*There are so much reposts, and removing all of them would take years.
*Freedom 2 states that anybody can "repost" software (includes game mods)
*Most of modders do it for fun
Due to those, I license my mods with licenses that allow reposting (usually GNU GPL, maybe Public Domain).
What about if somebody decompiles your mod, and not just any mod but an extensive mod you'd spent the past 8 years developing, and distributes their own version without your permission, and worse, in ways that break the EULA?
Malicious software
If a mod gets reposted, the mod author doesn't have any control over the files on the reposting site. This means that malware/adware could get on your computer when downloading/using the mod.
No income for Developers
Developers live from income. If you download from reposting sites, they won't get any revenue, which could mean less mods from them in the future.
Outdated versions
Reposting sites might link you to outdated versions, which could mean more bugs, crashes and errors for you.
(I should note that that the EULA technically forbids you from making money off of mods; "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"; at the very least, anything more than site ads, and arguably, donations, as long as there is no benefit in return, similar to how server monetization must work)
Likewise, you'll usually see advice to only download mods from trusted sites like CurseForge or the modder's own web site (e.g. https://optifine.net, being careful to make sure you entered it correctly as people can and have made sites with similar names with the intent to redirect them to a malicious site/download - and yes, it does happen).
What about if somebody decompiles your mod, and not just any mod but an extensive mod you'd spent the past 8 years developing, and distributes their own version without your permission, and worse, in ways that break the EULA?
(I should note that that the EULA technically forbids you from making money off of mods; "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"; at the very least, anything more than site ads, and arguably, donations, as long as there is no benefit in return, similar to how server monetization must work)
Likewise, you'll usually see advice to only download mods from trusted sites like CurseForge or the modder's own web site (e.g. https://optifine.net, being careful to make sure you entered it correctly as people can and have made sites with similar names with the intent to redirect them to a malicious site/download - and yes, it does happen).
That applies to your question- mod repost and EULA violation are two independent situation. Also EULA violates Freedom 2- that is another reason to go to Minetest.
"Worse"? That would be so exaggerated. I do not trust repost sites (I only download mods from CurseForge), I am not trying to say "reposting is good". I am just saying, if there is no malicious software put in the reposted file, and if it is a non commercial repost, that should be tolerated. -i do not care if my mod(s) is/are reposted-
I saw that my "Obtainable Technical Blocks" mod has been reposted. That is not a problem for me, I do not do it for any income, just for fun. In EULA, there is statements that copyright law does not allow (for instance, "you can not sell account(s)". That is what called "copyright fraud".
Copyright fraud is a serious problem as copyright infringement, in some circumstances, even more serious. Ignore copyright fraud in EULA and continue as you did.
If it is any kind of data, it does not matter if you spend 30 minutes or 10 years. All data can be copied, reposted, modified, reverse engineered, decompiled infinitely and you (or me, or somebody else) cannot prevent it.
Decompilation of mods is so easy that anybody can do. Did you see BON2? It deobfuscates mods with Forge/MCP mappings and generates near-to-source code. It might be useful when you lose the source code of your mod, or you want to learn modding from other mods. But if people use BON2 to redistribute the source code of mods, that is a problem.
What about if somebody decompiles your mod, and not just any mod but an extensive mod you'd spent the past 8 years developing, and distributes their own version without your permission, and worse, in ways that break the EULA?
(I should note that that the EULA technically forbids you from making money off of mods; "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"; at the very least, anything more than site ads, and arguably, donations, as long as there is no benefit in return, similar to how server monetization must work)
Likewise, you'll usually see advice to only download mods from trusted sites like CurseForge or the modder's own web site (e.g. https://optifine.net, being careful to make sure you entered it correctly as people can and have made sites with similar names with the intent to redirect them to a malicious site/download - and yes, it does happen).
"What if somebody decompiles your mod?" I can answer you as that: "What if you decompile others mod?". Decompiling mods is so easy that anybody can do. You just need a good decompiler and a SRG -> MCP deobfuscator.
