#other_ip_topics

1 messages · Page 2 of 1

potent moss
#

Not advocating for illegal activities to make it clear

vast stump
#

mayhaps this line of conversation has ran its course

potent moss
#

Mayhaps lol

onyx delta
#

Hi, I am making a discord-bot using some screenshots taken in arma

#

and using jpgs of the ingame icons

#

will there be any issues if I publish that?

mossy yarrow
vast stump
onyx delta
#

Would that count as IP as well?

vast stump
#

yes

#

or well

#

the screenshots would be your IP so they might be ok to use. 🤔

#

at least if they are original enough maybe. I dont remember the exact thing about that

#

if you want complete answers you will need to ask BI legal department what you can do with them.

graceful hill
graceful hill
#

taking screenshots of UI elements and using them as UI elements would probably be considered just "copying" something.

onyx delta
#

on top of that I render some icons representing player-positioning

graceful hill
#

For use in the discord bot? Yeah that would count as "copying things" You aren't supposed to do that even if it's unlikely that anyone will care

south remnant
#

if it's done ingame I believe it'd be your IP still as it's still a screenshot
however if its done externally it would not be afaik

graceful hill
#

Taking a screenshot of something doesn't mean everything in the screenshot is your IP to use as you please

meager fractal
#

e.g can't publish a commercial picture of the Eiffel Tower

willow crane
graceful hill
#

there might not be a licensing fee option available

meager fractal
willow crane
meager fractal
#

well… we both know then 😄 🍻

willow crane
#

@meager fractal All of these examples go back to the photo of a "Lamborghini argument".

You take a pic of the Lambo.
You dont own the Lambo.
You Own the pic of the Lambo.
The problem comes when the owner of the Lambo shows up and has to make a decision:
a) Chilled, happy you like and envy his car. He smiles, climbs in and drives away. never asked you your intent and doesn't care.
b) Gets upset you are taking pics of his car without permission. Tells you to delete the photo and never to do it again.
c) Asks what you are doing. Decides on your response what to do. You commercially exploit it - he wants a cut. You just want to put it on your Facebook and Flikr, no problem enjoy your day.

My point being, your intent matters. But your ownership of the photo is never in dispute. Just what you are allowed to do with it. And its always better to check with the owner first if there are any restrictions on how you use, display or share images of their content. BI have that in their EULA.

celest sundial
potent moss
#

During the day, yes. It's the lights that affect it if I remember correctly

willow crane
onyx delta
#

Aaah, ok well then that clears it up, as I would not charge people to use the bot

#

that was a nice long consideration of law, I enjoyed the read

#

So I guess I am in the clear

#

Unless BI contacts me, in which case I'll just take it down

graceful hill
#

wouldn't dare infringing on "european copyright law" after all 🤭

#

I find the statue staring at the censor bar to be specifically poetic.

graceful hill
#

you can use my censored version to remain compliant.

potent moss
#

......Bad troll

graceful hill
#

well it's technically true

#

But yeah, I am just trying to make a point of how stupid it is.

willow crane
graceful hill
#

Discord says they don't want you to share copyrighted content without permission, that would include linking to it.

willow crane
#

I'm not sharing the copyrighted material on Discord's platform

graceful hill
#

But yeah, the site owner would be on the hook for the image on their site. You are on the hook between you and discord for sharing such images.

willow crane
#

only a link to it

willow crane
#

The site owner exploiting the image is the one infringing it.
If i were to copy and paste __ the image__ in here maybe, but im only providing a link to the article.

graceful hill
#

Discord Community guidelines

Do not share content that violates anyone's intellectual property or other rights.

Linking to content counts as "sharing" I can't for example link to the GTA 6 leaks, because that is all infringing content.

#

they were nuking servers left and right for sharing links to that content

willow crane
graceful hill
#

it's in here.

willow crane
#

They are within their rights to remove links and content etc, but I would not be the one liable.

graceful hill
#

legally liable, nah. You would just be violating the agreement between you and discord

#

thats my point

potent moss
graceful hill
#

France is serious about the Eiffel tower after all.

celest sundial
#

Here I come in again from the side lines with my fair use stuff
Reporting on copyrighted material with credits to the original author for non commercial purposes e.g. a professor teaching about this case in law school showing an image, is covered by fair use.
The image or in this case actually a video taken uses copyrighted material but they paid the maker a license fee or have a royalty free license to use it or it was public domain. There is no infringement.
Why are you trying to argue ip law if you do not actually know it

graceful hill
#

I'm not arguing IP law, I said it's a violation of the agreement between you and discord.

celest sundial
#

Discord would only be upset with you if you took a photo from a stock image site that you need to pay for normally and upload it on discord publicly 🙂

graceful hill
#

And like I said, I made the point to highlight how stupid the eifel tower thing is.

willow crane
celest sundial
graceful hill
#

Lol, I see we have touched a nerve. I have a meeting to go to now. See ya.

celest sundial
#

You do realize that the embed preview meta data is a) from a source that is allowed to use it and b) its not actually on discord? its not on their servers. its only meta data your pc shows locally. What is on a website and what preview stuff it wants to show is not at all touched by discords EULA, not even in the ever so slightest way

willow crane
fiery egret
#

btw I'm actually curious if Discord proxying images (because it's either proxying or storing a copy, here) could be held liable in case the source was not allowed to use it 🤔

2023-01-30_21h55_34.png
#

I believe it's actually just proxying, because I remember that I once went back to an old conversation I had with someone and both the image I linked to in that conversation AND Discord's thumbnail were broken

#

Which would imply that either they were simply proxying images or that they delete old thumbnails and regenerate them when people re-request them

#

I guess they are forced to at least proxy that data, to protect users' privacy, because other people would otherwise send links to images hosted on their own servers and would then gather IPs of their interlocutors

willow crane
# fiery egret I guess they are forced to _at least_ proxy that data, to protect users' privacy...

Well they must be hosting or paying for the service to host any uploaded attachments surely which would make them required to comply to the DMCA/Article 14 legislation. Mid last year I got into a row with some Lifers ripping my content. I DMCA's their steam page, their A3sync repo and webhost. They resorted to sharing via Discord thinking i couldn't DMCA that.

Long story short, I reached out to Discord and they eventually responded with some clarification and explanation of their terms. Once we got through the stock replies and they understood what was really happening they immediately took down the offending discord server. But only after establishing my models were held on their service. I was assured that all my models had been removed. (I seriously doubt that but they were no longer available to the rippers).

i confirmed the links were dead as was the servers where my content was being hosted. The "owner" spent several weeks trying to DDOS me and make frivolous IP Claims against me.

My point being, the Discord team seemed to have access not only to the links but the hosted data too.

potent moss
willow crane
# potent moss Uploaded attachments and files would be handled differently than the embeds I as...

They are atleast as far as the Discord Support Team implied. I'll try and find the actual emails but they said something along the lines of DMCA legislation doesn't cover the links, only files hosted on the Discord services.

They did go on to say they would be reviewed to see if they broke community guidelines but unless they were seen to be deliberately sharing stolen content they could not take action. I vividly remember that part because they were linking to several webstore sites eg Payhip etc. and told me I would have to DMCA them and not Discord.

fiery egret
#

But isn't that because you're talking about models, precisely, in which case Discord doesn't show (nor store) any preview on their servers, which isn't the case in case of infringing images? (or that previews weren't the thing to take down in question, so they didn't matter either way)

willow crane
#

I dont think it is. Previews etc arent the issue. At least legally.
The preview is dependant on the content you link to. its not a deliberate act on your part when you drop a link in. You are not liable for something a 3rd party does.

However, if you take my model and drop it in a Discord server (Or any service provided by them) they are now directly hosting that file. There is no linked preview or reasonable excuse/exception that could be applied. Under the DMCA/Article 14 laws any provider must remove any infringing content once notified within a reasonable period of time. But the uploader is liable for the infringement. (And the Host must not enable it for longer than is necessary to process the claim.)

When you link something and it generates a preview thumbnail are you the one uploading it? I dont think so. And I can imagine any reasonable court saying you are. its just a function of the modern internet protocols. The same happens on Messenger and Whatsapp etc. We'd have to believe that their respective legal teams have considered this surely?

fiery egret
#

I understand and fully agree with the part about uploading the model to Discord (obviously).

You are not liable for something a 3rd party does
Oh, I get what you meant here! You were talking about the poster's liability the whole time. Okay

willow crane
#

According to Copyright law, the content that gets uploaded is irrelevant, we could be talking about a "widget". Its about the rights and liability around ownership, hosting and intent.

fiery egret
#

We may have misunderstood each other, because I was just wondering if Discord itself could be held liable for preemptively grabbing any images that users post links to.
Because that Url that you can see on my screenshot, I could give it to you and you'd then be able to use it to download an (allowed or not) image of that Eiffel Tower. Discord would be effectively serving it

#

So that you could then tell them "Ha! You're serving my copyrighted Eiffel Tower Lights! Now pay! 😈 "

willow crane
# fiery egret We may have misunderstood each other, because I was just wondering if _Discord i...

Yeah maybe missing each others points a bit. Sorry about that.

As i said I don't think they would be liable as they aren't copying or claiming anything directly. And the preview changes based on the info on the page (at least as I understand it). You take down the page the low res copy in the preview might persist until the cache is updated.

Its the same as you browser cache in that respect isnt it? Change the page, next time you visit it updates and refreshes...

fiery egret
#

Now that I think of it, I'm taking a guess that they could be seen the same as the thumbnails on "Google Images" (which were found to not infringe copyright, AFAIR)

willow crane
#

Are you liable for the changes the 3rd party makes too?

willow crane
#

Are we all liable for IP infringements by surfing websites that host dodgy unlicensed images.

fiery egret
#

100%
Honestly? I'm placing my bets on 99% 😛
There's always a chance that something slipped through 😄

willow crane
heavy gate
#

Copyright really does last a depressing long time.

supple saffron
#

Not sure if this is the right place to ask. But I'm making a GitHub Repo with a bunch of useful scripts for my Unit to help those less experienced with scripting add some cool QOL scripts to their missions and I am wanting to create a part of the repo that will basically display all of the useful icons to put at the start of an action for example, and I just want to check if I'm basically allowed to take the icons from any PBO, convert them all into PNG's and put them into a public repo, would anyone know if I'm allowed to do this? Legally speaking and I guess Morally (because its someone else's work)

south remnant
#

no, it depends on the license attached to the pbo

supple saffron
#

How would I find out what license is attached?

south remnant
#

by looking at either the license file or steam workshop page

#

if there isnt any license that means you cant do anything with the files without permission of the author

supple saffron
#

Okay thank you. Thought I'd ask before violating some copy right

fiery egret
#

If there is no license and you really want those images, you can message the author and ask them if they can make an exemption for you. Worst case scenario: they say "no" 🤷‍♂️

#

So you lose nothing by asking

south remnant
#

best case scenario they say yes and send you a photo of darth vader

supple saffron
#

I was more thinking the Bohemia ones in the ui_f_data.pbo file, but Im not guessing thats a no no

south remnant
#

Ask them

supple saffron
#

How would I go about that?

south remnant
#

sending an email to BI legal i would presume

mossy yarrow
#

Hello most of you know me already as a ripper (Bad Rep i have to live with i guess)

If you all think i state im not a ripper anymore and think i would include ripped assets in my upcoming Mod you are very mistaken.

