Payments, Ownership and Copyright

[Cerez]

The issue of paid commissions and legal ownership of commissioned content needs to be further discussed, so I'm opening this topic here to post your ideas and legal research material, so that the community can get to the bottom of its fears from legal prosecution, reach an understanding of the risks, and find a method for the artists to receive payments for their work if they so choose.

I'll start the discussion with this statement, which I believe to be representing the fundamental moral and legal essence of a commissioned creative work and both the commissioner's and the artist's interests:
 

Just because a commissioned work is referenced from copyrighted material does not mean that it is illegal to pay the artist for their services. This is perfectly legal. In fact, a payment or donation is a sign of respect and appreciation to the artist and their effort.

Feel free to post your ideas, points of view, and researched material/evidence, but I ask that everyone be respectful to each other's wishes and opinions.

[Circa]

All I'm saying is, if this ends up like the others, it will be locked.

[CrimsonStrife]

The game's EULA should provide somewhat of an answer to this, alas I do not have it on hand and cannot find an online version.  Anyone care to enlighten us?

[Lamented]

I personally don't see why people make such a huge deal out of this sort of thing.

 

You want a model from someone. They want money for it. So you should be able to pay them. It's as simple as being jinxed and being forced to pay for a soda for someone so you can talk again.

 

If it's not that simple, then let's put it this way. All someone is doing is making a deal. I don't see the problem in that. This kind of thing really shouldn't be labeled as seriously as it is, imo. In fact, it kind of defeats the purpose of making requests on this website. If money is the only way someone will accept a request and for some reason that isn't allowed... I mean, come on. The people here are practically unmotivated by requests unless money is involved (no offense, not calling you greedy.) It seems less and less like there's any other compromise and frankly, I don't see why people are charging more for the model than it's worth. Doesn't really help the situation rise a millimeter higher than it has already sunk.

[Cerez]

All I'm saying is, if this ends up like the others, it will be locked.

 

Let's hope we're all reasonable and it doesn't.

 

The game's EULA should provide somewhat of an answer to this, alas I do not have it on hand and cannot find an online version.  Anyone care to enlighten us?

 

Good point. That's a good start. Here:

 

 

Aspyr Media, Inc. Software License Agreement

 

Please read this License Agreement ("Agreement') carefully before running this software. By clicking "Agree", you are agreeing to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If you do not agree to these terms and conditions, click "Disagree" and you may return this software package and all included materials, including the Compact Disc or DVD("Disc"), to the place where you obtained it for a refund, if applicable.

 

This Agreement is a legal document between you ("Licensee") and Aspyr Media, Inc ("Aspyr").

 

Limited License; Your Rights and Responsibilities

In consideration of your payment of the license fee (included in the price you paid for the Software) and your agreement to abide by the terms of this Agreement, Aspyr agrees to grant, and you agree to accept on the following terms and conditions, a non-exclusive, limited license to use this software and the accompanying related materials ("Software").

 

This Agreement authorizes you to use the Software on the single microcomputer in which the Disc is installed. Title to the Software will at all times remain with Aspyr and third parties who have granted Aspyr the right to distribute portions of the Software. The Software is proprietary and subject to protection under various intellectual property laws, including copyright throughout the world. Unauthorized copying of the Software, or any portion thereof, is expressly forbidden. You may be held legally responsible for any infringement caused by your failure to abide by the terms of this Agreement. You may not modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software or create any derivative work thereof or any software interfacing with the Software.

 

As the Licensee, you may physically transfer the Software from one computer to another provided that the Software is used on only one computer at a time. You may not (a) electronically transfer the Software from one computer to another over a network, (b) distribute copies of the Software to others, or © print, modify, adapt, translate, or create derivative works based on the graphics or written materials included in the Software without Aspyr's prior written consent which may be withheld.

 

This Agreement is (a) effective until terminated and (b) will terminate immediately without notice from Aspyr if you fail to comply with any of the provisions of this Agreement. Upon termination you must destroy all copies of the Software.

 

Limited Warranty; Limitation of Liability

The Software is delivered "as is" without any warranties except that Aspyr warrants, for a period of ninety (90) days from the date you obtained the Software that the media on which the Software was delivered is not defective.

 

ASPYR MAKES NO OTHER WARRANTIES, AND DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, STATUTORY, EXRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

 

In no event shall Aspyr or any of its licensors, contractors, vendors or suppliers be liable to licensee or any third party for any claims or damages, including, but not limited to any lost profits, lost savings, lost data or any other direct incidental, consequential, indirect or punitive damages, whether resulting from impaired or lost data, software or computer failure or any other cause, even if such damages are caused by Aspyr's own negligence and even if Aspyr is advised of the possibility of such damages, or for any other claim by any user of the software. Aspyr's entire liability to Licensee and all third parties and your exclusive remedy shall be the replacement of the media found to be defective and returned to Aspyr, prepaid with a copy of your purchase receipt by the registered Licensee within ninety (90) days from the date you obtained the Software.

 

No oral or written advice or statement given or made by Aspyr, or its dealers, agents, distributors or employees shall create any warranty or in any way increase the scope of the foregoing warranty.

