On the new ToS.

Általa írva Quantum027, 15.03.2015 at 21:05

Általa írva brianwl, 15.03.2015 at 20:18

I've read this thread... so much good content, i don't know where to begin, so let's start back at the ToS changes... and why they may have been done that way...

Based on the initial post, let's assume the map creators provide a positive addition to AW, by creating excellent maps...

Let's put this in a legal perspective then - the map makers, who tend to make some fairly steep demands over control, could, in a legal framework, make a valid argument that their contributions are adding value to the game.

They would then have a claim on profits, proceeds and control of AW, if there were no ToS protection.

So Amok and Ivan wisely put out a ToS which would protect their sorry asses in the event mapmakers went to some court...

Now, i don't know anyone personally... not Amok, Ivan, or any mapmaker, BUT, based on the threads and the tone of the posts, who would be more likely to go to court in order to make money :

Ivan and Amok, who:
♦ maintain they do this in their part time now, that the game doesn't make enough to pay the bills, and is more or less a hobby and joy for them.
♦ don't seem particularly aggressive, disagreeable, or argumentative in their forum posts
♦ don't make many demands from the community, calling for bans of certain players, or more rights and recognition for their creation.
♦ seem authentic in their wish to have non-commercial principals in their marketing of the game, in that it is not 'pay to win' and uses no annoying 'advertisements'

Mapmakers, who:
♦ some of whom, have hundreds of hours of free time to make wonderful maps, yet do not seem to view their maps as 'gifts' to benefit the AW community.
♦ some of whom, have posted frequently aggressive, disagreeable or argumentative posts on the forums.
♦ some of whom, make demands from the community, calling for ban-lists, unilateral decision making, recognition for their creations, and are dissatisfied even when these demands are conceded.
♦ some of whom, despite their abilities in cartography, seem to wish to derive a profit from their creations (as indicated in the initial post), and feel their work is what maintains the quality of the game, and keeps it alive:

Általa írva Guest, 13.03.2015 at 21:53

.... I must protest to the fact that I do not wish for anyone but myself to gain royalties off of my own work. ...

.... Without any sort of quality anymore, your game will die entirely, beyond players eternally addicted, or those stricken with poverty and living in the slums of Whogivesafuckistan....

i could go on, but i think this covers the basic sense of who would be more likely to initiate legal action:

So, Ivar and Amok have simply removed the leverage from the mapmakers to go to court... they are protecting AW, and the game, from having it shut down in a legal process.

NOW, this information could change, IF it turns out Ivar and Amok are secretly selling maps made by map-makers at Sotheby's and E-Bay for outrageous profits:

This seems absurd, but this is exactly what the mapmakers seem to be concerned is happening to their creations.

So, if the above information is reasonably accurate, is it unreasonable for Ivar and Amok to make a change in ToS to protect AW and the community from legal process?

Keeping that question in mind, sure if AW was run by a corporation or the government, absolutely, yes, we should all absolutely have concerns that the ToS was a back-alley approach to steal the hard work of map-makers to benefit their own pockets. However, THIS is AW with a staff of what, two people? It is not some multi-national or military backed government. You have to look at the integrity of the people who are creating the ToS, and what their intent is.

It seems Ivan and Amok have the intent of not having AW fall into the hands of 'some' mapmakers, who, if they went to court, would probably achieve nothing more than destroy the game as the court costs incurred wouldn't cover the costs of running the game.

I have no sense that Ivan and Amok have the intent of becoming billionaire's on the exploitation of map-makers hard work. (though i agree, in a profit and litigation driven culture, i can see why some players might reel at the ToS)

===
i look forward to a further post on this.... ♥

I am not sure about all map makers but I have stated many times that I make maps purely out of enjoyment and I have no reason to receive financial compensation for the maps i have made or help made, however these ToS changes do not just protect against us asking for money, but they basically state that we as the creator have no right, we can not even delete the maps we make, how the hell are we supposed to be expected to make content when the rules state that everything is the admins and that they get a say in everything, this goes back to the banlist issue and everything that has been a hot topic as of late. Admins are creating junk rules to choke map makers out of any right of a map maker's map. I acknowledge that the maps are property of atwar but I do not give atwar the right to publish my map if I do not allow it, nor do I allow atwar to say that the rules I have for my map are unfair to the players who probably wouldnt even play my maps most of the time. That is my issue, I don't give a shit about getting money for the maps I make, I do this for fun and this is not fun when the admins wave their cocks around trying to choke us out of everything that we should have a say in.

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 00:22

That is my point. Since we do not live in Estonia.. there laws do not affect us here, nor do they matter. However, since this site is accessible here in the states.. I am pretty certain they should be following American laws.

