ARMA III & Steam WORKSHOP

[Vigil Vindex 64]

All this talk about licences and "agreements" is a distraction from the real issue, that some people are so determined to hate on steam and want to make as loud a protest as possible by boycotting anything to do with steam. I don't see anyone using any recognised licences, just arbitrary "agreements" that aren't enforceable by law. That's why most developers use some derivative of the creative commons licences when publishing their work. The only people going to lose from all this drama is the players and the community.

I will say it again, if I give you an ice cream, it's your ice cream, I can't tell you how to eat it.

[max power 21]

This 'they're just hating on steam / SWS' discussion stops now. It's clouding the issue and it is off topic. Further attempts to steer the topic in this direction will result in administrative attention.

[h - 169]

It's irrelevant if I have published work for the community or not, just because you have published work doesn't mean your opinion is any more valid than mine. I happen to have chosen not to publicly release my stuff because I am not ready to do so. But when I do release anything it will be under the Creative Commons Share Alike licence detailed here: http://freedomdefined.org/Licenses/CC-BY-SA

I recognise the right to attribution, and I dislike people that take peoples work given for free and try to make financial profits from it, hence my choice of licence. As long as attribution is given and its not for commercial use I see no problem. And in regards to the issue at hand, I don't think any of the above is being broken by sharing a mission on the steam workshop.

Isn't your choice of license then wrong if you dislike people who take others work for free and then try sell it as the license clearly states that the work may be sold freely.. :confused:

The freedom to redistribute copies: Copies may be sold, swapped or given away for free, as part of a larger work, a collection, or independently. There must be no limit on the amount of information that can be copied. There must also not be any limit on who can copy the information or on where the information can be copied.

Furthermore, isn't that in direct violation of BIS Tools EULA?

Or am I just misunderstanding something here..?

[Vigil Vindex 64]

On the topic of licences, the link to the relevant steam workshop licence is here: http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/

The section of concern I guess would be user generated content:

6. USER GENERATED CONTENT

A. General Provisions

"User Generated Content" means any content you make available to other users through your use of multi-user features of Steam, or to Valve or its affiliates through your use of the Software or otherwise.

You grant Valve and its affiliates the non-exclusive, irrevocable right to use, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute, transmit, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and publicly perform, your User Generated Content, and derivative works of your User Generated Content, in connection with the operation and promotion of the Steam site. If you use Valve cloud storage, you grant us a license to store your information as part of that service. We may place limits on the amount of storage you may use.

If you provide Valve with any feedback or suggestions about Steam, the Software, or any Valve products or services, Valve is free to use the feedback or suggestions however it chooses, without any obligation to account to you.

B. Content Uploaded to the Steam Workshop

Some games or applications available on Steam ("Workshop-Enabled Apps") allow you to create User Generated Content based on or using the Workshop-Enabled App, and to submit that User Generated Content (a “Workshop Contributionâ€) to one or more Steam Workshop web pages. Workshop Contributions can be viewed by the Steam community, and for some categories of Workshop Contributions users may be able to interact with, download or purchase the Workshop Contribution. In some cases, Workshop Contributions may be considered for incorporation by Valve or a third-party developer into a game or into a Subscription Marketplace.

You understand and agree that Valve is not obligated to use, distribute, or continue to distribute copies of any Workshop Contribution and reserves the right, but not the obligation, to restrict or remove Workshop Contributions for any reason.

Specific Workshop-Enabled Apps or Workshop web pages may contain special terms (“App-Specific Termsâ€) that supplement or change the terms set out in this Section. In particular, where Workshop Contributions are distributed for a fee, App-Specific Terms will address how revenue may be shared. Unless otherwise specified in App-Specific Terms (if any), the following general rules apply to Workshop Contributions.

Workshop Contributions are Subscriptions, and therefore you agree that any Subscriber receiving distribution of your Workshop Contribution will have the same rights to use your Workshop Contribution (and will be subject to the same restrictions) as are set out in this Agreement for any other Subscriptions.

Notwithstanding the license described in Section 6.A., Valve will only have the right to modify or create derivative works from your Workshop Contribution in the following cases: (a) Valve may make modifications necessary to make your Contribution compatible with Steam and the Workshop functionality or user interface, and (b) Valve or the applicable developer may make modifications to Workshop Contributions that are accepted for in-Application distribution as it deems necessary or desirable to enhance gameplay.