 

This warranty gives you specific rights. You may have other rights which vary by state and certain limitations contained in the limited warranty may not apply to you. This Agreement shall be governed by the law, other than choice of law rules, of the State of Texas and The United States of America.

 

[Circa]

Let's hope we're all reasonable and it doesn't.

 

 

Good point. That's a good start. Here:

 

 

Aspyr Media, Inc. Software License Agreement

 

Please read this License Agreement ("Agreement') carefully before running this software. By clicking "Agree", you are agreeing to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. If you do not agree to these terms and conditions, click "Disagree" and you may return this software package and all included materials, including the Compact Disc or DVD("Disc"), to the place where you obtained it for a refund, if applicable.

 

This Agreement is a legal document between you ("Licensee") and Aspyr Media, Inc ("Aspyr").

 

Limited License; Your Rights and Responsibilities

In consideration of your payment of the license fee (included in the price you paid for the Software) and your agreement to abide by the terms of this Agreement, Aspyr agrees to grant, and you agree to accept on the following terms and conditions, a non-exclusive, limited license to use this software and the accompanying related materials ("Software").

 

This Agreement authorizes you to use the Software on the single microcomputer in which the Disc is installed. Title to the Software will at all times remain with Aspyr and third parties who have granted Aspyr the right to distribute portions of the Software. The Software is proprietary and subject to protection under various intellectual property laws, including copyright throughout the world. Unauthorized copying of the Software, or any portion thereof, is expressly forbidden. You may be held legally responsible for any infringement caused by your failure to abide by the terms of this Agreement. You may not modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software or create any derivative work thereof or any software interfacing with the Software.

 

As the Licensee, you may physically transfer the Software from one computer to another provided that the Software is used on only one computer at a time. You may not (a) electronically transfer the Software from one computer to another over a network, ( B) distribute copies of the Software to others, or © print, modify, adapt, translate, or create derivative works based on the graphics or written materials included in the Software without Aspyr's prior written consent which may be withheld.

 

This Agreement is (a) effective until terminated and ( B) will terminate immediately without notice from Aspyr if you fail to comply with any of the provisions of this Agreement. Upon termination you must destroy all copies of the Software.

 

Limited Warranty; Limitation of Liability

The Software is delivered "as is" without any warranties except that Aspyr warrants, for a period of ninety (90) days from the date you obtained the Software that the media on which the Software was delivered is not defective.

 

ASPYR MAKES NO OTHER WARRANTIES, AND DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, STATUTORY, EXRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

 

In no event shall Aspyr or any of its licensors, contractors, vendors or suppliers be liable to licensee or any third party for any claims or damages, including, but not limited to any lost profits, lost savings, lost data or any other direct incidental, consequential, indirect or punitive damages, whether resulting from impaired or lost data, software or computer failure or any other cause, even if such damages are caused by Aspyr's own negligence and even if Aspyr is advised of the possibility of such damages, or for any other claim by any user of the software. Aspyr's entire liability to Licensee and all third parties and your exclusive remedy shall be the replacement of the media found to be defective and returned to Aspyr, prepaid with a copy of your purchase receipt by the registered Licensee within ninety (90) days from the date you obtained the Software.

 

No oral or written advice or statement given or made by Aspyr, or its dealers, agents, distributors or employees shall create any warranty or in any way increase the scope of the foregoing warranty.

 

This warranty gives you specific rights. You may have other rights which vary by state and certain limitations contained in the limited warranty may not apply to you. This Agreement shall be governed by the law, other than choice of law rules, of the State of Texas and The United States of America.

 

This is Aspyr's, which is the company that ported the game to Mac. Not sure if that's relevant or not.

[Cerez]

This is Aspyr's, which is the company that ported the game to Mac. Not sure if that's relevant or not.

 

This is the only EULA that I've received with my purchased version of the game. It was purchased on the App Store.

[ensiform]

Official PC EULA
 

SOFTWARE LICENSE AND LIMITED WARRANTY
 
PLEASE READ THIS LICENSE CAREFULLY BEFORE INSTALLING OR USING THE
SOFTWARE.  BY USING THE SOFTWARE, YOU ARE AGREEING TO BE BOUND BY THE
TERMS OF THIS LICENSE.  IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE:
DO NOT INSTALL OR USE THE SOFTWARE, DELETE THE SOFTWARE AND ALL RELATED
FILES FROM YOUR COMPUTER, AND PROMPTLY RETURN THIS PACKAGE AND ITS
CONTENTS TO THE PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A REFUND OR EXCHANGE SUBJECT TO
THE RETURN POLICY OF THE RETAILER.
 
