To be honest, if I had a work that I intended to monetize I wouldn't post it in a public forum on the internet. Yeah, EA may have its legal paws all over it but, also, everybody with an internet connection can just rip it at will.Originally Posted by ieatrazorz
Plus EA ain't done shit yet.
Well, I hope you don't intend to use the Steam Workshop then, because it has the same wording. Does that mean Valve are an incredibly evil group out to own everything? Nope. Neither is EA in this case. The words are deliberately wide to encompass a wide range of actions but EA clearly isn't exercising those powers nor do they show any indication of doing so. Here's the dirty secret: 99% of it is absolutely worthless from an ownership aspect. Statistics? Useful, which is why Valve are fond of collecting statistics with Steam. Personal information? If you're using Origin or Steam it's required. A forum post about why the M16 is OP and helicopters are too hard to fly because you suck? Worth absolutely nothing.
Exactly this, EULAs cover a wide range of different things, and they're yet to be abused. I can pull out a scary clause from any EULA but it doesn't make a difference.
This one is always bugging me. Why you mates are always okay with Steam online control? I dont really see the legitimacy of it. Valve is running a RETAIL STORE to SELL games, not leasing them. Yet people seem to be brain-washed to accept such practice as if it is okay since "it is Valve doing it, in Valve's name we trust". Oh com'n. EA is not entitled to do it, nor UBI, nor 2K, nor any other publishers / retailers, that include Valve.
And I dont use Steam.
Kind of wondering why tags I didn't associate with this thread are now attached to it.
Anyway, thank you for seeing that point squirrel.
I think people are simply to complacent for their own good. How did governments get to be the corrupted mess it is now? People not speaking up and just accepting it at face value. Large corporations are the same way.
Keep saying it's okay to things such as this and the consumer will simply keep getting reared with an uneasy smile. EA and others have gotten away with as much as they have because people allow it. Soon consumers will have no rights, especially if we continue give up our right to legal action.
Edit: Question was answered.
Last edited by ieatrazorz; 22-04-2012 at 03:19 AM.
You do know that anyone can tag the thread, right?
Exactly how are you being "reared" by EA or anybody else? Show me one instance where a person has directly suffered as a result of the paragraphs you've quoted and prove to me that they are legally binding as tested in court. You've extracted a bunch of scary-looking EULA statements and decided they are superior to all other laws and are being abused. Not to mention that you're ignoring that most user content (particularly forum posts) have zero value anyway, so there's nothing really to exploit.
EDIT: Also I sure as hell hope you didn't add "theft" because theft != copyright infringement, which is what this would actually be. Seriously this whole theft = CI has to stop.
Last edited by soldant; 22-04-2012 at 02:35 AM. Reason: Pay attention.
Now I do, thank you.
The point I was making with that post, notice I did not specifically refer to UGC there, is that these TOSs protect the companies and only their interests, which is understandable but not at the cost of the consumers rights. I spent a good chunk of time looking stuff up before I wrote this. I did not find an instance where this has occurred. I would love to see it tested in court. I honestly don't think it would hold up.
I extracted two sections of a TOS. Please note 'terms of service' and 'end user liscence agreement' are not the same thing. There is a difference. I never said they were being exploited. I did not decide they are superior to all laws. I never said that, nor did I indicate it. I simply stated that EA has set stage to do something such as that then say 'But it's in the ToS'.
Would you consider waiving your right to sue okay? Something like sky diving, yes it's understandable. Something like a company dealing with digital entertainment and message boards? Why should companies like Sony and EA be allowed to do that on the broad terms they have set?
As far as UGC, yes, most of it has zero value. As for the stuff that doesn't? It's perfectly okay for a someone to take credit for it? Do you know how many hours can go into a single model or texture? Do you know how many hours can go into creating and mixing a song?
Yea I did add theft. Would you not consider the swiping of someones work that? That's the core of what I wrote about, the possibility of theft.
lolwut? You're making content for their game, utilising their tools, and distributing via their service. At which point is any of this yours? Or in other words, it's like taking a copy of someone's homework, switching their name for your own, then trying to claim it's an entirely new and original piece of work.
There's a pretty simple test you can apply to it. Remove everything you didn't do yourself, and if what's left no longer works, then you can't claim it's entirely your work. It's not really a new concept, what with having been around since the invention of the printing press and patent system.
I'm done. I don't know how people can miss the point of what I was trying to say. The inherent flaws with wording like that, and the abuse that can result from. If a majority wants to think it's alright for the possibility to exist, then great. If a majority wants to think it can't happen, then fine.
That doesn't necessarily make it valid, it'd have to be tested in court. Since that hasn't happened yet we're all speculating on the exact legal consequences of agreeing to such a thing (and a TOS and EULA aren't that much different; if you use this service/this software you agree to the following), and since no abuse has as yet taken place you're just speculating on what might happen.
If I was modding a game, they'd have to have at least partial credit because I'm using all their tools, their engine, and perhaps even many of their assets. If they also distribute the mod that I make then they have to have the right to do that. I know how many hours can go into creating assets but that doesn't change the fact that you're modding a game.
No, it isn't theft, just as copying a game or an MP3 isn't theft. It's copyright infringement. When I steal something from you, I deprive you of it. Say for example if I take away your keyboard so that you can't use it, you can say I've stolen it from you. If I copy your idea and claim it as my own, your idea is still with you. I can't literally take the idea away from you. But I can infringe on your intellectual property rights, which is why whenever filesharing cases or "stealing ideas" (like with EA copying W40K designs) it's talked about in terms of copyright or intellectually property infringement. It isn't theft, and the RIAA and friends are quick to make that distinction in court because they can seek obscene damages for minor infractions, while stealing a physical CD is probably less likely to net the same monetary punishment.
You can't steal an idea. It's not a good.
Firstly, don't ever say "mates". It doesn't work for anyone anywhere.
But they do kinda semi-not-quite lease games. When you buy one, you have to agree to the Steam Subscriber Agreement, the key word being "subscriber".
Technically, you never bought software. You bought discs and leased the right to use what was on them. Without the discs, you've effectively bought nothing.
The two quoted bits seem to contradict each other anyway.
The first is the scary bit, as it claims ownership over everything you create. That is a big deal (you could even maybe call it theft) as it means that EA own what you create and all the rights to it. That means theoretically that no only can they do what they want with it, but if you go of yourself and try to sell or use it elsewhere, they could sue you. I imagine they'd face major issues getting that to stand-up in a court of law though.
The second is more usual. It just licenses EA to use what you've created wherever they want. The copyright remains entirely with you.
You're not creating anything. You're modding their game. As the creators and owners of said game, they're the ones who own the rights to it. Technically, you should be asking them permission to use their work in the first place.
Not the case. As an obvious example, say I mod Mickey Mouse into an EA game. EA don't then own Mickey Mouse. Likewise if I create original elements as part of a mod, then EA don't automatically own them (unless they attempt to assert ownership, as they do here). Of course, you can't copyright ideas, and things like level design are a weird grey area, but for things like art assets and writing, the ownership remains with the creator.
What EA can do is demand a license to use that stuff as they see fit, to protect them in case they have anything similar planned in a sequel or another game. But what they shouldn't be able to do (but seem to be trying to claim as a right) is later sue you for using those assets in your own standalone game.
All print media is just a 'mod' of paper, but the stationary companies don't own Harry Potter.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