You may, in your sole discretion, choose to remove a Workshop Contribution from the applicable Workshop pages. If you do so, Valve will no longer have the right to use, distribute, transmit, communicate, publicly display or publicly perform the Workshop Contribution, except that (a) Valve may continue to exercise these rights for any Workshop Contribution that is accepted for distribution in-game or distributed in a manner that allows it to be used in-game, and (b) your removal will not affect the rights of any Subscriber who has already obtained access to a copy of the Workshop Contribution.

Except where otherwise provided in App-Specific Terms, you agree that Valve’s consideration of your Workshop Contribution is your full compensation, and you are not entitled to any other rights or compensation in connection with the rights granted to Valve and to other Subscribers.

I would argue that this:

Valve’s obligations are subject to existing laws and legal process and Valve may comply with law enforcement or regulatory requests or requirements notwithstanding any contrary term.

Could be interpreted as stating that existing laws will be adhered to, so if I include the CC BY SA licence in any work I put on Steam Workshop, I could still insist that the requirements of the licence are still to be upheld. In any event, any kind of case regarding IP laws would have to be taken to court. Is this really what the problem is all about?

[max power 21]

That is correct. Things produced with the tools may not be sold.

[Vigil Vindex 64]

Isn't your choice of license then wrong if you dislike people who take others work for free and then try sell it

Not as long as they have clear attribution, and the share alike licence stipulates that any derivative work must adhere to a similar licence to allow me to copy back any improvements on the work back into my own work which I could then sell if wished to.

---------- Post added at 07:17 ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 ----------

Furthermore, isn't that in direct violation of BIS Tools EULA?

EULA isn't worth the paper it is written on, hasn't it been proven that if you don't read it they can't claim you have agreed to it? I am sure I read about it a while ago in some EU court. Link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-user_license_agreement#Enforceability_of_EULAs_in_the_United_States

PS. Still thinks it's sad we are having to debate licencing and law when we now have cool new toys to play with and should be talking about how to get mods working and such. /sadface

Edited August 8, 2013 by ssechaud

[max power 21]

Before it starts, the discussion regarding the legitimacy of the BI Tools license stops now. If you wish to remain a member of the forums, you will abide by it.

[kylania 568]

talking about how to get mods working and such.

I'm not happy with how it dumps everything in one remote folder outside of the ArmA structure and especially outside of the ArmA profile structure. Fairly certain you can point arma3.exe to load mods from anywhere now right? But still for organization it seems to be a potential nightmare.

I think SWS would have to give users a lot more control over where things are stored and how things are accessed before I'd consider using it for mods. Even for missions it's not really appealing at the moment. But it's new, so improvements are bound to happen.

[.kju 3245]

There are two core issues:

1) Some have worries how Valve is treating 3rd party content, and how they react to complaints of content being uploaded without the author's consent or against the license.

2) BI should have made their own addon sync application, or if unable, instead support community made tools, like Play withSIX, DayZ commander and others.

The fact of the matter is that Steam workshop is far too simplistic to handle the complex nature of Arma addons, mods and their dependencies.

The recent dev comment essentially tells the same story - Steam workshop is unable to handle it, and it won't for a long if ever.

Bottom line the core problem of addon sync in MP is still completely unsolved in A3.

[akm74 1]

You're making up a scenario and then insulting so far non existent people for perpetrating a non existent act. Surely we can find something more productive to discuss.

"non existent act" right here. Post #427 (right after your post). Don't know how you miss it...

For all other guys and girls who want somehow protect their work. This is a good place to start:

http://creativecommons.org/choose/

I know it's not 100% and may not protect your "hello world" :-) but at least it somethink to start with. Then just include URL to generated licence with your mod/mission/script "readme.txt" file.

Edited August 8, 2013 by AKM74

[max power 21]

"non existent act" right here. Post #427 (right after your post). Don't know how you miss it...

Because I don't read every post on the forum. Mostly, I respond to user reports.

[Vigil Vindex 64]

In regards to dependency management, I don't know what SWS can do or cant do, but I know it can be done outwith SWS relatively easily. As I said earlier something along the lines of npmjs.org would be great, a place to register mods and such, supply a url and version number and then arma can parse that registry for the relevant stuff when it is specified within the mission.

