Updated Terms Notice & Privacy Policy

[Draconomial]

A highlight of the ToS: 

Quote

 

VIRTUAL CURRENCY AND VIRTUAL GOODS

The Online Services, including software, may offer the ability to purchase and/or earn via gameplay a limited license to use virtual currency and/or virtual goods exclusively within applicable software and services provided by the Company. Such license is subject to and specifically conditioned upon your acceptance of, and compliance with, the EULA, this Agreement and any other applicable policies or agreements. All in-game Virtual Currency and/or Virtual Goods may be consumed or lost by players in the course of gameplay according to the game’s rules applicable to currency and goods, which may vary. See the EULA at www.take2games.com/eula for more details.

 

Who's looking forward to loot crates and kerbal skins? Buy ten for $29.99 and get three free!

Edited February 24, 2018 by Draconomial

[The Aziz]

13 minutes ago, Draconomial said:

 

Who's looking forward to loot crates and kerbal skins? Buy ten for $29.99 and get three free!

Oh gimme a break

It's all about the DLC and nothing more.

The sentence

14 minutes ago, Draconomial said:

The Online Services, including software, may offer the ability to purchase and/or earn via gameplay a limited license to use virtual currency and/or virtual goods exclusively within applicable software and services provided by the Company

means that you can purchase and download the DLC (as in: virtual goods) through the website or any given way by the publisher (as in: Online Services and Software).

Period.

/out

[SergeantBlueforce]

26 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Oh gimme a break

It's all about the DLC and nothing more.

The sentence

means that you can purchase and download the DLC (as in: virtual goods) through the website or any given way by the publisher (as in: Online Services and Software).

Period.

/out

It also pertains to the inclusion of microtransactions. Do not downplay the significance of this.

Knowing 2K, this will also mean the introduction of DRM is to be expected.

Edited February 24, 2018 by SergeantBlueforce

[DefiantZombie]

I don't understand why people are missing the main clause that is different/new that may directly apply to the KSP mod community.

Quote

USER CREATED CONTENT: The Software may allow you to create content, including, but not limited to, a gameplay map, scenario, screenshot, car design, character, item, or video of your game play. In exchange for use of the Software, and to the extent that your contributions through use of the Software give rise to any copyright interest, you hereby grant Licensor an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully transferable, and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use your contributions in any way and for any purpose in connection with the Software and related goods and services, including, but not limited to, the rights to reproduce, copy, adapt, modify, perform, display, publish, broadcast, transmit, or otherwise communicate to the public by any means whether now known or unknown and distribute your contributions without any further notice or compensation to you of any kind for the whole duration of protection granted to intellectual property rights by applicable laws and international conventions. You hereby waive and agree never to assert any moral rights of paternity, publication, reputation, or attribution with respect to Licensor's and other players' use and enjoyment of such assets in connection with the Software and related goods and services under applicable law. This license grant to Licensor, and terms above regarding any applicable moral rights, will survive any termination of this Agreement.

I haven't completed my research on this statement. It appears to be "standard" and directly states that "The Software may allow you to create content...gameplay map, scenario..." That's the bit I'm still looking into. KSP does not directly allow us to create certain mod content. However if this is to be interpreted to include the act of loading and facilitating the execution of mod content, then mod authors are releasing their copyright to Take 2.

I'm hesitant to post anywhere publicly about this, but the short notice on this has made other avenues hard to pursue. I'm involved in projects that require my knowledge of how this is clause may be applied, and would very much like clarification from Squad and Take 2 on how this clause will affect my copyright and the license(s) I have been granted access.

EDIT: Redacted. Further research invalidates my statement and turns it into a licensing, not copyright, issue.

Edited February 24, 2018 by DefiantZombie
Redacted

[MiffedStarfish]

What amused me was this. I’m tempted to print out a craft file and post it now.

Dear TakeTwo,
Root Part: StructualI-BeamPocket
Offset: 2.475822
Rotation: 89.0837

Part: LiquidFuelTank
Radial Offset: 4.9574739
Rotation: 6,8397

Unit: LiquidFuel
Amount: 400

Another thing I saw in EULA was that it is now illegal to have KSP on a hard drive. You have to keep it on the disc that it never came on.

[DefiantZombie]

A couple observations that came up in parallel with my research.