Általa írva Fockmeeard, 15.03.2015 at 19:04

"Worker" You're a worker? Were you hired by atwar? Did you sign a contract? Were you promised rewards? No, you are not a worker. You are a volunteer. You worked knowing there will be no benefit. You worked knowing that there is no compensation as no compensation was mentioned when you brought atwar features to build a map.

Általa írva Goblin, 16.03.2015 at 07:58

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 00:22

That is my point. Since we do not live in Estonia.. there laws do not affect us here, nor do they matter. However, since this site is accessible here in the states.. I am pretty certain they should be following American laws.

Omg lol no.

Általa írva RaulPB, 16.03.2015 at 07:25

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 00:22

That is my point. Since we do not live in Estonia.. there laws do not affect us here, nor do they matter. However, since this site is accessible here in the states.. I am pretty certain they should be following American laws.

I really doubt internet works like that.

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 09:22

Általa írva RaulPB, 16.03.2015 at 07:25

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 00:22

That is my point. Since we do not live in Estonia.. there laws do not affect us here, nor do they matter. However, since this site is accessible here in the states.. I am pretty certain they should be following American laws.

I really doubt internet works like that.

If it does or it doesn't, I believe Amok and Ivan should have the decency to notify us about some changes. They are quick to notify us whenever a special is going that involves money. So why couldn't they simply send each of us a message letting us know there has been some changes with the terms of service?

Don't you think that would be the honorable thing to do?

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 09:02

Do you know the actuall laws? Can you share them with us... We are fairly interested.

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 09:22

Don't you think that would be the honorable thing to do?

Általa írva brianwl, 16.03.2015 at 10:02

true... did you ask them why they didn't do this in a p/m ? wouldn't that be honourable thing rather than question their decency in the public forums first...?

Általa írva Goblin, 16.03.2015 at 07:54

Általa írva Fockmeeard, 15.03.2015 at 19:04

"Worker" You're a worker? Were you hired by atwar? Did you sign a contract? Were you promised rewards? No, you are not a worker. You are a volunteer. You worked knowing there will be no benefit. You worked knowing that there is no compensation as no compensation was mentioned when you brought atwar features to build a map.

First you called map makers workers with your metaphore, which is an actual real life situation predicted in laws and now you change your story ...now we are volunteers? LMAO

Last year i was searching the web for volunteer work ...guess what, all does contracts had compensation in mind, good pocket cash, food, place to live.

Guess you would be fine with changes of ToS in which a new paragraph would emerge that says "all life time premiums will end on 17.03.2015. ...you can buy it again for 40$, have a nice day " you agreed with this terms of service by logging in this morning

Im not saying this is illegal ...im saying it's wrong.

Like does web sites that hold the privilage to share your private content etc. ...all according to their ToS, yet many of them got flames for it.

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 11:38

I should state this again, guys: I haven't been on AtWar for months. What exactly did the cartographer community do that all of you keep blaming them for? "Blackmailing", etc. I'm not a part of that, nor are some of my friends. We simply don't want the resources we provided being exploited, and for the abusive and elusive ToS to be made transparent, public, and humane.

Általa írva Fockmeeard, 16.03.2015 at 13:01

I called map makers workers? Where?

Also, for future reference, that was an analogy and 'metaphore' is spelt metaphor.

Volunteering may include compensation IF IT WAS STATED WHEN YOU SIGNED UP but that was not the case here, was it?

Your comparison in regards to premium is invalid. It specifically states here that Lifetime lasts forever. Changing the ToS would invalidate their word.



Nobody ever promised that atwar would never take down your maps. They promised in the pic above to always allow you to create maps but that does not mean the maps you created are prevented from being taken down.

Általa írva Goblin, 16.03.2015 at 13:20

...
I also said that Terms of service everywhere is a controversial topic and many people criticize the unilateral power companies and websites give themselves regarding this.

One of the criticism is also the user generated material that many argue companies have no right to claim absolute ownership over.
...

Általa írva brianwl, 16.03.2015 at 13:54

Companies don't give themselves power... we give them our power by submitting to their rules. We can choose to not give a company business, but it comes down to ease of getting what we want, and so we agree to give them our power in exchange. ☻

Általa írva Goblin, 16.03.2015 at 13:20

Általa írva Fockmeeard, 16.03.2015 at 13:01

I called map makers workers? Where?

Also, for future reference, that was an analogy and 'metaphore' is spelt metaphor.

Volunteering may include compensation IF IT WAS STATED WHEN YOU SIGNED UP but that was not the case here, was it?

Your comparison in regards to premium is invalid. It specifically states here that Lifetime lasts forever. Changing the ToS would invalidate their word.



Nobody ever promised that atwar would never take down your maps. They promised in the pic above to always allow you to create maps but that does not mean the maps you created are prevented from being taken down.

