With the recent announcement about changes to the EULA (and in particular, how they will affect multiplayer servers), many questions have arisen. Mojang has looked over numerous discussions by you, the community, and has released a new Q&A announcement, to address some of the most frequently-asked questions to come from the announcement. More many come in the future, but for now, check out these clarifying answers, direct from Mojang!
Quote fromAre any servers exempt to the EULA?
No. It affects all servers and players equally.
Do server hosts have a grace period to implement changes to their servers?
Yes. All servers must comply with the EULA by August 1st, 2014.
Can I charge for access to my server?
Yes. How players join a server is up to you. Single entrance fees or subscriptions are both allowed.
How often am I allowed to charge players to access my server?
You can charge players as regularly as you like. You can even charge for timed access if you think it’s the best way to monetise your server.
What counts as a server? Are proxies one big server, or lots of smaller ones?
A server is something a user connects to with their client. The user is on a different server when they leave the one they are connected to and manually join another (in the multiplayer screen). Virtual servers and proxies make no difference here, to the client it’s the same server.
Can I charge access to a specific part of my server, such as a minigame or world?
No, you cannot charge for any part of a server other than the initial access. Once on a server, all players must have the same gameplay privileges. You may make a different server for the user to connect to which features “premium” areas, and charge for access to that server instead, but the benefits cannot carry over to your other servers.
So can I charge for my minigames or mods?
Yes, so long as all players on your server have access to the features.
Can I offer a limited trial period for all users?
Yes. So long as both trial and paying users have access to the same gameplay features during the trial, we’re cool with it.
Can I give paying users priority access to my server?
Yes, but you cannot restrict gameplay elements to specific users.
Does the EULA still apply for access to user-created mods?
Yes. It doesn’t make a difference who made the mods, or how they were implemented onto your server. All mods require Minecraft to run. You are not allowed to charge for Minecraft features which affect gameplay.
What do you mean by “hard currency” compared to “soft currency”?
Hard currency is real money or anything that can be converted into real money, including Bitcoins. Soft currency is available in-game only, and has no real-world value. The restriction in the EULA only apply to hard currency; you may unlock anything with soft currency.
Can I sell “kits” for hard currency if I provide a balanced alternative for non-paying users?
If the “kits” contain gameplay-affecting features they are not allowed. Gameplay balance is not relevant to the EULA. If the items included in the kit are purely cosmetic, you can charge real money/hard currency.
My server features a currency that you can earn through gameplay, but which can also be bought for hard currency. Is that OK?
Soft currencies that are solely earned in-game are fine, but you cannot sell in-game currency for hard currency. Hybrid/dual currency systems are not allowed.
Can I sell boosters, which provide faster gold gain, XP, or other in-game resources for hard currency?
No – boosters, item generators, and all other features that affect gameplay are not allowed.
So how do I make money from cosmetic items?
You can sell cosmetic items for hard currency directly or allow players to fund an “account” specific to your server. It’s up to the host of the server to decide how this works. Remember that capes are the exception to this rule – you are not allowed to give them away or sell them.
Can I sell ranks on my server?
Yes. Ranks are allowed so long as any perks gained are cosmetic. Coloured names, prefixes, special hats etc. are fine.
Can users purchase something that affects the entire server, such as a temporary XP boost?
Yes, but everyone who can access the server must be able to use the feature, regardless of whether they purchased it or not.
Can I award all players with a gameplay feature if I reach a donation goal within a time period?
Yes, so long as all players receive the benefit regardless of who donated then it’s OK.
Can I charge for access to server commands?
Yes, as long as their effects are purely cosmetic. Commands that affect gameplay, such as a command to fly, cannot be sold for hard currency.
If all players get access to a feature such as a plot of land, can I sell access to multiple plots for hard currency?
No – that would be a gameplay affecting change, so it’s not allowed. All player who access your server must have the same gameplay features offered to them. The same rule applies to items, such as potions.
How should servers deal with users who have already spent hard currency on features that affect gameplay?
Users may keep the perks they have paid for, on the condition that the same perks are available to other players on the server (directly, or purchasable using soft currency). It’s up to the server host to decide how to compensate users for previous transactions.
Do you have a question you would like answered about the EULA? Let's discuss it in the comments!
_____________________________________________
EXTREMELY FRIENDLY REMINDER OF FRIENDLINESS AND HAPPY-JOY FEELINGS
Please keep all discussion as civil as possible! This is a very hot topic, and we understand that there are very strong feelings about the EULA. That's okay! Open discussion is a GOOD thing! However, please avoid the following:
- Name-calling
- Encouraging (or claiming to engage in) EULA violations
If you are arguing about ranks that does nothing, then it's fine. If you are arguing about rank providing benefits across all servers, then it is not fine. It is the responsibility of the server owner to make sure every server is completely independent from each other and has no way for any benefits to transfer. You cannot simply say "Opps!" that you left a link just like you cannot simply say "Opps!" for running over someone with your car because you were too busy with your phone.
I'm sorry but this is just wrong. Just because a server offers paid perks, does not mean it discourages competitiveness. If the perks are not balanced against non-paying players then perhaps it could, but not all servers are that way. In many cases, a paid perk is simply a slight head start (such as iron tools, an exp boost, a different class accessible). What you are doing is over generalizing a point and it makes it just not true.
Also, changing the rules the way they are being changed is NOT the only way to remedy the situation. They could find other sensible solutions to the problem, but they don't seem to care to. They took a heavy handed approach to what is essentially a parental issue and that is really disappointing. I expected a lot more from Mojang.
opps?
and leaving a link isnt against any of these rules. your car example makes no sense as it doesnt change you hit someone with a car. this is more like rear-ending someone else into a crosswalk where they hit a pedestrian in which case it is their fault and not yours that a pedestrian got hit. you are at fault for hitting them but not for hitting the pedestrian. look it up if you dont believe me.
Be better at first person shooters than Notch.
Until successfully challenged in court an EULA is legally binding the same as any other license or contract. An EULA is not above the law but in Mojang's case it does not violate any laws. Inconvenience is not illegal.
Your example however is a case where the EULA could be challenged as unreasonable and/or illegal.
I stand corrected; you stated you will not be setting up a server using the techniques you described and I believe you.
As for your second statement, believe me, it's served its purpose
This. This is great. I laughed.
There are some servers that have donations of $500 or more and that is abusive, in this Mojang is right
Knowingly leaving a link makes you guilty. Not knowing it does not excuse you to leave it as it is if someone pointed it out. Hiding it altogether is an underground transaction and we know it is illegal in the real world. Either way, you don't get excused for doing careless things unless you correct them.
You could also have an obnoxious title blocking the screen and you can donate for the beautiful cosmetic of removing it. ._.
but the leaving of the link wasnt related to the donation. there is no way to prove that it was even if it was only given to people who donated. you are trying to make this a moral issue when its a legal one. legality has nothing to do with morals and you can get away with a lot that is not moral but still legal. hiding a link isn't illegal in the real world. the example is that someone donates to a server. afterword you send them a link to a forum and anyone who registers on the forum gets a rank up for being a dedicated member. the rank up legally had nothing to do with the donation, it had to do with registering on a forum. there was no underground transaction, just the giving of a link that wasn't illegal to give. people will use these loopholes with no good way of getting called out on it regardless of if you argue with me about if they are legal here.
I am not speaking about morals either. If you want to share a link to your forums, then you either share it to everyone and not only to the paying members or you make sure sharing those links to paying members must not allow them to gain and advantage. I find it hard to believe a server owner knows nothing on how his server and forum works. Sending paying members a link that upgrades their rank and keeping it secret from non paying one is no different from selling the link that allows paying members' rank to get upgraded.
Believe me, there aren't any loopholes. If nothing else, trust that Mojang's lawyers didn't leave a loop to hole out of (lol)
EULAs are legal contracts and thus enforceable under the law as long as the contract clauses do not violate preexisting laws. Everything in the Mojang EULA is enforceable under both US and EU laws, and thus it is binding and legal. It's easy to opt out of the EULA though. You remove Minecraft from your hard drive and thus you have opted out of the EULA.
