• 1

    posted a message on To Mod Creators: Copyrights and Malicious code
    Quote from Sironin

    Except it is true. No amount of adhesion contracts (take-it-or-leave-it EULAs) can suborn someone's copyright (at least in the US, copyright law does vary in other countries).


    And you're accusing other people of sticking their fingers in their ears? See, unlike every single "pro-modder" poster in this thread, I am capable of doing the most minimal amount of research to determine legal precedent to back up my arguments.

    In MDY vs Blizzard, the court ruled that people who buy computer games are not legally owners of the product, but licensees, and therefore were required by law to obey the company's EULA. MDY, makers of third-party software for Blizzard products, were found "liable under theories of copyright and tort law for selling software that contributed to the breach of Blizzard's End User License Agreement and Terms of Use."

    This is not a one time thing. Blizzard has repeatedly sued and won against people who sell unlicensed products for their games. They are just one of the most visible (and stringent) enforcers of their right to prevent people from making money off of user-created content. Do your own research if you don't believe me. Again, why do you think it is that not one modder directly charges for their mods? Making money with your mods from adfly is still iffy legally, but it obviously isn't the same as directly charging for your mods because there is no actual transaction taking place

    If your goal was to frustrate me, consider yourself successful. I'm not used to people just repeating their claims over and over again in the face of a mountain of contradictory evidence.
    Quote from KuroNeko87

    I do not want to add more fuel to the fire, and I have NOTHING against modders, but I bet that most of these modders trying to enforce their copyright have, are, or will download a movie, album, software, or game off the internet illegally, which is more damaging (monetarily speaking) than putting a mod in a modpack or updating a mod without permission.

    To put this in perspective i went into TPB and looked for the most seeded software torrent. It turns out to be Adobe Photoshop CS6 13. Said software has a list price of $699. There are currently 4661 seeders (or people that already downloaded it and are sharing) and 462 leechers (or people currently downloading it) That makes 5123 the times this software has been illegally downloaded only in this venue. Going by these numbers Adobe has lost $3,580,977. In this situation i can see why copyright must be enforced as businesses make software to EARN money.


    It's more than that. Even if modders could sue for copyright infringement (and there is absolutely no empirical evidence indicating they can) it is literally impossible for them to sue for damages, because they are legally prohibited from directly profiting from their mods.
    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on To Mod Creators: Copyrights and Malicious code
    Quote from Sironin
    They could also directly sell them if they wished to.


    This is most emphatically not true. It is, in fact, pretty much the only thing both sides have agreed on and the one thing that the EULA is very, very specific about. I'm not sure how you missed this. If there's anything in the realm of mods that would initiate legal action from Mojang, it is this. Why do you think every single modder seeking compensation uses Adfly and donation buttons instead of just selling the mod?
    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 2

    posted a message on To Mod Creators: Copyrights and Malicious code
    Quote from CovertJaguar
    Modified binaries of popular mods were being distributed illegally.


    As ethically justified as your complaints are, I'm still compelled to challenge you to find me a single instance in which a court determined that this kind of behavior - stealing or misappropriating modifications to computer games - was illegal and someone was successfully prosecuted for it, in civil or criminal court. (Meaning, where the plaintiff won.) A case where such a dispute was settled out of court would also suffice.
    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 4

    posted a message on To Mod Creators: Copyrights and Malicious code
    Quote from Azanor

    If by "your opinion" you mean copyright law, then yes - I guess it is just my opinion.


    Show me a single instance of this law being enforced in the way you describe it - with regards to a mod to a computer game - and I'll concede the point. Remember, a rule means nothing if it's not being enforced.
    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on To Mod Creators: Copyrights and Malicious code
    Quote from Azanor

    Apart from point 1 and 6, this is all just my opinion.

    Sorry, 1 and 6 are still your opinion, and wrong at that. Nice mod, by the way.
    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on To Mod Creators: Copyrights and Malicious code
    Quote from Thyrllann

    If such a suit were taken, it would only be a binding precedent in the jurisdiction of that court - judicial decisions in America cannot bind courts in NZ, for example. As such, there is really no point, as not all modders etc live in a single country.


    That only makes these debates even more meaningless.
    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on To Mod Creators: Copyrights and Malicious code
    Let's be very clear about something. I will place it in slightly-larger-than-normal font size in order to emphasize it.

    Modders are not allowed to dictate who can and cannot use their mod, for any purpose. If you doubt this, then please try taking the makers of a particularly intransigent modpack to court for copyright infringement.

    All the debating and pseudo-legalistic jargon and hypothetical situations in the world will not change the fact that if you attempt to enforce your "right" to have your mod excluded from a modpack or any other unauthorized use, you'll be lucky if you don't have to pay the other party's legal fees.

    I would love to be proven wrong.

    Thank you and good night.
    Posted in: Mods Discussion
  • 1

    posted a message on 1.7 Horrid World Generation
    The level of contentiousness in this thread is kind of baffling to me. Can people not take the position that the way it is now is generally better than the way it was before, but it could still use some improvement, even if only to accommodate the people that would like more variety in the world? Surely it can't be that difficult to add an option to the world generation screen that reduces the degree of biome grouping.

    (Tangentially, with regards to the argument that really extensive biomes are "more realistic," I can't help but compare this analysis to my hometown of Portland, OR, where we have access to basically every "biome" - except the jungle - only an hour or two's drive away. The ocean, the mountain, the desert, the forest - it's all pretty much right here. It's not an argument for or against anything, just an observation.)
    Posted in: Recent Updates and Snapshots
  • 1

    posted a message on MAtmos - Environmental sound atmosphere simulator
    Has anyone checked to see if older versions of MAtmos are compatible with 1.6.4? Are there certain files that could be excluded (i.e., deleted from the .zip) in order to facilitate the proper functioning of the mod?
    Posted in: Minecraft Mods
  • To post a comment, please .