Decompiling mods should not be a problem, because it is their right to see how does the mod work. If it is a problem for you, that is your problem.
"What if somebody decompiles your mod?" I can answer you as that: "What if you decompile others mod?". Decompiling mods is so easy that anybody can do. You just need a good decompiler and a SRG -> MCP deobfuscator.
Decompiling mods should not be a problem, because it is their right to see how does the mod work. If it is a problem for you, that is your problem.
I never said that was a problem; in fact, this is part of my mod's license (amended to add "private"):
Otherwise, you are free to decompile and modify this mod for personal (private) use, and I will even provide code examples for any features/bugfixes you want to implement in your own mod, as long as you give credit to me.
This is similar to the license by the creator of Optifine (which I had at one time decompiled and modified to add my own optimization and bugfixes, before later splitting them out; all the features I've added in place of Optifine's, like improved video settings, zoom and Better Grass, are not implemented using Optifine's code (you can't claim that such features are copyrightable, if that wee the case then Mojang themselves would be in trouble for ripping off most of Optifine's advanced settings, like fine render distance, mipmaps, more fast/fancy toggles, even a brightness slider and vsync, heck, even zoom, via spyglasses. I also mention this because at one time Mojang actually wanted to buy Optifine so they could implement its features directly, instead of writing their own code):
(that said, the way this is worded makes it sound like they forbid you from modifying it even for personal private use, which is simply nonsense; of course, this doesn't stop people from illegally distributing it, including the decompiled source)
Likewise, I'm sure you can find tons of mods with features very similar to ones in TMCW, but I/they never took any code from each other (it is possible, and certainly is the case, that simpler pieces of code may be identical simply because it can't be written in many different ways).
Some mods containing code taken from TMCW (or a derivative of, TMCW Underground), or other mods I've made, all with credit/permission:
The issue in my previous post was because they had, without any permission, decompiled and made public the entire source and compiled jar for TMCW, not even a "derivative" but the entire mod, with improvements (multiplayer, shaders, LWJGL3) which would no doubt simply crush the original into oblivion, and they would probably gain credit for it (I doubt it has even had 1000 downloads in the 9 years it has been public, there is literally only one YouTube channel that made any videos, and just a crude timelapse mostly spent building something that could easily be vanilla, as opposed to a showcase/mod review/playthrough), in addition to modifying and distributing it in ways that are clearly not allowed; what if Mojang decides to also take down the original (such things can and do happen)? MCP doens't allow you to distribute the source either, which is why TMCW is closed-source (the code that I have posted is either only the parts I modified or my own classes. Exactly how much your code has to differ is in question, many people have posted slightly modified sources/assets without issues and there have been many arguments over this, but an entire repository including all the unmodified sources is definitely a no-no), and they had modified it to not need a launcher at all (not even to download assets/libraries, which had been placed inside a single massive jar file):
You are NOT allowed to:
- Use MCP to do anything that violated Mojangs terms of use for Minecraft.
- Release Minecraft versions or modifications that allow you to play without having bought Minecraft from Mojang.
- Release the decompiled source code of Minecraft in any way.
Also, due to the way TMCW is coded it would be very hard to work with the decompiled (not original) source, not just due to lacking the numerous comments I add to document it but my extensive use of constants which get stripped out at compile time, and compilers can and do make errors when decompiling, which is why MCP warns you if you decompile a modified jar, and when I decompiled Optifine there were rendering errors with several blocks:
Original source:
// Used by Mesa biomes to get a hardened or stained clay block based on its y-coordinate
public short getMesaBlock(int y)
{
switch (this.mesaData[(y & 127) + this.mesaColorIndex[y & 15]])
{
default:
case 0: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_hardenedClay;
case 1: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_whiteStainedClay;
case 2: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_orangeStainedClay;
case 3: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_yellowStainedClay;
case 4: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_lightGrayStainedClay;
case 5: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_brownStainedClay;
case 6: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_redStainedClay;
}
}
// Returns actual (not biome stone) block
public short getActualMesaBlock(int y)
{
switch (this.mesaData[(y & 127) + this.mesaColorIndex[y & 15]])
{
default:
case 0: return (short)BlockStates.hardenedClay;
case 1: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_white;
case 2: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_orange;
case 3: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_yellow;
case 4: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_lightGray;
case 5: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_brown;
case 6: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_red;
}
}
Decompiled code:
If you still don't see the problem then I don't know what to say.
I never said that was a problem; in fact, this is part of my mod's license (amended to add "private"):
This is similar to the license by the creator of Optifine (which I had at one time decompiled and modified to add my own optimization and bugfixes, before later splitting them out; all the features I've added in place of Optifine's, like improved video settings, zoom and Better Grass, are not implemented using Optifine's code (you can't claim that such features are copyrightable, if that wee the case then Mojang themselves would be in trouble for ripping off most of Optifine's advanced settings, like fine render distance, mipmaps, more fast/fancy toggles, even a brightness slider and vsync, heck, even zoom, via spyglasses. I also mention this because at one time Mojang actually wanted to buy Optifine so they could implement its features directly, instead of writing their own code):
(that said, the way this is worded makes it sound like they forbid you from modifying it even for personal private use, which is simply nonsense; of course, this doesn't stop people from illegally distributing it, including the decompiled source)
Likewise, I'm sure you can find tons of mods with features very similar to ones in TMCW, but I/they never took any code from each other (it is possible, and certainly is the case, that simpler pieces of code may be identical simply because it can't be written in many different ways).
Some mods containing code taken from TMCW (or a derivative of, TMCW Underground), or other mods I've made, all with credit/permission:
The issue in my previous post was because they had, without any permission, decompiled and made public the entire source and compiled jar for TMCW, not even a "derivative" but the entire mod, with improvements (multiplayer, shaders, LWJGL3) which would no doubt simply crush the original into oblivion, and they would probably gain credit for it (I doubt it has even had 1000 downloads in the 9 years it has been public, there is literally only one YouTube channel that made any videos, and just a crude timelapse mostly spent building something that could easily be vanilla, as opposed to a showcase/mod review/playthrough), in addition to modifying and distributing it in ways that are clearly not allowed; what if Mojang decides to also take down the original (such things can and do happen)? MCP doens't allow you to distribute the source either, which is why TMCW is closed-source (the code that I have posted is either only the parts I modified or my own classes. Exactly how much your code has to differ is in question, many people have posted slightly modified sources/assets without issues and there have been many arguments over this, but an entire repository including all the unmodified sources is definitely a no-no), and they had modified it to not need a launcher at all (not even to download assets/libraries, which had been placed inside a single massive jar file):
Also, due to the way TMCW is coded it would be very hard to work with the decompiled (not original) source, not just due to lacking the numerous comments I add to document it but my extensive use of constants which get stripped out at compile time, and compilers can and do make errors when decompiling, which is why MCP warns you if you decompile a modified jar, and when I decompiled Optifine there were rendering errors with several blocks:
Original source:
// Used by Mesa biomes to get a hardened or stained clay block based on its y-coordinate
public short getMesaBlock(int y)
{
switch (this.mesaData[(y & 127) + this.mesaColorIndex[y & 15]])
{
default:
case 0: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_hardenedClay;
case 1: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_whiteStainedClay;
case 2: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_orangeStainedClay;
case 3: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_yellowStainedClay;
case 4: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_lightGrayStainedClay;
case 5: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_brownStainedClay;
case 6: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_redStainedClay;
}
}
// Returns actual (not biome stone) block
public short getActualMesaBlock(int y)
{
switch (this.mesaData[(y & 127) + this.mesaColorIndex[y & 15]])
{
default:
case 0: return (short)BlockStates.hardenedClay;
case 1: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_white;
case 2: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_orange;
case 3: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_yellow;
case 4: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_lightGray;
case 5: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_brown;
case 6: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_red;
}
}
Decompiled code:
If you still don't see the problem then I don't know what to say.