Human makes mistakes as i did with rips and the wip screenshots. Im sure all of you are perfect.

Here for clarification to get it in your minds once and for all

Broken Arrow will feature Models i have bought from CGTrader, and Models that were made for me for a lot of money. Think about it that you get this for free.

I will credit my comissioned 3d Modelers and will show documents of liscence of the Models.

graceful hill
#

hmmmm. consider hiring a PR person

"If you all think i state im not a ripper anymore and think i would include ripped assets in my upcoming Mod you are very mistaken."

because this is contradictory. I don't know you or have any skin in this fight, just sayin'

analog sphinx
#

Does using "Royalty Free" licensed models from CGTrader is actually acceptable and considered as "owned" or does it not abide to the standards of legality in EULA?

Asking because "Royalty Free" seems rather vague as a valid licensing.

south remnant
#

creative commons attribution is typically what you want to look for. royalty free isnt a license in of itself

willow crane
celest sundial
#

The royalty free license from cgtrader is incompatible with the AR modding workflow it you are in a team or want your mod source to he accessible. The reason is that you would include the source fbx for reimports normally but you are not allowed to redistribute the source format anywhere. So if you mod is only done by you and not open source then it's no problem. The bundling process for uploading the mod to workshop removed all source files, so you do not need to worry about people extracting it back.

mossy yarrow
analog sphinx
zealous ore
# analog sphinx yeah, its not open source. However and just in case I will contact the seller an...

yes, in that case it is.
based of what @celest sundial said above

  1. if you buy a model from cgtrader and use it just yourself to bring it into the game, then it is all fine, at least in accordance to the RF license as written on cgtrader
  2. if you but a model from cgtrader and you provide anyone else access to the original files, that means distribution outside the locked format, and that is a no no.
#

generally speaking, best course of action would be to contact the author as well, make sure it is fine

sudden flame
#

So obviously it says I was denied but I'm pretty sure it's because they thought it was gonna be for commercial use, so either I can send another email clarifying it's not or we can make mods based off it as long as it's not for commercial use though it may be inappropriate. Disclaimer that's how my brain perceived the last 2 sentences basically

IMG_3171.png
#

Your guys thoughts would be helpful tis why I sent this in here for your opinions

celest sundial
#

That is a bad answer from them. First they give a hard no as first sentence and then this strange closing. Regardless, you are not the first to inquire about it. So far making mods has never been possible. Which is why I am mega confused why the star wars mods for squad exist and are officially promoted by the developers too. I would be surprised if they got permission. Needless to say, you can not even name anything starwars. Apart from the copyright on the existing media and assets, they also own trademarks and registered designs that are also all active in the EU (I checked with the EUIPO). My personal recommendation is to stay away from it. You might invest a lot of time only to get shut down a day after making it public - even if it is for free ... Disney has the strange twist to also consider mods commercial use in a way that there might be sales of Arma games because of the free community made mod for it - a bit far fetched if you ask me, but has not stopped them from sending C&D's.

vast stump
#

the game is commercial though

sudden flame
#

The mod is not commercial though

vast stump
#

yes but the game it is on is and Disney gets no money from it

#

in business sense the mod is making profit for someone else (BI)

sudden flame
#

But I gotta agree with ya Ark the fact that Squad has the Star Wars mod and as far as the public has seen there hasn't been any issues/lawsuits with it even with like Arma 3

vast stump
#

thing is, you would be the one getting in trouble if something did come up

#

nobody can say "no problem, do it"

#

and BI does not look good at non permission IP use either

#

so you would be risking a lot

south remnant
#

Unofficial Star Wars content will always exist and for as long as Disney own the IP will likely remain illegal

sudden flame
#

I doubt many of the people who made the Star Wars mods they created 100% from scratch has gotten permission as well and if they did it's a rarity don't you think those mods wouldn't exist?

south remnant
#

No. People do what they want, especially when they're too small for the IP holder to notice

vast stump
#

then one day Disney comes knocking

south remnant
#

IP holder has complete authority over their content whether you like it or not (most fans coming down on the latter)

celest sundial
#

out of couriousity what email did you send this to? do you have an address for me to send something to?

south remnant
#

There's a contact on the lucasfilm site that forwards you to a disney one iirc

sudden flame
#

Yea here's the one for Lucasfilm

south remnant
#

yeah hes the one

south remnant
sudden flame
#

I may or may not have bought Arma 3 for the starism

#

Worst part is I don't even own a pc still

south remnant
#

Weirdest part is calling unauthorised use inappropriate as a minimum tbh thonk

sudden flame
#

Which means the Star Wars mods that have been made thus far are only inappropriate but not worthy enough to care to take any action against

vast stump
#

yes well, they are all piling on the problem that someone else is profiting from Star Wars IP

#

and at some point it will stop

celest sundial
#

Lets see what they reply to me, I inquired about the squad situation. Same rules for everyone, if that mod team did not seek permission they should be taken down imo

sudden flame
#

Why would you do that if it gets taken down then I can't play the Battlefront that the fans always wanted and needed

celest sundial
#

I can see that they tried to use as little star wars branding as possible, but all the in game models and designs (some of which are protected designs) are still used so that does not change anything. Same goes for the All rights and IP reserved to Disney. they put on the workshop page. Its like a "no copyright infringement intended" you find on old youtube videos, thinking it would protect them from being striked ...

sudden flame
#

That goes for the Arma 3 Star Wars mods as well

celest sundial
#

Exactly, and those ones were and still are banned everywhere

#

So if we can't have any star wars, they can't have it either.

sudden flame
#

No it's BI that's basically tellin us no

celest sundial
#

I asked a while back about this and its not BI defending other peoples IP rights on their behalves. There were takedowns issued by the right owners, let me see if I can find the message, it was in here or the #ip_rights_violations channel not too long ago

sudden flame
#

Bro decided to go Karen mode just because rn it's not on Reforger which again I'm sure will make it to here

celest sundial
#

My hope though is that the reply is - we don't like it but such use is permitted - which would green-light any future star wars content made the same way for future BI games.

sudden flame
#

But still if it gets taken down you do realize your gonna ruin the fans only good battlefront that has ever been created?

celest sundial
#

I am not a karen, I just dislike double standards. Taking down one modding teams work while tolerating another

south remnant
#

Illegal is illegal

sudden flame
#

Only if you get caught

frozen jackal
sudden flame
#

And in this case either Disney has caught the mods but literally don't care, again as I said it's BI that's preventing us from the Star Wars mods rn not Disney

south remnant
#

No, its still illegal

celest sundial
#

They are promoted on major news outlets and the official squad twitter handle. Its not some secret closed group stuff. Which is why it makes me think there is some kind of agreement or this use is allowed now - cause normally disney lawyers are quick to take down anything on the internet they did not authorize. And getting word from them would allow us to show to BI that we are good to go on this if they wanted to wipe it off any workshop (even though again I do not think its BI taking down mods for other ip right holders)

hardy bone
south remnant
#

Disney would 100% have taken down galactic contention (the mod in question) by now given squads popularity and the mods popularity

#

Course, if arkensor is the first to bring it to their radar (very much doubt it) he'll probably get a few angry dms

sudden flame
#

Then wouldn't they have taken down the Arma's communities Star Wars mods? That's very popular with Arma 3 so in conclusion your logic would be that there might be a agreement?

south remnant
#

no

hardy bone
celest sundial
#

Show me any star wars mod on the workshop right now that is not an illegal re-upload of the one popular mod that got DMCA'd and has more than 10 subscribers.

vast stump
south remnant
#

#1 is having asked those teams
#2 is theyre not being promoted by official bi media
#3 is theyre also not too popular in the grand scheme of things compared to the number of ig videos

south remnant
plain sedge
celest sundial
sudden flame
#

And yet there still up?

south remnant
#

Correct, though it was dwarden who took them down. Afaik disney have never taken action against star wars content on the a3 workshop

sudden flame
#

Exactly

celest sundial
sudden flame
#

I seriously doubt it

south remnant
sudden flame
#

To date from my knowledge no mods based off Star Wars has been taken down by Disney, that's including other games that aren't just squad and arma

south remnant
#

Course, I could be wrong -- but this is beginning to just get into dmca tit for tat now

Bottom line is if there are SW mods, they're not allowed as far as anyone here is aware -- ripped assets or not

#

However given the fact official squad media has been promoting the galactic contention mod it may be that we are incorrect

sudden flame
#

^^^^

vast stump
#

so far official word from Disney is NO

plain sedge
sudden flame
#

That's what I thought

south remnant
#

However however there is also a star wars fps game being worked on. This could mean any positive responses could change in the near future to deal with the conflict of interest

celest sundial
#

Again I hope it is now possible and we can make star wars mods. I like star wars, I would love to make star wars content. But so far my impression is unless I work for a licensed game publisher that has the rights to do so - its a no no

south remnant
vast stump
#

This is starting to go in circles now

south remnant
vast stump
#

bottom line is that SW content is not allowed on Arma/BI platforms untill someone can obtain a greenlight from Disney

south remnant
#

Either way there's no more to be said here

vast stump
#

no matter of anyones personal feelings on the matter

south remnant
#

What if one person got permission in fact? Would they then have to upload all sw mods?

vast stump
#

if you want to see change, youll have to work it out with Disney

celest sundial
#

Ha thats a good one

vast stump
#

depends on the wording of the permission

#

usually in cases where IP holder does say yes, its per project

#

unless they make bigger more public policy like what HALO IP enjoys

south remnant
#

Ah, fair. I would presume that if there is anything for the squad mod that permission would not be likely to carry across to Arma then unless it was a policy about modding

sudden flame
celest sundial
#

It would most certainly be per project but if people know there is even a chance to get approval it would make it worth to prepare and present them something worth approving

vast stump
#

or what Disney has stated as blanket no

vast stump
#

you can try to change that

south remnant
sudden flame
#

That's also the wording that they gave so in this case I'm not making profit so at minimum which it would be it's "inappropriate"

IMG_3171.png
south remnant
#

no.

