!!7 Days to Die Asset Mod!! ....? What do ya think?

[Spider]

@Prisma501

Isn't this the whole reasoning behind making the ATM, so that people without money, could have custom assets in their mods...

 

And saving time for modders in 7D2D that just wanted a different looking plant from vanilla for their mod

 

*example. How many modders have had to prepare the exact same free asset for 7D2D? Too many is how many

[Prisma501]

@Prisma501

Isn't this the whole reasoning behind making the ATM, so that people without money, could have custom assets in their mods...

 

 

After reading spider clarifying of leaving out the obvious, no. The way that would be organized would be totally okey. Want this payed asset containing 7dtd ready compiled file? Sure thing! Pls send the evidence of license ownership and it's yours!

 

So not for peeps who can't afford to buy something they like. That's what the free assets are for imo. But with spiders clarification that would be totally cool imo.

 

Cheers

[Doombringer101]

@Doombringer101-

 

I have no doubt about the legality of this project it is already being done in other ways on steam and here.

 

@Guppycur-

 

Yes I understand you and others already do this on a smaller personal scale. What I am suggesting is we make it less excusive club thing and more a community thing. Also I understand that it does take a lot of work to prepare the assets for 7D2D. But unlike others I believe the purpose of technology is to make things easier for others, for the hard work of one to make the work of others faster and easier. I have no wish to force others to do work that I have already done and I can easily share and I know for a fact that many other modders here also feel the same way I do and also find it aggravating to spend hours doing work that is not necessary because it has already been done. This is why many if not most Modders share their work.

 

You have no doubt... Haha

Unity gets 30% of the proceeds from asset sales.

As I said go ask the question in the Unity forums to get an 'official' response.

[Kubikus]

"Without limitation of the foregoing it is emphasized that END-USER shall not be entitled to share the costs related to purchasing an Asset and then let any third party that has contributed to such purchase use such Asset (forum pooling)."

 

Sharing costs is not a problem, noone can forbid me to get money from 10 people and then buy an asset. The combination of a) sharing costs and then let a third party (which is someone else than party 1, the seller of the asset and party 2, the immediate buyer) "use" such Asset is forbidden.

 

But what does that mean, "use such Asset"? What constitutes as "use"?

 

Answer this: When 7 days to die had store bought assets in the game - and according to Guppy, 7 days to die had store bought assets in the game until at least alpha 14 - was it illegal to mod it? To provide modded XML-files and modded .dll-files?

 

If it was - then what we want is most likely illegal. If it wasn't - then what we want is most likely legal.

 

 

 

Also, to adress the ethical side of things, consider this:

 

If, say, a dozen people participate and spend, say, 100 bucks over a year. Which is what I most probably would so. Then we would already spend well over one thousand bucks in the asset store. Who would benefit from that? Everybody. The players, because they get cool new mods. The modders, because their artistic freedom will be greatly increased. The sellers at the asset store, because they sell a lot more assets. And last not least 7dtd, because with more cool mods, the game becomes more attractive for the buyer.

[Prisma501]

"

 

 

Also, to adress the ethical side of things, consider this:

 

If, say, a dozen people participate and spend, say, 100 bucks over a year. Which is what I most probably would so. Then we would already spend well over one thousand bucks in the asset store. Who would benefit from that? Everybody. The players, because they get cool new mods. The modders, because their artistic freedom will be greatly increased. The sellers at the asset store, because they sell a lot more assets. And last not least 7dtd, because with more cool mods, the game becomes more attractive for the buyer.

 

1/12 buys a buggy for 10 bucks. 12/12 use it because it's the coolest buggy ever Income artists is 10 bucks where it should have bee 120 bucks. Repeat 11 times with only 1 random asset. I really don't think the artist will benefit. Only difference is they spend 100 bucks and share all purchases with 11 othes instead of spending 100 bucks and use those assets in their mod only. Only one benefits is the 11.

