open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked Constructive MD related license feedback for CCP
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.17 09:15:00 - [1]
 

Introduction

I am writing this document because CCP announced a new licensing draft that could potentially have an huge impact on Market Discussion operations.
The following are a series of considerations that I ask a CCP Moderator to forward to the licensing department.

The official feedback thread, in fact, has so much volume that this would be pass unseen.

I kindly ask the other MD players to report this thread so a CCP Moderator sees it. (it's the only way).


Market Discussion operations

We are a strong roleplay / metagaming community.
We have investments, bonds, loans, scams YARRRR!!, audits. We have very niche software being produced (mine has been downloaded about 44 times, the largely succesful ones 500 times).

We are extremely heavy into third party ISK transactions, with a metagaming infrastructure that took years to develop.
Many of us have done all in EvE, metagaming and community are the only factors left that still make EvE appealing and worth subscribing for years.


Concerns: regular Market Discussion gameplay

* Bonds, loans, IPOs... this is the bread and butter of this forum (MD) and are often issued by newer players.
With the proposed license this will cease to exist. No new player is going to pay $99 to borrow 500M (it's seen as commercial ISK transaction).
I doubt any experienced player / trader would pay $99 to setup a 10B operation either, the in game margins are razor thin already even without a $99 burden strapped on top of that.

* Audits: some trusted players are ISK paid to perform audits and checks on others. We auditors are one of the major EvE API users (yet we only use it few times per auditee).
Auditing is a community service often with no real gain. In fact, mining is often more lucrative as ISK per hour.

An auditor has to use up to 10 software, has to use EvE-Search and the EvE API. With the proposed changes this profession immediately ceases to exist.
There's no chance we are going to purchase 10 software. Almost all of these software are on Google Ads or Paypal Donate websites that the new license will consider Commercial, therefore these softwares become payware.
Also, auditors may have their own website (I and Kazzac do for sure) where they archive a searchable copy of their reports.
These sites are a free effort purely for the community, yet we are meant to pay $99 on top of 10 X payware software licenses.
This is just unbearable even for the most community oriented player. On top of that, since we usually hold investments collateral as part of the job, or get a ISK fee, we also are considered commercial.
I am sure you may see the implications at stacking such an impossible burden on us.

* Other services
Investees often are borrowed money and they must safeguard it. They are required to safely transport the goods they buy with borrowed money.
They will use Red Frog or some other freighting corporation. With the proposed draft, all those service corporations are going to be considered commercial.
This will probably kill every smaller freighting corporation and Red Frog themselves will have to consider $99 on their balance. In fact they both provide ISK-ware services and are hosted on a website that is classed as commercial.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.17 09:17:00 - [2]
 

Concerns: advanced Market Discussion gameplay

The final licensing scheme should preserve our gameplay.

* As of now, a Third Party service like Chribba's would require a commercial license. This will singlehandedly kill his most prominent activity.
If he can't do his profession he might quit and then shutdown all his well famous EvE-Search, EvE-Agents, EvE-Files etc. websites with great damage for all.

There are also many other people sharing the same profession as well, including me. I would not pay $99, we smaller guys are not going to hold Titans etc. so I would never make the ISK equivalent of $99 in a year.

* There are lenders by profession, they are also going to have to pay $99. This will greatly reduce new players chances to find a willing lender.
With no security in place, EvE is a very dangerous game when we talk about lending money already. If the risk takers have also to pay $99 on top of that... imagine the consequences.

* Software makers: we (yes I am doing everything Razz) are developiong super-niche software that get downloads in the orders of the tens.
It's just impossible to hope to break even by selling these applications. Yet most of our websites have Google ads, even in case we don't get a penny for them (i.e. the free hosting for free software).
How do we cope with having to pay $99 yet the potential market is negligible? I have recovered and fixed ancient applications I give everyone for free yet I have to pay $99 for my hard work?

* Charities: they exist, actually the CCP CEO showcased mine (along with another guy's) in your Fanfest 2011.
These charities have ZERO income, I even pay it the NPC fees and do my own donations so I am well in the negative balance with it.
Many donated to these charities, for > 91B ISK amount just for PLEX for Japan (the other charity, 50B if I recall correctly). Yet, with the proposed licensing scheme, it is commercial and must pay $99. It also got a very, very labor intensive website that also will be considered commercial and have to pay $99.
Is this compatible with the generous community donations effort?


Concerns conclusions

I just skimmed the whole situation. But even with this small picture, it's evident who Market related discussions and game play are going to be completely devastated by the proposed licensing scheme.
There is a community value built around MD, a value built over many years, a value we were given by our predecessors to preserve, to share and to teach to the new player generations.
Please don't make it die.


Suggestions

I have some ideas about the main CCP concerns: preserving IP value, identifying third party IP usage and so on, identifying possible illegal / RMT vendors etc.

Since the blog clearly states CCP are not doing all of this for the money, what about they use the same system I have been asked by a bank?
They ask for a valid driving license / equivalent document copy, a recent bill (i.e. phone), some other personal data and maybe 1-2 papers to fill in (in my case they were tax related). That's it.

Or CCP could do like Paypal, get the $99 to check the legitimacy of the licensee and then refund most of it.


Basically, CCP, we love to help the community and poured in many hours / weeks / months (in my case) into it.
Please don't single-handedly destroy all of this in one day.

Dasola
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.17 09:44:00 - [3]
 

I support this cause by my 4 accounts, used to be 7 but thanks to some ccp changes i figured 4 is enough.

Also put on hold all my eve related programming projects (Not so many of them anyways), so effectively learned how api calls work for nothing.

Thank you ccp for trying to kill your game on purpose. Has been fun 2+ years so far, even if you dont listen your users.


Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro
Posted - 2011.06.17 10:25:00 - [4]
 

Seriously. Stop peddling your lies, half truths and scare stories. It got old quick.

Jerry Pepridge
Posted - 2011.06.17 10:30:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Butthurt rant #20282


Can i have your stuff when you quit ?

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.17 10:34:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 17/06/2011 10:37:25
Originally by: Lauren Hellfury
Seriously. Stop peddling your lies, half truths and scare stories. It got old quick.



If you desire to post your own feedback based on your predictions and hopes, please do so in an appropriate thread.

This one is based on the current version of the written blog, which will stay current until it's revoked or further amended. Work with hopes is not my profession.

Rhivre
Caldari
TarNec
Posted - 2011.06.17 10:40:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Rhivre on 17/06/2011 10:41:52
Current statement. You can choose to interpret what it says however you wish, but at present no changes are being made.

"So what well do is take a step back, harvest feedback from this thread, do an iteration pass on the contract and terms and give you an updated version before the end of summer. Until we have a license that meets our needs and your expectations we will not make any changes to our terms or enforcement thereof."

"Its obvious we have to review and iterate on the contract and program as presented in the devblog since most of the points mentioned in the comments are not in line with its core purpose."


As per the green devblog update:

"I've spoken to Biz Dev and this is something that might be revised, possibly to exclude ISK payments. I'll let you know as soon as I know more. "

Note the green update was PRIOR to the latest update. So, use the latest update for drawing assumptions, not the first draft, which is the smurfed version

The leap to "IPOs are commercial isk" is quite astounding btw. Link to the text where it stated "Selling of shares via the CCP ingame forums is viewed as a commercial transaction and anyone taking part in this, or asking for loans will be subject to the 99 dollar fee"

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.17 10:57:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 17/06/2011 11:02:11
Rhivre I thank you for having written in clear text what I could have typed bad.

The intent of this document is exactly to be inserted in the number of inputs that the mentioned Developer is going to evaluate ("harvest") in order to improve said draft (and yes, this doc is already linked in the full feedback thread).

I.e. this is not about contesting their initiative but to give CCP additional food for thought, so that they have a jumpstart when they will deal with the finer details.
Having MD in the picture since the draft phase is a better way to insure MD won't be added just at the last minute and certainly understimated in its facets.


About the IPOs: the shares part is not covered nor needed (see virtual shares IPOs) for the license. The fact the game "sees" ISK being directed to a person or corporation automatically put focus on such person activity and make them eligible to be suspected (at a minimum) to be an ISK income vehicle and thus eligible for commercial licensing.