The computer software, artwork, music, and other components included in this
product as such may be updated (collectively referred to as the "Software"), are the
copyrighted property of LucasArts, a division of Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd.
and/or its affiliated entities or divisions, and its licensors (collectively referred to as
"LucasArts").  The Software is licensed (not sold) to you, and LucasArts owns and/or
controls all copyright, trade secret, patent and other proprietary rights in the Software.
You may use the Software on a single computer.  You may not:  (1) copy, distribute,
rent, lease or sublicense all or any portion of the Software; (2) modify or prepare
derivative works of the Software; (3) transmit the Software over a network, by
telephone, or electronically using any means, except in the course of your network
multi-player play of the Software over authorized networks; (4) engage in matchmaking
for multi-player play over unauthorized networks; (5) design or distribute unauthorized
levels; or (6) reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the Software.  You may
transfer the Software, but only if the recipient agrees to accept and be bound by the
terms and conditions of this Agreement.  If you transfer the Software, you must
transfer all components and documentation and erase any copies residing on computer
equipment.  Your rights in and to this license are automatically terminated if and when
you transfer the Software.
 
LucasArts warrants to the original consumer purchaser only that the media
furnished in this Software will be free from defects in materials and workmanship under
normal use for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of purchase (as evidenced by
your receipt).  If the media furnished in this Software proves to be defective, and
provided that the original consumer purchaser returns the media to LucasArts in
accordance with the instructions in this paragraph, LucasArts will replace the defective
media:  (a) free of charge to the original consumer purchaser, if the media proves to be
defective within the ninety (90) day period following the date of purchase, or ( B) for a
fee of $5.00 per Compact Disc, if the media proves to be defective after the expiration
of the ninety (90) day warranty period, provided that the request is made within a
reasonable time from purchase, and LucasArts continues to distribute the CD
commercially.  To obtain a replacement CD, please return the defective CD only,
postage prepaid, to LucasArts, a division of Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd., P.O.
Box 10307, San Rafael, CA 94912, accompanied by proof of date of purchase, a
description of the defect, and your name and return address, as well as a check for
$5.00 made payable to LucasArts per CD if after expiration of the warranty period.
LucasArts will mail a replacement to you.
 
You expressly acknowledge and agree that use of the Software is at your sole
risk.  Except for the limited ninety (90) day warranty on the media set forth above, the
Software and any related documentation or materials are provided "AS IS" and without
warranty of any kind.  LUCASARTS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
AND IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
LUCASARTS DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE FUNCTIONS CONTAINED IN THE
SOFTWARE WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, THAT THE OPERATION OF THE
SOFTWARE WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR-FREE, OR THAT DEFECTS IN THE
SOFTWARE WILL BE CORRECTED.  THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE RESULTS AND
PERFORMANCE OF THE SOFTWARE IS ASSUMED BY YOU AND YOU (AND NOT
LUCASARTS) ASSUME THE ENTIRE COST OF ALL SERVICING, REPAIR AND/OR
CORRECTION.  SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE EXCLUSION OF IMPLIED
WARRANTIES, SO THE ABOVE EXCLUSION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU. 
 
UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE, SHALL LUCASARTS,
OR ITS DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, LICENSORS OR AGENTS, BE LIABLE TO
YOU FOR ANY INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
(INCLUDING DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION,
LOST DATA, LOSS OF BUSINESS INFORMATION, AND THE LIKE) ARISING OUT OF THE
POSSESSION, USE, OR MALFUNCTION OF THIS PRODUCT, INCLUDING WITHOUT
LIMITATION, DAMAGE TO PROPERTY AND, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW,
DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURY, EVEN IF LUCASARTS OR A LUCASARTS
AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGES OR LOSS.  SOME JURISDICTIONS DO NOT ALLOW THE LIMITATION OR
EXCLUSION OF LIABILITY FOR INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, SO THE
ABOVE LIMITATION OR EXCLUSION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.  
YOU AGREE THAT THE LIABILITY OF LUCASARTS ARISING OUT OF ANY KIND OF LEGAL
CLAIM (WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, OR OTHERWISE) WILL NOT EXCEED THE
AMOUNT YOU ORIGINALLY PAID FOR THE USE OF THE SOFTWARE.  YOU AGREE TO
WAIVE ANY RIGHT TO EQUITABLE RELIEF, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, TO ENFORCE THE TERMS HEREOF.
 
THIS WARRANTY GIVES YOU SPECIFIC LEGAL RIGHTS, AND YOU MAY HAVE
OTHER RIGHTS DEPENDING ON THE LAWS IN YOUR STATE.  
 
This Agreement is governed in all respects by the laws of the State of
California as such laws are applied to agreements entered into and to be performed
entirely within California between California residents, and you hereby consent to
personal jurisdiction in California.  You and LucasArts each agree that any claim or
controversy arising out of or related to this Agreement or the Software shall be settled
by expedited binding arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration
Association.  Such arbitration shall take place in Marin County, California, and you waive
any claim that such forum is inconvenient.  Any such claim or controversy shall be
arbitrated solely on an individual basis and shall not be consolidated with a claim of any
other party.  The Arbitrator may not change the terms of this Agreement and may not
award any injunctive or other equitable relief.  If it is judicially determined that any claim
or controversy arising out of or related to this Agreement or the Software cannot be
settled by expedited binding arbitration as noted above, then you agree that any such
claims or controversies shall be brought and maintained in the state courts located within
the County of Marin, State of California or the federal courts of the Northern District of
California, and you waive any claim that either such forum is inconvenient.  The
foregoing shall not preclude LucasArts from seeking any injunctive relief for protection
of LucasArts' intellectual property rights.  If any provision of this Agreement is held to
be invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be struck and the remaining provisions
shall be enforced.   LucasArts’ failure to act with respect to a breach by you or others
does not waive LucasArts’ right to act with respect to subsequent or similar breaches.
This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding and agreement between you and
LucasArts with respect to the subject matter hereof.  Except as provided herein, this
Agreement may not be amended except in a writing signed by both parties; provided,
however, that LucasArts has the right, without notice and/or without a writing signed by
both parties, to amend this Agreement in connection with any modifications or updates
to the Software.
 
