Updated Terms Notice & Privacy Policy

[The_Rocketeer]

I found some more shrapnel to throw in the well:

EULAs exist, amongst other reasons, to make sure that the product/service is being used for the purpose it was sold to be used for, i.e. entertainment, and not for someone else's profit. Besides the obvious commercial rights/intellectual properties issues for the producers, there could be revenues and customs and far-reaching legal implications for companies that allowed undeclared incomes to proliferate amongst their userbase. This would be really, really bad if it wasn't legally established that a producer/service provider was outright saying this was against the terms of their agreement with the customer.

So long as you're using the game for fun and not for profit, I don't think there's a single thing to worry about. I'm not denying there are questions that are raised for fanfic works created for non-commercial reasons, but I find it hard to believe that these would become targets even if they do technically exist outside the bounds of the EULA. Where is the harm?

Edited March 3, 2018 by The_Rocketeer

[klgraham1013]

1 hour ago, The_Rocketeer said:

I found some more shrapnel to throw in the well:

EULAs exist, amongst other reasons, to make sure that the product/service is being used for the purpose it was sold to be used for, i.e. entertainment, and not for someone else's profit. Besides the obvious commercial rights/intellectual properties issues for the producers, there could be revenues and customs and far-reaching legal implications for companies that allowed undeclared incomes to proliferate amongst their userbase. This would be really, really bad if it wasn't legally established that a producer/service provider was outright saying this was against the terms of their agreement with the customer.

So long as you're using the game for fun and not for profit, I don't think there's a single thing to worry about. I'm not denying there are questions that are raised for fanfic works created for non-commercial reasons, but I find it hard to believe that these would become targets even if they do technically exist outside the bounds of the EULA. Where is the harm?

So, what about EJ_SA making money on Twitch playing KSP?  I doubt they'll seriously go after him, but the vague nature of such things does little but question their overreaching necessity.  There was a time before EULAs and everyone managed to survive then.  Is it really, actually necessary for them to reach so far?

[Yakuzi]

3 hours ago, panzer1b said:

Anyways, all that aside, if it really comes down to it, i still have like 3 backups of KSP 1.3.1 on various hard drives, and noones gonna stop me from playing something ive legally bought EULA or not (worst case i just wont get the recent updates)...

Unfortunately, according to the EULA, KSP is licensed not sold, so by playing any version of KSP (whether it's 1.3.x or 0.7.3 or anything in between) you accept the new EULA:

Quote

THE SOFTWARE IS LICENSED, NOT SOLD. BY OPENING, DOWNLOADING, INSTALLING, COPYING, OR OTHERWISE USING THE SOFTWARE, AND ANY OTHER MATERIALS INCLUDED WITH THE SOFTWARE, YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES COMPANY TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, INC.

 

And here's the statement from Daniele Peloggio (= @UomoCapra?) on the KSP steam website:

Quote

Please note that the EULA[www.take2games.com] for Kerbal Space Program will be changed on March 6, 2018. Please read this agreement in its entirety. You must agree with the terms of the EULA including the Privacy Policy[www.take2games.com] and Terms of Service[www.take2games.com] to play Kerbal Space Program.

If you don't accept the new EULA, it means you're terminating the license provided by Take Two, and, as described by the EULA, you are required to destroy and/or delete any and all copies of KSP Software in your possession, custody, or control.

NB: IANAL

Edited March 3, 2018 by Yakuzi

[The_Rocketeer]

1 hour ago, klgraham1013 said:

Is it really, actually necessary for them to reach so far?

I'm in no way setting myself up as an expert, but to the best of my limited understanding...

In short, yes. EULAs aren't intended to directly benefit or protect the user at all, they provide legal protection for the producer/provider from action by governments, lawmakers and corporate rivals. The potential costs of not establishing these matters over every transaction, and clarifying the relationship between every customer and the producer/provider, under the worst circumstances, could backfire on producer/provider in the most serious of ways. It's just (very cheap) insurance.

[Chemp]

4 hours ago, klgraham1013 said:

That's how EULAs work.  You accept them without even knowing it.

