jaysus Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) it totally does not matter what their intentions with such an EULA are, i doubt they want my swords lol, usually so far they just took some scripts and such from mods and used em in their games (and only once did they ever even acknowledge that in the case of weapon mod kits for FO3 and the use of the idea in FONV) the real problem really is simply that it creates legal problems for bethesda and valve for promoting piracy and gaining ad revenue and such from it, for mod uploaders for breaking national law or breaking the EULA by agreeing or disagreeing with the EULA, or even 3rd parties getting ripped of their assets and those that upload them for theftnoone knows what some new CEO might do with those rights, no idea what zenimaxes shareholders decide on their next meeting and no idea what someone over at lucas arts thinks of lightsabers in skyrim... we simply dont know, we only know that there is a little loophole that can kick loose all kinds of poopstorms in basicly all directions which all harm modding... especially should ACTA get enacted or SOPA revived (lets hope not for lokis sake)... @paranoia and conspiracywell whatever :Di just see a danger in the vague wording of that legal document you gotta sign (What about underage modders btw? they cant legally binding sign such an EULA lol)and even vague and seemingly lil dangers can become full blown whatever you wanna callit ragnaroeks Edited February 13, 2012 by jaysus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colourwheel Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) it totally does not matter what their intentions with such an EULA are, i doubt they want my swords lol, usually so far they just took some scripts and such from mods and used em in their games (and only once did they ever even acknowledge that in the case of weapon mod kits for FO3 and the use of the idea in FONV) the real problem really is simply that it creates legal problems for bethesda and valve for promoting piracy and gaining ad revenue and such from it, for mod uploaders for breaking national law or breaking the EULA by agreeing or disagreeing with the EULA, or even 3rd parties getting ripped of their assets and those that upload them for theftnoone knows what some new CEO might do with those rights, no idea what zenimaxes shareholders decide on their next meeting and no idea what someone over at lucas arts thinks of lightsabers in skyrim... we simply dont know, we only know that there is a little loophole that can kick loose all kinds of poopstorms in basicly all directions which all harm modding... especially should ACTA get enacted or SOPA revived (lets hope not for lokis sake)... @paranoia and conspiracywell whatever :Di just see a danger in the vague wording of that legal document you gotta sign (What about underage modders btw? they cant legally binding sign such an EULA lol)and even vague and seemingly lil dangers can become full blown whatever you wanna callit ragnaroeks Hiya Jaysus :) ACTA and SOPA are evil for sure. Edited February 13, 2012 by colourwheel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redxavier Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) Their intent rests entirely in the rights they grant themselves. Nothing more nothing less. It has nothing to do with protecting their assets, because SW has no assets, and strictly speaking anything you create in the CK isn't BGS assets neither. It's 'new materials', as it states that are 'created'. Which implies new s*** that is not theirs. bulls***. The CK's principle function is to work with Skyrim assets using the Skyrim engine. It's not a game creator nor it is a game engine creator. You cannot make an argument that it's not there to protect Bethesda's stuff; the CK is the access platform for everything they've done in this game. And not just assets but game mechanics and code, they don't want that stuff being stolen by other game companies. The CK EULA is there to say, no, our stuff is our stuff still because you're using our software to modify our code and bring your creation into Skyrim. The only thing they 'own' is the esp, since that's the only thing that's created by the CK. That's your 'new materials'. What the SW EULA says is irrelevant. Modders don't sign anything and don't have to use its uploading service. By not uploading things onto SW they thereby void any of its terms (which are a little loose). This is about the CK license agreement that Jaysus thinks was written so that his models could be used and sold without gaining him any money the very second it's been loaded into the CK, to the point where he's openly threatening people. Edited February 13, 2012 by redxavier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 It's pretty amusing to me to sit back and watch the modding community discovering copyright and all that it entails as though it were a fresh subject worthy of hot debate. Amusing because this has been raging for two decades now in the MUD community for exactly the same reason. The licensing that comes with the programs is draconian and vague. Bottom line is, the EULA says they grant themselves a license to use what you generate with it. They cannot grant themselves ownership of it without a written transfer of copyright under US law. Or a valid Work for Hire agreement. Something which I'm pretty sure none of us has with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghogiel Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) bulls***. The CK's principle function is to work with Skyrim assets using the Skyrim engine. It's not a game creator nor it is a game engine creator. You cannot make an argument that it's not there to protect Bethesda's stuff; the CK is the access platform for everything they've done in this game. And not just assets but game mechanics and code, they don't want that stuff being stolen by other game companies. The CK EULA is there to say, no, our stuff is our stuff still because you're using our software to modify our code and bring your creation into Skyrim. The only thing they 'own' is the esp, since that's the only thing that's created by the CK. That's your 'new materials'. It's not BS, the SW EULA is what it is. And any rights they grant themselves that do not pertain to their own assets, and this goes for the CK as well, that pertain to assets users have created, pertain to those users assets and are not there to protect BGS assets from being stolen, they already own the copyright to all things, code, assets, IP etc to do with Skyrim. At no point have they given any special license to users really. In reality chopping up their assets and redistributing them packed in mods is copyright infringement, they do encourage modding, but if they so wished could request any unauthorised distribution of their assets to be removed or otherwise declare it infringement, with or without the CKs EULA. It's their stuff and they never granted a license for such things specifically. I am aware how the term 'materials' is defined