On 2/22/2018 at 12:51 PM, swjr-swis said:

So much for having multiple installs of the game? Or keeping old versions around to finish playing a career, or to test differences between versions, or just for play/challenge purposes? Or copying the game out of the Steam folder into another place to ensure it doesn't get messed up by unexpected updates? Or even something as simple as sharing a craft file or a savegame, since that too would be 'making a copy of part of the software'. This was all explicitly allowed up to now.

This is covered under US law. (unsure of other locations) Archival copies are allowed so long as they are not distributed/sold/etc.

On 2/22/2018 at 12:51 PM, swjr-swis said:

So... no more modding? Because that is literally what modding means. And I find no article or provision anywhere that makes an explicit exception for modding.

Reverse engineering is covered under Copyright and DMCA. It is allowed with the intent to create inter-operable code and/or hardware. However, distribution of copyrighted code is where you run into issues.

On 2/22/2018 at 12:51 PM, swjr-swis said:

Which in essence states that they get to ignore whatever license terms you choose on your mod (= user created content) and do as they please with it and allow others of their choosing to do so as well. Which would mean mod authors need not bother anymore with picking and publishing a license for their mods, since they are nulled and voided anyway by the above text, at least when it comes to T2 and subsidiaries and yet-unidentified third parties.

The block you quoted states "the Online services" which does not apply to the KSP software as there is no online service component (yet).

As far as licensing for mods, from my research on this topic all mod licensing is still valid as far as the mod end user is concerned. What the EULA does in this case is grant Take 2 an automatic unlimited license.

[severedsolo]

This bit worries me:

Quote

The Company welcomes input from the gaming community. You hereby grant the Company an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully transferable, and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use any submissions you submit to the Company of any nature whatsoever, whether through a posting on a Company website, email to the Company, mail, or any other means and without any obligation to account, credit, or make any payment to you for any use thereof.

(emphasis mine) - Now, I'm not a lawyer, but to me that says "If you make a mod and post it to the forum we can do what we like, and monetise it if we see fit".

Considering that we as the creators are explicitly forbidden from monetising our mods (even if we wanted to, which I don't) that's worrying.

It then goes on to say:

Quote

No purported reservation of rights incorporated in or accompanying any submission shall have any force or effect.

Again, not a lawyer, but to me that says "your license means nothing"

Having said all that, my mods are actually hosted on Github, my forum posts are just a means for people to find them. I suppose that would mean I have not uploaded them to the forum directly, so the above may not apply.

Edited February 24, 2018 by severedsolo

[Benjamin Kerman]

Yeah, I really don't like that. Saw that myself, and thought pretty much the same thing. 

Edit: is there any way we could form a petition to TTI to change this?

Edited February 24, 2018 by Benjamin Kerman

[TotallyNotHuman]

40 minutes ago, severedsolo said:

This bit worries me:

(emphasis mine) - Now, I'm not a lawyer, but to me that says "If you make a mod and post it to the forum we can do what we like, and monetise it if we see fit".

Considering that we as the creators are explicitly forbidden from monetising our mods (even if we wanted to, which I don't) that's worrying.

It then goes on to say:

Again, not a lawyer, but to me that says "your license means nothing"

Having said all that, my mods are actually hosted on Github, my forum posts are just a means for people to find them. I suppose that would mean I have not uploaded them to the forum directly, so the above may not apply.

I'm not a lawyer either, but I know GitHub is legally obligated to comply with any takedown requests of any repositories, provided the takedown has merit. I'm not sure if Take-Two can use the DMCA to take down mods' repos on GitHub, or even if they would; but if they are able I'd be slightly worried as I am a content creator myself.

[severedsolo]

26 minutes ago, TotallyNotHuman said:

I'm not a lawyer either, but I know GitHub is legally obligated to comply with any takedown requests of any repositories, provided the takedown has merit. I'm not sure if Take-Two can use the DMCA to take down mods' repos on GitHub, or even if they would; but if they are able I'd be slightly worried as I am a content creator myself.

I don't think takedown notices are an issue, the wording says more to me that I am forced to grant Take-Two a license to do what they like (In UK law at least, I automatically hold the copyright to anything I create). In other words, I can't DMCA them. This would be a rapid change of direction, the official line has always been "you own your mods" (that's why we need licenses)

Now, I don't really want to go over the top here, but if this isn't clarified, I might have to remove my mods from the forums on March 5th.

