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
How do you figure that? Napster was one service. There are thousands of minecraft servers.
If it really is their intent to go after every joe schmoe selling +1 meter jump bonuses for $5/month donations, they will quickly learn that it isn't worth the effort. Their time is much better spent going after people that are actually abusing the system.
They can prevent your server from utilizing the authentication servers.
They'll probably not go after the smaller servers till they become something that matters.
Instead of telling Mojang to screw off, maybe you guys should come up with some solutions to get donations.
Honestly, just charge for a minigames server once a month for like 4.99 if you have a big playerbase, add cosmetics you can buy ingame, pets, etc., and you're set.
GL KITPVP YOU'RE SCREWED
Exactly! Notch doesn't care about Minecraft anymore, so instead of leaving it alone he decides to be a jerk and make things WORSE!
Really? First, please read everything I posted, not just that section!
Secondly, it ISN'T pay-to-win! I played for over a year without donating, and won hundreds of times! There is stuff in the game that you can earn (like gems, which you can use to get classes), those classes everyone can get, and you CAN'T buy gems! The only things you can buy is VIP, PRO, LEGENDARY, and a few VIP classes (which some aren't even that good)
I bought VIP solely to support the community of the server, as there isn't much it adds! So if that is somehow pay-to-win (which it isn't, as some free classes are better than some VIP classes), then every server should be shut down by those standards!
Either way, I bet every good server will close now, as that is how they get their income!!!!!!!
Yet again, that isn't pay to win! See above for what I mean!
I'd like to clear something up....
The reason why Notch didn't answer those questions thoroughly is because (Source : REDDIT)
http://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/28dz59/notch_responds_to_polygons_biased_questions_like/
(Note how it says bias)
A user then explains :
Now you see, I would love to see these questions asked without the horrible bias and answered.
This really is poor journalism (lazy, in particular), and certainly not what I would have expected from Polygon. The loaded questions are simply shameful.
===
Then another user says
I tried to "un-load" the questions:
I studied this kind of bias in my AP statistics course, it's called wording bias in which the question either hints at a correct answer or is worded in some way to influence the answer. If I were to say, "What do you think about the scumbags at Nintendo ruining the smash bros series, and making another one just for money?". This question is wording bias because it calls the people at Nintendo scumbags (not true), says that they are ruining the series (not true imo), and that their only motivation is money (I hope not true). The question is worded so that when you hear it you want to agree with it; it's almost as if it's a rhetorical question because it so heavily implies the answer. Every question this guy from Polygon asks has wording bias.
It insinuates people don't understand Mojang's motivation and that the blog posts aren't really helping
Fallacies I use above explained:It is essentially a statment asking Notch to affirm that the policy changes are unfair.
He uses a non-sequitur fallacy in an attempt to create the premise that the servers are a 'valuable part of the ecosystem' and they 'need' the 'pay-to-win funcionality to survive'. Then he uses bandwagon appeal saying that 'people enjoy them' then a non-sequitur again saying that since people enjoy them, they should be left alone
This question is literally littered with non-sequiturs, ad hominems, false assumptions. I could write a whole paper on how ty and loaded this single question is.
It insinuated that others think servers can't thrive, and by asking for his advice, it also implies that the servers are in need of advice because since the policy change things have gone to hell.
non-sequitur = an illogical conclusion: The drug on wars has failed therefore we should make all drugs legal
Ad-Hominem = name calling: The policy changes made by that Notch are totally out of line
Bandwagon appeal = everyone is doing it so why aren't you?: Dude, everyone is voting for Reagan, why aren't you?
My credibility(ethos)? Studied bias and fallacies in AP English and AP Statistics
tldr:These questions are loaded
=====
Then Notch comes along and answers the unloaded questions from above
These are questions I don't mind answering, and if anyone is curious:
What do you think about the blog posts and efforts to explain Mojang's actions?
Some people think that changing this policy so late into Minecraft's life is unfair. Just as many disagree. What do you think about policy changes on a game that has been out for so many years?
What caused you to make this change in policy?
How do you think some servers, which have previously thrived on the old policies, will react? Do you think they'll be alright after the change?