in the CK. What the SW EULA says is irrelevant. Modders don't sign anything and don't have to use its uploading service. By not uploading things onto SW they thereby void any of its terms (which are a little loose). This is about the CK license agreement that Jaysus thinks was written so that his models could be used and sold without gaining him any money the very second it's been loaded into the CK, to the point where he's openly threatening people.No it is not irreverent. Modders who upload there agree to those terms set out in the EULA. http://steamcommunity.com/workshop/workshopsubmitinfo Edited February 13, 2012 by Ghogiel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaysus Posted February 14, 2012 Author Share Posted February 14, 2012 (edited) Bottom line is, the EULA says they grant themselves a license to use what you generate with it...which is totally nuts!beth has been doing it for a decade now too but with the introduction of SWs EULA they really pushed it... @colourheya sweety pie :) @ghogielcompletely agree @redxavierto the point where he's openly threatening people. who am i openly threatening?that x dude? who honestly admitted to modifying my mod with the CK and complains i dont have a right to not permit that due to the EULA? ya, i threatened to report him and left possible further consequences open... if he doesnt bring up the subject again and i dont see his mod anywhere i wont do zip... are you honestly complaining about that? ...a car thief cant really complain to a judge about the threatening nature of him possibly going to jail for his crimes either... i guess you simply dont get my idea of the problem... its not about me being a paranoid conspiracy nut (lol colour thx -.-) but that there simply is a problem... you can of course argue that it aint a problem, but why then waste time on this "no problem"... do something productive with your time or please show me that we dont have to worry, that beth is only out for the good of mankind trying to create a paradise for us all and them taking control over literally thousands of assets doesnt constitue a threat to personal property rights at all...honestly, what do you think is more likely? that beth only put such weird rules in to defend itself and the modding community from a non existant problem which is covered in lots of other trade rules, ip laws, civil laws and so on yet or that this whole EULA thing could actually be used to make money of gamers creativity for free basicly? that all people at bethesda, valve and the not named affiliates are all faihtful, good and loving people who dont have a single bad thought, are free of guilt and would never do wrong? or rather that a few of them are just as dikisch as the rest of us and would sell your grandma if they could (well if you put a picture of your grandma in the CK they kinda could yet) edit:btw, why is bethesda the only company that has such a ridiculous EULA? not even unreal has one like that... Edited February 14, 2012 by jaysus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natterforme Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 I think that one of the reasons that Bethesda does not use or will not use modded content in DLC or in new projects is twofold. One: they know that modders will call them out on it when it is discovered that they are making us pay for our own(collective) repackaged content. The second is that Bethesda is a game company. The second one of the level designers or concept artists or whoever recommends that they use modded content from the community in their game to either save time or because it is done better, the rest of the team at the table will look at them and say: "We are a game company. We make our own stuff. If the mod community made it better then we should have worked harder to begin with." And considering the good PR that Todd Howard has generated for Skyrim since its reveal, I would personally like to believe that he would simply respond to any similar ideas with a big fat "FUS RO DAH!" :woot: If they were going to repackage our content into DLC for Skyrim, they would have had mounted horse combat to begin with( still dont know why that never got implemented in the first place, took the team a week once they got the go ahead(if the mod jam video is anything to go by)). The short answer is that if Bethesda did this it would make them look bad! :happy: -Natterforme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Bottom line is, the EULA says they grant themselves a license to use what you generate with it...which is totally nuts!beth has been doing it for a decade now too but with the introduction of SWs EULA they really pushed it...Nah, it's not totally nuts. IT makes perfect sense actually. That EULA is there to protect them from being sued because they used your idea in a mod. Were it not for the extremely liberal licensing they take with our kit generated content, they'd be hanging open to lawsuits up the ass over every little thing perceived to have been taken from modders. btw, why is bethesda the only company that has such a ridiculous EULA? not even unreal has one like that...They aren't, not by a long shot. I mean, hell, look at Valve's ToS for TF2 mods in the Workshop and then tell me Bethesda is the evil one here. BTW, no, those terms aren't applicable for Skyrim. My understanding of copyright is such that they can't run counter to the EULA for the game and/or CK and impose their own terms over what Bethesda has already applied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghogiel Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 The terms on SW are applicable to the point where if one of those rights that SW grants itself is in direct contradiction to one of the rights granted to users as set forth in the CKs EULA. the key line in the SW EULA is thus "With respect to Third Party Games, the end user license or subscription terms for the Third Party Game may provide to You or third parties different ownership rights and responsibilities for Contributions. " Of which there aren't really any ownership rights being granted to the users, so that is debatable. Secondly, all assets which are not covered by BGS CK EULA are definitely bound by the SW EULA, as there is nothing to void that agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthmoor Posted February 14, 2012 Share Posted February 14, 2012 Of which there aren't really any ownership rights being granted to the users, so that is debatable.No need. Ownership is yours by default and Bethesda (or Valve for that matter) can't claim it without some kind of written transfer. Realistically speaking, even the EULA's for both sites as they exist now are highly suspect instruments in what they simply assume for themselves. It would be sort of like Microsoft claiming they could do as they pleased with any documents you created with Word. The only reason nobody cares is because there's no money involved here. Were it to go to court, the situation changes immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts