!!7 Days to Die Asset Mod!! ....? What do ya think?

[Spider]

@Prisma501-

Let me calm your fears and state somethings I assumed where apparent. This Mod would be like any other mod that adds assets to 7D2D. It/I/They would legally purchase the asset from the creator and post/include any legalese language that is required by the creator. It/I/They would also plainly and clearly state that the mod could not be re distributed or any parts in it be redistributed. No different than any other mod that adds copyrighted assets currently. The mod would not be the files that are purchased from the creator they would be the 7D2D load ready files it/I/they created. Even if someone else purchased a asset and wanted to donate a 7D2D load ready asset it/I/they would still have to go purchase legally the original asset for legal reasons to include it in the mod.

 

[Alloc]

Not affected but I still wonder why this is even going on for so long for people who say they want to stay legal. Doombringer already brought up the relevant part:

https://unity3d.com/legal/as_termsSection 2.2.1 covers it I believe.

2.2.1 Non-Restricted Assets. The following concerns only Assets that are not Restricted Assets: Licensor grants to the END-USER a non-exclusive, worldwide, and perpetual license to the Asset to integrate it only as incorporated and embedded components of electronic games and digital media and distribute such electronic game and digital media; reproduction and display in distributed physical advertising materials is permitted solely for marketing purposes in respect of such electronic games or digital media. Except for game services software development kits (“Services SDKs”), END-USERS may modify Assets. END-USER may otherwise not reproduce, publicly display, publicly perform, transmit, distribute, sublicense, rent, lease or lend the Assets. It is emphasized that the END-USERS shall not be entitled to distribute or transfer in any way (including, without, limitation by way of sublicense) the Assets in any other way than as integrated components of electronic games and digital media or in supporting physical marketing materials. Without limitation of the foregoing it is emphasized that END-USER shall not be entitled to share the costs related to purchasing an Asset and then let any third party that has contributed to such purchase use such Asset (forum pooling).

I suggest asking the question in the Unity forums for additional clarification if required.

Emphasis added by me: That's pretty specifically forbidding what you're talking about here. Can't be any more precise than that

Also, I agree with Prisma: Even if it *was* ok from a legal standpoint what you're talking about is saying ripping off people is ok because you want to use stuff for free and don't earn anything yourself (IMO).

But either way, not my call what you guys do, just thought I would bring up that quote again as I think it was missed.

 

[Prisma501]

@Prisma501
I think selling assets for mod creators on asset stores is not the main target audience for the asset creators (I might be wrong here), but in general my assumption is that the assets are meant more for video game creation and creation of animated scenes etc.

Not every mod author or team has the luxury to buy expensive assets for their mods just because of the fact, that they won't get anything in return of doing so, while if they would make their own game, eventually if the game would be successful, they could get some return over the investment in the assets they bought to make the game.

If you don't have the luxury, don't use it. There are plenty of free ones around. With your logic I could go a take a Ferrari without paying, because I just can't afford the darn thing. Not making money with it mind you. So all good. Guess it's a morality thingy. I'll leave you to it,. Pris out.

Cheers

 

[Alloc]

I think selling assets for mod creators on asset stores is not the main target audience for the asset creators (I might be wrong here), but in general my assumption is that the assets are meant more for video game creation and creation of animated scenes etc.

If that was the case contacting to the author of the assets you want to use and ask them for permission would solve all your problems already because if they didn't care about such use they would give you the required permission.

 

[Subquake]

@Prisma501

Isn't this the whole reasoning behind making the ATM, so that people without money, could have custom assets in their mods...

@Alloc

"shall not be entitled to share the costs related to purchasing an Asset" - it's a gray area, because people can donate and support mod authors by paypal/patreon/other means and mod creators can spend that money to buy assets if they wish to do so. The supporters don't share the costs, they donate the cash to the mod author and he can do whatever he wants with it without any obligations other than maybe some legally nonbinding promises.

"and then let any third party that has contributed to such purchase use such Asset (forum pooling)" - obviously people, who contribute with donations don't have any rights over the assets obtained by the mod author, that buys assets in question.

 

[Spider]

@Prisma501 Isn't this the whole reasoning behind making the ATM, so that people without money, could have custom assets in their mods...

And saving time for modders in 7D2D that just wanted a different looking plant from vanilla for their mod

*example. How many modders have had to prepare the exact same free asset for 7D2D? Too many is how many

 

[Prisma501]

@Prisma501 Isn't this the whole reasoning behind making the ATM, so that people without money, could have custom assets in their mods...

After reading spider clarifying of leaving out the obvious, no. The way that would be organized would be totally okey. Want this payed asset containing 7dtd ready compiled file? Sure thing! Pls send the evidence of license ownership and it's yours!

So not for peeps who can't afford to buy something they like. That's what the free assets are for imo. But with spiders clarification that would be totally cool imo.

Cheers

 

[Doombringer101]

@Doombringer101-
I have no doubt about the legality of this project it is already being done in other ways on steam and here.

@Guppycur-

Yes I understand you and others already do this on a smaller personal scale. What I am suggesting is we make it less excusive club thing and more a community thing. Also I understand that it does take a lot of work to prepare the assets for 7D2D. But unlike others I believe the purpose of technology is to make things easier for others, for the hard work of one to make the work of others faster and easier. I have no wish to force others to do work that I have already done and I can easily share and I know for a fact that many other modders here also feel the same way I do and also find it aggravating to spend hours doing work that is not necessary because it has already been done. This is why many if not most Modders share their work.

You have no doubt... Haha

Unity gets 30% of the proceeds from asset sales.

As I said go ask the question in the Unity forums to get an 'official' response.

 

[Kubikus]

"Without limitation of the foregoing it is emphasized that END-USER shall not be entitled to share the costs related to purchasing an Asset and then let any third party that has contributed to such purchase use such Asset (forum pooling)."

Sharing costs is not a problem, noone can forbid me to get money from 10 people and then buy an asset. The combination of a) sharing costs and then let a third party (which is someone else than party 1, the seller of the asset and party 2, the immediate buyer) "use" such Asset is forbidden.

But what does that mean, "use such Asset"? What constitutes as "use"?

Answer this: When 7 days to die had store bought assets in the game - and according to Guppy, 7 days to die had store bought assets in the game until at least alpha 14 - was it illegal to mod it? To provide modded XML-files and modded .dll-files?

If it was - then what we want is most likely illegal. If it wasn't - then what we want is most likely legal.

Also, to adress the ethical side of things, consider this:

If, say, a dozen people participate and spend, say, 100 bucks over a year. Which is what I most probably would so. Then we would already spend well over one thousand bucks in the asset store. Who would benefit from that? Everybody. The players, because they get cool new mods. The modders, because their artistic freedom will be greatly increased. The sellers at the asset store, because they sell a lot more assets. And last not least 7dtd, because with more cool mods, the game becomes more attractive for the buyer.

 

[Prisma501]

"

Also, to adress the ethical side of things, consider this:

If, say, a dozen people participate and spend, say, 100 bucks over a year. Which is what I most probably would so. Then we would already spend well over one thousand bucks in the asset store. Who would benefit from that? Everybody. The players, because they get cool new mods. The modders, because their artistic freedom will be greatly increased. The sellers at the asset store, because they sell a lot more assets. And last not least 7dtd, because with more cool mods, the game becomes more attractive for the buyer.

1/12 buys a buggy for 10 bucks. 12/12 use it because it's the coolest buggy ever Income artists is 10 bucks where it should have bee 120 bucks. Repeat 11 times with only 1 random asset. I really don't think the artist will benefit. Only difference is they spend 100 bucks and share all purchases with 11 othes instead of spending 100 bucks and use those assets in their mod only. Only one benefits is the 11.

