Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 56
  1. #21
    Network Hub mentor07825's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaCat View Post
    Also, if you study/work at a university, chances are, that all you do are owned by said university, no matter how creative or such.
    That is true. We have to sign a document saying that all our project work is owned by the college and we waive all rights to IP and so forth.
    Can be found on Steam, Evolve and Eve Online.

    (•_•)

    ( •_•)>⌐■-■

    (⌐■_■)

  2. #22
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus soldant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Terra Australis Incognita
    Posts
    4,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    Which means that not only do they "own" information on your user profile as well as your forum posts, but they reserve the right to "adapt" that information to fit their needs.
    Really this seems more like saying that they'll edit your profile if they feel the need to, say because you've got a vulgar signature or something like that. Which pretty much any major company will do. You can dig out scary clauses from pretty much any EULA (I've dug out a very similar clause for the Steam Workshop which suggests that anything you make is also owned by Valve, but it doesn't stop people using it) but they're often not as serious as people postulate.

    Quote Originally Posted by squirrel View Post
    Takes UDK for instance, I think Epics makes it crystal clear that contents generated by UDK is essentially owned by author himself/herself, but any commercial distribution and Epics is entitled to a cut. And Epics maintains a black-and-white price list for that (or course, I think that when it comes to practice, it is highly negotiable).
    UDK is a bit different than what we're seeing here, since EA is mostly talking about modding while UDK is a full development kit. The license agreements aren't the same and don't translate; the agreement with UDK isn't that Epic owns your content, rather that if it's to be used for commercial purposes (beyond a particular sales value or something, I don't recall) you must pay Epic royalties for use of the engine and tools etc. They don't exert a claim to your actual content (and least not as far as I know).

    What we see here is that EA are taking ownership of your generated content such that they have the right to use it in various ways. Since the user generated content is on EA services, they're going to be doing this anyway, and when you extend that to content creation in game (say making a Spore creature or something) EA by the very necessity of the game are going to have to handle and distribute it in some way. All the legalese here seems to be setting up a framework to prevent ridiculous litigation cases, not "Let's steal ideas" as the OP seems to put forward. The agreement should also be read as a whole, which is something I haven't actually done, and plus I doubt that they can take away legal rights with a EULA.

  3. #23
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    3,690
    I'd imagine these are the same sort of terms that Blizzard used with WoW modding, that means when a modder adds something really useful to the UI, they can take that idea and develop their own version for the base UI without having to worry about being sued by the modder.

  4. #24
    Lesser Hivemind Node
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    876
    [QUOTE=soldant;118239]Really this seems more like saying that they'll edit your profile if they feel the need to, say because you've got a vulgar signature or something like that. Which pretty much any major company will do. You can dig out scary clauses from pretty much any EULA (I've dug out a very similar clause for the Steam Workshop which suggests that anything you make is also owned by Valve, but it doesn't stop people using it) but they're often not as serious as people postulate.

    Yes, that is the **spirit** of what they are saying here. Doubtless the "usual" intent is simply to allow them to monitor user profiles and forum responses for vulgar content or other blatant EULA violations and remove those posts.

    Unfortunately, that is not the **real limit** of the power this EULA affords them. That real power, because of this wording, allows them to buy/sell your information, alter it and use it in ANY way they see fit, whether for profit or otherwise. The intent is reasonable, but the rules allow for things that go far beyond the intent.

  5. #25
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus squirrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    Really this seems more like saying that they'll edit your profile if they feel the need to, say because you've got a vulgar signature or something like that. Which pretty much any major company will do.
    That depends. I believe that legistration is in place to protect the integrity of personal information, which essentially grants the individual control over one's own information, be it stored in and used by any organization, and game companies should of course not be exempted from such legal restriction. Over here we have something like Privacy Ordinance to regulate management of personal information, and is above all contracts signed within parties. That says EA cannot take EULA as the agreement to force us to relinquish our control over our own personal information.
    Last edited by squirrel; 22-04-2012 at 02:48 AM.

  6. #26
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    5,348
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    allows them to buy/sell your information, alter it and use it in ANY way they see fit, whether for profit or otherwise. The intent is reasonable, but the rules allow for things that go far beyond the intent.
    and.........................

  7. #27
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackcompany View Post
    , that is the **spirit** of what they are saying here. Doubtless the "usual" intent is simply to allow them to monitor user profiles and forum responses for vulgar content or other blatant EULA violations and remove those posts.

    Unfortunately, that is not the **real limit** of the power this EULA affords them. That real power, because of this wording, allows them to buy/sell your information, alter it and use it in ANY way they see fit, whether for profit or otherwise. The intent is reasonable, but the rules allow for things that go far beyond the intent.
    Same as with every other EULA, the clauses are wide-reaching to cover their backs in every possible eventuality. As has been stated many times, you'll find these types of clauses in all sorts of EULAs going back years. In fact I seem to recall there was a similar outrage about some Google service a while back; it turned out that they'd literally just copy-pasted a generic EULA from one of their other services.

  8. #28
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Kadayi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lagoon West, Vermilion Sands
    Posts
    4,459
    FUD ...10 char
    Why yes you're right I'm deliciously evil

    Tradition is the tyranny of dead men

    Steam:Kadayi Origin: Kadayi GFWL: Kadayi

    Probable Replicant

    *blush* I'm flattered by the attention boys, but please let's not make the thread about liddle old me


    Quote Originally Posted by Finicky View Post
    Kadayi will remain the worst poster on the interwebs.
    Gifmaster 4000 2014 Year of the Gif

    Persons of disinterest: Nalano, deano2099

  9. #29
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Rii's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Aussieland
    Posts
    1,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Squirrel
    Back to the topics, if you generate a piece of content based on someone's work, then the someone would be entitled to a share of commercial interest of your creation. It's that simple.
    The guy who gets 1 cent for every thousand words of English spoken is going to make a killing.

