Is the Arma Communtiy getting too obsessed with legal issuse such as EULA's ?

[rhaggan 10]

After seeing the PR thread I began to wonder, is the Arma Communtiy getting too obsessed with legal issuse such as EULA's ?

Surely the EULA is the resposibility of the mod or addon not for the community to dictate how they "think" it should be?

Do the people who comment on these threads actually know any thing about international law, intilectual property rights, national laws?

Has any one actually read any of these regarding copyright ?

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=105256&highlight=User+licence

Why is the Arma community acting like a bunch of three year old kids who have thrown their toys out of the pram?

discuss.

[wld427 1705]

The major issue lies with theft.

modders and addon makers spend countless hours working on stuff to release for free tot he community. Then we get some clown who thinks he can simply rip it open and begin selling it on the open market. That's right making money off of someone else's hard work.

The EULA is intended to protect the addonmaker as well as the content provided by BIS.

In the end this is truly a great community. i have approached many other addon makers about using thier content and the majority are glad to share.

The EULA has become a necessary evil of the modern internet age where things are shared in the blink of an eye.

[Sekra 10]

Because the community provides every person the tools to rip apart every single piece of code, model, anything in a addon. And because these tools are handed out without regard to who they are give, what is done with them, the community thinks that it is their right to rip apart and reskin, reconfig, update, rape, mutilate and redistribute other peoples work, publicly or within clans or their own communities. The EULA's are disregarded as just a piece of text that means nothing.

Sadly the words of Maruk fall to deaf ears in this community:

Few years later, it is again time to address some licensing issues and uncertainties related to re-using and modifying other creators content. Most importantly, I believe addon makers and users need to understand that the fact something is possible or easily available technically does not mean they really can take it and do whatever they like with it.

taken from http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=105256

[celery 8]

In the case of PR, almost everything in the terms and conditions was a direct attack against the spirit of the community. No EULA will prevent theft, and imposing laughably strict restrictions only makes the addon team seem like self-important pricks on an ego trip. Theft has, is, and will always be dealt with whenever it's discovered.

[PuFu 4600]

I think the main problem is an understanding of some concepts. Including the importance of an EULA, the rights of an addon/mod maker of using such an EULA, as well what a MOD is. In the end it is about the rights that a addon/mod maker has.

1. An addon/mod can be more than just content (ACE -not ACEX- is a good example).

It can have a different scope than providing the community with new content to play with (which is indeed what most addons do). An addon that would remove the editor button is still an addon, it doesn't break BIS EULA (which i am sure only a tiny minority have read it from start to end - yes, i did, just like all the others EULAs i agree with).

Of course the end user can choose whether or not to use it.

2. BIS EULA doesn't stipulate that there can't be restriction (as the above example) to the way the game behaves by modifing it.

No matter if it doesn't suit/conforms with the community view as a whole or an particular individual, it is well within the addon/mod maker right to create any addon he feels like, and restrict its use as he pleases.(again, as long as it isn't against BIS EULA or some international laws).

The end user has the right to choose whether or not to use it

3. By releasing the said addon to the community, the creator does NOT grant the unlimited use (as in unpacking, and further modifying it (partially or fully), not even for personal use, unless otherwise stipulated. Having something for FREE, doesn't mean it is your IP, nor that you can use it

If the end user doesn't agree with the free addon EULA, he can choose not to use it.

4. The very common comment such as "i have bought the game, i will play the game as i feel like it" stands true (within BIS EULA) until the point you have to agree with a 3rd party EULA.

5. The openness of BIS community is, unfortunately, understood as one can do whatever i he wants to the downloaded content - from ripping it apart for "learning purposes" to modifying it for personal or closed community use. Neither could be farther apart from what an open community really means, and what the respect for another ppl hard work should mean.

In order to ensure some sort of tracking/debug system for the end user (which is again, not compulsory from the said addon maker part), everyone would need to be using the content provided by the end user, and not variations of it - because nowadays it is just so cool to edit other ppl work and call yourself and addon maker.

6. Content and its quality is immediately associated with a name/nick/group/brand/etc. In order to maintain that brand, it could be necessary to exercise some restrictions and/or limit the use of the provided modification files.

The end user can choose whether or not to use it.

In the end, a proper understanding of what the end user rights are as well as the ones of the addon makers (within the layout and EULA provided with BIS games), together with possible reasons for certain decisions, could only benefit both side of the coin.

Even so, i find it more than weird that certain decisions can create such flame wars and demands (of course those could be discussed, but in a more civilized manner at least). In the case of PR, you have your vote, as a individual user or server admin, by using it or not. I find this is enough to let a certain developer know about his work's success.

---------- Post added at 03:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:26 AM ----------

In the case of PR, almost everything in the terms and conditions was a direct attack against the spirit of the community.

Which is arguable and very subjective. Yes, it can be discussed over, in a civilized manner. Still, NO ONE, will force it upon you. Just skip it and be done with it.

Same sort of thing is going about commercial games: if more would vote with their money - bad/against your own principles just don't buy it/return it. Instead there is a lot of these interetz bikering

I am certain if more would say "it's bad" with their wallets, the gaming industry would progress in better ways.

Read p2-4

[maddogx 13]

+1 to everything in PuFu's post. :)

To expand on that, I think it should be pointed out again that PR contains specially licensed high quality BAF DLC material for everyone to use (even those who only have BAF lite), so the PR EULA is not just about protecting their own content, it's about protecting BI's content.

[DAP 619]

+1 to everything in PuFu's post. :)

To expand on that, I think it should be pointed out again that PR contains specially licensed high quality BAF DLC material for everyone to use (even those who only have BAF lite), so the PR EULA is not just about protecting their own content, it's about protecting BI's content.

I agree with content protection. But.. missions protection? Restriction to create new missions with unmodified content? This is something new. BIS EULA don't restrict free mission creating, but PR EULA does it. WTF?

[maddogx 13]

I agree with content protection. But.. missions protection? Restriction to create new missions with unmodified content? This is something new. BIS EULA don't restrict free mission creating, but PR EULA does it. WTF?

Actually that's still the same point. If they allowed people to freely make missions using the PR british forces content, it would essentially be the same as releasing BAF for free. Think about it.

As it stands, people who want to play with high quality BAF units must buy the DLC, otherwise they have to make do with the lite version. But if people can simply use the high quality BAF units from PR instead, no one would have to buy BAF to get access to the high quality units. That's pretty much the only reason for the restrictive EULA that covers missions aswell.

In fact, if I understood UK_Forces posts correctly, only the licensed BAF units are covered by this specific EULA, meaning that you might be able to use the rest of the PR content more freely. But don't take my word on that, as I may have misunderstood something. :)

[DAP 619]

Actually that's still the same point. If they allowed people to freely make missions using the PR british forces content, it would essentially be the same as releasing BAF for free. Think about it.

As it stands, people who want to play with high quality BAF units must buy the DLC, otherwise they have to make do with the lite version. But if people can simply use the high quality BAF units from PR instead, no one would have to buy BAF to get access to the high quality units. That's pretty much the only reason for the restrictive EULA that covers missions aswell.

In fact, if I understood UK_Forces posts correctly, only the licensed BAF units are covered by this specific EULA, meaning that you might be able to use the rest of the PR content more freely. But don't take my word on that, as I may have misunderstood something. :)

Disagree :) I can't see connection between BI's BAF content in PR mod and missions creating :) If I make mission for those units.. how someone can play in this mission if he have no those units? :) He must have PR mod for this mission. Where is problem? If someone download my mission without those units.. he can't get them from mission. He must download whole mod :) Right? :) So.. where is problem? :)

[maddogx 13]

Disagree :) I can't see connection between BI's BAF content in PR mod and missions creating :) If I make mission for those units.. how someone can play in this mission if he have no those units? :) He must have PR mod for this mission. Where is problem? If someone download my mission without those units.. he can't get them from mission. He must download whole mod :) Right? :) So.. where is problem? :)

The problem is:

- PR contains BAF high quality content.

- PR mod is free, BAF DLC is not. (Only lite is free.)

Currently if a mission maker wants to use BAF for a mission, the players must either own the BAF DLC or live with shitty looking units. If mission makers could use the BAF units from PR, there would no longer be a dependency on owning BAF in order to get the high quality units. The only dependency would be PR, which can be downloaded for free. ;)

Personally, I don't believe many people would go out of their way to use the PR BAF units instead of the official DLC just to avoid the cost, but I still think it would have been negligent of BIS to provide these units to PR without these restrictions. It's their IP, and it's not free (yet).

[DAP 619]

The problem is:

- PR contains BAF high quality content.

- PR mod is free, BAF DLC is not. (Only lite is free.)

Currently if a mission maker wants to use BAF for a mission, the players must either own the BAF DLC or live with shitty looking units. If mission makers could use the BAF units from PR, there would no longer be a dependency on owning BAF in order to get the high quality units. The only dependency would be PR, which can be downloaded for free. ;)

Personally, I don't believe many people would go out of their way to use the PR BAF units instead of the official DLC just to avoid the cost, but I still think it would have been negligent of BIS to provide these units to PR without these restrictions. It's their IP, and it's not free (yet).

Aaaand what? :D PR mod anyway will be free for download. Even if user, which will download this mod never seen editor before :D Here is no any connection. Any can download this mod and "get BI's BAF units for free". And this user can do anything with downloaded content. Because it free for download. Not like BAF from BIS. So why those restrictions for mission makers? Here is no difference. No connection. No sence. Only.. if they want protect their gamemodes. And PR community from spraying on different custom servers with custom missions ;)

[dm 9]

Said it before, will say it again:

A decade of quality free content has turned this community into a spoiled, self-entitled bunch of brats. As soon as someone legitimately wants to protect their work, their design decisions and their IP, all the brats start crying the same boring bullshit about their "rights" to rip other peoples work apart.

I for one fully support teams like PR, who want their work to be played the way they designed it to be played, and not to be ripped apart because johnny-come-lately thinks he knows better.

[DAP 619]

Said it before, will say it again:

A decade of quality free content has turned this community into a spoiled, self-entitled bunch of brats. As soon as someone legitimately wants to protect their work, their design decisions and their IP, all the brats start crying the same boring bullshit about their "rights" to rip other peoples work apart.

I for one fully support teams like PR, who want their work to be played the way they designed it to be played, and not to be ripped apart because johnny-come-lately thinks he knows better.

Iron Front. If they want get paid for their work, then need move on Iron Front's route.

[dm 9]

Iron Front. If they want get paid for their work, then need move on Iron Front's route.

Thats the point. They dont want to be paid. They just want to ensure that it is played the way they designed it to be played.

Why is it that when people see something released for free, they assume its a free for all?

Just because it is free does NOT mean you are allowed to do with it what you want...

[rangerpl 13]

It just seemed to me that the PR team had been very arrogant by putting out that EULA, as if to say "We don't want you making our mod look bad with crap missions" and "You're too stupid to decide how you want to use PR, so you have to follow our rules".

It was just the tone of the whole thing. I understand wanting to protect your own work, but restricting mission design? Come on.

And besides, as we've already seen, asses like Vora_bat will steal content anyway without much regard for IP. Writing an overly restrictive EULA won't stop the dedicated thieves.

[DAP 619]

Thats the point. They dont want to be paid. They just want to ensure that it is played the way they designed it to be played.

Why is it that when people see something released for free, they assume its a free for all?

Just because it is free does NOT mean you are allowed to do with it what you want...

This is correct for content. But for missions creating? Example: I like mod's features, but dislike mod's missions. And same for my friends. And some other ppl. What we must do? Wait until mod's team create special mission for us? You must be kidding. I agree with terms of using mod's content. But disagree with terms of using mission editor.

[maddogx 13]

This is correct for content. But for missions creating? Example: I like mod's features, but dislike mod's missions. And same for my friends. And some other ppl. What we must do? Wait until mod's team create special mission for us? You must be kidding. I agree with terms of using mod's content. But disagree with terms of using mission editor.

The EULA doesn't stop you from using the mission editor itself... you just can't use the content in question with it.

I'm not sure how many different ways I need to phrase this, but it's getting tiresome. Anyway, here goes again:

BIS has granted the Project Reality team exclusive rights to use BAF DLC content in their mod. "Exclusive" means that this content may only be used within the context of the PR mod, nowhere else. The fact that the mod is free to download does not mean that everyone automatically gets to use its content however they want - the restrictive EULA is there for a reason, which is not simply so PR can thumb their nose at you.

Edited August 26, 2011 by MadDogX

[DAP 619]

The EULA doesn't stop you from using the mission editor itself... you just can't use the content in question with it.

Are you sure?

The only way to "release" missions for PR, is via speaking with our team.

Missions - if you want a mission, released and playable on the servers, it just needs running by the team to check it fits in with the gameplay modes, and we will add it to the Mod, with Credits of course.

I think it sounds little different.

It says that they want to prevent replacing of their missions and their gamemodes with another. So.. I can't make crash'n'kill mission even if I want it. (for MP of course)

Edited August 26, 2011 by DAP

[maddogx 13]

I think it sounds little different.

It says that they want to prevent replacing of their missions and their gamemodes with another. So.. I can't make crash'n'kill mission even if I want it.

I don't see your point.

Asking for and recieving permission to do something is always fine. That's not what this discussion is about.

[-Snafu- 78]

Said it before, will say it again:

A decade of quality free content has turned this community into a spoiled, self-entitled bunch of brats. As soon as someone legitimately wants to protect their work, their design decisions and their IP, all the brats start crying the same boring bullshit about their "rights" to rip other peoples work apart.

I for one fully support teams like PR, who want their work to be played the way they designed it to be played, and not to be ripped apart because johnny-come-lately thinks he knows better.

The entire community? The community, thousands strong, should not and can not be held responsible for the actions of a few. A number of those few not even being from this community.

The issue here is not the protection of work that has caused a stir but an EULA that prevents the public release of missions with certain addons. Something that, I believe, has never happened before. As I am sure you know, an editor created mission simply references addons in the mission.sqm. No ripping of addon PBO files involved.

