TOS explanation and myths

[Paillan]

So... here we are. Day 2 of... well you already know. For those who are fortunate enough to have avoided the mega rant of the discord server, I bring here a topic that has been brought up there and explained by me time and time again. I hope people can link this thread so we don't have to answer this a million times. Moving on.


What is TOS?
TOS or Terms of Services is best described as an adhesion contract people sign online when using certain online services. It basically states what the service is, what it isn't and were the legal problems will ne solved in case there are any, what the company will be providing you, and, more importantly for this discussion, what the company will expect from you, specially in regards on how you handle their product.


Is TOS legal?
This is a tricky question. While some argue that there is no consent given in a click, as one isn't really signing something with their personal signature, others argue that the forced nature of it all voids the contract to begin with, while the more conservative approach tries to keep at least some parts of the contract as valid, mostly those which are considered fair, for it is argued that a legal document is required when partaking in the act of adquiring an online service, basically, something needs to regulate the relation between the company and customer in the internet.


So what's with the new Warcraft 3 TOS that came out with Warcraft 3: Reforged?
To be very concise and simple, this TOS establishes in one of it's clauses a rule that basically means the following: "Nobody can claim ownership of Warcraft 3 maps, they all belong to blizzard" (this is NOT a direct quote). You can read the entire paragraphs here if you so wish (courtesy of @
deepstrasz)

Spoiler: Lines of the TOS in discussion here

"Game Editors. Certain Games include editing software (hereafter referred as “Game Editor(s)”) that will allow you to create custom games, levels, maps, scenarios or other content (“Custom Games”). For purposes of this Agreement and any agreements referenced herein, “Custom Games” includes all content created using the Game Editor(s), including but not limited to all digital files associated with such Custom Games, as well as (1) all content contained within such files, including but not limited to player and non-player characters, audio and video elements, environments, objects, items, skins, and textures, (2) all titles, trademarks, trade names, character names, or other names and phrases associated with or included within the Custom Game, and (3) any other intellectual property rights contained within the Custom Game, including any and all content, game concepts, methods or ideas. A Custom Game may only be used with the Game’s engine that is associated with a particular Game Editor. The manner in which Custom Games can be used or exploited is set forth in the Custom Game Acceptable Use Policy, the terms of which are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Blizzard may modify, remove, disable, or delete Custom Games at any time in its sole and absolute discretion."

and

"Ownership Custom Games are and shall remain the sole and exclusive property of Blizzard. Without limiting the foregoing, you hereby assign to Blizzard all of your rights, title, and interest in and to all Custom Games, including but not limited to any copyrights in the content of any Custom Games. If for any reason you are prevented or restricted from assigning any rights in the Custom Games to Blizzard, you grant to Blizzard an exclusive, perpetual, worldwide, unconditional, royalty free, irrevocable license enabling Blizzard to fully exploit the Custom Games (or any component thereof) for any purpose and in any manner whatsoever. You further agree that should Blizzard decide that it is necessary, you will execute any future assignments and/or related documents promptly upon receiving such a request from Blizzard in order to effectuate the intent of this paragraph. To the extent you are prohibited from transferring or assigning your moral rights to Blizzard by applicable laws, to the utmost extent legally permitted, you waive any moral rights or similar rights you may have in all such Custom Games, without any remuneration. Without limiting Blizzard’s rights or ownership in the Custom Games, Blizzard reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to remove Custom Games from its systems and/or require that a Custom Game developer cease any and/or all development and distribution of a Custom Game. Please note that your Blizzard account can be subject to disciplinary action in event that you do not comply with Blizzard’s request or this Policy."

Is this legal?
If we go by european and even some of the most unreasonable consumer laws in south america, by any means this is an abusive clause, and is therefore void. However the TOS itself states that the signer and the company will abide by US laws and all conflicts will be resolved by the college of legal arbiters of california. However, this clauses of legal alteration and submition to private jurisdiction can also be considered void for the same reason, as it is in of itself, an abusive clause.
It's a different story for american modders, but some basis for the same arguments can be found (I am not very versed on american laws saddly, so it's beyond my expertise).


