Discussion in 'Bukkit Discussion' started by Kabino, Jul 19, 2014.
I think they never announced a new EULA, they just made clearifications to the existing one.
xTigerRebornx Syd For real? How nice of them to leave all those gray areas unexplained. Have any servers been already hit?
I'm thinking they might only be able to "hit" servers that are running 1.7.10+ because 1.7.10 you need to enable a variable in a file.
Well the EULA is clear. Monetisation is forbidden.
However, they said what is allowed (tollerated) and what not. Grey area should be seen as black for safety reasons.
Not sure if they actually update the EULA in the next days, or if they keep the one from Dec. '13, but that's how it currently is...
The EULA applies even with older version.
Syd so why bother forcing it in new versions?
ZachBora to remind people of it, and to stop people from claiming "I never agreed to it!". Seems to be basically an answer to the twitter spam when this first started.
xbenas What grey areas?
Can I provide a VIP spawn that only differs from the default with cosmetic changes?
Can I give out Name Tags to VIPs, since they only make cosmetic changes?
I got a couple more, just a few I remembered ATM.
You would need to ask Mojang for clarification I guess - since it is really just cosmetic, I think they were more thinking mini-games can't be limited to VIPs only, or similar.
Yes, cosmetic changes are fine.
Heh. Who's going to enforce this new law? The game developer who openly invites people to pirate his game?
More importantly; HOW can they possibly enforce it? This is akin to, y'know, snuggling for money. The only way you can get caught is by trying to pay a snuggler who's actually a cop in disguise. I can spawn items to anyone I want on my server, whether they donated or not, and nobody's gonna take the time to prove a link between the number of god gear someone has to the amount of money they donated.
tl;dr: The new EULA don't mean jack squat. :-DDDD
This. What's keeping me from giving infinite diamonds to my brother on my server? What if I like somebody and dicide him to award with some access that is not available to simple players? EULA is useless then.
What if I put up on my site that you don't get anything in return for donations but run a lottery everytime someone donates with one winner? Afterall, all players get a chance to get "perks".
I shouldn't need to ask Mojang, they should make something that is crystal-perfect-clear so we can actually take some actions.
LEOcab The meaning of a rule is not affected by the enforcement of that rule. Maybe the rule doesn't need strict enforcement.
xbenas Believe it or not, knowing every single possible case in advanced isn't all that easy The only way something can be crystal-perfect-clear is by following a generic rule (something like "if it's cosmetic, it's alowed"), but even that people will still find cases to argue about, like squabbling over what counts as cosmetic and what doesn't.
AdamQpzm From what I can see most servers aren't changing anything, it's only the biggest servers which are changing. So, if Mojang want it to be adhered to they're going to have to enforce it.
You aren't selling those diamonds you're giving your brother. So you can do it without any issues. The problem is when you start selling things that give advantage over other players.
You can run a lottery as long as everyone, donators or not, get the same chances of winning.
It's all about "does the donator get a game advantage over others".
Why would anybody follow a rule that they know isn't going to be enforced? There's no incentive, other than the possible lack of knowledge about said lack of enforcement.
LEOcab You'd be surprised, there are people who would follow rules regardless of enforcement. Their reasons for doing so vary from person to person. Either way, you may think the rule will have no enforcement, but again, maybe it's not meant to for the most part. Maybe it just gives Mojang more teeth to fight those cases that they deemed unacceptable - maybe their plan isn't really to try and enforce on every little server.
But think about it. The strength of Mojang's case is certainly improved against such servers if such servers are clearly violating the terms of the EULA, at very little additional effort on their part.
How do you know it's not getting enforced?
Syd Probably the fact that it hasn't since the 4 days since the grace period has ended (come on Mojang, get a move on! (I wonder if anyone on here is called Mojang...)) and the fact it would be impractical to enforce for everyone. Same defence used in piracy, I guess. As I said above, though, it might only be enforce for some.
Well, we havn't heard of any enforcement, yet.
That doesn't mean it isn't happening.
I can imagine it is a slow process:
- you have to find a server
- you have to find out if the server is breaking the rules
- you have to find out how to enforce the rules (contact owner, contact hoster, etc.)
- you have to wait, as you can't assume the other party replies instantly
Also, you have to keep in mind that the 1st August was a Friday and that there was a weekend.
Chances are that they either didn't start enforcing yet, because there was no time, or that we simply did not notice it, as Mojang will most likely not release to public who got a C&D (or whatever) from them.
Syd Agreed. Should enforcement come, it shouldn't be expected so soon. My post above was mostly a joke, but there is a little bit of me that would like to see some action from Mojang ASAP, if only to stop everyone going on about it
I have yet to see a new EULA. I have only seen the existing EULA and a couple blog posts. It's aug 4th so I assume the "new EULA" is actually the one we already had but with some clarifications. Surely Mojang has a competent legal department? They must be overwhelmed.
_LB People call it a new EULA but there's really no need for one, I'm tired of the whole argument over the incorrect presence of the word 'new', though. They may make a new EULA but there's no need, servers will still be in the wrong.
There's an argument over the use of the word "new"? Good - it's extremely misleading and the primary reason for all the misunderstanding. Oh well.
_LB This is true and I'm really not sure why so many people think that there currently is a new, the awareness of the EULA doesn't really justify fooling so many.
Separate names with a comma.