3: When publishing a derivative of this product you may not use a name that might create the impression that your version is an official release.
@paper prawn Where in there does it specifically state “we allow any user to reupload this content to the Steam Workshop”? A lack of specificity does not necessarily grant rights.
"you are granted the right to redistribute any combination of the .pbo-files of the finished product"?
And "When publishing a derivative of this product"
From my understanding, Steam Workshop is a different kettle of fish. Let me get the exact wording for you.
Also "You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's
source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate
copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the
notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty;
and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License
along with the Program."
And Steam says: In order to own the mod this means you shouldn’t include material owned by others in your mods without their permission (that includes copying the look and feel of other mods or materials as well as copying the actual models, scripts and other assets).but the ACE3 team have kindly given permission. That was my understanding. Now I am gonna have to email them to confirm... 😦
was originally created by you (or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you, by you and the other contributors, and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors
It is specific to the creators and its contributors
I hope I am not wrong since I and a MILSIM group I am familiar with do in fact do this... with all files, licenses, credits and copyrights left intact - the only difference being the removal of certain PBOs. ACE will take a big hit if this is not in fact the case... will remove it from my servers
It’s always best to get that sort of thing in writing (before reuploading).
If you are correct and they DO allow SW reuploads, they should make written reference to that.
Oh well... there goes my integration of ACE3 into Epoch. Removing now and shutting down the server
Personally I am not taking the chance of violating IP and if it is a written permission rather than license deal then the written permission can be removed at any time. Note my servers are utterly unmonetized
As i said before, I will put in a request that the Ace team publishes their optionals via their acemod account. I'd very much prefer not to be at risk of violating the ws eula, No matter what their license states
That does not help those of us who have to remove PBOs. Only solution to that is to (1) not use Steam... not an option if you want players, or (2) not use the mod
Steam WS ≠ ACE3's license, which is why i asked in the first place in case there was a first hand source that didnt require me to create an account on their slack
Or 3. Local repos which have been used for years in the Arma community.
Not for Epoch or Exile style servers tbh... unless you stick to Steam you don't get players. In fact, if you don't stick to Steam mods available through A3Launcher you really don't get many players 😦
Im not going to argue about something that is out of the scope of my question, I'd suggest anyone wanting to do anything with Ace and the ws get in touch with them just as I will.
Perfect answer
I will continue using ACE3 for my MILSIM events but I have shut down and ended my Epoch ACE3 server. Oh well, was a nice idea
You could just ask them you know.
No. Written permission has been given and removed in the past. Not going there again... one reason why Epoch is not taking something I recently asked a mod dev whether could be added to the mod. They gave permission but the dev team have had this issue in the past where permission was then subsequently removed. A license on the other hand is something that cannot be revoked for the duration of the license. If the ACE3 team clarify this in their license then fine.
Re: ACE3 and Steam we will presumably get an answer to the more general question here over the next day: https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/issues/6527
@paper prawn if you get the OK from the ACE3 team you are fine
in fact they even encourage uploading customized builds (with keeping them up-to-date)
@paper prawn steam workshop license overrides mods license
Same goes for uploading the Exile Mod package btw
Exile is not officially on steam, all are reuploads
Had some small issues with people putting hack pbos in exile steam uploads so people would get autobanned when joining servers.. that was fun
Thanks folks. Really appreciate the updates.
@blazing wyvern expect a knock regarding monetization permission, i was asked (via RHS facebook page) permission for your files
oh lol, check AMA
Dont know what to make of this, but someone called "withSix" just uploaded a bunch of mods to Arma 3 ModDB page
those are the mods uploaded
I think withSIX merged with moddb
they offered to bail them out previously
yep
When the withsix.com team told us they were turning off their server, we worked with them to archive all of the mods they have stored and this is the result.
ahhh
but did those mod authors give permission for their stuff to be hosted on ModDB?
This 6.7GB big cup_terrains-1.0.7z with title **WILL BE DELETED** sounds interesting.
I guess not.
IceBreakr's FAP unit pack is on there aswell
But atleast this tells us that armaholic will probably be able to do the same when they go down
our old legacy island pack before we split it up is there too 🙃
I appreciate moddb what is is and does, but jeez withSIX uploading all that content without permission/licence.
You know, with six years of arma I’ve NEVER looked on the moddb website, armaholic with withSix were the preferred options when A3 kicked off
@heavy moon one of the mods uploaded is your MB Billboard mod
already sent c+d and tweeted withsix asking them wtf they are playing it.
before Steam workshop it was normal for sites to rehost mods without asking every author
it was just general social contract that mirror is good for everyone
that was then, this is now 😃
i didnt refer to "now"
I just looked at the 4 newest servers that most recently got their monetization approval.
2 are unmodded.
2 are modded and are running each atleast 3 mods without approval.