What different advice would you give to new servers as well as old servers to make for a more smooth transition into this new policy?
http://www.reddit.com/user/xNotch
========
I have posted the notch questionnaire three times in this thread and no one took notice... Then people make speculations based on polygon's bias questions.....
really shows the incompetence of some people on the mcf compared to reddit's community.
Also shows how some people are looking at the situation the wrong way.
Actually, with some tricky editing, you could just put every minigame on a different server, and then charge access to those servers. IF you wanted to have them connect I'm pretty sure there is a way to do that too. I'm sure someone will figure out a way. Trust me, this is gonna be a lot better for Minecraft in the long run.
And to all those that are saying that this will be the death of Minecraft, I can not see how you are being more dramatic. One guy even said that this would be the death of the entire video game industry! Anyhow, all this is doing is evening out the playing field a little better. I mean, get over yourself and look at the big picture. There aren't that many servers that rely on soley the money they get from kits to survive, and if they do, they are doing it wrong. Sell cosmetic things or put up advertisements. Mojang is giving you the tools, you just need to use them.
The way I'm seeing this, is it is going to make it
1: Easier to get players (most servers will likely shutdown, which means finally the community will be more spread)
2: Harder to make money - It was already hard, I'm sure we'll find ways to fix this. I'm already working out ways.
I don't really fully support this, and if my server fails I will not bring it back due to this. But still, it's not the worse thing, I agree people are getting overly dramatic. Minecraft may lose a great number of players, but it won't die for at least a few years.
Though there's nothing I can confirm, so I suppose we'll just wait and see.
The letter of the law has been refined so that if Mojang should ever need to clamp down on some unruly, abusive server, they can do so to the full extent of the law.
The spirit of the law remains unchanged though. Mojang has been kinda lax about enforcing its rules and would honestly prefer to remain that way, so as long as you aren't sinister, you're probably fine the way you are. Think of it like the complex relationships anime studios have with fansubbers. The way fans sub and distribute anime is technically illegal, but most studios are content to leave them be because of the interest and excitement they generate for their work.
And really, if you're comparing Mojang to EA, you might as well be invoking Godwin's Law.
Not sure if you had a reply to this at all yet, but from my understanding is that shouldn't be against the EULA as it is purely a cosmetic gain rather than "providing" an item that players that haven't paid can't get access to. Mojang as far as I could tell are encouraging to be able to give cosmetic stuff to players if you wish to do so, just don't go giving out diamond swords that can 1/2 shot someone else that is unable to pay
I am not sure how accurate I am so it may pay to check it out some more first.
So far you have made the most sense more than anyone else on this topic so far. You said about how people aren't taking much notice of what you have posted multiple times? I feel that has more to do with the fact that the ones that are speaking up the most are the ones that don't seem to understand the situation with the EULA, they see that something is supposedly gone wrong and jumped on board to make more noise. Most of the ones remaining quiet are ones that aren't bothered by the whole ordeal as they understand and know that the community and servers in general aren't going to effected as much as some think they will be
I just hope the ones making more of a mess of this start to calm down soon enough.
I was thinking about this and the answer I arrived at surprised me. You can charge whoever you want. There's nothing in the EULA that states you must charge everyone. You could demand a fee from every other person (or usernames that start with A-M), because once they get on to your server, the gameplay is the same.
Any thoughts? Ideas?
I'm all for Mojang wanting to protect their IP rights, but I dislike this sort of turnabout. They neglected to enforce the current EULA, effectively giving permission for developers to use their code to create plugins and allowing server owners greater control over their servers. This freedom helped grow the user base into what it is now. After developing a large user base, Mojang effectively gives everyone, who helped make the Minecraft phenomenon what it is, the finger and starts putting out signs that they are going to clamp down on people who break their EULA.
