jakj Posted May 21, 2012 Posted May 21, 2012 It is a dick move and it is wrong IMO. Kind of like Eloraam explicitly forbidding decompilation or reverse-engineering of her mod produced by the reverse-engineering and decompilation of Minecraft.
Krid Posted May 21, 2012 Posted May 21, 2012 That's not the same thing. In that case, you purchased a car, and have the right to do whatever you want with that car. In this case, you're being given the right to use minecraft, but you do not own it. The example would be more reasonable if you were talking about a rented or leased car. In such a case, you'd better believe they're going to have a fit when they find out you modified it by jamming a stereo system into it. The lease/rent argument is invalid as those carry the expectation that the car will go back at some point. It's also invalid because Minecraft is purchased, not leased or rented - please see the white-on-orange "BUY NOW" button on http://minecraft.net/ for further details. For the record, when I bought my copy of minecraft the only term of service was that I would get all updates free forever. One of the most basic rules of any transaction is that the terms of the transaction can't be changed once money has exchanged hands unless there is a specific agreement allowing the terms to be changed. There was no such term, ergo Mojang can't hold any such terms against me. As they agreed to provide me with free updates forever the normal route for getting around such problems - making people agree to the terms to receive updates - is equally invalid. One of the big reasons we have (or used to have' date=' before modloader) a lot of conflicts, is because a lot of mods modify the same classes. This isn't you putting a stereo system into a stereo system-shaped hole. This is you cutting a hole out of the dashboard, splicing into the wiring, etc. The code being distributed by mod makers is usually largely original code. However, in order to actually make that code work, they have to modify things that are already part of minecraft.[/quote'] Yes. That would be the modification-for-interoperability which is a protected right. Until you consider that minecraftforum is providing a service for Mojang, and Mojang is actually responsible for the actions of people providing services for them. Can you imagine how terrible the world would be if all you had to do to wash your hands of liability was hire somebody to do your dirty work? Consider if the MPAA hired a company to promote, say, The Avengers, and that company posted a torrent for entire movie on the front page of its website. After willfully letting it go on for a few months MPAA decides it doesn't like this and sues everybody who torrented the movie for copyright infringement. Minecraftforum has an official relationship with Mojang, and Mojang is well aware that Minecraftforum actively supports mods and modding. Willful inaction is kind of a big deal here.
ErusPrime Posted May 21, 2012 Posted May 21, 2012 in response to OP: modding is legal, they finally updated their ToS. in order for a mod developer to sue you (USC title 17) they would first have to register their work with the copyright office. Which they can under sec. 106a, but then mojang would have to get involved to determine the legal status of the mod, and most courts would just throw out the case as the mod developer wouldn't be able to prove financial damages so they would have to prove damage the honor or reputation. In the case of running a Tekkit server, they cannot. Modpacks are perfectly legal under USC title 17 sec. 109 "Fair Use" fun fact: BTW is illegal under SCR 336 (i think it's 336. I'm not super familiar with canadian copyright law). Finally, just use it. You're not important. Even if there is a DMCA takedown request, you could easily get it reversed and the aforementioned are some good arguments to make that happen.
jakj Posted May 21, 2012 Posted May 21, 2012 modding is legal, they finally updated their ToS. Where? http://www.minecraft.net/terms still says don't distribute changes.
ErusPrime Posted May 21, 2012 Posted May 21, 2012 Where? http://www.minecraft.net/terms still says don't distribute changes. based on that ToS, you can only distribute original code. If you modify the base minecraft code for your mod, you can't redistribute it.
Mauricio Matos Posted July 3, 2012 Posted July 3, 2012 Yes they said on Term of use that you can distribute MOD plugins or tools .
Mauricio Matos Posted July 3, 2012 Posted July 3, 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 one will give a two penny fuck about your rinky dink Tekkit server, and the legalities revolving around it . Not true . From minecraft Terms of use http://www.minecraft.net/terms Mods ( or plugins or tools ) are cool you can distribute those
disconsented Posted July 3, 2012 Posted July 3, 2012 Not true . From minecraft Terms of use http://www.minecraft.net/terms Mods ( or plugins or tools ) are cool you can distribute those Mods ≠ Pluggins 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
Recommended Posts