Edit: what I mean is that we need CLEAR clauses to tell us what we are allowed to do and what not. Else we are in a grey area and being in grey areas with license lawyers around is never a good idea.

Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro
Posted - 2011.06.17 11:01:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 17/06/2011 10:37:25
Originally by: Lauren Hellfury
Seriously. Stop peddling your lies, half truths and scare stories. It got old quick.



If you desire to post your own feedback based on your predictions and hopes, please do so in an appropriate thread.

This one is based on the current version of the written blog, which will stay current until it's revoked or further amended. Work with hopes is not my profession.



Oh but sweety, I am working with what is in the current version of the blog. When I do mention what I expect to happen it is always done so in a clear manner and flagged as such.


Do you really want me to take apart your posts line by line? You have already tried pulling this bullcrap in GD and I called you on it there. You currently have yet to answer me on how "in-game" operations will require a license when the license is designed for out of game applications, websites and services.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.17 11:19:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 17/06/2011 11:20:23
Originally by: Lauren Hellfury
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 17/06/2011 10:37:25
Originally by: Lauren Hellfury
Seriously. Stop peddling your lies, half truths and scare stories. It got old quick.



If you desire to post your own feedback based on your predictions and hopes, please do so in an appropriate thread.

This one is based on the current version of the written blog, which will stay current until it's revoked or further amended. Work with hopes is not my profession.
Do you really want me to take apart your posts line by line?


Feel free to, in a dedicated thread with such topic.


Quote:

You have already tried pulling this bullcrap in GD and I called you on it there. You currently have yet to answer me on how "in-game" operations will require a license when the license is designed for out of game applications, websites and services.


The dev blog states (even now):

Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license?

Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license.

No distinction about website is being made.


In the patched part it's the same:

2) Regarding this clause:
Q: Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license?
A: Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license.


Also, many prominent corporations have a website as well, which makes them even more eligible:

Red Frog have a website (flagged as commercial) and therefore they'd need to pay.
All the currently audited investments are on a website that will be flagged as commercial.
Mercs advertising their work / public killboard / forum with Shattered Cystal buttons or ads (most common case) will be paid in ISK but are classed as commercial.
I only get ISK fees, yet the audits are on a website and will be classed as commercial (same for EvE Bank, AC155 was talking about this earlier in SCC).

Since the other draft points HAVE the "for website" keyword attached to the questions and answers it means these keywords were used in their context.

Not having "website" been used in the above sentences means it's a general statement including all. This is even more true when we start taking in "legalese" terms.

Brock Nelson
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:06:00 - [11]
 

At the top of the blog

Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.


I doubt CCP thinks that IPO, Bonds and Loans falls under this umbrella.

Strrog
Caldari
Zero Excavations
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:17:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Brock Nelson
At the top of the blog

Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.


I doubt CCP thinks that IPO, Bonds and Loans falls under this umbrella.


However

Q: Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license?
A: Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license.

I am curious if this going to extend to investing, collateral holding, mercenaries, low sec hauling, audits, etc.

The only really thing so far is that they will be asking licenses if you have website related to eve-on-line and will be planning to use APIs.

Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:17:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha

Originally by: Lauren Hellfury
Do you really want me to take apart your posts line by line?


Feel free to, in a dedicated thread with such topic.


No, this thread is the correct place for such things. You say you want this thread to be a place for constructive feedback yet you want that constructive feedback to be based upon your own twisted interpretation and misrepresentation of the devblog.

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Quote:

You have already tried pulling this bullcrap in GD and I called you on it there. You currently have yet to answer me on how "in-game" operations will require a license when the license is designed for out of game applications, websites and services.


The dev blog states (even now):

Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license?

Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license.

No distinction about website is being made.


In the patched part it's the same:

2) Regarding this clause:
Q: Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license?
A: Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license.


This is the devblog about licensing "applications, websites and services for EVE Online" correct? So where exactly is there a lack of distinction?