#

simply, no.

chrome plinth
south remnant
#

to both your point and you having permission

elder horizon
south remnant
#

no you are not omfg

#

if its an "i guess" its a no

elder horizon
#

they clearly state commercial usage in the message he posted

south remnant
#

i just did mmmyes

#

show me where you have permission to do anything noncommerically with the sw ip

#

if its not explicitly stated, its no.

hardy bone
elder horizon
south remnant
#

you dont navigate ip law by jumping around loopholes or taking one explanation to mean the opposite for the contrary

sudden flame
#

How about this I'll send another email and we get back on this topic in about 2 days and finish this once and for all

elder horizon
sudden flame
#

That's also true wording is important and unless it was specified that even non commercial use is a no go then a lawyer would eat that up if taken to court about it

south remnant
#

he cannot. one wording does not mean the opposite for the contrary

#

why do you engage in conversation if you are convinced you are right

#

that is not how this works

mossy yarrow
#

Quick Question, i bought the same weapons from CGTrader as the SOG DLC did, so theoretically speaking i can use them in my Mod since SOG does that too right ?

south remnant
#

Sog dlc may (probably does given commercial gain) have a special case with the author. Check the license

hardy bone
#

Wasn't that question already asked earlier in the channel?

south remnant
#

Just because someone else did doesn't mean you can/can't. Check license and if in doubt msg author

elder horizon
south remnant
vast stump
mossy yarrow
vast stump
#

Odd. but youll just have to wait. Hes just human too

hardy bone
#

(in the assumption there is a similar case, like the HUMVEE one)

south remnant
#

because its not a case law if someones just used it in another mod

hardy bone
#

Isn't case law about something that's been ruled by a court?

south remnant
#

correct. "legal precedent" is case law, neither of which apply to sog using a model

hardy bone
#

Oh... I thought you were talking about case law for the mail of LucasArts, not SOG using a model. My bad

south remnant
#

no

sudden flame
#

Ok I sent another email more detailed and worded differently so we shall see in a couple of days

south remnant
#

poor chris

vast stump
willow crane
# sudden flame That's also the wording that they gave so in this case I'm not making profit so ...

The wording is deliberately vague. But Disney does have a Community policy regarding "Fan Art" etc. Its been debated here many times. But what you have to understand is that Disney has written a policy that says "You can make what you want as long as you understand we can claim it or end it if it interferes with our interested."

Anything that competes with an existing product line is not allowed and no permission will be given.
You want to mod a licensed EA game, you will be pointed at the Community license for that game published by EA or whomever is the license holder.
You want to mod Arma, something separate from a Licensed product then you will always get a solid "NO!" as it would allow for competition. Commercial or Not.

They simply will not allow you to create a competing platform to their licensed games. While you may still create your mod, you've now got a definitive answer denying you permission. So if late they see your mod and choose to DMCA/C&D then sue you they have a solid basis to prove you ignored their wishes. A lot of "Star Sim" mods still exist because Disney/EA legal teams are not aware of them.

shell scaffold
#

Squad Star Wars mod...

sudden flame
#

EA doesn't have exclusive rights to Star Wars anyway so nobody worried about them

willow crane
#

And if you dig into their Community guidelines, they are intended for Fan Art and written stories. Not for 3D models and games. And making anything that hurts their bottom line will always be met with a "No" and a Cease and Desist if you go ahead.

willow crane
shell scaffold
#

Ummmm

#

So do other companies at this point, they don't own Star wars

willow crane
#

They are the ones who's license is impacted by competing games

shell scaffold
#

But Star Wars Theory made a 3D fan animation, which Disney knows about

willow crane
shell scaffold
#

Squad Star Wars mod, is the biggest Star Wars mod out atm and has yet to be shut down

#

I will never understand how people perceive Star Wars mods to be comparable to Star Wars games in terms of competition.

#

Battlefront 2 Sales were still popping off as the Squad mod was in development.

sudden flame
#

There's also that Star Wars mod for the space combat simulation don't remember but it's pretty popular as well

shell scaffold
#

Insurgency Sandstorm now has a Star Wars mod which is regularly announced by the devs of Sandstorm...

sudden flame
#

Even that mod is better than BF2 change my mind XD

shell scaffold
#

You played it?

willow crane
#

Again, maybe that Disney/EA hasnt gotten around to it. I dont know but there is plenty of legal precedent of Disney/Lucas Arts/EA taking down mods.

sudden flame
#

A little I don't own a pc but do got a bud who does so I tried it out

shell scaffold
#

It's been 3 years, be serious

#

Actually 4 years

sudden flame
#

Disney/Lucasarts/EA hasn't taken down any mods unless they were ripped from their property

shell scaffold
#

EA does not own Star Wars, they cannot give anyone a C&D

willow crane
#

You may not like it but it is BI's decision not to allow SW mods on the A3 workshop. And the reality is it is against the Disney IP licensing so sorry it is just the rules

shell scaffold
#

I don't play Arma as much so idc, I'm just trying to clear up any misconceptions of Star Wars mods

sudden flame
#

You say that but there's literally a SW mod for A3

willow crane
shell scaffold
#

What?

#

Do you not realize that other companies now have the Game License

#

Not just EA? They aren't enforcing Disney's IP Laws, they are not the creators, they are on a contract

willow crane
elder horizon
sudden flame
#

You forgot Arma 3

shell scaffold
#

I'm literally the creator of both those mods and I'm telling you not one instance were we contacted by Disney in any regard.

elder horizon
#

They apparently take down the A3 mods no ?

sudden flame
#

No

elder horizon
#

But all other games are fine ?

sudden flame
#

It's only for reforger

elder horizon
#

Which makes 0 sense

willow crane
sudden flame
#

It's because BI now has access to what we put up

shell scaffold
#

Can you show me emails from Disney Legal

vast stump
#

somehow when I left last time I thought this dead horse was beaten enough again for tonight..

sudden flame
#

Wasn't me who started it this time 🤷🏻‍♂️

willow crane
#

Sorry, was trying to help and seems Jayy doesnt like the reality.

elder horizon
shell scaffold
#

Sure, I don't like the reality

elder horizon
#

You said you talked to them

willow crane
#

I'll add this to yet another blog article. And include the emails there.

sudden flame
#

We all don't like the reality that Disney is trash but it's one we live in

shell scaffold
#

You can DM me the emails

#

I can post one right now, on their take for fan games

vast stump
#

Im going to halt this inquiry now, you guys have said what you have to say

#

@shell scaffold there is no need for such hostile tone

shell scaffold
#

???

elder horizon
sudden flame
#

Now I'm confused

elder horizon
#

Hostile tone ?

#

My brother in christ

vast stump
#

correct. this is getting heated up. tone it down

elder horizon
#

🤣

#

What

#

Are you on about

shell scaffold
#

I don't think anyone was under that impression, but yk go off lol

willow crane
# elder horizon You said you talked to them

Yes I did and got the same reply as ShizuOtakuVR. A polite but flat refusal. Then later when I went for a Job at Disney Europe I had a conversation over lunch with one of their Branding Execs about this topic and was told in person that Disney's policy was to leave enforcement of competing products to the License holder.

elder horizon
#

We are having a civil discussion which you don't like as it seems

sudden flame
vast stump
#

I dont prefer arguments on this matter at all. The policy is pretty simple and clear

#

if you want to argue, you can do so with Disney to seek their approval

#

all of the above is just same what has been said in circles so many times before

#

nothing new has surfaced since

elder horizon
shell scaffold
#

^

celest sundial
shell scaffold
#

^

elder horizon
willow crane
sudden flame
#

Exactly that's why the modding community for Star Wars mods are needed

willow crane
#

Thats the message I wrote after coming back from Paris

shell scaffold
#

This is their take for games btw, since mods literally aren't games lol.

image.png
willow crane
shell scaffold
#

I just told you this was for games

#

We asked about creating a game and his take on mods

willow crane
elder horizon
willow crane
shell scaffold
#

Bruh

willow crane
#

Thats insane.

shell scaffold
#

Because people are still going to be playing the official version hello?

elder horizon
shell scaffold
#

Battlefront 2 was literal proof

sudden flame
#

And Jedi fallen order

shell scaffold
#

The Squad mod didn't compete with Battlefront 2 in the slightest

sudden flame
#

It was good for even a sequel

elder horizon
#

The squad SW mod is and wad extremely popular but BF2 sales/playercounts still rise

shell scaffold
#

^

sudden flame
shell scaffold
#

BF2 Gameplay is mid for sure

willow crane
#

That email does not give explicit permission to use SW IP in another game. Its an expression of interest to hear about making a new game concept. It is not proof of anything

elder horizon
#

There are Halo mods in arma I don't see halo games dying because of them

vast stump
shell scaffold
#

His point still stands

elder horizon
vast stump
#

you can take that to disney

#

we dont write disneys policy here

sudden flame
#

Yea halo is a different story they haven't been doin good anyway since H4 regardless

shell scaffold
#

That was irrelevant to his point

#

Halo Online wasn't taking away sales from MCC.

#

And that was a fan driven project more so a mod

vast stump
#

well you can explain that to DIsney if you want to try to change their policy

#

we cant say for sure what the reasoning is behind it

sudden flame
#

Didn't that in the end fail btw?

elder horizon
#

An argument was made that it (A3 SW Mod) will take players off Disney game we are presenting proof to the contrary, I'd advise you read the convo before reacting @vast stump

shell scaffold
#

It's still up the devs just moved to MCC

willow crane
#

Microsoft vs Disney community guidelines/licensing are worlds apart

vast stump
sudden flame
#

Oh really? I thought Halo online died guess I was wrong

vast stump
#

or think otheriwise

shell scaffold
#

Like Halo literally hired Online devs as MCC devs

vast stump
#

which is why their policy is what it is

#

you can use it as a example reference perhaps

#

but here saying so is irrelevant

elder horizon
#

According to what @willow crane posted as long as it doesn't hurt a Disney game and is 100% self made (not ripped) its completely fine, now given the fact the mods were made for other games with higher player counts then arma and SW games still skyrocketed your entire argument is completely irrelevant

sudden flame
#

Well rn of course player counts is higher than reforger

vast stump
#

well anyone can do whatever they like, Disney can smoke you out anytime they want

#

its your time and effort you risk

shell scaffold
#

It's been 4 years and the Squad mod is still up

vast stump
#

if it shut down tomorrow what would you do then?

#

it could be 4 years of wasted time

shell scaffold
#

Work on another mod, but good thing it wont be getting shut down anytime soon

#

If Disney wanted to shut down the mod, it would've been shut down years ago

vast stump
#

maybe

shell scaffold
#

That notice would've already appeared

elder horizon
vast stump
#

still it does not mean anyone here can say "yes go ahead you have permission"

#

unless Disney says otherwise

sudden flame
#

Honestly I wouldn't mind commissioning someone to make a mod if it gets taken down BY DISNEY then it's my money that I wasted but if it don't then do I gotta worry about BI taking it down

vast stump
#

dunno, you will have to ask BI legal department about definitive answers on that

elder horizon
#

Matter of fact you have no argument other then saying that Disney policy states something which is doesn't, Disney policy states that I can make a mod as long as it doesn't hurt their sales and if squad a larger game then arma has a mod like that and it doesn't hurt Disney game sales then an arma mod won't either, your logic and argument do not exist please just stop, it is truly sad at this point

vast stump
#

My argument is BIs current policy on the matter. I dont make the policy, Im just telling how it is

elder horizon
#

And those should be taken down

#

Since original mods are not illegal

#

So unless BIs policy is against Disney policy your argument doesn't make sense

vast stump
#

Im just telling you what Ive been told. You can do as you please with it. If you want BI blessing you got to ask from BI legal.

shell scaffold
#

"She was aware of Star Wars mods being taken down by Disney for computer games but did not know the details"
#ip_rights_violations message
Which Star Wars mods is my question

sudden flame
#

The only thing I wanna know personally is if BI would take down the Star Wars mod if Disney doesn't say anything about it, cuz if that's the case then we'll just have to see what happens

elder horizon
#

So what you are saying that BIs policy is against Disneys policy?
Because at that point it's actually somewhat illegal since only Disney is allowed to dictate terms for SW IP

elder horizon
sudden flame
#

Prolly ones that were ripped

vast stump
#

I dont make such decision so I dont know. Like I said for this kind of details you will need to consult BI legal department

#

Im just telling how things been handled so far

shell scaffold
#

EA would've been the ones to take it down then, not Disney, that's if the assets were coming from EA which I think they were.

elder horizon
#

You realise you are saying stuff that doesn't make sense right ?

sudden flame
#

Is there an email for or somewhere to contact em on the website or here jw?

elder horizon
#

Disney allows only 100% creator made mods for games

shell scaffold
#

It'd be EA's Policy not Disneys

elder horizon
#

But EA doesn't own the IP or the license anymore I think ?

vast stump
shell scaffold
#

It's not exclusive anymore

elder horizon
#

So it's Disneys shtick now I think?

shell scaffold
#

But if the assets are coming from their game, it's still theirs

#

Disney owns the IP, the companies just have a contract with Disney for holding the Game License.

