other_ip_topics

[grim sand]

It's like if BI tried to sue you for using the word armed assault, Not going to happen by a million miles

(and more than likely the reasoning for the big pile of documentation saying it's ARMA! Which is a defendable trademark.)

[meager fractal]

Arma* 😝

see that model's license

[grim sand]

opens up aRMA to beat the trademark rules

[meager fractal]

aRMA, by cODEMASTERS 🤣

https://tenor.com/view/elmo-hello-elmo-rise-elmo-hell-gif-3989603362345473118

[grim sand]

Send your game back. Simulator.

[fiery egret]

😈 AʀᴍA 😈

[zealous moon]

lmao

Anyway, cheers for the info

[abstract crest]

It needs saying that ARMA 3 is not yet "in EOL" and Live Ops are very busy making it better - see the patch notes for the latest profiling build, you'll see something quite unexpected in it 👀

||Replaced Real Virtuality's multithreading system with Enfusion's version||

[zealous moon]

Right, of course

I meant more in terms of "They didn't do it at launch, they have a lot less of a reason to do it now"

[zealous ore]

editorial license can be used in specific cases, specifically for editorial purposes

[grim sand]

Which then treads into the fair use laws in the United States, and the equivalency and most countries.

Which is why when you read a book, and you take notes, you're not getting nailed for copyright infringement.

[meager fractal]

leeet's not go down that rabbit hole again.

[zealous ore]

sure, but how does that compare to making mods?

[zealous ore]

let's because i honestly do not understand the train of thought on the perpetual and reaccuring fair use thing

[grim sand]

While about the same, equivalency of how useful editorial licensing would be? I was just adding this to the the scope of understanding of this conversation.

[zealous ore]

while you make notes, you make notes for yourself. If you publish these notes for any other purpose than editorial, then you are no longer under fair use

so with mods, having a look over mods or even making modifications that remain local to yourself does indeed go under fair use

[grim sand]

I wouldn't say that's fair use, and they could all be in violation of the EULA and a whole bunch of other stuff.

[zealous ore]

the moment you share said modifications with anyone else, buh bye fair use

[abstract crest]

And if you copy and paste some of that book into your own book then it is plagiarism

[grim sand]

Fair use is pretty specific, and limited to instructional learning and speech. Making a mod is generally under entertainment and in some cases profit, So fair use would never really apply.

Unless of course you make the claim " I'm just modifying all this stuff so I can learn" " I am untouchable"

😜

[abstract crest]

That bit on fair use is clearly stated in the Intellectual Property biki page https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Intellectual_Property

[zealous ore]

you can do that as long as you do not publish it

[grim sand]

Keep in mind @abstract crest at the end of the day, the laws of the land supersede the laws of BI, but if you really want to test that theory, you're going to have to go to court 😂

[zealous ore]

Unless of course you make the claim " I'm just modifying all this stuff so I can learn" " I am untouchable"
you can do that just fine as long it is not published, no matter of the license

[abstract crest]

Well, I mean, you can rip models as much as you want if you don't publish or distribute it too 🤷

[zealous ore]

yes indeed, IF you can prove you used that for learning purposes

[grim sand]

If that's the case, I could steal a book from the internet and that would be fine as well.

Possession of copyrighted work without the author's permission not under fair use.

Lol, nice edit

[zealous ore]

different scopes and uses

[grim sand]

Well I was using that book to learn... I needed to learn about C++

[abstract crest]

Bad analogy. You'd already have the mod, the same way as having a book that you copy from. I said nothing about theft to get what you copied, that then becomes another issue

[grim sand]

Anyways, I'm intentionally being obtuse, because it's really not that cut and dry.

[grim sand]

When you buy a book, there is the unwritten agreement that you get permission to use the book - but that comes with a limitation - generally written at the front of a book.

But you could have gotten that book many other ways. Just like you could get the mod any other ways, and that mod could also have no permission for you to rip or take.

So it's not really the fair use that's being talked about here, but the application of the limited license you got from purchasing an object.

Same reason you don't get sued for watching a DVD that you bought.

Anyways. All just protectionism, and kind of off topic to the earlier question. In the end what will be done will be done.

[zealous ore]

we are digressing here. i was talking specifically about this

which is something that has been discussed here many times over

[grim sand]

That is the natures of conversations, they tend to happen, frequently and repeatedly 😁

[abstract crest]

Especially in this channel 🤣

[meager fractal]

hence my earlier remark 😄

[old jay]

Some don’t understand subtle and not so subtle hints.

[grim sand]

Some are just not bound by timidity.

[old jay]

The answer to 98% of the questions asked here is "no". This is the channel where users come to in a futile attempt to find some obscure legal principle to support their unauthorized use of someone elses content.

[grim sand]

But like the real legal system, the whole system has to stand for that 2% that have legitimate concerns, lest we become a monster 😛

[inland sphinx]

For the watermarks
I would say a good example to look at, is the Arma 3 DLC nags.
It shows a small popup on the side about the DLC. And in time intervals, temporarily blocks the whole screen with watermarks.
it is not stopping anyone from playing, but its making it very clear and impossible to miss.

If Bohemia themselves does it that way, then you doing it the same way won't be that wrong.

[inland sphinx]

Arma 3 IS in EOL. Even if we are still working on it.

[normal pond]

Maybe when the next title releases and is 2 years old and functioning, I'll believe it

[grim sand]

EOL =/= Dead. Games can live on life support for decades. Worse, they might get necro'ed

[meager fractal]

cue OFP patch v1.99 (and beyond? 👀)

[fiery egret]

and beyond?
The v2.00 taboo has already been broken by A3, so... 👀

[meager fractal]

P E R H A P S 🐮

[grim sand]

HapsPer! A3 -> 3.0.0 Final

[pseudo spruce]

i didnt see no one actually done it, but im quite curius... there is something in the eula that forbids Ads in the game?

[hardy bone]

Making money out of the tools part?

[celest sundial]

Depends what you want to do. Ads for real products would be considered commercial use. If it's not your brand you don't have the IP rights to use their logos or trademarked names.

If you want to create fake products and advertise for them ingame it's fine. We do that too

[mossy yarrow]

How does BI handle people that rip models from other games to prove that they are ripped ? i mean if that person proves it by ripping it breaks EULA and therefore is a ripper too am i right ?

[pseudo spruce]

yea i mean real ads, when you get payed somehow to show that ad... not fake ones

but yea, commercial use will be the answer

[meager fractal]

"ah-HAAAH, police officer! if you ask me if I took drugs, it means you had drugs!! takes one to know one!"

[pseudo spruce]

since in real life situation you cant get evidence in an ilegal way... probably this is the case too lol

[mossy yarrow]

The only way to prove that a model is ripped is through wireframe, and you can only get acess to the wireframe if you rip the model. So in this case you need to get it in an illegal way to prove it

[pseudo spruce]

afaik the only one who can do a dmca strike is the real owner of the model, who can prove it, since it has the source files legally, so there is no point

the best course of action is to contact the real owner of the content and he will take action

[meager fractal]

so you think
and nonetheless, kinda guessing in the dark and offtopic

[inland sphinx]

There are also render debugging tools that let you view the wireframe without exporting and ripping it out of the game

looking at things is not illegal. It only becomes a problem once you take it

And usually you don't even need to go down to wireframe, as most people don't bother making textures. Most often just a screenshot of the original game is enough to see it

[rugged prawn]

i often leave subtle deviations from reality in models that very few people can tell. a combination of these inconsistencies would be enough without seeing the wireframe

[mossy yarrow]

i used to engrave my gun models in the normals with my fictional gun company

[mystic hornet]

Say ArmaModder_A and ArmaModder_B both download "FREE_Skyscraper" on CG Trader. A makes a mod of the building. B makes modifications to the FBX further from what was downloaded to CG Trader.

Are both Modders OK? Or would Modder A have any recourse against Modder B in terms of publishing mods on the workshop?

[south remnant]

Both are fine provided there is an editorial license with the model - in which case it is up to whoever made the model to enforce it, not whichever arma modder

[vast stump]

is editorial applicable in this kind of use

isnt that exactly not good one

[south remnant]

Given you're modifying the FBX requires editorial license no?

[mystic hornet]

As I understand

The modified FBX cannot be redistributed in its original or modified form as a standalone item. This means you can modify the model, but the end product must not allow users to extract or reuse the FBX file. ```

[normal pond]

that is fine for arma (as long as you binarise it on release), just remember that you can't put it on github etc

[south remnant]

p3d must be binarized iirc but yes

ilbi is correct

in that case it is fine so long as theyve binarized it which if the mod isnt taking 20 trillion years to load it is binarized

[edgy rover]

CGTrader editorial means news, not editing 😄

[willow crane]

"Editorial" - in practical terms means "for visualisation" and precludes distribution or modification. So an Editorial license alone is no good for use in Arma.

Editorial content is typically used in news articles, magazines, blogs, and other educational resources. It can also be used in documentaries, essays, textbooks, and travel pieces.

Editorial assets can only be edited for minor technical adjustments, slight cropping, or resizing. The editorial context and meaning of the original asset must be maintained.

Editorial Licensing is a licensing agreement that defines the usage of a product as editorial only. Purchasing a product with an Editorial License gives you no rights to any IP within, meaning you cannot use it commercially unless you secure the rights with the original IP holder(s).

So you have only limited rights to modify it for the purpose of "illustration" or "explanation" not distribution or game purposes.

[autumn brook]

would one be able to take content from a pbo that bi has released and then use the models (with no modification) as a base to write scripts for?, specifically for the contact campaign aliens which are found under filepath "C:\SteamLibrary\steamapps\common\Arma 3\Contact\Addons\props_f_contact.pbo" or would this not be kosher?

i havent been able to locate any licensing details aside from arma 2 references that id assume are not relevant

[old jay]

I don't have my thinking cap on at the moment, but I'd say NO, you cannot take content from a PBO.

[inland sphinx]

You cannot redistribute content from base game files.
You're thinking of getting to use contact content without having to load contact, no you cannot do that.

[autumn brook]

Damn that's a shame

[lyric light]

So what about those vanilla vehicle retextures?
Are those not allowed?

[celest sundial]

Technically no, but for vanilla textures t hat were edited significantly its practically tolerated as there is no real harm in it.

[spice sleet]

May we ask for license change on vanilla A3 content, regarding modding within arma 3, please? It would really help.
As, exactly said, there is zero harm done, you need to have base game anyway. It would only help game sales as it would boost creativity for modders and help with refreshing really old content which is more than 10 years old now.
People would kill to see vanilla maps modified like it was with chernarus back in the days. Unfortunately, deformer script and other config/mission ways of simple replacements are very limited in what can be done, and have perfomance/load impact.

[south remnant]

data packs are On The Way for A3

Pretty sure it's legal holding it up at the moment

[spice sleet]

was there already info regarding that from devs?

[south remnant]

that has been the status for years bro

dedmen or someone will chime in in the morning

[autumn brook]

i just want contact props usable in mp man

[vast stump]

They are usable. People who don't want the ads can buy the dlc.

[autumn brook]

the alien assets in the campaign are not though

[vast stump]

How so?

[autumn brook]

they are only usable when you load the contact dlc in launcher

[vast stump]

Well, then you can make mp mission for contact owners I suppose.

[autumn brook]

loading the dlc breaks multiplayer and it it disables the server browser option in the ui

as well as map and other functions are forced when you load the dlc

[south remnant]

Yeah the campaign exclusive content isn't able to be used with MP scenarios

Quite sad but it is what it is

[autumn brook]

i was trying to remake it in a modded version but problem is the models

[south remnant]

Contact Bohemia legal as the models still have dlc restrictions no matter where they are

Slim chance but possible

[autumn brook]

i cant find it pinned in here or #ip_rights_violations can you send it to me?

[south remnant]

BI legal email is channel topic in #ip_rights_violations

[autumn brook]

ah thanks didnt see it as brain instantly scans for blue hyperlink thanks

[spice sleet]

So, is it true that A3 data packs have been on their way?
referring back to this convo
#other_ip_topics message

[south remnant]

yes

me when i actually use the search

[spice sleet]

Damn. I mean I get why they may hesitate to allow porting to other arma titles, but within arma 3 it would be about time for non-dlc content to be usable. It would make perfect sense given EOL and how long it has been since release.

[south remnant]

legal takes a while

[spice sleet]

& all the fun with it

[abstract crest]

LOL, first result is me complaining about a lack of furniture. I find that comforting 😉

[grim sand]

Toilet thought: So Bohemia makes it prohibited to pay for or otherwise commercialize the use of their tooling - but (without reading the legal in detail again) does that extend to paying for IP rights, content in batch or buying a company that has a portfolio of Reforger content?

You're not paying for the work directly, but you are paying money for the value of said works, via incorporated into the value of the company.

I guess to protect yourself you could remove the value of those assets from the purchase price - but you're basically playing pretend at that point. As you'll still end up with the content transferred to your ownership.

Because fundamentally the transfer of "rights" is part of the selling process - but it can be separated, ie, It's not inherent. I guess if you really boil it down, you could broad stroke argue, that you can't have a company built around commerical work with the engine - but you can easily skirt around that, by keeping commerical operations and not seperate as per legal terms.

Anyways, just a thought while I'm sitting here 😂

[inland sphinx]

buying a company that has a portfolio of Reforger content
How would a company have reforger content?

As long as the content itself, is still freely available to the users. You could buy, say a company that makes free mods.. But.. wtf? 😄

"via incorporated into the value of the company." Making free content goes into the value of a company? Well publicity maybe?

"the value of those assets" Value of freely available mods?

[old jay]

Having done a bit of work in the IP space, my response would be "that sounds like a nightmare". There are way too many variable to consider in that scenario, one would need a dedicated legal team to ensure compliance.

