Arma 3 Server monetization

[Johny 25]

Hello,

I will try to respond to all of your questions and address your concerns.

First let me address these:

Can I add a rule into my license that says anyone who uses content I made has to pay me 1/3 of their server profits?

unfortunately no, we are not allowing UGC monetization at this time.

You either allow or do not allow server operator to monetize your content. You may accept donations.

I agree that this position of "allowing only to paying users" is dangerous, because if BiS is mosly dependant on reports to enforce that monetization process, those server will not ever be reported, since noone except paying users can see what is used by those. Thus, it is kind of making most of the monetisation process moot.

We may request access to the server or forums to check how the monetization is handled. If the server operator does not cooperate with us, it is within our rights not to allow the monetization.

If you believe a approved server is stealing your work, report it and we will check it out.

very good point. and to me it also seems a little like: you can't sell separate objects but you can sell the whole thing. so while you can't sell ingame perks or objects you can sell all ingame perks or objects as a package. it's almost like this is intended to avoid pay2win instead of making sure servers don't become a weird grey area business model :D

If you sell all ingame perks as a access, then everyone on the server is playing under the same rules. Pay2win is not permited.

The point of approvals and report system is to allow good guys to accept monetization, while freeing our hands to handle the gray shady characters.

So now we are extending open arm with an option for everyone - start monetize legally, with registration and approval and permission from addon creators or risk us looking into your practices.

I would be very interested in what process will be used to deal with people who infringe on the rules and use anthers mod without permission or recompense, do they get a warning if so how many and how long to adhere to it? does the mod creator have the chance to negotiate with the infringer?

This brings up many questions around the process that is going to be used and just how transparent it will be.

You may try to negotiate with the infringer on your own. When you report to us stolen content and we do verify it then depending on the situation we may try to "reform" the infringer or remove the monetization permission. If he continues to monetize, he is infringing on our IP rights and we may take the matter further. I will refrain from listing the specifics but there are both legal and technical actions which we use take to take down such communities.

but I would like to reserve the right to prevent others to do so.

You have every right to do so.

If you wish to contest the "approved status" then use the report button. Sometimes the infringements are so obvious, that we will be able to see ourselves that the person requesting approval is not acting in the best of the Arma community and we will not grant the approval. Most of the times it is not so obvious and that is where content creators such as yourself can use "report" to help us maintain the healthy community.

[ZertyKchan 14]

Thank you for all your clarifications, it is really appreciated.

[dr death jm 117]

this is funny to me... I really thought this was so no one stole somones mission (witch is already possible with server side scripts), but from what im reading here and some other places is that some are hoping and planning on editing other peoples mission cti,wasteland,rpg ect; and getting it so no one can steal what they just stole... please laugh with me as I don't think this is what bis is giving us. oh and @M1Km8n if you get 1/3 what are you guys paying BIS ? If BIS makes it free for you to use there stuff and in returnyour selling it if every one is good with that, then BIS should just make every DLC and what ever free... Im not complaining or stating whats wrong or right.. just something that poped in my head .

Edited January 29, 2015 by Dr Death JM

[shinkicker 5]

EDIT: Read Johny's reply and I am ok with this now. Especially means if action will be taken against those monetizing without permission.

Edited January 29, 2015 by shinkicker

[ZertyKchan 14]

Got one (last/more) question:

The monetization page specifies:

Accepting donations is allowed, but to avoid any doubts: not providing donations must not prevent anyone from accessing the content.

If a person is accepting donations (for his work which might be based on some other works) and by a strange coincidence is also owning a Arma3 server, do that person needs to go through the application for approval process for his server even if it is not strictly speaking monetization (since nothing is traded)?

Or does that line need to be considered with at least one of the ones above it (meaning that it could only be true if already in a monetization process)?

ps: sorry just trying to brush all possible cases

[dr death jm 117]

Thanks for the clarification Bohemia,

However :

I do not see the difference between a reseller of your work ( vehicles, weapons, uniforms, vests, map... ) and between a person who is blocking all of this content ( Pay me if you wan't to connect on my server... ).

That mean, i need to pay for a content i've already buy with the game? Just imagine an custom mission like Altis Life where you need to pay your access to the gamemode?

However, are you going to do something against servers profiting from donation reward ( locked content like vehicles, weapons... if you do not donate or buy it on the " donator shop " ) ?

I have regrouped more than a dozen of illegal server with informations like links, reasons, owner, contact email... and I sent this list at BIS and I had no answer.

http://arma-france.com/illegal-servers/

Anyway, I congratulate BIS for having saying things as they are and clarifying the monetization system.

I like this guy.... on top of what he just said ... the donations are forced, so you don't really have a choice.. but besides this I don't play any of these missions, my hole thaught on it is how rpg server are setting the stage of what a lot of server are going to try and do. soon enuf ill join a cti mission but my upgrade will charge me _x amount of dollars (donation), or I can choose not to donate and run around with a hand gun with 10 rounds.. then ill be forced to donate it I want to reload my weapon...

[Jackal326 1181]

I like this guy.... on top of what he just said ... the donations are forced, so you don't really have a choice.. but besides this I don't play any of these missions, my hole thaught on it is how rpg server are setting the stage of what a lot of server are going to try and do. soon enuf ill join a cti mission but my upgrade will charge me _x amount of dollars (donation), or I can choose not to donate and run around with a hand gun with 10 rounds.. then ill be forced to donate it I want to reload my weapon...

You have a very vivid imagination...

[terox 316]

I am expecting this not to be a good thing for the community.

Since the A3 engine release, things have been going imho the wrong way. There has been a growing attitude towards "This is my work, you can't use it".

Most if not all content I have seen is based on somebody elses work which was based on somebody elses work etc etc etc right back to OFP.

I see this as the starting point to the end of the openess of the community in sharing their work.

AND WHAT IS CONTENT ?

Imagine if every server owner only that read my Dedi server tutorial had to pay me for using the content I provided

lets say just 1 euro

Now i'd have

316,205 euros

Of course that would be nice and I would say if questioned that i had used it to buy a 1u hex core xeon and would claim it cost me 316,205 euros to buy, build and pay for the hosting at a datacentre. I would be doing this from my new uber laptop while on a world cruise

Maybe this is a good thing if i were selfish and greedy like that

Edited January 29, 2015 by Terox

[St. Jimmy 272]

Term 'Donation' should be made clear in the FAQ as the first thing. If you give money and you get something like a hat, gun, player slot ect, it isn't doantion. It's a paid service.

[dr death jm 117]

@jackal sorry you feel that way... but this all started in arma2 ... and slowly its being done... maybe BIS getting into it will stop these things from going on.. but personaly I use a lot of other peoples things, I ask permission, I don't take there name out of there work, and life goes on... this has been done séance ofp no problems.. till someone in a rpg server said hey , I can make money from this... So I think if you wanna protect your stuff do what someone did on wasteland ... server side scripts, mission is usless without them.

---------- Post added at 11:44 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 AM ----------

I am expecting this not to be a good thing for the community.

Since the A3 engine release, things have been going imho the wrong way. There has been a growing attitude towards "This is my work, you can't use it".

Most if not all content I have seen is based on somebody elses work which was based on somebody elses work etc etc etc right back to OFP.

I see this as the starting point to the end of the openess of the community in sharing their work.

AND WHAT IS CONTENT ?

Imagine if every server owner only that read my Dedi server tutorial had to pay me for using the content I provided

lets say just 1 euro

Now i'd have

316,205 euros

Of course that would be nice and I would say if questioned that i had used it to buy a 1u hex core xeon and would claim it cost me 316,205 euros to buy, build and pay for the hosting at a datacentre. I would be doing this from my new uber laptop while on a world cruise

Maybe this is a good thing if i were selfish and greedy like that

perfectly said

[Johny 25]

Got one (last/more) question:

If a person is accepting donations (for his work which might be based on some other works) and by a strange coincidence is also owning a Arma3 server, do that person needs to go through the application for approval process for his server even if it is not strictly speaking monetization (since nothing is traded)?

Accepting donations was allowed and you are free to do so without approval process. But donations are voluntary gifts without expectations of any counter value.

So donation is OK. For donations where you give rewards to donators, you need to apply. Giving gameplay affecting gifts to donators is not allowed even under the new rules.

EDIT: To be a bit more clear - We do not consider donations without any counter value to be commercial use. But if you are using 3rd party work on your donations, you should make sure the author does not prevent his work to be used to raise donations. Also to be absolutely clear - we cannot and would not assign anyone any rights or licenses over 3rd party work.

I do not see the difference between a reseller of your work ( vehicles, weapons, uniforms, vests, map... ) and between a person who is blocking all of this content ( Pay me if you wan't to connect on my server... ).

That mean, i need to pay for a content i've already buy with the game? Just imagine an custom mission like Altis Life where you need to pay your access to the gamemode?