 

Cheers

 

-edit- but again: now that spider has cleared up that modders that will use such a shared asset compiled will have to buy a license for it. Easy access for all modders. No one has to reinvent the wheel to rig the assets into 7dtd and the artist gets payed per use of his work.

[Kubikus]

1/12 buys a buggy for 10 bucks. 12/12 use it because it's the coolest buggy ever Income artists is 10 bucks where it should have bee 120 bucks. Repeat 11 times with only 1 random asset. I really don't think the artist will benefit. Only difference is they spend 100 bucks and share all purchases with 11 othes instead of spending 100 bucks and use those assets in their mod only. Only one benefits is the 11.

 

Cheers

You make the mistake to assume that if we would not have this collab, we'd all buy the asset individually. No. I would not buy an asset ever. I don't even know how to put it in the game. Without the collab, not a single penny of my money will ever go to the asset store.

[Prisma501]

You make the mistake to assume that if we would not have this collab, we'd all buy the asset individually. No. I would not buy an asset ever. I don't even know how to put it in the game. Without the collab, not a single penny of my money will ever go to the asset store.

 

Then still the buying once sharing 11 times doesn't make sense.The coalition is a modders collaboration. They share knowledge and work.So you want the buggy and ate in the coalition. You let "it" buy it and "it" will make a 7dtd ready file from it. Now you can use it in your mod. Perfect. You wouldn't have bought it without the coalition. Now the other members of this coalition can use this compiled asset also. Easy peasy no work. Just buy the license and you re good to go. But spider already cleared up that that will be the case. And in that form it's a beautiful initiative imo.

 

Cheers

[Subquake]

What Kubikus wants is basically to get custom assets, that someone else payed for and spent time to make them game ready and be able to use them as basis for his mods without ever contributing financially or otherwise (by preparing the asset for the game) and sitting on the backs of the people, that would invest and donate to the ATM team to buy the assets, now how fair would that be in regards to the poor souls of ATM, that would invest their time, hard work and above all else money to obtain them assets?

 

You make the mistake to assume that if we would not have this collab, we'd all buy the asset individually. No. I would not buy an asset ever. I don't even know how to put it in the game. Without the collab, not a single penny of my money will ever go to the asset store.

That's the problem, you have no perception how hard it is to make assets game ready.

 

Now I don't have anything against Kubikus personally, but people like him, that don't want to invest in any way, shape or form and sit on other peoples hard work and investment is just....

[Guppycur]

It's funny how people argue so vehemently for "free"...

[Spider]

Well what I gather from the discussion and comments is that this is legal doable and would be enjoyed by many. No one would be forced to donate money, anyone could download and enjoy the part of the mod they wanted to, no one could redistribute any part of it only offer a link to the Asset Mod and instructions on what Mod Pack in the Asset Mod they would need for their mods.

 

I'm planning on spending money on assets anyway so I will just start with what I buy for True Survival and go from there see what happens.

[Guppycur]

How do you gather that, when it's been pointed out twice that it's not?

 

- - - Updated - - -

 

Look, I'm all for sharing, just not stealing.

[Kubikus]

Well what I gather from the discussion and comments is that this is legal doable and would be enjoyed by many. No one would be forced to donate money, anyone could download and enjoy the part of the mod they wanted to, no one could redistribute any part of it only offer a link to the Asset Mod and instructions on what Mod Pack in the Asset Mod they would need for their mods.

 

I'm planning on spending money on assets anyway so I will just start with what I buy for True Survival and go from there see what happens.

I would make a first small contribution, this guy looks alright:

 

https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/characters/creatures/skeleton-24305

 

More, if the project gains traction.

 

How do you want to go about donations and so on? Did you consider founding some kind of company or organisation? What if you, for whatever reason, will not continue to work on the project? If this gets the support it deserves, it might easily end up being quite valuable, and with 7dtd still being developed, the master mod would probably have to be updated to the next alphas and the final version.