[grim sand]

Well the company would have IP, potentially staff, and a whole bunch of other soft and hard assets that aren't covered by BI legal.

[zealous ore]

are there companies that make mods on the side for reforger? i don’t follow

[grim sand]

Its just a thought regarding the separation of things. Since there is stuff that is covered, and this seemed like a grey area.

[old jay]

One of the first hurdles is:

• Do not use the game, any of its parts or the game content commercially without Our permission.

If you buy a company, that falls under commercial use. However, if you could get BI to agree, that changes things.

Secondly would be verifying that all of the content is legit and is in accordance with the EULA and other legal instruments.

https://reforger.armaplatform.com/eula
https://www.bohemia.net/community/game-content-usage-rules
https://reforger.armaplatform.com/workshop-terms

and others.

[inland sphinx]

Your IP in case of making a mod. Would for example be the model that you made.
And you can sell your model or use it commercially all you want. And that model would be an asset of the company.

I fail to see how that model, in converted form in a freely available mod, would be an asset in the same way, where it would be relevant for selling the company.
Your "IP" is in the source model, not in the free Arma mod version of the model.

[rapid escarp]

Also, how are they even operating as a "company"? How are they making profit from Reforger? Are they paying tax?

[inland sphinx]

Is it a analogy of buying the "rights" to a mod?

That would mean the mod authors, are selling the mod to you. Which is commercial use of things created using the game.

I guess you could sell them the permission to take over the mod and upload it to workshop. But not give them any of the mod files. (that doesn't make much sense..)
But then, to transfer the workshop mod to them, you'd have to use workbench which at that point is using it for a commercial purpose again.

You could sell them the rights to the mod, and tell them you will take down your version so they can upload a new one.
But then, opening workbench to delete the mod (as set in your contract with the buyer), would be commercial use again.

I don't think this brain juggling makes any sense

[meager fractal]

also I would really like if #ip_rights_violations and #other_ip_topics were kept free of "what if" cases and only covered real scenarios of "I want to do this" so we know who and what we're dealing with, and keep them void from in-head drama

[grim sand]

Well, I wouldn't be asking if I didn't want to know if I could do it. I would like to know options, that's all. I want to renumerate my supporters, but I understand the EUL:A and legal implications, but it occurred to me that IP/Corpo stuff and such would exist outside of BI (although really BI has final say anyways so it is all moot). So I posed the question to see the thoughts.

But I think Dedmens last post is closest too. You could buy ideas and work, but it would be generic and nothing that has touched or involves the game/engine/workshop. Which was my original though as well.

[meager fractal]

roger that; your "toilet thought" writing made me think it was a random inquiry about a "what if"
do not mind my post here but leave it addressed to others who may need to see it 😃

[grim sand]

All good. In the hood.

[celest sundial]

I can accurately answer this for you: Not allowed. Even if me and my business buddy made a little project which we never release anywhere ... at the moment you purchase us and the reforger content becomes your property, it was part of a sale, which is commercial use, and that is not allowed by default (though you can always try to seek permision).
Leaving it out of the contract but then exercising ownership later by e.g. publishing said content under the company name etc, even if you never paid money for it specificallym is still commercial use then as it was produced in a commercial context. This is why very nice and respectful companies like adobe can charge so many people, as you can barely do anything in business that would not be commercial use if it involves any file made in their software.

[grim sand]

Interesting and good info.

[celest sundial]

The only saving grace for you is that we plan to update our terms in the future to open up slightly towards comissioned work (that will fall under strict licenses to ensure free availability to end users though). So if you have big oil money you can group together a bunch of modders and have them make content that you put your name on, and you can pay them to work for you - but the end result must be free. So you can not run a business with it, as there will be no income, but sponsorings are within the realm of possilities in the not so distance future (™️)

[old jay]

That's actually really good news. Shame it took 22 years.

[meager bolt]

wooooo money wooooo

[dreamy sluice]

wait, so when you mean sponsoring, do you mean for some extreme example, "Coca Cola gives you X amount of money to put their logo in your mod"?

[grim sand]

I think he means sponsoring as in running a onlygamers and selling ARMA pics to keep development going 😜

[abstract crest]

Terms for Reforger only, or ARMA 3 and DayZ too?

[old jay]

Good follow up! 👍

[zealous ore]

he means person A sponsoring the creation and release of a mod that is publicly available by paying person B who would do the modding part.

although coca cola should work too if they are the ones paying

[abstract crest]

So basically allowing mod monetization but only allowing it if the eventual mod is available for everyone on the workshop? Cause that's not gonna be exploited 🙄

[blazing epoch]

So sort of like a go fund me or patreon but none of the in game content is actually locked behind the paywall or "supporter backing"?

[celest sundial]

Oh yeah sorry I always forget to clarify. Arma Reforger. Maybe we expand it to other games if we see it go well, maybe we don't.

[zealous ore]

yes,

[analog sphinx]

Dear god, its finally happening!

[normal pond]

well, people link their paypal/patreon/whatever in their mods
But it is as "sponsor me overall", not as "sponsor me to make this exact mod". Which afaik is ok even with current rules

[icy linden]

I link my of

[abstract crest]

Will reserve judgement until we see the wording, license under which it allows. Can certainly see at least one big possible exploit but, again, depends on the terms

[celest sundial]

What would that be? Once the terms come out its unlikely to be changed again in due time, so its best to share any thoughts you have before they are set in stone

[edgy rover]

Are there any news to this btw? @celest sundial
#other_ip_topics message

[celest sundial]

Not right now, but both is still in process. Just not as high of a priority as other things we needed to sort out 🙂

[edgy rover]

Alrighty - appreciate the response 🤝

[crimson garden]

Are you allowed to debin the contact pbos / models to see how they are implemented?
I'm seeing if its possible to add a custom spectrum device (#arma3_config message) and as far as I can tell it has some specific data in the model itself (maybe some selections or memory points?).

[abstract crest]

I'd assume you can for educational purposes given that the Contact addons are now PBO not EBO and the ODOL Web Converter has never been taken down by BI, Arkensor might be able to give context on the latter

[crimson garden]

That was my assumption, I was just waiting on an "official" statement

[celest sundial]

The official answer is: No you may not debinarize any of our games contents.

However as long as you play around with what ever locally and in private, so not sharing it with anybody, nobody would know about you doing so.

[inland sphinx]

What you can do however: Ask.
I don't understand why so many people feel the need to just take our stuff (even if only to learn from it) and violate the EULA for it.
When you could simply just ask for it and most likely get what you need.

[icy linden]

can I have your stuff

[crimson garden]

Is there some specific place to ask?

[inland sphinx]

No. You have to find and directly contact people who would have access.
So anyone on Arma 3 team in this case.

[meager bolt]

u can ask u just gotta find the right person and hope they didn’t move on from an old game 😭

like I’d love to know and ask the ppl who made the 3D assets for a lot of stuff, like the MX rifles, but I doubt they’re around in any capacity nowadays

[abstract crest]

MX was designed by the irl firearms company CMMG

Actually never seen anything saying whether they did the models or whether BI did them based on drawings/specs from them

[wicked sequoia]

No need to guess. Buchta explicitly stated in the 10th anniversary livestream that CMMG only made the concepts while BI's artists handled the rest:

So, they came up with design and a couple of variants like grenadier rifle, marksman rifle, support weapon, carbine.
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1759425550
Skip ahead to 01:49:06. The few minutes before that is Buchta explaining how Chris Torchia reached out to CMMG in the first place.

[inland sphinx]

The people that designed these models and made them work might not be around anymore.
But there are still people that can open them and look at it to answer technical questions like Dart seems to have

[crimson garden]

I meant to ask more on that, but got busy. Would you be able to check the model and/or provide a debinned one?

I suspect it definitely has some model specific details, but no clue if that's just for the mini screen on the gun itself or the larger one. Or if those are the same and that explains why just swapping the model breaks it

[inland sphinx]

Send me DM, with the full path to the model, and what you need to know and I can take a look. You have about ~3 hours left or I'll bump you to january 😄

[solid basin]

Sorry this is probably in wrong place but didnt find better one. My question is, is it ok to create extension for arma 3 that registers hosted games to a web site to create a list of hosted missions so people can see the games running?

[golden dew]

sure, but completely useless.
there are already a bunch of arma 3 server lists that dont require an extension, see battlemetrics / arma3-servers

[solid basin]

oh ic, well i was just thinking of listing only specified missions

[fiery egret]

For the record this also can be done without any extension (you can get the mission name as a string, by querying the server using the steam protocol). You can ask in #arma3_tools

[solid basin]

this https://developer.valvesoftware.com/wiki/Server_queries ?

[fiery egret]

Yes, this. But move to #arma3_tools if you want to continue the discussion, please

[solid basin]

maybe i will. thx ! 👍

[normal pond]

is it ok to create extension for arma 3
Yes
Doesn't matter what it does unless it is illegal, like a virus
In the end, it still has to be loaded by the server admin for the extension to be running.

[solid basin]

I thought that having server info sent over net to website would be something people wouldnt like. though its already happening with server browsers

[abstract crest]

If a server owner doesn't like it they won't load it...

[solid basin]

actually I would add that feature to an existing extension that my mission already depends on. so it might come as bit of surprise 😄

[abstract crest]

Hmmm, would that run into GDPR issues?

[solid basin]

dunno thats why i brought this up

[abstract crest]

Well, you didn't mention adding it under the covers...?

That's an entirely different question

[meager fractal]

which is then a legal/GDPR issue, not an EULA one

[solid basin]

um yeah i was just talking about making it into extension

[abstract crest]

As others have noted though, Battle Metrics (and other things like DZLauncher, DZSALauncher and A3Launcher) show that most information can be remotely queried from servers with no extentions needed

[solid basin]

so is extension bad because of the legal stuff? sorry this law stuff is over my head 🙂

[hardy bone]

If you force the user to have your extension loaded and it send info outside without their approval, you'll be violating one of the GDPR regulation/rule

[solid basin]

ok i see. i was thinking giving the user option to enable that feature, in a way or another

[hardy bone]

If you allow the user to enable the function (or disable and make it clear that it's by default enabled) you should be good. Though you'll have to read the GDPR to be certain you're doing it right

[solid basin]

ok

[abstract crest]

And good luck understanding GDPR 😉

[hardy bone]

So true

[solid basin]

ok thx for the help guys im not much wiser with this law stuff but i'll keep what you said in mind

[fiery egret]

Or maybe instead of sending that data, ping your server and your server will then query the gaming server back for the same data (using Steam protocol) that you would be sending, but then that would be publicly available data

And I'm guessing that people have agreed that data to be available by agreeing to the Steam EULA anyway (because otherwise finding any server would be impossible)

[solid basin]

the only thing with steam protocol is that it may not be possible to filter only my missions?

[fiery egret]

That's why your extension could ping your server, telling it "ask me! I'm GenCoder8's mission!"

(or you could check GDPR and check if it applies to publicly available data and if whatever people above told you is still true for that data 🤷‍♂️ - IANAL so I don't know)

[dark tulip]

Or simply make it configurable (default disabled!), so it will only ping when people allow it 🤷

Not sure if it's related to GDPR (as this is about personal information, although a local IP would be...), however there are more national and international laws/rules/guidelines which could be affected.
By making it optional, and server-side only, it should be OK 99.9% of the cases.

[fiery egret]

Local IP wouldn't make sense in the context of listing servers on the internet, though

[solid basin]

you mean like the steam protocol (server) would get its data from the arma server running with the extension?

[fiery egret]

1. Game server running the extension pings your backend server.
2. Backend server uses Steam Protocol to fetch publicly available data from game server.

[solid basin]

ok got it

[hardy bone]

Number 1 would go against GDPR if user is not informed and doesn't have the ability to toggle it on/off

[fiery egret]

Is it? It's just pinging the server and NOT transmitting any data. Just the same as fetching an image or html from a random host.

AKTCHUALLY... @solid basin doesn't even need any extension, now that I think of it. Just do a htmlLoad call to your server, and that's all that's needed 🙃

Like, it's literally doing the same thing as the ACE mod (? not sure if it's them or some other mod - don't shout at me if it's not them) doing htmlLoad to check the latest version of the mod available and show it on the screen

And I'm quite sure you can't opt out of that 🙃

[solid basin]

the only info that would be sent is the IP really (and maybe player count) . havent planned sending players names or anything. and to play safe all that would be initially disabled and have to be toggled on

[fiery egret]

Technically IPs are PII (Personally Identifiable Information), however you're NOT sending players' IPs, just the server IP. Not sure how that changes things. Just pointing this out 🤔

[solid basin]

right

[fiery egret]

One could argue that server IPs are public information, but again, IANAL!

[dark tulip]

If I locally host a server, than my IP address is shared (needed to connect to) and that falls under GDPR as personal information, as it can be used to track your location and person.

[fiery egret]

Yes, but I hope you realize that Valve broadcasts your server's IP to literally anyone who is asking and your IP can be obtained by querying this url: #arma3_tools message

You can either do an HTTP GET of that URL or you can also query the valve master server through UDP (in which case you don't need any API key).
That's what websites like Battlemetrics do, and you'll find your locally hosted server there as well

That's what websites like Battlemetrics do
And the Arma launcher, as well. Forgot about that one 🙂

Those IPs are and have literally always been publicly avaialable

See here, all the DESKTOP-xxxxxx servers for example: https://www.battlemetrics.com/servers/search?q=DESKTOP&game=arma3&sort=score

[dark tulip]

Just because it "always have been available" doesn't mean it's legal 😉

As for Arma and Steam, this is part of EULA / Privacy Policy, where you agreed to have your personal data shared (like IP addresses).
That doesn't mean ANYONE can just collect and share that data.

[fiery egret]

Too bad that I can't check what's required to get a Steam api key right now, at work :/

Well, anyway, I guess we'd have to wait for someone to sue Battlemetrics (or other similar sites) to settle whether collecting that data is illegal

[celest sundial]

I do not really understand where this discussion is supposed to go.

1. What mission a server has loaded is publicly listed via steam master server and query api. You can make a website to find all servers that run the mission if you want to. Gametracker already provides this info too.
2. If you for some reason want to make an extension that registers servers in your own listing api, you can do that. Nobody stops you. But people need to opt in for using that anyway. Extensions can not be loaded from mod or mission file.
3. Using htmlload to register a host by sharing the info via clients that connect to it is also possible, but needs a privacy disclaimer at the location before people would run such missions, so its rather in-practical. Given that the 1st option exists, discussing 2. and 3. is somewhat theoretical and pointless.

[solid basin]

thx for your input @celest sundial. but i dont understand, extensions cant be used?

[celest sundial]

You can but the user must download it manually, place it in the correct folders for it to load.

[solid basin]

why cant it come with a mod?

[celest sundial]

Because that would be a major security risk. Extensions have significant PC access, and full memory access to the arma process. So if I want to destroy your PC I could. This is also why extensions on clients are blocked and need to be whitelisted by Battleye. There are only few to link to teamspeak and other reputable sources that are commonly used. Anyway, this is going off topic for IP questions. It makes no sense for your use-case, don't waste your time on it.

[normal pond]

Ehm, I am 100% sure extensions are in mods.
ACE, TFAR, ACRE and OCAP are the main ones. Extensions (the actual dll/so files) are either in mod folers OR Arma root.

[normal pond]

Should have tagged this

[celest sundial]

Not inside the pbos I meant. Since he wants to make a mission file to include it thats not working.

[normal pond]

PBOs no. But mods are fine.

Missions also no

[celest sundial]

Even when inside @mod folder windows and antivirus and BE will block it. Anyway, I do not want to continue this topic here and I would ask you to refrain from that as well.

[normal pond]

As for security, what he is saying sounds like server only mod, which are not checked by BE

[cursive sedge]

you can create one per steam account at https://steamcommunity.com/dev/apikey

[twilit garden]

So I have a question, I take some files out of one mod and add them to my own. That's repacking right? And most licenses prohibit that

[inland sphinx]

Yes

[twilit garden]

Thanks

[left sage]

Quick clarification:

I'm making a map for someone's public server. I'd like to use some workshop content under the APL-ND license.

Is my understanding here correct?

• I can't change the mod at all, but i can place the items in the map.
• It's fine for other people to play on the map.
• Unless specified in the mod's description, I don't need to have an attribution on a loading screen or something.

Other questions:

• If the server I'm making the map for eventually allowed donations someday, or if I sold the map, does that cause a problem?

[inland sphinx]

1. I would expect so, but it could be classed as a derivative, depends what the mod is, if the mod is clearly buildings to be used on a terrain.. (safer to ask)
2. Yes
3. Correct, you are giving attribution anyway by having it as a dependency
4. Donations don't matter, if they are donations. But, MANY people are illegally selling things and calling it donations. Donation has a very specific meaning, don't get it wrong.
   You cannot sell maps, commercial use is forbidden.

[knotty latch]

Hey, so I have a Mexican military mod for Arma Reforger, and I just found out that the Mexican law states that things such as the flag or coat of arms can only be reproduced for official government purposes (at least that is my understanding from the research I did), so I was wondering if I would have the change the flag in the mod or if I'm able to keep it as is, since it is just a mod?

If I need to change it, would I be able to use older versions of the flag or use AI to create a new coat of arms for the flag?

[south remnant]

Wikipedia isn't an official government purpose and has the mexican flag on it, so I would expect you're misinterpreting it - that'd be a pretty nonsensical law too

[grim sand]

Yes, but that's illustration purposes which most laws allow and most countries.

Canada has the same law and it allows them to enforce, essentially people trying to impersonate the government (The flag and the seals and all that are trademarks of the government and have to be rigorously defended or they're lost to the commons as per the law). While you will be breaking the law by using the flag in a non-sanctioned environment - The likelihood of enforcement is near zero (unless you go on to impersonate the Mexican government 😂)

[normal pond]

In the Czech Republic you're also not allowed to wear the flag, other state symbols or military markings on uniforms.

Anything that would indicate that you're actually part of the military (other than having the uniform) is prohibited.

However this is for real life only. No one cares if it's in a game. It's to prevent people thinking you might be military and trying to impersonate a military member. Same goes for police.

[grim sand]

And that's a good point. Every country has laws about impersonating the military - and of course when you play a video game, that's all you're doing. But laws at least in the western world, have a evil mental component and an evil action component - and one is missing you (generally) don't have a crime.

[knotty latch]

The main reason I'm asking this question is that, unlike other country flags, I've noticed that the Mexican flag has been changed in some games. One example I can think of is COD MW2 (2022)

[plain sedge]

that's due to COD having various IP issues; just looking at the Humvee incident (They have been moving away from potential IP issues by creating things that are deliberately not the real thing).
Different games have different reasons for doing their own things Also, what applies to one game doesn't necessarily apply to others

[south remnant]

^ case was won and then they immediately went yeah fuck that we arent spending that much on legal for arguably neglibile benefit ever again

[abstract crest]

What game companies do does not necessarily imply that modders should or need to do the same thing. Look at DayZ SA and its ridiculous KA-74, KAM and VSD 🙄

[jolly jewel]

Hey there! I got an email that something i uploaded awhile ago (likely outdated and broken) got banned from the workshop due to section 3 breach! however i bought a new pc a month ago and dont have any of my old files or addons for tools. So i basically have no idea what it was that got banned and dont know how to look it up? any help on this. ofcourse you cant email back the email that was sent to you.

[unkempt sorrel]

There’s an email in the #ip_rights_violations channel you can email

[junior crow]

Likely a Fallout mod, they mostly all got taken down a few days ago

[unkempt sorrel]

The main fallout mod was taken down a while ago. And the devs got banned

Likely reuploads of it

[autumn brook]

is there a bi legal email to reach out to other than infringments? i want to make a content usage request and can only find [e-mail] in this discord or the contact page on the bi site

[inland sphinx]

There is one other. But not for content usage, afaik the infringements is the best contact point for that

[autumn brook]

ok thanks im guessing they would also want filepaths / references to what is wanted to use in the email or is that only useful later? and instead just a specific definition

[inland sphinx]

If you can do it all in one email, instead of dragging it out over multiple, that would be easier and faster for everyone

[autumn brook]

ok thanks for the help

[icy linden]

How is BI enforcing no monetization for servers in Reforger?

[meager fractal]

we execute trespassers in public

[autumn brook]

is that why bi brought the t-72?

[meager fractal]

some guys really went for it so…

[normal pond]

From what I understand, every server has a Battleye GUID. BI can just ban this GUID, so the server will not start.
Is it probably super simple to get around if you have dedicated server/own the HW? Most probably.

[icy linden]

Yeah that sounds useless

[lethal cape]

https://reforger.armaplatform.com/workshop/645547260E2C6DBC-PlayStoreSupport/changelog

Too lazy to download and look at this

But the name screams EULA

[lethal grove]

so you’re making a report without doing the due diligence to discover if it’s actually against TOS?

[vapid orchid]

50 updates in 2 days, what?

[lethal cape]

There's a button for reporting shit. If I was gonna report it i'd click that button.

Bohemia didn't design a report system where you air your drama out in #other_ip_topics (Even though we all do 😦 )
I put it here so if anyone WAS interested in looking they could know it exists to look.

[celest sundial]

Dealt with thx.

[mystic marsh]

whats against the EULA ?

its my mod

[mystic marsh]

what against EULA about it ?

the pic ?

[glacial meteor]

it was a drone mod that was under development. why was he banned?

he named it that just for testing?

[glacial meteor]

Laziness is the reason good developers arent doing anything for this game

[vale trail]

its already hard enough to get arma 3 devs to start modding on reforger and then you get situations like this. smh

[vast stump]

There typically is strong reason why something gets taken out. Such things may not be publicly shared though so the maker needs to contact BI.

[celest sundial]

I will list it again but please:

• use a name that indicates what you are doing.
• Put the mod on unlisted or test tag if you just play around.
• See if you can avoid updating it every few minutes. If you need to test, do it in workbench.

To me it looked like you are pumping 40mb of garbage versions to our servers for a meme.

[mystic marsh]

bruh

this wasnt in the eula

we want the mod to be easy to find so we name it something unique

[vale trail]

you guys didnt even open the mod💀

[glacial meteor]

it is literally a full drone mod and it was working.

no ticket, no email. just banned no warning

if the name was an issue. that literally takes 2 seconds to change

[mystic marsh]

#1331082870537715732 message

[glacial meteor]

the whole thing is, someone scanned the workshop, found a mod that was named weird, didnt even check the code or what it was doing, and reported, and it immediately got banned.

laziness on all fronts truly

[glacial meteor]

this shouldve been sent to him before the ban was "dealt with"

[mystic marsh]

@celest sundial please can we get the mod unbanned ?

we shall change the name

[celest sundial]

Your profile is unblocked. You should be able to publish your local data again.

[mystic marsh]

[glacial meteor]

appreciate you.

[celest sundial]

A mod with absolutely 0 info, but 10+ PAGES of versions (outstanding from all other workshop items), "asking" for playstore support with "hehe" as description is not exactly something I wanted to further look at in the evening. I blocked the profile from uploading to not wake up to potentially 1000 more versions, assuming this is some automated batch file loop updating to our servers. Not more, not less.

[lethal cape]

I don't want to be a dick here but it's not my responsibility to download and look at a mod named "Playstore Support" to see if it's in violation of an EULA I didn't make.

Maybe don't name your mods after things that break EULA.

And they wont get thrown up here.

[vale trail]

you should read the EULA

[lethal cape]

This is extremely satirical coming from you specifically.

[glacial meteor]

this is just a lame excuse really bro. as a modder why do you scan the workshop just to throw other modders under the bus. this is not a competition

[celest sundial]

It is not about eula violations, it is protection against getting spammed with data by malicious actors until we could investigate. We will probably implement a rate limit to technically avoid a scenario that I had in mind with it. Valid uploads should not be affected probably.

[glacial meteor]

i understand that

[lethal cape]

If you think I put the link up because I think this is a competition you're mistaken. I was just looking for mods for inspiration/our own servers and stumbled on this.
It appears at face value this is a mod that's supporting monetization of in game assets. So I threw it up here.
Arky found something else he took issue with.

Because a name like "Playstore Support" literally indicates some form of STORE where money is exchanged.

Name your shit appropriately.

[glacial meteor]

lol

[jolly jewel]

wasnt your mods banned or something for putting Z's on vics and stuff but your gonna come in here and complain about EULA? i get your frustrated, we didnt know it was the drone guy, its just like all of those mods that are are those like weird spam ones that are super small. Believe me we dont want to have cool stuff banned

[vale trail]

no my account was not banned for that

[celest sundial]

I do not see any point in continuing this topic. The mod author is free to ask me for further support if needed via dms. Lets close this. Take your fight to DMs please. The channel was already derailed enough

[mystic marsh]

check dms ❤️

[icy linden]

What is the stance on something like a league or tournament with an entry fee and cash prize?

[pliant oracle]

unless everyone on the same hardware so there's no hardware advantage due to low fps on certain users.

[dark tulip]

Sounds like "monitized", although if you contact BI with more details they may even (un)officially support it

[rich quarry]

you said you list it "again". where it is listed first time?

[rich quarry]

Dear train conductor, if your "backend" cannot chew 30 mb mod uploads, maybe consider hiring better backend-specialised developers, and building stronger backend?
Game have thousands of players after all, and big chunk of them can and will download and upload alot of mods on a daily basis...

[golden dew]

It can handle it just fine. but spamming the workshop with 30+ submissions a day for no reason that all need to be saved is usually considered spam. + the useless name, description and image make it highly likely to be spam

[lethal grove]

yet the workshop is still flooded with what feels like thousands of useless SCR save files

[icy linden]

Isnt that like a bug

[vast stump]

As you can see the matter was already concluded. please refrain from taggin BI people unnecessarily and ranting offtopic here. if you have game feedback to give you can use the feedback tracker. instructions at #reforger_feedback. (this is not invitation to discuss the matter. just to notify you for the future)

[rich quarry]

someone was scolded for breaking rules. i asked to be pointed to that rule, since i am making my own mod atm. i did not tag, i did reply, it is different thing. does give notif, or not, depending on how you do it

[grim sand]

Goats above post was your polite indication that the topic is dropped. Which isn't an invitation to start it up again.

[celest sundial]

The workshop system is used for GM save sharing too. Just not filtered out as intended.

#enfusion_workshop for topics on this please

[rich quarry]

i dont care about what was there much, i need link to rules. too hard to share rules but not hard to enforce them?

as i said, i am making my small mod and would like to see if its compliant

since if its not - no point of spending time on it

[grim sand]

You will care when the moderators ban you from speaking for a week or longer.

The short and sweet of it, is BI makes the rules and can change them as they want, and the moderator's word is law.

I'm just giving you a heads up, If you care to ignore it, well that's going to be on you.

[dark tulip]

2 cases which basically explain the why, even without explicit "this is allowed and this no" (as that list would be massive and impossible to maintain)

You acknowledge that We may in Our sole discretion decide to remove any Content uploaded to ARMA REFORGER Workshop particularly if it is in breach of these Terms of Use or in any other way violates the rights of third parties.
source: https://reforger.armaplatform.com/workshop-terms (under chapter 3)

If You create any content, You may do so, but there are rules.
This content must not infringe anyone's copyrights or author rights, it must not be offensive to people or illegal in any other way. The content must also not interfere with the proper functioning of the software, ARMA REFORGER game or any other Services associated with it.
If You do not want to accept these rules, do not create and share any content using our software.
source: https://store.steampowered.com/eula/1874910_eula_1

And Arkensor already explained the details on his decision on why, based on (most likely) the above 2 texts (and rest of documents)

[blazing epoch]

If we have explicit, written permission from a musical artist to use their songs in a mod should we make that known so that our mod doesn't risk being flagged? My fear is that someone shazam's the song or something and assumes we don't have permission and reports it to BI, who (understandably) assumes I don't have permission to use the song.

[icy linden]

Put it in the description, that you have permission

[old jay]

Also, just stating that you "have permission" does not grant you a free pass. Ideally, you would have something from the creator that is legally defensible.

[icy linden]

"Made with permission from <owner of the copyrighted material, recording label etc>" is enough not to get the mod immediately banned - you would expect being asked for proof

[inland sphinx]

Even without writing it you should expect being asked for proof. Unless that musician somehow has the reputation for never giving anyone permission 🤔

[celest sundial]

If we think there is a violation of thrid party rights we would contact you via email to ask for clarification if we can not be sure about it. The only direct report to permenanet takedown action would be seen if the rights holder whos IP was violated asked for it.

[grim sand]

Yea, no way BI is going around and wacking people on the reports of a 3rd party who feels that maybe something is afoot. Give them a little credit 😛

[blazing epoch]

That sounds good, thank you for clarification. They're self-published so there's no holder to the rights other than them and I have their written consent to use it in Arma (I'm personally friends with them) so I guess I'm in the clear here

[blazing epoch]

I understand, which is why I explicitly asked them in writing about it and they gave the explicit permission to use it in Arma Reforger. There's no other IP holder on their music other than them and they're not going to strike it, I'd assume those things combined is following the rules as well as you possibly can on such a topic

[meager fractal]

it seems so!

• you asked for permission
• you obtained it
• you can prove it
  thank you, a model for everyone to follow 🍻

[old jay]

https://tenor.com/view/the-chosen-jesus-point-look-up-smiling-gif-18032168

[rich quarry]

just use ai slop

some of the tools are quite flexible

[icy linden]

Bump

[serene stirrup]

If you don't get an answer here, check with the guys from https://esportsmasters.org/. They ran A3 competitions for a while with cash prizes, but I'm not sure if they ever had an entry fee. I believe @deft pulsar is one of the main guys behind it, he might be able to give some insight.

[meager fractal]

@shut forge here

[shut forge]

hello

so what can we do do. i have mentioned my points what more is there for me to say sir

[normal pond]

most probably mention them again here?

[shut forge]

’’As a community content creator, can I limit who can use or modify my mods?
Yes, as a community content creator, you can limit who can use or modify your mods by complying with the respective terms outlined in the EULAs or by the content license you assign. For instance, if you wish to restrict anyone from creating upon or modifying your mod, you may apply an APL-ND license. More information about this can also be found in Section 3 of the Workshop Terms of Use.’’ breaks Section 3 of the workshop TOS, i also would say that donations for a mod would fall under indirect monitization breaking this part of TOS, The custom license shall explicitly prohibit the use of the Content for any commercial purposes, shall explicitly prohibit any direct or indirect monetization of the Content and shall explicitly prohibit the use of the Content outside Our own products. The custom license shall also not limit the functioning of this ARMA REFORGER Workshop and shall support its purposes.

isnt this considered Monitization? its so clearly obvious man...

hes asking for donations directly to develop said mod.

[mystic marsh]

i knew it was your friend XDDD

nice trap

wont catch me lacking

[shut forge]

your breaking tos bro, hope your proud

[mystic marsh]

mario said i am not

[shut forge]

you can read the tos yourself do you want a link? what your doing is directly against the sections i have mentioned

[mystic marsh]

ok, ban me then

[shut forge]

your ego is really shit bro u need to chill

just let people use your mod as per tos

right...

[mystic marsh]

nuh uh

[shut forge]

your only digging a bigger hole with that my friend

[mystic marsh]

okey...

[shut forge]

my points been made, and youve helped me prove it so i thank you bro

[mystic marsh]

waiting for ban

[shut forge]

idk why you sent me a friend req

[mystic marsh]

cause i want to be friends

[shut forge]

right

[river patrol]

the good ending 👍

[mystic marsh]

i love making friends 🥰

[mystic marsh]

btw i gave your friend permission to use the mod

[river patrol]

I'm honestly curious what's the turnout of this. it doesn't clearly state on tos that you may or may not prevent users from accessing your mod. yet I've seen this happen multiple times before on custom licenses.

also are external donations for an enfusion project allowed? thought it would still fall under the monetization rule. not engaged on this discussion, more legitimately curious.

[vast stump]

donations are fine

since donations get nothing in return

however the moment you give something in return its a transaction

people can support their favourite modders. they just cant get anything in return

which for some reason turns off many people it seems

[river patrol]

makes a lot more sense. thanks as always goat

[vast stump]

well they do kinda get the mod in return same way as everyone else

[river patrol]

more to prevent paywalled content I'm assuming

[mystic marsh]

i dont mind it

[shut forge]

that is fair enough, but what about section 3?

[mystic marsh]

bro, lots of mods have it

this on RHS

[shut forge]

FROM CREATING A DERIVATIVE

they can still use the mod

[mystic marsh]

doesnt matter

no they cant

[shut forge]

they just cant make anything using it as a dependancy

bro read

[mystic marsh]

they are banned from using it

[shut forge]

okay thats not the same as ask permission just to put it on a server

theyre probs banned for good reason

what you are doing is dodgy matey

[mystic marsh]

mario said its fine

[river patrol]

I don't believe you can stop people from downloading and using your mod. at least the tos doesn't mention these cases. (that'd even be ridiculous to enforce) I remember there was a huge hoopla back then about a group that tried to.

[visual crag]

The idea of trying to stop another group from using a free, publicly available mod for a game you do not own the rights or control to is laughable.

Please bring that crap to court, I would pay to be in the room.

[shut forge]

lmfao fr

its almost like the tos doesnt allow that. they need to make it more clear though shiits vauge as hell

[atomic yarrow]

Just reading up on this is so cringe. He legitimately said you can use it and said you can donate if you wanted to help develop and/or support. But wasn't required of you.. then you come in here for the BI team to see a "got ya" post between yall it just Sounds like to me (in my humble opinion) what I'd call a blue falcon type of thing going on here. I mean people take a large amount of time out of their life to develop mods for the game, that's what makes this game worth anything is the mods. Why are you going after this guy? Sounds like he has a mod you want and/or jealous over. Also To the Moderators as a consumer that has played the arma series since the very beginning. Modders make the game great so I would focus more on servers/better base game assets then dudes coming here poaching modders over jealousy in my humble opinion.

[shut forge]

i have more hours modding then most people have played this game... since when was seeing something against tos and not agreeing with it considered jealousy? your whole comment is rage bait bro. ive literally pointed towards the section of tos hes breaking i cant be any more clear. weve learnt that donos dont fall under indirect monitzation which i was unware of and i even said that is fair enough? so what is your issue with me being concerned with ths TOS?

@atomic yarrow

[atomic yarrow]

You don't have to explain yourself to me. I'm just commenting on how I see it from my point of view in this chat. Im not a modder im just a dedicated player there is No need to play victim bud lol

[shut forge]

yet again.. rage bait. how am i playing the victim?

the only victims here are the people who genuinley think they need to ask this scummy guy for permission to use his mod on their servers.

[atomic yarrow]

Look at the way you are typing it out man. You obviously don't get it. I didn't come in here for a little back and forth with you. I explained it in my original comment what I thought about the whole situation. Hope your day gets better

[shut forge]

i hope you get a life brother

[mystic marsh]

i have the rights to my own mod thank you

[shut forge]

Technically no you dont. anything built on the enfusion engine bi have the rights to as far as i am aware

the only rights you have are over any assets you made or bought

[mystic marsh]

thx for info, next update the mod is gona be password locked

[shut forge]

are you alright in your head?

[mystic marsh]

wdym ?

[shut forge]

TOS

[icy linden]

You can create a mechanism by which a server would have to have a certain condition pass like a password in a file otherwise the mod does not function. By not function I mean imagine a vehicle that once spawned is not usable. It cannot do things like break the game, shut down a server, or other kind of trolling.

[shut forge]

wouldnt that fall under gatekeeping?

[icy linden]

There is no mention of gatekeeping in the terms of service

[shut forge]

i mean preventing use is gate keeping, ik it doesnt explicitly state it but isnt it sort of just obvious?

[icy linden]

You should read the EULA

[shut forge]

i have many times. it states that you can only prevent people from using your mod as a dependancy via licenses doesnt mention preventing people from using your mod at all. which it should

[autumn brook]

you can make your mod not work but not the game functionality intentionally

[icy linden]

Long story short, it is OK for you to deny usage of your mod as long as it is not based on some kind of commercial use (ie. pay me to access my mod) and does not troll the game (ie. shutdown a server if using your mod without a license)

[mystic marsh]

🥱

[shut forge]

different rules for different people i guess

good to know

[mystic marsh]

hehe

[icy linden]

My bad I did not realize you were trolling

[shut forge]

who is trolling?

me?

[autumn brook]

same rules for everyone its the eula so long as you have a copy its ok

[mystic marsh]

yes

ur funny

[shut forge]

...

[mystic marsh]

i like chatting with you ❤️

[shut forge]

seek jesus

[mystic marsh]

i already do

[shut forge]

your the one trolling bro idk how it isnt obvious to these people

[mystic marsh]

you should maybe tell the admins then

[shut forge]

its all here for them to see and quite clearly ignore

other then the gifs you sent and instantly deleted

[mystic marsh]

i think the admins do thier jobs pretty well in this discord

[mystic marsh]

its not the admins, gifs are not allowed at all

[shut forge]

yes and youre abusing that rule with very quicky disappearing offensive gifs which im sure breaks discord tos matey

so yeah keep talking bro

[chrome fox]

Its amazing how much time is wasted in these ip-channels

[mystic marsh]

offensive ?

[chrome hearth]

It seems like you've never dealt with a troll before. The more you interact the more he'll troll. Just let it go and stop interacting with him.

[mystic marsh]

am working on my password lock while chatting, its fun

[shut forge]

its just frustrating bro

[sly kiln]

this chat is interesting lol

[chrome hearth]

Yeah, if you keep interacting with him it will be. That's literally the point of trolling.

[mystic marsh]

am not trolling, i was defending the fact that what am doing is allowed by EULA and admins

if you dont like what am doing, dont use my mods, oh wait you cant anyways

[chrome fox]

What mod is this shitshow even about? Does someone have the workshop link?

[mystic marsh]

https://reforger.armaplatform.com/workshop/645547260E2C6DBC

[zealous ore]

nope

[mystic marsh]

[zealous ore]

to conclude this
a. you can limit the mod usage - but you need a license to do that written in explicit manner - what is and what isn't allowed and under what criteria - @mystic marshi haven't seen such a thing from your part.
You cannot limit it by DRM that would crash / hand / break the game or server. Not having the assets load or function (based on conditions) is fine as long as it doesn't break game / servers
b. you cannot get donations to access any mods - be it client side or server side - that is commercial enterprise and is 100% not allowed. That will get you instantly banned from workshop/

@shut forge please mind your manners in this discord server. personal attacks and inflammatory comments are not tolerated. same goes for you @mystic marsh

[shut forge]

❄️

[mystic marsh]

can i have the criteria be the player count on the server ? like you can only use it if you server has less than 32 players

[shut forge]

whaT HAVE I SAID WHICH IS A PERSONAL ATTACK?

sorry for caps

this is super one sided

ive seen many mods myself be removed from the workshop because they were gatekeeping, and even mods being used published so theyre not on the workshop but still be usable be removed because of gatekeeping

this is absurd

now i will go back to what im doing and ignore this chat again

please do not reply to my message i do not want another ping. thank you

[mystic marsh]

@zealous ore can clear the messages please ?

people will miss what you said

[zealous ore]

#other_ip_topics message
#other_ip_topics message

[zealous ore]

no

[mystic marsh]

all good, let me know if you can also anwser my question above

[shut forge]

i understand english may not be your first language. but that is not an attack? please look at what the meaning of attack is in the oxford dictionary...

[chrome fox]

You are delusional bizentine haha - sorry pufu

[zealous ore]

the text in the description and the EULA used (APL-ND) don't match. In case you are using a custom EULA, i would suggest you consult with a solicitor / lawyer of your choice (ideally someone who has the know how in IP rights)

[zealous ore]

if you'd actually bothered reading what i wrote, you'd notice that i typed personal attacks and inflammatory comments

[shut forge]

i can read very well thank you? i did go to school. nothing i have said is either of the things you have mentioned. i have been nothing but respectful. on the other hand there is literal proof of him trolling here.

[zealous ore]

note here - the current version of the mod, based on the current EULA can be used without any sort of limitations btw @mystic marsh. Just because you wrote there is a 32 player limit for server doesn't mean much considering the license, neither does DONT USE ON SERVER WITHOUT PERMISSION ! thing

[mystic marsh]

yes, idk what he is on about

[zealous ore]

if you haven't noticed, i mentioned you both.

[mystic marsh]

but this will change next update due to this conversation

[shut forge]

why mention me for that at all though i dont understand? i was simply stating my point. i was not personally attacking no one or using derogatory language. i simply asked him if he was okayin the head, and i called him a scummy guy? thats my opinion not an attack

hes gone out of his way to send me a request to try and troll outside of this discord

[autumn brook]

i feel like the best choice here would be stop this conversation and move on with life

[mystic marsh]

proof ?