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Also, many prominent corporations have a website as well, which makes them even more eligible:

Red Frog have a website (flagged as commercial) and therefore they'd need to pay.
All the currently audited investments are on a website that will be flagged as commercial.
Mercs advertising their work / public killboard / forum with Shattered Cystal buttons or ads (most common case) will be paid in ISK but are classed as commercial.
I only get ISK fees, yet the audits are on a website and will be classed as commercial (same for EvE Bank, AC155 was talking about this earlier in SCC).

Since the other draft points HAVE the "for website" keyword attached to the questions and answers it means these keywords were used in their context.

Not having "website" been used in the above sentences means it's a general statement including all. This is even more true when we start taking in "legalese" terms.


Again, they used "website" because it was specific to websites. Without that distinction then it should just be read in context with the rest which is "applications, websites and services for EVE Online". Nowhere does it state that you are required to obtain a license for in-game activities.

*If Red Frog Freight have commercial ads on their website then they will need a commercial license. Why? Because they are monetizing their EVE IP website.

*If Block maintains the paid by ISK ads on the BSAC website then he will need a commercial license. Why? Because he is monetizing (for in-game currency) his EVE IP website.

*If a merc corp/alliance doesn't have any ads on their website offering an in-game service then they will need a free license. Why? Because they are not monetizing their website and they are not providing an external service.

*If you continue auditing people you will need a commercial license. Why? Because you are monetizing an external service for in-game currency.

*If a corp rents a killboard from somewhere that has shattered crystal ads on it then the provider of the killboard will require a commercial license. Why? Because they are monetizing their website.

*If a corp rents a killboard from somewhere that has no ads on it then the provider of the killboard will require a commercial license. Why? Because they are monetizing for in-game currency an external service.

Brock Nelson
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:21:00 - [14]
 

I must've re-read that blog 3 times and I have a hard time trying to figure out how VV sees the proposed changes as a threat to IPO/Bonds/Loans as it's referring to the use of APIs and out of game applications. IPO, bonds and loans do not require the use of 3rd party application nor APIs.

Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:22:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Strrog
Originally by: Brock Nelson
At the top of the blog

Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.


I doubt CCP thinks that IPO, Bonds and Loans falls under this umbrella.


However

Q: Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license?
A: Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license.

I am curious if this going to extend to investing, collateral holding, mercenaries, low sec hauling, audits, etc.

The only really thing so far is that they will be asking licenses if you have website related to eve-on-line and will be planning to use APIs.


You quoted it, but you didn't read it. Here let me help.......

Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.


They are not talking about in-game activities. You do not, as it currently stands, need a commercial license if you want to do 3rd party work in-game.

To extend the argument based on that Q/A to its logically absurd conclusion I will need a commercial license in order to run missions or rat since even if I don't "require" the mission reward/bounties then they will be donated to me anyway.....

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:30:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 17/06/2011 12:35:22
Quote:

Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I doubt CCP thinks that IPO, Bonds and Loans falls under this umbrella



Well, I hope so. They mention "services" though, and how would you classify Deathmourne's lending operation? Or a 3rd party / collateral holder?


Quote:

They are not talking about in-game activities



If I read:

"Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and web based services for EVE Online"

then I'd fully agree.

But the bolded words are not here.

Maybe it's another example of my poor English, and I should assume something unwritten?


Quote:

No, this thread is the correct place for such things. You say you want this thread to be a place for constructive feedback yet you want that constructive feedback to be based upon your own twisted interpretation and misrepresentation of the devblog



No, I have my interpretation and you have yours and both are probably imprecise because of the lack of information. It's why it's addressed to CCP and not you or me.

Therefore all you may achieve is an argument with me, when it's CCP who would take this text and remove the imprecisions and keep the remaining suggestions.

Lauren Hellfury
Full Pocket Aggro
Posted - 2011.06.17 12:41:00 - [17]
 

Edited by: Lauren Hellfury on 17/06/2011 12:42:53
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha

If I read:

"Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and web based services for EVE Online"

then I'd fully agree.

But the bolded words are not here.

Maybe it's another example of my poor English, and I should assume something unwritten?


Possibly, the use of the word "for" indicates that the applications, websites and services are external to EVE Online. If it had mentioned "in EVE Online" then I would be jumping around this much but with you.


