Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
Students of MIT, during there time at MIT, any thing they develop, or create, be it a device, or code, belongs to MIT, even if they do it at home, on vacation, on there own personal hardware, so yes, if you agree to terms, then you agree to terms, and they are legally binding.
Students of MIT, during there time at MIT, any thing they develop, or create, be it a device, or code, belongs to MIT, even if they do it at home, on vacation, on there own personal hardware, so yes, if you agree to terms, then you agree to terms, and they are legally binding.
You need to think this through more. Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures. Then shut up about it because it's completely irrelevant to everything here.
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?.
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
completely irrelevant to everything here.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
Once cannot write terms of use for something one has no legal authority over
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
Oh, and btw...nobody is forcing anybody to click any link. Or do you have some mod authors sitting at your home pointin a gun at your head?
If you don't want to click adfly links, than don't do it. It's as simple as that.
Or install an adblocker and Javascript blocker (which in general helps your computer security anyway), and don't even care about that.
There are also plenty of ways to convert adfly links to normal links online. You could use those...
You could also try to explain better alternatives to the mod authors, instead of just saying "you are an because you 'force' me to use adfly"...
You see, there are so many better ways to deal with this situation, but those need actual work instead of just blaming others...just blaming ppl doesn't change anything...
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
Except that it doesn't, at all. It only reiterates normal copyright law with respect to works made for hire. One can attend MIT and create whatever one likes with one's own resources and time and retain copyright. Unless Mojang is providing equipment/tools directly to modders, it's completely irrelevant. What is a modder's IP is usually very, very clear.
I get it that you don't like adfly links. That's ultimately your problem.
You clearly did not read my post in entirety, which leads me to believe you do not read anything in entirety and I shall not waste any further time with you.
And look into what MIT considers "sponsored" research and development, wait, you don't read things through, ok I will sum it up in a one liner
As an MIT "student" (ie, not staff, or faculty, as they have different terms) ANY research and or development you as the student create, is considered "a sponsored" project. this agreement is held until you are no longer considered a student at MIT.
this is a fact i know 100%, because a former employer of mine, half of there "product" was owned by MIT because the engineer that came up with it, was still a student at MIT at the time, even though it was COMPANY resources used to develop the product in the students "personal" (non class) time and was done off campus.
back on track thogh
I get it that you don't like adfly links. That's ultimately your problem.
this is why i state you dont read things through, I dont actually have a direct problem with ad-fly links, i have a problem with them being made mandatory to obtain a mod which by EULA should be free, (just because mojang has not stepped in directly does not mean its not a violation of the EULA, its actually against the microsoft EULA to reinstall your computer with the same cd key more than once, but people do it every day.)
You clearly did not read my post in entirety, which leads me to believe you do not read anything in entirety and I shall not waste any further time with you.
And look into what MIT considers "sponsored" research and development, wait, you don't read things through, ok I will sum it up in a one liner
As an MIT "student" (ie, not staff, or faculty, as they have different terms) ANY research and or development you as the student create, is considered "a sponsored" project. this agreement is held until you are no longer considered a student at MIT.
I do read your posts. I just try to avoid quoting irrelevant junk. You're misrepresenting what a sponsored agreement is to conflate it with a EULA. That's ridiculous. Total apples to oranges. It's work for hire versus not. Next time Mojang lets a modder use their original source code, their computers, or otherwise provides some sort of measurable tangible support, we can talk about whether or not they have any sort of legal authority over a modder's work beyond the current state of total non-existence.
I dont actually have a direct problem with ad-fly links, i have a problem with them being made mandatory to obtain a mod which by EULA should be free
Right, that's your problem. Mojang's Minecraft EULA does not apply to modders' code/art. Never has, never will. If they release their own modding API, they could do so with a EULA that makes things how you prefer them, but only for the modders using it. But they haven't and it doesn't look like they're going to anytime soon.
i really want to know which way this argument is in favor of at the moment
Mod authors are allowed to license their mods. "Content" in the EULA refers to the blocks, items, entities etc. making up the in-game maps and other types of content transferred over multiplayer server connections, for instance. Mods are specifically excluded from this clause with the EULA saying the following: "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."