 

I also suggest that you at least disclose what kind of assets are being bought as soon as they are being bought, along with the number of people who contributed. If they don't want to be named, they should get a number or some kind of identifier. For transparency.

 

 

What Kubikus wants is basically to get custom assets, that someone else payed for and spent time to make them game ready and be able to use them as basis for his mods without ever contributing financially or otherwise (by preparing the asset for the game) and sitting on the backs of the people, that would invest and donate to the ATM team to buy the assets, now how fair would that be in regards to the poor souls of ATM, that would invest their time, hard work and above all else money to obtain them assets?

 

That's the problem, you have no perception how hard it is to make assets game ready.

 

Now I don't have anything against Kubikus personally, but people like him, that don't want to invest in any way, shape or form and sit on other peoples hard work and investment is just....

I would contribute work as well, if I knew how. I'll gladly do XML-stuff, if I can. I'd "even" get into the SDX side of things, if need be, but I believe that only the person who bought the assets can work with them anyway. How you conclude I don't want to pay after I've been talking about three digit contributions is beyond me, though. Well, not really of course, prejudice and such. *shrugs*

 

 

Then still the buying once sharing 11 times doesn't make sense.

 

Yes it does. You actually explain how:

 

The coalition is a modders collaboration. They share knowledge and work.So you want the buggy and ate in the coalition. You let "it" buy it and "it" will make a 7dtd ready file from it. Now you can use it in your mod. Perfect. You wouldn't have bought it without the coalition. Now the other members of this coalition can use this compiled asset also.

 

See, that's how it makes sense. It's much like getting a discount when buying in bulk.

[Spider]

I would suggest I start a Steam group for the mod then we would have forums and be able to view members and stuff.

 

I don't see a problem with others working on a file its the distributing part that gets you in trouble. As long as the finished file is being transferred back to the copyright owner and only they distribute it all is well.

 

Maybe we could all suggest assets and the group vote. The asset with the most votes gets purchased and added next? Something like that. I don't know just a thought.

[KhaineGB]

Since Alloc and Doombringer have already pointed out where in the unity EULA this is a VERY grey area, I'll just repeat what I posted in the other thread.

 

This idea would only work if you were to approach 3D artists for commissioned work and they know exactly what you're going to do with it, because then there is no EULA. What you want to do, even with allowing people to use the unity3d file in their mod (important, use... not redistribute) just opens up a whole can of DMCA worms at the very least.

[Prisma501]

I would make a first small contribution, this guy looks alright:

 

https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/characters/creatures/skeleton-24305

 

More, if the project gains traction.

 

How do you want to go about donations and so on? Did you consider founding some kind of company or organisation? What if you, for whatever reason, will not continue to work on the project? If this gets the support it deserves, it might easily end up being quite valuable, and with 7dtd still being developed, the master mod would probably have to be updated to the next alphas and the final version.

 

I also suggest that you at least disclose what kind of assets are being bought as soon as they are being bought, along with the number of people who contributed. If they don't want to be named, they should get a number or some kind of identifier. For transparency.

 

 

I would contribute work as well, if I knew how. I'll gladly do XML-stuff, if I can. I'd "even" get into the SDX side of things, if need be, but I believe that only the person who bought the assets can work with them anyway. How you conclude I don't want to pay after I've been talking about three digit contributions is beyond me, though. Well, not really of course, prejudice and such. *shrugs*

 

 

 

 

Yes it does. You actually explain how:

 

 

 

See, that's how it makes sense. It's much like getting a discount when buying in bulk.

 

You are not buying in bulk. You totally evade my point. Even cut of the most important part of my post in your quote. If not everyone in the coalition pays for the use of the buggy in my example how can you keep saying the artist is better of selling his asset once instead of 12 times like he should? Perfectly fine to share as said B4, but-just-pay for it if it's a payed asset. Why is that such a prob?

 

Cheers

 

-edit- or even better. Just follow allocs suggestion. Just ask if the artist is okey with his asset being paid fir only once and then will be available to an entire modding community for free. Would clear up Al legal and moral questions. Easy thing to do I guess.