#

Any assets ripped from their games, their going to be the ones to take action

elder horizon
#

@vast stump According to the conversation @willow crane had which can and will hold up in the case of an IP lawsuit, we can.

shell scaffold
#

Like Goat and Rock were saying earlier, Disney still owns the IP so they can pull the plug whenever they want to, so the assets don't have to be theirs, they can still take it down.

#

But if you rip assets from BF2, DICE is most likely the one to address it, since it is their assets made by their team, just Disney owns it the IP.

elder horizon
#

Which we have establishes that it wont

shell scaffold
#

Yeah that's Disneys Policy

elder horizon
#

Yeah and that's what matters right?

vast stump
#

well since many here said EA BF games are shit and only reason you bought Arma is because starsim Id call that hurting sales

shell scaffold
#

Yeah, not EAs policy unless you're ripping stuff from BF2, then both apply

vast stump
#

but you can take that up to Disney

shell scaffold
#

EA no longer has exclusive rights over the license, Ubisoft is now making a Star Wars game and a few others .

#

Respawn which is owned by EA is making JFO2

elder horizon
#

Which one person does not cause

shell scaffold
#

They mostly likely bought EA BF2 to play it in order to make that judgement, so Disney/EA still made profit

sudden flame
#

Heck I preordered SW squadrons and still occasionally play that even though it's a ghost town

shell scaffold
#

The only way I see a fan project actually competing against an legitimate AAA game. Is if it's an actual game that's high quality, like the KOTOR fan project.

sudden flame
#

Well supposedly we're getting an open world game like that sometime this year but I doubt it'll be this year

shell scaffold
#

The KOTOR fan project, was not a mod, it was a full fledged game. The developers just tried to say it was a mod, so it could picked up as a mod and not a game but it had a company behind it and was in a different engine besides the proprietary engine.

shell scaffold
#

I think it'll be kinda mid, cause Ubisoft is making it. But of course since it's Star Wars, people are going to buy it.

graceful hill
sudden flame
#

Exactly

shell scaffold
vast stump
shell scaffold
#

If the Open World game by Ubi flops, what is going to determine why it did. An Arma 3 mod or is just being terrible.

graceful hill
#

I haven't seen many people say "I was about to buy the EA starwars game, but the arma mod looked cooler"

sudden flame
#

Who remembers the micro transactions and the beta for preorders raise ur hand 🙋🏻‍♂️

shell scaffold
#

What I have seen is, "I played Battlefront 2 and didn't like it, so I bought this game just for this mod"

vast stump
#

pretty much everyone here arquing for SW mods is SW fan and wants to see SW mod in Arma. blobdoggoshruggoogly

sudden flame
#

Well yea the ppl know what they want

shell scaffold
#

Lol

sudden flame
#

They yearn for it

graceful hill
#

I wonder what the userbase size is when you compare the daily unique arma 3 users and the daily unique users for a popular star wars EA game.

sudden flame
#

If Disney knew what we wanted do ya think we would've gotten the sequels they gave?

graceful hill
#

Or in other words, if every single arma3 player bought arma3 for the star wars mod, and passed on buying the EA game, how much would sales of the star wars game have been affected?

shell scaffold
#

Not a lot

vast stump
#

I suppose you could use that as a defence in court if it came to it

graceful hill
#

They would.

sudden flame
#

Most likely cuz ya know we gotta buy and try out their new "AAA" game

shell scaffold
#

It's like COD

#

People are always going to say COD is shit and then go play IW4X, or a Fan Client. But as soon as a new released COD game drops, they're going to buy it

#

MW2 broke record sales, on its release while IW4X, Pluto and other Fan Clients existed

sudden flame
#

I mean I even own skins for cod games I don't own

shell scaffold
#

I think the issue is, people overhype mods a bit too much to where people can unironically compare them to AAA games.

sudden flame
#

Well yea most def but sometimes they are

shell scaffold
#

Yeah ofc, I think the Squad Star Wars mod is actually dying rn, like the servers aren't as full as they used to be.

#

Like bro this doesn't compare to BF2 in the slightest lool

sudden flame
#

Yea so is it a direct competitor to Disneys Star Wars games def not

shell scaffold
#

And that's a Battlefront 3 map

vast stump
#

well this is just your take on the matter. Im afraid it does not really count as much

elder horizon
#

Which means a mod can only be removed after Disney deems it as hurting sales he is just saying that he thinks Disney won't say it hurts the sales due to the experience gained with the squad SW mod

vast stump
#

Rock is very well versed in IP stuff yes, and I respect his grasp on things. But in this case there is no written and signed policy from Disney, While Rocks account on the subject is likely accurate I dont think it is said in any official policy

#

unless you guys can get it in writing from Disney

elder horizon
shell scaffold
#

Going off what Rock said, I just showed you 2-3 Examples of mods that have been up for years, with large player counts, ripped assets etc...

vast stump
#

You can believe that, I would not.

elder horizon
#

It is a matter of fact

willow crane
shell scaffold
#

I mean at the end of the day, BI isn't going to really change their mind, nothing you can really do about it. I think a lot of the Star Wars fans here are out of luck and may as well go play the ones for Sandstorm, Squad, Operation Harsh Doorstop (If it ever comes to be). From what I've seen in this chat before it does seem like it's a matter of not having direct statements from Disney themselves even if evidence exist otherwise (I actually thing a while ago me and a few others posted a statement from their policy where it did say you could make fan content, mod included. So I'll have to look for that) and people just not liking the Star Wars community as I've also seen that in this chat before.

willow crane
vast stump
shell scaffold
#

I've seen a plethora of other people in this chat say otherwise

#

So that's why I'm catering that in

vast stump
#

There bad apples of SW modding have put a big stigma on it though

vast stump
shell scaffold
#

It is, because I've seen people in this chat blatantly bash the SW Community saying it's a good thing it isn't allowed

vast stump
#

dude come on. you know this is how these conversations end up badly

mossy yarrow
#

Sorry to interrupt again, what is the right way when my Mod releases to show BI i got permission, liscence, whatever ?

A google drive document linked ?

willow crane
# shell scaffold I mean at the end of the day, BI isn't going to really change their mind, nothin...

Look, personally Im not opposed to Star Wars mods. I love the universe. But all I have ever tried to do is help everyone on all sides of the debate understand where the rules take us and where the limits are.

i cant make any meaningful comment about Disney's business practices. I can read the License and guidelines and give you an informed opinion based on 25 years+ of working with IP, contracts and Asset creation.

Why do some mods survive Disney's periodic purges and others dont. I dont have a definative answer. But I do know not all of them do.

vast stump
#

nobody checks your papers when you release a mod

mossy yarrow
#

I see thank you 🙂

shell scaffold
#

https://disneytermsofuse.com/english/
7B -

"To the extent that we authorize you to create, post, upload, distribute, publicly display or publicly perform User Generated Content that requires the use of our copyrighted works, we grant you a non-exclusive license to create a derivative work using the specifically referenced copyrighted works as required for the sole purpose of creating such a work, provided that such license shall be conditioned upon your assignment to us of all rights worldwide in the work you create for the duration of copyright in the User Generated Content, in all formats and media known or unknown to date, including for use on Disney Products and on third party sites and platforms. If such rights are not assigned to us, your license to create derivative works using our copyrighted works shall be null and void."

"We grant you a non-exclusive license to create a derivative work using the specifically referenced copyrighted works as required for the sole purpose of creating such a work"

vast stump
shell scaffold
#

It's why I linked the page with the citing...

sudden flame
#

Isn't that what lawyers will do as well?

willow crane
# shell scaffold What mods exactly haven't, I'm not aware of them and I'm getting a link really q...

Its 00.34 here and the end of a long day. Im not at my main PC, just the media pc upstairs so I dont have access to my files.

But off the top of my head - Disney specific IP, I would need to find my lists. But Stargate Mod, Command and Conquer, Mass Effect teams all got C&D from their IP owners periodically. Lego Wars mod got spanked a while back. There are more than a few mentions in here about it if you take the time to look.

shell scaffold
#

I think I know w hat Lego Star Wars mod you're talking about

willow crane
# shell scaffold https://disneytermsofuse.com/english/ 7B - "To the extent that we authorize you...

And specific to this license you linked and in the context of the conversation i had in Paris... you need to also look at the other licenses for that type of product to try and find the proper context.

The EULA you are linking is the general community guidelines and may not be specific to Modding computer games. I'll have a read and try and break it down in the morning. But my point is those guidelines are meant to cover all Disney IP in the loosest terms possible. Disney's own interpretation specific to your use case may be very different than your opinion.

shell scaffold
#

It literally says User Generated Content>

vast stump
#

From how I read it so far it is for user generated content in Disneys products

#

and that this is general TOS for Disneys wide range of products and platforms

#

and as a side note even here it says you must not pay for the content so any commission work would not be possible within this

shell scaffold
#

Who's paying for these mods?

willow crane
# shell scaffold It literally says User Generated Content>

I attempted a deep dive into all the Star Wars/Star Sim IP stuff last year (which was prompted by the Paris conversation) and User Generated Content can mean many things. What i discovered was that there is a different set of rules covering each content/product type. And that the General EULA is literally a big box filled with many smaller more specific boxes within boxes.

Also a lot of that specific license relates to the transmission of Disney Shows and Movies over the internet and not Licensed products and games etc

vast stump
#

which is why I said side note.

shell scaffold
#

We're talking about allowing Star Wars works to be made for Arma, those users will most likely will be giving a C&D and those are specifically individual users which doesnt' disqualify Star Wars works as a whole being made. One sec I'll be right back tho

willow crane
vast stump
#

this part in the beginning reads to me this talks only about user generated content within the disney products the TOS refers to

image.png
willow crane
#

Sorry to do this, its 00:47 and I am up and out the door at 0630 i need to try and get some sleep. I will do my best tomorrow to dig out my refs and write up a breakdown of the key points asap.

Have fun guys.

vast stump
#

I cant spot anything that says about using Disney IP outside of Disney Products (Mod for non Disney product Arma 3)

shell scaffold
#

"To the extent that we authorize you to create, post, upload, distribute, publicly display or publicly perform User Generated Content that requires the use of our copyrighted works"

#

Star Wars IP is a Disney product?