There have also been clarifications on Twitter and Reddit from Mojang about these matters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I AM NOT YOUR PERSONAL MINECRAFT MOD SUPPORT AGENT, SO PLEASE DO NOT PM ME ABOUT PROBLEMATIC MODS THAT ARE NOT MINE. If you're having trouble/crashes with a mod, you'll have better luck resolving it in this forum section than PMing me. If you already made a topic, be patient about responses. If you have troubles with anything non-Minecraft related on your PC, I might be able to help, though, but no promises. Even though I could wish to be, I'm not a wizard.
i really want to know which way this argument is in favor of at the moment
In reality:
No one, practically everything here is speculation. Unless in actual lawyer comes in and straightens it out its just an internet armchair lawyer war
I don't get why mod authors are such jerks and block people from using there mods in mod packs, seriously, I mean its not like you will die if I put mo creatures in my little technic pack. I know they don't want people re distributing it, but if they give credit its not like they are stealing it. Also the thing about ad fly is real no matter what you have they always get pennies of the clicks, its a one way door, however you approach it you still have to walk through that door
I don't get why mod authors are such jerks and block people from using there mods in mod packs, seriously, I mean its not like you will die if I put mo creatures in my little technic pack. I know they don't want people re distributing it, but if they give credit its not like they are stealing it. Also the thing about ad fly is real no matter what you have they always get pennies of the clicks, its a one way door, however you approach it you still have to walk through that door
Not every mod author wants to deal with the eventual headaches of support because their mod was used in a halfbaked "pack" (term used loosely) that is more than likely going to have compatibility issues with something or other. Mod authors are well within their right to deny redistribution and open association with their work(s) to people. They're not being jerks, they're being prudent so that the reputation of their work(s) doesn't come in to question through no fault of their own.
Here's a hypothetical for you:
Say you build a fancy chair with lots of cool features, and patent it. Now some store or other third party vendor comes along and advertises it as part of a set. Shortly thereafter it's found out that because it was never designed to function with the set it's in, that when one of the features is used the result is a half city block wide fireball wreaking untold misery and destruction. Would you want to deal with the backlash from it as the chair maker because someone else created a disaster waiting to happen? No, I highly doubt you would.
Say you build a fancy chair with lots of cool features, and patent it. Now some store or other third party vendor comes along and advertises it as part of a set. Shortly thereafter it's found out that because it was never designed to function with the set it's in, that when one of the features is used the result is a half city block wide fireball wreaking untold misery and destruction. Would you want to deal with the backlash from it as the chair maker because someone else created a disaster waiting to happen? No, I highly doubt you would.
Despite the logical fallacies, QFT.
But there's also other reasons, too. Version control comes to mind - wanting to keep a consistent version across a majority of running versions saves a lot of headaches when it comes to sorting out bug reports.
Personally? I try to respect the mod authors wishes - if they're reasonable - so if they want me to ask permission to use a mod in a pack I will, despite not actually having to. I mean really, if I so chose I could make a modpack using nothing BUT mods like that and not ask a damn person for permission. The author would have no recourse legally, due to the EULA. But it'd kinda make me a jerk in their eyes, and I don't want that - do you?
I guess at the end of the day you could say I'm neither anti nor pro-modders rights, but just pro-not-being-a-****-to-eachother.
Does anywhere state that Mod Devs cannot have their own custom mod cape? I understand that Donators may not be aloud but for the Mod Devs it would be exclusive to them. You couldn't buy the cape.
What I'm getting out of this is we own our mods and can create licences but the second we remove something from the game Mojang gets the rights to our mod long story short, we can only add to the game.
Below is a copy and paste of the Minecraft EULA to date. I only emboldened the text that shows why mod authors cannot legally stop someone from using a mod for any reason. I did three notes explaining whats being said those notes are in quotes and highlighted red. Repeat the parts in quotes and highlighted red are not Mojangs EULA and are the only arguable points you can make. Keep in mind you are only allowed to make money off mods via donations so by arguing you can stop someone from using a mod for profit and causing damages to the author would not only imply the person in question is in violation of the EULA but the author is also in violation because to seek damages you have to prove profits.
OWNERSHIP OF OUR GAME AND OTHER THINGS
Although we license you permission to install on your computer and play our Game, we are still the owners of it. We are also the owners of our brands and any content contained in the Game. Therefore, when you pay for our Game, you are buying a license to play / use our Game in accordance with this EULA - you are not buying the Game itself. The only permissions you have in connection with the Game and your installation of it are the permissions set out in this EULA.
Any Mods you create for the Game from scratch belong to you (including pre-run Mods and in-memory Mods) 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 and so long as you don’t distribute Modded Versions of the Game. Remember that a Mod means something that is your original work and that does not contain a substantial part of our code or content. You only own what you created; you do not own our code or content.
CONTENT
If you make any content available on or through our Game, you agree to give us "Mojang" permission to use, copy, modify, adapt, distribute, and publicly display that content. This permission is irrevocable, and you also agree to let us permit other people to use, copy, modify, adapt, distribute, and publicly display your content.You are not giving up your ownership rights in your content, you are just giving us and other users permission to use it "This Mojang giving other users permission to use". For example, we "We meaing mojang and other people" may need to copy, reformat, and distribute content that you post on our website so others can read it. If you don't want to give us these permissions, do not make content available on or through our Game. Please think carefully before you make any content available, because it may be made public and might even be used by other people in a way you don't like.
If you are going to make something available on or through our Game, it must not be offensive to people or illegal, it must be honest, and it must be your own creation. Some examples of the types of things you must not make available using our Game include: posts that include racist or homophobic language; posts that are bullying or trolling; posts that are offensive or that damage our or another person's reputation; posts that include porn or someone else's creation or image; or posts that impersonate a moderator or try to trick or exploit people.
Any content you make available on our Game must also be your creation or you must have permission or the legal right to do it. You must not and you agree that you will not make any content available, using the Game that infringes the rights of others. '
We reserve the right to take down any content in our discretion.
Not every mod author wants to deal with the eventual headaches of support because their mod was used in a halfbaked "pack" (term used loosely) that is more than likely going to have compatibility issues with something or other. Mod authors are well within their right to deny redistribution and open association with their work(s) to people. They're not being jerks, they're being prudent so that the reputation of their work(s) doesn't come in to question through no fault of their own.
Here's a hypothetical for you:
Say you build a fancy chair with lots of cool features, and patent it. Now some store or other third party vendor comes along and advertises it as part of a set. Shortly thereafter it's found out that because it was never designed to function with the set it's in, that when one of the features is used the result is a half city block wide fireball wreaking untold misery and destruction. Would you want to deal with the backlash from it as the chair maker because someone else created a disaster waiting to happen? No, I highly doubt you would.
I realize your post is 2 years old, but the point still stands.
Just because your hypothetical can, well, hypothetically happen, doesn't mean a mod author should be allowed to *actively* seek out people using their mods against their terms of use and demand mods to be removed from modpacks.
Yes, I get that mod authors develop mods in a way to be used in a specific manner. I'm not saying mod authors shouldn't do that. In fact, some of the best mods out there work best in very specific environments.
However, lets take another hypothetical. Lets say you buy an iPhone. When you buy the iPhone, you agree to a set of rules which basically say "we only intend the iPhone to be used in a manner outlined as such: blah blah blah don't go swimming with it, it wasn't designed for that blah blah", which you AGREE to even if you don't read it. This is something called a DISCLAIMER, which I RARELY see mod authors use (but boy oh boy, mod authors sure are keen on licenses and restrictions)
Now, lets say you go swimming with the iPhone and try taking photos underwater, even though the disclaimer explicitly said it wasn't an supported nor intended function of the device. You then complain because the iPhone stops working. Heck, maybe it even explodes and burns your hand. You then get angry at Apple and demand not only a refund, but for them to pay your medical bills. Well, Apple doesn't have to comply. They will outright refuse to offer support if their device is used in a manner not intended for use.
So, why can't mod developers do the same? Let us modpack developers use their mods whoever we see fit, but attach a disclaimer on their support pages, in their threads, on their githubs, etc, instead of these useless licenses that people can just ignore anyways. Then, when someone uses a mod in a manner that wasn't intended by the developer, the dev can just close the ticket and point to the disclaimer "yo, we told you not to use our mod with this other mod, but you did anyways - and no, I wont help you"
The end. Done deal. Problem solved. You've accomplished the intent to shrug off all responsibility and headache for dealing with bugs and issues caused by your mod being used inappropriately while also allowing COMPETENT modpack developers to use your mod without restriction.
In my opinion, Mojang needs to step up and clarify that mod authors can't attach licenses and restrictions to derivative works of Minecraft (which is what mods essentially are). Mod authors should still be able to pursue legal recourse in the event their code, models or textures are stolen and used maliciously, but for people like me who just want to use mods in accordance to the EULA (as in, just using the mod in my modpack and making it public), I shouldn't have to ask for permission, I shouldn't have to abide by arbitrary rules (such as "don't use Minetweaker to bypass the progression of my mod"), and I shouldn't have to respect any demands by mod authors to remove my mod from a modpack, as long as I'm using that mod in good faith and in accordance to the Mojang EULA.