I just reported two servers for monetization violations. Just 2 weeks after they got approved.
oof
The first server isn't that interesting as their Life server is still in development and not public yet and their dev is going around and trying to get permissions.
The second one however.. Complete CityLife from @astral marlin
CUP Weapons @dull moon
Kickass, About 8GB of Car packs
MELB @echo orchid
SFP wheelchair @keen trout
SFP bo105 @sonic blade
TFAR @soft egret
My report is out. Please report them too guys.
https://www.bohemia.net/monetization/approved/arma3 Just scroll all the way down. The 4th from the bottom Andoria Life.
They have only been monetized for a couple weeks.
And BI somehow approved this mess.
BI literally approved this 14GB modpack consisting of atleast 5GB of 26 mods that they don't have permission for and 5.5GB of Car packs.
reported
Do you have the a3snyc link?
PM o7
thanks, reported
http://theranos-rpg.ru/ one to keep an eye on as they are selling mod packs licences with stolen content in them i have no prof of them licence just what was reported to me
Ok so idea, What if the Approved monetized list had a complete modlist that the server got monetization permission with
Imo that would make it more clear and open
Yeah. The server I'm currently handling actually does that. They have a big spreadsheet with all mods, their authors, how to contact them and screenshots of their permissions.
Everyone should do it like that.
yeah and that should really be a reaquirement for getting the permission
Not sure if it has been discussed but I got no clue how that actually works right now
the approval process that is
Also that's far less work that checking mods yourself. Or checking everything of the dozens of mod violations that I send over in reports every week
We don't know. Atleast we never got official word about it
ok so probably need to set up a crappy server and apply xD
Hey.. I can just ask that server guy that I'm chatting with right now 😄
Make server with blatant infringements and faux website, see if you get approved
well just clicked around the approved list rules links and few links were dead
and couple went to the donations page
Okey I got a screenshot of a "accepted monetization approval" from BI infront of me. It's not the full approval though. It was "put on hold" because they didn't find a donator store.
But even in that email they say "Servers with our Monetization license can not use RHS or CUP addons except CUP Terrains. Any other mods and addons for which you do not have permission given by intellectual property owner are also forbidden."
That's atleast something. Full screenshot in AMA discord
The least you could do is feature it on the public channel....
What? you wanna see the screenshot of that mail?
Didn't see anything showing what server it's about so I guess it's fine
https://i.imgur.com/KsuPxmr.png
I meant the AMA public channel
Well now you got it here 😄
Note that if the car packs are Jonzi's then they can in fact be distributed... He uses a CCBY4.0 license which allows "Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format" which fulfills the requirements of Steam Workshop I assume. Not commenting on anything else, just Jonzi's car mods since they seem to be on most Life servers. I assume that I will be told that in fact the Steam Workshop EULA prevents him from giving this permission in this way...? 🙄
Yeah sure we can all freely distribute and monetize all these packs made of stolen stuff.
which fulfills the requirements of Steam Workshop I assume no it doesn't. Didn't we talk about that just a couple days ago?
Actually the CCBY4.0 explicitely says: Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
and?
Look, I do not ever monetize my servers. Don't even accept donations. I also fully support the actions and comment made by you and other mod devs in this thread. But when you start telling mod devs that they cannot give a permission because you wouldn't, then I start to have a problem
Workshop explicitly says you cannot reupload.
Monetization is a completly differnt thing than distribution
I never talked about distribution today.
You started talking distribution and now it sounds like you meant "monetization" when you said "distribution"? Confusing
Also if you steal someone elses stuff. Then put a "Free for everyone" sticker onto it. Does that mean it's fine to give it away to people?
I don't know if Jonzie stole any stuff. But there is a pattern with all these too-high-poly car packs with models that look exactly like the ones from other games
So CUP and RHS are in violation of Workshop guidelines, yes? Since BI have not explicitely given permission. Don't give me that, my problems started when you started interfering with the ACE team's professed acceptance of people to distribute that mod on Steam...
What?
No?
The Steam workshop rules are quite clear.
If you didn't contribute anything to the "thing" you cannot reupload it.
So no one can upload ACE3 even if the ACE3 team say you can?
That's what you said here and on their github
I have... if you have permission then you can
No you can't. Read it.
https://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/english/#6 6D
In particular, with respect to Workshop Contributions, you represent and warrant that the Workshop Contribution was originally created by you (or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you, by you and the other contributors, and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors).
Just read it. It's quite clear on what you can do.
you represent and warrant that the Workshop Contribution was originally created by you Did you create ACE?. No. So that doesn't apply to you.
or There is a second possibility which could permit you to upload the "thing"
to which others contributed besides you If YOU and other people contributed to it. (Doesn't apply to you because you didn't contribute)
[was originally created] by you and the other contributors Again. If YOU and other people contributed to it (Still doesn't apply to you because you didn't contribute) that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors``
That the other contributors granted you permission that you can upload it in their name.
