Legal discussion regarding Steam Workshop

[John Kozak 14]

In 2012 limit was 100mb , in 2013 it was raised to 200mb - so i think its still 200mb

I wish the server had a option to add a address from where to download those files instead of workshop, otherwise this will cause many issues like with missions (which is not good)

Well, I think there's a valid way to address both issues - upload subscribed content from client logged in as admin (from the launcher?).

But how will version conflicts be solved? i.e. there is a new version of addon released; client downloads it; client now can't connect to the server because it runs the old version.

---------- Post added at 16:02 ---------- Previous post was at 15:51 ----------

The real problem are the license issues. As far as I know steam workshop means that everything you release is basically owned by Steam. Correct me if I´m wrong.

Steam Subscriber Agreement:

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.

- note the special clause (bold by me). Maximum evil they can do is display your work and say "Hey, look what cool stuff our users create!".

•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.

- other modifications are limited to technical compatibility stuff, OR your mod may make it into game as core functionality (and will need to be modified for that, obviously)

•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.

- if your TF2 hat made it in-game, it can't be removed; if a user downloaded your mod, he'll still have a copy of it installed. Otherwise, when you delete something, it's deleted and all Valve's rights are waived.

There's nothing about "owning". IMHO, whole "Steam pwns your work!!!!1!11!!" is pure hysteria.

Edited July 2, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Well, I think there's a valid way to address both issues - upload subscribed content from client logged in as admin (from the launcher?).

But how will version conflicts be solved? i.e. there is a new version of addon released; client downloads it; client now can't connect to the server because it runs the old version.

---------- Post added at 16:02 ---------- Previous post was at 15:51 ----------

Steam Subscriber Agreement:

- note the special clause (bold by me). Maximum evil they can do is display your work and say "Hey, look what cool stuff our users create!".

- other modifications are limited to technical compatibility stuff, OR your mod may make it into game as core functionality (and will need to be modified for that, obviously)

- if your TF2 hat made it in-game, it can't be removed; if a user downloaded your mod, he'll still have a copy of it installed. Otherwise, when you delete something, it's deleted and all Valve's rights are waived.

There's nothing about "owning". IMHO, whole "Steam pwns your work!!!!1!11!!" is pure hysteria.

Thank you for posting this, the constant whining about steam workshop has been getting on my nerves as it's a serious case of people being misinformed by 'word of mouth' instead of god forbid, reading the EULA. Instead they buy into this hysteria of valve wanting to steal their mods (seriously what utter nonsense is that..)

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Well, I think there's a valid way to address both issues - upload subscribed content from client logged in as admin (from the launcher?).

But how will version conflicts be solved? i.e. there is a new version of addon released; client downloads it; client now can't connect to the server because it runs the old version.

---------- Post added at 16:02 ---------- Previous post was at 15:51 ----------

Steam Subscriber Agreement:

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.

- note the special clause (bold by me). Maximum evil they can do is display your work and say "Hey, look what cool stuff our users create!".

Tends to be the use of the words "irrevocable right" that bothers people. Nobody believes Valve are going to use workshop content as if it were their own IP, but it's nice to be able to withdraw support if you do find objection to something, or just decide later on that that Steam isn't the way to go for other reasons (that may be caused by the community, not Valve itself).

Really though, I just don't see the point of signing any legally binding agreement in order to distribute content if I don't have to. Nobody else asks me to sign anything when they want to host my stuff, and I know who to talk to if I find something objectionable about how they're hosting it. There's nobody to talk to directly at Valve, no 2-way interaction - their "customer" service as hosts is inferior to other community-based providers, so why pick them?

[John Kozak 14]

Tends to be the use of the words "irrevocable right" that bothers people. Nobody believes Valve are going to use workshop content as if it were their own IP, but it's nice to be able to withdraw support if you do find objection to something, or just decide later on that that Steam isn't the way to go for other reasons (that may be caused by the community, not Valve itself).

Really though, I just don't see the point of signing any legally binding agreement in order to distribute content if I don't have to. Nobody else asks me to sign anything when they want to host my stuff, and I know who to talk to if I find something objectionable about how they're hosting it. There's nobody to talk to directly at Valve, no 2-way interaction - their "customer" service as hosts is inferior to other community-based providers, so why pick them?

