Complying with the EULA (Effective Aug 1, 2014)

Discussion in 'Bukkit Discussion' started by Kabino, Jul 19, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Offline


    So I have just read the updated EULA in terms of server-monetisation (Which can be found here and here - both link to Mojang's website) and I figured that some of us still had some questions. I, myself, have a few questions as well.

    In the article, it states that ALL players must have equal access to all areas of the world as donators. Now does that include areas that are purely cosmetic? For example, would a VIP hangout lounge for donators violate this rule? There would be absolutely no benefit to being in the lounge, besides hanging out with other donators. The reason I am asking this is because in the article, it also states the purely cosmetic benefits (like /hat or pets) are OK to give to donators.

    And just a few clarity questions (which I think I know the answer to, but I want to double check):
    - Providing a certain # of ingame currency for purchasing a certain rank is not allowed?
    - Giving donators access to certain shops is not allowed?
    - What about disguising as mobs? Is that a gameplay changing feature? (Assuming the plugins even work in the upcoming path haha)

    EDIT: Also, would donator vault chests be against the EULA? I'm assuming so but I would like to double check.

    Thanks for reading and for any advice!
  2. Offline


    1. VIP hangout do not provide ingame advantage, would be cosmetic.
    2. Currency is used to purchase ingame items, not cosmetic.
    3. Depends on what these shops are, if selling non-cosmetic items, not cosmetic.
    4. Can you use it to avoid other mobs, or in PVP? if yes, not cosmetic.
    5. what would the vault chests do?
  3. Offline


    4. Cannot avoid other mobs and would turn off in PvP (upon being hit). Perhaps making it turn off after leaving a region would make this work better?
    5. Vault chests would be locked, private chests.

    And for anyone else viewing this, feel free to post ideas on donator perks that comply with the EULA. I'm currently redoing my entire server and by having multiple top-tier donators, I have to compensate them somehow.

    EDIT: I also have a set of in-game ranks (that are buyable with in-game currency). Would it be allowed to boost donators up to a certain in-game rank?
  4. Offline


    4. would be cosmetic then, as long as you cant use it to PVP ambush.
    5. gameplay advantage, protected chests while you can steal from other player's.
    6. if in-game rank contains non-cosmetic feature, not cosmetic.
  5. Offline


    Alright, just what I thought, thanks!
  6. Offline


    To be honest, I think the EULA is absoloutly pointless. I mean, why does it matter to Mojang if servers make money or not? Way to destroy your own company Mojang...
  7. Offline


    O wow, I have never heard of this EULA yet. Almost all minigames servers I know would offend the EULA, as they sell kits and stuff. If Mojang really goes with this, what do you think will happen in two weeks when it applies? Will all these servers have to close, or will they change their whole concept? I'm really curious on what will happen. What do you think?
  8. Offline


    The only benefit I can see from this is from the player's perspective, which I do like, and that is the removal of pay-to-win. However, as a server owner, I rely on donations to keep the server up and enjoyable for EVERYONE. My donation perks could be considered pay-to-win, however I balanced them out pretty well. The main benefits from donating on my server were: Boost up to a higher in-game rank (saving time), getting a small amount of in-game currency, access to multiple homes, and access to donator shops (which contained lower prices on items already IN the normal admin shop). Now, all of these benefits are against the EULA and I need to rethink my policies. My server was all about creating fairness and I made sure no one got too powerful (whether they donated or exploited a glitch or whatever).

    And you brought up a valid point about some of the bigger mini-game servers that solely rely on kits. I'm not sure how they are going to adjust to this (Mojang said NO servers have an exception to these regulations). I think there will be some sort of reporting method for servers suspicious of breaking the EULA. Then, Mojang will inspect servers and either contact the owner to adjust the server or face legal action. I picture either A) All servers changing to a simply cosmetic-style donating system or B) A lot of servers closing down (which could be good in terms of weeding out pay-to-win servers).
  9. Offline


    1. Lobby without gameplay should be cosmetic, on the other hand you're not allowed to charge for access of specific parts of your server...
    I would ask Mojang for it, as it's somewhat unclear and they mentioned "if you're not sure if it's allowed it propably isn't".
    (I don't think you'll get in trouble for a VIP Lobby only, though...)

