Khaptaw Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 As I stated in the subject, I would like to know if Tekkit has permission from every modder, or else it could be a legal problem towards my server. Thank you for the information in advance.
caspertheghost Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 As I stated in the subject, I would like to know if Tekkit has permission from every modder, or else it could be a legal problem towards my server. Thank you for the information in advance. Its all one giant grey zone. Not all of the mods in Tekkit are used with permission from their respective developers, but then again, those mods are modifications of minecraft code without permission on Mojang's part, which is illegal. In the end, no one can bust you for anything except for Mojang, and I would love to see how that court case would go. Mojang going after individual users of mods is NOT going to happen. I wouldn't worry about getting in legal trouble over hosting a Tekkit server OP. No one will give a two penny fuck about your rinky dink Tekkit server, and the legalities revolving around it .
RyanTheAllmighty Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 Just best to not ask and do it, ive never heard of a server getting a Cease & Desist letter because of it
disconsented Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 Its all one giant grey zone. Not all of the mods in Tekkit are used with permission from their respective developers, but then again, those mods are modifications of minecraft code without permission on Mojang's part, which is illegal. In the end, no one can bust you for anything except for Mojang, and I would love to see how that court case would go. Mojang going after individual users of mods is NOT going to happen. I wouldn't worry about getting in legal trouble over hosting a Tekkit server OP. No on will give a two penny fuck about your rinky dink Tekkit server, and the legalities revolving around it . Not true, Notch supports modding. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110403192724AADbxiA http://www.instructables.com/answers/Is-it-legal-to-make-mods-for-Minecraft/ But the tekkit pack is on a technicality possibly illegal due each of the individual modders legal agreements.
Brunswick Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 Not true, Notch supports modding. His EULA and license agreements disagree.
jakj Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 Oh god, not this shit again. Come on, people. Minecraft ToS prohibits modding. Most modders' copyright claims are bullshit due to derivation, lack of fair use, and ToS violation. 97.486% of all Minecraft modding is not actually legal. LET IT DIE STOP TALKING ABOUT IT OH GOD WHY
Ragnar Homsar Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 No-one's gonna sue you over your dinky little server anyway. No modder has enough time, money, or patience to actually sue you for using their mods in an "ILLEGAL MODPACK WAAAAAAAH".
disconsented Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 His EULA and license agreements disagree. Source?
perpetualgamer Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 Source? I would have thought the source would be blatantly obvious, but since its not. http://www.minecraft.net/terms Is your name pink for a reason?
Jay? Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 Source? Do not distribute anything we've made. This includes, but not limited to, the client or the server software for the game. This also includes modified versions of anything we've made.
jakj Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 And for the terminally stupid, even though a "mod" is installed in the mods folder (usually) instead of actually in the .jar, that is still modifying the game, because guess what! All Modloader does is load it into the .jar in memory at runtime instead of physically ahead of time. The only non-modification modding is externals like MCEdit. Good gods, I'm getting tired of having to explain this.
Wolvenmoon Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 It doesn't matter. The only issue Technic could have is if a modder sued them for illegal distribution - or made enough noise saying they were going to. In which case Technic could simply add it in to their downloader to download the original mod from the mod maker's source, and apply any changes or secret sauce to the mod after downloading it from the authorized distribution source. There is no moral ambiguity over usage of the Technic pack or Tekkit. There is no legal gray area outside of distribution. Modders (or even programmers) may NOT prevent end user modifications of their mods or software, just distribution of their own original code. (Mentioning reverse engineering here would instantly identify someone as derpier than a post-Simon derpy bird.) This means that, if software/unmodded code was name brand patented craft paper and mods were home made dried spaghetti, no one can sue if you distribute spaghetti to glue on the craft paper. Tekkit happens to be a particular glue-by-numbers spaghetti-on-paper crafting recipe, and that makes some spaghetti makers very angry, and Tekkit might have to stop distributing spaghetti, but spaghetti recipes are out of control of spaghetti makers and they'll just have to get over it, or stop making and giving away spaghetti. (Noodles.) No EULA is applicable. Notch prohibits the redistribution of Minecraft code without an explicit exemption. This does not make him anti-modding, it makes him anti-forking. I'm not sure what kind of bastard he is to make us eat spaghetti without a fork, but vikings have some odd feti obsessions.