[Lonestar 11]

;2462478']Bottom line the core problem of addon sync in MP is still completely unsolved in A3.

I agree with what kju said and it makes me sad because I see a lot of willingness in Gekon's post.

Let's not be pessimistic and hope this will be addressed in the medium term.

As Gekon said: "Mods in the workshop is one possibility"' date=' if this fails other solutions may be considered.[/color']

Edited August 8, 2013 by Lonestar

[Vigil Vindex 64]

I wonder if it might be useful to contact Valve regarding the dependency issue, it must be something they are aware of that needs addressing within SWS.

[spamurai 3]

I think in the flurry of emotions regarding the issue, people are focused too much on limitations and disadvantages and not enough on what potential is possible from Steamwork Shop.

It hurts my brain to see this issue dwell on legalisms that have misplace the primary objective of what Content Portals are all about. Connecting End Users with Custom Content. vALVE didn't create Steam Workshop with ARMA in mind... they created it with a mind of making it easier to connect end users with custom content. It just so happens that ARMA deals with the same issue and has a need for simplifying the process of connecting ARMA Users with custom content.

I just keep feeling like the real problem here isn't vALVE or Steam WorkShop at all. People are just not thinking out side of the little box that has been our reality for the last 6 years of dealing with ARMA and the Custom Content facet of it's experience. Instead of thinking optimistically about how to adapt to a new possibility of delivering custom content and making community creations accessible to more ARMA players... we focus on is how it's not like tradition and how it's not going to work. That's an incredibly regressive and limiting mind space to work in.

The way I see it, the traditionally established norm for distributing custom content has been great, but not perfect and still has gaps where it doesn't meet the needs of the ArmA community.

For me, I still see a basic problem with the Online ArmA experience for the average would-be ArmA player. When you enter the online world of ArmA, you'll find that servers are as unique among each other as ArmA players are among themselves. They all have personalities spawned from the way each server is customized with custom content. Different maps, different rule sets and different mods. Navigating the jungle is awkward at times when you are an ArmA player. Frequently you'll join a server that requires a certain type of custom content. Sometimes is easy to fix this problem, for example the server will upload a missing mission file to you. Other times it is not, such as needing a certain set of vehicles or a specific total conversion package set of mod files.

Usually, as a Player you will encounter a barrier that kicks you off the server with a message "Failed: We need what you don't have". These kinds of issues are disruptive and create a disjointed online experience for users that is not common when compared to a variety of other games they are experienced with. Where do you go to get what you need? What do you do with it once you have it?

As a Server Admin, this is a problem because you want to use custom content to personalize your server and make it a unique and attractive place to play. However, the more you do so, the less accessible you make your server to players. The very players you need to make your ArmA server a worthwhile experience. How to ensure yours know where to go to get what they need?

At this point, this is where I see the Steam Workshop being more of a tool for Server Admins then for Content Creators. However, I think I can appreciate some of the feelings Content Creators have, but for now we'll focus on Server Admins.

Once ARMA has encounter a situation where a player has failed to join a server because of missing content, Bohemia should have a UI that essentially creates a link to the Steam Workshop. As a Server Admin, I would create a Workshop page for my server where all the custom content that is needed to play on the server is displayed. It becomes a one-stop-shop for links to what players need. Now I, as Admin, can be assured that I'm not losing potential players because they do not know what content they need or where to get it. It's all right there. Once they obtain what is needed, ARMA can restart and immediately attempt to join my server automatically. All should well now. Additionally, I can even offload some of the network strain on my server because I can even put large mission files (like Domination/Warfare) on the servers workshop page and not have to upload extra data every time a new player joins. I can also now lock the server with the Requisite/Dependencies function and not worry that players will get left out not knowing what they need or where to go to find it.

As a player, it's a closed loop and unified system. I do not need to use additional third party applications to manage game data. I don't need to search the internet for community websites that host content. I don't have to question if I have everything I need. EVen though they were designed to solve these issues, you still deal with shortcomings of the otherwise great apps like withSIX and Commander. They are not perfect, or entirely intuitive at times. There are still hurdles that players must cross to setup and use the tool correctly and without problems... and it's a lot more trouble at times then players want to deal with when all they want to do is join a good server and play ArmA. Some people may have issues with a commercial service from vALVE... well, many more have a problem with installing software made by some guy on the internet in his spare time. Think about it.

