Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 @DUST2DEATH- No. That is talking about subleasing the License. As in giving other people permission to distribute or change the asset I would have the License for. And I am clearly saying that would not be allowed. You could not redistribute the mod or any of its contents at all. Key words = sale, sublease, standalone file, redistribute, republication, retransmission, reproduction None of those apply, The Asset mod would not do or allow any of those Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazer777 Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 OMG would you guys stop arguing about god damn stupidity already for crying out loud its old news Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 @Blazer777- Hi Blaze. I just started this thread today? lol and I am quit impressed with how respectful and helpful everyone has been to be honest. Its really helping square away what can be done legitly and be a benefit to the community. It could save a lot of people time, make asset makers money and most importantly help people enjoy 7D2D more and longer which is why we are all here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 It could save a lot of people time, make asset makers money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 ROFL!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSBX Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 I feel like unless it could be proven 100% beyond a reasonable doubt that this project is legally airtight, everybody should err on the side of caution. Best case, yeah it would work according to plan and save a lot of time and effort. Worst case, it violates ToS and TFP shuts down modding to avoid any liability. Is it really worth risking losing the ability to make mods at all based on assumptions and "as far as I can tells"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 @TSBX - You don't have to prove something legal to do it, someone has to prove its illegal to stop you. Well for the time being still in this country anyways. Operating in a gray area has never(and shouldn't) stopped people before. Gray is still legal and this wouldn't involve TFP anymore than any other legal mod involves TFP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 See where some of you think you are listing reasons it cant be done I hear you telling me where the legal lines are that a mod like this would have to stay inside. Things I have learned. -It would need to be in small Mod Packs like Flowers, Guns, Knives for easy download -It could not allow downloading of single use assets -It would need to be packaged like any other mod with files including xmls to load them in game. -It could not have sponsored assets paid for by users but could allow plain donations for mod production -It could not offer any special "anything" for donators These are important things to know if I'm to get this to work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 -It could not have sponsored assets paid for by users but could allow plain donations for mod production Using legalese, define how a donation is not equal to a resale or sublicence for use by person(s) donating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 @DUST2DEATH That part is not really in question because all current mods do that that add purchased assets and accept donations right now and that's almost all of them. But the difference is. One is pointing to an object and saying here's some money buy that with it. And the other is saying I like what your doing with this mod here's some money keep doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 One is pointing to an object and saying here's some money buy that with it. So sublicencing then. You buy, they use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 @DUST2DEATH The current system right now has donations. A mod has a paid asset and still accepts donations. That's how it is now. "One is pointing to an object and saying here's some money buy that with it." is sponsored assets paid for by users. That is why I said "-It could not have sponsored assets paid for by users but could allow plain donations" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUST2DEATH Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 No. A donation to a mod does not say, imply, or suggest one buys anything. Its a "I like your mod and here is something to help you continue to fund your mod". It could buy a person's groceries for a week. Mods with paid assets specifically state against any redistribution or other use. You've already stated that money changes hands in a transaction to buy a *specific* asset for *use* in a master *mod* that is *intended to circumvent licencing and time and effort for those who cant be bothered to pay and do the work themselves* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Posted November 4, 2018 Author Share Posted November 4, 2018 @DUST2DEATH- Ok Dust me and you are agreeing on everything but you continuing to argue I'm wrong. I agree with "A donation to a mod does not say, imply, or suggest one buys anything. Its a "I like your mod and here is something to help you continue to fund your mod". It could buy a person's groceries for a week. Mods with paid assets specifically state against any redistribution or other use." I said no sponsored purchases. Im not allowing any redistribution, said that many many times. "You've already stated that money changes hands in a transaction to buy a *specific* asset for *use* in a master *mod* that is *intended to circumvent licensing and time and effort for those who cant be bothered to pay and do the work themselves* " No this is a thread discussing how a mod such as this could be made for the community to use legally. That was one of my starting statements but others have posted "fine print" to show that would not be legal. That is why I now said "no sponsored assets". We are spit balling here, new information is learned, plans adjust and change to adapt. The goal remains the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazer777 Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 i know spider and while i do agree with you this all started coz of that huannan thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prisma501 Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 I vote for asking the artist before buying his/her asset if he/she is okey with this way of using his/her work (one time buy free for all), all this assuming of legallity and morallity is no more then. If not, even a discount can be discussed with him/her. Lets say you buy 5 with coalition's money but pay 3 only. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kubikus Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 I vote for asking the artist before buying his/her asset if he/she is okey with this way of using his/her work (one time buy free for all), all this assuming of legallity and morallity is no more then. If not, even a discount can be discussed with him/her. Lets say you buy 5 with coalition's money but pay 3 only. CheersMorality, as harsh as it might sound, is irrelevant. Different people have different opinions about morality. I only discuss that because I am interested in philosophy. Because there are different opinions about ethics, we have laws. Either using asset the way we want is legal or it is not. If you have factual reason to believe it is not, present them and argue over them. To me it looks much like you have a moral opinion that what we want is not ok. If you dislike the concept - just don't join the coalition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subquake Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 And eventually you might end up making Unity Asset Store and other asset seller stores to change their EULA and licensing policy to make mods like this to become illegal and you will end up being sued by exploiting a loop hole in the current legality of things. You are just begging for someone to slap you in the face so that you finally wake up and face the reality as is. Remember - licenses and EULAs aren't set in stone, they can be changed/updated. Worst case scenario - we will be forced to use only Creative Commons and free licensed assets. Worst, worst case scenario - TFP will prohibit mods with custom assets all together, because of pressure from companies like Unity Technologies with legal repercussions of allowing such mods to exist. P.S. TFP can change their EULA and Modding Forum Policy anytime to prevent such mods to begin with and they should, based on where this discussion is heading to prevent further headaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subquake Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 Besides, modding isn't just about tweaking some XML files a little bit. Modeling and texturing assets by yourself or preparing bought assets for any game is a huge part of modding from my point of view. As I mentioned before, this kind of asset pack won't make mods more interesting, this pack will just make all the mods look the same with slightly different XML parameters, because everyone will want to jump on the band wagon and use the asset mod. Eventually it will probably trigger some form of legal repercussions (you are begging for that to happen), because you are basically suggesting to steal bread and butter for those poor souls, that spend their time in making the assets you desire so much to use for free in your own selfish way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subquake Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 Kubikus, ever considered becoming a politician? You look like a perfect candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prisma501 Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 You are right the artists does make money if the coalition buy it. But only once and then you make it available for free. You evade again. IF the coalition buys an asset (yes the artist makes money i agree) and it wouldnt get bought without it (no one knows). Than still, what gives you the right to decide thats the income that artist deserves and not a cent more? This artist gives a rats @ss that you will also be buying from other artists. Trust me. All he is seeing is one sale, unlimited use. So you say ♥♥♥ him/her, he should be glad we even bought ONE license instead of paying him/her for the asset as deserved. Again fine by me. At least just-admit-it that this is to ♥♥♥ them over. You seem to think that creating the coalition will give you the right to detemine what income an artist deserves. Its irrelevant if you are in the coalition or not. Your logic: artist should be glad we even bought his/her sh*t once. We decide that we gonna use his sh*t with an entire community and only pay once (he/she should be really really thankfull we even bought ONE license). So in this (not hypothetical) situation we are in now is, that the artist makes 10 bucks with his asset where he should have made X times 10 bucks. No "whatif" can deny that you are ripping off income from that particular artist. And the excuse is: well he at least makes some money now. The coalition has decided that is all the money the artist is gonna make in this modding communtiy. Not ok. If used in 5 independant mods, it should be paid for 5 times. Anyways, good luck. Ive expressed my feelings bout this ripoff, sugercoated as a "everyone wins" situation. Nothing more to do. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prisma501 Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 I will check if Kub's worldimage of how the artists think of this is correct. Since there is a concrete request, ill just email the author of this one and ask. I will post the reply here so we dont have to make assumptions on the artists side/point of view anymore. https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/characters/creatures/skeleton-24305 Cheers -edit- or even better. Do as doombringer suggests. Bring the question to the unity forums and get an official response on constructions like this. Artists opinions about asset use in a free for all one purchase construction? Hello, I was heavily discussing a construction for the shared use of assets in the 7 days to die modding section of the forums of that game. This is the thread: https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?93075-!!7-Days-to-Die-Asset-Mod!!-What-do-ya-think Short story: A "coalition" of modders would assign one person to purchase an asset in the assetstore by request of other members of the modding commity. The requestor would "donate" to the coalition.for payment of that asset. The "coalition" would then make a 7 days to die ready unity3D package of it and offer it for download to all other members of the modding community. It woudl be called a "mod", but its obvious the sole purpose of the assets is to be used in independant other gamemods but without purchasing the asset. I feel like the artist community is spoken for (instead of with) in that thread. So, would you artits be okey with a construction like this? Would you rather get paid per use, or are you fine with a one time purchase and free use for all the modding community of a game? Thanks, Pris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prisma501 Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 Next thing that leaves me wondering: Guppies coalition, which is around 80%-90% of all the great and known modders (which have spoken neg on this individually also) are seeing this as not ok to do. Even one of the pimps on a personal note speaks out that its not okey. So except Kub and spider who favor the get as many assets for as lil money possible, which modders are we actually talking about? Or is this going to be a 2 man coalition? Any others at all that would go about this way? Just curious. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KhaineGB Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 Next thing that leaves me wondering: Guppies coalition, which is around 80%-90% of all the great and known modders (which have spoken neg on this individually also) are seeing this as not ok to do. Even one of the pimps on a personal note speaks out that its not okey. So except Kub and spider who favor the get as many assets for as lil money possible, which modders are we actually talking about? Or is this going to be a 2 man coalition? Any others at all that would go about this way? Just curious. Cheers I'd only consider working on something like this if my idea was used. No assets purchased from engine stores (Unity/Unreal) or websites (CGTrader, Sketchfab). It only contained assets an artist was willing to make and there is documented evidence they knew what it was going to be used for and were OK with it. That's literally the only way to be 100% legal without a shadow of a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prisma501 Posted November 4, 2018 Share Posted November 4, 2018 I'd only consider working on something like this if my idea was used. No assets purchased from engine stores (Unity/Unreal) or websites (CGTrader, Sketchfab). It only contained assets an artist was willing to make and there is documented evidence they knew what it was going to be used for and were OK with it. That's literally the only way to be 100% legal without a shadow of a doubt. I allready considdered you as part of Guppies coalition ^^. All the big modmakers seem to not go along with this. The question is who is this made for then? Thats what i was wondering, but thanks for the confirmation Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.