If you want to know how things pan out without having to accept the new EULA, you can always read the forum without signing in. Which is more or less what I plan on doing.

On 2/25/2018 at 1:57 AM, JPLRepo said:

No I can't comment on this; but have passed on all the concerns to the Comms and Legal Teams who hopefully can provide you with a clearer response next week when their offices are open.

I had high hopes for an answer after this comment, but a week has passed and there's no word from Squad. On the other hand, the KSP Weekly stated that they had added an Author field to the missions we can create with the DLC. That's a positive signal in my opinion, it shows that they care about crediting users for their content.

[AngryBadger]

It's probably a good idea for Squad or T2 clarify this ASAP, since the negative reviews have started on Steam. 

Edited March 4, 2018 by AngryBadger

[StarStreak2109]

I doubt there'll be any official comment, because then T2 or Squad would give legal advice on which they could get sued... And given the fact that they sit on the long end of the stick......

[TiktaalikDreaming]

55 minutes ago, StarStreak2109 said:

I doubt there'll be any official comment, because then T2 or Squad would give legal advice on which they could get sued... And given the fact that they sit on the long end of the stick......

And therein lies the problem.  This is why I figured we'd be in for a significant wait.  Certain topics you should never give advice in, due to the ramifications, include legal matters, right at the top.  If they come back with something, I expect it will be prefaced with "In <country A>, this can be ...." as well.  Because the terms will vary from place to place, as will how enforceable certain clauses are.

23 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

I agree with you on this point. But here is the thing, part tools isn't distributed with the core KSP software. It's a free 3rd party tool for Unity only available through the forum. (duh) It would be bad, if not fatal, practice to revoke any copyrights by using a tool created for some other companies software. That type of behavior may even breach Unity's EULA and Squad wouldn't what to do that. If KSP had an internal part tools like importer, then I would be very worried.

Well, here's the thing.  Part Tools isn't third party.  It's produced by Squad.  Yes, it's a set of scripts for Unity.  But it's most definitely made by the KSP dev team, for KSP only, and is presumably owned by Squad/Take2.  Take note that similar sized script bundles for various tasks are available for Unity as paid software.  Unity is quite happy for you to license things based on Unity, it is after all, their business model.

And I do actually think any of our concerns would die a slow death if ever tested in court, for all sorts of reasons.  I'd just like the clarification before anyone needs to go to court.  I don't think they could defend the "but it was made in Part Tools" in a court.  But the thing is, they could try, and most of us would cave in because we can't afford to fight it.

[KSK]

3 hours ago, StarStreak2109 said:

I doubt there'll be any official comment, because then T2 or Squad would give legal advice on which they could get sued... And given the fact that they sit on the long end of the stick......

There's something deeply wrong with that situation. 

For background, dealing with contracts of various kinds is part of what my department at work does. If we see a clause that we don't like or don't understand, very often the best way to resolve that is simply to ask the other party why they included it. Sometime's there's a good reason that we hadn't considered because it turns out that the other party need the contract to cover various specific situations that we weren't aware of. At that point we're in a good place for further negotiation - perhaps we can agree to a restricted version of that clause, or can agree to the original version, provided that they can agree to tweak another clause somewhere else in the contract to protect our interests.

However, if the other party can't provide a reasonable explanation for that clause they wanted, then we would tend to regard it with a somewhat jaundiced eye and at the very least, we may end up pushing back harder on the rest of the contract, since we don't have much option but to take a pessimistic approach to it. Not knowing what the other party wants from a contract isn't the best way of building a good working relationship with them, either.

In the present example, it appears that Take Two are throwing a contract at us on a take-it-or-leave-it-basis without being willing or able to explain that contract. Which would be ridiculous in a business-to-business relationship and is egregious in a business-to-consumer relationship, because our ability to negotiate a more favourable contract is severely restricted.

12 hours ago, Yakuzi said:

If you don't accept the new EULA, it means you're terminating the license provided by Take Two, and, as described by the EULA, you are required to destroy and/or delete any and all copies of KSP Software in your possession, custody, or control.