To give an example where the EULA would not be above the law (instead of along with the law), let's say they inserted a clause that said by agreeing to the EULA, your soul is theirs. Well, slavery is banned under international law, as well as specifically in EU and US law. So that part of the EULA (and by extension, possibly the whole EULA) would be null and void since it violates law. Good luck finding anything in there that is against the law.
yeah it is, it was only a coincidence the paying members knew about the link. someone who hadnt paid could find the link through the correct use of google. also, how would it be proved. they wouldnt be guilty because they wouldnt be guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
theres loopholes in everything. there are ways to circumvent taxation for one and i would expect there to be no loopholes there if there were no loopholes here. the main problem i see is that mojang has no way of monitoring who donates what to what server. all they can do is hear a report from some player whining about a server giving perks for donations. there is very little they can do to prove the transaction took place. if they go to the server and dont see anything obviously amiss like signs advertising kits, how can they prove the server was in the wrong without a lot of wasted time?
here, i thought of another one. have a player join who isnt affiliated with the server and have him use xray mods to get a lot of diamonds. have him tell people that if they donate to the server he will give them diamonds. the server owner doesnt have control over what another player does with his supply of diamonds. it wouldnt break the eula as it was not the server providing perks for donations. how would mojang prove that was a breach of the eula?
Well the tax code couldn't even fit in a single file cabinet, so I would expect it to be full of loopholes. The Minecraft EULA fits on a small HTML page. It's all there pretty much in black and white, with very little vague language. All Mojang has done is decided to go in and add some parts to it to allow for donations and such, which by the way up until now have been against the EULA. The moaning and groaning is by server ops who up until now have been violating the EULA, knowingly or unknowingly. And the law doesn't making a distinction between violating a contract due to ignorance vs. willful violation.
yeah, those are valid points and i didnt know all of that. i really just read posts saying how this ruined minecraft and didnt think it would change anything that much. i think we are making the same point in different ways that this changes nothing. mojang doesnt have the ability to enforce this even if they wanted to, and its doubtful they want to. as long as the eula isnt blatantly broken it is hard for mojang to prove wrongdoing.
i thought of another one. what if donators to a server gain the cosmetic perk of being able to cuss out anyone else on the server without repercussion? that could be argued as cosmetic as it would merely be new text they could use. i think a lot of people would buy a rank like that.
Does anyone know if this is legal within the new EULA?
I would agree that enforcement is going to be tough for them. They have the money, but not the manpower, and I really don't get the feeling that we'll be seeing a lot of cease and desist requests. I have a feeling that when it comes down to it, they have to at least appear to be consistent with everyone, although I'm willing to bet that small offenders who aren't getting a lot of complaints will essentially go unpunished, whereas emails will be sent to server ops who are in blatant, absurd violation requesting them to stop, with follow up requests to cut off service sent to the host if they don't. A lot of people seem to think Notch is being a greedy bleep when in reality he is just trying to protect his passion project from lawsuits by angry users and parents of users who got ripped off by scumbags who aren't even associated with Mojang. In a year this probably won't even be an issue we discuss, ironically. And Minecraft will still be alive and well.
And to people saying this is just to make more money off of Realms, you guys do realize that Realms cannot handle the kind of load that the big servers can, right? I'm sure they'll make money off of Realms, but after costs I doubt it's going to be the truckloads of money that some people seem to think it'll be. I'm willing to bet that after overhead, they're only making a small percent off of Realms.
Only if the VIP ranks don't alter gameplay or hide non-cosmetic gameplay elements from non-VIPs. Whether they are purchasable with soft currency or not is irrelevant. If they are purchasable for hard currency, they can't alter the gameplay in ways other than cosmetics, unless they are made available to anyone (made available to anyone I translate as freely available in-game, not purchasable by soft currency). Although I can see where the language is still not crystal clear, mainly due to the horrible responses that to me have muddy language. I think they need to be more specific in clarifying some of their responses.