Decompiled code of mods? All open-source mod authors release the original source code of the mod.
Do not care MCP ToS, because minecraft eula allows to distrubite the source code of any mod that belongs to you:
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.
Nobody can claim ownership in your content {including MCP devs}, unless you license as "public domain", "copyleft" or something like that.
If you used CurseForge to publish your mod, you could see how many times it has been downloaded, but unfortunately this forum does not have a similar functionality.
What about if somebody decompiles your mod, and not just any mod but an extensive mod you'd spent the past 8 years developing, and distributes their own version without your permission, and worse, in ways that break the EULA?
https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/mapping-and-modding-java-edition/minecraft-mods/mods-discussion/3160789-somebody-is-modifying-and-distributing-my-mod-in
Also, https://stopmodreposts.org/ gives many reasons why reposting mods is bad:
(I should note that that the EULA technically forbids you from making money off of mods; "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"; at the very least, anything more than site ads, and arguably, donations, as long as there is no benefit in return, similar to how server monetization must work)
Likewise, you'll usually see advice to only download mods from trusted sites like CurseForge or the modder's own web site (e.g. https://optifine.net, being careful to make sure you entered it correctly as people can and have made sites with similar names with the intent to redirect them to a malicious site/download - and yes, it does happen).
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
That applies to your question- mod repost and EULA violation are two independent situation. Also EULA violates Freedom 2- that is another reason to go to Minetest.
"Worse"? That would be so exaggerated. I do not trust repost sites (I only download mods from CurseForge), I am not trying to say "reposting is good". I am just saying, if there is no malicious software put in the reposted file, and if it is a non commercial repost, that should be tolerated. -i do not care if my mod(s) is/are reposted-
I saw that my "Obtainable Technical Blocks" mod has been reposted. That is not a problem for me, I do not do it for any income, just for fun. In EULA, there is statements that copyright law does not allow (for instance, "you can not sell account(s)". That is what called "copyright fraud".
Copyright fraud is a serious problem as copyright infringement, in some circumstances, even more serious. Ignore copyright fraud in EULA and continue as you did.
If it is any kind of data, it does not matter if you spend 30 minutes or 10 years. All data can be copied, reposted, modified, reverse engineered, decompiled infinitely and you (or me, or somebody else) cannot prevent it.
Decompilation of mods is so easy that anybody can do. Did you see BON2? It deobfuscates mods with Forge/MCP mappings and generates near-to-source code. It might be useful when you lose the source code of your mod, or you want to learn modding from other mods. But if people use BON2 to redistribute the source code of mods, that is a problem.
To people who says "It is not (?) cool to repost others mods": That violates Freedom 2 of users. #AntiCopyright #ProCopyleft
I will stay in mostly 1.7.10 and sometimes 1.12.2 until all bad up(!)dates get reverted.
My mod with manually registered ItemBlocks of technical blocks:
What the hell happened to minecraft?#Post6 - My opinions about new up(!)dates since 15w33c.
"What if somebody decompiles your mod?" I can answer you as that: "What if you decompile others mod?". Decompiling mods is so easy that anybody can do. You just need a good decompiler and a SRG -> MCP deobfuscator.
Decompiling mods should not be a problem, because it is their right to see how does the mod work. If it is a problem for you, that is your problem.
To people who says "It is not (?) cool to repost others mods": That violates Freedom 2 of users. #AntiCopyright #ProCopyleft
I will stay in mostly 1.7.10 and sometimes 1.12.2 until all bad up(!)dates get reverted.
My mod with manually registered ItemBlocks of technical blocks:
What the hell happened to minecraft?#Post6 - My opinions about new up(!)dates since 15w33c.
