open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: CCP Zulu on third party application licensing
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic

Erik CoolBreeze
Amarr
Posted - 2011.06.23 15:19:00 - [61]
 


1 - Can't control api access through contracts, neither to protect your ip or end-users
2 - Incomplete documentation
3 - Overall poor api system
4 - Accepting a license contract? how about binding it to a player's account? same way you make people accept your ToS etc?
5 - license fee = money grubbing little *****, why would I, on top of spending time and money to develop a piece of software, pay ccp as well.

I got plenty more issues, but cba to post them right now.

Photon Ceray
Posted - 2011.06.23 15:56:00 - [62]
 

again, CCP you want to make more money? then do it freaking properly! not in pesky sneaky ways.

Best way to make more money is to fix EVE, make it more fun and attractive, and market it properly.

Not some BS fee that will discourage people investing their time and effort to give a service to the community.

Tel'Kar'Tir
Posted - 2011.06.23 16:13:00 - [63]
 

Can we get rid of aurum please

Lady Britania
Posted - 2011.06.23 18:03:00 - [64]
 

If CCP is hurting so badly for cash I have an idea. Instead of screwing over the community which has put so much of their personal time and effort into making some incredible apps why not start renting advertisement space on Concord's billboards. The ads can be stored local to each users machine that way CCP can target the ads to the right demographic base on the user's A/S/L.

Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.06.24 04:05:00 - [65]
 

Thanks for listening, and for keeping us updated on your plans.

Most of us understand that CCP needs to retain control of its image and intellectual property. Am also fairly sure no-one would have a problem if CCP were to charge for-profit developers $99 or maybe even more. On the other hand, it makes no sense to treat developers who try to offset develoment and hosting costs through ad revenue or donations, or who charge ISK fees for services like they're for-profit businesses.

In such a case it would make more sense to charge non-profit developers a nominal fee, and maybe retain the right to audit those developers' books at most to make sure they're not profiting from CCP's work unfairly.

Popsikle
Minmatar
Caffeine Commodities Company
Posted - 2011.06.24 04:52:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Pierce Alta
Edited by: Pierce Alta on 22/06/2011 18:48:13
Token charge? What's needed for the contract is an exchange of value...I'm certain the creative minds at CCP and their legal counsel can characterize the value exchange in terms of something other than cash.

There are plenty of other third party/community developer arrangements that don't charge anything to the developers (token or not), and still have effective contractual terms.

Besides...a 'token' exchange (and admitting it's merely a token) may have other implications CCP/their legal don't intend. Shocked



I dunno, I was pretty happy with the 99$ license fee. Its small enough to not ever really effect anyone's business model....

If you cant afford 99$ on time fee, hmmm get a job? Its not like most other MMO's or games in general publish the wicked amount of info via dumps and api like ccp does.

Grow up, **** IRL cost REAL money...

Crunchmeister
Sick Tight
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.06.24 05:18:00 - [67]
 

Attempted damage control through sleight of hand. Seems to be a common trend these days. CCP - you're walking on thin ice. Remember, we can easily exist without you. You can't exist without us. Remember that when plotting to bite the hand that feeds you.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.24 06:12:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: Popsikle
Originally by: Pierce Alta
Edited by: Pierce Alta on 22/06/2011 18:48:13
Token charge? What's needed for the contract is an exchange of value...I'm certain the creative minds at CCP and their legal counsel can characterize the value exchange in terms of something other than cash.

There are plenty of other third party/community developer arrangements that don't charge anything to the developers (token or not), and still have effective contractual terms.

Besides...a 'token' exchange (and admitting it's merely a token) may have other implications CCP/their legal don't intend. Shocked



I dunno, I was pretty happy with the 99$ license fee. Its small enough to not ever really effect anyone's business model....

If you cant afford 99$ on time fee, hmmm get a job? Its not like most other MMO's or games in general publish the wicked amount of info via dumps and api like ccp does.

Grow up, **** IRL cost REAL money...


Bolded part is totally wrong. YOU see a game as a business, most other developers already code for a living and play EvE for what it is: a game. They happen to want to share their expertise and their personal made Excel sheets / software for free and all what they want is to offset the hosting costs.

If we wanted a business model we'd develop Apple apps. At least, the market over there is not composed by few thousands of students playing on PLEX.

Also, the italic part is offensive. We are just out of a big world crysis, "get a job" is not even an option in some countries ATM.

Mia Vola
Posted - 2011.06.24 12:24:00 - [69]
 

we need a plex for ccp drive.
I think there drowning in stupid idea's

Lutz Major
Posted - 2011.06.24 13:46:00 - [70]
 

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
These are the questions, and so far I got Z E R O answers.
... and we will not get them either.