If that's correct then so be it. No more KSP for me and (probably of more concern to Take Two) no expansion pack purchase either.

And yes, there will doubtless be other games that I'll look at in future with similarly overbearing and overreaching EULA's attached. As other folks have pointed out on this thread, Take Two are hardly unique amongst game publishers in their liberal over-application of legal boilerplate. However, just because something is standard practice, that doesn't make it good practice. I'll just have to decide whether I care about playing a new game enough to agree to the over-the-top EULA. You can bet that I'll be disinclined to engage with the game community and developers at anything more than a superficial level though, without taking a long look at what I'm signing up to.

Because, at the end of the day, that's the only real negotiating position we have. Agree to the terms or walk away. 

Edited March 4, 2018 by KSK

[klgraham1013]

1 hour ago, KSK said:

Take Two are throwing a contract at us on a take-it-or-leave-it-basis without being willing or able to explain that contract. Which would be ridiculous in a business-to-business relationship and is egregious in a business-to-consumer relationship, because our ability to negotiate a more favourable contract is severely restricted.

Always been my biggest problem with EULAs.

1 hour ago, KSK said:

just because something is standard practice, that doesn't make it good practice.

Words to live by.

[Benjamin Kerman]

Well, seeing as it is March 4th, Doomsday is less than 2 days away. I wish you all well on your respective journeys. I, for one, will probably not be visiting the forums anymore after tomorrow. @SQUAD I'm sorry, but you've lost my respect. It was great while it lasted. 

TTI: You've lost a customer. No DLC's, no more game. 

My mods will, from this day forward, be strictly on GitHub. No links from the forum, find me there. I wish everyone well yet again. 

[KSK]

3 minutes ago, Benjamin Kerman said:

Well, seeing as it is March 4th, Doomsday is less than 2 days away. I wish you all well on your respective journeys. I, for one, will probably not be visiting the forums anymore after tomorrow. @SQUAD I'm sorry, but you've lost my respect. It was great while it lasted. 

TTI: You've lost a customer. No DLC's, no more game. 

My mods will, from this day forward, be strictly on GitHub. No links from the forum, find me there. I wish everyone well yet again. 

A 'like' isn't exactly the appropriate response here but its the only one on offer. Hopefully things won't come to this but if they do - well good luck to you too and my respect for holding to your principles.

[The_Rocketeer]

Just now, Benjamin Kerman said:

My mods will, from this day forward, be strictly on GitHub. No links from the forum, find me there. I wish everyone well yet again. 

I'm confused.

So are these going to be unsupported, no-further-development mods just maintained for download as the current release? I mean, otherwise it'll be pretty hard for you to deny you've played the game since the new EULA goes live, which if you do you'll have already accepted it. And once the next major release comes out they'll all be broken.

So why bother leaving the forums?

[softweir]

15 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

I'm confused.

So are these going to be unsupported, no-further-development mods just maintained for download as the current release? I mean, otherwise it'll be pretty hard for you to deny you've played the game since the new EULA goes live, which if you do you'll have already accepted it. And once the next major release comes out they'll all be broken.

So why bother leaving the forums?

He's leaving the forums so he doesn't have to agree to the new T&C and EULA. I assume he will continue to maintain and develop mods, but will host them in GitHub and won't link to them here.

[Ultimate Steve]

And one last thing - if I host stories on this forum, TTI owns them, but what if I hosted them somewhere else? Would the screenshots and the use of the Kerbal name still mean TTI owns the story?

Because if I can make sure that I own the story I will, but if I can't do anything about it at all, then I'll be really sad but I'll probably still continue writing.

[Gaarst]

Quote

The application is licensed not sold, to you for use only under the terms of this license. DEPORTED B.V. (“DEPORTED”) reserves all rights not expressly granted to you. The product that is subject to this license is referred to as the “Licensed Application” which may include associated software components, media, printed materials, and “online” or electronic documentation.

[...]