[Spider]

@KhaineGB-

All the gray areas could be stayed safely in bonds with proper wording of the mod documentation. I don't see that as a reason not to try. As long as it stated donations were not a promise of the suggested asset being included and you don't charge anyone any money in any way to use it. Its no different than any other mod using a purchased asset that accepts donations.

 

 

The only difference between this mod and any current mod is it would not have a theme or change game mechanics or add recipes. It would just be assets that load.

[KhaineGB]

And you're missing the point, just like Kub was.

 

Someone downloading a pre-done mod (like yours) and modifying the XML is fine. Redistributing that XML is also fine because it's a patch to an existing project. In this scenario, someone would download the main mod and then patch it.

 

Providing a "mod" that is just a collection of assets and the required XML to use them with the sole intent of people actually using that in their own mods (even if that master mod has to be downloaded on it's own, therefore not redistribution) is NOT OK as per the EULA/TOS because you're allowing it to be used in other projects by people who do not own the licences. In this scenario, a user would be downloading a "master mod" of a bunch of assets that are required by another mod to function.

 

So I'm going to say this again.

 

Drop the Unity asset store idea. The base idea has merit, but this is the wrong way to do it. Start going through stuff like CGTrader and Sketchfab to look for artists taking commissions and approach them. Make sure they know exactly what the idea is so that when you buy the model, it is yours to do with as you please. Then you can write your own EULA on how users should incorporate these models into their own mods and you completely circumvent any legal issues at all.

[Kubikus]

I currently don't have time for more, but I'd like y'all sceptics to answer this question:

 

While 7 Days To Die was using store bought assets, bought under the asset store's EULA, was it legal to mod 7 Days To Die or not?

[DUST2DEATH]

Sketchfab has no grey area.

 

What can you do with a standard license?

Basically everything, everywhere, every time, subject only to certain restrictions detailed below. You may use the 3D asset worldwide, on all types of media, for all types of use (whether commercial and non-commercial), in all types of derivative works. Others can do the same, as none of our licenses are exclusive.

 

What is forbidden?

As a rule of thumb, you may not use the 3D asset in a way that allows others to use or access the 3D asset as a stand-alone (for instance, no sub-license or sale by you to others is allowed). For similar reasons, you may not distribute the 3D asset incorporated in a derivative work if the derivative work is too similar to the 3D asset (for instance, you may not print a 3D asset or a slightly modified version of it and sell it).

 

You may not use the 3D asset in pornographic, defamatory or otherwise unlawful use. Similarly, you may not use the 3D asset for the direct or indirect promotion of alcoholic beverages, tobacco, gambling, weapons and explosives.

 

And you may not claim you are the creator or copyright holder of a 3D asset you purchased.

 

Give up, and pay up.

[Prisma501]

I currently don't have time for more, but I'd like y'all sceptics to answer this question:

 

While 7 Days To Die was using store bought assets, bought under the asset store's EULA, was it legal to mod 7 Days To Die or not?

 

Yes it was legal. As it was not the sole purpose of 7dtd to be used in another mod to circumvent license payment of totally individual unrelated projects (mods). You may distribute patches to an existing mod (game) as you could with 7dtd. Khaine explained it very well. If you distribute with the sole purpose of being put in other projects you breach EULA/TOS as those projects have not paid for a license.

 

Cheers

[KhaineGB]

I currently don't have time for more, but I'd like y'all sceptics to answer this question:

 

While 7 Days To Die was using store bought assets, bought under the asset store's EULA, was it legal to mod 7 Days To Die or not?

 

1) 7 Days to Die, when using store bought assets, had them all packed up in resources.assets, which is encrypted until tools were made to access it. As such, that's in EULA compliance. As for modding it back then, I believe that probably WASN'T because you had to distribute modified resources.assets files, and as such that would count as redistribution.