Sure, it's gonna **** off some mod authors, but mod authors can grow a pair and tell people who disregard any warnings or disclaimers to get stuffed. I would. "Oh, you used my mod in a modpack and now its crashing? Sorry, I dont support modpacks - load my mod without any other mods and see if the problem happens again. It works fine? Ok, ticket closed"
Students of MIT, during there time at MIT, any thing they develop, or create, be it a device, or code, belongs to MIT, even if they do it at home, on vacation, on there own personal hardware, so yes, if you agree to terms, then you agree to terms, and they are legally binding.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumYou need to think this through more. Suppose a student at MIT develops a mod for Minecraft.
Also you are as completely and totally wrong about MIT's policies as one could possibly be. Look it up. It's under section 13.1 of their policies and procedures. Then shut up about it because it's completely irrelevant to everything here.
Are you playing Sleepless Horrors? Let me know what you think!
http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/1-6-4-sleepless-horrors.39181/
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?.
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
Perhaps you should re-read the verbage on that nice little document, because it (in legalese) sais exactly what i did above.
however;
The answer to this is wich side would push harder if it came to court, it would not be the first time the MIT blanket agreement conflicted with some other agreement, during a 2 year span that I lived close to an MIT campus chatter about "yet another MIT vs xyz company" court cases over who realy had the copyright were common.
only about 50% true, as the MIT agreement was brought in because of
You have to remember, that Intellectual Property, does not conform to the standard ideals of "property" or "things" and the logic one normally applies to "this is mine" is in many cases impossible to apply to IP.
But it all comes back to my personal issue, in that, I am tired of tyranical MOD authors, making harsh demands and then to access the MOD having to click the peny-a-click link they put in the way,
They are not forcing in the manner of brute force, its more like "here is only one door to go through, no matter how you walk up to the door, you can still only pass through this one door"
I do use ad-blocking, they still get the pennies from the click, they also get the pennies from the click if i use one of those ad-fly bypass services/tools. so no matter what they profit not on the merit of there work but on strong-arming.
Many of the mods that employ such tactics I would gladly donate to, and even a $1 donation would pay them MORE then the ad-fly click from me, but why donate when they already make money off of clicks?
In the matter of "explaining alternatives to mod authors" I am not sure if you are aware, but most mod authors will ether ignore you, or, if your on there forums, ban you. for bringing up anything that means them not using a peny-a-click service to access the download
Some mod authors, offer separate links, one that is ad-fly one that is a direct link, in those cases I actually have no problem with clicking the ad-fly one, (the direct link must be just as visible as the ad-fly one for me though) and those MOD authors also tend to be far more relaxed in "what you can do" with that file you just grabbed.
The basic bottom line is, its a MOD for Minecraft, stop with the strong-arming, put a donation link up just below the direct download link, and let people do as they want with the mod beyond that, it was meant to be played was it not? that's the whole reason the author put it in public view yes? So stop trying to play the "half-private" game, and watch as more money is gathered from donations then ad-fly could ever hope to acheve.
on a side semi unrelated note, donation funds in the USA are tax free at the federal level, and in most states at the state level (identified as a gift from one person to another, with no implied or required services or goods rendered) , ad-fly REVENUE is however subject to income tax both federal and state. wonder how many USA based mod authors declared there ad-fly income this year?
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumExcept that it doesn't, at all. It only reiterates normal copyright law with respect to works made for hire. One can attend MIT and create whatever one likes with one's own resources and time and retain copyright. Unless Mojang is providing equipment/tools directly to modders, it's completely irrelevant. What is a modder's IP is usually very, very clear.
I get it that you don't like adfly links. That's ultimately your problem.
Are you playing Sleepless Horrors? Let me know what you think!
http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/1-6-4-sleepless-horrors.39181/
And look into what MIT considers "sponsored" research and development, wait, you don't read things through, ok I will sum it up in a one liner
As an MIT "student" (ie, not staff, or faculty, as they have different terms) ANY research and or development you as the student create, is considered "a sponsored" project. this agreement is held until you are no longer considered a student at MIT.
this is a fact i know 100%, because a former employer of mine, half of there "product" was owned by MIT because the engineer that came up with it, was still a student at MIT at the time, even though it was COMPANY resources used to develop the product in the students "personal" (non class) time and was done off campus.
back on track thogh
this is why i state you dont read things through, I dont actually have a direct problem with ad-fly links, i have a problem with them being made mandatory to obtain a mod which by EULA should be free, (just because mojang has not stepped in directly does not mean its not a violation of the EULA, its actually against the microsoft EULA to reinstall your computer with the same cd key more than once, but people do it every day.)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumI do read your posts. I just try to avoid quoting irrelevant junk. You're misrepresenting what a sponsored agreement is to conflate it with a EULA. That's ridiculous. Total apples to oranges. It's work for hire versus not. Next time Mojang lets a modder use their original source code, their computers, or otherwise provides some sort of measurable tangible support, we can talk about whether or not they have any sort of legal authority over a modder's work beyond the current state of total non-existence.