First of all i bet you wouldn't be able to learn how to say properly or write 2 sentences in my language.

Also it specifically stated before the change that i bought custom maps package to "create my own maps" ...yet that is shit now.

Furthermore what the fuck are you talking about maps being taken down? ...do you even know the subject of this topic or are you here just to troll.

And you know that my responses about your little analogy and volunteers is a response that i didn't claim is the same with AW case ...i merely commented about your incorrect analogy and volunteer work.

If you read all what i said you could see that i wrote that what they have done isn't illegal ...but its a dick move, slap in faces of people who help them improve the game.

I also said that Terms of service everywhere is a controversial topic and many people criticize the unilateral power companies and websites give themselves regarding this.

One of the criticism is also the user generated material that many argue companies have no right to claim absolute ownership over.


Now you respond to me in croatian fock ...or in serbian if you like.

P.S. love how you said you guys HATE map makers ...really makes you look objective on the matter.

Általa írva Fockmeeard, 16.03.2015 at 14:31

Being able to make that distiniction is what allows me to be objective.

Általa írva Fockmeeard, 16.03.2015 at 13:12

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 11:38

I should state this again, guys: I haven't been on AtWar for months. What exactly did the cartographer community do that all of you keep blaming them for? "Blackmailing", etc. I'm not a part of that, nor are some of my friends. We simply don't want the resources we provided being exploited, and for the abusive and elusive ToS to be made transparent, public, and humane.

Nobody hates the community of map makers. We hate the arrogance and attitude that many map makers portray. Going back to when mapmakers first wanted the banlist, the whole ideology was "You better give us what we want because we willingly spend our free time doing something you never asked us to do, or else we'll threaten you!!!" and that ideology still seems to be in effect today.

Mapmakers are generous to the community, There is a trade with a steep learning slope when mapmaking. It's not easy. But regardless, you guys hold no right to walk around thinking you deserve the world for what you do.

It is the attitude of the member, not the member himself, that we hate.

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 14:41

I had a huge doc written up as a response to this, but it signed me out when I tried to post it. This is literally the fifth time this has happened. Amok & Ivan need to get their fucking server shit together, this is goddamn ridiculous.

Basically, what I said was: I always was against banlists. They were, and still are, retarded.

We need these three clauses for cartographers:

I. Cartographers own all resources they've made and/or provided for their maps. This includes but is not limited to: Images, Backgrounds, Fonts, Sounds, Ideas, Concepts, and Advertising/String text.

II. Cartographers have the right to publish or un-publish maps that they are the sole, original creator of, or have implicit and proven permission by the sole, original creator of said map, with no intervention into the decision by the Protobytes/AtWar staff in any way, shape, or form. They will only publsh/un-publish the map as requested at the earliest convenience.

III. Cartographers have the right to claim ownership on any and all resources featured in clause I, as long as they do not infringe or come from ProtoBytes/AtWar in any way, shape, or form. IE, you can own anything you make yourself outside of AtWar (Images, Border ideas, stories, etc), but you cannot own the map on AtWar itself.

Does this work?

Általa írva Fockmeeard, 16.03.2015 at 14:43

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 14:41

I had a huge doc written up as a response to this, but it signed me out when I tried to post it. This is literally the fifth time this has happened. Amok & Ivan need to get their fucking server shit together, this is goddamn ridiculous.

Basically, what I said was: I always was against banlists. They were, and still are, retarded.

We need these three clauses for cartographers:

I. Cartographers own all resources they've made and/or provided for their maps. This includes but is not limited to: Images, Backgrounds, Fonts, Sounds, Ideas, Concepts, and Advertising/String text.

II. Cartographers have the right to publish or un-publish maps that they are the sole, original creator of, or have implicit and proven permission by the sole, original creator of said map, with no intervention into the decision by the Protobytes/AtWar staff in any way, shape, or form. They will only publsh/un-publish the map as requested at the earliest convenience.

III. Cartographers have the right to claim ownership on any and all resources featured in clause I, as long as they do not infringe or come from ProtoBytes/AtWar in any way, shape, or form. IE, you can own anything you make yourself outside of AtWar (Images, Border ideas, stories, etc), but you cannot own the map on AtWar itself.

Does this work?

What defines what clause you get put into?

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 14:41

...

Basically, what I said was: I always was against banlists. They were, and still are, retarded.

We need these three clauses for cartographers:

I. Cartographers own all resources they've made and/or provided for their maps. This includes but is not limited to: Images, Backgrounds, Fonts, Sounds, Ideas, Concepts, and Advertising/String text.

