[closed] Companion app for iPhone

[TheKraken]

Hello everyone, I was thinking about releasing a companion app for 7 Days to Die for iPhone on AppStore that will contain information about items from the game, and how to craft them. However, I'm not sure about the law aspect of it, namely the application will need to have some assets extracted from the game. Those assets would need to be included in the app. Since I'm not the author of those assets, I'm not really sure if I'm allowed to use them that way?

 

From my POV the situation is similar to when a gamer shares a gameplay or posts a screenshot from the game. The video/image contains artwork that is not done by the gamer, yet the gamer can post it and even make money off of it (e.g. when streaming).

 

If the game assets could be used this way, is it possible to get some clear answer from someone that has the authority to allow for such use? I would like to attach this answer for AppStore review process. But if you think I shouldn't use assets from the game for such use (companion app), then I'd like to know that as well. Thanks for any info!

Edited January 20, 2022 by TheKraken (see edit history)

[DEATH MECHANIC]

@%$# "safety net" apple

[ricp]

I think it's great you are asking first and not just going ahead and assuming. That's good development right there.

 

I don't know the licencing specifically surrounding 7DtD, but in general, you should be able to put any content on the app, but graphics may be a problem. So, for example, there would be no legal recourse should you say "X provides you with Y health, and needs A and B to craft", what you might fall down on is if you used the same image for X as in the game, that would be a copyrighted image - unless stated otherwise by TFP.

 

That said, you look around at the numerous wikis and private hobbyist pages that cover the game and you'll see those images are used anyway and I can't imagine everyone asked TFP if that was OK.

 

The above is from my own experience when developing "fan" websites, I get that legal issues relate to certain jurisdictions (ie; US, EU, etc) and TFP may have already addressed the use of their content already.

[TheKraken]

> but graphics may be a problem

 

Yes. Worst case scenario, I can put placeholders instead of real images, but this will cripple the app.

 

I can see that TFP has already addressed some of the issues for making gameplay videos:

 

https://thefunpimps.com/video-policy/

 

(tl;dr -- gamers can create gameplay videos and monetize it in some ways)

 

But there's no mention about any direct use of assets in a mobile app. I would be greatful if anyone could clarify this, or at least point me to some direction which has more information about my issue.

Edited January 8, 2022 by TheKraken (see edit history)

[BarryTGash]

Probably best to just email them: https://7daystodie.com/thepimps/

[TheKraken]

2 minutes ago, BarryTGash said:

Probably best to just email them: https://7daystodie.com/thepimps/

Yes, I've seen this page, but since I don't have any *serious* news media request nor *serious* business request, I've decided to go with Forums first.

Edited January 8, 2022 by TheKraken (see edit history)

[BFT2020]

You might want to take a look at this

 

"Other forms of monetization of our intellectual property for commercial purposes are not permitted (including limiting access to our content for payment of any kind) or licensing our content to another company for a fee of any kind."

 

Are you planning on pricing the app?  If so, that would fall under commercial purposes.  Also, some assets that TFP are using may be licensed assets.  If that is the case, you can't use them for monetization purposes as you don't have the rights to them.

 

This is not something you can hash out in the forums.  Your best bet is to work directly with TFP on your idea / app to make sure you don't have any legal issues.

[TheKraken]

The app would be free, without limitations, with advertising. From my POV it isn't much difference to how gameplays work; the assets in the app would still be used on behalf of the game, the app doesn't use them for itself. But I'm not a lawyer, so I don't really know.

 

I thought someone from TFP would be kind enough to answer on the forum. If not then I'll just write to them directly. Thanks for the advice.

[Urban Blackbear]

43 minutes ago, TheKraken said:

The app would be free, without limitations, with advertising. From my POV it isn't much difference to how gameplays work; the assets in the app would still be used on behalf of the game, the app doesn't use them for itself. But I'm not a lawyer, so I don't really know.

 

I thought someone from TFP would be kind enough to answer on the forum. If not then I'll just write to them directly. Thanks for the advice.

 

You're wanting to publish an app that draws ad revenue. That is a standard form of monetization. They're not going to give anyone permission over a forum for that. It's a business request and you've been given the means to make it.

[TheKraken]

@Urban Blackbear -- I think you might have missed the existence of their Video Policy. They actually allow using videos on Twitch with some forms of monetization (including serving ads). Second point is that I don't really ask for permission -- I ask for interpretation of their existing Video Policy they have online since years. If I'd suspected that I would go against the TOS unless I get an explicit permission, then I wouldn't write anything on these forums.