Any site you're hosting your content on has some form of user agreement - even your OS and tools you use have a legal agreement. Even Dropbox/Google Drive has similar license terms. And it's not because Valve or Dropbox or Google are evil, it's to protect themselves from those wanting to make quick buck on EULA loophole.

The fact that Armaholic doesn't have such clauses means a possibility for problems for Armaholic itself - because since in fact user doesn't sign any agreement, Armaholic does an illegal thing by publishing the files.

P.S. If you read my post carefully, you'll notice that there is in fact an option to revoke rights from Valve.

Edited July 2, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[da12thMonkey 1943]

No shit. But those are usually providing a service that one couldn't get elsewhere, so there are exclusive personal benefits to entering into the agreement.

The service that Valve offer isn't really any better for addon makers than PW6 or AH except that it makes it easy for players to install addons and connect to servers using those addons. However, widespread usage by the community and resultant "fame" of having a successful piece of work isn't really the motivation behind why people take the time to make addons in this community or why they publish them. People make stuff because they want to see that particular idea they have, ingame.

Addon makers are doing their userbase a favour by uploading to SW far more than doing something that benefits them, so ultimately they are agreeing to legally binding contracts mostly for the sake of others. As such you should be very grateful to the people who do decide to share their work via Workshop. However, I just don't see the point of entering into the agreement when I can avoid it.

[John Kozak 14]

Services Valve offer are better for ArmA 3 because you get 100% coverage of userbase and easier installation for users. And it has no downsides except 200mb limit and some emotional rejection started originally by law-illiterate people. That's the point - you enter into agreement to let players download your mod via integrated tool, which magically spreads possible target audience from 10% of game owners to 100$.

Nobody's forcing you to develop addons or use Workshop for them. Don't like it - don't use it. Just please don't spread disinformation.

P.S.I love the phrase about "legally binding". So scary. Sounds like you're trading in your heart at least - for the sake of others.

Edited July 2, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Just please don't spread disinformation.

At what point did I spread disinformation?

The question was asked of why some addon makers are wary of SW, and I explained why me and a number of people I have spoken to don't want to use it. i.e that the terms of the license aren't completely satisfactory and we prefer the model that community sites and PW6 use for distribution. I did not say that there's some expectation that people will get the royal screw job from Valve the second they sign up for it (i.e. the myth that seems to perpetuate about the SW and some like to scaremonger about it).

Like you said, we don't have to use it and while some of us will, some wont because they aren't interested in the service it provides in its current state. Exactly what I said in my two posts. So what's your problem?

I would never advise somebody who wanted to use the workshop, not to use the Workshop. The choice of how they wish to license their content is their own.

Oh and sorry for using the word "legally binding" when making reference to a document that begins

This Steam Subscriber Agreement ("Agreement") is a legal document...

Clearly the addition of an -ly suffix, and understanding that the statute of law when entering a written agreement is "binding" (a word that's used repeatedly in the agreement itself), somehow made my description of the agreement a lot more scary than I found it to be. :rolleyes:

[vegeta897 13]

The service that Valve offer isn't really any better for addon makers than PW6 or AH except that it makes it easy for players to install addons and connect to servers using those addons. However, widespread usage by the community and resultant "fame" of having a successful piece of work isn't really the motivation behind why people take the time to make addons in this community or why they publish them. People make stuff because they want to see that particular idea they have, ingame.

This sounds like one big contradiction. If mod makers didn't care about people using their work, they wouldn't post about them at all. It's not about a desire for fame, it's about wanting to share your work with others. The workshop is an easy avenue for that because it will (hopefully) provide many advantages over the classic "go to a site, download, and install" process. I don't see why uploading to the workshop is inherently different or driven by different motivations than a modder posting their work on this forum or anywhere else.

[John Kozak 14]

At what point did I spread disinformation?

The question was asked of why some addon makers are wary of SW, and I explained why me and a number of people I have spoken to don't want to use it. i.e that the terms of the license aren't completely satisfactory and we prefer the model that community sites and PW6 use for distribution. I did not say that there's some expectation that people will get the royal screw job from Valve the second they sign up for it (i.e. the myth that seems to perpetuate about the SW and some like to scaremonger about it).

Like you said, we don't have to use it and while some of us will, some wont because they aren't interested in the service it provides in its current state. Exactly what I said in my two posts. So what's your problem?

I would never advise somebody who wanted to use the workshop, not to use the Workshop. The choice of how they wish to license their content is their own.

Oh and sorry for using the word "legally binding" when making reference to a document that begins

Clearly the addition of an -ly suffix, and understanding that the statute of law when entering a written agreement is "binding" (a word that's used repeatedly in the agreement itself), somehow made my description of the agreement a lot more scary than I found it to be. :rolleyes:

Yeah, you made it so by making it sound like signing it was a big sacrifice from a modder. This "legally binding agreement" binds you to so many things... Not.

That's right, that agreement has you to do exactly 0 things. I must be so grateful for you now - you do nothing for me. Right?

You need to make up your stance. Either you do care about legal stuff, then community sites are no option for you because you have no agreement and hence no legal protection - Armaholic is already "stealing" your work. Or you don't care about it, then it won't matter to you what you use.

Or, if you just don't trust Valve - just say so, don't make up things about legal stuff you don't actually care about. Right now all I see is just bias - "signining something is bad". Well, go live in a forest, then.

Do you know how many legal points your mobile operator and your employer had signed you on already?

P.S. That's the disinformation - that there is something worse about Workshop than there is about community sites. Actually, it's the other way around.

Edited July 3, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[PuFu 4600]

This sounds like one big contradiction. If mod makers didn't care about people using their work, they wouldn't post about them at all. It's not about a desire for fame, it's about wanting to share your work with others. The workshop is an easy avenue for that because it will (hopefully) provide many advantages over the classic "go to a site, download, and install" process. I don't see why uploading to the workshop is inherently different or driven by different motivations than a modder posting their work on this forum or anywhere else.

There is no contradiction here: it is not that they don't care about the people they share their work with, but it is far from being the primary motivation and/or concern. That is what most veteran modders would tell you anyways. And since Steam Workshop has some disadvantages towards the creators and their IPs, while having certain advantages towards the users, it is obvious that some (including myself) will be wary to use it in it's current form

Yeah, you made it so by making it sound like signing it was a big sacrifice from a modder. This "legally binding agreement" binds you to so many things... Not.

That's right, that agreement has you to do exactly 0 things. I must be so grateful for you now - you do nothing for me. Right?

You need to make up your stance. Either you do care about legal stuff, then community sites are no option for you because you have no agreement and hence no legal protection - Armaholic is already "stealing" your work. Or you don't care about it, then it won't matter to you what you use.

No, armaholic is not stealing my work. And i say that without a doubt, because i trust the owner (foxhound), and because i know from previous interaction that he and his staff can be trusted when it comes to taking down IP infringing content, as well as with dealing with conflicts and alike. That is something i don't have for Steam Workshop: trust. Moreso, their history shows it is slow and unwillingly to take down IP infringing content, and the report/reply process is a real headache. Why should i jump in such a boat, especially when there are better (for me) alternatives?

Or, if you just don't trust Valve - just say so, don't make up things about legal stuff you don't actually care about. Right now all I see is just bias - "signining something is bad". Well, go live in a forest, then.

No one is stopping YOU, or anyone else for that matter to host your own addons there. I am actually looking forward to it. BUT just because someone disagrees with you, stating why (you don't need to agree either) doesn't give you the right to flame him. But i know where this comes from, it is out of frustration that YOU, the user, cannot do anything about it, and it is most likely that most veteran modders (that i know and i have had a chat with recently) will never use workshop...tough luck.

If the older system works for RKSL, RHS (to name a few) and for a lot of other individuals (myself included) i had a talk with, why do you bother trying to change those minds? What is it for you?

Do you know how many legal points your mobile operator and your employer had signed you on already?

Yes, i am well aware about my mobile operator, and i own my bussines, so i am no one's employee. That being said this stands no comparison. Mainly because i can do without modding just fine, but i cannot run a business without a mobile phone, and secondly, every mobile operator has the same sort of contract, while in this particular case (hosting sites), i get to choose one that has it differently: one where i am NOT bind by a legal agreement to give my IPs to a 3rd party.

P.S. That's the disinformation - that there is something worse about Workshop than there is about community sites. Actually, it's the other way around.

no, it isn't.

Edited July 6, 2014 by PuFu

[John Kozak 14]

No, armaholic is not stealing my work. And i say that without a doubt, because i trust the owner (foxhound), and because i know from previous interaction that he and his staff can be trusted when it comes to taking down IP infringing content, as well as with dealing with conflicts and alike. That is something i don't have for Steam Workshop: trust. Moreso, their history shows it is slow and unwillingly to take down IP infringing content, and the report/reply process is a real headache. Why should i jump in such a boat, especially when there are better (for me) alternatives?