  10. #30
    Lesser Hivemind Node Feldspar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    634
    I saw something recently where someone had counted the words in the EULA and other licenses of various services, I believe both Google's and Apple's came out longer than the complete works of Shakespear.

    However you can basically assume any license will state:

    a) All software remains property of the company.
    b) Anything you do with the software belongs to the company.
    c) You can't make money off it.
    d) You can't use it to annoy anyone.
    e) Your soul/internal organs/pet platypus now belongs to the company.

    Anything else is just them trying to put everything in a form that avoids legal loopholes.

  11. #31
    Moderator QuantaCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    6,800
    I dont see the problem here. Or atleast, I dont see the problem here already existant everywhere.
    - Tom De Roeck.

    verse publications

    "Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."

    "It's frankly embarrassing. The mods on here are woeful."

    "I wrinkled my nose at QC being a mod."

    "At least he has some personality."

  12. #32
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus squirrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Feldspar View Post
    I saw something recently where someone had counted the words in the EULA and other licenses of various services, I believe both Google's and Apple's came out longer than the complete works of Shakespear.
    Isnt that you westerners saying sth like "Devil is in the details"?

    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaCat View Post
    I dont see the problem here. Or atleast, I dont see the problem here already existant everywhere.
    To me, wordings of EULA posted seems like EA owns absolute copyright over user-generated contents on their games. That, "ABSOLUTE", is the issue. If such term contradict with existing legislation, EA is obligated to explain what it intends with such terms.
    Last edited by squirrel; 21-04-2012 at 03:44 PM.

  13. #33
    Moderator QuantaCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    6,800
    youre supposed to call us long nosed.
    - Tom De Roeck.

    verse publications

    "Quantacat's name is still recognised even if he watches on with detached eyes like Peter Molyneux over a cube in 3D space, staring at it with tears in his eyes, softly whispering... Someday they'll get it."

    "It's frankly embarrassing. The mods on here are woeful."

    "I wrinkled my nose at QC being a mod."

    "At least he has some personality."

  14. #34
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus squirrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,704
    Quote Originally Posted by QuantaCat View Post
    youre supposed to call us long nosed.
    meaning? (hey I cannot type short reply)

  15. #35
    Lesser Hivemind Node
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    876
    My main problem is the failure to differentiate between user generated content, and user personal data. The information on your profile - and the words in your forum posts - are not content. They are personal information. EA does not own your personal information no matter where you post it. Nor does anyone else. To claim otherwise is a violation of personal, inalienable rights.

    Now, if they want to reserve just the rights to block you or your information from sites they own, or pull vulgar posts, fine. If they want to reserve the right to refuse you service, fine (so long as its not a refusal to let you play games you paid for at least offline.) If they want to restrict the forums you can use, fine.

    But to claim a right to take a user's profile information, and "adapt" it for future use...yeah, no. They need to walk that back a few steps into a more reasonable, more restricted, less overblown and less presumptuous form. Block or remove whatever you want, EA, its your forum, I respect that just as I respect the same here at RPS or on Steam.

    But claiming to own, and be able to adapt, my personal info for your use...I never wanted a profile with you. Never asked to have one. You made me have one, to play your game. Now you want to own the data you required me to post?

    Deal breaker. Period. I love gaming, but not as much as a I value privacy.

  16. #36
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Stockton-on-Tees, UK
    Posts
    2,403
    Your forum posts are definitely content, not personal information. As for personal information in the profile, there will be legal restrictions on what they can do with it that aren't mentioned in the EULA, so you probably don't have too much to worry about there.
    Irrelevant on further examination of the rest of the thread.

  17. #37
    Lesser Hivemind Node
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    876
    Fair point, Nathan. And another fair point: This seems to be an uncomfortably popular trend amongst media companies. Not just EA. Its disturbing and unfair and rightly unpopular.

    But its not just EA.

  18. #38
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Nalano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    NY f'n C
    Posts
    9,917
    Considering the fiasco with EA bans, people still use their forums?
    Nalano H. Wildmoon
    Director of the Friends of Nalano PAC
    Attorney at Lawl
    "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." - Woody Allen

  19. #39
    Network Hub Megagun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    254
    The problem with UGC is that you need to acquire the rights to distribute the UGC from the user, and it's probably safe to acquire the rights to use the UGC commercially, in case you're developing a sequel and the UGC from the previous game is being used in the sequel.

    How about this: all UGC inside a game is released under the GPL (or, say, an MIT/BSD license). That way, *everyone* benefits from everyone's work, and game developers can freely use the UGC inside their games.

  20. #40
    There are a lot of good points brought up here.

    I understand EA is not the only villain, but does that make it acceptable? Why should it have to come to a situation in court? Shouldn't it be handled before someone is victim of their intellectual work being snatched. Companies protect their own, then turn around and say the consumer doesn't have the same right?

    If it comes down to protecting profit, preventing someone else from making gains off their work, how is it that I can go to any number of sites and buy a hack? That's profit being gained from their work. So, just as with DRM, the legal consumer again gets the shaft, but now with the possibility of the company to profit from "legal" intellectual theft.

    Search Google, looks for EA shuts down hack site. Find anything?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •