ATTN: Addon Makers - Rules of content permissions.

[Placebo 29]

Anyone know how to get a hold of Col. Klink? I wanted to ask to port over his fishing boats.

I spoke to him on Skype and forwarded your Email to him :)

if some one posts a addon on armaholic.com for ArmA do i have do this or is it just taking add ons from OFP and puting them ArmA? if i am not alod to get them from armaholic.com i will go and delete them now.

I'm not really following what you're asking here sorry?

[SureFire 10]

I am sorry about all the trouble. I just liked the tiger and wanted to use it.

I am confused and would like to ask a few questions. I am sorry if this is wrong place for it but I don't know were else to ask.

If it is a mod for the community, why break the biggest community rule about addons?

If it is a beta addon and not released to public and someone takes it and hands it out is that right?

If you edit a mission not made by you and remove makers name from it and put your own name and have others play it, who is wrong?

Can't all this junk about addons be answered by asking/showing permissions given from original model/script maker?

Again I am sorry if this is wrong place for it. All this bay city and city life stuff has made me all confused:confused:.

Lol all I wanted to know is were to get the black tiger thing.

[Placebo 29]

If it is a mod for the community, why break the biggest community rule about addons? .

That's a good question, some people I guess just don't care or are too impatient to wait for PMs/Emails to be answered, for some it's a genuine mistake I think but that's probably a little rarer, anyone who keeps making new stuff learns quite quickly that getting permission is the cardinal rule.

If it is a beta addon and not released to public and someone takes it and hands it out is that right? .

Nope, absolutely not. It doesn't matter what state the original content was released in alpha/beta/final permission must be sought if you want to use it yourself.

If you edit a mission not made by you and remove makers name from it and put your own name and have others play it, who is wrong? .

You are. You must receive permission to edit the mission if you plan to share it with anyone.

Can't all this junk about addons be answered by asking/showing permissions given from original model/script maker?

.

Yes that's what's supposed to happen.

[SureFire 10]

Another question is about all this ford, chevy, ect ect junk.

Is what those bay city guys say true about needing permission from the real life companys before you make an addon? If that is true then every addon ever made would need to be removed unless they have a permission slip in the addon folder correct :eek:? Also if you know an addon is in violation yet you use that addon and alter it also are you not just as much to blame as original maker? It would be like buying/accepting something you know was stolen but do it anyway.

I always thought when an addon was made it was the makers interpitation of the subject and as long as no $ was made of it then it was ok. :bounce3:

I just don't want to get sued for making an addon.:butbut:

Thanks again.

[Mojo 0]

The EULA says that no one can make a derivative work with out the express written concent of BIS. A derivative work is a work that is based up on the original, a Modification. So, BIS says, via this EULA, no one can create a modification for Arma2 without the express written consent of the BIS legal department.

The point being, what most of the folks here are talking about is 2 levels removed from the questionable section. As derivative works of a derivative work ;) -- a modification of a modification, then according to the EULA, you will need not just the permission of any mod-maker who's mods you are looking to modify, but BIS' permission as well.

A whole new bucket of worms here. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm really not sure that the original program creator (BIS) has an ability to claim ownership of derivative works. Let alone the creative work of others not in their employ. A bit like writing a book about some Star Trek adventure, the original material is copyrighted, but the derivative work is the author's own, and then seeing someone bnase a new book off of that one. Messy, to say the least.

[rocket 9]

Messy, to say the least.

Well, it's not nearly as messy as people try to make out. If you (as a consumer) own a copy of a game, and you make a modification to it you can pretty much do whatever you want to that within your own home. Distributing those results to other users, becomes a little more grey. Two key words in this area that should never be separated: Copyright and Fair Use.

"Fair Use" is a concept that is well defined for consumers. Consumers have the rights of users to modify copyrighted works for their own use.

I work in the games industry as a Producer myself, and while I think EULA's are extremely important... they're not usually worth the paper they're printed on when it comes down to it in any legal sense. Companies regularly put whatever they want in them, and there is no penalty for putting something in there that is unenforceable. Derivative works... there's not really legal agreement on this area and unless you're selling the results, a legal case is unlikely to present itself in all but the most dire of situations.

The rules Placebo listed here are community enforced. What we've said as a community (and BI supports), is that peoples authorship (including BIS) is important, and needs to be respected in certain ways.

I often use copyrighted work to generate my own content. Artists will regularly use "samples" of images from google to help them create textures... modelers may use high resolution models to "trace" around to produce low polygon models... or bake base textures. A mission maker might decompile someone elses mission, study how they did it, and make a similar implementation. My opinion is all of the above constitutes fair use of copyrighted material.

As a community, we say that credit where credit is due. So it's simple, just acknowledge when and where you got help, whether that be simply inspiration, or anything. Then you're covered. Nobody gets slammed here for being honest.

---

Edit: Found the old line from my favorate EULA of all time... shipped with Age of Conan:

THE IN NOT TO THE SOFTWARE AND WITHOUT OF ANY TO THE BY AND OTHER OR OTHER OR NOT TO AND/OR OF OF AND FOR A WITH TO THE SOFTWARE AND AND WITHOUT TO THE OF THE NOT THAT THE SOFTWARE OR THAT IT WITHOUT THAT IT ANY IN THE SOFTWARE NOT THAT THE SOFTWARE ON OF TO THE FOR

Edited June 24, 2009 by Rocket

[SWIFT88 0]

can we have a similar thread for ARMA II please

[Chunk3ym4n 10]

No you do not need BIS' permission for using our stuff within our own games, as long as it's not for any kind of commercial product.

So we can't extract the models into different games like Garry's mod:(?

[Placebo 29]

Nope.

[Gunner1241 10]

One ? if someone put there addon on a public site for people to use for there mods or there own uses on the website of community like armaholic and armedassault.info or where ever they have the downloads..

like there are some models or even addons that the mod baycity rpg using. that some allready release the model for everyone to use. is it ok...

same with our models if we release it to the public to let anyone to use it. then its the same for those who post it on the public websites for download. its not a private download then its free to the public..

[franze 196]

One ? if someone put there addon on a public site for people to use for there mods or there own uses on the website of community like armaholic and armedassault.info or where ever they have the downloads..

like there are some models or even addons that the mod baycity rpg using. that some allready release the model for everyone to use. is it ok...

same with our models if we release it to the public to let anyone to use it. then its the same for those who post it on the public websites for download. its not a private download then its free to the public..

Having difficulty trying to understand what you're asking, but I'll take a whack at it...

Here's the way it works:

If you made the model outside of O2, then you're free to do with it as you please. If you made it with O2, it can only be used in BI's games/products. This is according to O2's EULA.

Releasing an addon/model to the public does NOT make it open source. Only the author of the content can give permission for any modifications to it or further uses.

[Capjerahya 11]

One question. I'm working in a mod that require some addons as prerequisite to use the mod. But I don't include them in the mod package it self letting users download the addons and install to run the mod. Do I still need to contact the author of the addons? I think I have to but just want to clear things for me before using someone else's work.

[zulu1 145]

One question. I'm working in a mod that require some addons as prerequisite to use the mod. But I don't include them in the mod package it self letting users download the addons and install to run the mod. Do I still need to contact the author of the addons? I think I have to but just want to clear things for me before using someone else's work.

I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Island makers use objects made by others and infantry uses other weapon packs all the time. As long as you don't alter some one else's work you're fine.

Just mention any requied addons and provide links in a readme should be enough.

[Capjerahya 11]

I see. But what about using addon's class but still without modifying the pbo. Just my own config class.