As I said above - it's your call. But the fact that you don't trust it doesn't mean it really might "steal your work".

And yes, from legal view ArmAholic does actually steal it. Until they fix a basic agreement for the author of an addon (there's one only for addon user), anyone can sue it.

No one is stopping YOU, or anyone else for that matter to host your own addons there. I am actually looking forward to it. BUT just because someone disagrees with you, stating why (you don't need to agree either) doesn't give you the right to flame him.

I can flame all the day if I want to, as long as it's within forum rules. You don't like it? Your problem.

But i know where this comes from, it is out of frustration that YOU, the user, cannot do anything about it, and it is most likely that most veteran modders (that i know and i have had a chat with recently) will never use workshop...tough luck.

Totally wrong guess. See below.

If the older system works for RKSL, RHS (to name a few) and for a lot of other individuals (myself included) i had a talk with, why do you bother trying to change those minds? What is it for you?

Because I hate it when something within my reach is defined by prejudices, not real concern. You don't trust user agreements and don't want to upload files to Steam - fine, your call.

You talk about something you don't have a clue about - well, go to hell.

one where i am NOT bind by a legal agreement to give my IPs to a 3rd party.

Hey, try actually reading that agreement.

Edited July 6, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[rksl-rock 1301]

Hey, try actually reading that agreement.

I have and so has my lawyer. He says id be a fool to agree to it.

So i'm taking his 32 years of legal experience and not going near SWS.

If you dont like my informed decision then I suggest you dont use any of our addons.

Rock

[John Kozak 14]

I have and so has my lawyer. He says id be a fool to agree to it.

So i'm taking his 32 years of legal experience and not going near SWS.

If you dont like my informed decision then I suggest you dont use any of our addons.

Rock

And what does your lawyer say about Google, Dropbox, Microsoft, Facebook or any other of thousands of Internet companies with exactly the same clauses in EULA?

[rksl-rock 1301]

And what does your lawyer say about Google, Dropbox, Microsoft, Facebook or any other of thousands of Internet companies with exactly the same clauses in EULA?

Facebook, Dropbox, MS skydrive (or whatever they are calling it now) - don’t put anything on it you don’t want in the public domain. Which is why we don’t use it to store our IP. We use our own servers.

And unlike Valve they don’t have businesses geared solely toward 3D assets and games based IP. They also don’t say they will use your data to promote their services and profit from it. And more importantly (arguably) is the fact that with all the other cloud based services – as with many other Internet companies – they all give me the right to remove my content at any time and give me the right to terminate my contract with them.

Valve does not.

[John Kozak 14]

Which is why we don’t use it to store our IP. We use our own servers.

Sorry to break it to you, but hey, your hoster doesn't give any guarantees either :)

1and1 license agreement:

All information, mail messages and other data stored on the Company's computer system will be treated as private and solely the property of the Customer at all times and will not be duplicated, copied, reproduced or viewed publicly in any way except with express or implied permission of the Customer and/or for the purpose of the Company's back up services and/or providing the Customer with the Services and/or for the Company's own internal purposes such as market research.

You're screwed - they can use your information, mail and other data for unidentified internal purposes and/or with 'implied' permission ;)

And Facebook doesn't actually delete your data upon request.

And Facebook can use your data for marketing purposes (even after deletion)

And Google will cache content on your site without opt-in

It all ultimately comes to trust and trust only ;)

[rksl-rock 1301]

Sorry to break it to you, but hey, your hoster doesn't give any guarantees either :)

1and1 license agreement:

You're screwed - they can use your information, mail and other data for unidentified internal purposes and/or with 'implied' permission ;)

Now you are grasping LOL You are trying to compare apples and oranges. 1and1 dont demand i sign a contract to give them irrevocable rights over what i upload. Vales does.

But to give you clarity 1 and 1 use the statistics but they don't and cannot use our IP for commerical needs. They have no claim over our digital content etc. But even then i do have legal rights covering my data even after cancellation. Under that contract Valve retain all rights.

And Facebook doesn't actually delete your data upon request.

And Facebook can use your data for marketing purposes (even after deletion)

And Google will cache content on your site without opt-in

It all ultimately comes to trust and trust only ;)

This is the joy of free services. Basically if you dont pay for it YOU are the product.

Facebook may not instantly delete your data but they dont leave it out there for all to see and use.

Google, well you can opt-out of some Google services and right now - im told - they are going through the courts in several countries over privacy concerns about their licensing. Something that happened to MS already and Dropbox and a few other cloud based services. Most of which ended in support of the poor little human. Not the big corporation

But you should also realise that the license i signed for 1and1 is different than the SWS agreement. Since I do pay 1and1 for hosting services i do have rights. I dont have clauses in there that says they can exploit the actual content i upload. They can only exploit the statistics about my uploaded content. Access stats, size, type etc. Somehow I dont think 1and1 will be using my addons to promote their hosting... :P

Either way, Apples or Oranges all the research I have done. All the advice I have been given by professionals tells me to avoid SWS like the plaque.

You dont like it? Sorry but we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll take the word of legal professionals over a faceless forum poster all day, every day and twice on Sundays ;)

But another interesting point, Dezkit is a prime example (sorry Dez but you are probably just the first of a long list). Hes uploaded content that is not solely his - since it uses donated content he has just ported with authorisation - he cant legally agree to the contract anyway unless he has a deed of rights from the original author... But ill let others pick that one up.

---------- Post added at 15:50 ---------- Previous post was at 15:44 ----------

EDIT - By the way - i forgot this - I do actually own the physical server and drives our website sits on. Its co-located in 1and1's datacentre. All they have rights over is traffic data.

Edited July 6, 2014 by RKSL-Rock

[John Kozak 14]

Now you are grasping LOL You are trying to compare apples and oranges. 1and1 dont demand i sign a contract to give them irrevocable rights over what i upload. Vales does.

But to give you clarity 1 and 1 use the statistics but they don't and cannot use our IP for commerical needs. They have no claim over our digital content etc. But even then i do have legal rights covering my data even after cancellation. Under that contract Valve retain all rights.

This is the joy of free services. Basically if you dont pay for it YOU are the product.

Facebook may not instantly delete your data but they dont leave it out there for all to see and use.

Google, well you can opt-out of some Google services and right now - im told - they are going through the courts in several countries over privacy concerns about their licensing. Something that happened to MS already and Dropbox and a few other cloud based services. Most of which ended in support of the poor little human. Not the big corporation

But you should also realise that the license i signed for 1and1 is different than the SWS agreement. Since I do pay 1and1 for hosting services i do have rights. I dont have clauses in there that says they can exploit the actual content i upload. They can only exploit the statistics about my uploaded content. Access stats, size, type etc. Somehow I dont think 1and1 will be using my addons to promote their hosting... :P

Either way, Apples or Oranges all the research I have done. All the advice I have been given by professionals tells me to avoid SWS like the plaque.

You dont like it? Sorry but we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll take the word of legal professionals over a faceless forum poster all day, every day and twice on Sundays ;)

But another interesting point, Dezkit is a prime example (sorry Dez but you are probably just the first of a long list). Hes uploaded content that is not solely his - since it uses donated content he has just ported with authorisation - he cant legally agree to the contract anyway unless he has a deed of rights from the original author... But ill let others pick that one up.

---------- Post added at 15:50 ---------- Previous post was at 15:44 ----------

EDIT - By the way - i forgot this - I do actually own the physical server and drives our website sits on. Its co-located in 1and1's datacentre. All they have rights over is traffic data.

Well, you kind of prove my point - it all boils down to, as you say, "somehow you don't think 1and1 will use your content to ". They can still screw you badly with the current contract. All points applied to "protection from evil corporations" apply well to Valve or any other company. So, again, whether you trust it or not is totally the question - any company can try to play with your data, really.

And hey, once I spent 3 hours explaining to bunch of telecom lawyers the workings of agreement (on electronic signatures) they were rejecting at first - and they ultimately agreed they were wrong and I was right. Somehow my one day exposure to it outweighed their combined many years of experience. Anyone can be wrong.

To trust or not to trust - that is the question everyone should answer themselves.

Dixi.

Edited July 6, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[rksl-rock 1301]

Well, you kind of prove my point - it all boils down to, as you say, "somehow you don't think 1and1 will use your content to <insert needed>". They can still screw you badly with the current contract. All points applied to "protection from evil corporations" apply well to Valve or any other company. So, again, whether you trust it or not is totally the question - any company can try to play with your data, really.

Actually I think you are missing the point. But you are so invested in validating your own opinion that nothing will change that.

And hey, once I spent 3 hours explaining to bunch of telecom lawyers the workings of agreement (on electronic signatures) they were rejecting at first - and they ultimately agreed they were wrong and I was right. Somehow my one day exposure to it outweighed their combined many years of experience. Anyone can be wrong.

I've spent 2 years telling a company that they were legally exposed and liable. They lost £1.4 million in the end. But hey I'd rather be "wrong" and nice and safe than right and screwed :P

I've been into enough companies who didn’t understand their contracts. I've also seen Freeware addon makers fleeced by "Benevolent benefactors" more often than I care to remember. I don’t trust any contract where i have to give away irrevocable rights. Steam Workshop is not going to be an exception. The best advice I have says I should not to blindly trust it no matter what you think.

You arguing that an Apple is in fact and Orange, making passive aggressive comments and dubious anecdotes wont ever change that.

---------- Post added at 17:02 ---------- Previous post was at 16:59 ----------

;2723817']Can a forum mod please move the posts about the legal discussion to the steam workshop thread in this forum. Thanks

Why its a valid part of the discussion giving people the ability to observe all sides and issues relevant to the actual topic. To move the last few posts is to obfuscate a valid part of the debate allowing them to make up their own minds.

[John Kozak 14]

Actually I think you are missing the point. But you are so invested in validating your own opinion that nothing will change that.

I've spent 2 years telling a company that they were legally exposed and liable. They lost £1.4 million in the end. But hey I'd rather be "wrong" and nice and safe than right and screwed :P

I've been into enough companies who didn’t understand their contracts. I've also seen Freeware addon makers fleeced by "Benevolent benefactors" more often than I care to remember. I don’t trust any contract where i have to give away irrevocable rights. Steam Workshop is not going to be an exception. The best advice I have says I should not to blindly trust it no matter what you think.

You arguing that an Apple is in fact and Orange, making passive aggressive comments and dubious anecdotes wont ever change that.

---------- Post added at 17:02 ---------- Previous post was at 16:59 ----------

Why its a valid part of the discussion giving people the ability to observe all sides and issues relevant to the actual topic. To move the last few posts is to obfuscate a valid part of the debate allowing them to make up their own minds.

Yeah, right, I'm totally missing the point, only you and your lawyer can read and understand legal agreements. Everyone using Steam Workshop will lose millions of euros. Poor guys. You win ;-)

[rksl-rock 1301]

Yeah, right, I'm totally missing the point, only you and your lawyer can read and understand legal agreements. Everyone using Steam Workshop will lose millions of euros. Poor guys. You win ;-)

LMAO not what i was saying but hey go for it.

I was saying that you seems to be missing the distinction between contracts like the Steam Workshop and Paid-for-hosting services and the inherent and implied rights under law. But again if you cant see that I'm not sure how else to explain it.

[PuFu 4600]

Because I hate it when something within my reach is defined by prejudices, not real concern. You don't trust user agreements and don't want to upload files to Steam - fine, your call.

What is the thing that is suppose to be within your reach? Other people work?

You talk about something you don't have a clue about - well, go to hell.

On the contrary, you seem to be the one that have no clue about what you're talking about..

on, and i don't believe in hell, thank you very much. That doesn't mean it doesn't show the maturity of your posts, or in fact the lack of..

Hey, try actually reading that agreement.

I did, did you?

[.kju 3245]

Why its a valid part of the discussion giving people the ability to observe all sides and issues relevant to the actual topic. To move the last few posts is to obfuscate a valid part of the debate allowing them to make up their own minds.

[...]

And to make it clear - it is useful and important to have this discussion.

Edited July 6, 2014 by .kju [PvPscene]

[mordeaniischaos 3]

Well, I think there's a valid way to address both issues - upload subscribed content from client logged in as admin (from the launcher?).

But how will version conflicts be solved? i.e. there is a new version of addon released; client downloads it; client now can't connect to the server because it runs the old version.

---------- Post added at 16:02 ---------- Previous post was at 15:51 ----------

Steam Subscriber Agreement:

- note the special clause (bold by me). Maximum evil they can do is display your work and say "Hey, look what cool stuff our users create!".

- other modifications are limited to technical compatibility stuff, OR your mod may make it into game as core functionality (and will need to be modified for that, obviously)

- if your TF2 hat made it in-game, it can't be removed; if a user downloaded your mod, he'll still have a copy of it installed. Otherwise, when you delete something, it's deleted and all Valve's rights are waived.