#

It is Copyrighted works

shell scaffold
vast stump
#

That you will have to confirm from someone more versed in IP law. For me the user generated content defined in the beginning of the 7B is not anything done out of Disney Products, the IP is not the product, products are Disneys licensed games, movies, Disneys various websites and online services etc.

shell scaffold
#

Alright I gotta go with my wife, so I may or may not be back lol

vast stump
#

have a good one! blob_wave

wild copper
#

It's frustrating that there's special rules for fan films but not games or mods

#

But I get it to an extent

dark tulip
# shell scaffold "To the extent that we authorize you to create, post, upload, distribute, public...

Keep in mind this normally applies to fan art (drawings, paintings, digital art) and actually adds cosplay ("...publicly display or publicly perform...") in a very generic form.

Besides that the TOS is an overall coverage for everything under Disney IP, however specific TOS's most likely exist for each IP they have, and may even require additional permissions from third-parties who own specific rights (like EA owning the rights for publishing games or Lego to create toys).

In the end; unless you're an IP lawyer the best thing you can do is actually ask for explicit permission from the IP holder before claiming it's allowed (and I'm sure even IP lawyers would do that just to be save).

inland sphinx
# elder horizon that's not how it works

Thats exactly how it works.
If I tell someone "you cannot steal my car and sell it" does that automatically mean you can steal my car?
Please use common sense over "how can I possibly exploit this wording" sense.

inland sphinx
# elder horizon are you aware of a little thing called legal precedent

Doesn't apply if SOG paid extra money to get the models AND a license to use them. Which you don't get when you normally buy them.
Someone else having something, doesn't set legal precedent that you can do the exact same.

"Hey that guy grabbed a banana and walked out with it, that sets legal precedent that i can do that too!"
Well that guy paid for it, and you didn't...

inland sphinx
inland sphinx
inland sphinx
stone bridge
inland sphinx
#

license to put it into a mod

#

The question was

Quick Question, i bought the same weapons from CGTrader as the SOG DLC did, so theoretically speaking i can use them in my Mod since SOG does that too right ?
Thats what I replied to

stone bridge
#

i dont understand, the royalty free license allows you to use the models that way, no need to pay extra money for extra licenses 🤔

#

Royalty Free License
Royalty Free License allows you to use the product without the need to pay royalties or other license fees for multiple uses, per volume sold, or some time period of use or sales. Products published with this license may not be sold, given, or assigned to another person or entity in the form it is downloaded from the site, but can be used in your commercial projects multiple times after paying for it just once.

#

so basically you cannot "flip" the asset, as in grab it and put it in sale by yourself, but using it in a videogame is a commercial project

#

if you go and read the license it goes on to explain further how the model needs to have some form of read protection if you use it in a work like a videogame (like binarization, so you cannot share the pbo with the model in unbinarized state) and some other stuff

#

the license that doesnt allow you to do any of this is the editorial license

#

for example if you buy from turbosquid, most models are under editorial license and cannot be used in a videogame

celest sundial
#

The problem I suppose is Products published with this license may not be sold, given, or assigned to another person or entity in the form it is downloaded from the site. So because you are a team you were not allowed to share the source model with others in it (the fbx or obj file). But I assume you instantly converted to unbinarized p3ds which would then be fine to be shared

stone bridge
#

i guess someone might say that the model was bought by the company so you're not sharing it with "externals"

inland sphinx
shell scaffold
stone bridge
#

Sure, fair enough

stone bridge
#

They had an exclusive license before

shell scaffold
#

Yeah they did, but they weren't the ones to C&D a fan project, Disney were the ones to do that. Ubisoft was working on their Open World SW game before the end of the year

stone bridge
#

Well it wasn't published yet

shell scaffold
#

The Ubisoft game?

stone bridge
#

Yes

shell scaffold
#

It didn't have to be published, other companies got a hold of the license

#

It was no longer exclusive at that point

stone bridge
#

I mean in regards to the end of the exclusive license, they didn't violate it cause the game hasn't come out before end 2022

shell scaffold
#

Ubisofts game was known to have been in development since October, Disney allowed them to develop it, otherwise they wouldn't be.

#

Around Jan 2021, there were major talks about EA having lost exclusive rights to making games

Earlier this year (2021), Disney announced that current and future Star Wars games will be branded together under the revived Lucasfilm Games brand name. During the announcement Disney said that Lucasfilm Games will be the “official identity for all gaming titles from Lucasfilm”

vast stump
#

anyway, one big corporation makes deal with another to make a game in the first ones owned franchice

shell scaffold
vast stump
#

anyone wanting to make a star wars game can ask for a licensing deal

dark tulip
shell scaffold
rapid mauve
shell scaffold
#

Obviously, I'm just clearing up what you said lmfao

#

EA doesn't hold exclusive rights, it's now a misconception

brave knot
somber fiber
#

dont go down this road sanchez

#

never ends well

vast stump
#

read what was said above.

dark tulip
#

I never said EA has/had exclusive rights, just said they own(ed) rights to the IP as an example.
Again; reading and understanding are 2 different things...

shell scaffold
#

EA owning the rights for publishing games

vast stump
#

Why does it matter

shell scaffold
#

?

rapid mauve
#

Why noone calls with phone mickey mouse and ask about SW IP

brave knot
vast stump
shell scaffold
vast stump
#

why does it matter

#

is someone here trying to make a commercial game with SW IP

shell scaffold
#

I think it's fair for me to clear any misconceptions regarding that

vast stump
#

and if yes, great, they need to take that up to Disney

shell scaffold
#

I see no problem with that

rapid mauve
shell scaffold
#

People just love Star Wars lol

dark tulip
vast stump
#

I suppose people are looking if they can change that

#

SW mods are not fine.

shell scaffold
#

Not fine here*

vast stump
#

This has been covered many enough times

stone bridge
#

🤣 we're saying the same thing

#

apparently my phone decided to send this message 30min later than what it was supposed to 🥴

zealous ore
#

this channel's topic is legality

somber fiber
#

which I corrected after that statement

zealous ore
#

yes, and?

somber fiber
#

nothing else after that

#

just stating a fact

zealous ore
#

just because a certain mod is up right now, doesn't mean it won't be taken down

somber fiber
#

this isnt some sly angle to do yet another tired and shitty "being illegal is okay" statement. just was stating facts and correcting a statement I made that was not factual.

zealous ore
#

in regards to reforger, it is even more simpler, and i love the fact that BI now owns the platform for their product's mods distribution

#

it also doesn't matter at all that there are mods out there for other games that are using ripped content, or disney's IP, it is 100% irrelevant for the topic

#

considering the above, i think the but why isn't BI allowing it kind of topic has sort of ran it's course already

graceful hill
# south remnant correct. "legal precedent" is case law, neither of which apply to sog using a mo...

Not so fast. legal precedent/case law doesn't have to be an "exact match"

For example, there might not be a court case establishing a specific precedent that someone is allowed to make a parody of the Halo video games.

But just because there is no case that affirmatively says "You can make a parody of a halo game as long as it's truly a parody" that doesn't mean it is not established legal precedent that parody is an affirmative defense from copyright infringement, including when applied to the halo video games.

#

So it's very possible that there is some legal precedent that could be found which applies in the given situation of "sog using a model" even though as far as I am aware there has been no litigation or judgements/adjudications regarding sog and their models.

#

For example, when Nathan Fielder made "Dumb Starbucks" in a commercial, for profit television entertainment venture. There was no caselaw that said "You are allowed to make a parody of starbucks"

The caselaw/legal precedent is just "You are allowed to make parody without censorship" And so there was nothing starbucks could do, because it was obvious parody in every aspect.

#

The store location was legally licensed / registered / whatever the process is in that city as an "art gallery" and thus they did not need a license to serve a limited type of food and drink for a limited time, of which coffee was included.

dark tulip
#

Except in this case Starbucks could go for trademark infringement for using the same name and logo (albeit slightly modified), even when used for a "parody".

Which is the same to SW/Halo/etc. modding; even if you would call it a parody (which modding isn't), you still can't use the name/logo due to trademarks and could even get into problems for using the same (or similar) world/backstory/etc. due to IP.

Just look at the massive influx around D&D licensing, which would forbid any adoptation of the concept without paying the IP holders.

hasty galleon
graceful hill
final leaf
# sudden flame But still if it gets taken down you do realize your gonna ruin the fans only goo...

Best thing for star wars fans to do is create their own sci fi mod which includes none of the star wars things. You could probably still include a “stormtrooper” for example but it cannot look like a star wars one. The term stormtrooper has been used in the german empire and you could argue your game, called “Star dominion”, “Galaxy at conflict” or something like that if those names aren’t used already is actually about an alternate history german empire in space, not the star wars empire. You could just copy the ww2 german uniforms for the officers and make minor changes and you would be set. Dont think hugo boss minds considering how many fake uniforms are used in ww2 movies. A lot of the star wars blasters were based on real guns but modified. You could make 3d models of the base guns and modify them differently. What are they gonna do? You would have to change the ships up drastically but star ship design shouldn’t be too hard and come up with some new lore. I’m not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. I do not know how well this would hold up in court

#

The creators of the mod must also at no point to anyone say it is based off starwars, because it is not😉😉

graceful hill
#

right, and to be legal it would be pretty radically different. I think people want star wars stuff that looks like star wars

final leaf
#

It just cannot look like star wars. Think The Orville-Star Trek

final leaf
#

So the effort making a star wars mod would be wasted when disney shuts it down

#

Wouldnt reach a big audience

#

It probably has happened at least once but creator quit because only like 2 players played.

#

People want steam workshop convenience

graceful hill
#

you just have to make it really good, then people would buck up and drop a folder in another folder.

final leaf
#

I’m myself not a big star wars fan

vast stump
#

@graceful hill since we dont support that stuff here lets not go around suggesting ways to work around IP rights

graceful hill
#

I didn't suggest anything, It's the obvious way someone might try to do that. Anyone with a 2005 level understanding of the internet could have said and known the same thing. I said I don't condone it of course. But it is the type of challenge that ip holders may face, and is relevant for that reason.

zealous ore
#

@graceful hillyou have developed a certain pattern in regards to posting and some specific channels. Just letting you know that BI doesn't allow it, and no matter how much some of you would want it doesn't also mean is gonna happen.

graceful hill
#

I'm not into star wars. I was just making a point.

abstract crest
#

Er, I know that donations are allowed to mod devs, but can you monetize ARMA 4 servers in the future yet? Seriously, that is a real tweet 🤣

Capture2.PNG
vast stump
#

its a scammmm

abstract crest
#

Ah, so more dodgy than I initially thought 🙂

#

Is this one for Karel?

vast stump
#

mayhaps could give em a tip

abstract crest
#

If you mean the tweeter, I did respond to their tweet. Waiting to here... but yeah, if they don't I'll probably shoot off an email. Mark this day though... the day the monetization shite started for a game that doesn't exist at this time in the ARMA franchise 🙂

fiery egret
#

Besides the fact that this is obviously wrong, there's one question that popped in my mind now: can you break BI monetization rules for a game that's not even out and doesn't even have actual monetization rules in place? (does it? Or maybe I missed that there was a blanket statement somewhere covering all BI works).

Let's dive into the absurd and let's say that I let people pay me for my mod for... Arma 6. Am I even breaking any rules if I manage to convince people to pay me? (which is another topic)

abstract crest
#

I'm guessing that they are using Reforger tools assuming that things will work forward...

fiery egret
#

Yes, obviously

vast stump
#

Arma 6 you probably claim to do whatever

abstract crest
#

If they even are doing anything. I really need to come up with a cool idea for a mod that will be completed in a couple of years and make money off it if this is okay 🤣

vast stump
#

but if you use the work in existing Arma game before that it becomes monetizing

#

my guess is this is someones attempt for cash grab

fiery egret
#

My Evil Plan: make them pay for a mod for Arma 4 and tell them that they get special treatment for as long as they are paying. I use that money to fund mod development.

When Arma 4 releases, I stop accepting any money and deny everyone that special treatment (since they're not paying anymore).

...but I have the mod already created with their money they have been giving me for the last few years 😈

mossy yarrow
fiery egret
#

...and there goes my business plan 😒

abstract crest
#

Email sent ... don't want to see anyone get scammed

abstract crest
#

$1,200 would keep my dedi running for a year...

1.PNG
celest sundial
#

They want to support development, which from a purely ethical standpoint is totally fair. I have paid 100€ left and right to individual asset makers and texture artists for my mods so it quickly adds up. Now normally I would never ask for money until I have something to show for it - I treat it as costs for hobby. If I release my mod and people want to donate for its creation (one gets nothing, except for a thank you from me) then that would probably be better - but the arma community tends to never donate if they can just already download something ... ehhh ...

On the legal aspect of this as correctly stated before, they would probably make use of the Arma Reforger toolset, which forbids commercial use. If their donations unlock anything like early access (even forbidden if your server is monetized), or even just cosmetic rewards that would be a violation. However until any of their work is public, there is no way for BI to do anything about it. They are also not using the trademark ARMA for promotional purposes. The use as seen in their sub-description is allowed as they reference the original and distinct their own product from being compatible with but not official content for or the same as ARMA the game.

Needless to say, based on what they tweeted about it too with "exclusive gear and weapon access for donators" they have disqualified themselves from getting benefit of the doubt. Second reason to not give them a single penny. If you need to convince people with exclusive rewards to donate, your content is maybe not worth donating for.

deep solar
#

I want to port over assets I made for my own game into Arma, is this going to cause anyone to have a stroke upon asking for directions on how to do so?

celest sundial
# deep solar I want to port over assets I made for my own game into Arma, is this going to ca...

You are free to port your own original creations into arma of course, but unless your question is about the legal aspects (which I just cleared, yes you can) you are probably best in #enfusion_model and maybe #enfusion_blender_tools . Also the wiki has info on importing models: https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Category:Arma_Reforger/Modding/Tutorials/Assets, https://github.com/BohemiaInteractive/Arma-Reforger-Samples

deep solar
#

Alright cool I was not certain on how that would turn out

graceful hill
fiery egret
#

Depends on how you look at it. Quite a lot of Kickstarters are for products that "do not exist" at the time of the Kickstarter. So if you'd phrase it adequately, mention that you're using reforger's enfusion, expecting A4's enfusion to be similar, blahblahblah... you wouldn't really be scamming people as they would know what they're buying into. (regardless of the legality of using Reforger's tools - that's for another discussion)
But my proposition was a joke anyway, obviously, so 🤷‍♂️

graceful hill
#

I know you aren't serious, but you mentioned it because it's an interesting scenario to think about. I think that the main difference between something like a kickstarter and a mod for a game that doesn't exist, is that the kickstarter people's goal is to make the whole thing. A mod for arma4 requires that Arma4 exist.
It requires that you know that the mod will work in Arma4, People should reasonably know that you aren't claiming that you will make all of Arma4 to go alongside the mod. So I don't really see any scenario where you sell and deliver a mod for arma4 before the game is out and it's not fraudulent.

#

So if you made and sold me an arma4 mod right now the following would be true

  1. It could not be used, with no current ETA on when it could be used, if ever.
  2. you wouldn't know if it would work in Arma4 when it comes out because there is not currently any documentation for arma4 mods.

I think you could do a kickstarter for a big arma4 mod and not be committing fraud, as long as you made it clear that it's gonna be a long project and will not be usable at least until Arma4 comes out

#

An easier thing to do would just be to sell server infrastructure itself. Without distributing or including any content from Arma / Steam out of the gate.

For example, nothing is legally stopping me from writing a script that downloads and deploys an Arma3 server, The script would not contain any data or IP from Steam or Bohemia, The script would be my IP.

And then nothing is legally stopping me from selling you a server with that script on it. For you to run.

#

The customer is the one that would choose to execute the script and download the server or not. The customer is free to do whatever they want with the server I sell them

final leaf
graceful hill
#

would be a pretty simple process

  1. Customer uploads their mods/missions/other data of their choosing to their server, or downloads the mods from on the server
  2. Customer runs script
  3. Arma3 server appears
#

@final leaf tl;dr I would take actions to take my content back and remove it from their possession / systems.

#

If they don't like that, they are free to pick up their Belarusian phone and call the US embassy and let them know that they think an american is "hacking their Arma mods". And see how much the US cares or takes their request seriously.

#

Belarus legalized piracy from "unfriendly nations" which includes the US. I take this as acknowledgement of the risks involved.

My response would be unfriendly. And I believe they are ok with that, or are at least aware of the risks and potential consequences, based on the openly confrontational law they passed.

dark tulip
#

Problem is, you can't do anything in-game without using the game or tools provided by BI. Which, by default (and by TOS/EULA) prevents you from using it for commercial reasons (which included "donations" used to sell stuff).

So, unless you have permission from BI or can give something without using the game or tools, it's not allowed. Even when the game doesn't exist yet, which is based on the fact that this has been the case since BI made it possible to mod their games and providing the tools for it.

graceful hill
#

Your biggest risk in such a scenario would be criminal penalties for fraud, rather than the potential for civil litigation from game developers in another country.

zealous ore
graceful hill
#

Right, and that would be an example of a criminal investigation / penalties as opposed to the potential for civil litigation with a game developer.

zenith turret
#

how would i go about getting the armored suv with minigun from arma 2 to use with reforger, is that allowed?

cursive sedge
zenith turret
dark tulip
#

If the vehicle is in the pack it would be allowed (following the license), however I doubt it will be technically possible to do it without the source files of the models.

zenith turret
abstract crest
#

In the Wheeled>PMC folder

abstract crest
#

@zenith turret ^

mossy yarrow
#

All Models from Arma Armed Assault, A2, OA, + DLCs are in the sample pack, even OP Flashpoint ones i think

zenith turret
#

yes i have found it

#

thank you guys 🙂

full blaze
#

what is the policy for porting dayz content to arma? like clothing ? im assuming its a no?

inland sphinx
#

forbidden

#

in general you cannot port any dayz content to anywhere. Because you cannot get the source format without ripping, and ripping is forbidden anyway

cunning zinc
#

Can retextures of A3 content be licensed under APL-ND? Or only APL-SA?

stone bridge
#

dont think there's any license requirement for retextures

#

considering the apl-sa is only for certain a2 content

cunning zinc
stone bridge
#

im the one asking you for a clarification, why do you mention apl and apl-sa licenses related to a3 content? 🤔

#

to my knowledge there's no such license attached to a3 data

south remnant
#

Share Alike - If you adapt, or build upon this material, you may distribute the resulting material only under the same license.

#

If the retextured content is APL-SA, you can only redistribute under APL-SA

cunning zinc
south remnant
#

if it's able to be retextured chances are it's APL-SA and therefore modifications of the content are not able to be redistributed in any other form

marsh sparrow
#

Did you ever hear back from this?

sand quest
#

Question: Looking into EA titles and thier EULA, I have found so far that you can personaly create things based on their titles as long as it is not locked behind a paywall correct?

stone bridge
#

I have found so far
how did you come to this conclusion exactly?

sand quest
vast stump
#

taking something out of the games is always a no no

sand quest
#

@vast stump Im tracking ripping is always a big no no. But it is okay to make models and things based on the game correct?

vast stump
#

no

sand quest
#

same way OPTRE, lot of the star wars mods, etc, do things

vast stump
#

Only OPTRE has the privlilege as Halo IP guidelines allow it

sand quest
#

Where does EA guidelines not allow it?

vast stump
#

they dont allow it

#

it has to be explicitly said its ok

sand quest
#

I believe you, but would you link your specific source for that?

vast stump
#

no I dont have specific source on that.

#

all the stuff you linked above talks about modding EA games

meager fractal
meager fractal
sand quest
#

the IP page also says SCP is a no but that is flat out wrong.

meager fractal
#

source?

sand quest
#

SCP is public domain. Anything may be created under it as long as it is not monotized.

meager fractal
#

as long as the license does not change iirc

sand quest
#

also it says command and conqure is tolorated

#

which falls under ea

#

so would mass effect

meager fractal
meager fractal
sand quest
#

okay but what im saying is, do you know if it is or not with reliable proof?

meager fractal
#

it is not until you can prove it is

#

this is how IP works

vast stump
#

there is a single C&C mod where the creator got EXPLICIT OK

sand quest
#

Gotcha

#

though I would suggest to update the SCP portion of the wiki

meager fractal
vast stump
#

and that is ok just for him and his project

sand quest
#

i will reach out to that creator

meager fractal
sand quest
#

thank you guys for the help.

meager fractal
#

if you can have someone from SCP tell me it's OK (for Arma or for everyone), I will gladly update the wiki, no worries!

sand quest
#

well SCP is public sort of thing

vast stump
#

SCP has a lot of derivate creators

sand quest
#

their is no one that officaly owns the domain of "SCP"

vast stump
#

so they might have different licenses on their work on top

meager fractal
# sand quest well SCP is public sort of thing

I know (and I appreciate that)
the issue is that SA in "CC by SA" means "Share-Alike"
and publishing on the workshop is a different, more restrictive license (but still free)
this is why it does not fit "on the paper"

sand quest
#

Alot of this legal jargin is complex to me so sorry for any major mistakes on my part. I understand, thank you agian for the help!

vast stump
#

basically the permission has to come clearly from the IP owner

analog sphinx
#

that why when the creature called Siren Head was created it did not become an entry into the SCP wiki as it was originally intended, the creator of the concept wanted to be able to profit from its creation and SCP licenses did not work on that agreement, same with the peanut statue, the original sculptor didnt want anyone profitting from its work.

But this is of course offtopic

vast stump
#

no its fine, it shows how SCP IP is pretty muddy waters

wispy iron
#

Lots of layers

graceful hill
# vast stump no its fine, it shows how SCP IP is pretty muddy waters

eh, whether something is "SCP" really just comes down to name.

The idea of "shadowy government / military agency investigating weird things" has been around long before "SCP' was a thing. So if you don't want to deal with their license, just don't call it "SCP" But you can have everything else that the SCP stories have of course.

#

Where are the "muddy waters" ?

sand quest
sand quest
#

Question, why were the original mass effect mods removed?

hollow harness
#

I guess is that it's probably ripped

unkempt sorrel
sand quest
#

Gotcha. So if a mod was made with original content it would be fine?

vast stump
#

either explicitly given to you or some sort of public policy like what Halo IP enjoys

vast stump
inland sphinx
#

Give people something that feels like mass effect.
Not something that looks like a 1-to-1 copy and has the name written on it.

