I think you need to familiarize yourself with what 'malicious' means. The subtext is both act and intent. That should clarify your situations for you.
I am aware of what malicious means, it's just I foresee a situation of internet crusaders going on quests of 'justice' just because their favorite mod doesn't work with their other favorite mods. I'm not very good at explaining myself, am I?
Also, could someone with some authority clarify the EULA section here:
and you must also let us permit other people to use, copy, modify and adapt your content. If you don‘t want to give us this permission, do not make content available on or through our Game. Please think carefully before you make any content available, because it will be made public and might even be used by other people in a way you don‘t like.
As this is the most argued point in this topic, and no one can give a legitimate answer, I think it will end some discussion and clarify a few things.
Does this section mean that content made available though Minecraft is made available to everyone, everyone who brought Minecraft, or just who Mojang gave permission to. If it's the latter, does Mojang give permission to everyone, or everyone who brought a copy of Minecraft, to use that content in anyway they want, or in a specific way, either defined by Mojang or the Creator (e.g. Modpacks)? And if this is the case, is this an implied clause? or is it stated somewhere else that's been overlooked.
Back on topic, I had a few thoughts about situations that could become.. lets say... interesting.
If a mod is incompatible with another mod, and their code is at fault, but is required for the mod to function, would that be considered malicious?
If a developer has his art assets stolen and used on another website, say, Second Life or IMVU or any of those user submitted content marketplaces, where if you lodge a legitimate copyright claim under any other circumstance those items can be removed, in this instance could that be considered invalid according to the above anti-mod-eula arguments? (Or certainly how they are worded. You make it seem modders have absolutely no rights to their content.)
And finally, is a malicious code considered a code that stops your mod from functioning, without compromising integrity of any other data, when used in circumstances that the developer didn't want it in?
Basically, users can do whatever they want with ALL mods now.
If my above argument holds true, this isn't exactly true. And the EULA hasn't changed since December, so the future changes haven' been made yet. Honestly, it's probably easiest to blanket allow use to everyone bound to the EULA explicitly, and state if it can be used for modpacks, or if pemission is needed. I've made a few private packs before, and I feel that it's fair enough if a Mod Developer asks for a user to give credit where credit is due. Maybe a clause saying that any compilation must give clear credit to any work that's not their own? Time will tell anyway. By the looks of it, seeking permission is just a matter of respecting the Mod Authors work, rather than a requirement.
In a slightly different topic, but still concerning the EULA,
Essentially the simple rule is do not make commercial use of anything we‘ve made unless specifically agreed by us, either in our brand and asset usage guidelines or under this EULA. Oh and if the law expressly allows it, such as under a “fair use” or fair dealing” doctrine then that‘s ok too – but only to the extent that the law says so.
If I was to make a Minecraft parody (not that we have enough of those) and use art assets and such from Minecraft, that is covered by US Fair Use. If I was to make and distribute it from a country where Parody is not considered fair use, would that be considered copyright infringement?
I wrote a massive post before, but for some odd reason it didn't submit. Not sure if it got deleted or not. I think I managed to write a better argument this time around anyway
The basic gist of it though was that you do not give up your rights to your mod if you make it public. You only allow Mojang to the right to copy, modify, and adapt your work, and also any third party that they choose. Just like you don't give up your copyright to a Youtube video if you make it public, it's still your work, or if you write a song and put it up on Soundcloud. There are terms of service for using those services, but at the end of the day it's still your work.
Having said that, there is no stipulation in the EULA requiring you to allow modpacks (or anyone else) to distribute your content, Unless Mojang gives permission.
and you must also let uspermit other people to use, copy, modify and adapt your content.
There is nothing stopping you from distributing it however you like, with the exception of selling it. That you can not do. But you can choose what permissions you give to the public. Open Source, Creative Commons, etc.
You might of gotten the wrong impression from this
Please think carefully before you make any content available, because it will be made public and might even be used by other people in a way you don‘t like.
Because the EULA is written so colloquially, it's hard to tell if it's advice, or a guarantee, but from how I see it, it is advice to content creators who may not understand what it means to give Mojang those permissions. It could end up in third party hands, and you have no say in that if Mojang allow it. I belive this is the case because of this section of the EULA
Any tools you write for the Game from scratch belong to you. . Modifications to the Game ("Mods") (including pre-run Mods and in-memory Mods) and plugins for the Game also belong to you and you can do whatever you want with them, as long as you don‘t sell them for money / try to make money from them. We have the final say on what constitutes a tool/mod/plugin and what doesn‘t.