There's nothing about "owning". IMHO, whole "Steam pwns your work!!!!1!11!!" is pure hysteria.

Almost any amount of whining about Steam by BI Forum users is grossly exaggerated and melodramatic. Thank you for offering some clarity, hopefully it'll nip the bud relatively effectively!

[roshnak 41]

I have and so has my lawyer. He says id be a fool to agree to it.

Would you be willing to post what his interpretation of the User Generated Content section of the EULA? I'm only asking because it would be nice to get the opinion of a legal professional instead of everyone making guesses as to what that agreement is supposed to mean.

It seems to me that any references to in-application distribution is only relevant to Valve games and that removing your content from Steam Workshop actually does revoke their "irrevocable right to use..." (I know! I totally just contributed to the guessing!)

No, armaholic is not stealing my work. And i say that without a doubt, because i trust the owner (foxhound), and because i know from previous interaction that he and his staff can be trusted when it comes to taking down IP infringing content, as well as with dealing with conflicts and alike. That is something i don't have for Steam Workshop: trust. Moreso, their history shows it is slow and unwillingly to take down IP infringing content, and the report/reply process is a real headache.

I totally get why people would be upset that it can be a difficult, red-tape-filled process to get IP infringing content removed from the Steam Workshop (although you wouldn't want it to be too easy, either), but won't that be a problem regardless of whether or not you personally utilize the service?

[rksl-rock 1301]

Almost any amount of whining about Steam by BI Forum users is grossly exaggerated and melodramatic. Thank you for offering some clarity, hopefully it'll nip the bud relatively effectively!

I rather strongly disagree. But I'm guessing you arent a model maker.

Would you be willing to post what his interpretation of the User Generated Content section of the EULA? I'm only asking because it would be nice to get the opinion of a legal professional instead of everyone making guesses as to what that agreement is supposed to mean.

It seems to me that any references to in-application distribution is only relevant to Valve games and that removing your content from Steam Workshop actually does revoke their "irrevocable right to use..." (I know! I totally just contributed to the guessing!)

I dont have a written copy to post i wish i did. We had a face-to-face meeting about licensing relating to my 3D Asset creation business in October(?) last year; during which I asked him to take a look at the Steam agreement and the Workshop agreement. His view was that The first, "was a fantastic way to generate money" that comment was in regard to the fact you dont actually own anything you just "buy" the right to play the games through their service. Break their rules and all the games you have are gone.

And more specific to the Workshop agreement that it was "suitably vague as to constitute the proverbial deal with the devil." - His direct quote was "Between the two agreements they have you no matter what you do." He went further to say, "If you were to sign this agreement you might as well gift wrap your models and artwork and send it to them on a DVD. Regardless of what you believe their intent to be they could potentially do anything they like with your content. No where does it say what their intent is."

So based on that alone I won't use Workshop. Even if they do change that clause i still have concerns based on the experience of many other users in many games complaining about how Valve ignore their IP claims. Even then it takes months to remove illegally uploaded/stolen content. Even then Valve do not communicate with either party. it just vanishes from the Workshop and their is no notification from valve to the claimant/owner of the IP about the removal of their content and the "return" of their rights etc.

The entire process to me is suspect. While Steam makes buying games much easier I'm not convinced that I can trust the Workshop platform. Either legally or in practical terms. Call me a dinosaur if you like but I'd prefer a solution that me as an addon maker can build a relationship with. Build trust and have confidence that the host will look after my best interests. I have that with most of the hosting sites in the ArmA community. Based on the experiences of other modders in various steam based games, and on top of the legal concerns I just don't get a comfortable feeling about Steam and Steam Workshop.

I totally get why people would be upset that it can be a difficult, red-tape-filled process to get IP infringing content removed from the Steam Workshop (although you wouldn't want it to be too easy, either), but won't that be a problem regardless of whether or not you personally utilize the service?

Well the concern is that since i refuse to use the "service" others will do it on my behalf without me being aware. Valve can then claim rights to my IP without my agreement/knowledge. Now IF i find out i can fight Valve and the idiot that uploaded it for my rights but its me that has to fight to be recognized as the author and owner of the IP. And if Valve dont acknowledge anything what do i have to do to get my IP and rights "returned" to me? Its about me investing time and effort to prove something is mine in the first place.