Edited February 24, 2018 by severedsolo

[Krakatoa]

Someone on @SQUAD /TT staff may want to think about actually replying in this thread or another with some clarifying information, because our community has a tendency to run with a worst possible scenario and freak out, and the vast majority of the visitors on this forum need to know what the future of modding will be, because it's 100% of the reason at least I am on the forum, and I'm sure it goes for other people, too.

[Kerbart]

On 2/22/2018 at 3:51 PM, swjr-swis said:

So much for having multiple installs of the game? Or keeping old versions around to finish playing a career, or to test differences between versions, or just for play/challenge purposes? Or copying the game out of the Steam folder into another place to ensure it doesn't get messed up by unexpected updates? Or even something as simple as sharing a craft file or a savegame, since that too would be 'making a copy of part of the software'. This was all explicitly allowed up to now.

DOesn't it state that you cannot make copies for someone else?

Edited February 24, 2018 by Kerbart

[KSK]

I'm glad somebody started this thread and I echo @Krakatoa's comment about a need for clarity, from Squad, Take Two, or a forum member who's better versed in the relevant law. If that includes correcting this post, then I welcome that correction.

I haven't reviewed the Privacy Policy or updated Terms in any great detail but on the whole I'm thoroughly unimpressed. For starters, I think it's frankly cowardly of Take Two to hide their business-to-consumer transactions behind a wall of legal bafflegab. Added to that, if I was reviewing these terms in a work context, there are several places where I would recommend pushing back on them or, if Take Two refused to budge, telling them to take their contract and blow it out their tubes.

In an appropriately professional manner of course. 

However, there is one particular aspect of these terms that I take great issue with since it demonstrates a complete lack of common courtesy on Take Two's part, not to mention an unhelpfully dismissive attitude towards their customers, particularly those in the KSP community, for whom user generated content of various types has been a staple of their community since the beginning. I refer to the right of attribution for that user generated content.

From the Updated Terms:

Quote

The Company welcomes input from the gaming community. You hereby grant the Company an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully transferable, and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use any submissions you submit to the Company of any nature whatsoever, whether through a posting on a Company website, email to the Company, mail, or any other means and without any obligation to account, credit, or make any payment to you for any use thereof. No purported reservation of rights incorporated in or accompanying any submission shall have any force or effect.

Emphasis added. Now, I think payment for fan-generated content is always going to be a controversial topic, so lets not get sidetracked into that. However, Take Two being able to take fan generated content without permission (any obligation to account) or acknowledgement (any obligation to credit), makes me angry.  The right to use somebody's work can depend on a whole bunch of factors but not crediting that person for their work shows that aforementioned  lack of common courtesy. Next up:

Quote

By creating UGC (User Generated Content - KSK), posting messages, uploading files, creating files, inputting data, or engaging in any form of communication with or through the Online Services, you are granting the Company a royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive, unrestricted, worldwide license to: (1) use, copy, sublicense, adapt, transmit, publicly perform, or display any such material; and (2) sublicense to third-parties the unrestricted right to exercise any of the foregoing rights granted with respect to the material. The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such material, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, service mark, or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction. Please consult the EULA at www.take2games.com/eula for additional license terms related to our software.

Okay then. Let's consult that EULA.

Quote

USER CREATED CONTENT: The Software may allow you to create content, including, but not limited to, a gameplay map, scenario, screenshot, car design, character, item, or video of your game play. In exchange for use of the Software, and to the extent that your contributions through use of the Software give rise to any copyright interest, you hereby grant Licensor an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully transferable, and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use your contributions in any way and for any purpose in connection with the Software and related goods and services, including, but not limited to, the rights to reproduce, copy, adapt, modify, perform, display, publish, broadcast, transmit, or otherwise communicate to the public by any means whether now known or unknown and distribute your contributions without any further notice or compensation to you of any kind for the whole duration of protection granted to intellectual property rights by applicable laws and international conventions. You hereby waive and agree never to assert any moral rights of paternity, publication, reputation, or attribution with respect to Licensor's and other players' use and enjoyment of such assets in connection with the Software and related goods and services under applicable law. This license grant to Licensor, and terms above regarding any applicable moral rights, will survive any termination of this Agreement.

Emphasis added again. So any content created using the Software together with any intellectual property rights in that content are automatically licensed to Take Two. Once again, they do not have to tell you they're taking that license or compensate you for using your content, financially or otherwise. Furthermore you explicitly agree to permanently waive your rights of attribution - in other words the right to be acknowledged as the creator of your own content. 