This section in the Minecraft EULA supports my Opinion that a mod developer's own Eula should be allowed, as it is their work, even though there's no real way of enforcing them, it at least gives content creators a way of covering themselves if their content is stolen for other purposes other than Minecraft. It's just a matter of respect otherwise.
As for
Copyright infringement is a civil crime.
This is true if someone was to seek damages. But most services have a Term of Service that does not allow copyrighted material unless it belongs to the user. A mod developer could theoretically file a copyright infringement notice to a file hosting company if their content was being distributed without their, or Mojang's permission. If it managed to follow through is an entire different story. Certainly be interesting to find out.
I would like to see how the EULA changes in respect to the malicious code, and if the changes will clarify content creator's right to add terms to their service.
The quick version is that you need MultiMC, Forge, and a understanding of Configs and ID Conflicts.
The long version is a lot of trial and error to get something that is stable and doesn't break the instant you try something complex. And learning to read error logs.
Well, yes and no. Some mods have a retroactive generator in them, to place the new ores/world generation in the world. Otherwise you will need to load new chunks, or even load a new world, depending on the mods you are adding. Once option is creating a map with the same seed of your old one, and using a map editor to put the old buildings back in. This should work as long as you don't add biome overhaul mods. What were the mods you were thinking about adding anyway?
1. Minecraft username: Furcas 2. Skype username: ircarlos 3. What will you be best at doing? (Building, acting, presenting ideas): Building, Ideas, + Critical analysis (I will tell you if something is crap or overused), Professional Audio Engineering skills, Voice Acting (to a certain extent), Guitar, and adding music for film. (I'm currently finishing of a degree in Audio Production and composition for film) 4. How often are you able to help during the week? Varies, but at least 3-5 hours a day 5. And on weekends? See above.
Edit: Thought I might add additional information
Age: 21
Been Minecrafting since Beta 1.2
I personally own an okay mic, and have access to some amazing mics.
I definitely agree with you, never over look audio quality.. Right now, my largest issue is not having a pop filter. I should be able to fix that soon though! But yeah, I'll add your thoughts to the original post. Thanks!
No problem. Audio is overlooked so much, and not many people realize how important it is, or know what to do with it. I'm not too good with Audacity, so I can't do an in depth tutorial on it, but anything to do with ProTools I can help with.
Also, DIY pop filter is some tissue dangled in front of the mic. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Cheers.
Here is my advice - and it relates to audio specifically.
Make sure your recording is clean. I don't want to hear the sound of saliva in your mouth as you open your mouth to talk. That 'gliick' noise? No one likes it. And it can be the most annoying thing to hear. Try and practice talking without making that noise. It is possible, just takes time to learn.
Depending on your microphone, you might notice a deep rumbling noise from movement or the background. If that is the case, open up an equalizer plugin and subtract around under 100Hz. In Audacity you select all the audio you wish to be processed, and under effect there is a plugin called equalization. Click on the frequency on the blue line (e.g. 100 Hz) and then click again somewhere under that line somewhere to the left. Click preview to see if it has worked, and if so, press OK. If not, either drag the white dots created, or create additional white dots to move around.
If you constantly find your audio to be very quiet, use 'Normalize'. However, if your audio is very dynamic, (i.e. very loud at some places, and soft in others) you might find this wont work, in this case use the 'Compressor'. This plug-in may be at bit advanced, but ill try cover the basics, but with it you can set a more level dynamic range. The threshold adjusts when the compressor will start working according to how loud it is. The ratio will set how much the audio will become level with the rest, and the attack time will tell the compressor how fast it should act when the audio gets above the threshold. Just remember with this tool, if you use it too aggressively, it will destroy the audio, making it sound even worse. So use it sparingly, the less, the better. Since it is a free plugin, it *WILL* destroy the quality of the audio, so no setting everything to full. You have been warned.
Lastly, if someone watches the video and has nothing negative to say about the quality, it means you have done your job. If one person picks up on something, everyone will pick up on it, distracting them from the video itself. Don't overlook audio quality.