It has all been a big misunderstanding! The blog was not set in stone. It was only to get some feedback. Blah blah blah

Nothing will change in the next iteration, except for the token fee (probably $98.99) and maybe the aspect of a free/reduced license for ISK donations. Everything else will remain.

The same as they listened to player feedback for the MarketOrders API or the lolthreads about Aurum prices - which were probably only test values - a misunderstanding you must see!

LifeHatesMe
Posted - 2011.06.24 14:02:00 - [71]
 

Originally by: Lutz Major
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
These are the questions, and so far I got Z E R O answers.
... and we will not get them either.

It has all been a big misunderstanding! The blog was not set in stone. It was only to get some feedback. Blah blah blah

Nothing will change in the next iteration, except for the token fee (probably $98.99) and maybe the aspect of a free/reduced license for ISK donations. Everything else will remain.

The same as they listened to player feedback for the MarketOrders API or the lolthreads about Aurum prices - which were probably only test values - a misunderstanding you must see!
Sadly, while I know your being sarcastic. I agree. Saying "oops, $99 is too much for you devs barely making by with your google ads on your website".. is not going to fly.

I thought about this alot. If I had to choose between $99 / $69 for developing apps on apple iOS / Android respectively.. or making customized programs with the Eve API. I would MUCH rather stick with the former.

The API is better, well documented, and they -listen- to what devs want. I understand the hassle that comes with allowing people access to API, that they can, and do pull in tons of data using some Apps that are poorly written.

If you need money to keep API fast, and updated with the best tech possible. My suggestion is to charge the user base on a teir level. Then on the dev end give some developers seals when they write good programs...

But that again falls into issues, does EVE create it's own "app store"? You need alot of coders to review the code, a database of some sort to store all these applications, connectivity with all the types of services that devs use. (PC, iOS, Android, Blackberry, Java, etc.)

Really EVE, don't you think that your over-stepping your bounds? I can just think of it already, the eve-central database being stored on EVE's web server for $99/year using gigabytes of bandwidth.. something that someone else designed that costs EVE nothing.

Unfortunately, you can't force developers to get rid of their shoddy advertisements, you can't make them do what you want. And if you try, you stand to alienate them. (Especially me.)

Your better off hiring the best ones to work for you, and the bad ones? Just write a token as you call it, that blocks their apps if they don't fix them properly. I'm sure no dev will even read this post.. so I dunno why I even bother :P

Consortium Agent
Posted - 2011.06.24 15:16:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Consortium Agent on 24/06/2011 15:31:21
Originally by: CCP Zulu
What is going on is that we as a company saw the need, and this is coming from all third party developers, that they want to make some money


Ahem. One or two people wanting to sell iPhone/Mobile apps for real money *does not* constitute *all third party developers* requesting this capability. To my knowledge, none of the loyal guard of developers who work so tirelessly to provide services for Eve *want* to charge people RL money for them. You're blanket justification that the developer community cried out for this is a blatant lie. Not unlike many of the others you and your CCP brethren have been passing down to us lately.

Originally by: CCP Zulu
or have the option to charge ISK for services that they are providing to the community.


Err... under your current EULA/TOS we *already have the option to charge ISK for services*. So, that a moot point.

Originally by: CCP Zulu
What we are trying to accomplish is building an environment where we can have as many people developing third party apps as possible while we still maintain a measure of control in how these people portray our IP and brand.


In other words... 'we want to ensure places like EveNews24 only puts out polished and sterilized content about our company. You GD third party developers keep telling the world how much we suck and don't listen to our players and we've decided the best way to combat this is to require everyone to be licensed so we can approve only the people who think we're hot stuff and ban the people who want to be honest about our company. That's just bad press and we don't want the bad press that comes from the poor decisions we make as a company'.

Originally by: CCP Zulu
Now, I feel that the blog that was put out was good in many aspects and we had our lawyers go over the contract to ensure that it is sound.


Nobody has questioned the legality of what CCP has proposed, we've only questioned the morality and ethics behind such a decision. We're sure the lawyer types will ensure the contract is 'sound' to CCP standards. The question becomes - does it pass mustard with the people who have been *giving your game free press, free advertising and making the game actually playable so you can continue to have a company*? So far that answer has been no.

Originally by: CCP Zulu
There were some nuances in there which the community called ‘bullsh!t' on, and rightfully so.