Now..

As for Content Creators, I think I perceive how they might be feeling. With the current environment our community has established, because we're a fairly close community, if a content creator has an issue with how someone may be using content that isn't their own and claiming credit for it... a person can usually go to places like ArmAholic or withSIX and plead their case and there is the understanding that these community outlets can and will remove the offending content. Problem solved. Naturally of course... there is nothing to guarantee that is what will happen and I think we take for granted that is something our community has evolved and come to expect. However, there is nothing to stop someone from plagiarizing content made by others and distributing it using other means outside of community control. Creators just assume that it just won't happen or it's too much of a bother. I, for example, could start up my own Content portal and let people upload and distribute anything they wanted and there is nothing anyone could realistically do about it. Threats of copyright and legalisms are pretty hollow and carry very little weight and we all know it.

And that is what I think people are afraid of when it comes to Steam Workshops. They worry that the illusion of control over their creations will be lost because vALVE will not police creative control over what is put up and distributed. Which is fair enough because vALVE likely won't with the same level of commitment that members of our community do now.

Bohemia could step in here and rather then worry about a vALVE commitment to protecting user created content, BIS could do more to allow creators to protect their own content from plagiarism. Could they not create a custom archive file with it's own fancy extension such as *.acc (ArmA Custom Content)? A content creator can publish his material to mod.acc which contains header data about who created it or flags for other dependencies. All an end user would have then, is a file to deal with, not access to the content in the file.

So, in the end, I see Steam Workshop as having more positive potential for ArmA collectively as a whole. Some concerns are not unjustified, but are not insurmountable obstacles and I think some people are just making them out to be mountains, when in fact they are just mole hills.

[Ekko 1]

;2462478']Bottom line the core problem of addon sync in MP is still completely unsolved in A3.

So, what does this exactly mean for management of steam workshop in our daily Arma 3 life?

[Masharra 10]

So, what does this exactly mean for management of steam workshop in our daily Arma 3 life?

Here is an example.

You download my arma mission "co08_stolen_flame"

Unless you already have

BAF

Namalsk

Afrenian Army

Lingor units

Loaded you will have to go find those addons at a different place armaholic, pw6, armarize whatever.

To even play the mission.

Here is where the system works.

I downloaded Soak's "Whole Lotta Stratis WIP " from the workshop.

That mission does not require any addons thus will work perfectly.

Heck it adds another step when compared with say armaholic. IF the mission is hosted there you can go and get the req addons there also. Pw6 is also working on something quite similar. IIRC they are also working on a method to autoload addon per mission or something like that. ( I may be mistaken)

This also ties into MP. A while back they announced server invites are working. The problem? If you invite someone to a modded server it will attempt to join then kick them for not having the mods. thus sending them back to the Bold area.

Now how will it affect daily steamworkshop life? It depends. Do you play missions that have addon req's? If all you play are wasteland and its ilk then you have nothing to worry about. Now when the mods start rolling in and servers start using acre, lingor units, namalsk, mcn_aliabad, etc and the different versions associated with them it will be a clusterfack.

Not a clusterfack I mind really as I am accustomed to it and with pw6 it couldnt be any easier. Well maybe if he paid me.

Edited August 8, 2013 by Masharra

[[aps]gnat 28]

Wow people. Didn't realise the extent of how several generations of people have come to think IP is not really important ...... !

.... Must be all that mp3, PC software and movie ripping over recent years !

The Valve language clearly pushes hard their rights, but does little to clearly articulate a content providers and or authors rights.

Certainly the language seeks to nullify an authors prior rights.

My background: 15 years as a contracts manager, negotiating, executing and terminating, for a very large international conglomerate with 100s of in-house lawyers.

[Dwarden 1125]

bottom line, to get seamless 'experience' from SWS or similar, you need features like : http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=9111

to be done, before it can be said it's ease to use feature which greatly enhaces the friendliess and usability of the distribution ...

also aboutte IP , some seems to think that the SWS EULA overrule theirs own license / eula included with work...

imo i think that's not possible ...

[massasster 1]

Gnat;2463312']Wow people. Didn't realise the extent of how several generations of people have come to think IP is not really important ...... !