How will this affect my map? What can I do?
It won't. Here's how the simple flow chart goes:
1. You make a map
2. Your map becomes popular
3. You decide to make a game about your map
4 blizzard might approach you for comercial reasons and MAYBE tell you to stop
5. You continue developing on your own.
6. Blizzard MAY sue
If blizzard wants to claim ownership of the game idea based on the TOS that gives them ownership of the map according to them, they first need to sue you, which is an active stance that requires blizzard to actively check maps. In a personal opinion, this is aimed at popular maps which blizzard might think have a chance of becoming a game (anyone remember DotA?). However if the Blizzard Dota 2 lawsuit is anything to go by, Blizzard has a large chance of loosing this legal battles after further inquiry I have to apologise for this missinformation. As you can read in the comment section below, someone pointed out that blizzard's and valve's lawsuit was resolved outside of court by a private agreement, making it a very bad example for the sake of this thread. For this reason we have no legal basis to say A or B and it's an open plainfield in cases of users vs blizzard.
I still stand by my opinion that it's unlikely blizzard will sue a user, unless that user really annoys them and ignores their calls, and even then, we can go back to the fact that most of the clauses in the contract can be declared void.


I have been sued. What do I do?
First, don't panic. Contact me and I'll try me best to help you for free as much as I can. Keep in mind that many countries have free lawyers institutions for those who can't afford one, and that their legal advise is probably more suited than mine. Be smart and inform yourself, and most importantly, don't drop the legal battle out of panic. I can only recommend you this however, you are free to do what you feel is best.


Should I even make maps... I don't want to be sued even if I win and I don't want Blizzard to own my work...
This is a more personal opinion again, but I think you absolutely should make maps. As I mentioned, this will mostly fly by you.


I am a coder, modeller or skinner. Does this new TOS affect me?
No. While blizzard said that all content used in maps is theirs, one has to distinguish:
Models can have their own license, meaning that Blizzard can't just say they own the model just because it is being used in a map. Otherwise they are engaging in intelectual property theft. In this case one has two distinct properties: the model property, which belongs to however created it. The map property, which belongs too blizzard. It is recommended you license your models, there are open source free licences in the internet.
You can find open source free licenses here: Choosing a Free License for Your 3D Project. Full disclosure though, I am not responsible for any issues you might encounter trying to license your work or for licensing it.

Skins share the same faith, as they can be licensed as images.

Code is a bit fuzzy. If you use Jass I am sad to tell you that Yes, blizzard owns all Jass codes.

Lua codes and others can be licensed as open source however, and thus protected from this TOS entirely (even if we already discussed that this TOS is not enforcable).


I hope this thread has helped you understand the situation more. Any suggestions from any other lawyers or laws studends here in the hive would be greatly appreaciated, as well as any grammar help (I am not that well versed in english law language).

Kudos, Paillan.

PS: review your sombreros.

 

[deepstrasz]

Well, now that maps won't probably be playable offline but online requiring you to upload them on their platform as with StarCraft II unless you play them directly via the editor, the company can just remove/ban your maps that they think are unlawful without needing to sue you.

 

[Paillan]

Well, now that maps won't probably be playable offline but online requiring you to upload them on their platform as with StarCraft II unless you play them directly via the editor, the company can just remove/ban your maps that they think are unlawful without needing to sue you.

Considering that a report buttom was added for maps, and the sheer volume of map content, I doubt they'll take down checking on upload, rather based on report.
And map legality is something different from map ownership, which is the main discussion.

 

[Deleted member 247165]

I really can't stand this. Why would this come up? I have question, if we used materials from other games such as icons, spell sounds, models too etc, can something bad happen now?

 

[Paillan]

I really can't stand this. Why would this come up? I have question, if we used materials from other games such as icons, spell sounds, models too etc, can something bad happen now?

This is the topic of map legality. Maps with rips and copyrighted material were not targets of bans before, I don't see why now.
I think the report button was made for them to more easily find maps they are not confortable with (aka porn, racism, apoligies to hatred, etc). RIP Caterparty

 

[Dr Super Good]

If blizzard wants to claim ownership of the map, they first need to sue you, which is an active stance that requires blizzard to actively check maps. In a personal opinion, this is aimed at popular maps which blizzard might think have a chance of becoming a game (anyone remember DotA?). However if the Blizzard Dota 2 lawsuit is anything to go by, Blizzard has a large chance of loosing this legal battles.

That has nothing at all to do with the ToU.

The problem was that DotA as a term was trademarked by Valve. Hence Blizzard or anyone in the western world cannot use it on a product. This has nothing to do with the DotA Allstars map, as Blizzard was just trying to use the name like so many silly map developers had before. Blizzard DotA was what became Heroes of the Storm, and it shares nothing, like it did from the start, with DotA Allstars.

The ToU does not stop map makers trademarking or copyrighting their ideas. Blizzard only owns the map however if Blizzard tried to enforce their ownership and deny the author then the author could remove the map's right to use their intellectual property and hence Blizzard could not use the map anymore.

I suspect it is there so that maps are technically owned and that Blizzard legal team can enforce reasonable laws on custom maps. For example a map like "Nazi concentration camp simulator" can be legitimately pulled down from the servers.

I have been sued. What do I do?
First, don't panic. Contact me and I'll try me best to help you for free as much as I can. Beware that many countries have free lawyers institutions for those who can't afford one. Be smart and inform yourself, and most importantly, don't drop the legal battle out of panic. I can only recommend you this however, you are free to do what you feel is best.

SC2 has operated the same ToU for 10 years now. No one has been sued.

There were a few cease and desist orders sent. But that was for other reasons, usually involving copyright claims from Blizzard (was accidental, they thought they were really making a SC MMORPG and not a SC2 custom map) or copyright claims from other companies. I think some people trying to commercialize their map not through Blizzard may have been hit, but that is because allowing such unauthorized micro transactions would break the age rating up to 18 and make the game illegal in many countries.

Should I even make maps... I don't want to be sued even if I win and I don't want Blizzard to own my work...
This is a more personal opinion again, but I think you absolutely should make maps. As I mentioned, this will mostly fly by you.

Keep making maps. Unless you do something spectacularly stupid or ethically incorrect then you will not be sued. Blizzard support map making, even if people like the topic creator are trying to make it sound like they do not.

If your map is popular and Blizzard is interested in it then they will likely try to contact you to come to some form of commercial agreement. This includes profit share of any in game transactions. Desert Strike in SC2 is an example of this.

You are also free to ask for donations in the map as long as they offer no advantage to gameplay. If they offer advantage to gameplay then that is effectively pay to win gameplay which runs fowl of some country laws which is why it cannot be permitted.

Blizzard like custom map makers. They will not spontaneously take your map.

 

[DracoL1ch]

thats your mind, and not their. moreover, there were 0 dota-like projects for the past years, thats why we have no idea how blizzard may react.

 

[FeelsGoodMan]

This has been in place for a long time though, very little has changed. 99% of Warcraft 3 modders aren't trying to monetize their maps anyway, and not only Blizzard can steal your concept and monetize it, anyone who plays your map can also take your concept and re-create it in Unity or whatever else.

If you're a serious game/map developer who wants to monetize your maps then Warcraft 3 isn't the platform to use.

Not only Blizzard has rules like this, all social media platforms also "owns" peoples works. If you as a 3D designer or graphics designer post your work directly on Facebook they will own all rights to your content, and you are no longer allowed to monetize your own work. This is nothing new. It's a scummy practice sure, but nothing new so I don't understand the sudden outrage over this when there are 10000000 other things that has broken the game.

 

[DracoL1ch]

Doubt anyone here even thinks about monetization. It's about their ideas not being stolen right away if the shot is good. and it's cheaper to test an idea on wc3 AND then move on to Unity rather than vice versa

 

[FeelsGoodMan]

It's about their ideas not being stolen right away if the shot is good.

Anyone can do that though, not only Blizzard.

 

[DracoL1ch]

Anyone can do that though, not only Blizzard.

yeah, but blizzard will be behind the wall "you've seen the TOS, you've gifted this project to us"

 

[FeelsGoodMan]

yeah, but blizzard will be behind the wall "you've seen the TOS, you've gifted this project to us"

To play the devils advocate a bit here, it is strictly speaking within their right to do so, which means (as also previously stated) that anyone who are serious about developing games should do so in other platforms, not Blizzards.

One can argue that testing maps in Warcraft 3 is "cheaper", but nothing stops you from developing games offline and testing it there. If you want community/player feedback on a map then that concept is already up for grabs by anyone who might wish to create derivative works or near direct copies as one can't copyright a concept or idea. Blizzard just has more resources than most people and will be able to develop a working version faster.

 

[DracoL1ch]

did you just said 'offline'? blizzard would like to have your internet connection now

 

[FeelsGoodMan]

did you just said 'offline'? blizzard would like to have your internet connection now

If for the sake of testing just use an older version.

 

[Paillan]

I decided to add a bit of extra info to the 5th point, aka "How will this affect my map? What can I do?" For extra clarity sake's since some people seemed confused.

I'd also like to point out that I never advocated stopping modding, in fact the very opposite.

 

[BlinkBoy]

If blizzard wants to claim ownership of the game idea based on the TOS that gives them ownership of the map according to them, they first need to sue you, which is an active stance that requires blizzard to actively check maps. In a personal opinion, this is aimed at popular maps which blizzard might think have a chance of becoming a game (anyone remember DotA?). However if the Blizzard Dota 2 lawsuit is anything to go by, Blizzard has a large chance of loosing this legal battles.

You have one big mistake here. The DOTA issue wasn't a lawsuit. It was a trademark dispute which is different to copyright claims. Under their trademark dispute, Valve should have not been allowed to acquire the trademark for Defense of the Ancients(Dota) due to prior and continuous use of the trademark in question within Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2. Normally when a company/person tries to acquire a trademark, the USPTO(United States Trademark and Patent Office) presents it to the public and a transition period is giving between the request of a trademark and its grating. In this period the public may present disputes which could void the original pursuer's claims. Under this situation, Blizzard's dispute could have avoided Valve from claiming ownership to the DOTA trademark. In order to prevent that, Valve and Blizzard settled Blizzard's dispute outside of court under the next simple terms: Valve would renounce claims for the trademark use within Blizzard's Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2 and Blizzard would drop their dispute to the UPSTO. It was that simple,

As a former Staff member, I ask you kindly to amend your message. Also for this kind of topics. It is better to coordinate with the rest of the Staff's members and try to stay as objective as possible. Rather than an FAQ, this felt more like "My opinion placed on official format".

Dearly,

Blinkboy.

 

[Ezekiel12]

I would like to know if the uproar about the TOS is justified in any way. That means I would like to know what actually changed from let's say 1.26 to now and if those changes warrant so much fuss.

Would be good to have that in the OP.

 

[deepstrasz]

I would like to know if the uproar about the TOS is justified in any way. That means I would like to know what actually changed from let's say 1.26 to now and if those changes warrant so much fuss.

Would be good to have that in the OP.

Changed or not, this is the gripe

"Game Editors. Certain Games include editing software (hereafter referred as “Game Editor(s)”) that will allow you to create custom games, levels, maps, scenarios or other content (“Custom Games”). For purposes of this Agreement and any agreements referenced herein, “Custom Games” includes all content created using the Game Editor(s), including but not limited to all digital files associated with such Custom Games, as well as (1) all content contained within such files, including but not limited to player and non-player characters, audio and video elements, environments, objects, items, skins, and textures, (2) all titles, trademarks, trade names, character names, or other names and phrases associated with or included within the Custom Game, and (3) any other intellectual property rights contained within the Custom Game, including any and all content, game concepts, methods or ideas. A Custom Game may only be used with the Game’s engine that is associated with a particular Game Editor. The manner in which Custom Games can be used or exploited is set forth in the Custom Game Acceptable Use Policy, the terms of which are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Blizzard may modify, remove, disable, or delete Custom Games at any time in its sole and absolute discretion."