I never said that was a problem; in fact, this is part of my mod's license (amended to add "private"):
This is similar to the license by the creator of Optifine (which I had at one time decompiled and modified to add my own optimization and bugfixes, before later splitting them out; all the features I've added in place of Optifine's, like improved video settings, zoom and Better Grass, are not implemented using Optifine's code (you can't claim that such features are copyrightable, if that wee the case then Mojang themselves would be in trouble for ripping off most of Optifine's advanced settings, like fine render distance, mipmaps, more fast/fancy toggles, even a brightness slider and vsync, heck, even zoom, via spyglasses. I also mention this because at one time Mojang actually wanted to buy Optifine so they could implement its features directly, instead of writing their own code):
(that said, the way this is worded makes it sound like they forbid you from modifying it even for personal private use, which is simply nonsense; of course, this doesn't stop people from illegally distributing it, including the decompiled source)
Likewise, I'm sure you can find tons of mods with features very similar to ones in TMCW, but I/they never took any code from each other (it is possible, and certainly is the case, that simpler pieces of code may be identical simply because it can't be written in many different ways).
Some mods containing code taken from TMCW (or a derivative of, TMCW Underground), or other mods I've made, all with credit/permission:
The issue in my previous post was because they had, without any permission, decompiled and made public the entire source and compiled jar for TMCW, not even a "derivative" but the entire mod, with improvements (multiplayer, shaders, LWJGL3) which would no doubt simply crush the original into oblivion, and they would probably gain credit for it (I doubt it has even had 1000 downloads in the 9 years it has been public, there is literally only one YouTube channel that made any videos, and just a crude timelapse mostly spent building something that could easily be vanilla, as opposed to a showcase/mod review/playthrough), in addition to modifying and distributing it in ways that are clearly not allowed; what if Mojang decides to also take down the original (such things can and do happen)? MCP doens't allow you to distribute the source either, which is why TMCW is closed-source (the code that I have posted is either only the parts I modified or my own classes. Exactly how much your code has to differ is in question, many people have posted slightly modified sources/assets without issues and there have been many arguments over this, but an entire repository including all the unmodified sources is definitely a no-no), and they had modified it to not need a launcher at all (not even to download assets/libraries, which had been placed inside a single massive jar file):
Also, due to the way TMCW is coded it would be very hard to work with the decompiled (not original) source, not just due to lacking the numerous comments I add to document it but my extensive use of constants which get stripped out at compile time, and compilers can and do make errors when decompiling, which is why MCP warns you if you decompile a modified jar, and when I decompiled Optifine there were rendering errors with several blocks:
// Used by Mesa biomes to get a hardened or stained clay block based on its y-coordinate public short getMesaBlock(int y) { switch (this.mesaData[(y & 127) + this.mesaColorIndex[y & 15]]) { default: case 0: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_hardenedClay; case 1: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_whiteStainedClay; case 2: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_orangeStainedClay; case 3: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_yellowStainedClay; case 4: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_lightGrayStainedClay; case 5: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_brownStainedClay; case 6: return (short)BlockStates.biomeStone_redStainedClay; } } // Returns actual (not biome stone) block public short getActualMesaBlock(int y) { switch (this.mesaData[(y & 127) + this.mesaColorIndex[y & 15]]) { default: case 0: return (short)BlockStates.hardenedClay; case 1: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_white; case 2: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_orange; case 3: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_yellow; case 4: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_lightGray; case 5: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_brown; case 6: return (short)BlockStates.stainedClay_red; } }Decompiled code:
If you still don't see the problem then I don't know what to say.
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
Decompiled code of mods? All open-source mod authors release the original source code of the mod.
Do not care MCP ToS, because minecraft eula allows to distrubite the source code of any mod that belongs to you:
Nobody can claim ownership in your content {including MCP devs}, unless you license as "public domain", "copyleft" or something like that.
If you used CurseForge to publish your mod, you could see how many times it has been downloaded, but unfortunately this forum does not have a similar functionality.
To people who says "It is not (?) cool to repost others mods": That violates Freedom 2 of users. #AntiCopyright #ProCopyleft
I will stay in mostly 1.7.10 and sometimes 1.12.2 until all bad up(!)dates get reverted.
My mod with manually registered ItemBlocks of technical blocks:
What the hell happened to minecraft?#Post6 - My opinions about new up(!)dates since 15w33c.