perpetualgamer Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 *Legal Stuff Ok so I might be wrong but its worth the public embarrassment just for this analogy. Your "explanation", that technic would be in trouble for distribution made me think of this golden thought. Given the EULA and TOS: A Mod Maker who stole some code from Mojang, yelling at a ModPack for using its code, is like a Drug Dealer, who stole his drugs from some cops, yelling at the junkie for sniffing it. Even if it makes some kind of retarded sense, they have no ground to REALLY stand on unless they are Mojang. A Mod Maker CANNOT sue, for any reason whatsoever, a ModPack. (based on my limited knowledge of life and liberty). PS. Even if they did sue, i'm sure it would get laughed outta court by a 60 year old judge.
Wolvenmoon Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 Not quite, but almost. The mods are like fanart. They don't contain original Minecraft code. http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/accesscontrol.html The mods use public Minecraft methods, Tekkit uses what the mods don't hide, more or less. The times where there are exceptions aren't noteworthy. Mojang has no ability or right to sue a mod that does not contain Mojang code unless said mod is explicitly against the law, I.E. a crack, and then those laws vary from country to country. (I miss programming so much.)
Brunswick Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 Fanart is pretty legally wonky, or at least from what I learned with the stupid SOPA/PIPA act circus.
jakj Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 "public Minecraft methods" Oh god, so this is where that smell of bullshit was coming from. I hope you aren't under some delusion that using the Java keyword "public" somehow has an influence on the legality of the issue. Minecraft does not have a modding API. Minecraft does not have any API at all. The only way to get Minecraft to behave differently in any way is to modify its code via decompilation, and substitution before or at runtime. Whether you do that by distributing base classes, or you do that by utilizing Modloader, or you do it by writing your own custom class loader off of javassist, you are modifying Minecraft. There is no legal, practical, or logical way to escape that fact. All "mods" (as we use the term) are a violation of Minecraft's ToS the moment you distribute them. The ToS allows you to modify Minecraft for personal use but NOT TO DISTRIBUTE THEM. So less bullshit about "public" interfaces, please.
Krid Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 Minecraft ToS prohibits modding. No, it prohibits distribution of Minecraft files and altered versions thereof. Any mod distributed in such a way that doesn't include any Minecraft files is perfectly legal. Diff patches, as they only include information required to change the original file into a new file, fall under fair use. The license mentions distribution of modified files, but not minimal excerpts taken from those files. That doesn't mean it's permitted, just that a court would have to decide if that's actually violating the license or not. License violations and copyright violations are not the same things, however. Bukkit plugins don't even alter the original files. Those are completely legal, even if bucket itself were not. Most modders' copyright claims are bullshit due to derivation' date=' lack of fair use, and ToS violation.[/quote'] The ToS doesn't change copyright ownership. It doesn't even mention it. Under the Berne convention you own the copyright for everything you create barring a specific agreement otherwise; all other legal issues are irrelevant. Fair use doesn't extend to license violations, but licenses and copyrights are not the same thing. For derivative works you own the copyright on the differences between the original work and the modified work. So no, their claims are not bullshit. They actually do have legitimate copyright claims to what they have personally made, and that copyright protection exists even if they're violating a license agreement. Now, getting back to the issue at hand? Copyright violations punish the distributor, not the person who receives it. Even if distributing a mod were a violation, obtaining or using it would not be a violation. In terms of copyright, running a modified server is completely permissible. Licenses punish the violator, but only for their violations. Minecraft's terms don't forbid creating, obtaining, or using modified files, just distributing them. Also, nobody here is a lawyer. Everybody is clueless about what they're talking about. In short? If you can legally run a Minecraft server, you can legally run a modified Minecraft server. If you're worried about legality then just don't put any mods up for download.