and

"Ownership Custom Games are and shall remain the sole and exclusive property of Blizzard. Without limiting the foregoing, you hereby assign to Blizzard all of your rights, title, and interest in and to all Custom Games, including but not limited to any copyrights in the content of any Custom Games. If for any reason you are prevented or restricted from assigning any rights in the Custom Games to Blizzard, you grant to Blizzard an exclusive, perpetual, worldwide, unconditional, royalty free, irrevocable license enabling Blizzard to fully exploit the Custom Games (or any component thereof) for any purpose and in any manner whatsoever. You further agree that should Blizzard decide that it is necessary, you will execute any future assignments and/or related documents promptly upon receiving such a request from Blizzard in order to effectuate the intent of this paragraph. To the extent you are prohibited from transferring or assigning your moral rights to Blizzard by applicable laws, to the utmost extent legally permitted, you waive any moral rights or similar rights you may have in all such Custom Games, without any remuneration. Without limiting Blizzard’s rights or ownership in the Custom Games, Blizzard reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to remove Custom Games from its systems and/or require that a Custom Game developer cease any and/or all development and distribution of a Custom Game. Please note that your Blizzard account can be subject to disciplinary action in event that you do not comply with Blizzard’s request or this Policy."

Blizzard End User License Agreement - Blizzard Legal
Custom Game Acceptable Use Policy - Blizzard Legal

 

[Paillan]

You have one big mistake here. The DOTA issue wasn't a lawsuit. It was a trademark dispute which is different to copyright claims. Under their trademark dispute, Valve should have not been allowed to acquire the trademark for Defense of the Ancients(Dota) due to prior and continuous use of the trademark in question within Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2. Normally when a company/person tries to acquire a trademark, the USPTO(United States Trademark and Patent Office) presents it to the public and a transition period is giving between the request of a trademark and its grating. In this period the public may present disputes which could void the original pursuer's claims. Under this situation, Blizzard's dispute could have avoided Valve from claiming ownership to the DOTA trademark. In order to prevent that, Valve and Blizzard settled Blizzard's dispute outside of court under the next simple terms: Valve would renounce claims for the trademark use within Blizzard's Warcraft 3 and Starcraft 2 and Blizzard would drop their dispute to the UPSTO. It was that simple,

As a former Staff member, I ask you kindly to amend your message. Also for this kind of topics. It is better to coordinate with the rest of the Staff's members and try to stay as objective as possible. Rather than an FAQ, this felt more like "My opinion placed on official format".

Dearly,

Blinkboy.

First, thanks on the feedback. I wasn't completely sure about the dota lawsuit, tho I knew it was because of name use. It was mostly meant as an example (but I have to agree that it's a bad example).

I'd like to point out that I did this thread not as a staff member, but a modder with laws knowledge. Maybe I posted it in the wrong section, I wasn't really sure were to post this. If that's the case I would gladly have it moved somewhere else. I want to make it clear that this thread was NOT made as my position of reviewer, but as user.

I like to point out that I tried to be as objective as possible, which I know is hard to self determine.

I'll edit a bit more to remove some biases and add the info about dota lawsuit you just gave me.

 

[ThompZon]

So right now I started my WC3 editor to get the links to read the new documents.
I didn't want to accept at this moment, so I right-clicked the process and clicked "Close Window". The TOS-window disappeared and the editor opened.
I exited it and restarted it, no new TOS.

I have never clicked accpet to any TOS and I noticed the formulation "you hereby assign to Blizzard ".
Does this mean anything? You can bypass the TOS without accepting and, by the formulation "you hearby assign", NOT "by using the editor you assign ...".

Great job with this thread btw

 

[Dr Super Good]

Does this mean anything? You can bypass the TOS without accepting and, by the formulation "you hearby assign", NOT "by using the editor you assign ...".

No you technically have accepted it. Since you are aware of the ToU and also skipped it knowing what the ToU are.

 

[Paillan]

So right now I started my WC3 editor to get the links to read the new documents.
I didn't want to accept at this moment, so I right-clicked the process and clicked "Close Window". The TOS-window disappeared and the editor opened.
I exited it and restarted it, no new TOS.

I have never clicked accpet to any TOS and I noticed the formulation "you hereby assign to Blizzard ".
Does this mean anything? You can bypass the TOS without accepting and, by the formulation "you hearby assign", NOT "by using the editor you assign ...".

Great job with this thread btw

If we go by the line of though that considers a click on accept equal to signing, then by all means, no, you haven't signed aynthing.
However this is impossible to prove, so the best outcome is if blizzard also can't prove that you clicked. In any case, as said in the post, most maps need not to worry about this.

No you technically have accepted it. Since you are aware of the ToU and also skipped it knowing what the ToU are.