If the Software is acquired under agreement with the U.S. government or any
contractor therewith, it is acquired as "commercial computer software" subject to the
provisions hereof, as specified in 48 CFR 12.212 of the FAR and, if acquired for
Department of Defense (DoD) units, 48 CFR 227-7202 of the DoD FAR Supplement, or
sections succeeding thereto.
 
Rules Governing New Levels:  "New Levels" are data that modify, add to, or
substitute for data in the Software, thus modifying, adding to, or replacing levels
provided by LucasArts in the Software, and may also include saved games, and
scenarios created using the skirmish features of the Software.  New Levels may be
permitted by LucasArts, in its sole discretion, on the following conditions.  You agree
that the following conditions apply to your creation of any New Levels:  
(1) New Levels will work only with the retail version of the Software, and may not
work with any demo or Original Equipment Manufacturer (generally known as "OEM")
versions of the Software.  
(2) New Levels may not modify any COM, EXE, DLL or other executable files.  
(3) New Levels must not contain any illegal, scandalous, illicit, defamatory,
libelous, or objectionable material (as may be determined by LucasArts in its sole
discretion), or any material that infringes any trademarks, copyrights, protected works,
publicity, proprietary, or other rights of any third party or of LucasArts.  
(4) New Levels may not include any LucasArts sound effects or music files or
portions thereof.  
(5) New Levels must identify in every description file, on-line description,
read-me, and in comments in the New Level code (if new code is added): (a) the name,
address, and e-mail address of the level’s creators, and ( B) the following disclaimer:
"THIS LEVEL IS NOT MADE, DISTRIBUTED, OR SUPPORTED BY LUCASARTS, A DIVISION
OF LUCASFILM ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY LTD.  ELEMENTS TM & © LUCASARTS, A
DIVISION OF LUCASFILM ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY LTD."  
(6) New Levels may not be sold, bartered, or distributed with any other product
for which any charge is made (other than incidental charges for time spent on-line), but
rather must be distributed free of charge at all times. 
(7) By distributing or permitting the distribution of any New Levels, all creators or
owners of any trademark, copyright, or other right, title or interest therein grant to
LucasArts an irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, sublicensable right to distribute or
exploit the New Level by any means or media (whether now known or hereafter
invented), and to create and distribute by any means or media (whether now known or
hereafter invented) derivative works thereof, and to charge for the distribution of such
New Level or such derivative work, with no obligation to account to any creators or
owners of the New Level in any manner.
(8) LucasArts may revoke your right or permission to use, distribute or make New
Levels at any time and in its sole discretion.
 
LucasArts and the LucasArts logo are registered trademarks of Lucasfilm Ltd.  © 2003
Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd. or Lucasfilm Ltd. & ® or TM  as indicated.  All
rights reserved.
 
This game and manual are each a work of fiction.  All of the characters, events,
locations, logos, and entities portrayed in this game are fictional.  Any resemblance to
real persons, living or dead, or actual events, is purely coincidental.
 
LucasArts, a division of
Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd.
P.O. Box 10307
San Rafael, CA 94912

[CrimsonStrife]

I originally had edited this into my previous post, but given the replies since, I moved it here:

 

 I dug around for a bit and found some articles that can kinda shed some light on why this is viewed as a negative thing:

 

While technically aimed at 'fan-art' (which is also technically what this would be considered) this is what the law says:

 

According to copyright law, copyright holders have the sole right to distribute derivative works based on an original creation. This includes sequels and any other work that includes copyright-able elements from the original creation.

As was confirmed in the “Catcher in the Rye” case, characters can be granted copyright protection as can many other non-expression elements of the original work. This is furthered that most fan creations are built upon plot elements and other copyright-able parts of the original material.

That being said, fair use may protect some fan creations from being an infringement, but that is handled on a case-by-case basis, looking at the facts of the actual work. However, most fan creations, by their very nature, don’t parody or criticize the source material, which would provide a great deal of protection, nor are they highly trans-formative, meaning that they are less likely to win in the even that such a suit takes place. It is also worth noting that fan fiction and fan art can be a trademark violation as well, especially if it uses names and titles in a way that causes confusion as to whether they are official. Trademark disputes over fan creations are rare, but still possible. (Essentially, simply calling a character in a fan creation by their actual name could be considered in violation of this, depending on how it was depicted)

 

Yet, despite a relatively strong legal position, lawsuits over fan fiction and fan art are extremely rare. This is especially odd considering that many of the rights holders who are the most common target of fan creations are also among those most aggressive at stopping other infringement of their work.

 

So the question you're probably asking now @, is why has fan art, and the selling and commissioning of it, thrived?

 

It is kind of an "unspoken rule", from a copyright holder viewpoint, fan fiction and art is usually not very harmful. Fans create works that are openly recognized to be non-canon to the story and are not replacements for the original.  In fact, some feel these fan communities actually serve a valuable service to copyright holders by providing a thriving site for fans to visit, keeping them entertained and engage between official releases. In short, since fan creations don’t take away sales of the original work, they are often seen as free promotion and a way to grow the brand without cost or effort.

 

The bigger issue, however, is the cost of going to war with fans. Being litigious with creators of fan art can be very costly, not just in terms of court costs, but in terms of backlash. No creator wants to sue their fans, especially when the fans aren’t earning revenue, and as such most creators will tolerate fan fiction and art under most circumstances.

Some even go as far as to create fan site kits, for the purpose of aiding the creation of fan Web sites.

 

Fan fiction and fan art communities, in turn, usually have a set of rules that they follow to preserve their symbiotic relationship.

First, they agree to not profit from or sell copies of their creations. Though some of the communities run ads to cover hosting costs, most do not turn any profit and the individual authors never sell their works. Second, they always proclaim that their work is unofficial and has no connection with the creators. Finally, they respond to requests from the copyright holder to remove content and work with the creator as needed.

In short, the community works to ensure they don’t hurt the original creator’s ability to profit from the work and the creator tolerates what is technically a copyright infringement in many cases.

 

Granted, not every fan artist who sells copies of works is pursued, Magic the Gathering, for example, seems to have many artists that sell fan art of the cards but Wizards of the Coast, the makers of the game, don’t seem to actively be pursuing (at least not that I've heard).

Still, that is the most common tipping point between when a fan creation goes from being a “tolerated infringement” to a legal matter.

That being said though, every creator has right to make the choice for themselves where they want the line drawn and to enforce that line as they see fit, an important thing to remember when dealing with fan fiction and fan art.

 

The key point to remember is this: Fan fiction and fan art are, usually, an infringement of the right of the copyright holder to prepare and license derivative works based on the original. This is almost without exception.

However, many copyright holders, for good reasons, tolerate fan art and even encourage it, but this should not be taken as a free-pass to do what you want with the source material. There are many lines that a fan artist can cross and wind up in legal trouble.

Your best bet is to study the rules for your community and obey them closely. If you do that, you should be fine but always remember that your creations only exist through the good graces of the copyright holder and they can change their mind at any point.

 

 

tl;dr version:

 

It is a big messy grey area.

[eezstreet]

The legality of the EULAs are in question because of two things which kinda void them:

• LucasArts is no more, and they are one of the enforcers of said EULA
• The source code was officially sanctioned and released, and releasing a mod with this new source code is (technically) going against the EULA

Before I go any further, let me comment on the OP quote:

 

Just because a commissioned work is referenced from copyrighted material does not mean that it is illegal to pay the artist for their services. This is perfectly legal. In fact, a payment or donation is a sign of respect and appreciation to the artist and their effort.

There's a fine line here between what qualifies as an artist's work and a derivative of the original. If you were to pay an artist for painting over someone else's work, or a recreation of that same work, that's drawing the question of copyright front and center. The copyright laws were put into place to combat this exact thing. If everyone on the planet were allowed to recreate Hillary handbags, there would be an insane market for them, because let's be honest here, who's going to pay that kinda money? Likewise...who's going to pay an absurd amount of money for say, Windows? Or Linux? If I were to sell you a copy of Linux which I made (compiled) myself with special features, do you think this would be morally correct? As far as this standpoint goes...yes. It would be well within my grasp to compile my own fancy version of Ubuntu or something else, change everything, make it better, and then start charging people money for Ubuntu.

 

It doesn't make much sense to call it a 'donation' either, since you can literally change any sentence to use "donate" instead of the word "pay." Let's talk lingo for a sec:

• A donation is considered to be a gift, something which is given out of charity. The point of a donation is to be charitable, or invoke altruism. If I ask you for a donation in exchange for doing something, that's not a donation.
• Philanthropy is the idea of investing in something, with the prospects that it goes towards a good cause, one that may not benefit you directly monetarily, but may make you feel better or give you some sort of object. Example? Kickstarter.
• Payment is the idea of giving someone money in exchange for an object/good or a service being performed.

 

So, what is JKHub's standing on these rules? You'll note that there is no official mention in the rules regarding for-pay projects.