I have to agree with Failed101's review, you really need to work on your redstone. A few times it was possible to skip sections when multiple 'keys' were needed, as one powered the whole thing.
Also, please replace the sand in the strength challenge.
One misguided creeper caused the whole wall to collapse, and messed up everything above it too.
~
IGN: Furcas
age: 20
EXP: A lot of SP, want to move on to Mp, have made a few structures in others servers
reason: Suggested to me by a friend, I would love to have a look at what other people build and see If i can make something on the same scale.
did you ever greif and swear to never in the future?: Never Griefed and I shall never grief.
Have you read the rules and accept them?: Yes and Accepted
~
I understand you think the Steve model looks better, but from my understanding, the community doesn't, and I agree with them.
Also, if the new character model was used, that would mean that the other models would have to change to suit the style. Such as Zombies and Creepers. And besides, the Human model is iconic to Minecraft. You see the Human Model, and no matter the skin, you know its Minecraft. Same for the Creepers, but thats just me being a fanboy.
I'm not saying change is bad, but Dock's Steve is not for Minecraft.
Maybe a bit of an update, possibly something like this?
0
I am aware of what malicious means, it's just I foresee a situation of internet crusaders going on quests of 'justice' just because their favorite mod doesn't work with their other favorite mods. I'm not very good at explaining myself, am I?
Also, could someone with some authority clarify the EULA section here:
As this is the most argued point in this topic, and no one can give a legitimate answer, I think it will end some discussion and clarify a few things.
Does this section mean that content made available though Minecraft is made available to everyone, everyone who brought Minecraft, or just who Mojang gave permission to. If it's the latter, does Mojang give permission to everyone, or everyone who brought a copy of Minecraft, to use that content in anyway they want, or in a specific way, either defined by Mojang or the Creator (e.g. Modpacks)? And if this is the case, is this an implied clause? or is it stated somewhere else that's been overlooked.
0
If a mod is incompatible with another mod, and their code is at fault, but is required for the mod to function, would that be considered malicious?
If a developer has his art assets stolen and used on another website, say, Second Life or IMVU or any of those user submitted content marketplaces, where if you lodge a legitimate copyright claim under any other circumstance those items can be removed, in this instance could that be considered invalid according to the above anti-mod-eula arguments? (Or certainly how they are worded. You make it seem modders have absolutely no rights to their content.)
And finally, is a malicious code considered a code that stops your mod from functioning, without compromising integrity of any other data, when used in circumstances that the developer didn't want it in?
1
If only Wheaton's Law was able to be a binding clause in a EULA....
2
If my above argument holds true, this isn't exactly true. And the EULA hasn't changed since December, so the future changes haven' been made yet. Honestly, it's probably easiest to blanket allow use to everyone bound to the EULA explicitly, and state if it can be used for modpacks, or if pemission is needed. I've made a few private packs before, and I feel that it's fair enough if a Mod Developer asks for a user to give credit where credit is due. Maybe a clause saying that any compilation must give clear credit to any work that's not their own? Time will tell anyway. By the looks of it, seeking permission is just a matter of respecting the Mod Authors work, rather than a requirement.
In a slightly different topic, but still concerning the EULA,
If I was to make a Minecraft parody (not that we have enough of those) and use art assets and such from Minecraft, that is covered by US Fair Use. If I was to make and distribute it from a country where Parody is not considered fair use, would that be considered copyright infringement?
Edit: Spelling and Grammatical errors
2
The basic gist of it though was that you do not give up your rights to your mod if you make it public. You only allow Mojang to the right to copy, modify, and adapt your work, and also any third party that they choose. Just like you don't give up your copyright to a Youtube video if you make it public, it's still your work, or if you write a song and put it up on Soundcloud. There are terms of service for using those services, but at the end of the day it's still your work.
Having said that, there is no stipulation in the EULA requiring you to allow modpacks (or anyone else) to distribute your content, Unless Mojang gives permission.
There is nothing stopping you from distributing it however you like, with the exception of selling it. That you can not do. But you can choose what permissions you give to the public. Open Source, Creative Commons, etc.