Cheers

-edit- but again: now that spider has cleared up that modders that will use such a shared asset compiled will have to buy a license for it. Easy access for all modders. No one has to reinvent the wheel to rig the assets into 7dtd and the artist gets payed per use of his work.

 

[Kubikus]

1/12 buys a buggy for 10 bucks. 12/12 use it because it's the coolest buggy ever Income artists is 10 bucks where it should have bee 120 bucks. Repeat 11 times with only 1 random asset. I really don't think the artist will benefit. Only difference is they spend 100 bucks and share all purchases with 11 othes instead of spending 100 bucks and use those assets in their mod only. Only one benefits is the 11.
Cheers

You make the mistake to assume that if we would not have this collab, we'd all buy the asset individually. No. I would not buy an asset ever. I don't even know how to put it in the game. Without the collab, not a single penny of my money will ever go to the asset store.

 

[Prisma501]

You make the mistake to assume that if we would not have this collab, we'd all buy the asset individually. No. I would not buy an asset ever. I don't even know how to put it in the game. Without the collab, not a single penny of my money will ever go to the asset store.

Then still the buying once sharing 11 times doesn't make sense.The coalition is a modders collaboration. They share knowledge and work.So you want the buggy and ate in the coalition. You let "it" buy it and "it" will make a 7dtd ready file from it. Now you can use it in your mod. Perfect. You wouldn't have bought it without the coalition. Now the other members of this coalition can use this compiled asset also. Easy peasy no work. Just buy the license and you re good to go. But spider already cleared up that that will be the case. And in that form it's a beautiful initiative imo.

Cheers

 

[Subquake]

What Kubikus wants is basically to get custom assets, that someone else payed for and spent time to make them game ready and be able to use them as basis for his mods without ever contributing financially or otherwise (by preparing the asset for the game) and sitting on the backs of the people, that would invest and donate to the ATM team to buy the assets, now how fair would that be in regards to the poor souls of ATM, that would invest their time, hard work and above all else money to obtain them assets?

You make the mistake to assume that if we would not have this collab, we'd all buy the asset individually. No. I would not buy an asset ever. I don't even know how to put it in the game. Without the collab, not a single penny of my money will ever go to the asset store.

That's the problem, you have no perception how hard it is to make assets game ready.
Now I don't have anything against Kubikus personally, but people like him, that don't want to invest in any way, shape or form and sit on other peoples hard work and investment is just....

 

[Guppycur]

It's funny how people argue so vehemently for "free"...

 

[Spider]

Well what I gather from the discussion and comments is that this is legal doable and would be enjoyed by many. No one would be forced to donate money, anyone could download and enjoy the part of the mod they wanted to, no one could redistribute any part of it only offer a link to the Asset Mod and instructions on what Mod Pack in the Asset Mod they would need for their mods.

I'm planning on spending money on assets anyway so I will just start with what I buy for True Survival and go from there see what happens.

 

[Guppycur]

How do you gather that, when it's been pointed out twice that it's not?

- - - Updated - - -

Look, I'm all for sharing, just not stealing.

 

[Kubikus]

Well what I gather from the discussion and comments is that this is legal doable and would be enjoyed by many. No one would be forced to donate money, anyone could download and enjoy the part of the mod they wanted to, no one could redistribute any part of it only offer a link to the Asset Mod and instructions on what Mod Pack in the Asset Mod they would need for their mods.
I'm planning on spending money on assets anyway so I will just start with what I buy for True Survival and go from there see what happens.

I would make a first small contribution, this guy looks alright:
https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/characters/creatures/skeleton-24305

More, if the project gains traction.

How do you want to go about donations and so on? Did you consider founding some kind of company or organisation? What if you, for whatever reason, will not continue to work on the project? If this gets the support it deserves, it might easily end up being quite valuable, and with 7dtd still being developed, the master mod would probably have to be updated to the next alphas and the final version.