I think we shouldn't allow for an open-affairs "marketplace" of mods, for a variety of reasons:

• It's rather legally shady at this point. I wouldn't want to risk JKH getting sued. I fear that if this place goes down, there won't be any other JK2/A communities out there left, aside from maybe MB2.
• It's lopsided. It takes me five minutes to compile something. It might take a modeller several hours to perfect a model. How much would you be willing to pay for either one? Your choice in payment might surprise you. Furthermore, specific skillsets are going to be difficult to find. If you want a sound professional, be prepared to fork out lots of money due to equipment fees.
• It takes the 'community' out of the community. I pay you for a model. Who is allowed to release it on JKH then? I'm willing to bet that people will buy it, and then say "MINE IS MINE I PAYD FOR IT MIEEEN" and that really does create quite a rift between the buyer and other people who genuinely want that mod. Greed is king, after all.
• It reduces the quality of mods overall. Generally speaking, artists know good art better than normal people know good art. If we're making terrible-looking mods, we'll be none the wiser since we're just paying the piper for the models. I could make you a model that wastes verts, has tons of stupid subdivisions, has no LODs, is poorly rigged, ... and I don't think that would bother you so much. Other people might be bothered. I mean, if you're using it as part of a mod, and that mod happens to go big...that's an eyesore on our community. I'd rather have devoted, learnéd community members making great works of art, rather than people with fat wallets calling the shots.
• It promotes laziness. I understand completely, some people simply do not possess certain skills or they're more involved in another skillset. However, if we wind up turning the Requests board into a giant cluster-fuck of bidding, nobody is going to have the drive to complete projects. It's easy for someone to say "hey, I want a Darth Maul model for my DOTF duel mod" (just first example I thought of) and then completely skimp out on the rest of the mod because they would rather pay someone to complete the mod for them.
• It removes the intrinsic motivation of modding. Enough said. People won't want to mod for passion if they can do it for profit.

I think donating for stuff is okay though. I mean, saying "Oh hey, hit me up if you want a little extra cash in making this model," isn't a bad thing at all. Like I said, there's people who genuinely are in need of others to complete their project, and having a small cash motivation does improve the odds. I just don't want to see this place devolve into a money-fueled marketplace.

Do note that these are my personal opinions here, and they may not reflect the standpoint of all the staff.

[Futuza]

Basically something that CrimsonStrife said is what it boils down to in my opinion

 

 

 

According to copyright law, copyright holders have the sole right to distribute derivative works based on an original creation. This includes sequels and any other work that includes copyright-able elements from the original creation.

 

Therefore, if a model is being made of a copyrighted work there is a risk of the copyright holder taking someone who makes such a thing (or endorses it, or participates in its distribution) to court and suing them.  This is ultimate basis as to why sites like Youtube have to immediately take down videos when they receive take down notices, whether or not the claim is legitimate, simply because the risk that it is legitimate could mean massive amounts of lawsuit money and so forth.

 

The area of fanart isn't really grey area, it just is risky since it is dependent on another entities opinion.  If the copyright holder approves of your works, no risk, you're all good.  If they don't though, you lose.

[Mysterious Stranger]

I think there's a similar topic long long ago but anyway -

 

I've paid someone for a mod (won't tell you which game tho, but its legal stuff was the same) 5 years ago. He had been developing it for a while for his own fun but ran into severe financial issues. I didn't want the mod but since he was my friend, I ended up paying a tiny sum, which to him was a lot, for the source codes. We made an agreement to keep it (the sale) between ourselves and that it was mine. I didn't plan to release the mod. I did use the mod later for others, but didn't charge them.

 

As of present we've had more made (and $ exchanged) maybe more in the future. Money isn't always a pushing factor. Somedays I'm richer and I offer him $50 for a small job and he says no 'cause he's lazy or my request is for the moon. A month later he needs the money or has free time and we're good to go again. But of course I'm willing to wait.

 

I don't think paid mods should be released on JKH unless the guy who paid for it is willing to let it go free for others to enjoy. Save the site and let the guy deal with trouble elsewhere if it arises. If someone genuinely wants the mod but doesn't want to fork out $, he'll have to learn how to make a similar one himself. This applies in the real world.

 

The reducing quality of mods is debatable. Granted I may not have knowledge of what looks are the minimal standard out there, but I am very particular about how I want things to work in my mod. That's why all of these must be laid bare in the contract, that changes can be made (it'd probably cost more though) over time if needed. And there are a few people out there who have the passion to do it beautifully and want or can use extra $. Of course I wouldn't get any random Tom, Dick or Harry to make my stuff. I'd check up on interested people and see what their background is like.

 

Promotes laziness no doubt, but sometimes one single try is enough to fuel personal interest. I'm now messing with one of the mod's source codes because of a tiny bit of success at changing things. It's exciting! What better than to create more things from there and save money by learning how to do it yourself? Still there are people who like to throw money around. Good for them if they have that kind of money.

 

That being said, I've seen people who mod with extreme passion and give away their alpha releases. And when hard times fell, sell the final one for a bigass sum.

 

It's murkier than what goes inside a sewer pipe.

[CrimsonStrife]

@@eezstreet it should be noted that LucasArts does still exist, but only as a licensing company and publisher, no longer a developer. As long as they remain a legal entity the EULA will still hold in that regard. Now the release of the source code might muck with it a bit, but it doesn't change the fact that, technically speaking, ANY mod made that references or contains an IP the maker does not own, is in reality a copyright violation.

 

So @, most mods are already technically illegal by copyright laws, but these are usually tolerated because there is no money involved and it would be stupid expensive to take someone to court over. However, copyright holders have to take action in some cases or risk losing their trademark.

 

The moment we start marketing mods, we become a financial threat, and while fair-use exists, it is viewed on a case by case basis, and typically will only hold water in parody situations.