We keep trying to tell CCP they have a loyal base of highly educated, highly intelligent players - but you're internal communications seem to indicate you believe we're all a pack of ill educated dumbasses whom are to be used as the golden geese we are and sucked dry of every penny you can possible get from us. Greed is good! Right, Gordo? So, of course we call bullsh!t when we see it. And lately we've all had to strap on giant sized hip waders to wallow through the muck and mire of the asshat decisions you're making.

Originally by: CCP Zulu
What we are going to do now is go back, factor that in to a new arrangement and try to come up with something which is more to our needs and more to community expectations at the end of summer.


I'm not clear how that poor excuse for a money grab could be any 'more to CCPs needs' and I'm not clear you really understand nor care about the community expectations. I've said it before and you've proven me right before - this will be swept under the rug until the end of the summer when it will be crammed down our throats regardless of if we like it or not. That is exactly CCP's MO on every other hot topic for the last two years - what makes you think you're little video is going to make us think otherwise, exactly?

You're in the middle of a PR nightmare of your own creation. Word in the gaming industry since Incarn'a release is CCP is a joke and more than one gaming journalist has predicted the downfall of CCP within the next 6 mos to a year. I, for one, agree with them. You've barked up too many wrong trees lately. Sad panda. :(

Kerrisone
Posted - 2011.06.24 16:57:00 - [73]
 

Edited by: Kerrisone on 24/06/2011 17:00:42
I said it before and I'll say it again you need models that fit the different developer types, the different 'products' and services and that are aimed at the developer's goals.

Not every developer wants to get rich off thier work, some want a small fee, some just want to cover costs, many just want the option to be 'thanked' by players with isk or $ *IF* they so choose to do so.
Originally by: Kerrisone

What if you have no website and do provide a 'service' in game like hauling freight, or do research, does your character need a commercial license or is this only applied to distributed applications and websites that run a service?

Does every site(if you have several) have to get a commercial license? IE someone like Chribba with many sites that may or may not be on the same server.

toneoyay
Minmatar
Venture EVE
Posted - 2011.06.24 22:44:00 - [74]
 

Force us to pay a $99 fee (£61) just so we can use ads to break even on our hosting and domain costs?
No, in a word.

Although I understand what you are trying to achieve, this approach will most likely not work, and will result in the death of many community websites.

I would appreciate it if you could clear up one fact for me: If someone donates ISK to the creator of a 3rd party app, and that creator hasn't said anything like "Please donate" (asked for donations, if you like) does this mean the creator needs a commercial license?

IMHO, you should restrict the $99 license to those seeking to SELL said app ONLY.

Zey Nadar
Gallente
Unknown Soldiers
Posted - 2011.06.25 11:18:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: Lutz Major
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
These are the questions, and so far I got Z E R O answers.
... and we will not get them either.



This seems to be a recurring theme in CCP communication.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.25 12:55:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Zey Nadar
Originally by: Lutz Major
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
These are the questions, and so far I got Z E R O answers.
... and we will not get them either.



This seems to be a recurring theme in CCP communication.


After the recent facts, I understand that I am meant to wear $1000 pants.

Therefore, why would I care for measly $99?

Mars Theran
Caldari
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
Posted - 2011.06.26 16:03:00 - [77]
 

Edited by: Mars Theran on 26/06/2011 16:03:18
Originally by: Seleene
Edited by: Seleene on 22/06/2011 18:42:03

"So no $99. We need a token charge and it is going to happen and we are all good."

So, token charge = 99 cents.

Amirite?

Regardless, I'm glad to see him addressing this issue so directly. Thank you.


Given your history and position; why don't you try helping instead of hindering? .99 cents ffs? $10 is token; .99 cents is a joke; you can't even legally transfer assets for less than a dollar.

GIDGET GLAM
Posted - 2011.06.27 01:56:00 - [78]
 

Yay more examples of CCP leaching and cheap money grabbing antics. Low integrity, zero loyalty and bucket loads of smug responses... these are thee core values of CCP.

Chris Libby
Gallente Heavy Industries
Trinova
Posted - 2011.06.28 12:42:00 - [79]
 

I don't normally post, but I feel I must as these latest changes in EVE are getting to the point where I am considering quitting the game. I don't have any problem with CCP charging a license fee for developers who wish to make a small profit developing software applications based on their API. In fact, I would like to take advantage of this. I consider the $99 a reasonable fee, but I would also demand better API documentation and a method to submit issues related to the API. I would also want to see milestone dates and possible two-way communications with the live game itself. How cool would it be for someone to download an app to read and respond to in-game mail real time? How cool would it be for CCP to not have to support three different mobile clients as developers have taken care of this for them? Would you pay $0.99 for an app like this?