I also suggest that you at least disclose what kind of assets are being bought as soon as they are being bought, along with the number of people who contributed. If they don't want to be named, they should get a number or some kind of identifier. For transparency.

What Kubikus wants is basically to get custom assets, that someone else payed for and spent time to make them game ready and be able to use them as basis for his mods without ever contributing financially or otherwise (by preparing the asset for the game) and sitting on the backs of the people, that would invest and donate to the ATM team to buy the assets, now how fair would that be in regards to the poor souls of ATM, that would invest their time, hard work and above all else money to obtain them assets?
That's the problem, you have no perception how hard it is to make assets game ready.

Now I don't have anything against Kubikus personally, but people like him, that don't want to invest in any way, shape or form and sit on other peoples hard work and investment is just....

I would contribute work as well, if I knew how. I'll gladly do XML-stuff, if I can. I'd "even" get into the SDX side of things, if need be, but I believe that only the person who bought the assets can work with them anyway. How you conclude I don't want to pay after I've been talking about three digit contributions is beyond me, though. Well, not really of course, prejudice and such. *shrugs*

Then still the buying once sharing 11 times doesn't make sense.

Yes it does. You actually explain how:

The coalition is a modders collaboration. They share knowledge and work.So you want the buggy and ate in the coalition. You let "it" buy it and "it" will make a 7dtd ready file from it. Now you can use it in your mod. Perfect. You wouldn't have bought it without the coalition. Now the other members of this coalition can use this compiled asset also.

See, that's how it makes sense. It's much like getting a discount when buying in bulk.

 

[Spider]

I would suggest I start a Steam group for the mod then we would have forums and be able to view members and stuff.

I don't see a problem with others working on a file its the distributing part that gets you in trouble. As long as the finished file is being transferred back to the copyright owner and only they distribute it all is well.

Maybe we could all suggest assets and the group vote. The asset with the most votes gets purchased and added next? Something like that. I don't know just a thought.

 

[KhaineGB]

Since Alloc and Doombringer have already pointed out where in the unity EULA this is a VERY grey area, I'll just repeat what I posted in the other thread.

This idea would only work if you were to approach 3D artists for commissioned work and they know exactly what you're going to do with it, because then there is no EULA. What you want to do, even with allowing people to use the unity3d file in their mod (important, use... not redistribute) just opens up a whole can of DMCA worms at the very least.

 

[Prisma501]

I would make a first small contribution, this guy looks alright:
https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/characters/creatures/skeleton-24305

More, if the project gains traction.

How do you want to go about donations and so on? Did you consider founding some kind of company or organisation? What if you, for whatever reason, will not continue to work on the project? If this gets the support it deserves, it might easily end up being quite valuable, and with 7dtd still being developed, the master mod would probably have to be updated to the next alphas and the final version.

I also suggest that you at least disclose what kind of assets are being bought as soon as they are being bought, along with the number of people who contributed. If they don't want to be named, they should get a number or some kind of identifier. For transparency.

I would contribute work as well, if I knew how. I'll gladly do XML-stuff, if I can. I'd "even" get into the SDX side of things, if need be, but I believe that only the person who bought the assets can work with them anyway. How you conclude I don't want to pay after I've been talking about three digit contributions is beyond me, though. Well, not really of course, prejudice and such. *shrugs*

Yes it does. You actually explain how:

See, that's how it makes sense. It's much like getting a discount when buying in bulk.

You are not buying in bulk. You totally evade my point. Even cut of the most important part of my post in your quote. If not everyone in the coalition pays for the use of the buggy in my example how can you keep saying the artist is better of selling his asset once instead of 12 times like he should? Perfectly fine to share as said B4, but-just-pay for it if it's a payed asset. Why is that such a prob?

Cheers

-edit- or even better. Just follow allocs suggestion. Just ask if the artist is okey with his asset being paid fir only once and then will be available to an entire modding community for free. Would clear up Al legal and moral questions. Easy thing to do I guess.