II. Cartographers have the right to publish or un-publish maps that they are the sole, original creator of, or have implicit and proven permission by the sole, original creator of said map, with no intervention into the decision by the Protobytes/AtWar staff in any way, shape, or form. They will only publsh/un-publish the map as requested at the earliest convenience.

III. Cartographers have the right to claim ownership on any and all resources featured in clause I, as long as they do not infringe or come from ProtoBytes/AtWar in any way, shape, or form. IE, you can own anything you make yourself outside of AtWar (Images, Border ideas, stories, etc), but you cannot own the map on AtWar itself.

Does this work?

Általa írva brianwl, 16.03.2015 at 14:55

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 14:41

...

Basically, what I said was: I always was against banlists. They were, and still are, retarded.

We need these three clauses for cartographers:

I. Cartographers own all resources they've made and/or provided for their maps. This includes but is not limited to: Images, Backgrounds, Fonts, Sounds, Ideas, Concepts, and Advertising/String text.

II. Cartographers have the right to publish or un-publish maps that they are the sole, original creator of, or have implicit and proven permission by the sole, original creator of said map, with no intervention into the decision by the Protobytes/AtWar staff in any way, shape, or form. They will only publsh/un-publish the map as requested at the earliest convenience.

III. Cartographers have the right to claim ownership on any and all resources featured in clause I, as long as they do not infringe or come from ProtoBytes/AtWar in any way, shape, or form. IE, you can own anything you make yourself outside of AtWar (Images, Border ideas, stories, etc), but you cannot own the map on AtWar itself.

Does this work?

Keep in mind a ToS is a Term of Service... not a ToWM (Terms of What's Mine)

What you propose is reasonable if you were self-publishing. However, you are not. Your maps are co-creations. If you cannot see that, imagine how many AW maps you would make if there were no AW?

I know this sounds like elementary logic, but it's the foundation of why this doesn't work for the game creators. They are looking to keep their creation. If you 'own' all the resources, then you literally 'own' AW, and the game is now at your mercy, and you have done so without any recognition of the developers time and effort. If what you want is simply your own ToS, go create your own AW clone and install your ToS.

Otherwise, consider seriously that perhaps, the developers want to maintain ownership over their creation, which they are literally 'gifting' to people free of charge without advertisement.

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 14:59

Általa írva brianwl, 16.03.2015 at 14:55

Általa írva Guest, 16.03.2015 at 14:41

...

Basically, what I said was: I always was against banlists. They were, and still are, retarded.

We need these three clauses for cartographers:

I. Cartographers own all resources they've made and/or provided for their maps. This includes but is not limited to: Images, Backgrounds, Fonts, Sounds, Ideas, Concepts, and Advertising/String text.

II. Cartographers have the right to publish or un-publish maps that they are the sole, original creator of, or have implicit and proven permission by the sole, original creator of said map, with no intervention into the decision by the Protobytes/AtWar staff in any way, shape, or form. They will only publsh/un-publish the map as requested at the earliest convenience.

III. Cartographers have the right to claim ownership on any and all resources featured in clause I, as long as they do not infringe or come from ProtoBytes/AtWar in any way, shape, or form. IE, you can own anything you make yourself outside of AtWar (Images, Border ideas, stories, etc), but you cannot own the map on AtWar itself.

Does this work?

Keep in mind a ToS is a Term of Service... not a ToWM (Terms of What's Mine)

What you propose is reasonable if you were self-publishing. However, you are not. Your maps are co-creations. If you cannot see that, imagine how many AW maps you would make if there were no AW?

I know this sounds like elementary logic, but it's the foundation of why this doesn't work for the game creators. They are looking to keep their creation. If you 'own' all the resources, then you literally 'own' AW, and the game is now at your mercy, and you have done so without any recognition of the developers time and effort. If what you want is simply your own ToS, go create your own AW clone and install your ToS.

Otherwise, consider seriously that perhaps, the developers want to maintain ownership over their creation, which they are literally 'gifting' to people free of charge without advertisement.

I implicitly stated that resources refers to anything not made by Protobytes for AtWar, or anything stemming from AtWar itself. You would not own any of the creations on AtWar, but simply the intellectual properties behind its creation.

Általa írva Covid19, 16.03.2015 at 15:15

Bla

Általa írva RaulPB, 16.03.2015 at 10:40

Általa írva theFuehrer, 16.03.2015 at 09:22

Don't you think that would be the honorable thing to do?

Általa írva brianwl, 16.03.2015 at 10:02

true... did you ask them why they didn't do this in a p/m ? wouldn't that be honourable thing rather than question their decency in the public forums first...?

You have a point but as the great Brianwl says... you made a mistake as big as the admin's by making this a public cry of attention. Things get solved by talking with each other, not by making problems public and let everyone else besides the resposanble for this action tell their opinion about all this stuff.