 

2) Stop trying to validate using Unity Store assets for this project. Unless they are FREE, it's going to get anyone involved in the project and possibly TFP into a murky, legal, grey area.

 

Please, just drop the unity idea, start contacting artists for custom commissions.

[Spider]

@DUST2DEATH-

Thanks for posting that lets break it down,

 

"Basically everything, everywhere, every time, subject only to certain restrictions detailed below. You may use the 3D asset worldwide, on all types of media, for all types of use (whether commercial and non-commercial), in all types of derivative works. Others can do the same, as none of our licenses are exclusive."

Sounds good so far

 

"As a rule of thumb, you may not use the 3D asset in a way that allows others to use or access the 3D asset as a stand-alone (for instance, no sub-license or sale by you to others is allowed)."

Sounds good here. It would be a mod pack not stand alone and no lease /sub lease or sale of any kind going on.

 

"For similar reasons, you may not distribute the 3D asset incorporated in a derivative work if the derivative work is too similar to the 3D asset (for instance, you may not print a 3D asset or a slightly modified version of it and sell it)."

Still sounds good we are not selling any modified version of the asset.

 

"You may not use the 3D asset in pornographic, defamatory or otherwise unlawful use. Similarly, you may not use the 3D asset for the direct or indirect promotion of alcoholic beverages, tobacco, gambling, weapons and explosives."

Nope not going to do any of those

 

"And you may not claim you are the creator or copyright holder of a 3D asset you purchased."

Would never think of doing that.

 

From this it sounds like this could be a resource for some assets for the mod.

[DUST2DEATH]

No, its dead in the water cause you glossed over:

 

no sub-license or sale by you to others is allowed

[Spider]

@DUST2DEATH-

 

No here is a definition of sublease-

"A sublease is simply a situation where a tenant or lessee has granted a lease of part or all of leased premises to another person, but with the original tenant retaining some right or interest under the original lease."

 

We are not subleasing the right to redistribute or change the asset in any way. Only use in the end-users game. Just like every other mod and we certainly wouldn't sale anything

[DUST2DEATH]

No, here is the full licence text regarding rights and permission from sketchfab.

 

1.8. "Rights and Restrictions" means SKETCHFAB granting Licensee a perpetual, non-exclusive (meaning others may use the same Licensed Material), nontransferable and non-sub licensable, Single-Seat license to use, modify, display, distribute, transmit and Reproduce the Licensed Material for the purposes of the following: (a) commercial uses, (b) marketing, promotions, advertising © personal, educational or any other noncommercial uses, the foregoing uses in both the digital and retail formats.

 

However, Licensee shall not (a) sublicense, sell, assign or otherwise transfer or attempt to do so all or part of its rights under the Agreement, (b) sell, license, distribute or otherwise make available the Licensed Material as stand-alone and/or in a way that allows third parties to use, download, extract or access the Licensed Material as a stand-alone file (with the sole exception however, of the use of the Licensed Material in view of displaying such Licensed Material on a website or app provided that the number of Licensed Materials displayed on each given website or app does not exceed 1,000 (one thousand)) ; © distribute the Licensed Work if ( i ) it is so similar to the original Licensed Material incorporated therein that the Licensed Work cannot qualify as an original work of authorship or (ii) the primary value of the Licensed Work lies with the Licensed Material itself. The rights granted herein shall be applicable for so long as Licensee is in compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

 

1: However, Licensee shall not (a) sublicense, sell, assign or otherwise transfer or attempt to do so

 

This is what you are trying to do.

 

2: The rights granted herein shall be applicable for so long as Licensee is in compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

 

By doing 1, you break 2.

 

Give. It. Up.

 

Go deeper:

 

2.9. Licensee may not make the Licensed Material available in a manner intended to allow or invite a third party to download, extract, redistribute or access the Licensed Material as a standalone file.

 

2.12. Licensee shall post terms and conditions on its permitted websites that prohibit, republication, retransmission, reproduction or other use of the Licensed Material as a stand-alone file.