Now, before anyone bites my head off, I am not taking sides and while I find the EULA mission conditions odd I really don't care. I like PR and what they have done for BF2 but the Arma 2 version will probably be warp central for me and my crappy internet connection. Nevertheless, I'll still give it a try, just to see what they've cooked up. :cool:

The only reason I posted is because it's getting tiring seeing the entire community blamed and generalised for the actions of a few people.

[DAP 619]

I don't see your point.

Asking for and recieving permission to do something is always fine. That's not what this discussion is about.

I'm talking about this:

Missions - if you want a mission, released and playable on the servers, it just needs running by the team to check it fits in with the gameplay modes, and we will add it to the Mod, with Credits of course.

It prevent all mission makers from making missions with different gamemodes (warfare, domination, evolution, deathmatch, flag capture, sniper hunt and etc.) Also it prevent creating custom servers with PR mod and custom missions with this mod.

[maddogx 13]

It prevent all mission makers from making missions with different gamemodes (warfare, domination, evolution, deathmatch, flag capture, sniper hunt and etc.) Also it prevent creating custom servers with PR mod and custom missions with this mod.

Indeed it does, and like it or not, that's their prerogative.

The thing I don't understand is why people are making such a fuss about it. If you want to make missions using brit content you have BAF at your disposal, don't you? Aswell as some pretty excellent community mods, I might add. I honestly don't see why it's such a big deal.

As for the whole server thing, all you need to do is contact them to get a free server license. No one is asking you to fork out heaps of cash or sacrifice your first born son...

[max power 21]

I agree with content protection. But.. missions protection? Restriction to create new missions with unmodified content? This is something new. BIS EULA don't restrict free mission creating, but PR EULA does it. WTF?

I was similarly confused about that. I think it's possible that PR's mod locks out the editor, or uses the content in such that it is quite difficult to use their mods in the editor without altering them in some way. Speaking hypothetically, it's also possible that there are ways around that, but I think the only people who really know what UK_FORCE was driving at is the dev team at this point.

In the case of PR, almost everything in the terms and conditions was a direct attack against the spirit of the community. No EULA will prevent theft, and imposing laughably strict restrictions only makes the addon team seem like self-important pricks on an ego trip. Theft has, is, and will always be dealt with whenever it's discovered.

I think that when you phrase it like PR Mod was 'attacking' the community with its ideas you are being disingenuous and/or distorting the actual situation.

Regarding the subject at hand in general:

PR Mod's licensing and their general stance is much different than we have had in the community previously. Part of their license was agreed upon and ratified by BIS. It's possible, now, that the behaviour of some on these boards is responsible for the failure of a new experiment in community outreach. Think about that for a second.

As stated by very intelligent people before me, I think that a lot of the eponymous obsession and dare I say prejudiced behaviour has to do with a lack of understanding of the EULA concepts in general, and this situation in particular. There is little blame to be handed out for this ignorance since information is quite sparse. I certainly don't understand it. In this case, at this point in time, there seems to be no way of knowing to what UK_FORCE was referring when he said that there was an EULA forbidding mission distribution. Similarly, it's difficult to know what sources of information some other users on the boards were referring to when they suggested that BIS would consider itself legally offended if someone was to distribute a mission.

edit: I don't want to comment specifically on the claims made by the PR team or other users on the thread because I don't know anything about their EULA or other agreements. I do however want to express my agreement with the notion that an EULA that is overstepping its limitations or is unreasonable is harmful to peoples' respect for such documents. EULAs are a legal issue, but more than that, I think they are a moral issue. You want to try to encourage people to respect each other. Unless you really want to run around suing everyone you see, you must foster a feeling of good will towards these agreements. If your EULAs are not reasonable, people will not respect them.

I do however believe that full copyright means full copyright.

Edited August 26, 2011 by Max Power

[DAP 619]

Indeed it does, and like it or not, that's their prerogative.

The thing I don't understand is why people are making such a fuss about it. If you want to make missions using brit content you have BAF at your disposal, don't you? Aswell as some pretty excellent community mods, I might add. I honestly don't see why it's such a big deal.

As for the whole server thing, all you need to do is contact them to get a free server license. No one is asking you to fork out heaps of cash or sacrifice your first born son...

I don't want continue discussion :) Now it all clear for all. But one thing :) And I against it :) They create precedent :) Now any other modmaker can do something like this or even worst :) This policy can freeze community's creation ability. And this is bad for community. I can understand their feeling, but if you do something for free, if you do something for community, then let community decide how use this and how make this better.

[dm 9]

This policy can freeze community's creation ability.

Oh noes! The sky is falling! We're all DOOMED.

Its not going to kill the community, its not going to stifle creation.

Stop repeating the same boring doom message over and over...