My understanding is that this action is in response to parents complaining that their children had spent lots of money on gaining perks to be used in servers. This next part will probably be controversial, but if that is true then it is the parents responsibilty for either giving their children the means to use that money or not taking sufficient steps to prevent them from getting it. I'm sorry if this offends people, but in my limited experience of multiplayer servers, I have not yet once found a server where the game Minecraft was limited in some fashion and it required real money in order to unlock basic features in the vanilla game. All servers that I've been on have provided exactly the same functions I find in my single-player game for free. It is true that most, if not all, servers that I've seen allow donation, and in return for donations perks are provided as a "thank you". Teleporting to a visable place and cutting down trees instantly are just a couple of examples. Such perks should not be considered as game breaking or overpowered since someone who has not donated can stil quite easily get to the same place or cut down trees without donating.
People talk about donations being "pay to win", but what does that mean? In vanilla minecraft there are currently only two bosses: The Ender Dragon and The Wither. Any time spent in the game afterward is for simply creative purposes in which it is not possible to "win" or "lose". There are 3rd-party plugins that provide extra games such as spleef, TNT run, etc. It may be possible for some perks to give players an unfair advantage, but that would be according to the rules of that server. It is quite easy to find another server to play on that provides a more level playing field among users.
One major problem facing public servers that I've found is "griefers", namely people who log onto a server simply for the single purpose of destroying another person work. A user could spend hours building something just to have it destroyed the next time they log on because a griefer found their build. Making all users equal and giving them access to all the same perks means giving griefers the same things. With commands like teleport, jump, etc. they will be able to travel further and do more damage, thereby causing more problems. TNT is often restricted (about the only thing from Vanilla Minecraft that is) because of it's destructive power. Allowing everyone, including griefers, would be a grave mistake. Who wants to play (even if for free as they are now) on a server where anything they build will be destroyed and gone when they next log back on? No one. Users certainly won't pay a subscription fee (discussed below) to access such a server.
My main concern though about the Mojang choosing to enforce the new EULA (which is their right of course) is that there are only two ways for a server owner to make money from the server; non-cape cosmetic items (which don't exist yet in the game) and compulsory subscription fees (which no one will want to pay). Basically, server owners have a choice: 1) Spend a lot of money (sometimes thousands of dollars in equipment, maintenance, utilities, etc.) with no form or return or either accept their loss (if they've already got a running server) or give up on hosting a minecraft server in the first place (to give you an idea of the cost, I run a very small server on my desktop for a few local friends, and keeping that runnning 24/7 has near doubled my monthly electricity bill to about $150-200). Imagine how much a multi-server setup for 500-10,000 users would cost?
My concern is that large servers will disappear leaving only small servers such as mine operating simply because I'm not too worried about sucking up the cost (at the moment).
Unfortunately, it looks as though the effect of enforcing this new EULA will be to change the current model of donations which are completely voluntary to one of either compulsory monthly payments (I'm sure the aforementioned said parents will love that) or playing for free on a small server with just a few friends.
Either way, I'm afraid I can't view this change as being progressive.
The current system of server self-management is much cheaper in the long run; mainly because if users don't wish to donate, they don't have to, and if a server charges too much money for anything, the user can easily change to a different server (there are after all, hundreds out there).
Sounds good to me, according to:
However, it also sounds like:
I suppose you have to ask yourself, what exactly is a gameplay privilege?
Boring is subjective and it may be boring for you to play with the same group of people in a modded server but there are people who never gets bored playing with only 1 friend together on a vanilla server. I do get bored of MC sometimes but it I simply play another game until the urge to play MC returns instead of forcing myself to play it. Why don't you take a break from MC sometimes instead of treating it like a full time job that it was never meant to be.
Some Mojangsters mentioned how ridiculous it was that 'donation' ranks cost more than the Game itself.
Both are direct violation of EULA.
The thing is, it's been going on too long. It is ingrained in most of the younger players, (even some of the older players) that in order to donate to help with server expenses, something is expected in return other than a simple "thank you".
If players like a server they play on, like the staff, they should donate (if able) without expecting something in return.
That would be in a perfect world, and is not the case though.
I am sure some of the larger servers out there, that have all these perks, ranks, titles for a specific amount of money, and have players foolish enough to donate such an amount, probably make enough money to not only cover the server expenses, but some of their own personal cost of living.
It's hard to conform to the proper way, and most will always want something in return for a donation.