Contracts need to be signed tho, and for online contracts the most accepted interpretation is that click on accept = signing.

Sorry for double post.

 

[deepstrasz]

No you technically have accepted it.

and also skipped it knowing what the ToU are.

It means that he's acting unlawful, not that he signed it.

 

[Ralle]

I'd like to point out that I did this thread not as a staff member, but a modder with laws knowledge. Maybe I posted it in the wrong section, I wasn't really sure were to post this. If that's the case I would gladly have it moved somewhere else. I want to make it clear that this thread was NOT made as my position of reviewer, but as user.

Site Discussion is for discussions about the site. But then again, this is very relevant to the site. I thought about moving it but then I thought against it.

 

[Paillan]

I have added a website link for those who need a license.

 

[Krolan]

I will state here for the record once again that in absolutely all circumstances it has been stated in precedences of actually happened court-cases, that neither ideas nor concepts are copyrightable (or "trademarkable", whatever blizzard thinks it is attempting when it would pursue so called "legal" action)

The case with DotA, to me, is also not the first time someone got bullied into being scared, that there might be a chance that a company has a legitimate claim to something, it even comes up with people reporting on leaked data, which is equally ridiculous, with then there being a "behind the scenes private resolution" thing. Blizzard is doing, what quite a few Scam-based groups and some very shady lawyers in very shady companies have repeated time and time again, to fail to ever sue anyone for 100% of the time, failing to scare anyone for 99% of the time, but a 1% is naive, stupid, scared or just sick of it and wants them to stop, by whatever means necassary, and therefor then there is a "compromize".

Invade into the Claimage (yes, that's a word now) of something that by all laws of justice, logic and common sense has nothing to do with you, then attempt to reach a "compromise", as previously, you would have just gotten nothing out of it, now you are getting something out of it.

Might as well rob a person, clearly taking posession of anothers property, but then, before it would come to any form of legal battle, which you brought up and threatened with, give half of what you robbed back and call it a "compromise".



Btw. Yes, Blizzard can of course ban people and their maps from their service, but without a legitimate, actual legal, basis, it would open a completely different can of worms called "discrimination", treating someone differently from anyone else (insert arbitrary common example here) based on personal disliking or loathing of a person, which a "I don't like that you make mods that are better than anything me and my multi-billion dollar company has produced, so I will claim that it somehow broke the law for you to dare to make a mod, and ban you from my service." would constitute.
Selective Discrimination by a company is always a fun little thing, so I urge you to take your time, but over the course of some months or years, come to an understanding that this publicly traded company owes something, morally, and, given their incompetence, legally, to their customers/contributers, not the other way around.

 

[deepstrasz]

I will state here for the record once again that in absolutely all circumstances it has been stated in precedences of actually happened court-cases, that neither ideas nor concepts are copyrightable (or "trademarkable", whatever blizzard thinks it is attempting when it would pursue so called "legal" action)

I mean could their silly EULA go past the constitution or main country law package?

 

[Krolan]

I mean could their silly EULA go past the constitution or main country law package?

I am no lawyer, but in all cases of silly contracts saying silly things, even in employment contracts, I only ever saw companies threatening you, trying to act all convinced of their right to demand something that they can't from you, and quickly backing off if you even slightly resist.

If their silly EULA, which would be a hilariously failing attempt, would even reach court, I think it would have as much argumentative power as stating to a group of video-game-business investigators, that those are not "loot boxes" but "Surprise Mechanics"

 

[DrakPanda]

the initial post is extremely thorough, and nicely edited as new information comes in and is compiled

may i add this thread to my signature of helpful/important links? @Paillan

 

[Paillan]

the initial post is extremely thorough, and nicely edited as new information comes in and is compiled

may i add this thread to my signature of helpful/important links? @Paillan

Thanks for the good response. Sure, go for it. The more people see it the better.

 

[Fingolfin]

Personally, I don't think the ownership clause is as big of an issue as the copyright clause. By changing the hosting architecture from p2p to server based, Blizzard find themselves in the position of having content related to copyrighted IPs on their servers. This makes them legally responsible to remove it, or they might receive hefty fines. This is already an issue for SC2 where map makers have been asked to remove my Star Wars models from their maps.

