Azimech

Updated Terms Notice & Privacy Policy

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Eskandare said:

This isn't Grand Theft Auto , or a community of whiney teenage gamers, this is playing with fire. I can just imagine the article in Forbes, "Kerbal Crashes, Squad's Parent Company Alienates Aerospace Industry!"

I hate to disappoint you, but indeed KSP is not GTA. Alienating that usebase would surely hit the pages of the WSJ. Something about KSP? Even if it would alienate the entire Aerospace industry (doubtful), what would the impact on the bottom line  of T2 be? It’s not like they have juicy contracts with the defense industry. As for T2’s image with the general audience: science ranks at the very bottom of what the general public cares about. An outfall with a gaming company and a community the general public doesn’t care about over a game the general public never heard of will be less than a storm in a glass of water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eskandare said:

This! This is what Take Two should be absolutely worried about. The EULA, in this case does not prevent damages to the company but causes self inflicted harm by alienating the community that supports the product, and thus losing money from the purchase of Squad. Sure, there are many assets from Squad that are desirable, plus obtaining cute Kerbals, and having an IP to water down and over merchandise, but the overall outcome could be disastrous for a company. Imagine, if you will, should the community be alienated from Kerbal, they aren't alienating some little gaming community but alienating the entire aerospace industry that has had a very watchful eye on Kerbal Space Program. This is and not limited to NASA, SpaceX, and the ESA. There are professors and students, engineers, mechanics, administrators, etc. many have who been turned on to Kerbal and have played it themselves and/or got it for their kids to interest them in aerospace. A community collapse would be a disaster! Once Wall Street hears about it, and they will (yes, a people who will make a financial decision if a CEO sneezes) will undoubtedly make their financial decisions about a company who allowed massive fallout from an industry far lager then the scope of their silly little video games. This isn't Grand Theft Auto , or a community of whiney teenage gamers, this is playing with fire. I can just imagine the article in Forbes, "Kerbal Crashes, Squad's Parent Company Alienates Aerospace Industry!"

Yes, ostensibly, we can still mod in KSP 1.4, but the EULA does not support that. 

Is this sarcasm? Please tell me it's sarcasm.

 

_______________________

 

Also, has anyone of you ever read any EULA on any other software ever created? TL;DR: you have zero rights and the parent company can ruin your day if they want to; doesn't mean they will ruin your day, doesn't mean they will put an end to modding, doesn't mean TT hates KSP and its players, doesn't mean they are literally that German guy from the 30s. They tried to restrict modding on GTA V because they felt it was interfering with their online microtransactions (neither of which KSP has or will ever have), people got angry and they backed down because angry people is bad for business.

Edited by Gaarst

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

Is this sarcasm? Please tell me it's sarcasm.

I think part of the problem is the silence we've heard from Squad officials AND the rampant rumors running wild. If we knew where we stood as modders and authors of fan-fic from someone formally associated with Squad, then that would help...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Just Jim said:

Woah... what???  So you're saying I have to sign over the rights to Emiko just to keep playing??? That's extortion!!!   

NOT HAPPENING!!!  :mad:

Not as I read it. A Mission pack based on Emiko though - yeah you most likely sign over any rights to those automatically. Assuming that EULA doesn't change and assuming that Missions count as something 'made using the software' - in this case KSP.

And under the new Forum terms - well you sign away any rights to new Emiko chapters posted after the 6th March. Take Two get an exclusive license to them with no obligation to compensate or credit you for them. Doesn't mean they won't of course, but the fact they feel the need to give themselves that snatch-and-run option in the first place doesn't inspire confidence. 

1 hour ago, Kuzzter said:

What did I miss? Take-Two can take all my characters, dialogue, designs and plots and make (or lose) millions on KERBFLEET: THE ANIMATED SAGA!  ?????

Yup - as written by A.Nonymous. Not this Kuzzter fellow - never heard of him. Potentially anyway - one would hope that they would throw you a bone and stick your name on it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, adsii1970 said:

I think part of the problem is the silence we've heard from Squad officials AND the rampant rumors running wild. If we knew where we stood as modders and authors of fan-fic from someone formally associated with Squad, then that would help...

Yes and no. While it would be great to get clarification, they can't really just jump in and give that clarification without checking with the lawyers and so on.  Obviously it would have been nice if they'd done a bit of research first and had the answers ready to go. But that ship has clearly sailed. We just need to wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kuzzter said:
7 hours ago, Just Jim said:

Gaaaa... now I'm more confused what to do than ever... it's a big deal... it's not a big deal... they can stop you from playing... no, they can't... :confused:

I just want to keep writing Emiko, without having to worry someone is going to some in and say I have to change this or that... or I have to stop all together... or I'm shut out. I'm really starting to freak out over all this.

Jim, my read of this is as follows:

1. If you want to use the Forum you have to accept the new Terms.
2. If you want to play any version of the Game you have to agree to the Terms that come with that version.
3. You can create anything you want based on the game, which TakeTwo owns.
4. You can't make money off the things you create.
5. They can.

It's not the money... I doubt anyone would ever pay me for it... It's the idea that once it's been posted... if I'm reading this right... then anyone from TT can go in and change whatever they want. That bugs the crap out of me.  :mad:

Edited by Just Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A thought: These T&Cs for using online content are creepily similar to the T&Cs of using any Bethesda softworks product. In theory this would make Bethesda a monster when it comes to modding the Elder Scrolls games or Fallout 3 & 4, but in fact Bethesda love modding and bend over backwards to support it, even helping with successive iterations of the Script Extender on which a great many mods depend. Why? Because they know that a great many players of ES and FO buy the game with a view to extending it with mods. They aren't going to shoot their sales in the foot by abusing the T&Cs!

So why do Bethesda have these T&Cs? So that when they decided to sell DLC to give armour to horses (for instance, there are probably many others that more dedicated ES fans could name), they didn't have to worry that a mod might also give armour to horses, and that the modder who created it might insist s/he therefore owned a share of Bethesda's DLC income.

It happens in many industries that fans create material based on an Intellectual Property, and then try to sue the owners of that IP when they extend the IP in some way coincidentally similar to the fan's output. Terry Pratchett and other authors protect themselves by not reading fan-fiction based on their IPs, software houses do it by making fans agree to hand over the IP on mods, fanfiction and the like. Some electronics and computing firms protect themselves against claims of Patent infringement by videoing every brainstorming or development session any of their techies attend - just in case.

Which other game depends on mods, in a way similar to ES or FO? Why, our very own KSP. Squad and TTI know that there are a great many players who have got very used to using mods. There is even a special area of the forums dedicated to supporting modded KSP installations. For KSP to continue to make money, it has to sell; and to sell it has to sell new product to the existing fanbase. To do that, they have to support modding, and not get heavy-handed. But they have to have a way to allow the developers to create features and content without having to reach for copyright lawyers whenever they do so, just in case the feature is a bit too much like a mod for some modder's liking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All EULA's are the same....essentially "We own you and we can kill your use of the software at any time, and we will not allow fanfiction or anything of the type because it's ours and we will sue the pants off of you.  And if you put new pants on, we'll sue THOSE off too!  Be our slave and you will be fine."

I never read those things....I have no desire to make money off of whatever's attached to a EULA anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, softweir said:

Terry Pratchett and other authors protect themselves by not reading fan-fiction based on their IPs, software houses do it by making fans agree to hand over the IP on mods, fanfiction and the like.

Yeah... but respectfully, that's a huge difference. You're talking about fan-fiction based on another authors work... I'm talking about fan-fiction based on a game with no backstory or canon what so ever. In fact, I would argue it's us fan-fiction authors that are laying the groundwork for any type of KSP canon.

11 minutes ago, softweir said:

It happens in many industries that fans create material based on an Intellectual Property, and then try to sue the owners of that IP when they extend the IP in some way coincidentally similar to the fan's output.

OK, this part I hadn't really considered. Mostly because I would think it a huge honor for Squad to do something like add Emiko's name into the game's name-list. 

Again, I'm not interested in profit... or suing anyone... I just want some assurance no-one is going to tamper with what I'm writing after it's posted!

Edited by Just Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Just Jim said:

Yeah... but respectfully, that's a huge difference. You're talking about fan-fiction based on another authors work... I'm talking about fan-fiction based on a game with no backstory or canon what so ever. In fact, I would argue it's us fan-fiction authors that are laying the groundwork for any type of KSP canon.

OK, this part I hadn't really considered. Mostly because I would think it a huge honor for Squad to do something like add Emiko's name into the game's name-list. 

Again, I'm not interested in profit... or suing anyone... I just want some assurance no-one is going to tamper with what I'm writing after it's posted!

I agree...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2018 at 12:07 PM, severedsolo said:

 the official line has always been "you own your mods" (that's why we need licenses)

My understanding was that we needed licenses so that Squad could cover their asses when a modder goes AWOL and someone else unilaterally decides to take over their work and start redistributing it. They do that through Squad's forums and suddenly Squad can be made liable. Mods can literally expose Squad to legal liability so modders need to be explicit as to what people can and can't do with their creations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Just Jim said:

Wait... I already own the software... how can they prevent me from using it if it's already on my computer?

Oh, Jim Jim Jim.... such an innocent!

The absolutely number one most important thing you need to keep in mind when looking at law is: 

THE RULES ARE WHAT THE RULES SAY THEY ARE. THERE IS NO CONNECTION TO 'COMMON SENSE' IN ANY WAY, EXCEPT BY COINCIDENCE.

I got bit by this a lot when I was learning legal things - "But that makes no SENSE!"

It doesn't have to make sense, it only has to be law.

Now, 'the law' and 'practical reality' may actually have any amount of contact with each other. 

But what they say in legal terms doesn't have to have any relation to what they can or cannot do in real life. But if you think it's worth fighting, you have to be ready to fight it in court because the number two most important thing is

THE RULES ARE WHAT HAVE BEEN PROVEN IN TRIAL. ANYTHING CAN BE CHANGED IF YOU GET A FAVORABLE (set of) DECISION(s). Because if it goes against the other side, they can always appeal it to a higher-level-of-hierarchy court, hoping for a reversal. 

Law depends greatly on precedent, what has been forged in previous trials. Lawyers are always quoting previous trials as if they mean something, because they do to other lawyers. And, since law depends on lawyers, the 'precedents' mean something to you, even if law isn't your thing, because they will affect you.

The problem specifically with this new EULA is, that many precedents about intellectual property, copyright, assignment of rights thereof, and use of others' ideas in your own work, have historically - and more so lately - been decided in favor of the owner, rather than the non-owner. With Take Two Interactive saying We Own It All, then they have not just one eight hundred pound gorilla on their side, but thousands. 

But there's the third most important thing, which is

THE RULES DO NOT MATTER UNLESS THEY ARE ENFORCED, BY FORCE.

If they choose not to press the matter, then it doesn't matter what the rules are. (This is one of the irritations peons and peasants and workers have with the rich and powerful; the laws are supposedly the same, but they are enforced differently on different social classes.)

If Take Two Interactive doesn't hunt down, say, modders, or fanfiction writers, or YouTube video makers, and drag them into court (which costs them court costs to file the case, plus lawyer fees) then it doesn't practically matter what the written rules are. As Brikoleur and I think others have mentioned, the changes look pretty standard for modern times, and may have been copied from other sources without even changing the wording in the slightest. Maybe they won't do anything with their 'new' rights of ownership and control. Maybe.

But who knows what Take Two Interactive will actually do? And, what will the future Take Two Interactive will do? That's my concern.

TAKE TWO INTERACTIVE: seriously, you corporate guys, make some changes in your EULA and elsewhere to reassure your fans. People like Nertea and Eskandare and Just Jim - or, rather, their works - are the reason _I_ play, and are the ONLY reason I'd be willing to pay money in the future for downloadable content and/or future editions. If you scare them away, I won't be happy, and I won't recommend buying this game to other people, and I won't ever spend money again (and I may stop playing and uninstall). I stopped playing World Of Tanks partially because the forums were as vicious as any, and partially because they forbade some mods I was using; it was no longer worth my time to play, and so I stopped spending money. My husband has cut his WoT spending in half because of similar concerns. That is money Wargaming is not making off us. Bottom line, corporate guys.

Everyone else: say something, so that someone in Take Two Interactive can count the posts and say something like "9% of our forum users objected." Say it NOW, theres's not much time left. As planned, I suspect. The more people/posts that can be counted, the more likely it'll change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Squad / Take Two drives away the modders with their legal repurposed bovine waste, there won't be much mod support for 1.4

 

I'll rather play a modded 1.3 than a 1.4 with whatever DLC Squad will come up with.

 

LOL at the autocorrect, I'll leave it at that

 

 

Edited by Hans Dorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not purchase or play any version or DLC for KSP past 1.3.1 if the modders are forced out by the new Terms. I would like to have a say in whether someone else gets paid for, for example, putting my cockpits and all of @MOARdV and @alexustas's hard work into a DLC pack. If I don't, well, then, I guess I suddenly have a lot more free time.

Edited by theonegalen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think at this point...an official response is not only DESPERATELY wanted...but NEEDED/REQUIRED of squad/taketwo...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RaiderMan said:

I think at this point...an official response is not only DESPERATELY wanted...but NEEDED/REQUIRED of squad/taketwo...

They need time for their legal team to sort this out properly - the last thing Squad wants to do is hastily say something and then have to backpeddle. Give them time :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Daishi said:

They need time for their legal team to sort this out properly - the last thing Squad wants to do is hastily say something and then have to backpeddle. Give them time :)

Absolutely not. They had all the time to review new terms and think of consequences BEFORE making them public and mandatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, radonek said:

Absolutely not. They had all the time to review new terms and think of consequences BEFORE making them public and mandatory.

They had the time.  But they clearly didn't use that time.  That's not to say they should now hastily cobble together responses everyone might regret later.

I'm firmly in the camp of "raise polite questions and wait patiently for the answers".  Anything else is just [expletives deleted].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, just read the whole thread, and was hoping to see official respond at the end, but was disappointed. Actually, while I was reading I also started to archive my current version of KSP and will probably stay with 1.3. Which is too bad, I was really looking forward to the update, but I guess you need to vote with your money to tell companies that it is not ok to not care about the community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, adsii1970 said:

I think part of the problem is the silence we've heard from Squad officials AND the rampant rumors running wild. If we knew where we stood as modders and authors of fan-fic from someone formally associated with Squad, then that would help...

I was referring to the part where he said that TT's EULA possibly being interpreted as restricting modding on an (ex-)indie game would lead to the bankruptcy of a multi-billion dollar company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

I was referring to the part where he said that TT's EULA possibly being interpreted as restricting modding on an (ex-)indie game would lead to the bankruptcy of a multi-billion dollar company.

Oh, yeah, if anything, TT would offer a modder who had an excellent mod some compensation package, a non-disclosure agreement, and incorporate it into a game. But a modder will not break the back of TT. Not financially possible...

Now TT might sue a wayward modder into oblivion - and that's the more likely scenario. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given Take2's history with modding announcements and the concerns expressed when the acquisition was announced it would have been better if Squad had covered some of the likely questions with the announcement.  It's possible that Take2 didn't give them enough notice to do so?


It would be great, if we could get some plain language explanation.  I totally understand that they need to be able to legally distribute anything you publish to the forums or wiki because they are doing exactly that every time someone loads the page.  I'm also pretty sure that content hosted elsewhere but linked to on here is not covered (Take2 don't own an exclusive right to the NASA logo just because I've linked to the image here) 
nasa-logo.svg


However mods created with PartTools absolutely needs some clarification.  If I create a mod with PartTools does Take2 then own the IP of the 3d model which was processed though PartTools or do I retain the rights?

One thing is for sure, I'm very happy we have Spacedock and are not relying on a Squad hosted mod repository.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Paul Kingtiger said:

However mods created with PartTools absolutely needs some clarification.  If I create a mod with PartTools does Take2 then own the IP of the 3d model which was processed though PartTools or do I retain the rights?

That last sentence from the "SUBMISSIONS" section concerns me: "No purported reservation of rights incorporated in or accompanying any submission shall have any force or effect"  That reads as "your license does not apply".  Considering *all* of my mods incorporate material licensed from elsewhere (open source fonts, MIT or GPL licensed source code, and so forth) and they all either used PartTools or link to KSP DLLs, it seems I'd be setting myself up for legal exposure if TTI decide to exercise their claimed right to exploit a mod I've posted.  Even I waived my rights to claim IP on the mods I create, I can't waive other people's rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.