You are paying for the access to the server.

If the mod is publicly available, or if you create your own or use the content which was distributed with the game your free to host your own server.

Or your may connect to any of the official Arma 3 servers we provide.

However, are you going to do something against servers profiting from donation reward ( locked content like vehicles, weapons... if you do not donate or buy it on the " donator shop " ) ?

To reiterate - Game play affecting donator shop are not allowed, so are donator shops without approval or registrations. If you get something in return, it is a sale not a donation.

Once the first dust settles on these monetization rules and everyone is given reasonable time to adjust their ways, we will focus our attentions on the rules violators.

I have regrouped more than a dozen of illegal server with informations like links, reasons, owner, contact email... and I sent this list at BIS and I had no answer.

http://arma-france.com/illegal-servers/

[/b] system.

We have some of these servers (not all) on our watch list. I will investigate why your message did not get to the appropriate people.

As I said above - now everyone has a chance to change their ways or face the consequences.

If people are monetizing a server, this probably constitutes "Commercial Use". In this regard, it would rule out use of any mods that restrict Commercial Use - including BIS own APL content.

As long as the people otherwise follow the licenses, we are OK with our licensed data packages from https://www.bistudio.com/community/licenses/licensed-data-packages being used for the server monetization according to the http://www.bistudio.com/monetization rules.

By the way, I hope I am not missing any important issues raised here, but if you feel I did or you have some questions specific to your community or situation, please feel free to send me an email to monetization@bistudio.com. Thanks

Edited January 29, 2015 by Johny
Donations clarification

[terox 316]

I think every addon maker and scripter should now add a EULA to their new and existing work that states something like.

My content is offered on the understanding that it can not be used

1) On any server where any form of monetary contribution is paid to the server owners other than a voluntary donation which does not add any additional form of content, cosmetic or functional or any higher status or abilities that a non contributing player would have regardless of who made that content.

Reword that into legalise and add it to everything :)

[anthariel 165]

@Johny, thanks for taking the time to reply

[Johny 25]

@Terox - I apologize, but officially I cannot comment on this as the company is not able to give any legal advice.

In my personal capacity I think that in IP law (might depend on the country), what is not explicitly allowed is forbidden.

There is huge amount of articles on the subject all over the web. This might help a bit: http://choosealicense.com/no-license/

@Anthariel - My pleasure ;)

[Jackal326 1181]

I think every addon maker and scripter should now add a EULA to their new and existing work that states something like.

My content is offered on the understanding that it can not be used

1) On any server where any form of monetary contribution is paid to the server owners other than a voluntary donation which does not add any additional form of content, cosmetic or functional or any higher status or abilities that a non contributing player would have regardless of who made that content.

Reword that into legalise and add it to everything :)

If they're going to steal addons/missions/scripts/whatever, a EULA isn't going to stop them, regardless of its content. The only way it to report them and hopefully get them bummed in prison.

[dr death jm 117]

you know this all comes down to people worried about popularity.. this is my last comment on this (some may say thank god).

there not much of stealing when for one "most anything has been done before" just in a different way, I may be reading things wrong, but why is it up to BIS to protect your mods or scripting (skill).

if someone liked something I did , "have fun", if I was working for a year to make a mod and had a following and was asking for donations cool but it'll be a mod made public. the only thing that is or needs to be fixed is server admins expecting $$$ ... and I really don't see a way of this being stoped... some of this crap is ruining or is going to ruin people sharing anything.

BIS should just say oh well to bad so sad and move on... sharing is caring....:bounce3:

[Nexusmax 16]

This whole thing is going to be a big hot mess.

[tupolov 520]

So in theory... Tonic, the original author of Altis Life, could state that his mission/scripts are not allowed to be used on any "monetized" server (his license is already for Non Commerical use only).

He could then setup his own approved server (with his Altis Life code) and charge access to his server, fully within the rules. He is charging for access not content. He now has a monopoly on Altis Life :)

If others continued to run "monetized" Altis Life servers and were reported, what recourse does BIS have here? Is there a mechanism via Steam to lockout said servers?

Tonic is gonna make a lot of money!

Edited January 29, 2015 by Tupolov

[dr death jm 117]

So in theory... Tonic, the original author of Altis Life, could state that his mission/scripts are not allowed to be used on any "monetized" server (his license is already for Non Commerical use only).

He could then setup his own approved server (with his Altis Life code) and charge access to his server, fully within the rules. He is charging for access not content. He now has a monopoly on Altis Life :)

If others continued to run "monetized" Altis Life servers and were reported, what recourse does BIS have here? Is there a mechanism via Steam to lockout said servers?