2. LIMITED USE LICENSE.
DEPORTED grants you, and you accept, the non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable, non-commercial, limited right and license, during the term, to copy, install, access and use one copy of the Licensed Application solely and exclusively for your personal use [...] Your license confers no title or ownership in the Licensed Application and should not be construed as a sale of any rights in the Licensed Application. This Agreement shall also apply to any patches or updates you may obtain for the Licensed Application.

3. OWNERSHIP.
All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Licensed Application (including but not limited to any patches and updates) and any and all copies thereof (including but not limited to any titles, computer code, themes, objects, characters, character names, stories, dialog, catch phrases, locations, concepts, artwork, animation, sounds, musical compositions, audio-visual effects, methods of operation, moral rights, any related documentation, and “applets” incorporated into the Licensed Application) are owned by DEPORTED, affiliates of DEPORTED or DEPORTED’s licensors. [...] You acknowledge that DEPORTED owns all rights in and to the Licensed Application, including, but not limited to worldwide statutory and common law rights associated with [...] (b) works of authorship, including copyrights, copyright applications, copyright registrations and “moral rights;” [...] and (e) divisions, continuations, renewals, derivative works, and re-issuances of any of the foregoing, now existing or acquired in the future.

[...]

7. YOU SHALL NOT:
You hereby acknowledge and agree that you shall not use the Licensed Application for any purpose other than for non-commercial personal enjoyment, entertainment purposes, and that you shall use the Licensed Application in accordance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations. Except as expressly provided herein you shall not, and shall not permit any third party to:
[...]
7.2 Use the Licensed Application, or permit use of the Licensed Application, on more than one device at the same time.
7.3 Make copies of the Licensed Application or any part thereof, [...]
7.4 Copy the Licensed Application onto a hard drive or other storage device except as specifically permitted herein.
7.5 Use the Licensed Application, or permit use of the Licensed Application, in a network, multi-user arrangement or remote access arrangement, including any online use, except as otherwise explicitly provided by the Licensed Application.
[...]
7.7 Reverse engineer, derive source code, modify, decompile, disassemble, or create derivative works of the Licensed Application, in whole or in part.
[...]
7.9 Create, develop, modify, distribute or use any software programs, in order to gain (or allow others to gain) advantage of or access to the Licensed Application in any on-line multiplayer game settings including but not limited to local area network or any other network play or on the Internet.

[...]

11. TERM & TERMINATION.
[...] Additionally, DEPORTED and/or its licensors, reserve the right to change, suspend, remove, or disable access to or elements of the Licensed Application at any time without notice. In no event will DEPORTED be liable for the removal of or disabling of access to the Licensed Application or any elements or portions thereof. DEPORTED may also impose limits on the use of or access to certain elements or portions of the Licensed Application, in any case and without notice or liability. YOU AGREE THAT DEPORTED SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGE CAUSED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, BY ANY SUCH TERMINATION AND/OR SUSPENSION. IN THE EVENT THAT YOUR ACCOUNT IS TERMINATED, YOU WILL HAVE NO FURTHER ACCESS TO THE LICENSED APPLICATION AND YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE ANY REFUND OR REIMBURSEMENT FOR PAYMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH YOUR ACCOUNT.

Please read the above. Scary isn't it?

This EULA explicitly prohibits you from:

• claiming ownership of your KSP copy (2),
• having multiple installs of KSP (2 and 7.3),
• having KSP on a hard drive (7.4),
• using KSP on more than one device (7.2),
• claiming any rights on any derivative work based on the KSP IP (3),
• playing KSP in any form of multiplayer whatsoever (7.5 and 7.9),
• writing any kind of mods (7.7),
• complaining if Squad voids your ownership of the game whenever they feel like it (11).

Think about how awful KSP would be if you had to follow this EULA to be able to play the game. Now think about how awful KSP was these last 7 years when this very EULA was that of KSP.

Edited March 4, 2018 by Gaarst

[Derb]

12 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

writing any kind of mods (7.7),

 

12 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

7.7 Reverse engineer, derive source code, modify, decompile, disassemble, or create derivative works of the Licensed Application, in whole or in part.