Make good tissue paper, don't re-make "Kleenex"
Yes I know its easier to copy someone elses work than come up with your own. But hey, you can copy others peoples work if you get permission, so just do that if you really want to.

hardy bone
#

Would doing it the same way Lucas did the weapons for star wars work?
As in take the same object and apply enough modification for it to not be that object anymore but not enough that people having knowledge in the field/sector will recognise it.

vast stump
#

since its ok to model weapons as they are yes

#

but like dont make same modifications as StarWars does so it looks same 😅

hardy bone
#

Nah, I'm talking about taking something like an X-wing and removing or adding parts to it so that it doesn't clearly looks like an X-wing (and also renaming it to something else since the names are protected too for Disney)

vast stump
#

then no

#

I dont think that would be ok

#

but like for definite answers Id consult on a professional IP lawyer

#

but it sounds like trying to find some shady loop hole

#

it sounds dishonest

hardy bone
#

a loop hole is by definition shady, but yeah trying to find a middle ground will always look like trying to find loop holes

#

dishonest? in what way?

vast stump
#

trying to circumvent someones rights to their owned IP by taking it but changing it so its same but not same so you can claim its yours

#

sounds dishonest

#

the goal is clearly not make something new but to copy the existing thing

#

but because copying it is not allowed you "copy" it

south remnant
#

using what you consider a loophole likely wont hold up in court if you even managed to get a defense

vast stump
#

thats why I would recommend consulting IP lawyer before enacting on such thoughts

abstract crest
#

For those who haven't been following the situation, there are good DCMAs and there are bad ones, and sometimes the bad ones "win" (note there is a followup video from today after Workers & Resources went back on Steam after the devs had to reach an agreement with the individual who filed the bogus DCMA): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HstyGiJB-Yw

YouTube
Raptor
Rogue Fan DMCA Strikes Steam City Building Game AND THIS CHANNEL

Info, Sources & Useful Links:

Workers & Resources: Soviet Republic Community Steam Page https://steamcommunity.com/app/784150

News Regarding Steam DMCA takedown
Kotaku: https://kotaku.com/workers-resources-steam-pc-dmca-takedown-communism-1850125125

PC Gamer: https://www.pcgamer.com/indie-city-builder-removed-from-steam-after-angry-fan-claim...

▶ Play video
vast stump
#

(watched it a bit)

abstract crest
#

A gameplay guide that was based on what others had already written (a few small changes here and there and a fancy new name), and the mode added to the game was completely different - with new content that was needed to actually implement it in a game so it integrated seamlessly, that the guide writer had nothing to do with. And he was hurt because they decided that he would not be added to the game's credits because prior to a game update he'd started DCMAing YT videos that featured people playing the game that way and not crediting him in the video's description 🤦

#

Note: the person in question is a lawyer in the US... never let lawyers be involved in your game community seems to be a logical conclusion

#

The game already existed, was just another set of restrictions in the game's setup for a scenario

vast stump
#

anyway. yeah I got the gist right

abstract crest
vast stump
#

hopefully not for long more then

abstract crest
#

Devs had to capitulate - zero support from Valve and he could have kept them in litigation and off the Steam store for months or years...

vast stump
#

well valve is not responsible for that stuff really. Its very shitty situation but it is each developers own thing to handle

#

as unfortunate as that is

south remnant
#

youtubes dmca system is another instance of a bad system (taking ad revenue until the claim is disputed regardless of it being correct or not)

abstract crest
#

Yeah, that's why Raptor is able to post his videos (he has 1.11M subs and a YT rep) and other, smaller content creators just get copyright struck. Thankfully he raised attention of this guy to YT and they are holding all strikes from the individual at this time

shell scaffold
#

lol I saw on gmod some stolen assets on the workshop page had the name of the game they ripped the content from, and it said
" DISCLAIMER: I DID NOT MAKE THE MODELS, THE SOUNDS, OR THE TEXTURES.

Do not use my vehicles on your server without prior agreement.

No version or modification of this content is allowed to be uploaded to the workshop except under the account ID "xxxxx", or without permission from said account."

I Find it so funny that he posted it

south remnant
#

idk how gmod works but under arma the config would still be the ip of the author so could not be reuploaded

shell scaffold
#

well its still stolen content from a game that the guy is selling and he has balls to say its mine you cant use it...

south remnant
#

ok

graceful hill
# hardy bone Nah, I'm talking about taking something like an X-wing and removing or adding pa...

Correct. star wars does not own "bi-wing / 4 armed spaceship" universally At a certain point of adding and removing things and giving it a new name, it's no longer an xwing.

But then at the same time. it's no longer an x-wing.

https://preview.redd.it/1963mdrzqvz81.png?width=2522&format=png&auto=webp&s=8ed924006bc274aa818f46296f3a425a5ba6db52

Take this for example. This is definitely not an x-wing. This does not infringe on any star wars IP. But I can see the clear inspiration.

#

but then at the same time this probably isn't going to be scratching anyone's star wars itch. Because it's not an xwing.

south remnant
#

Looks inspired from the x-wing concept art

#

-- the designs of which are still part of the star wars ip i believe

inland sphinx
graceful hill
dark tulip
#

If that would be the case, Disney/LucasArt has a problem as well, because the Bi-plane already exists since the 1900's (Brothers Wright), so they would also break several patents...
Just moving them diagonally still makes it a biplane (2 wings on each side of the aircraft), so nothing that can be done against it.

abstract crest
#

Don't know why people like the X Wing so much... functionally, it just can't work (for example the wings cannot retract together and it only has unidirectional thrust)... The Star Fury from Babylon 5 is quite realistic and would trash an X Wing in combat

frozen jackal
potent moss
#

Hey, now Ewoks are pretty friggin' cool

#

And some of the ship designs looks pretty nice as well

#

Nice to see a spaceship that has dirt and crap on it instead of looking like it's fresh off the factory floor

meager fractal
#

grumbles something about topic

cursive sedge
#

it's discussing an IP? 😄

#

also, the first word in the topic has a typo 😛

#

Intelectual

graceful hill
#

arrest my case your honor.

meager fractal
#

makes case sleep
this case is a-rested! 🛏️ 🇮🇹

stuck rapids
#

Idk if this is the right place to put this but its my best guess-

Could someone explain the APL-SA license to me in like two simple sentences? Especially when it comes to retextures

vast stump
stuck rapids
#

Sweet

fiery egret
# stuck rapids Idk if this is the right place to put this but its my best guess- Could someone...

If 4 sentences is not too much (after all, you asked for 2 😉 ), then I suggest you to read these bullet points, in bold, here: https://www.bohemia.net/community/licenses/arma-public-license-share-alike

Bohemia Interactive
Arma Public License Share Alike (APL-SA) | Bohemia Interactive

Bohemia Interactive is an independent game development studio, known for the Arma series, DayZ, Take On Mars, Ylands, and more.

vast stump
#

if this leaves something unclear though, do ask.

stuck rapids
#

Alright

#

So pretty much-

Give credit where credit's due
Cant make money off of it
Cant use it for other games
And must let others adapt my work similarly

#

Right?

fiery egret
#

Must release your work as APL-SA as well(!)

#

So they keep exactly the same rights as you have, right now

#

I mean, it kinda falls under your "must let others adapt my work similarly", but the wording is a bit stricter

stuck rapids
#

Oh okok

#

Thx

urban patrol
#

I can make a mod for the scp universe without it being removed right?

frozen jackal
#

if you follow the SCP licensing guide and by "make a mod" you mean actually creating models or textures or whatever from the very scratch instead of taking stuff from other games or other people with no permission then yes, it won't be removed

meager fractal
#

it is technically against their license because the Steam/Arma license is slightly more restrictive than theirs, but in the spirit it is seen as OK
be sure to check with the SCP peeps to be 100% sure

shell scaffold
#

would like to ask

#

is okay for me to use these tracks for menu

#

it doesnt seem copyrighted

lavish basalt
#

Ask the copyright holder

shell scaffold
#

ye about that it does have

#

i mean its a mod from 2003 or 2004 its less likely

lavish basalt
#

There is nothing else to answer

shell scaffold
#

well i guess i can

#

not that mean i can answer but i guess i can use it

#

as long to credit the owner of it which is desert combat

lavish basalt
#

Credit them is not a permission

#

Also I didn't said you can, nor anybody

shell scaffold
#

well what about this?

#

ik the desc said it but to make sure to go with ip violations standards

lavish basalt
#

Again ask the copyright holder

vast stump
#

Ah there was answers! They are right.

shell scaffold
#

im gonna need some advice regard the cc atributions

#

i gotta make sure if im right when what im assuming

#

im assuming that i can extract the pbos as long its non profit and not corrupted as well as credit the owners

#

is that correct?

meager fractal
shell scaffold
lavish basalt
#

Just wonder: if we see an IP issue with somewhat stolen CDLC content, which to report? BI or Devs? Or both?

serene stirrup
#

I'd say send an email to infringements@bistudio.com, just like you'd do for any other IP issue.

lavish basalt
#

Noted, thanks

frozen jackal
#

I hope they read messages that went to spam too, I've sent a report of a tonne of SOG, CSLA, GM and DayZ assets being "distributed" almost two months ago and they are still active clueless

meager fractal
chrome plinth
graceful hill
#

see if they open them

iron root
#

In Apex and Tanoa there is the "Predator" sound from the movie.

Would Bohemia have to pay royalties for this, or is it "fair use"?

https://youtu.be/V5IxOyhyu9U

YouTube
Sc0rpion3 Gaming
Arma 3 - Apex - Predator Easter Egg - Mission #2 "Warm Welcome"

The Predator sounds can be triggered by lingering around this temple ruins section after the dialogue has completed by the AI. It only seems to be active when you stay within the walled section.

The trigger is situated in or around the giant stone head.
There doesn't seem to be any physical presence of the predator, sadly/thank goodness.

Plea...

▶ Play video
vast stump
mossy yarrow
iron root
vast stump
#

the music added to the video? You'll have to take that up to the video maker

iron root
vast stump
#

well technically not since they admit to taking the data straight from the game.

hollow harness
#

i was like hmm looks like cities skylines

willow crane
#

If the PBO's are still actually EBOs then yeah its 100% against the EULA.