.... Must be all that mp3' date=' PC software and movie ripping over recent years !

The Valve language clearly pushes hard their rights, but does little to clearly articulate a content providers and or authors rights.

Certainly the language seeks to nullify an authors prior rights.

My background: 15 years as a contracts manager, negotiating, executing and terminating, for a very large international conglomerate with 100s of in-house lawyers.[/quote']

I think you have the wow wrong. This is a game... You are not a developer.. you are, at best, a modder... If you are here for fame and fortune you are in the wrong place. go start your own indie title and get all the attention whoring you like.. Simply put, you are making an EDIT of someone's game, not reinventing the wheel. Realize that and we can all move on to a better game play experience with expanded reach through a universally adopted file sharing source built into an engine that already supports it.

Get over yourself.

[gammadust 12]

get real MassAsster... fyi some of the current BI devs where contributing members such as gnat. don't drive the topic that way, please!

On the license update itself, and as one of the ceptics, it looks to be a step in the right direction... the most significant part to me being:

"(...)You furthermore represent and warrant that the User Generated Content, your submission of that Content, and your granting of rights in that Content does not violate any applicable contract, law or regulation"

This should help in making any potential case, still though, IP dispute/Violation of 3rd party terms processes should have an official and distinct avenue (aside of report buttons and the like).

Also this still leaves the burden of proof on the side of the eventual victim, not very pallatable to me.

But an explicit admission in the license that it may be void in case of violation of other preceding licenses is a step in the good direction.

[xendance 3]

get real MassAsster... fyi some of the current BI devs where contributing members such as gnat. don't drive the topic that way, please!

On the license update itself, and as one of the ceptics, it looks to be a step in the right direction... the most significant part to me being:

"(...)You furthermore represent and warrant that the User Generated Content, your submission of that Content, and your granting of rights in that Content does not violate any applicable contract, law or regulation"

This should help in making any potential case, still though, IP dispute/Violation of 3rd party terms processes should have an official and distinct avenue (aside of report buttons and the like).

Also this still leaves the burden of proof on the side of the eventual victim, not very pallatable to me.

But an explicit admission in the license that it may be void in case of violation of other preceding licenses is a step in the good direction.

I agree with MassAsster. And besides, the EULA of the tools says that Bohemia own all rights of every piece of derivate work made for their game with their tools and you're forbidden to make any money with them. Instead of arguing copyright law here, I'd let BI take care of it.

[PuFu 4600]

I agree with MassAsster. And besides, the EULA of the tools says that Bohemia own all rights of every piece of derivate work made for their game with their tools

No, it doesn't. Unless by derivative you mean using BIS content as a starting point.

[STALKERGB 6]

I think you have the wow wrong. This is a game... You are not a developer.. you are, at best, a modder... If you are here for fame and fortune you are in the wrong place. go start your own indie title and get all the attention whoring you like.. Simply put, you are making an EDIT of someone's game, not reinventing the wheel. Realize that and we can all move on to a better game play experience with expanded reach through a universally adopted file sharing source built into an engine that already supports it.

Get over yourself.

Most modders do not do it for the fame MassAsster. Most make stuff because they want to make something for themselves, just so happens a lot of the time they share that with the community. How and if a content creator chooses to share their work is completely up to them.

Simply saying they are just editing the game is unfair too. I wouldn't categorise spending 10's or even 100's of hours modelling say, a new aircraft, followed by texturing and configuring it "just editing" the game. Almost all of that was done separate from ARMA.

[astast 12]

Most modders do not do it for the fame MassAsster. Most make stuff because they want to make something for themselves, just so happens a lot of the time they share that with the community. How and if a content creator chooses to share their work is completely up to them.

Simply saying they are just editing the game is unfair too. I wouldn't categorise spending 10's or even 100's of hours modelling say, a new aircraft, followed by texturing and configuring it "just editing" the game. Almost all of that was done separate from ARMA.

I agree. So far, MassAsster you have proberbly mostly seen reskins and scripts yes that is editing yes. But sooner or later if not already new vehicles, islands and units will make it into the game and i'm not talking about reskins but independent models and textures never seen in arma before and never made by BIS, is that also editing? not in my book it isn't!

Edited August 11, 2013 by astast