 

Anyway, I've actually asked The Fun Pimps directly, but nobody has answered, so I'm back here.

 

I'd like to get back to the Video Policy they've put on their website one more time: https://thefunpimps.com/video-policy/

 

Specifically, point 3:

 

Quote

3.   We encourage you to create videos that include your own creative input and commentary on our Gaming Content. It is not permitted to make videos and images that just contain mere copies of our Gaming Content without any of your creative input or commentary.

 

Since a video is a series of screenshots that contain the Gaming Content, could using fragments of those screenshots fall under this point? I think a mobile app could be interpreted as a creative input?

 

Could anyone share your point of view?

[theFlu]

(I'm not a lawyer, just a cynic of imaginary rights..)

 

I wouldn't try to conflate a statement about video content with screenshots of icons and hope to have a legal standing, let alone an apple-policy standing. Especially the latter is at the whims of a corporation, who are by default afraid of everything.

 

I don't see anything wrong or even against copyright law in your project, I'm assuming it would essentially be a proprietary wiki-app; you wouldn't even necessarily need the images for the basic functionality. Just make one; if apple gives you a hard time, remove the "infringing" content.

 

And again, not legal advice, just my weird practical/moral take.

[Urban Blackbear]

24 minutes ago, TheKraken said:

@Urban Blackbear -- I think you might have missed the existence of their Video Policy. They actually allow using videos on Twitch with some forms of monetization (including serving ads). Second point is that I don't really ask for permission -- I ask for interpretation of their existing Video Policy they have online since years. If I'd suspected that I would go against the TOS unless I get an explicit permission, then I wouldn't write anything on these forums.

 

Anyway, I've actually asked The Fun Pimps directly, but nobody has answered, so I'm back here.

 

I'd like to get back to the Video Policy they've put on their website one more time: https://thefunpimps.com/video-policy/

 

Specifically, point 3:

 

 

Since a video is a series of screenshots that contain the Gaming Content, could using fragments of those screenshots fall under this point? I think a mobile app could be interpreted as a creative input?

 

Could anyone share your point of view?

 

I am not in charge of anything. I'm not discussing this further. Not sure what everyone's problem is but from now on I'm not bothering to speculate about a damn thing here, because people just want to argue about it with me.

[warmer]

If you are making money from using assets you dont own, you are making money from assets you dont own. Pretty simple. "free" to the user doesn't change that.

 

I see this all the time on youtube. People clip a professional piece of media and put ads on it. That is 100% not allowed by law. 

 

Trying to apply a "video policy" that allows monetization has NOTHING to do with an app that uses assets. That is 100% not related to YouTube videos. Not peripherally or otherwise.

 

Why would a video policy apply to;

 

making an action figures for the Traders

making a comic book about the game

selling 7D2D cereal that has status symbol shaped pieces

 

if you are using assets you dont own, and are branding yourself to appear to represent a company you aren't a part of for profit, you are using assets you dont own to profit from their use.

 

why is this confusing?

Edited January 20, 2022 by warmer (see edit history)

[TheKraken]

@warmer -- the examples you've proposed aren't allowed under the Video Policy, but from different reasons; those examples are violating this rule:

 

Quote

including limiting access to our content for payment of any kind

 

The app would be free and available to be used by everyone. So the access is not limited.

 

Quote

if you are using assets you dont own, and are branding yourself to appear to represent a company you aren't a part of for profit, you are using assets you dont own to profit from their use.

 

I agree. Unless it's stated in TOS of this company that the assets are allowed to be used this way. Which is the point of this thread.

 

Another thing is that you've stated that making videos on YouTube for money (ads) is 100% not allowed by law. But it is allowed by law in The Fun Pimp's case, because they state it is. So that's why I've clicked the Confusing button.

Edited January 20, 2022 by TheKraken (see edit history)

[outhous]

40 minutes ago, TheKraken said:

Another thing is that you've stated that making videos on YouTube for money (ads) is 100% not allowed by law. But it is allowed by law in The Fun Pimp's case, because they state it is

Where did @warmer state this? Not in this thread.

[TheKraken]

Yes, @warmer didn't state it exactly this way, I've might have rounded up this part a bit too much. But still, the part about 100% confidence in the original statement is untrue.

 

This thread is going off topic, so I humbly suggest we could slowly start wrapping it up.

 

Thanks for your opinions guys.