So how broadly should we interpret 'The software may allow you to create content...' Does it, for example, include any using game APIs to build your mods? That's a good question and not one that I feel I can answer clearly. However, I am pretty sure that any player-created Missions built using the Making History Mission Builder falls pretty squarely within the realm of content created through the Software. In other words, I see nothing in these Terms and Conditions that would prevent Take Two from scouring the forums or other mod repositories, picking out a set of popular Missions and bundling them up as a paid-for DLC, without notifying the creators of those Missions or even acknowledging them as the creators.

And that stinks. Doubly so for a community (like KSP's) that is very largely built on player-created content.

I'll be honest - the Mission Builder doesn't really appeal to me and I think it's unlikely that I'll get into creating Missions in a big way. Likewise, I'm under no particular illusion that Take Two are likely to pick up my own user-created content and run with it. However those updated Terms aren't exactly filling me with enthusiasm to create new KSP content once I'm done with my current project. Quite the opposite in fact.

Edited February 24, 2018 by KSK

[UomoCapra]

The advance notice for KSP is to get the terms in line with the broader Take-Two terms that all of their labels and games use.  Modding is hugely important to KSP, and will continue to be supported and promoted just like the vibrant modding communities around Firaxis games, which are also published by a Take-Two label.

[DeltaDizzy]

I fell like i'm quite justified in being a little nervous about this, so until I am absolutely sure, all my mods will go under All Rights Reserved(though my new ones were going to go under that anyway).

[KSK]

27 minutes ago, UomoCapra said:

The advance notice for KSP is to get the terms in line with the broader Take-Two terms that all of their labels and games use.  Modding is hugely important to KSP, and will continue to be supported and promoted just like the vibrant modding communities around Firaxis games, which are also published by a Take-Two label.

With all due respect, you'd better ask Take Two to change their EULA then.

Quote

LICENSE CONDITIONS

You agree not to, and not to provide guidance or instruction to any other individual or entity on how to:

• reverse engineer, decompile, disassemble, display, perform, prepare derivative works based on, or otherwise modify the Software, in whole or in part;

If that's not a clause banning modding, then it's doing an awfully good impression of one. 

7 minutes ago, DeltaDizzy said:

I fell like i'm quite justified in being a little nervous about this, so until I am absolutely sure, all my mods will go under All Rights Reserved(though my new ones were going to go under that anyway).

Sadly, it seems that you're out of luck there:

Quote

SUBMISSIONS

The Company welcomes input from the gaming community. You hereby grant the Company an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully transferable, and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use any submissions you submit to the Company of any nature whatsoever, whether through a posting on a Company website, email to the Company, mail, or any other means and without any obligation to account, credit, or make any payment to you for any use thereof. No purported reservation of rights incorporated in or accompanying any submission shall have any force or effect.

 

Edited February 24, 2018 by KSK

[DeltaDizzy]

well, i guess I just have to hope they dont like it too much

Edited February 24, 2018 by DeltaDizzy

[severedsolo]

24 minutes ago, UomoCapra said:

Modding is hugely important to KSP, and will continue to be supported and promoted just like the vibrant modding communities around Firaxis games, which are also published by a Take-Two label.

Don't mean to be rude, but you've completely dodged the question.

Quote

You hereby grant the Company an exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, fully transferable, and sub-licensable worldwide right and license to use any submissions you submit to the Company of any nature whatsoever whether through a posting on a Company website .....  without any obligation to account, credit, or make any payment to you for any use thereof. No purported reservation of rights incorporated in or accompanying any submission shall have any force or effect.

I assume the KSP forums count as a company website yes? Therefore any mods posted on the forums can be taken by Take-Two without permission, credit or payment. That's EXACTLY what that says.

"We will continue to support mods" is not the same as "we won't steal your content" (and again not to be rude, but that's exactly what that clause is. It's legalised theft).

 

[TiktaalikDreaming]

8 minutes ago, KSK said:

Sadly, it seems that you're out of luck there:

 

Well, not yet.  Until @DeltaDizzy agrees to the new terms, his existing works are still covered by any existing license restraints.  Existing mods would have been created in good faith under the existing system.  Where a ARR or the various NC license terms are perfectly acceptable.  They don't just change without all parties agreeing.  So, mod authors would need to agree to the new terms, presumably when updating for 1.4, before those terms apply.