I do not agree with charging players to access their own data (even tho CCP owns it) for their own personal gain. There are a great many Excel and Google Spreadsheets geniuses who utilize this information to enhance their game play in many ways. I also do not agree with charging the developers of great software such as EveHQ, EveMon, etc. or websites such as Eve-Central. These people have donated a great deal of time and resources to the player community, and that community has received much value from these services. I believe that charging for this access will give players an unfair advantage, and possibly making Eve even less attractive to new players.

Well - that's my two cents. I do hope it isn't falling on deaf ears.

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2011.06.28 15:03:00 - [80]
 

Originally by: Eclorc
Edited by: Eclorc on 22/06/2011 20:36:20
I do get what CCP want to accomplish with this.

An "approved product" or "developer" scheme, is a decent thing to aim for, enhances quality and allows commercial apps to be developed.
As with so many things, the aim is great, but falls down on implementation.

The Devil's in the details.

Etheoma
Posted - 2011.06.28 17:09:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: Etheoma on 28/06/2011 17:17:21
Originally by: Chruker
I doubt any kind of contract requirement will keep people from making sites with advertising and certainly wont protect anybody from harmfull apps.


Well it will at least protect CCP's IP and will also if CCP puts up all the apps/sites that have licences with them and have some kind of way in which you can easily report malicious/useless sites / apps this would protect the careful player but unless CCP enables some kind of search function for these applications/sites that they control and also successfully encourage players to use there list and search facility by making them easy to use and promoting it properly and or give Google and other search engines warnings about malicious sites / apps which should really be done in conjunction with the first idea as well as making it legally binding that third party devs have to follow a code of conduct which they can be prosecuted for if they break all of these things together would help protect users

but yes simply charging third party devs having them sign an agreement and having them registered would not really help players that much without a public centralized list for reporting and searching these sites that the majority of eve players will use.

Eldaec
Posted - 2011.06.28 17:50:00 - [82]
 

I enjoyed the bit where they said they don't want RMT services advertising on third party eve apps.

Presumably this means people signing this can't do business with the CCP Global Virtual Goods Mega Mart and this magical self enforcing CCP contract will collapse reality in on itself creating a wormhole into Hilmar's mind.

Plans within plans...

Etheoma
Posted - 2011.06.28 21:05:00 - [83]
 

I know its a very small number of devs that actually make a profit out of making apps/sites but for those who do make a profit an actual profit after costs i think they should have to pay royalties to eve online to use a companies name and if you are making a profit off there name you should have to pay simple as that but for those not making a profit and often not even managing to break even it is unfair to require any money from them simply because there apps / sites are making up for bad game design which it totally your fault.

Lutz Major
Posted - 2011.06.30 16:57:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: Etheoma
I know its a very small number of devs that actually make a profit out of making apps/sites but for those who do make a profit an actual profit after costs i think they should have to pay royalties to eve online to use a companies name and if you are making a profit off there name you should have to pay simple as that but for those not making a profit and often not even managing to break even it is unfair to require any money from them simply because there apps / sites are making up for bad game design which it totally your fault.
please name at least one dev who makes 'a profit'. Nobody does or did. They contribute countless hours of their free time to enrich EVE.

Another that would interest me is how someone actually proofs that he didn't make any profit to not pay the royalties.

Hel O'Ween
Men On A Mission
EVE Trade Consortium
Posted - 2011.07.01 08:57:00 - [85]
 

Also this gem from the original dev blog (which strangely enough has disappeared from the blog's archive ...):

Quote:

We will continue to provide technical assistance via the Technology Lab forum and IRC channel, but CCP does not offer formal technical support to developers or warrant the API in any way. It's provided as is.



* Continue to provide technical assistance ...?!? This somehow implies that there has been some kind of assistance in the past. This rarely happened.

* It's provided as is.
Yes, we do like announcements like this one, just one week ahead of it's implementation, which breaks tools left and right and even removes features from the API.

And it's almost two weeks after Incarna deployment, but still no sign or announcement when the SDB will be available.

If I'm supposed to sign some kind of license agreement (yes, that includes a free license), I do expect some reliable service in return. And that's not just a working API, but also proper documentation and availability of the SDB prior to the deployment of the expansion.

Xander Hunt
Minmatar
Dead Rats Tell No Tales
Posted - 2011.07.07 22:53:00 - [86]
 

Originally by: From the Forum Post Headings

ccp zulu on third party application licensing
reported by CCP Guard | 2011.06.22 18:14:29 | Comments

Dear space friends,

To date, the EVE Online third party development community was only permitted to sell its products for ISK. After careful consideration of the growing requests for change, we set out to establish a program that will allow these third party developers to charge a fee for their services, if they so choose, but in such a way that also lets CCP protect its intellectual property and protects the EVE Online community from potentially harmful applications.