DragnHntr Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 Any mod distributed in such a way that doesn't include any Minecraft files is perfectly legal. but... Do not distribute anything we've made. This includes, but not limited to, the client or the server software for the game. This also includes modified versions of anything we've made. and according to jakj (and I believe him): Minecraft does not have a modding API. Minecraft does not have any API at all. The only way to get Minecraft to behave differently in any way is to modify its code via decompilation, and substitution before or at runtime. Whether you do that by distributing base classes, or you do that by utilizing Modloader, or you do it by writing your own custom class loader off of javassist, you are modifying Minecraft. Minecraft says you cant distribute modifications of our code. Mods are distributed modifications of minecraft code. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. You are saying that even though it is based on decompiled minecraft code that they wrote it and it is therefore their code, so let me make a completely ridiculous and probably irrelevent comparison. If I take a copy of someone elses copyrighted painting and draw a moustache on it, does that make it my art and I can now sell it as my own?
saintnicster Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 but... and according to jakj (and I believe him): Minecraft says you cant distribute modifications of our code. Mods are distributed modifications of minecraft code. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. You are saying that even though it is based on decompiled minecraft code that they wrote it and it is therefore their code, so let me make a completely ridiculous and probably irrelevent comparison. If I take a copy of someone elses copyrighted painting and draw a moustache on it, does that make it my art and I can now sell it as my own? The key there is "modified versions of the files". As jakj has also brought up before, it is possible to create and distribute files that map the binary differences between two versions of a file (jar or otherwise), and then have a program to manually flip those bits change the files to the newer versions. As an example, we aren't allowed to re-distribute the jar files, but MCNostalgia works using the above practice to allow the user to roll back the bits to previous versions of minecraft.
jakj Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 MCNostalgia's patching doesn't create modified versions of Minecraft; only restores versions previously distributed by Mojang. By doing binary patches, they prevent copyright violation, and by not modifiying the files, they prevent ToS violation. I may not be a lawyer, but I am willing to bet a very large sum of money that any judge in the entire United States (and by extension, nations that treat with the US), would look at how Modloader works and immediately rule it modification of the binary code. You can argue until you're blue in the face that it is not practically a modification, but it is effectively one, and it is functionally one, and it is--in every way except the most technical--one. That is what matters for the law.
perpetualgamer Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 The ToS doesn't change copyright ownership. It doesn't even mention it. Under the Berne convention you own the copyright for everything you create barring a specific agreement otherwise; all other legal issues are irrelevant The Berne three step test: Right of Reproduction: 1. Generally; 2. Possible exceptions; 3. Sound and visual recordings - (1) Authors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form. (2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproduction of such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. (3) Any sound or visual recording shall be considered as a reproduction for the purposes of this Convention. Now I am not a lawyer but even to me it sounds like Mojang being the author has exclusive right to reproductions (alterings) of minecraft. In ANY manner or FORM.
aerospark Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 I could be totally ignorant about this, but isn't mojang funding bukkit?
perpetualgamer Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 I could be totally ignorant about this, but isn't mojang funding bukkit? That article looks more like mojang HIRED Bukkit developers, thus meaning that Mojang is still only really working with Mojang.
Krid Posted May 18, 2012 Posted May 18, 2012 Now I am not a lawyer but even to me it sounds like Mojang being the author has exclusive right to reproductions (alterings) of minecraft. In ANY manner or FORM. Yes, they do. Meaning that people can't distribute altered versions without the permission of the one who created the original. The changes they make, however, are owned solely by themselves, and the data required to modify the original into a new form is not itself an altered version of the original. Copyrights are about Rights to Copy. Hence the name. What people do with their own legitimate copy is not restricted by copyright. Mojang can't use copyright against people who distribute mods unless the distributed mods actually contain something Mojang created. Generally a license can be used to prohibit unauthorized modifications of a work or to prevent the modifications themselves from being distributed, but the Minecraft site explicitly prohibits distributing modified files. I am fairly certain that the intent here is to prevent dissemination of Minecraft or derivatives thereof to people who don't own their own copy. Statements made by Notch and other Mojang staff lend strong support to this reading, and with contracts intent is considered when deciding how to rule on something the contract doesn't make clear. Beyond that? The official Minecraft forums have an entire section devoted to the development and distribution of mods. ( http://www.minecraftforum.net/forum/56-mapping-and-modding/ ) This means that mods are officially regarded as acceptable. In fact, the rules of the modding forum, as posted by an administrator appointed by Mojang, state "Must modify the minecraft.jar file". TL;DR: Mods are legal and copyright their authors.
Recommended Posts