Legal discussion regarding Steam Workshop

[PuFu 4600]

Of course, that's how it's been for a while. But the point of SWS integration was convenience. The biggest obstacle for mod usage in Arma is that convenience and discovery. So many public servers run vanilla because they shut out a large number of people by running mods. Better integration with Steam can (and will) change that. It's just unfortunate that there are a lot of legal issues to be aware of, which to you and others are deal-breaking.

Convenience for who? (rhetoric) Both the users (arguable here at this point) and steam could gain something. But for the creator, it seems to be more hassle than it's worth.

As it has been already stated, mod makers create mods (in a vast majority) for their own enjoyment (creating being the fun part). Why would one share his IP with Valve voluntarily, especially when there are alternatives?

[miketim 20]

Why would one share his IP with Valve voluntarily, especially when there are alternatives?

For a few reasons.

1. It is important to (some) modders how many people view their content, and steam workshop will heavily increase that number most likley.( I think this is more or less indisputable)

(ie:they want more than "their own enjoyment", they want some "internet fame" or somthing :j:.)

2. They simply do not care or do not understand what they are signing away/agreeing to.

3. The whole integration thing, they want their mods to be as close to the source of the inital product (the game on steam) as possible.

(ie: acessible, which leads us back to #1, because they probably want it to be accessible so they can get more of #1^^)

(Before anyone responds without understanding, no this post is not advocating the steam workshop.)

[rksl-rock 1301]

But you never had a right to control how it's used by valve and affiliates, so how can you lose that?

I always had it under law. That's the point of the EULA you agree to when downloading the addons. Its how every piece of software you have installed controls its usage and rights.

I understand that. But my point was that what you were saying was kind of circular logic. You say you lose the right to choose how your models are used, but in uploading to SWS you agree to lose that right. So it's kind of a given. Everyone understands that already, so I don't get why you're telling me as if I said otherwise. Again, you are taking the meaning of "lose" as I used it too far, despite me already saying I agreed with you on the facts of the situation, semantics aside.

But that's the point I don't want to use SWS, i don't want to give my rights away. What i want to know is how Valve are going to handle the situation when someone else uploads my content without my consent.

As for the use of "lose" i have a feeling you are trolling now. No one else appears to have an issue understanding what i mean. The circular part of this debate seems to be the repetitive need to explain the basic concepts. :P

I can agree with all of this, and I never said otherwise.

Really ? At several points you were advocating blind trust that Valve would never doing anything...

Of course, that's how it's been for a while. But the point of SWS integration was convenience. The biggest obstacle for mod usage in Arma is that convenience and discovery. So many public servers run vanilla because they shut out a large number of people by running mods. Better integration with Steam can (and will) change that. It's just unfortunate that there are a lot of legal issues to be aware of, which to you and others are deal-breaking.

This has always been the issue with mods in all the BIS games. It was the same in OFP back in the day.

The annoying thing for many of the longer standing fan-base is that we've all seen promises of a "fix" and we've all discussed whats needed time and time again to fix this issue but each time BIS just seem to miss the issue. I like BIS, I'm friends with a number of the staff and I have a lot of respect for Marek, Ivan and a lot of the others but I do wonder sometimes if they read these forums to understand what the community actually want and need. :eek: Because SWS is not even half of a solution. At least in my opinion.

[vegeta897 13]

I always had it under law. That's the point of the EULA you agree to when downloading the addons. Its how every piece of software you have installed controls its usage and rights.

Once again I think we're miscommunicating here. You do not lose your ability to maintain how your content is used when distributing it outside SWS. By uploading to SWS you are specifically granting them control, so I just don't view that as "losing" anything, since you never would have had it uploading to SWS in the first place. Let's just drop this point because we both clearly understand what's happening, but we keep mincing over eachother's words.

But that's the point I don't want to use SWS, i don't want to give my rights away. What i want to know is how Valve are going to handle the situation when someone else uploads my content without my consent.

I understand that, you've made that clear. If I were you I'd also want an answer to that question.

As for the use of "lose" i have a feeling you are trolling now. No one else appears to have an issue understanding what i mean. The circular part of this debate seems to be the repetitive need to explain the basic concepts. :P

I think you're imagining that need, because the things you're explaining I already am aware of. I guess this is just a big case of miscommunication. Shall we drop it? I am sincerely not trying to troll you.

Really ? At several points you were advocating blind trust that Valve would never doing anything...

I'm sorry, but I really don't think I ever did that. I just double checked my posts in this thread. I know I've said elsewhere that I think Valve are trustworthy (as in, as trustworthy as a corporation can be, not trusting them with my life savings), but I never would had said "blindly trust them!" In fact if you recall in this thread I agreed with you that your friend's steam account suspension was unfair.

This has always been the issue with mods in all the BIS games. It was the same in OFP back in the day.

I know, that's what I'm saying. With the overcoming of this obstacle comes other problems, and that's simply unfortunate. We need more answers from Valve and BIS.

[roshnak 41]

By uploading to SWS you are specifically granting them control, so I just don't view that as "losing" anything, since you never would have had it uploading to SWS in the first place.

Yeah, but this is where you are misunderstanding the situation. It's not really a matter of opinion. By agreeing to the Steam Workshop license agreement, you are, in effect, agreeing to become partners with Valve. That means that you have, by definition, less control than when you were the sole owner of your property. Look at it this way:

Before agreeing to the Steam Workshop agreement, you are solely in charge of what happens with your assets. If you find out that someone is selling your stuff or hosting it without your permission or basically doing anything that you have explicitly said not to do with your assets, you can attempt legal action in order to put a stop to it. If anyone wants to do anything with your assets, it's up to you and you alone whether or not that thing is allowed to happen. In theory, anyway.

After agreeing to the Steam Workshop agreement, it's entirely possible that anyone doing anything that you don't like with your stuff is doing it with the permission of Valve and, if that's the case, there's nothing you can do about it. It's not just about what Valve can or will do with your stuff. They can give anyone else permission to do whatever they want with your stuff. People don't have to ask you anymore. They can ask Valve. It's possible that you could find yourself completely cut out of any decision making process regarding how your assets are used. That is definitely losing something.

Practically speaking, I think it's incredibly unlikely that Valve will do anything objectionable with Arma 3 addons. In all likelihood they don't care about modding in Arma 3 one bit beyond whether it helps them get more sales. If they were to do something shady and it were to get out, it could seriously damage their reputation as a company, which they have spent years building as being friendly to modding. However, to say that the Steam Workshop license doesn't cause you to lose control because you never had it in the first place is just plain incorrect.

[vegeta897 13]

Good point, I didn't see it that way. Thanks for enlightening. No fault of RKSL-Rock's, it just didn't click with me the way he was saying it.

Also agree with your last paragraph.

[ballistic09 241]

Well that was fast...

Same guy who did it before. Until Valve or BI decide to lay down some actual punishment (steam/workshop ban) for this sort of blatant theft on the Steam Workshop, it's only going to get worse. Saw this coming from a mile away. :rolleyes:

[roshnak 41]

Haha, that guy sure jumped on Steam Workshop, eh?

Well, I guess we're about to find out how Valve is going to handle people uploading others people's work. Unfortunately, this is probably an even less clear cut situation than someone just straight up uploading someone else's stuff for whatever content moderators Valve employs for Steam Workshop.

[zooloo75 834]

As I stated earlier in the thread. What prevents people from uploading others' work? It seems nothing.

[vegeta897 13]

As I stated earlier in the thread. What prevents people from uploading others' work? It seems nothing.

Being reported and punished for it. One's steam account is actually a valuable thing. More valuable than a throwaway account/email on a website that also lets you upload work you do not own.

[ballistic09 241]

As I stated earlier in the thread. What prevents people from uploading others' work? It seems nothing.

Well, in fairness, it did only take about an hour or two before Dwarden flagged it...

[dsiOne 10]

As I stated earlier in the thread. What prevents people from uploading others' work? It seems nothing.

What stops me from uploading anyone's work to any website that allows me to upload that type of file?

[PuFu 4600]

i guess the real question is: how fast will the "take down" going to be ;)

of course anyone can upload anything anywhere. but there is little reach unless you post that link someplace. And most of time, the ones that handle those that makes these someplaces (for arma's players anyways) will make sure you don't unless you have permission or you are the original author ;)

now let's wait and see steam at worked after something has been already flagged. i'd like to be proved wrong, but my

money is that is going to take sooome time ;)

[vegeta897 13]

Have you guys seen the latest comments on that submission? The submitter makes a decent point, and it's been pointed out that what he's doing may not actually really be theft. What do you think?

@PuFu, while it may seem simple to just take down a submission that is reported, there has to be process involved. If Valve just took down anything that was reported without actually investigating, there would be chaos. It takes actual manpower and time to investigate the ownership of the content. Would FoxHound just take down anything that anybody reported on Armaholic? He would do a certain amount of fact checking and not just listen to any anonymous report.

Edited July 14, 2014 by vegeta897

[roshnak 41]

Probably a discussion for a different thread. Maybe the CBA thread? Although I will say that the argument seems shaky.

Edited July 15, 2014 by roshnak

[dsiOne 10]

Have you guys seen the latest comments on that submission? The submitter makes a decent point, and it's been pointed out that what he's doing may not actually really be theft. What do you think?

@PuFu, while it may seem simple to just take down a submission that is reported, there has to be process involved. If Valve just took down anything that was reported without actually investigating, there would be chaos. It takes actual manpower and time to investigate the ownership of the content.

You mean, like Youtube's insanity? :p

[vegeta897 13]

You mean, like Youtube's insanity? :p

Yes indeed! I suppose there's a compromise to be made. What's worse, unpunished content theft, or hassling legit modders with false takedowns?

[ballistic09 241]

The submitter makes a decent point, and it's been pointed out that what he's doing may not actually really be theft. What do you think?

Umm... no.

Crying about how few mods are available and how he should be allowed to revive "dead" mods without permission does not give him legal permission to steal someone else's work, especially when the original author complains (Opticalsnare's comment was deleted by the thief). And for the record, Blastcore is not dead. Opticalsnare has repeatedly stated he is still working on it.

@PuFu, while it may seem simple to just take down a submission that is reported, there has to be process involved. If Valve just took down anything that was reported without actually investigating, there would be chaos. It takes actual manpower and time to investigate the ownership of the content. Would FoxHound just take down anything that anybody reported on Armaholic? He would do a certain amount of fact checking and not just listen to any anonymous report.

I'm sorry, but as long as there is an IP dispute in progress, further downloads of the infringing content should not be allowed. That's pretty basic common courtesy.

I believe foxhound already does do this. For instance, this was taken down until the mlods were released...

[PuFu 4600]

fair point. usually, there is a "frozen" status until ip conflicts are resolved. also most if the time when you report something you also provide proof of ownership or lack of if that is the case. no matter, i am watching it being resolved. Again, the author makes some good points BUT:

1. should not use the same name for the mod

2. should create an additional config keeping the original intact (sam goes if he wants to provide bespoke animations for RH weapons for instance)

it is not always needed to modify the existing code, especially when you the simpler option to overwrite it in a separate file

[vegeta897 13]

Umm... no.

Crying about how few mods are available and how he should be allowed to revive "dead" mods without permission does not give him legal permission to steal someone else's work, especially when the original author complains (Opticalsnare's comment was deleted by the thief). And for the record, Blastcore is not dead. Opticalsnare has repeatedly stated he is still working on it.

I was just bringing the comments to attention, I don't know the full story. I especially didn't know he deleted comments from the rightful owner.

I'm sorry, but as long as there is an IP dispute in progress, further downloads of the infringing content should not be allowed. That's pretty basic common courtesy.

But anyone can submit a report. Are you saying we should give literally everyone the ability to lock any mod from being downloaded?

I believe foxhound already does do this. For instance, this was taken down until the mlods were released...

It was taken down because FH made an informed decision. My point was that it wasn't automated. I can't cause something on Armaholic to be removed simply by reporting it. FH has to actually respond to the report. What you're suggesting is that Steam have an automated system that locks people from downloading until it's resolved, which effectively means anyone can cause a mod to lock down simply by reporting it (and maybe getting some friends to do it as well)

[zooloo75 834]

All the more reason to trust in the Foxhound instead :)

[vegeta897 13]

All the more reason to trust in the Foxhound instead :)

I don't think anyone ever made the claim that the workshop was a better place to upload mods than a dedicated, trusted, human-curated community site. But it does offer advantages that Armaholic does not, namely game integration. That's really the only reason BIS wants to use it.

[zooloo75 834]

I don't think anyone ever made the claim that the workshop was a better place to upload mods than a dedicated, trusted, human-curated community site. But it does offer advantages that Armaholic does not, namely game integration. That's really the only reason BIS wants to use it.

At the current state, there's no reason to use the Workshop for mods. (missions work fine IMO, though)

Hopefully mod integration with servers, etc is improved.

[vegeta897 13]

Yes, I know it's a work in progress. I hope for great things to come. But even simply existing on the workshop gives a great deal exposure to players who don't even know what Armaholic is.

[ballistic09 241]

Are you saying we should give literally everyone the ability to lock any mod from being downloaded?

That's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that if a report is submitted, reviewed, and deemed to have an actual case, then yes, the download should be disabled.

In this case, it was flagged not because of an automated report system, but because someone got ahold of Dwarden and had him take action as an Arma 3 SWS moderator.

My point was that it wasn't automated. I can't cause something on Armaholic to be removed simply by reporting it. FH has to actually respond to the report. What you're suggesting is that Steam have an automated system that locks people from downloading until it's resolved, which effectively means anyone can cause a mod to lock down simply by reporting it (and maybe getting some friends to do it as well)

Again I'm not suggesting that at all, you're just assuming I am. What I want is for the download to be disabled after it's been flagged by a moderator...

Currently, even though Dwarden flagged the addon, the page is still public, and if you subscribe to it, the addon downloads.