[Poodmund]

1 hour ago, UomoCapra said:

Modding is hugely important to KSP, and will continue to be supported and promoted just like the vibrant modding communities around Firaxis games, which are also published by a Take-Two label.

This response unfortunately does not answer any of the queries and questions raised in this thread, all that has been said here is, "Oh, well it happens for these other games so why should you worry?". Well, seeing as, under strict policy set by SQUAD, we license all of our mods... however, this new EULA could be interpreted to say that any mods that any of us make from 6th March waive their right to be licensed under the selected license for Take Two and that Take Two can operate with the source of any of our mods released as an open license internally, claim rights to the source code and can monetize it afterwards send a cease and desist claim to the original modder.

This EULA change seems like it has been applied with VERY generic terms without much consideration as to how they affect the preexisting KSP ethos and community.

As part of the Modding community, we NEED very definitive clarification of this and I would suggest as much as it would be horrendous for another GTA V scenario to occur where the modding community are alienated from the game that they love.

@RoverDude & @JPLRepo I am sorry for singling both of you out but you obviously are caught between two parties being contracted for SQUAD and being independent mod authors. Could either of you shed any light on this situation, if you are allowed to outside of any NDA areas?

Edited February 24, 2018 by Poodmund

[TiktaalikDreaming]

Still just thinking this through, sort of out loud on the forums, so I could be horribly wrong.  Also, all legal advice by non-lawyers should be considered useless.

But, I have a suspicion that this could* effectively kill all "redux/revived" type mods.  The original coder/creator would need to accept the new EULA, as the redux work is based on their work.  But often, the original creator has exited the game community and probably won't be accepting the new terms.  Or, more specifically, it will be hard to confirm with the original creator about the status of their acceptance is.

* IF and only if this is an actual change to how mods are licensed, which has yet to be clarified.

Edited February 24, 2018 by TiktaalikDreaming
clarification

[swjr-swis]

Already being discussed here:

 

[KSK]

53 minutes ago, TiktaalikDreaming said:

Well, not yet.  Until @DeltaDizzy agrees to the new terms, his existing works are still covered by any existing license restraints.  Existing mods would have been created in good faith under the existing system.  Where a ARR or the various NC license terms are perfectly acceptable.  They don't just change without all parties agreeing.  So, mod authors would need to agree to the new terms, presumably when updating for 1.4, before those terms apply.

Ah yes. Good point - thank you!

[Gaarst]

1 hour ago, severedsolo said:

Don't mean to be rude, but you've completely dodged the question.

I assume the KSP forums count as a company website yes? Therefore any mods posted on the forums can be taken by Take-Two without permission, credit or payment. That's EXACTLY what that says.

"We will continue to support mods" is not the same as "we won't steal your content" (and again not to be rude, but that's exactly what that clause is. It's legalised theft).

 

I'm not familiar with licencing, but I don't think this is enforceable. Surely posting a mod on the forums can't override the licence (say NC for the sake of the example) included in the code itself? Especially when you consider that the KSP website doesn't host files: SpaceDock and GitHub are not related to Squad/TT (they have an agreement with Curse so it could be considered as a "company website" I guess), simply linking to an external hosting site doesn't (and shouldn't) engage you to anything.

Hosting/submissions aside, would Squad/TT have any rights on a mod whatsoever? A mod is written from A-Z by the modder, and even if it references functions from the game itself, most of the time it does not include any content from Squad; it's supposed to work with KSP but I don't see how this could justify any claims on it.

This segment looks a bit strange, especially the last sentence. How does that even work? What if the modder writes a licence in which he includes "No purported appropriation terms or licence modification by a hosting website shall have any force or effect" (or simply uses an ARR licence), who would have the last word?

 

Anyway, these ToS are TT's ToS, they were not written for KSP in particular, they are just your general EULA that you never read (otherwise you'd not use any software ever). Modding is a good part of what makes KSP alive, I don't think they will remove or restrict it. TT is not the Devil™: if something is not profitable they won't do it, they won't remove mods just because they want to make the playerbase suffer and witness their divine rights over the game.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Gaarst

[DefiantZombie]

1 hour ago, KSK said:

If that's not a clause banning modding, then it's doing an awfully good impression of one. 

Please do your research on Copyright and DMCA before stating false information. Reverse engineering is legal if the intent is to create inter-operable software and/or hardware.

https://www.eff.org/issues/coders/reverse-engineering-faq

Edited February 24, 2018 by DefiantZombie
Source citation.