So IF you contributed to the project AND if you have permission by all other contributors (Of course not needed if there are 0 other contributors). ONLY then you can upload it.
One thing to note though, you'd still need someone to enforce that specific statue.
There is nothing about Since BI have not explicitely given permission.
Or So CUP and RHS are in violation of Workshop guidelines
Also I do not ever monetize my servers is completely irrelevant here.
And the Mods license is also irrelevant.
But when you start telling mod devs that they cannot give a permission because you wouldn't Where did I ever say that?
Note that if the car packs are Jonzi's then they can in fact be distributed I never talked about distribution in the first place.
Don't give me that, my problems started when you started interfering with the ACE team's professed acceptance of people to distribute that mod on Steam ACE Team knows the Steam workshop rules quite well. And I never told them that they can't give you permission. They can do whatever they want. I just said that Steam technically doesn't allow it. Which is true.
You can just ignore the Steam rules like thousands of other people are already doing though. No one's gonna stop you from doing that. Except the mod author if a author is not fine with you reuploading something
In order to own the mod this means you shouldn’t include material owned by others in your mods without their permission (that includes copying the look and feel of other mods or materials as well as copying the actual models, scripts and other assets).So with permission you are fine?
See I do not want to break the rules...
That's why this is a big deal for me
You can include content by other people inside your mod if you have permission.
Using parts of other peoples stuff != reuploading other peoples stuff in their complete unmodified form.
The ACE Team is fine with you uploading stuff. So feel free to do it.
It just technically violates the Steam Subscriber agreement and neither you nor me can do anything about it.
And thousands of people are already reuploading stuff and Steam didn't care till today. And we don't know if they might care in the future
But you said that even with permission I could not upload parts of ACE3 with credits and license in my server mod despite ACE3 team saying that was okay mate... that's why I have a problem.
Technically. Yes.
You don't have a problem with me though. Why are you attacking me then?
All I'm doing is reading the Steam rules.
I am not steam.
I'm just a human with eyes.
There are tons of things that are technically against the law but that people just don't care about
For example throwing a cigarette stump onto the ground. That's littering. Do people care? no. Does the Police care? no. Is it still against the law? yes.
I'm not attacking you, apologies if the way I have said things has felt like that. Just frustrated on the ACE thing... Have great respect for what you and others have been doing and putting up with the last couple of months tbh
Hypothetically, would I feel bad for uploading something me and the creators have both mutually agreed upon? No. I would not. Because me and the author(s) have already agreed upon it.
So what I'd say is. Just reupload it.
If you really want to follow all the rules then you simply cannot do it. Don't get aggressive towards me for something Steam did.
Commy2 had it right: "Just here to say Steam is shit. Carry on."
Jup. We all know that ^^
(I miss Commy ;_;)
Sorry again Dedmen. Just trying to provide my opinion on stuff... not saying I am right, just really confused when it comes to mod owners giving permission that it seems that they cannot give. I for one do not want to fall foul of that down the line
I would note the EULA that I've read that in full says: MODDING AND OUR TOOLS We’re excited to see what you can create using our Tools, but it’s important that you respect our rights, and those of others, in doing so. If you create a mod from scratch, you will own it. In order to own the mod this means you shouldn’t include material owned by others in your mods without their permission (that includes copying the look and feel of other mods or materials as well as copying the actual models, scripts and other assets). If you include any parts of the Game, the Tools or our content in your mod, then we will own those parts of your mod. Don’t charge for anything you create relating to the Game or include any adverts or sponsored content in your mods. Make sure it’s clear they are unofficial, and comply with our modding guidelines from time to time, which you can find here: modding guidelines.
Which is why I am confused... it suggests that with permission you are fine...
That is the eula for the game "Scrap mechanic" ?
How is that related?
Modders cannot technically give permission for others to reupload their stuff. Which means the modders can DMCA them all they want.
Them giving you permission is just a verbal agreement that they won't DMCA you for reuploading it. But technically they could do it all they want.
Ah... because I had not noticed... first result on a google search this weekend... 🤦
And ACE is not gonna DMCA you for reuploading. Whether you have permission or not. They simply don't care.
RHS and CUP on the other hand...
So... CUP and RHS are in fact in the same situation as those who upload ACE3... cause BI cannot (and do not explicitely) give permission to upload to the workshop
BI is irrelevant here
Yeah.. How is BI relevant here?
BI are the original content owners
No they aren't
No....
For CUP they are
RHS made all their stuff on their own
Yes, my bad... just CUP
CUP has a special agreement with BI.
But yeah. Technically that doesn't count on Steam workshop. So BI could take them down if they wanted
Doesn't matter. They cannot give that permission..
So for CUP yes. Same thing. Just a "verbal agreement"
So based on what you've said... I have obviously misunderstood everything you've said 😉