 

To my knowledge, most (if not all) mods require none of those actions to be done to the Licensed Application.

 

EDIT: I'm dumb you were doing a sarcasm. Also very good point, because 7.7 does sound like a scary mod ban, but when parsed correctly it actually isn't.

Edited March 4, 2018 by Derb

[obney kerman]

Well, looking at this thread and... PANIC!!!!! PANIC!!!!!!! FANFICS ARE DOOMED! OLD SAVES ARE DOOMED!!!!!!!!!!!! RUN!!!!!!!!!!

[ble210]

I'm a corporate attorney.  I don't work for Take Two and so I don't have direct knowledge of what is going on, but maybe my experiences can offer a little context into why the EULA has changed as well as what it means for KSP players.

A corporate legal department's primary mission is to reduce legal risk as much as possible.  For a company like Take Two, whose income and profitability depend upon its intellectual property, then that means the legal department is going to do everything it can to make sure the IP is protected. Any new development in case law or experiences of other companies as relates to IP, no matter what industry they are in, will result in a company like Take Two updating their policies to reflect these changes, and to implement policies and language that is as protective as can possibly be.   Legal departments do this because the law is absolutely punishing for companies that don't properly and actively protect their IP; this is an area of law that lawyers are going to be particularly worried about.  The legal department isn't updating the language of the EULA out of some desire to take future punitive actions against players; it is doing it out of caution and worry that not doing so could possibly impair the company's rights to its IP (no matter how low the probability of the IP actually being in danger- a corporate legal department will take any action to reduce any amount of risk).

Take Two's management, as well as Squad's, probably aren't even aware of the specific changes to the EULA or the reason's for them.  The updated EULA will thus have no impact upon how the game is developed or managed online.  Again, these things are done by the legal department for the sole purpose of minimizing legal risks.  There is no nefarious plan in motion here to somehow exert control over players or their actions online.  The most important asset (aside from IP rights) of a company like Squad or Take Two is its customer goodwill; there is absolutely no way a company like them is going to destroy that goodwill by taking any of the actions that have been imagined of in this thread.

So long as you don't reverse-engineer the code and sell competing products online, then Take Two and Squad aren't going to do anything of consequence to you.  You are free to mod, post videos online, or do anything else you already have been.  The actual, real-life impact the new EULA is going to have on you is absolutely zero.

[ThirdOfSeven]

3 minutes ago, ble210 said:

So long as you don't reverse-engineer the code and sell competing products online, then Take Two and Squad aren't going to do anything of consequence to you.  You are free to mod, post videos online, or do anything else you already have been.  The actual, real-life impact the new EULA is going to have on you is absolutely zero.

We at least wanna hear this from somebody working for Squad or Take Two. Also we wanna see who to ask (and have answers before Sun lifetime isn't gone) if we have any particular questions related to their IP and their use. Some FAQ or guidelines about what is permitted to do (or even encouraged to do). We are just people who wanna minimize any risk to get channel strike, content removed, account banned for something listed in EULA or ToS. We don't know if somebody from staff will take some actions on their will without anybody knowing (like they don't know about EULA as you say...). Things like this were happening in the past with other companies (I will not post names).

[ble210]

3 minutes ago, ThirdOfSeven said:

We at least wanna hear this from somebody working for Squad or Take Two. Also we wanna see who to ask (and have answers before Sun lifetime isn't gone) if we have any particular questions related to their IP and their use. Some FAQ or guidelines about what is permitted to do (or even encouraged to do). We are just people who wanna minimize any risk to get channel strike, content removed, account banned for something listed in EULA or ToS. We don't know if somebody from staff will take some actions on their will without anybody knowing (like they don't know about EULA as you say...). Things like this were happening in the past with other companies (I will not post names).

In all likelihood Take Two's and Squad's management are either probably not aware of the specific changes or are not fully sure what the specific changes actually mean.  And it is highly unlikely that the legal department is going to issue a clarification, out of worry that doing so could be construed as limiting the changes to the EULA, and thus limiting the protections to the IP (again, a legal department will, first and foremost, act to minimize all risks and not create new ones).