It does still leave auditors screwed as it stands since they are providing an out of game service (checking API details, checking websites/forums etc) for an in-game activity (launching/running bonds/IPOs/scams).


"2) Regarding this clause: Q: Will services for in-game currency require a commercial license? A: Yes, if you require any sort of payment for your services you will need a commercial license. I've spoken to Biz Dev and this is something that might be revised, possibly to exclude ISK payments." Gives me hope that the ISK charges will be excluded, but the people that this affects are those that provide jabber/mumble/TS/vent hosting for ISK, web hosting for ISK, signature creating for ISK, killboard renting for ISK etc. Not those that provide strictly in-game related activities for ISK.

Things like acting as a third party, ransoming, WH search and rescue, WH sales, merc work, mission assistance (both help killing and help salvaging/looting) can't be licensed and it's inconceivable that such is or even was the plan.

flakeys
The Great cornholio's
Paper Tiger Coalition
Posted - 2011.06.17 14:19:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Brock Nelson
At the top of the blog

Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.


I doubt CCP thinks that IPO, Bonds and Loans falls under this umbrella.


Would be REALLY odd if that would fall under it indeed.Then you could also take mercenary work ingame under this.Reading it same as brock is , purely for out of game stuff eve related.

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2011.06.17 14:23:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: flakeys
Originally by: Brock Nelson
At the top of the blog

Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.


I doubt CCP thinks that IPO, Bonds and Loans falls under this umbrella.


Would be REALLY odd if that would fall under it indeed.Then you could also take mercenary work ingame under this.Reading it same as brock is , purely for out of game stuff eve related.


I have to agree. Think about all the 0.0 alliances that rent out space! Those alliances would have to pay the yearly fee since they are receiving ISK for it.

Renting space, IPOs, Bonds, Loans, 3rd party collateral holding, 3rd party services, ect will not be affected since they only uses ingame means.




RAW23
Posted - 2011.06.17 14:30:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Breaker77
Renting space, IPOs, Bonds, Loans, 3rd party collateral holding, 3rd party services, ect will not be affected since they only uses ingame means.




What about ingame services, such as those above, that have websites, such as BMBE? Do you think that would count as a commercial site or not?

Breaker77
Gallente
Reclamation Industries
Posted - 2011.06.17 14:35:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: RAW23
Originally by: Breaker77
Renting space, IPOs, Bonds, Loans, 3rd party collateral holding, 3rd party services, ect will not be affected since they only uses ingame means.




What about ingame services, such as those above, that have websites, such as BMBE? Do you think that would count as a commercial site or not?


Does the website have EVE graphics, use the API, or useable in the ingame browser? If so then yes. BMBE has a website and it can be used/viewed with the IGB so it would have to pay.


Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2011.06.17 15:11:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Breaker77
Originally by: RAW23
Originally by: Breaker77
Renting space, IPOs, Bonds, Loans, 3rd party collateral holding, 3rd party services, ect will not be affected since they only uses ingame means.




What about ingame services, such as those above, that have websites, such as BMBE? Do you think that would count as a commercial site or not?


Does the website have EVE graphics, use the API, or useable in the ingame browser? If so then yes. BMBE has a website and it can be used/viewed with the IGB so it would have to pay.




Tornsoul will feel happy, will CCP manage to singlehandedly kill the one functioning "bank" and one of the elder corporations?

Tirestun
Intaki Armaments
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.06.17 15:26:00 - [23]
 

VV, I've been reading your posts for years now, And Hexxx has already said it: You're better than this.

We need to keep in mind that the current devblog is a WIP drawn up. There's not much we can do at the moment except SPECULATE regarding the final content of the License, which won't be done until the end of summer anyways. This, and the umpteen-million threads about the SAME THING is just another thread for arguing semantics and legalese when there's no legalese to discuss in the first place.

Let's all Chill out, here, put ONE thread up in the Assembly Hall, where opinions can be posted and support for Yeas' or Nays' can be kept track of.