Right, that's your problem. Mojang's Minecraft EULA does not apply to modders' code/art. Never has, never will. If they release their own modding API, they could do so with a EULA that makes things how you prefer them, but only for the modders using it. But they haven't and it doesn't look like they're going to anytime soon.
Are you playing Sleepless Horrors? Let me know what you think!
http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/1-6-4-sleepless-horrors.39181/
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumMod authors are allowed to license their mods. "Content" in the EULA refers to the blocks, items, entities etc. making up the in-game maps and other types of content transferred over multiplayer server connections, for instance. Mods are specifically excluded from this clause with the EULA saying the following: "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."
There have also been clarifications on Twitter and Reddit from Mojang about these matters.
I AM NOT YOUR PERSONAL MINECRAFT MOD SUPPORT AGENT, SO PLEASE DO NOT PM ME ABOUT PROBLEMATIC MODS THAT ARE NOT MINE. If you're having trouble/crashes with a mod, you'll have better luck resolving it in this forum section than PMing me. If you already made a topic, be patient about responses. If you have troubles with anything non-Minecraft related on your PC, I might be able to help, though, but no promises. Even though I could wish to be, I'm not a wizard.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumIn reality:
No one, practically everything here is speculation. Unless in actual lawyer comes in and straightens it out its just an internet armchair lawyer war
Not every mod author wants to deal with the eventual headaches of support because their mod was used in a halfbaked "pack" (term used loosely) that is more than likely going to have compatibility issues with something or other. Mod authors are well within their right to deny redistribution and open association with their work(s) to people. They're not being jerks, they're being prudent so that the reputation of their work(s) doesn't come in to question through no fault of their own.
Here's a hypothetical for you:
Say you build a fancy chair with lots of cool features, and patent it. Now some store or other third party vendor comes along and advertises it as part of a set. Shortly thereafter it's found out that because it was never designed to function with the set it's in, that when one of the features is used the result is a half city block wide fireball wreaking untold misery and destruction. Would you want to deal with the backlash from it as the chair maker because someone else created a disaster waiting to happen? No, I highly doubt you would.
Despite the logical fallacies, QFT.
But there's also other reasons, too. Version control comes to mind - wanting to keep a consistent version across a majority of running versions saves a lot of headaches when it comes to sorting out bug reports.
Personally? I try to respect the mod authors wishes - if they're reasonable - so if they want me to ask permission to use a mod in a pack I will, despite not actually having to. I mean really, if I so chose I could make a modpack using nothing BUT mods like that and not ask a damn person for permission. The author would have no recourse legally, due to the EULA. But it'd kinda make me a jerk in their eyes, and I don't want that - do you?
I guess at the end of the day you could say I'm neither anti nor pro-modders rights, but just pro-not-being-a-****-to-eachother.
http://www.youtube.com/user/DiamondDashGaming?feature=mhee
What I'm getting out of this is we own our mods and can create licences but the second we remove something from the game Mojang gets the rights to our mod long story short, we can only add to the game.
My face maybe nooby but I'm all pro!
Guys your great mod creators perfect mod and keep up the great work
Below is a copy and paste of the Minecraft EULA to date. I only emboldened the text that shows why mod authors cannot legally stop someone from using a mod for any reason. I did three notes explaining whats being said those notes are in quotes and highlighted red. Repeat the parts in quotes and highlighted red are not Mojangs EULA and are the only arguable points you can make. Keep in mind you are only allowed to make money off mods via donations so by arguing you can stop someone from using a mod for profit and causing damages to the author would not only imply the person in question is in violation of the EULA but the author is also in violation because to seek damages you have to prove profits.
OWNERSHIP OF OUR GAME AND OTHER THINGS
Although we license you permission to install on your computer and play our Game, we are still the owners of it. We are also the owners of our brands and any content contained in the Game. Therefore, when you pay for our Game, you are buying a license to play / use our Game in accordance with this EULA - you are not buying the Game itself. The only permissions you have in connection with the Game and your installation of it are the permissions set out in this EULA.
Any Mods you create for the Game from scratch belong to you (including pre-run Mods and in-memory Mods) 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 and so long as you don’t distribute Modded Versions of the Game. Remember that a Mod means something that is your original work and that does not contain a substantial part of our code or content. You only own what you created; you do not own our code or content.
CONTENT
If you make any content available on or through our Game, you agree to give us "Mojang" permission to use, copy, modify, adapt, distribute, and publicly display that content. This permission is irrevocable, and you also agree to let us permit other people to use, copy, modify, adapt, distribute, and publicly display your content. You are not giving up your ownership rights in your content, you are just giving us and other users permission to use it "This Mojang giving other users permission to use". For example, we "We meaing mojang and other people" may need to copy, reformat, and distribute content that you post on our website so others can read it. If you don't want to give us these permissions, do not make content available on or through our Game. Please think carefully before you make any content available, because it may be made public and might even be used by other people in a way you don't like.
If you are going to make something available on or through our Game, it must not be offensive to people or illegal, it must be honest, and it must be your own creation. Some examples of the types of things you must not make available using our Game include: posts that include racist or homophobic language; posts that are bullying or trolling; posts that are offensive or that damage our or another person's reputation; posts that include porn or someone else's creation or image; or posts that impersonate a moderator or try to trick or exploit people.
Any content you make available on our Game must also be your creation or you must have permission or the legal right to do it. You must not and you agree that you will not make any content available, using the Game that infringes the rights of others. '
We reserve the right to take down any content in our discretion.
I realize your post is 2 years old, but the point still stands.
Just because your hypothetical can, well, hypothetically happen, doesn't mean a mod author should be allowed to *actively* seek out people using their mods against their terms of use and demand mods to be removed from modpacks.
Yes, I get that mod authors develop mods in a way to be used in a specific manner. I'm not saying mod authors shouldn't do that. In fact, some of the best mods out there work best in very specific environments.
However, lets take another hypothetical. Lets say you buy an iPhone. When you buy the iPhone, you agree to a set of rules which basically say "we only intend the iPhone to be used in a manner outlined as such: blah blah blah don't go swimming with it, it wasn't designed for that blah blah", which you AGREE to even if you don't read it. This is something called a DISCLAIMER, which I RARELY see mod authors use (but boy oh boy, mod authors sure are keen on licenses and restrictions)
Now, lets say you go swimming with the iPhone and try taking photos underwater, even though the disclaimer explicitly said it wasn't an supported nor intended function of the device. You then complain because the iPhone stops working. Heck, maybe it even explodes and burns your hand. You then get angry at Apple and demand not only a refund, but for them to pay your medical bills. Well, Apple doesn't have to comply. They will outright refuse to offer support if their device is used in a manner not intended for use.
So, why can't mod developers do the same? Let us modpack developers use their mods whoever we see fit, but attach a disclaimer on their support pages, in their threads, on their githubs, etc, instead of these useless licenses that people can just ignore anyways. Then, when someone uses a mod in a manner that wasn't intended by the developer, the dev can just close the ticket and point to the disclaimer "yo, we told you not to use our mod with this other mod, but you did anyways - and no, I wont help you"
The end. Done deal. Problem solved. You've accomplished the intent to shrug off all responsibility and headache for dealing with bugs and issues caused by your mod being used inappropriately while also allowing COMPETENT modpack developers to use your mod without restriction.
In my opinion, Mojang needs to step up and clarify that mod authors can't attach licenses and restrictions to derivative works of Minecraft (which is what mods essentially are). Mod authors should still be able to pursue legal recourse in the event their code, models or textures are stolen and used maliciously, but for people like me who just want to use mods in accordance to the EULA (as in, just using the mod in my modpack and making it public), I shouldn't have to ask for permission, I shouldn't have to abide by arbitrary rules (such as "don't use Minetweaker to bypass the progression of my mod"), and I shouldn't have to respect any demands by mod authors to remove my mod from a modpack, as long as I'm using that mod in good faith and in accordance to the Mojang EULA.
Sure, it's gonna **** off some mod authors, but mod authors can grow a pair and tell people who disregard any warnings or disclaimers to get stuffed. I would. "Oh, you used my mod in a modpack and now its crashing? Sorry, I dont support modpacks - load my mod without any other mods and see if the problem happens again. It works fine? Ok, ticket closed"
So do I need permission from a modder to make an add on of their mod?