You might of gotten the wrong impression from this
Because the EULA is written so colloquially, it's hard to tell if it's advice, or a guarantee, but from how I see it, it is advice to content creators who may not understand what it means to give Mojang those permissions. It could end up in third party hands, and you have no say in that if Mojang allow it. I belive this is the case because of this section of the EULA
This section in the Minecraft EULA supports my Opinion that a mod developer's own Eula should be allowed, as it is their work, even though there's no real way of enforcing them, it at least gives content creators a way of covering themselves if their content is stolen for other purposes other than Minecraft. It's just a matter of respect otherwise.
As for
This is true if someone was to seek damages. But most services have a Term of Service that does not allow copyrighted material unless it belongs to the user. A mod developer could theoretically file a copyright infringement notice to a file hosting company if their content was being distributed without their, or Mojang's permission. If it managed to follow through is an entire different story. Certainly be interesting to find out.
I would like to see how the EULA changes in respect to the malicious code, and if the changes will clarify content creator's right to add terms to their service.
0
The long version is a lot of trial and error to get something that is stable and doesn't break the instant you try something complex. And learning to read error logs.
0
0
0
1. Minecraft username: Furcas
2. Skype username: ircarlos
3. What will you be best at doing? (Building, acting, presenting ideas): Building, Ideas, + Critical analysis (I will tell you if something is crap or overused), Professional Audio Engineering skills, Voice Acting (to a certain extent), Guitar, and adding music for film. (I'm currently finishing of a degree in Audio Production and composition for film)
4. How often are you able to help during the week? Varies, but at least 3-5 hours a day
5. And on weekends? See above.
Edit: Thought I might add additional information
Age: 21
Been Minecrafting since Beta 1.2
I personally own an okay mic, and have access to some amazing mics.
0
No problem. Audio is overlooked so much, and not many people realize how important it is, or know what to do with it. I'm not too good with Audacity, so I can't do an in depth tutorial on it, but anything to do with ProTools I can help with.
Also, DIY pop filter is some tissue dangled in front of the mic. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Cheers.
0
Make sure your recording is clean. I don't want to hear the sound of saliva in your mouth as you open your mouth to talk. That 'gliick' noise? No one likes it. And it can be the most annoying thing to hear. Try and practice talking without making that noise. It is possible, just takes time to learn.
Depending on your microphone, you might notice a deep rumbling noise from movement or the background. If that is the case, open up an equalizer plugin and subtract around under 100Hz. In Audacity you select all the audio you wish to be processed, and under effect there is a plugin called equalization. Click on the frequency on the blue line (e.g. 100 Hz) and then click again somewhere under that line somewhere to the left. Click preview to see if it has worked, and if so, press OK. If not, either drag the white dots created, or create additional white dots to move around.
If you constantly find your audio to be very quiet, use 'Normalize'. However, if your audio is very dynamic, (i.e. very loud at some places, and soft in others) you might find this wont work, in this case use the 'Compressor'. This plug-in may be at bit advanced, but ill try cover the basics, but with it you can set a more level dynamic range. The threshold adjusts when the compressor will start working according to how loud it is. The ratio will set how much the audio will become level with the rest, and the attack time will tell the compressor how fast it should act when the audio gets above the threshold. Just remember with this tool, if you use it too aggressively, it will destroy the audio, making it sound even worse. So use it sparingly, the less, the better. Since it is a free plugin, it *WILL* destroy the quality of the audio, so no setting everything to full. You have been warned.
Lastly, if someone watches the video and has nothing negative to say about the quality, it means you have done your job. If one person picks up on something, everyone will pick up on it, distracting them from the video itself. Don't overlook audio quality.
0
Also, please replace the sand in the strength challenge.
0
IGN: Furcas
age: 20
EXP: A lot of SP, want to move on to Mp, have made a few structures in others servers
reason: Suggested to me by a friend, I would love to have a look at what other people build and see If i can make something on the same scale.
did you ever greif and swear to never in the future?: Never Griefed and I shall never grief.
Have you read the rules and accept them?: Yes and Accepted
~
0
I feel theres not enough references to either company other than namesake for it to be a parody worth of lulz
0
Also, if the new character model was used, that would mean that the other models would have to change to suit the style. Such as Zombies and Creepers. And besides, the Human model is iconic to Minecraft. You see the Human Model, and no matter the skin, you know its Minecraft. Same for the Creepers, but thats just me being a fanboy.
I'm not saying change is bad, but Dock's Steve is not for Minecraft.
Maybe a bit of an update, possibly something like this?
This was taken in IMVU, using the Steve AVI