SimonBondRSA

This is exactly what I was trying to get at, thank you! If every mod author does this then if any use of their mod in a way that they do not like or do not support can be removed and the author will be happy and no argument can be made as it was explicitly stated in their license.

I didn't say that in any way... What I am saying is that if a license agreement is breached - fire away. If a license agreement does not outline explicitly what the content creator intends then they cannot revoke the user's rights unless they change their license agreement! Any federal or international copyright laws that were broken and are backed with evidence have every right to have action taken against, but I am speaking about the content where the creator is simply "Unhappy" about where it is being used because they did not outline a Restricted access agreement beforehand, that is all. My argument does not support any illegal use or negligence of licensing, but only addresses negligence on the license holder's part - to clarify.

delta, I have nothing against that and also wish to cherish the modding community that helps ArmA thrive so well. Trust me, I do not only play Arma for A3L, but on many other servers and parts of very different communities, but I feel that the approach to this situation is wrongly based and has been made into something it should never have become - a flame war. I only want the best for the ArmA community, but I do not see how attacking a successful portion of the Arma playerbase is going to help anyone? Content creators are not going to make money off of their mods by definition - so if another community does so to cover Management and Overhead costs then why not let them? I understand that if a content creator does not like how their mod(s) are being used or implemented, then by all means they have every right to make sure they are not - but these creators also need to understand that if they want to define who uses their mod(s) and how they are used, then a proper license needs to be created BEFORE release of said content. I am on the side of the ArmA community in cherishing modmakers and content creators but they also need to protect themselves or define explicitly beforehand how they want their stuff to be used, otherwise the afterthought argument of "Oh no, someone is using my content in a successful way, how did I not capitalise on that before??" is invalid and negligent.

I will from here onwards speak only from personal opinion, please do not quote me as an allegory for any A3L members or their associates: I joined A3L way back when no external content other than TFAR was being used to the best of my knowledge, and the basic amount of custom vehicles and skins had all been made by the A3L team - I personally would still want to play even if other content was used ( I say used and not stolen very intentionally ). I would love to know though, have you ever played on an A3L server? I feel that comment on a situation by complete outside perspective is somewhat misguided and I am not saying that everything that A3L is doing is correct, by many means they are not but I am also not going to attack them because some of their work and creditation is an icon for a lot of the ArmA community. What I am also saying is, if a content creator asks for their content to be removed from a community then fine, if I were to run said community I would remove it ASAP - however, if in the Terms of Use of any content it says that the creator cannot revoke this right of use, and it was either essential or very much desired, then I would adhere to the license and follow what I and the 1000's of users depending on this content wanted. If you take issue with A3L unintetionally generating more income than required to host servers, then please take a look at other communities that earn vast amounts through "Donations" where they restrict access to weapons, vehicles and ArmA base content without hesitation, where A3L does none of those things. Yes - there was a requirement of entry by payment of $30 but that has since been dealt with by BI themselves and completely nullified at A3L. The expedited application donation is a CHOICE by users to speed up a process, no one is being forced to pay a cent, as I have not and can play exactly the same as any other user that decides to play.

I don't know what you're asking here?? But A3L is not breaching any Terms of Use mod wise to the best of my knowledge - other than Tonic's Altis Life Framework which has already been admitted and is in the process of being phased out as we speak. My only argument here is this: If a mod creator does not accept that if he created a FREE mod to be used by the ARMA community, and it was used in a successful community that may be generating income unintentionally other than to cover their costs, why create content to be used in the first place?

In all honesty, you and the other people who are flame feeding this argument are consciously trying to create a flame war and hatred towards A3L to get it taken down. Personally, I have been with the community since March this year and have had no involvement in the direct development nor Staff other than Support Team for taking in applications, and the intention does not lie in A3L generating money for personal or company use, such as a commercial entity. The community got big, and they started to make money because people wanted to get on and play quickly, ahead of other people - they made the decision to donate, they were never ever forced to donate. People forget that the users who have donated are doing so fully knowing what they are doing, and are not being "cheated" out of anything. - General Disclaimer: No I have not donated a cent to the community and have played here since March, which goes to show that it is definitely not a requirement to play, or one of the Community's goals. - If content creators do not want their work to be used by a popular Community, then why provide their content for the ARMA community to play for free?? - If you don't want your content to be used, don't make the content or restrict the access, period.