#

I dont know if they still are or not?

cursive sedge
willow crane
#

Then no issue as long as the resulting data isnt used outside of arma

cursive sedge
#

you can create an heightmap ingame using SQF as well

celest sundial
willow crane
celest sundial
#

You said there was no issue using it as long as it used within arma. Which implies the APL license. The content discussed is not released under any such license. Tanoa content can only be inside arma 3 right now, nowhere else. Not AR and especially not other non BI games. Just wanted to clarify because many people take statements like that as reasoning why they can port arma 3 assets to dayz

vast stump
#

the linked mod is for cities skylines

#

which is a no no.

frozen jackal
#

judging by the pictures only the heightmap was taken from Arma, it doesn't seem to have a satmap and was recolored

vast stump
#

sure, but even taking the heightmap is IP violation

south remnant
#

You can do it with sqf commands

hardy bone
celest sundial
#

In short no. But even for just the height map BI actually has a copyright. So it can not be legally ported. It would need to be recreated only by looking at it from scratch

willow crane
#

But while we are being pedantic yeah APEX/Tanoa is not APL, but neither is the precedent of forward porting Arma content set and allowed by the BIS mods etc.

inland sphinx
stone bridge
#

some years ago there was altis as well, not sure if its still there

pliant oracle
#

safest way is just recreate Limnos with real life data

abstract crest
#

And so it snowballs... from that CS Tanoa's comments: where do i dig to get the file?i want to use the heightmap for rust

zealous ore
#

i was waiting on roblox comment

vast stump
#

what is it you made (model? mission? textures?) and who is asking the proof?

brave knot
inland sphinx
#

ATLtoASL script command. Bam heightmap

meager fractal
upbeat pumice
#

Right so, the drama with Taviana, I know about all of that and no rights to use it etc or modify it. But would remaking a map very similar to it same layout etc be a violation ? As it’s something made from scratch fall under the same kind of thing? Or would it be okay as it’s made from fresh

vast stump
#

very similar may be a problem. similar in sprit less a problem. If you want to be safe and respectful you make something new and your own.

inland sphinx
#

It seems like your intention is to just copy it but try to carefully tread the line of theft. But.. yeah just why? Just make your own thing then.
Why are you so set on copying someone elses work instead of making your own. Making it from scratch and trying to be similar is about as much work as just making your own from scratch

upbeat pumice
#

Don't want to have to go back to Arma 2 just to play one of most peoples all time favourite maps

#

I am crap with creativity as well, planning out road networks, town designs etc just minces my mind

inland sphinx
#

Okey so you really just want to copy someone elses work.
That will be a problem then yeah

vast stump
#

By making your own thing you can learn the creative things you say you have problems with and in the process better yourself. It will take time and effort for sure but it will be more rewarding than copying someone else's work

analog sphinx
#

you can always make an spiritual successor, its doesnt have to be Taviana, just reminiscent without blatant copy of sectors(?)

#

kinda somewhat what happened to esseker and new esseker

abstract crest
#

I'm always amused when I see someone say "To put it simply the map is good and I want to play it lol" in relation to Taviana as a justification to rip the map. Because you can, legally, take the map from ARMA 2 Origins and run it with CUP Terrains and it works fine. What you cannot do is upload it to Steam which is what people normally mean that they want to do...

upbeat pumice
mossy yarrow
#

Hello who can i ask for permission to port the Superhind from Take on Helicopters ?

lavish basalt
#

Please note that TKOH data are licensed for creating derivatives for both the Take On Helicopters and Arma games.
You don't need to, as long as you're porting it into Arma games

mossy yarrow
#

Alright thank you so much, i thought i need to ask since there are not samples of the hind, but makes sense since CUP and RHS ported the Superhind too

lavish basalt
#

There are?

inland sphinx
lavish basalt
#

Including Hinds

inland sphinx
#

"Data pack" indeed, says the page title.
Not the game itself then

stone bridge
#

note that the models in the libraries are binarized, we had to decompile them ourselves

vast stump
#

Cup got permission for that though.

dark tulip
mossy yarrow
vast stump
# mossy yarrow Thats why i was asking

You would probably email BI legal or support for starters to get connected with whoever can decide on such things. Or try use the Hind in Arma2 samples

mossy yarrow
potent moat
#

Is the "modded" feature and overriding e.g a prefab / UI / config in Reforger covered by APL-ND?
E.g someone mods or overrides something from a mod that has the APL-ND license and then uploads only the modded / overridden part as their own mod

south remnant
#

a derivative work is any work based upon work that has been created by an author

#

so yes a config patch or anything similar for a mod is a derivative work

celest sundial
#

Nope it's not. The technical nature of the files does not contain any of the original content. A derivative would be an image collage, edit to existing text, or sampling of a sound.

A modded class for example only contains text you typed yourself. The use of things like class names alone is not a guarantee for a derivative use. Especially with names such as "DamageManager" being too "obvious"/"not unique" to be copyrighted.

south remnant
#

no it doesnt if you inherit from someone elses class

#

inheriting off of someones work is a derivative

celest sundial
#

And if you look at the file you see none of the original content. No, inheriting in programming is not a derivative. Copyright law only cares about the content you share to others. If you share nothing copyrighted there is nothing to worry about

south remnant
#

https://www.bohemia.net/community/licenses/arma-public-license-nd

No Derivatives - If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
if I inherit off of an RHS class for example, that is a derivative as that is building/remixing/transforming the material they produce

Bohemia Interactive
Arma Public License No Derivatives (APL-ND) | Bohemia Interactive

Bohemia Interactive is an independent game development studio, known for the Arma series, DayZ, Take On Mars, Ylands, and more.

celest sundial
#

Again it's a misunderstanding about copyright. The meaning is literal. The rules apply to the content at hand.

If you take a texture from a mod or the game and put some text in it using paint then you built upon/transform the image. For programming code you would need to include a significant portion of the original code for it to become transformative work.

#

A "for this to he useful it must be run in this game or have additional dependencies" is a concept which does not exist in copyright law in Europe.

heavy gate
# south remnant https://www.bohemia.net/community/licenses/arma-public-license-nd > No Derivativ...

Adapted Material means material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights that is derived from or based upon the Licensed Material and in which the Licensed Material is translated, altered, arranged, transformed, or otherwise modified in a manner requiring permission under the Copyright and Similar Rights held by the Licensor.
Sounds to me that they're talking about the actual material, not a dependency on it.
Don't think normal copyright laws has any limitations regarding that so according to that definition there aren't any.

heavy gate
south remnant
celest sundial
south remnant
#

so if i upload a file that copies source code out of MS excel and just runs that and a few extra bits then that isn't a derivative work?

celest sundial
#

No you are not reading my answers closely enough. What is being talked here about is e.g. modding a class. A modded class file only contains the code you wrote yourself. Unless you copy paste half the original code for the override to change just one line, then you have to deal with the copyright of the entity who originally wrote those lines

south remnant
#

and so does my code to copy and run source code from elsewhere

celest sundial
#

And modded/inherited classes only contain what you did too. The changes get merged with the base content. So your mod does not upload any of the base content for these text based file types.

south remnant
#

so i can upload a file that copies source code out of MS excel and just runs that and a few extra bits and it not be a derivative work then

inland sphinx
#

You keep talking about copying

#

and setting it equal to inheriting in enfusion

#

but when you inherit, you copy nothing

#

When you inherit, you have nothing (besides the name) of the thing you inherted, inside your files.

celest sundial
#

That's an odd example but you got the point yes. You could make a program that for what ever reason runs on top of excel source code. If you don't upload excel itself somewhere you can do what you want. People would need to get a copy of excel to use your program. And you can't of course call it anything with excel cause that is trademarked

south remnant
#

ok

inland sphinx
#

If you want your excel example.

Its as if you tell someone "open that excel file posted on that website, and copy paste "hello world" into it"
You didn't copy that excel file on that website. Its copyright doesn't matter to you. Because in fact you are doing nothing besides telling others what to do

heavy gate
celest sundial
#

Well and you can write commercial excel plugins or macros inside Excel and sell them.

potent moat
#

But is inheriting not "build upon the material"

celest sundial
#

In an understanding of a programmer it's language wise, but in legal terms build upon has a very different meaning. The original work still needs to be present for that

#

You need to ask yourself the question if somebody looks at e.g. my texture or my .c script file can they still see somebody others copyrighted work in there yes or no.

#

And it's for situations like this where you can still see a lot of original content BI has made these licenses to still allow us to remix and transform etc etc for non-commercial and share alike and so on. Because without these rules there would be a lot of scenarios where the resulting work would infringe their IP. For example a vehicle skin that still has 99% if the original design and only a bit of text on the side of one door. That would be impossible to upload then. You would need to create the entire texture from scratch

potent moat
#

I understand the inherit with only the name but the 99% vehicle skin should not be allowed in ND

celest sundial
#

What do you mean with ND? Non derivatives? If a license does not allow derivatives then yes a 99% original skin is not allowed. But does AR not allow derivatives as long as we follow e.g. the share alike? Die stuff like the samples mod released on GitHub

#

Ah your question was about an ND mod. Yes that would be a situation. You can't take my texture if I don't allow it

#

You can mod my script though if none of my code is reuploaded as part of your mod

potent moat
#

Yeah the question was about modding and overriding in a ND mod

celest sundial
#

And you can override my config. None of my work is in your mod in that case.

potent moat
#

But overriding also does not include the original data in the files

celest sundial
#

My class names alone are not significant enough to he copyright able.

#

Not sure. I think for some situations, but most often it's override or append array etc. There should be few situations where your override config contains all the props from mine. That would be a huge waste

#

Open up the conf file after your override and see if my content is inside. Normally it's just the path to the object and there your override starts. And anything that is implied by technical necessity can not be a copyright violation. E.g. two mods who modify the same property path can't claim the other person stole their work because it's the only possible way to do this change

heavy gate
#

I mean... what difference is there to a mod that does config overrides and using attachTo to build upon a vehicle that doesn't allow derivatives.
None of the original work is included in your "battlebus mod" but you still need that bus (and in that case there's nothing in battlebus mod of the original one apart from some coordinates)

#

So the whole "it can't be allowed because it needs something else to work" is moot.

celest sundial
#

It would be pointless without the game as it does nothing but it can still just exist as files. Copyright does not require it to work with something 🙂

#

But if I write 200 lines of code in a very distinct way and I see 199 of them in your mod then I can come around and DMCA you.

potent moat
#

So to summarize, inheriting / overriding is not forbidden by APL-ND cause no original data is included (except e.g the class name).

celest sundial
#

Yes. And class names are rarely are copyright-able.

meager fractal
#

class Dog
I claim copyright for training purposes

south remnant
#

how dare you not prefix your classname

meager fractal
#

I AM the prefix!!1!

south remnant
#

legally changing my name to dog brb

celest sundial
#

LmA_HonHon

meager fractal
#

…I spend my days mentioning tags and all, leave me be for once 😭 😛

south remnant
#

i would say make me but ive already been muted for my actions having consequences once this week already

meager fractal
#

!enforceScriptPrefix @south remnant 30d respect muh authoriteh!

south remnant
#

hey i prefix everything just fine
privating things, however, is a different matter.

meager sluice
#

Am I allowed to use Tarkov stuff? There's millions of things on workshop with Tarkov assets

meager fractal
meager sluice
#

There's more

meager fractal
meager sluice
#

How'd you do that arrow?

#

That's cool

meager fractal
#

Alt + 24 🙂

lavish basalt
#

B-but there is no 24 key

pliant valve
mossy yarrow
south remnant
#

brotherman they're still there

unreal beacon
meager fractal
potent moss
#

Do some keyboards not have function keys/shift?

#

I guess the minimalist ones don't but most keyboards have F1-F12 and a shift key

unreal beacon
#

But wrong channel for this I think ^^

meager fractal
#

true that
I thought it was more frequent on Mac at one point, but yes F1..F24 do exist everywhere / only require the keyboard