    2. Hard Currency vs Soft Currency is not allowed.

    The rest has already been written by Necrodoom.

    Ideas for new perks:
    Serverwide stuff. Really, this could be awesome if done right. ;)

    There are multiple discussions about the EULA in this forum.
    TL;DR new EULA allows servers to make money (it was forbidden before) and sets clear rules against Pay2Win servers.
    The reason is to protect players against scam and pay 2 win. (What would affect the reputation of MC and Mojang itself)

    And no, Mojang does not destroy itself , they still get about 20k sales per day. ;)
  10. Offline


    I was just about to say that they still very clearly allow servers to be pay-to-play. I think that will be the thing that allows bigger networks to stay alive - to some extent.
  11. For minigames i could imagine a pay-to-play confined to certain minigames/variants, provided you can just get a silly rank up on the website, no other in-game advantages from it.

    For the donation-barrier/all-get-the-same concepts i would be interested in clarification of potential gray-zones:
    * Can we define "all" as "all recently active players", e.g. counting the last one or two weeks?
    * Can we define "get the same" as having the same probability to get certain/desired/chosen features? [Having no tricks in mind, but randomizing what they actually get.]

    Red-gray zones:
    * Are we allowed to to give "very active" players (also non-donators!) a higher chance to get something particularly useful, if someone donates. This could be based on the playing time within the last one or two weeks. Argument would be to reward people who play much, if anyone donates. Seems reasonable to me, but is it allowed?
  12. Offline


    1. Pay-to-play is only allowed if it applys to entire server. Else you are selling access to gameplay features (minigames), which is not cosmetic.
    2. Why would "all" not equal "all players"?
    3. Explain?
    4. So if someone donates, all players server wide get an adavantage based on activity? Seems to be allowed under "all players get the same" rule.
  13. (2.-4. i think)
    Both "all" and "all players server wide" is pretty informal - is it all online players, is it all players who ever played Minecraft, is it all future player s(your server/MC total)?

    To me "all active players" would make sense, otherwise you will give thousands of past players features for having joined for a mere split-second - that does not seem to make sense to me.

    As the aims of Mojang are to kill pay-to-win and enforce fairness for a part, i could imagine that "play to win" is a concept that they could agree with in theory. So the idea is to let people who play actively profit from donations (counting recent weeks, months if you will, i could even agree to add players who join within the next week(s)), because they are who keep the server alive on the Minecraft side. That's the basic idea, the red-gray zone isn't crucial with giving very active players more than those who joined for just minutes, but could help maintaining the hardware-money balance.
    Some players just like to donate, and some like to get something extra, we don't strictly need donations, but many players are demanding it (!), so i would like to have some lottery effect there (random benefit mixed with some certain benefit). But we also need balance, we can't give 500 players fly for one 2 $ donation (we were cheap!), that just won't work with the money/hardware balance, so we do need randomization and some limit in terms of "recently active", in order to provide the most loved features.
  14. Offline


    "All" would mean "all players who joined server" in this case. Else you will have player paying, others kicked, perk given only to payer.

    This would where actvity-based rewards come at, If the rewards dont favor the donator, there wouldnt be a distinctive advantage to payer, and could be good, but youd want mojang's response on this.
  15. Obviously i won't go for "all online players", neither for trying to lock out any players actively - but some activity period like +- 2 weeks with a minimum of 1 hour playing time i would find reasonable - i would understand if they say that they can't maintain the differences concerning the EULA, on the other hand they can not do more than going case by case on base of actual complaints (realistically).

    Similarly gray-zone-ish would be to just add it to all players, but let it expire if they don't join (for all players including the donators), possibly this makes sense, as it would include players joining "soon" as well as all past players who will join "soon enough" - yet again "all past players" is based on what? Is deleting player files and database entries (!?) allowed or not, how does it affect "all past players".... it remains a "tasty" aspect :p

    After thinking about this way, the most likely to be "legal" version would probably be to add something which is same for all who ever played (and join within some time frame) and let it expire within some time frame, so we can maintain both fairness and hardware-money balance. We could even vary the amount of features based on how many people get rewards (too many -> more money neeeded to trigger features). Still i would be interested in the official Mojang-opinion (does that exist?) on scaling the amount of reward by playing time (some guaranteed minimum from 1 hour on or so, scaling up to some max. amount for +- N weeks).
  16. Offline


    the answer is very obvious, you want servers to go down or let peope play with a little better items? mojang is quite ***** they don't understand basic stuff, and because of my server many players, bought minecraft, like more than 50 people bought minecraft premium...

    now i was thinking of coding some really cool minigames for my server, but should I waste time with it? maybe not.

    EDIT by Moderator: merged posts, please use the edit button instead of double posting.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 9, 2016
  17. Offline


    I kinda hate it, but I am happy Shotbow has to give us their precious MineZ Guns now.
  18. Offline


    Most people here seem to forget that right now it's not allowed to sell anything at all and the EULA is only getting "better".
  19. Offline


    So if I interpret your post right, you say that not all players on your server bought Minecraft?
    (Which is required to play legally in Multiplayer)
  20. Offline


    Do not think that Mojang does not want us to earn money... instead think of it as the exact opposite :), If we were to create such plugins, we would be 'forced' to charge 'All' players who join our server ;)
  21. Offline


    Access to any plugin can be charged for, as it is out of the realm of Mojang's jurisdiction. Let me explain:
    Plugins rely on the Bukkit API, which is free, and the Bukkit API relies on the CraftBukkit server software, which Mojang is OK with (and of course is also free). The plugins in no way rely on the software Mojang distributes and therefore access to any parts of these plugins is not under Mojang's control.
    Venexor likes this.
  22. Offline


    ZanderMan9 Except, plugins which spawn items, like "kit" plugins can't be sold. That's in the examples mojang had provided. Because the sword is a mojang item and isn't purely cosmetic. You can sell custom items not made from mojang items.

    What you can sell is access to a plugin which names a weapon or makes it glow, as long as it's just cosmetic addition to existing item.
  23. Offline


    You can't make a plugin that interacts with players that do not use stuff Mojang owns.

    Stop trying to make loopholes happen, they are not going to happen!
  24. Offline


    Syd I'm not "loophole-hunting". I'm just trying to protect the plugin development community, and more importantly, the Bukkit community as a whole.
    And yes, ZachBora I realize that, but things that are strictly in the plugin are all clear...
  25. Offline


    You haven't read the updated EULA. There's no such thing, it doesn't exist. The EULA hasn't been updated.

    You have read a blog post, which is far from a legal document.
  26. No, this is a purchase. "Donators" shouldn't do so because they expect something in return, yet most servers who do the whole "donation" thing (pre-EULA enforcement) are quite clearly purchases.
    chaseoes Technically it has been updated - but back in Dec 2013 :)
    ZanderMan9 The Bukkit community is one that is supposed to be one that does it for free.

    StefanXX Sure, Mojang have absolutely no idea how business works. That's why they're broke. Oh wait a sec... I really doubt your statement. I really doubt that "over 50 people" were convinced to buy Minecraft from the look of your server without actually playing it, and that it was your server that deserved the credit rather than Minecraft's gameplay itself. And how about the plugins? Did you make them yourself, and they drastically change Minecraft's gameplay? If not, don't the plugin developers deserve a large portion of the credit? And how about Bukkit itself? No small amount of work went into that to make such things possible.

    And if you claim that your server had players who used a cracked version and your server convinced them to buy, good luck bringing that up in a legal debate.
  27. Offline


    What i don't get is a few things, I own a server and as far as i have found out i cant see why i cant give the people who purchased/donated before a new rank that cant be purchased anymore so its like a mod rank where they keep what they bought, is this not illegal? Also is the abiltiy to create warps cosmetic as it warps can be used by everyone? Does a rank with a different amount of homes count as comestic? And does changing time and weather count as cosmetic?
  28. Offline


    dragonzodiac99 What gives advantage to a player over another player isn't allowed... So either it gives an advantage or it's cosmetic, will let you decide the rest.
  29. Offline


    Sooooooooo, where's the actual new EULA?
  30. Offline


    xbenas Probably not ready for release or some other reason. Mojang never gave a release date for it, they only said servers have to comply with "the EULA" (hint, not "the new EULA") by Aug 1
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page