Tonic is gonna make a lot of money!

life server started before tonic, life server's beta was in ofp resistance.

[tupolov 520]

https://github.com/TAWTonic/Altis-Life

The version used today by most Life servers... written by Tonic.

http://arma-france.com/illegal-servers/

[Col. Ben Sherman 3]

life server started before tonic, life server's beta was in ofp resistance.

He's kinda talking about ArmA 3 not OFP... Last time I checked Tonic pretty much was the first one who released his life server content for public, none or less then TCG released their server with custom mods added to it. A3L which ended up in a large argument since they claim their work where theirs however 90% of their scripts where Tonic's and that's why I'd guess this all started. We also have ArMaTeC which is correct me if I'm wrong the author of city life 3 which is none or less not based upon Tonic's life server mod.

I think every addon maker and scripter should now add a EULA to their new and existing work that states something like.

My content is offered on the understanding that it can not be used

1) On any server where any form of monetary contribution is paid to the server owners other than a voluntary donation which does not add any additional form of content, cosmetic or functional or any higher status or abilities that a non contributing player would have regardless of who made that content.

Reword that into legalise and add it to everything :)

Honestly I'm completely with you here, but this wont happen, what will happen is mod creators and content authors of third party content will stop creating such which is kinda what ArmA have been living on since so long time back, just look back at ArmA 2 when DayZ got released, how many more copies of ArmA 2 wasn't sold during that period? This rule/law will completely destroy ArmA 3 and it's community apart, it will just fall into a big pile of sh*t. But let it go a month or two and BIS will see that statics that will change on and around BIS & ArmA 3.

Also for those who is running a life server by Tonic or using his mission framework I'd just want to give you a heads up as it looks like Tonic will leave BIS/ArmA for good, and honestly after reading his message I'm supporting all his saying.

Good Luck with this!

-Cheers!

[uajii 13]

So in theory... Tonic, the original author of Altis Life, could state that his mission/scripts are not allowed to be used on any "monetized" server (his license is already for Non Commerical use only).

He could then setup his own approved server (with his Altis Life code) and charge access to his server, fully within the rules. He is charging for access not content. He now has a monopoly on Altis Life :)

If others continued to run "monetized" Altis Life servers and were reported, what recourse does BIS have here? Is there a mechanism via Steam to lockout said servers?

Tonic is gonna make a lot of money!

He could and there wouldn't be anything wrong with that. Why shouldn't he be allowed to have a monopoly over something he created?

However I don't think he will get an approval after he wrote he "wants to go on a mass murdering spree in their office".

Threatening to kill developers definitely isn't in the best interests of the Arma 3 community.

[MattLightfoot 1]

@Johny, thanks for taking the time to reply

Hi Anthariel,

I'm really sorry, this is my fault I didn't pass it on. I passed your more recent report on, I'm really sorry it has been added to the list now.

[tupolov 520]

He could and there wouldn't be anything wrong with that. Why shouldn't he be allowed to have a monopoly over something he created?

However I don't think he will get an approval after he wrote he "wants to go on a mass murdering spree in their office".

Threatening to kill developers definitely isn't in the best interests of the Arma 3 community.

Where did he write that?

And I'm absolutely in support of mod authors having a monopoly on their work! (If they choose to)

Edited January 30, 2015 by Tupolov

[BadHabitz 235]

As someone who maintains a mod, and am continuing development, this change has me questioning if I want to continue. So now I have to keep track of which commercial interests have permission to use my mod? In the past it's been easy; no permission for A3L because of their moneymaking schemes, and all others have permission as long as altered versions don't show up in video or screenshots. Now I have to research which servers I feel might be skirting the line and then make a decision? Can I turn around and revoke my permission?

And I think it's absolute horseshit that mod makers can't ask for a portion of the proceeds that servers generate. A server uses your mods as a way to make their servers more attractive, and therefore more profitable, and you're not allowed to profit from your work increasing their value? Ridiculous! Your work is making them more valuable and you're not allowed to share in that at all.

I don't want to make a profit from my work, but at the same time I don't want to sit by while someone else profits from my time and effort. The fact that you're singling out that content can't be monetized is just a matter of twisting words. If a server uses my mod and people are paying for access, the server owners absolutely are making a profit from my work. Why should I spend time and effort for someone else to get paid?

I'll have to think it over, but I'm leaning towards ceasing public development of any content.