I understand your concerns.  It sucks that EULA's like this exist, as they (justifiably) seem draconian.  But the legal department is doing so because if they don't publish EULA's like this, then the company will be in significant legal and financial jeopardy.  Its a result of some very strict and punishing IP laws (it'd be nice if the law weren't as strict as they are, but that's the environment that legal departments find themselves and have to operate within).

I would rate the likelihood of any punitive action being taken against the player-base as a result of the new EULA to be as near zero as possible.  You are of course open to take any course of action you like and to request clarification (although I doubt any clarification comes), but I'm going to continue operating as though the new EULA does not meaningfully change anything for me, because in practice it really won't.

[Manwith Noname]

2 hours ago, Gaarst said:

...snip...

Sorry, I can't let that slide. You've deliberately mislead people I feel by not including the entire sentences and paragraphs from the parts you want to appear more intimidating than they actually are. Prime example being 7.3. You failed to include the last part that says, "with the intention of illegal distribution".

This has previously been discussed on these forums and Squad made alterations to the EULA specifically to make it clearer and allow people to have multiple installs for personal use.

I'm all for playing the devil's advocate at times because...why not but deliberately misrepresenting the terms in this way is not cool.

[DAL59]

2 hours ago, Gaarst said:

having multiple installs of KSP (2 and 7.3),

The current EULA says this too, but the squad staff encourage it.  I agree with @Gaarst, this might not equate to any actual thing happening, even if it looks alarming.

[Gaarst]

19 minutes ago, Manwith Noname said:

Sorry, I can't let that slide. You've deliberately mislead people I feel by not including the entire sentences and paragraphs from the parts you want to appear more intimidating than they actually are. Prime example being 7.3. You failed to include the last part that says, "with the intention of illegal distribution".

This has previously been discussed on these forums and Squad made alterations to the EULA specifically to make it clearer and allow people to have multiple installs for personal use.

I'm all for playing the devil's advocate at times because...why not but deliberately misrepresenting the terms in this way is not cool.

That was intended. All legalese sounds scary, and every EULAs are written to allow the game developers/owners to ruin your day. Even if you include the parts that I snipped, it still is very intimidating.

My point is that even though Squad or Take-Two has all the rights on their product, it doesn't mean that they will enforce every single clause of their T&Cs as strictly as possible (as you said, they have altered the EULA several times). They can, but I don't think they will.

 

Modding is a good part of what makes KSP alive, KSP has zero DRM, KSP's code has been written to be as open to modding as possible since the beginning, KSP developers have supported modding since Alpha, KSP is strictly single-player... Buying a licence and banning modding to force people to buy DLC (alienating a good part of the game audience) is a terrible decision from a business perspective, even more so for KSP specifically. The case of GTA V is completely different (a mod that allegedly reverse-engineered the game code and that interfered with existent online microtransactions), and everything that may have justified T2's decision to send a C&D back then is absent in KSP.

Also remember that this new EULA is T2's EULA, it was not written specifically for KSP and neither Squad nor T2 have ever expressed any intent to ban modding from KSP (if anything, all statements regarding this issue seem to indicate the devs wish to keep modding as free as possible).

Edited March 4, 2018 by Gaarst

[KSK]

33 minutes ago, ble210 said:

I understand your concerns.  It sucks that EULA's like this exist, as they (justifiably) seem draconian.  But the legal department is doing so because if they don't publish EULA's like this, then the company will be in significant legal and financial jeopardy.  Its a result of some very strict and punishing IP laws (it'd be nice if the law weren't as strict as they are, but that's the environment that legal departments find themselves and have to operate within).

Perhaps this is better taken to private messages but as an honest question, motivated by professional curiosity, which strict and punishing IP laws did you have in mind? I ask as an IP manager for a tech transfer office but one who's more familiar with patent law (and European patent law at that) than copyright law. Hence, whilst I appreciate that you can only deal in generalities, I would be genuinely interested in your take on corporate risk perception in this context if you had the time to chat. 

It could be useful to me for future reference.