An overview of our tentative plans were presented last week in a dev blog by CCP Atlas.



RED:
Growing requests from whom and in what regard? To charge RW monies, or for ISK? Where's the balancing point for this change? Someone actually wake up and realize a new revenue possibility, but, then decided to screw it to not only the people who write their stuff for the good of the game for nothing but a possible ISK donation, but to everyone as well? Yeah, its time to allow the developers who want to earn RW money to play your game, but putting the screws to people financially who just want to support their corp with a web page and a database back end FOR NOTHING is a really low blow.

Green:
Glad the developers outside CCP were brought into this, or even had a hint to that this was going on. I sure as hell didn't realize that this particular talk was going on. Glad the head of the table was someone in finance, followed by a lawyer (Both who probably hardly know how to turn on a computer, let alone knew what PHP, CGI, Perl, Apache, IPv4 or TCP is), and not someone who wrote the code supporting the API, or, who actually plays the game.

Yellow:
Anyone who know their way around any kind of IDE knows how the internet works, and knows that it is impossible to protect anyone and everyone. Charging RW monies doesn't do anything to protect against idiots who'll pay the $99 fee and then turn around and manage $10,000 by scamming people with useless applications, installing keyloggers, or whatever. I worked in the business of cleaning peoples computers from viruses for several years, and I've even personally been nailed by one just by going to a web site. Even legitimate applications marked as "SPYWARE FREE" from download sites can be affected. You may be able to go after them for tainting your name (which is already in a questionable state considering the last month or two), but I sense you're not going to anything to recoup a players losses.

Final thoughts:
If you want to turn around a profit out of this, require that developers are to register their software with your site (Free/donation/for pay), and all RW payments are done via CCP. CCP takes a percentage home off registrations, the owner of the software can decide to cash in with taking payment from CCP either by transactions being put into a PayPal account, or in-game time. Any product that is found to be against the policies can have the payment account locked, and any funds acquired that haven't been "paid out" stay with CCP. Requests to the API server are done via a POST and SSL connection to validate the applications access.

Kordel Trask
Posted - 2011.07.16 05:15:00 - [87]
 

So, no new update on this in almost a week.
Anyone heard any news

Kenn
Caldari
McKae Industries and Research
Posted - 2011.08.02 17:22:00 - [88]
 

I liked Xander Hunts suggestion as follows:


Originally by: Xander Hunt
If you want to turn around a profit out of this, require that developers are to register their software with your site (Free/donation/for pay), and all RW payments are done via CCP. CCP takes a percentage home off registrations, the owner of the software can decide to cash in with taking payment from CCP either by transactions being put into a PayPal account, or in-game time. Any product that is found to be against the policies can have the payment account locked, and any funds acquired that haven't been "paid out" stay with CCP. Requests to the API server are done via a POST and SSL connection to validate the applications access.



It's a pay as you make money plan. It provides CCP with a return and protects the developer from loss. No up front costs are involoved although payment by ISK may be nerfed by 3rd parties. However with the Plex program that may result in a workaround as ISK can purchase Plexes which can be sold as GTC (that gets untouched by the liscence as it's double dipping). If the mechanics do not allow transforming Plex to GTC (never worked with that) then that needs to be fixed to make it work.

Sadly the outrage of the community and justifiably so has probably turned the dev away so they fail to see the constructive posts. I too question this move but if the devs feel it's necessary then let us simply find an agreeable way to do this.

I personally see Eve as dying anyway. I am just waiting for that point where I myself leave the game (it's coming soon). Many 3rd party devs have already left the game and some prominent ones too and CCP didn't seem to care. For me its' a very bad sign. Instead of correcting this they instead took the step of driving more away. Whether this was intended or not it shows the state of mind CCP is in. There were better ways of handling this as there were with many things about this game but this is the flavor we get. This is how CCP does business. The writing on the wall is clear to me.

There is still time however and maybe an anvil will fall on their heads and wake them up. Alternative solutions are out there that will work like Xander's shown above. So I won't retire my account just yet. Wink

Xander Hunt
Minmatar
Dead Rats Tell No Tales
Posted - 2011.08.21 09:10:00 - [89]
 

Thanks.

I hope this whole idea has been shelved. I've still not written one line of code since this crap was mentioned that has anything to do with EVE, however, I'm going to have to start soon as I need to keep tabs on some standings in my corp.

Either way, its really sad that the community could be charged for this kinda crap.


Pages: 1 2 [3]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only