[Cerez]

(7) By distributing or permitting the distribution of any New Levels, all creators or

owners of any trademark, copyright, or other right, title or interest therein grant to

LucasArts an irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, sublicensable right to distribute or

exploit the New Level by any means or media (whether now known or hereafter

invented), and to create and distribute by any means or media (whether now known or

hereafter invented) derivative works thereof, and to charge for the distribution of such

New Level or such derivative work, with no obligation to account to any creators or

owners of the New Level in any manner.

(8) LucasArts may revoke your right or permission to use, distribute or make New

Levels at any time and in its sole discretion.

Incredible! This effectively means that every map/level mod ever created by a fan is automatically licensed to Lucasfilm Entertainment Company Ltd. with full commercial and distribution rights to the content. They could sell your maps if they wanted to. I haven't seen anything like this in a EULA before.

 

The legality of the EULAs are in question because of two things which kinda void them:

• LucasArts is no more, and they are one of the enforcers of said EULA
• The source code was officially sanctioned and released, and releasing a mod with this new source code is (technically) going against the EULA

I don't think this is technically accurate. Even if LucasArts is no more, the copyright will likely have been transferred to another entity who can still enforce their rights on the content.

 

There's a fine line here between what qualifies as an artist's work and a derivative of the original. If you were to pay an artist for painting over someone else's work, or a recreation of that same work, that's drawing the question of copyright front and center. The copyright laws were put into place to combat this exact thing.

The line is actually quite distinct. If the new artwork is clearly recognisable as containing elements from copyrighted material, you are essentially infringing on copyright.

 

This a guideline excerpt from Elfwood, a creative community that accepts commissioned work from their members:

 

"Beware of copyright infringements! If you do work based on copyrighted material (Pern, Final Fantasy, Dragonlance, etc) be very wary about drawing things that are specific enough to be unique. For example, drawing a person with cybernetic implants isn't a problem, because those have shown up in plenty of movies and books, but using Geordie LaForge's visor from Star Trek is treading on dangerous ground. Likewise, drawing dragons exactly like the ones described in Anne McCaffrey's Pern books is very risky business (McCaffrey being notorious for siccing her lawyers on anyone using her creative material, even people not trying to make money off of it). Usually, a private exchange between two people regarding work with copyright-fringing materials will not be a problem, but beware of advertising your services with any images that may be on the edge of legality, and you may want to brush up on your copyright knowledge so that you know exactly what is acceptable and what isn't."

 

Source: http://www.elfwood.com/farp/guides/comissions.html

 

This actually means that pretty much all that the JK community has created based on characters/locations from the Star Wars universe legally constitutes as copyright infringement, but it is not likely that Disney or Lucasfilm Entertainment will go after this fan content and force it to be removed.

 

Every work of art created by an artist has a copyright of its own associated with it, but in the grand scheme if it is based on other copyrighted material, the owner of that content has the right to revoke the artist's content from circulation.

 

Source: http://www.artslaw.com.au/info-sheets/info-sheet/copyright/#headingh37

 

As for a donation, it has to be made clear that the donated sum is not provided in exchange for the artwork, but as a gift to the artist. And the artist can choose to share their work with the donator if they so choose -- independent of the act of donation.

 

That said, I highly doubt someone is going to chase you for a reasonable amount of money you have given to your friend online for whatever reason.

 

It would be nice to adopt a policy of supporting each other's time and work with donations, but this cannot be done in exchange for services or products!

 

Now that we've dived further into the legal circumstances, I find that my initial statement is unfortunately inaccurate. Fan labour is indeed still considered a grey area in law, and as a community we don't really have any rights that protect our fan-based creative work and most of the content on this website (except entirely original content). We are not really allowed to send/accept payments for commissions on fan art, as we are not in full ownership of the content, and any commercial benefit may draw attention from the affected copyright owners of the content our work is based on.

 

An interesting read (very relevant):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fan_labor

 

After this careful assessment, my views related to paid commissions and creative work here have changed. We need to be mindful at all times that the content we create is primarily for our own use, and that public distribution may be withdrawn at any time by a third party with the necessary copyright.

 

I agree now that fan made mods, maps, and models made that include or represent copyrighted material should not be paid for under any circumstance on this site.

 

However, completely original content may still be sold, so mods/assets that are entirely based on original work technically could be legally sold coupled with the open source engine, I think.

[Cerez]

Thanks @@CrimsonStrife, and thanks to everyone who contributed so far with their research and thoughts.

[Asgarath83]

mmm, well, in few words:

ripped  models: i think someone can use only for his personal use,

if make distribuction, need permission of author. otherwise i think if there is only for personal use or use with some friends, there is no one to bad. 

\ assembled model with merging pieces of other models: need to credits the auctors of original pieces. for distribuction, you need they permission. You can temporally limitated distribuition only if you cannot contact they for the permission. otherwise, if the auctor appear and is disappointed about that, you need to follow his desire.

Model created by yourself: it's your you can decide what do with it.

That's all.

[minilogoguy18]

The problem is like what was sorta said here and said in other request threads is that it means dick that you're paying an artist, the real problem is that you're paying for a copyrighted character that someone else owns legal rights to.