Zeta Zhul
Caldari
Preemptive Paranoia
Posted - 2011.06.17 16:49:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Zeta Zhul on 17/06/2011 16:54:27
Originally by: Jerry Pepridge
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Butthurt rant #20282


Can i have your stuff when you quit ?


1. Can I have -your- stuff when you quit? Very Happy

2. Honestly calling this nonsense a "WIP" doesn't excuse it. The basis of good CRM is maintaining a proper communications flow and being extremely careful of what gets put out as official. This ham-handed silliness by CCP shows the only thing they're good at is billing. And generally not even that.

Now most of you folks are hoping that "services" doesn't include whatever it is that you're up to. But that's "hoping" and not "knowing". That is the difference VV is getting at and until there is some serious clarification by an actual adult at CCP nobody really knows.

Hell I'm seriously doubting that anybody at CCP knows at this point either.

Dretzle Omega
Caldari
Global Economy Experts
Posted - 2011.06.17 17:16:00 - [25]
 

To try to claim that the proposed restrictions on out of game use of the API or Eve IP would have any affect on the use of in-game mechanics or this website, such as for use of the market, contracts, 3rd party loans, bonds, and IPOs, puts you in one of two positions.

Either you are stupid and cannot distinguish between the Eve API and the actual client and server you use to play the game.

OR

You're deliberately playing dense to make the issue and CCP sound even worse than it really is. This is a whining tactic used by little children to try to get what they want. It doesn't work.

So, which are you? (The "you" here, of course, being general to anyone that was trying to claim the above.)

If you realize that this only would apply to:

Originally by: Lauren Hellfury


Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.





Then you're on the right track.

cosmoray
Perkone
Posted - 2011.06.17 17:37:00 - [26]
 

Blimey VV you sure try to take the fun out of Internet games.
Do you think you could bore a WOW realm to death also.

I think you would be perfect for an EU official. You would be perfect as a stickler for implementing EU rules and regs.

I thought that my wife telling me about her day on the car ride home was bad but I can't even imagine what you would be like if you had a bad day.

Gabriel Rosencrantz
Gods of Freight
Posted - 2011.06.17 18:06:00 - [27]
 

Edited by: Gabriel Rosencrantz on 17/06/2011 18:13:43
edit: wtf ccp? RF site would qualify? Looks they're rethinking things though. *shrug*

Tau Cabalander
Posted - 2011.06.17 18:18:00 - [28]
 

I am not a lawyer, nor could I afford one to play EVE.

Originally by: CCP Atlas
Grueling legal details
* CCP will license 3rd party developers to create commercial applications and services created using the EVE API, In-Game Browser, Static Data Export, Image Export and Eve Image server.

I think the above quote is pretty specific about what is being licensed, but I must admit the entire wording of the blog leaves a lot of room open for various interpretations.

One of my web pages uses EVE Central, so I suppose if they are affected by licensing, I may be too. However there is nothing in the blog about redistribution, derivative works, or whatever that sort of thing would be called.

Gabriel Rosencrantz
Gods of Freight
Posted - 2011.06.17 18:21:00 - [29]
 

Also, the use of the word "commercial" really throws things off.

Krathos Morpheus
Legion Infernal
Posted - 2011.06.17 18:35:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Dretzle Omega

If you realize that this only would apply to:

Quote:
Starting this summer you will be able to charge people for usage of your applications, websites and services for EVE Online.

The problem is that you will not only be able to, you will be forced to charge or to remove any optional help to ease the costs. Also what is the definition of service? I want to believe you are right and ccp doesn't want those to be included, I almost believe it. Then I see what I believed that ccp changed in the last times.

Damn!, let's believe in what ccp says. Then you see how they supposedly were going to do it. You can never be too sure.

Does this letter make any wrong if you are right?, demanding something that will be included anyways? No.

Does it make any good if they still have not fully understood the scope of what they pretended to do? Yes.

I don't see what the fuss is about. Either it is or it isn't, but you can't know for sure without seeing the final draft. Discussing it may be interesting, but it contributes nothing here, because the document can't do any wrong. If you think it's unnecessary don't sign and ignore, if you think it can be improved or make any wrong raise your voice.


Pages: [1] 2

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