[shut forge]

yet i am the bad one here. okay bro

[zealous ore]

it is inflammatory as per #rules. if you wann continue this use #discord_server channel

[chrome fox]

btw
Your current version can still be used without any limitations after the update. You uploaded the content (this version) under a certain license and the content will be available under such license

[mystic marsh]

am changing to a custom EULA

[shut forge]

you just want a reaction

[mystic marsh]

they did ban me though lol

[shut forge]

your trolling bro

1 mutual server

[zealous ore]

if you are being harassed via DM, please send proof to me directly. That is also not allowed.

[shut forge]

and your right here

not banned are you

[mystic marsh]

on workshop

[chrome fox]

Yes, i got that. But the changes dont apply to the current uploaded version.

[zealous ore]

enough with the offtopic here

[mystic marsh]

yes, but the the mod will be re uploaded so you cannot use old versions

[chrome fox]

You can download any version from workshop via a dedicated server. So people could still use the old version under APL-ND without the limitations you want to have after the update

[mystic marsh]

the old versions wont be on workshop, it will be removed totally

[chrome fox]

Not if you just publish the mod again

[shut forge]

no you can tecnically still download an old version

[mystic marsh]

the new mod will be under a diffrent name and ID

[mystic marsh]

not if privated or deleted

[shut forge]

deleted yes, privated im not sure, all those wagner patches n shit are private mods and thousands of people download them joining servers

[mystic marsh]

yeah then i will probably delete it

[zealous ore]

please send these my way

[lethal cape]

To my knowledge someone could just re-upload the version of the mod previously under APL-ND. Deleting it off the workshop forfeits your ownership.

Additionally. Custom EULA's are cool but Bohemia has stated they will not enforce them and/or enforcement would be limited. They will only enforce the APL liscenses. It will be left up to you to seek enforcement of your EULA. That means lawyers, summons, etc.

[mystic marsh]

password locking

[mystic marsh]

true, but they wont get any new fixes or updates

[lethal cape]

Couldn't I just go into the mod files and find the password?

[mystic marsh]

good luck

am not gona say how my password locking works here XD

[lethal cape]

Let me know when you get it working and I'll tell you how it works.

[mystic marsh]

how could you do that, when the code for it is not shipped with the mod....

[lethal cape]

Let me worry about that.

I haven't been able to update a mod in 10 days. I'm bored and have nothing better to do.

Workshop API pls come back

[mystic marsh]

okey sure

if you can crack a DRM, then maybe you can crack my auth

[normal pond]

Can you actually ping me once you have it? I am interested in if it will take more than 5 minutes to crack

[mystic marsh]

like i said, the code is not even accessible, it purly exists on the server

how would you crack code that you dont have

unless you are talking about cheating

then u will get banned lol

[normal pond]

Then once the mod is available with this server side protection, ping me

[mystic marsh]

it is available already

[river patrol]

this has turned really scummy dude idk about that

[normal pond]

Link?

[normal pond]

Can you link it? I'll redownload tools because of it

[mystic marsh]

never mind, the workshop is broken and it did not update yet

have to wait for them to fix it

will ping you

[mystic marsh]

have you heard of roblux ?

[river patrol]

Roblox? I don't know how that would even compare here but go ahead

[mystic marsh]

u make mod, the mods is yours, you use it to make your server unique, its not charity

[river patrol]

still don't know what point you're trying to make. but there's something off with that practice in reforger. don't get me wrong do whatever you want with your mods but to me it doesn't sit right.

[mystic marsh]

ok cool

[river patrol]

also I don't think people think about Arma mods this way. like ever. it's not about "charity" or making a server unique. personally its about making content for fun for a game you like. anyway off topic but an interesting conversation.

[wheat flame]

this is very interesting but roblox cant be compared here

[mystic marsh]

arma life ?

[wheat flame]

is there a page for this mod i want to download and try

[river patrol]

what about them

[mystic marsh]

they are exactly that

mods made for specific servers only, that are mainly developed to make money from

[wheat flame]

arma life isnt just used on their servers

[wheat flame]

what is link for mod my friend told me this is about a drone

[mystic marsh]

it is, some of the variation that is

[river patrol]

doesn't matter who does it tbh. it isn't good for the community in general to "gatekeep" mods behind passwords. this game thrives on modding so to paywall/gatekeep content is backwards to me.

[mystic marsh]

yeah but its not gatekeeping from the players, its gatekeeping from the server hosters

[river patrol]

and if they do offer content in exchange for money that does break TOS so it is illegal anyway.

[wheat flame]

wait i need password to use this?

[river patrol]

idk about that man. but more power to you.

[mystic marsh]

the workshop is down

[river patrol]

I believe this is armed drones or pov drones or something the likes

[wheat flame]

okay i download when the game works

does this work on xbox

[teal pecan]

Not a lawyer, just personal opinion:
Just to have it stated:
Any exchange of value (money, gift cards, whatever) for goods or a service (this includes accessibility) falls under monetisation, is breaking TOS/EULA, is forbidden and will be dealt with accordingly.

This includes but is not limited to getting access for a 'donation'.
Same shit, just different name.

[lethal cape]

It seems to me like this mod is going to "spearhead" a greater discussion with BI infringements about custom EULA and gatekeeping.
I think you're playing with fire. And ahead lies a massive headache of multiple arguments in these channels.

[mystic marsh]

i was wondering on this topic, if one offers is mod only to people who host through his server hosting service, is that against EULA ?

[mystic marsh]

i dont need to have an argument with anyone, all i care about is what moderators say

[teal pecan]

Not a lawyer, just personal opinion:
I mean, think about it.
There is an exchange of money which is attached to access to a certain mod.
Kinda obvious, isn't it?

[wheat flame]

thats bad.

[mystic marsh]

not rly, the money is for the server, the mod comes with it for free

[river patrol]

yeah man you had me back there but now this is just bad...

[lethal cape]

That is identified as payed service. This is a long established precident for Bohemia.

[mystic marsh]

wether u use the mod or not doesnt change the hosting value

am asking to learn, idk why everyone thinks i want to do any of this

[teal pecan]

Flawed logic.

[river patrol]

I agree with asking for the sake of science and all but it is undeniably a shady hypothetical.

[teal pecan]

This channel is to deal with questions regarding IP topics.
Nothing bad about asking.

But if we find out shady business (not saying it's the case here), and we usually do at some point, consequences will follow.

[mystic marsh]

u do u my friend

but i wonder what the consequences are

if you ban thier account, they just make a new one

they can make thousands from this

[lethal cape]

Lawsuit

[teal pecan]

I mean, in a hypothetical case that a server hoster would monetize a mod, it could be fairly easy to for example black-list all servers by said hoster I would guess.

[normal pond]

BE fixed their stuff yet?

[river patrol]

is it actually grounds for a lawsuit to break EULA? legitimately curious

[teal pecan]

I am not a lawyer, hence just a personal opinion:
I do believe that it can be as it counts as a binding contract which both parties willingly agreed to.

[mystic marsh]

makes sense

[lethal cape]

I believe what Bob said is correct. It would depend on the amount earned by the offender as to whether or not a lawsuit would be appropriate.

But that's my loose understanding

[teal pecan]

So honestly, when a hoster would do that, he potentially would shoot himself in his own leg and loose the opportunity to create any money.
Which would be kinda dumb if it would be over a usage of a damn mod 😄

[river patrol]

has to be a really damn good mod to risk getting sued over ig

[lethal cape]

If you're a server provider and you want to entice people to rent your servers you can achieve this by:

1. Having a big name server using your servers
2. Provide a good experience by having powerful servers and networks
3. Provide adequate DDOSS protection
4. Provide a good customer experience
5. Have a somewhat usable interface.

If you're trying to entice people to rent from you by using a mod you're missing what the client wants out of a server in the first place.

[mystic marsh]

giving them mods they cant get anywhere else

just saying

[golden dew]

No you cannot do that since it violates the terms of service

[mystic marsh]

yes

[lethal cape]

Right...

[river patrol]

isn't there like. multiple drones on the workshop tho...

[mystic marsh]

yeah, idk why people really care about mine being locked

[golden dew]

people don't care about yours being locked, they care about you trying to monetize it. which is just not allowed...

[mystic marsh]

no, thats not true, i never said it will be monetized, i said i want to lock it to use it for my servers only, as in my servers not my hosting services servers

[solid briar]

how can u monetize somthing when what your providing comes free?

[river patrol]

not really what I meant I'm sorry. I'm not undermining your mod or anything. but the point is not only your mod. it's more about what is and isn't allowed per TOS

[mystic marsh]

well, locking is allowed

that is clear

[golden dew]

as stated above multiple times, making it so that it only works on your servers without breaking the game in any way for other people downloading/trying to use it (crashes, errors etc) you are free to do so (make sure you have a custom License for your mod that disallows others from using it).
But everything you have said up to this point makes it look like you are trying to find a way to circumvent the monetization rules defined in the EULA.

[river patrol]

locking so only your server provider may use it? not allowed as that falls under monitizations. but if you mean locking to your server yeah sure ig go ahead. but it is shady to most people in this community. but again you're free to do whatever. (within reason lol)

[mystic marsh]

if that what you think then k

[solid briar]

so just a question cause that doesn't make since if i host servers at said cost and then make mods that only work on my servers which doesn't increase cost of servers or anything i make it for free that is monitizations? because yall cant use my mods on your servers?

[mystic marsh]

i blv if it is not mentioned as a part of the payment deal, then its not considered monitization

[wheat flame]

legally that is monitization

[solid briar]

no its not lol

[wheat flame]

people would be paying for a server just so they can use that mod as it will only work on there

this is bending the rules and i disagree with it

[solid briar]

bending isnt breaking

[quick wigeon]

Indirect monetization is still monetization as far as Bohemia's policies go

[wheat flame]

it is directly against the rules

bending the rules is no different from breaking the rules

[river patrol]

if you read into what Bob Murphy said. it does count as a transaction as you're paying money to gain access to a mod/workshop content. in doing so breaking TOS/EULA

[river patrol]

bending the rules is as bad as breaking them. as in trying to circumvent a imposed rule

[pseudo spruce]

actually no... but you shouldn't do that anyways lol

its a loophole

[wheat flame]

if i wanted to for instance make a mod which adds patches and only people who have paid for my hosting can use it. that sir is a transaction for content and that goes against tos

[solid briar]

Monetization refers to the process of generating revenue from a product, service, or asset. It involves converting something—such as content, a platform, or an audience—into a source of income, often through methods like advertising, subscriptions, sales, or licensing.

in the said topic the only thing you are getting revenue from is is the Servers

[wheat flame]

and use of the mod

[solid briar]

nope

[wheat flame]

did you overlook that part?

[pseudo spruce]

it was told one or more times here... if you get something ingame, by paying IRL momey for it = monetization

[wheat flame]

if it ONLY works on that providers server then it becomes part of the bulk transaction.........

[wheat flame]

you are actually smart. i like you

[river patrol]

@solid briar @pseudo spruce @wheat flame read here. this has already been discussed and clarified by a bi.net staff

[pseudo spruce]

yea... but finding a loophole isnt ilegal either

there is a few ways you can do it harmlessly

[lethal cape]

Ya'll are wild.

[river patrol]

finding a loophole can still get you in hot water. I would avoid it. but then again it is not a loophole since as stated. paying money for workshop content is infact a TOS/EULA violation

[pseudo spruce]

paying money for workshop content

this isnt a loophole lol, this is a stright violation to EULA

[lethal cape]

Mario is here. Everyone scramble

[coral juniper]

@mystic marsh Indirect monetization is also not allowed. Please stop it.
You have been warned. First instance of direct or indirect monetization will result in a permanent ban (Not only the workshop).

[mystic marsh]

warned for talking about it ?

i did nothing wrong

[coral juniper]

You have been made aware.

[mystic marsh]

we are discussing the topic in the right channel

[mystic marsh]

understood

[coral juniper]

So next time you can't say thay you did not know

You got your answer

[lethal cape]

@mystic marsh Are you affiliated Liberty Interactive?

[mystic marsh]

who ?

[coral juniper]

I am not banning him at the moment. Informing him.

[lethal cape]

That answers that. Sorry I was curious about something.

[river patrol]

yeah sorry I read it wrong

[coral juniper]

Telling him before he gets himself in trouble

[lethal cape]

Mario when can I update mods again

I'm jonesing over here. I need my fix.

Scratching the skin off my forearms and elbows

[river patrol]

modding addict

[solid briar]

are you guys going to remove the mod that puts Z and Vs on vic ?

[river patrol]

I feel you tho I'm starting to ich like a crackhead too

[coral juniper]

Yes, they have always not been allowed. Systems being down does not help investigate them so there is a delay.

[wheat flame]

what about the hamas mods? why are these not banned

[mystic marsh]

i think they are being banned

[wheat flame]

good

no place for terrorism here

[river patrol]

bi can't ban what they can't see I guess

how about unnamed "insurgent" organizations

[wheat flame]

ira mod when

[coral juniper]

Report them too pls

[wheat flame]

where do i send u the links in dm?

[mystic marsh]

politics here ?

mario ?

[coral juniper]

@wheat flame You can in DMs, or in the in game report. or [e-mail]

[river patrol]

idk if that's really political tbh... terrorism is not cool

[mystic marsh]

who is terrorist and what, is political

[wheat flame]

hamas are a legitimate terrorist group...

its not needed in this community

[river patrol]

the statement "terrorism is bad" isn't political. just a fact I suppose. anyway off topic. I'll shut up now

[wheat flame]

same

point made

[boreal ibex]

you'd be suprised but yeah

[mystic marsh]

is it ok if i say " they should ban mods for idf

and then say

no place for terrorism here

[wheat flame]

okay now your being unnecasary

[mystic marsh]

okey buddy

[wheat flame]

the idf are a respected and legit military force

dude shut the fuck up please

this chat is not for this we were simply asking for a hamas mod to be looked into

[dark tulip]

Ok, let's go back on topic, stop the cringe "but everything is wrong" and stop the personal attacks...

[mystic marsh]

oh they also ban thier mods, its fine never mind

back to topic

[wheat flame]

theyre not

[shut forge]

ermmmmm im back ig

pufu said israeli stuff is fine?

[coral juniper]

Issue are not the countries, it's the portrayal of IRL groups/entities.

The same thing as portraying real life people.

[mystic marsh]

so if i use palestine flag it is fine ?

[coral juniper]

Or brands (Unless you have explicit permission)

[coral juniper]

Depends on context as well. If we consider it might be offensive, then we will decide to take it down.

[shut forge]

yeah thats understanable

if i make my israeli stuff completely neutral from any past or ongoing war then it is fine correct? just wanna be 100 percent sure here

[mystic marsh]

Ok cool, Palestine gear mod incoming

[shut forge]

so just civi clothes ?

[mystic marsh]

Dont worry about it buddy

[shut forge]

im not gonna even say anything you do you... god speed with your mod i wish you luck

[lethal cape]

holy mother of roles

[river patrol]

hey, are assets meant for UE4 or epic games software usable in AR? I've heard rumors about it since "epic is partnered to bi" so I wanted to confirm.

[shut forge]

reforger uses epic online services

epic and bi are not partnered i dont think

[river patrol]

interesting.

[dark tulip]

AR supports basically any 3d model format that is supported by Blender (which is a lot, and other 3D software also works), and then exported/imported to the Workbench.

Not sure if UE has a custom file format, but (almost?) all industry file formats can be made compatible with AR.

[wheat flame]

he means stuff designed to be used souly in ue i presume like the stuff on the ue marketplace

[zealous ore]

i did. Israelian military is fine

[river patrol]

sorry i shouldve clarified i meant the licenses

[dark tulip]

Content from FAB (UE Marketplace) does not allow it

General Restrictions. For any Content licensed to you under a Standard License, you may not:
...
iii. allow any third party to incorporate Content into their own products, services, or other projects (this means, for example, that you may not make Content available in world- or level-editing tools or templates or other modeling tools that allow works to be exported);
source: https://www.fab.com/eula

Content from other stores/marketplaces usually have specific licences, although if you think you can buy a great model cheap, it's most likely ripped, so wouldn't trust those

[normal pond]

Didn't read it fully, but afaik what you wrote does not prevent you from using it in Godot/Enfusion others. You just can't allow someone else to use it. (Like place the object in a mission editor).

Afaik, at least it used to be like it before it got the overhaul.
You could no issue use bought stuff in other engines.
The only exception was the monthly free stuff. As that came with extra license

[mossy yarrow]

Im curious about SOG PF. This is not bashimg etc just curiois. How comes SOG can redistribute Weapon Models they bought from CGTrader ?

[rugged prawn]

I would assume they have bought them with a license that allows this type of commercialization.

[vast stump]

Redistribute where?

SOGPF models are not shared anywhere

If you mean used in the dlc, then yes they are bought with license that allows them to be used in such way.

[mossy yarrow]

I mean like making money with it

[vast stump]

They are bought with appropriate licensing

[mossy yarrow]

I see

[celest sundial]

People often forget that there is usually more than the cheap royalty free licenses.

[vast stump]

I belive the sogpf made a deal with the creator directly.

[inland sphinx]

That is an age old workaround people tried to use for paid mods.
If you just think about it for a minute, it falls apart.

"You get the fully packed mod for free, you just pay for the model I put inside it"
"Okey so if I don't pay you for the model, I would still get you to make the mod for me for free?"
"No. I only give you the mod if you pay"
"So the mod is paid?"
"No the mod is free"
"uhhh... huh."

Its the same thing with "donator perks"

"If you donate, you will get extra items in-game"
"That sounds like a sale"
"No, the items are free"
"So you also give me the items if I don't pay you money"
"No you need to donate first"
"So, I only get the items if I pay you?"
"Yes"
"So the items are paid?"
"No the items are free, but you only get them if you pay me"
"uh huh."

[jolly jewel]

I mean idk, None of my mods are private or behind a custom EULA. I think the people that made Bakhmut put there mod saying we cant use it "due to violations" of there EULA when in reality theres obviously no violations ever made or never have been reached out about it. At the end of the day we could easily use whatever if we wanted too as BI wont enforce it but it just seems childish at this point. No mod is worth the headache. Its a shame how Reforger is being portrayed with Groups mentioned above "Banning people" from there mod when no actual violations ever existed. Not that we want to use it anyway but its just comical that you live in there head that much.

[glacial meteor]

Can people pay people to make mods?

This all should be in the TOS

[quick wigeon]

Arma 3, no
Arma Reforger, no as of now I think, but I may be wrong and that may change as they clean up the EULA and TOS

[zealous ore]

no, they cannot, and it is in already in the TOS

[turbid trench]

What did Dark Raider Group did to end up on this list? xD

[old jay]

The answer is in the quoted message. 🤔

[turbid trench]

Well i can also say you violated something and it doesnt have to be true, im wondering if there is some evidence?

[dark tulip]

I suggest asking Dark Raider Group for why they got on that list, they should know 🤷

[old jay]

RHS EULA: https://docs.rhsmods.org/rhs-status-quo-user-documentation/arma-reforger/rhs-status-quo/eula#limitations

[turbid trench]

Does that provide evidence of their violation? I did asked them and i know their side of the story, i wanted to know official rhs message, reason or anything really. 😄

[zealous ore]

i wanted to know official rhs message, reason or anything really.
we (RHS) do not have to provide the reasons and proof publicly (BI legal is aware of out motive btw). thanks for inquiring though.
I did asked them and i know their side of the story
i'd be amazed if the provided answer is anything but we didn't do anything wrong.

PS: this isn't the purpose of this channel.

[turbid trench]

Alright, thanks for a reply. 🫡 Speculations off we go

[zealous ore]

there isn't anything to speculate about.
the list mentioned includes people / groups who purposely (and repeatedly) breached our Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs EULA - https://docs.rhsmods.org/rhs-status-quo-user-documentation/arma-reforger/rhs-status-quo/eula

[turbid trench]

I am not gonna argue, and as you said yourself, this is not a place for it. I can also thoretically say you killed someone then put you on list of murderers and then point to the law that say killing is bad, but that isnt providing evidence. I could have also do it not because you actually killed someone, but because i dont like you, or you said something i dont like.

[zealous ore]

but you seem to be doing just that. and comparing limitation to usage via a license on a mod with murder is a gross exaggeration.

The fact that a group of people (that don't have cleanest public records anyways) keep peddling the same nonsense on their own servers that RHS is bad because they blocked us from using RHS mods for no particular reason is as funny as it can be, also similar to all the previous dramas that are unfolding on this discord server each time a mod gets banned from the workshop (it happened to one of their own mods as well btw, for monetization, go figure, same sort of drama followed) where the author never did anything wrong obviously, BI is the one in the wrong for enforcing their TOS and EULA.../s

Also, don't they have have their own awesome mods that are competing on the same level with RHS by now? i don't understand where the issue is, considering they already said numerous times that they don’t even wanna use RHS anymore. RHS mod(s) is also ND, so we can control what derivatives are allowed or not.

[inland sphinx]

Better comparison is a supermarket banning someone from entering their store because they insulted one of their cashiers once by calling them ugly.

The guy who got banned can say "I didn't do anything", other people might say "Ugly isn't an insult, that person really is ugly". In the end it doesn't change the facts.

[turbid trench]

Alright, thanks, now that makes it more than clear what happened, i was wondering why it was coming out of them like from fluffy blanket

[icy linden]

Ur not ugly

[turbid trench]

😄 Nobody is ugly, i genuinely was just curious of what happened 😄

[meager fractal]

u moderator bootlicker!

[old jay]

Talking to me? 🤣

[meager fractal]

no, u, u r ugli

[turbid trench]

Im putting you on the LIST!

[zealous ore]

oh noes, not on the murderers list? 🤭

[calm swan]

There is no issue. ❤️ we been over this many times before around the time it all happened, and when it did happen, we hadn't used said mod for a couple months anyway. Bygones be bygones. We don't insult/slander yall, so we'd expect the same in return 🙃

[visual crag]

And people wonder why this community is such a damn mess LMAO

[grim sand]

A community is defined by its institutions and its leadership, and if that's in "disarray", the population follows - but anyways that's off topic to this channel.

[visual crag]

The delusions people create for themselves lately are so amusing.

But yes, I agree.

[woven thunder]

Hi, I'm animating but I use a method of references, I ask people with experiences to record themselves doing the movements I need In my animations and I copy the motion. Since I'm in lack of "actors" to make the references, I'm thinking about recording other games animations like some of unity, ground branch,... and use them as references. I feel like that sound bad moraly. What you think about that ? Is that bad ? Or even Illegal ?

[woven thunder]

What you think about that ? ⬆️

[quick wigeon]

Are you doing motion capture?
Or just making a video for reference and making the animations from scratch?

[woven thunder]

I record a cycle and put the video in blender then I animate the rig it from scratch

[quick wigeon]

I think that's allowed,
Doesn't seem like that would make your animations derivative content, but I'm not entirely certain

[zealous ore]

?

[woven thunder]

For example here I did this one with a real life reference, I put the video in the sequencer and start copying

[woven thunder]

I wonder If I can do the same but with another games animations

#other_ip_topics message

[calm swan]

He's asking if he can use animation/movement from other games, and implement them as a base for his own creation

[calm swan]

I dont see there being an issue, aslong as its not a copy of, if you're creating it from scratch and using it purely as a reference for your own creation I don't see why that'd be an issue

[woven thunder]

I know nothing about that kind of things, I woud like to have the answer of a bohemia.net or admin because when I hear about ripping models that sound like I'm ripping animations, even know I don't reproduce it 1 : 1 , I just want to make sure I'm safe.

[calm swan]

You make your stuff from the ground up, so it's like taking a picture of a IRL vehicle and then using the picture as reference, I'm sure one of the guys will be helpful in answering your question tho, Mario, Bob and a few others from BI can be helpful

[dark tulip]

Animations are a bit weird I would say...

As long as you don't rip them from other games (aka take animation from game A and put them directly in game B) it's obviously not allowed.

However in your case you manually create the animation based of an existing one.
This, as far as I can tell, is a grey area, because I would guess there could be some form of copyright/IP rights on them.
That said, it's also known that for example dance moves (moonwalk, the Carlton, etc.) can not be copyrighted and are therefore allowed (by law).

[woven thunder]

Okay thank you, I won't work in grey area. I'll wait to get "actors" available to record references

[calm swan]

This is what i was trying to say, your not driectly pulling them from one game and implementing them into another. I know Bale creates from scratch so it's not like for like, 1:1 ect so I don't see that being an issue

[inland sphinx]

How would actors change it though.
Like if you tell an actor "I want something like this, please add your own twist to it"
And then, you model it based on the video of the actor, which will have lots of errors (because you're just guessing of a video and can't get things exact) and you will add your own twist to it.

I think having an actor in-between or not, would not change much about the end product

[calm swan]

So what he's asking, could he record an animation from another game like GroundBranch, and use the video of said animation for reference when creating his own animation from scratch

[inland sphinx]

I agree with the "gray area" Argument from above.

[calm swan]

It's a little grey sure, but he isn't ripping the animation directly and will have errors as he is making it from scratch, so I surely can't see an issue. It's no different from taking a picture of something and recreating it from scratch yourself

[fiery egret]

How would actors change it though.
My completely uneducated guess would be that having a human perform it gives it a 100% chance of at least being transformative, because a human cannot, by definition, do the exact same motion as the original.
If you're rotoscoping, you're copying the original positions and movement, not someone's interpretation of those

Ugh... not sure if "transformative" is the right word for it, though 🤔

[woven thunder]

I don't use the exact position and motion of the actor, as contrary as the game references, I need that references to get the good timing, motion, speed... That make the animation 300% better than If I do it by my own imagination

I give clear instruction of what I need and how to record a reference correctly

[inland sphinx]

Yeah rotoscoping, but the process is having a video of it run not he side to create your own interpretation of the movement. Not putting the video right below it and trying to match it exactly.

[woven thunder]

I have a bunch of animations made by a swat officer but he seems to be not available anymore, He make like 10 animations of high ready and different technique like flash bang animation, compress ready battle ready... But I need more..

[frank rock]

Anyone have any websites that I can use to make a arma map I wanna make one no one has done yet

[woven thunder]

That doesn't matter anymore, I got my answer. I won't work in grey area. Thank you guy's to take the time to answer me !

[quick wigeon]

#arma3_terrain or #enfusion_terrain
No such websites exist for Arma 3, map making is more involved than that
The closest for Arma 3 is Game Realistic Map, but the output from it can be somewhat iffy (can be a good starting place, but you will need to edit it for good results)

I don't know any of reforger terrain making, it's done with Workbench I think

Also, completely off-topic for this channel

[zealous ore]

record how?

[woven thunder]

With Nvidia, to take A3 as example, I go in game, take a flat ground or animation editor, I record the animation and use it as a base reference

That way I know what body part have to move, how, and what's my timing between each poses type

[zealous ore]

would be safer to use videos of human being. That being said, even using videos from other games, the chances of actually replicating that 1:1 is nil.
I would say unless you copy some choreography of sorts, you are 100% fine, i actually disagree that there is any sort of grey area involved

if i watch a video of someone modeling something, and i do follow the steps, i will never be able to match everything anyways, it is the same here. You are working of a 2d reference doing 3d work, which is precisely how referencing work, irrespective of where the reference is made from

[woven thunder]

That would be amazing, unfortunately the opinions are divergent and I'm not sure if I should use this method, I really want to. I would need the words of someone from BI on whom I can rely 100%. Can I rely on you in the event that I am called into question on my method ?

Don't feel obligated, I could find actors who would do the job.

The problem is when I have to work on parachuting animations and such things

[zealous ore]

1. unless animations are something very specific, not replicating human motions (unless there is some sort of dance choreography) then you are 100% fine - if, as you said, are using said motion as reference and nothing more
2. I stand by what i said for any further possible discussion here on this particular subject.
   That said, note that i do not represent BI’s views on the matter, , i am not a bi’s employee. however i do have quite a bit of experience and knowledge in regard to intelectual property rights and copyright.

[woven thunder]

Okay thank you very much for your time !

[zealous ore]

no worries, very nice if you to inquire about it prior to doing it. 🍻

[woven thunder]

To be honest I did it for a free fall animation then I questionned myself about what I was doing, but the animation is not in game or distributed anywhere

[zealous ore]

yeah, i strongly consider for all intents and purposes you are 100% fine.

[woven thunder]

https://streamable.com/2mmpuh I did that way

[dark tulip]

Animations are actually falling under copyright, especially when done with MoCap (which is being used more and more in games).

Obviously you can't copyright a "walking" animation, unless it's a specific way of walking. But if you try to replicate an unique animation I'm pretty sure people will not like it.

As for dance moves, as in my previous example, these can not be copyrighted (at least not in the US). Full choreography of a lengthy dance routine, then it obviously changes.

[zealous ore]

sure, animations as are the 3d models. i 100% agree with that. However, using some videos of said animation as reference is 100% fine, unless, as previously said it something like choreography or something that is very specific

As someone who have made quite a fee animations back in my early days, i can tell you it is 100% impossible to copy one if you are doing it by hand, even if you keyframe each individual frame

[woven thunder]

I'll send an Email to Mocap detailling what I did and exactly how, If they answer I will tell you what they said

I just realised that was Mocap for the freefall

[vast stump]

mocap stands for motion capture which is a technique to capture live performance into 3d animation

youll have to figure out the actual company who made the video and the animation if you want to contact them

[woven thunder]

There the answer of the man 🍾 , I'll ask to the owners of the animations every time before doing that

[calm swan]

Look forward to seeing what you cook up 👀🔥

[meager fractal]

doing so is the best approach, kudos to you!

[woven thunder]

Thank you, It's normal

[manic gale]

New to this so I'm making sure I understand the licenses correctly. If a mod is under apl-nd it means that you can't use it as a dependency for your mod that adds to it or edits it in any way, is that correct?
However, because I see mods published with dependencies that are under apl-nd, I assume it is feasible to contact the author of the apl-nd mod that you wish to edit and obtain direct and specific permissions?

This would be for arma reforger, if that makes a difference

[grim sand]

Anything published can be used as a dependency, minus custom elua, ND just means you can't modify it and republish it. If you modify it, you got to keep it to yourself.

NA I haven't seen that, do you mean SA? If so, that just qualifies with "If you adapt, or build upon this material, you may distribute the resulting material only under the same license."

Oh and to your question about superseding.. Yes absolutely. The license is only arbitrary. The final say is down to the mod owner of who and who can't violate their eula.

[manic gale]

Thanks, was a typo. So I see how the license says you could edit a mod published under -nd but not redistribute (ie not publish your mod that would use it as a dependency?). But I don't really see the practical purpose of making a mod based using another mod published under apl-nd as a dependency if you know your mod then can't be published?

[grim sand]

No dependency doesn't count as republishing it as your own. Dependency is using something, and the fact that the dependency is listed, Is enough to say that it's not yours and that you're just using it "as is", and more importantly unmodified.

ND does not stop you from downloading it, or using it as a dependency. You just can't modify it.

Now, When you build off of that mod it gets a little gray, but basically as long as you didn't edit any of the core files, I think that's acceptable. So you're allowed to have a mod that sits on top of someone else's mod, as long as you don't modify their files, or claim your mod is their mod, there's no problem as far as I know.

Because as you note, If not, it's incredibly stifling to the community if we can't expand and grow.

Now I know there's some issues with RHS and their patch/velcro system and all that. I don't know if that's because people haven't figured out how to make an abstract enough class, or people have been stealing it out of RHS main.

But for all intents and purposes, and people can correct me if I'm wrong, as long as you keep to yourself, you can use dependencies, Just don't go modifying their code or pretending you're them.

[manic gale]

Good to know that just having a dependency doesn't count as redistribution.
It may just be my lack of experience with modding but is there a clear distinction between using a mod and editing it? For example, if I find a mod that adds, say, a car or gun thats licensed under apl-nd, I can use it if I want that asset as a part of my mod. But if I wanted to make a mod that changed that car or gun (ie I go into workbench and find the asset's prefab and right click->override it to do something like add a spare wheel on the car or change the gun's sound) then that would be editing the mod and not allowed unless I got specific permission?

Or is making a mod that changes the assets or function of another mod in some way still ok (under apl-nd) because the mod you're changing is still a dependency?

[rugged prawn]

But if I wanted to make a mod that changed that car or gun (ie I go into workbench and find the asset's prefab and right click->override it to do something like add a spare wheel on the car or change the gun's sound) then that would be editing the mod and not allowed unless I got specific permission?

indeed, that would constitute a derivative. You are creating something that is directly deriving from the work of someone else. In theory, using a ND mod can also be seen as derivative, however in most cases is ignored as it is seen as a net positive for everyone. It all in the end depends on how you define "derivative", people have different ideas about it and there is no ONE definition, and as such in many cases will be ultimately in the scope of the original author to decide whether to object or not to how their work is used. That is why, usually directly asking the original author is the best bet.

[manic gale]

Awesome, thanks for the explanations. It all mostly matches what I expected. I'll try to get in contact with the author for the mod I'm looking at.
One last tangentially related question: is apl-sa in a practical sense a bit more "open" or "free-use" than apl? I get that in a single instance the permissions granted are basically the same but it seems more open in the sense that if I made something and wanted to make sure it and everything it gets modified into stays more freely available I'd use apl-sa to ensure all derivatives (or mods of my mod) are also apl-sa?

[inland sphinx]

SA adds extra restrictions. Thus I would call it less "open"

Yes APL-SA enforces that you can't for example relicense it as some closed source all rights reserved thing

[rugged prawn]

Exactly, it's more open in the sense it encourages downstream openness as you can't derive from an SA and make the derivative ND thus encourages further derivatives. A APL can be derived and the derivative made ND. Big note here: the ND only applies to the work originating in the derivative. The original APL cannot be overwritten

[small hamlet]

On the APL-SA / APL-ND note; would appending a PBO with _APLND be sufficient to convey that license, or would it be preferable to create a .cpp document somewhere in the main /addons/ folder outlining which licenses apply to which PBOs?

[barren tartan]

IMO: appending _APLND is nowhere enough to indicate the license. Suppose you encountered a file named Uniforms_HKUM.pbo , would assume that happened to encode some license reference so some (fictional) HKUM license? I could be anything, from nothing, to a faction abbreviation.

[golden dew]

iirc if there isn't a license you CANNOT assume you have permission to use it in any way shape or form, not entirely sure what the workshop eula/guidelines say about that but for code on github etc thats the case

same as how copyright doesn't have to be explicitly stated to apply since it applies automatically to any original works

[autumn brook]

in arma realm if the're is something not stated you must assume the tightest possible restrictions is what ive heard

[manic gale]

In looking around I have heard that if there's no mention of a license you should assume it follows the most restrictive license

[barren tartan]

Yes, but nothing to do with Arma specifically.

[golden dew]

outside of Arma, No license = No permission for anything, not even use

[dark tulip]

I would do the following;

• in the mod itself include a License.md (markdown) file which contains all license texts (both SA and ND) and a list of the files where it applies to
• in the specific pbo's include the specific license
• on the workshop link to both licenses, and to a page (eg. GitHub, doesn't even need to contain the source code) with both licenses and the list of files

And this is not to make your work harder to do, but just to protect yourself from people being too stupid to read properly...

[grim sand]

Take a long read of #ip_rights_violations Ark goes and explains in detail about modding a dependency.

[small hamlet]

This is ace, thank you. Do you happen to know of anywhere with example license.md's to look at?

[inland sphinx]

ACE does this for example https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/blob/master/LICENSE
See line 25

[near ether]

also In Reforger, if you place a license.txt file in the root folder alongside addon.gproj, the workshop uploader will automatically detect it as a custom license and display it on the workshop page

[small hamlet]

Awesome, cheers Dedmen!

[slender drum]

Does the text document have to be in any particular format?

[icy linden]

Yeah, text

[small hamlet]

Popping back in after the other day r.e. the license.md; the below is the text I've gone for in the top level file. Is this sufficient in the broad sense? And following on from that in terms of files in folders with assets that are under APL-ND, would using the same format as below (with the APL-ND information popped in) and a list of which files are covered under that license be right?

This modification is released under Arma Public License Share Alike (APL-SA), a full summary of which can be found at the hyperlink below. Some .pbo-files or folders of this project may contain a separate LICENSE.md file  or be appended as _APLND. Should that be the case, everything in that .pho-file, folder and all subfolders is subject to that license instead.

===============================================================================================================================
     Arma Public License Share Alike (APL-SA) - https://www.bohemia.net/community/licenses/arma-public-license-share-alike
===============================================================================================================================

Brief summary of this Licence

PLEASE, NOTE THAT THIS SUMMARY HAS NO LEGAL EFFECT AND IS ONLY OF AN INFORMATORY NATURE DESIGNED FOR YOU TO GET THE BASIC INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONTENT OF THIS LICENCE. THE ONLY LEGALLY BINDING PROVISIONS ARE THOSE IN THE ORIGINAL AND FULL TEXT OF THIS LICENCE.
  
With this licence you are free to adapt (i.e. modify, rework or update) and share (i.e. copy, distribute or transmit) the material under the following conditions:
  
Attribution - You must attribute the material in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the material).
Noncommercial - You may not use this material for any commercial purposes.
Arma Only - You may not convert or adapt this material to be used in other games than Arma.
Share Alike - If you adapt, or build upon this material, you may distribute the resulting material only under the same license.```

[woven thunder]

Is that legal to buy a steam account with reforger on Kinguin to have a reduction or I should buy the game again on my main steam account ? I did buy Reforger like that a year ago but I saw that sometimes that can be illegal depending of the production

[vast stump]

no

steam account selling is against steam TOS

and cheap key shops usually sell shady keys

[woven thunder]

Okay so what I can do now ? Can I simply buy the game again on the steam account I was using from the beginning to mod on reforger and delete the illegal steam account ?
If I'm banned following this conversation, Can I create another account and buy the game again to continue modding or I won't be authorized to use reforger in any situation, any case ?

[vast stump]

no idea

[woven thunder]

I'm asking Pufu if he can launch a procedure to analyze my case so we can find a solution. I don't want to continue modding if I'm not 100% clean regarding my mistake

[zealous ore]

do you know who had you banned? i assume it is your game account associated with the workshop as well

[woven thunder]

I'm not banned, I'm seeking for information's because I saw that I did something Illegal and should probably be banned, Apparently from what Mario said that's a problem concerning steam not bohemia

[zealous ore]

it is yes

since Bohemia doesn’t directly sell reforger, steam does

if you wanna be on the safe side, just buy reforger on your main steam account and that’s that. You should be able to delink / relink bi account from one steam account to another i guess

[woven thunder]

I just saw that steam explain I should stop using the game and account that are Illegal, I have to buy the game again on my main account and that's all good 🍾

Ah damn that's in french my bad

[zealous ore]

it’s fine, just do french

[solid adder]

I have written up a custom license for a Halo mod that I am working on. I am unfortunately no lawyer, so I derived it heavily from CUP's license and APL-SA. If anyone here who is more fluent in IP law could have a look and give some pointers, I'd appreciate it greatly.

(For example, what does the specification of a "Public" License mean?)

The goal is to allow players to take PAAs and scripts from the mod so long as they are licensed with the same license and attributed accordingly. With that, however, since Microsoft mentions some restrictions specifically with how Halo content can be used, we want to make sure we give ourselves the ability to police the derivatives in case a derivative work should violate Microsoft's expectations. (So as not to get ourselves in trouble somehow)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/13Xn7HQ8SjZ1ptkWAPZxwJhfW1HHRuc9GBoVpvrKzVIU/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.k7rnqvdatjx5

[grim sand]

By taking on the responsibility to police violations, You're taking on the liability.

You should State what is allowed and what is not allowed, and if it violates Microsoft's intentions, then the violator should be directly dealt with by Microsoft.

As soon as you become arbitrator, then if you fail to police properly, then it's on you, because you didn't do your job to stop the infringements.

But you can do like BI does. Just state you reserve the right to deny this mod to individuals and organizations for any reason of your choosing - or more specifically - You can limit yourself to those that you feel are infringing upon the intentions of Microsoft.

But again, that's just opening yourself up.

[solid adder]

Ah, I definitely see how that could worsen the situation rather than better it 😅

So rather than specify that it must be in accordance with the Microsoft GCUR, it would probably be best to duplicate the GCUR in our own license so that we are acting on our own license expectations as opposed to theirs?

I agree that just saying we reserve the right to deny the access is good, but I do want to explain to others what they can and can't do so that it is clear enough to the average person what will qualify for a report

Maybe under Section 3(c)(i) I just include that the "restrictions set forth in Microsoft's GCUR" will be, as you said, "directly dealt with by Microsoft"

But as such, by someone violating Section 3(c)(i), that would qualify enough for us to put forth a take-down, both because it specifies it must abide by Microsoft's GCUR, and also because we reserve the right to terminate the license given that they violate the expected conditions? (Section 4(a))

[small hamlet]

I don't envy you here Vespade - working with licenses is hard enough as is without having to work around an external license to boot.

[solid adder]

Little did I know I would find myself in this position when I started this project 😅

Probably best bet is to consult a lawyer if I want it done correctly...

[grim sand]

You don't have to get too fancy. Just state that: users of this mod have to agree to follow Microsoft's Eula.

And that this mod reserves the right to limit usage to violators, as well as, at our discretion.

There's no need for you to limit yourself. You hold all the cards. The more you write, the more you limit yourself. So what you want to write, is basically just a notice, that we

• grant you these rights
• retain these rights
• we have these expectations
• this is what happens when you break them
• and there's no warranties, don't sue us, have a nice day

You can get a little more fancy, and you can specify how disagreements are supposed to be settled. Specifying a court in your location and using the laws of your country. But realistically, You're not going to be suing anyone for violating your EULA. It would cost you about $30,000, and then the guy would just make a new account online, and do it again.

[icy linden]

What about having no license, doesnt that mean all rights are reserved?

[grim sand]

Yep. Although Arma won't allow you to publish with no license.

And that's kind of the basis of my "You hold all the cards"

[icy linden]

Hm. Does it mean that the EULA makes providing a license mandatory?

[grim sand]

I think it already says that. Although I haven't looked in a while.

Any Content You upload to ARMA REFORGER Workshop has to be licensed to other Users who download it under one of the following license terms: APL license, APL-SA license, APL-ND license, ADPL-SA license or any other custom license of your choice.

As well they clearly state

For the benefit of the entire User community, You give us an irrevocable permission to use, copy, modify and adapt the game content and share it with other Users of Our game in multiplayer or as an online download. You also agree that We may allow other people to use, copy, modify and adapt the game content under the terms of this license.

So that puts limitations on what you can add. Now that's only for BI. So, I wonder if you can actually limit specific people. You just can't stop BI.

[abstract crest]

The second statement is part of the game EULA and unrelated to modding and the workshop... https://reforger.armaplatform.com/news/eula-faq

[grim sand]

Good to know. I would have thought they compounded, but they're separating video and screenshots from, content made via the workshop. Whatever works for them.

[abstract crest]

Yeah, some bad actors in the DayZ scene continue to misrepresent that game EULA statement (is same in DayZ but not mentioned in ARMA 3's) as BI justifying being able to rip other people's mods. Probably why the FAQ was issued 😉

They may have fixed the DayZ game EULA at this point. No idea, uninstalled the game a year ago when I moved that game experience permanently to SCUM (and ARMA 3 ofc) for me

[grim sand]

Realistically though. I would expect if I use a corporation's tools and infrastructure, that everything I make is subject to seizure. I know BI says that's not the case, and makes a big point of it, but if it wasn't the case, I mean that's pretty stock normal.

[solid adder]

I will say that my license is intended to be used in A3 and not Reforger

but this is all good information

[grim sand]

And my bad, I should have realized when you were talking about CUP. My mind just immediately assumed reforger. Since there's been a lot of "conversation" about it lately 😁

[solid adder]

No worries, I have definitely been tracking the stuff going on with Reforger 💀

[abstract crest]

The bad bit was this: "You also agree that We may allow other people to use, copy, modify and adapt the game content under the terms of this license" which very much should NOT apply to mods specifically

And has long been used as a deliberately misinterpreted excuse for ripping by bad actors on the DayZ side of the shop

[inland sphinx]

The bad bit was the "may" missing in that one. Implying that the permission is already given to everyone

[abstract crest]

Just noticed this in the DayZ EULA - do not remember this one: "You give us an irrevocable permission to use, copy, modify and adapt the game content and share it with other Users of Our game in multiplayer or as an online download." So BI can steal your missions and release them as a DLC? 😜

[fiery egret]

So BI can steal your missions and release them as a DLC? 😜
As they have been doing for the last 11 years. Haven't you noticed? 😛

[wild copper]

Does anyone have that image handy that compares the pants from TFL to the COD ones to show it's ripped? Trying to prove something to a friend

I've seen it in here before but can't find it

[inland sphinx]

Depends on which pants, can you send me image in DM, then I can look up if I have them, have lots of comparison pictures of different types of ripped pants

[oak hare]

Interesting video on some IP issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZJlYTDpG-E

[frigid bay]

So someone that has no Knowledge in IP Rights making random claims and isn‘t sure of.

Idk if you should use this video for anything.

[celest sundial]

I got bad vibes from the video too. They did say towards the end that they really have no idea, but still then made a video on it. There are too many "if" to do something like this and be specific about who to accuse. If it was a theoretical discussion maybe it would be better. The questions are:

1. Were the models on market platforms really purchased ahead of makign the game trailer etc or did they rip it and offer the models through fake accounts to try and cover their ass.
2. If they were purchased, were the offerings of an appearance where the avarage educated user could safely assume that they are dealing with a legal source? I already doubt this, as one of the offerings shown mentions the artwork they stole from. So this is a red flag the game maker would have needed to see. He is liable for still using it regardless - at least if this case was ruled in the EU.
3. Would a game dev who took heavy gameplay inspiration from the games he mixed together for his own not recognize the prominent assets of those games?

If something is only true if you add many many unlikely conditions together, usually the more simple explaination is the right one. He knowingly ripped or purchased ripped assets for his game due to laziness.

And to answer this question of "Can I just make my own model based on the art work and offer it commercially". Plain and simple no. Even if the model file is your own work in blender, if it matches the original design from somebody else, that in itself can (and likely is) protected. That is why you can not make your own same shaped lego bricks in your own mold.

[wind beacon]

I had a lot of the same thoughts. It felt really cringy and very speculative. Feels like it was just clickbait effort at the end of the day.

[jolly jewel]

idk yea that guy concerns me, That SMG he ripped compared to the one in that game are definitely different but close looking. US copyright law is like 30% different and there's definitely differences of the two but definitely similar

[turbid trench]

Watched the video and i hope all of you are aware that there are programs that can rip 3d models from sites like sketchfab. Never put anything on sketchfab or if someone did, take it down right now. The guy doesnt mention that in video. Spread the word

[sacred wagon]

Yes, but everything is protected by a license and you can enforce your rights. So no need to panic

[limber oak]

Okay.

If a friend said "bet you won't name your mod you're publishing X Funny Name" and I did it and received the dosh, is that monetization?

I think yes. I am seeking other onions.

[icy linden]

Cooked

[grim sand]

I mean it is using their systems for monetization. I'd say those onions are sauteed.

[limber oak]

I agree.

I told the pal "hey that's probably going afoul of monetization rules so no thanks" but it's a funny enough question I thought I'd ask it.

[grim sand]

Now. If your friend just wants to make a donation. Because he thought what you did was funny.

And now you can quickly see how easy it is to skirt the rules 😁

[ivory dock]

Not necessarily, it varies from company to company.
Sometimes varying greatly.

[pliant phoenix]

Does ripping/extracting a model or texture for personal/retexture use qualify as an EULA breach?

(Arma Reforger)

[celest sundial]

That depends. Where are they from? Vanilla or another persons mod? Use them where? In a mod you want to publish or display in gameplay media only?

[pliant phoenix]

Vanilla, and a mod to publish

[junior rover]

we were having a discussion about it on another server, the real question is are we allowed to extract 3d models for the purpose of using those UV's to create custom textures

[celest sundial]

We generally tolderate re-textures of our vanilla assets. Please note that this does not apply to modded content. There you need to ask the authors of that mod.

[celest sundial]

We only allow a re-texture to be published. Not the source model. What you do locally on your pc as workflow is your concern only. But if you work in a team and accidentially upload some of that data onto e.g. github we will be forced to take it down. So please be careful what you share where.

[junior rover]

so as long as nothing is shared it's all good?

(when it comes to assets inside reforger?)

@celest sundial ?

[vast stump]

typically thats what people who make stuff consider a dick move.

[stray rover]

Wouldn't that act of extracting a 3D model itself not already constitute a violation of EULA?

[junior rover]

That’s what I’m tryna figure out. The eula prohibits reverse engineering but idk if that means you can’t get assets period or you can’t get assets to make your own stuff outside of Enfusion

[celest sundial]

Yes, but as I said if you do it locally nobody will know you did it and there is not much of a problem with it.

[stray rover]

That just sound to me that you do something illegally, but "not much of a problem", since it's unlikely you get caught if done locally only...

[lethal grove]

the only way anyone would even know about it to pursue action is if the person who extracted it told on themselves

[vast stump]

It is a bit dangerous to say its ok to such things even alone in your own space since we got a lot of people who take that as open invitation to then spread that around.

technically you dont need 3d model for retexturing

it may be more convenient

but you can do it just fine without it too

and then you dont have those illegally obtained models hanging around waiting for you to forget where they came from and maybe share to someone else too who then shares with someone else who puts them online somewhere

and so on

and if someone asks help for such things here they get banned

(well warned first but ban is possible too)

[junior rover]

Noted…

[icy linden]

Doing a retexture without having the model and a tool like substance painter is infinitely worse to the point outside of simple edits it's usually not worth the time

[celest sundial]

Modders have been painting on 2D unwrapped textures for decades with little to no issues.

[quick wigeon]

One solution to dealing with UV mapping is to just slap a UV grid texture on the model,
And that will show what parts of the model are where
Like this, when I was making a retexture for the P90

Not ideal though, and some models are much easier to do this to (depends on how messy the UV is)

[icy linden]

It takes 20 minutes of experience with substance painter to realize what a waste of time photoshopping textures for 3 hours is

[vast stump]

but does your convenience trump the authors rights?

[abstract crest]

Yep... or just editing BI textures to add details...

[icy linden]

It's actually easy to prove that someone used tools like Painter to retexture your asset, like imagine someone uses an edge wear mask. So if this is something that would be enforced then no point in doing it because doing a good retexture will get you banned - case closed.

[inland sphinx]

You always have the option to ask the mod author for the model, if you need it to make a retexture.

[icy linden]

Can I have the BTR70 model please

[blazing epoch]

Probably a dumb/redundant question but I want to confirm: Soviet music that was not created by a private band (therefor having the band own the music) is fair to use, correct? This isn't talking about a remake of the song that is owned by someone, but original Soviet music/art that exists within the public domain.

[inland sphinx]

"public domain" would be fair to use yes.
But I can't help you with determining if it actually is public domain

[blazing epoch]

That's fair, generally anything state media created by the USSR is considered public domain and was created that way, but I'll make sure whatever I look at doesn't have any hidden owners or something, though that'd be very stupid

[dark tulip]

Although USSR is a bit more complicated, the composer technically has the rights.
And as an educated guess it's now the Russian Federation that holds all the rights (unless stated otherwise).

Under the 1993 copyright law, all Russian or Soviet works from the RSFSR published in 1943 or later, as well as works of authors who died in 1943 or later, became thus copyrighted in Russia in 1993.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_Russian_Federation#:~:text=Under the 1993 copyright law,copyrighted in Russia in 1993

[light hazel]

When will be the arma 2 samples available again?

[meager fractal]

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_2_Sample_Models ?

[abstract crest]

While that page is fine, the zip at https://tr4.bistudio.com is unreachable Lou, as is the other torrent download link. Assume this will be the same for all LDPs/Samples

[meager fractal]

oh, I may have to check that

thonk

[light hazel]

That's what I meant, since the problem with the BI servers not being available haha

One thing before I get into it, can I use those assets to modify them and integrate them into Arma Reforger?

[abstract crest]

Samples yeah, you can

[unkempt sorrel]

Yeah, you can modify and use the samples. Pretty much anything except claiming them as yours

[abstract crest]

Also note the difference in licensing between map-related and other samples

I.e. map-related is -SA unlike the other stuff

[silver slate]

@zealous ore

That whole conversation is in there

So that’s why I’m confused why it’s not allowed now when back then it was

[zealous ore]

have you read what the reply states?

[silver slate]

I’m still looking for the confirmation email but it was apart of that conversation is what I mean

[zealous ore]

at no point there was proper permission in regards to bethesda’s ip for fallout as far as i know.

by that i mean - public and clear information made available by bethesada and/or a reply from their legal department confirming they are fine with 3rd party using their IP in another game as a mod.

[silver slate]

Seems like they got fucked regardless

[zealous ore]

as in - there was never proper permission received from bethesda to begin with

If bethesda answered bi about it (legal dep to legal dep) then it is 100% clear the ip holder doesn’t want to allow or tolerate mods portraying fallout in other games.

ps: BI cannot provide permission for IPs they do not own, so pretty sure bi didn’t provide said permission

[silver slate]

Yeah I get where you’re coming from I was under the impression it was an Legal response and not an community manger

What a shame

Apparently I can’t spell

[zealous ore]

anything related to legal matters needs to be answered by someone from a legal department or with legal counsel…

which wasn’t the case afaik. contacting ingame support for legal questions is also as funny as it is useless

[silver slate]

Yeah I could see that, like you mentioned it’s not even Bethesda‘s IP at the end of the day

Like the rights of it is up to the parent company I mean

I always forget that the parent company is the one with the ultimate say in what happens

Not the company itself

[zealous ore]

it is not always the case that the parent company owns the IP rights. It depends on how things where negociated between developer, publisher, parent company etc

[silver slate]

I didn’t know that, I always thought the top brass has the ultimate say