 

None of the requests for such things are ever a true original work.

 

Porting is actually totally OK IF you own the games you're porting from, porting to and not redistributing it.

[eezstreet]

...and yet nobody can pay me for code mods.

[Stoiss]

give me a price @@eezstreet and i will think about it

[Cerez]

Porting is actually totally OK IF you own the games you're porting from, porting to and not redistributing it.

 

Actually no, minilogoguy. Since you're modifying copyrighted assets, you'd be most likely violating both your game EULAs, and that would likely legally require you to delete your games:

 

You may not modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software or create any derivative work thereof or any software interfacing with the Software.

 

This Agreement is (a) effective until terminated and ( B) will terminate immediately without notice from Aspyr if you fail to comply with any of the provisions of this Agreement. Upon termination you must destroy all copies of the Software.

You may not: (2) modify or prepare

derivative works of the Software; (6) reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the Software.

Note that the term "Software" here covers the in-game art as well. Legally you are not allowed to edit or re-use the original assets in any way.

 

...and yet nobody can pay me for code mods.

Create a PayPal account. We will donate.

 

I think we should seriously help each other out like this. It will allow us to spend more time doing what we love. It really doesn't have to be much. Everyone chips in a couple of bucks (if they can, of course), and donations can add up to a nice sum. Depending on how important a project is to the community, this can really help support the people working on it, and speed up or improve the quality of the project.

 

So give up your sugar or coffee addiction and help support a fellow artist/engineer! 

[minilogoguy18]

Aspyr doesn't own Jedi Academy and like already mentioned the copyright to this game is gone but whatev's.

 

I also don't own a Mac so Aspyr couldn't do anything regardless.

[Cerez]

Aspyr doesn't own Jedi Academy and like already mentioned the copyright to this game is gone but whatev's.

 

I also don't own a Mac so Aspyr couldn't do anything regardless.

 

minilogoguy, I quoted relevant sections from the original (PC) game EULA for you there as well. Aspyr owns a license from the original developer/publisher to commercially distribute the game and all its assets, so yes, they do "own" the game in a way. And I seriously doubt that the copyright to the original assets is gone, otherwise we would be able to include all the original assets under a CC license with OpenJK.

[ZanderNao]

I think what everyone's saying so far is quite spot on. Makes sense.

 

Reading the EULA, it amuses me that all new content falls under the term 'new levels' but really includes any mod. The fact that they can't use lucasfilm sound effects was interesting as well, as that's a direct violation.

 

Clause 7 has been gone over in great detail and how all mods belong to Lucasarts, but it was clause 6 that caught my eye.

 

(6) New Levels [all mods] may not be sold, bartered, or distributed with any other product
for which any charge is made (other than incidental charges for time spent on-line), but
rather must be distributed free of charge at all times. 
 

That's an interesting phrasing they used. New content can not be sold along with another product that is charged for. So presumably one could not pay for a conversion mod that includes a variety of maps, or a collection of skins, but a single stand alone 'new level' could be monetized... at least legally.

 

As for morality, the intention of use is never an excuse so it falls back to the fan art example. Disney could prosecute but almost certainly won't.

Would I pay for a mod? Yes, yes I would. I've learned how to modify NPC's, how to reskin, but as for modeling and UV mapping and everything along those lines I'm bitterly hopeless and have not shown any sign of improvements despite years of efforts. I'd like to see some ideas realized, and if I lack the skill it would be nice if there was a way to accomplish it with any resources I did have.

 

That being said, even with money, I'm at the mercy of those with the skills. Does the project interest them? Is it something worth making?

 

And while it's just my opinion, it seems to me that I'd be fine with paying for a mod to be made, the person who made it to get all the credit, and the mod to be released to the internet for free for everyone to enjoy just as the mods have been all this time. We're supporting an eleven year old game because of the freedom it affords us. More than any other game out there, a true novice can dump files into a folder and revolutionize the gaming experience - then swap out for a completely different set. I hope that there continue to be new and exciting ways for the game to evolve, even if it needs monetary help.

[Cerez]

I think you're right, @. If your mod doesn't contain any content or subject copyrighted to LucasArts/Lucasfilm/Disney, I think the EULA allows you to sell your game mod/map/model on an individual basis. You wouldn't be violating the original agreement.

 

Because you own copyright on your work, they are legally not allowed to take that from you, so they can only (sub-)license use of your work, which they have done so using the EULA in clause 7.

[CrimsonStrife]

I don't get what all the talk about LucasArts being gone is about, yes they no longer exist as a developer, but Disney kept them as a legal entity which licenses out the IP to other developers.

 

 

 

LucasArts will now focus on licensing its intellectual property to developers, handing off the task of making “Star Wars” videogames. In transitioning to this new model, the company wil lay off the majority of its staff, keeping a small team that will handle licensing.

 

So all of the contracts and copyrights of the company still exist.

 

References:

http://www.thewrap.com/media/article/lucasarts-cease-making-games-will-lay-most-staff-83891/

http://www.cnet.com/news/disney-shuttering-lucasarts-moving-to-licensed-games-model/