 

[Arcmage]

only Blizzard has rules like this, all social media platforms also "owns" peoples works. If you as a 3D designer or graphics designer post your work directly on Facebook they will own all rights to your content, and you are no longer allowed to monetize your own work. This is nothing new. It's a scummy practice sure, but nothing new so I don't understand the sudden outrage over this when there are 10000000 other things that has broken the game.

Not true. Let's take a look at the relevant paragraph from Facebook's Terms of Service

You own the intellectual property rights (things like copyright or trademarks) in any such content that you create and share on Facebook and the other Facebook Company Products you use. Nothing in these Terms takes away the rights you have to your own content. You are free to share your content with anyone else, wherever you want.

or Youtube

You retain ownership rights in your Content. However, we do require you to grant certain rights to YouTube and other users of the Service, as described below.

or Twitter

You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services. What’s yours is yours — you own your Content (and your incorporated audio, photos and videos are considered part of the Content).

Now compare that to Blizzard's End User Licence Agreement.

Ownership Custom Games are and shall remain the sole and exclusive property of Blizzard. Without limiting the foregoing, you hereby assign to Blizzard all of your rights, title, and interest in and to all Custom Games, including but not limited to any copyrights in the content of any Custom Games. If for any reason you are prevented or restricted from assigning any rights in the Custom Games to Blizzard, you grant to Blizzard an exclusive, perpetual, worldwide, unconditional, royalty free, irrevocable license enabling Blizzard to fully exploit the Custom Games (or any component thereof) for any purpose and in any manner whatsoever. You further agree that should Blizzard decide that it is necessary, you will execute any future assignments and/or related documents promptly upon receiving such a request from Blizzard in order to effectuate the intent of this paragraph. To the extent you are prohibited from transferring or assigning your moral rights to Blizzard by applicable laws, to the utmost extent legally permitted, you waive any moral rights or similar rights you may have in all such Custom Games, without any remuneration. Without limiting Blizzard’s rights or ownership in the Custom Games, Blizzard reserves the right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to remove Custom Games from its systems and/or require that a Custom Game developer cease any and/or all development and distribution of a Custom Game. Please note that your Blizzard account can be subject to disciplinary action in event that you do not comply with Blizzard’s request or this Policy.

Most platforms ask you to give them a license to use your content in certain ways. Blizzard asks that you give them 100% of the rights to your content to the maximum extent legally allowable.

Personally, I don't think the ownership clause is as big of an issue as the copyright clause. By changing the hosting architecture from p2p to server based, Blizzard find themselves in the position of having content related to copyrighted IPs on their servers. This makes them legally responsible to remove it, or they might receive hefty fines. This is already an issue for SC2 where map makers have been asked to remove my Star Wars models from their maps.

Section 3 of the EULA "Use of Third Party Content in Custom Games." gives Blizzard the authority to remove any map containing 3ed party IP (like Star Wars). They don't need to claim full ownership of your content in order to do that. YouTube, Facebook, and every other content service require you agree not to post material that infringes copyright. But they don't have to claim full ownership over your submissions.

This is not a standard corporate policy. It goes far beyond most other services in claiming full ownership over any intellectual property you create or own and incorporate into a map.

 

[FeelsGoodMan]

Completely false. Let's take a look at the relevant paragraph from Facebook's Terms of Service



or Youtube



or Twitter



Now compare that to Blizzard's End User Licence Agreement.



Most platforms ask you to give them a license to use your content in certain ways. Blizzard asks that you give them 100% of the rights to your content to the maximum extent legally allowable.



Section 3 of the EULA "Use of Third Party Content in Custom Games." gives Blizzard the authority to remove any map containing 3ed party IP (like Star Wars). They don't need to claim full ownership of your content in order to do that. YouTube, Facebook, and every other content service require you agree not to post material that infringes copyright. But they don't have to claim full ownership over your submissions.

This is not a standard corporate policy. It goes far beyond most other services in claiming ownership over your work.

Hmm that's weird, I could have sworn I had a discussion with some dude here on THW who was super concerned about posting memes on Facebook as Facebook then "owned his memes".

I might have confused the whole thing with Facebook being allowed to monetize your work while it is uploaded to their platform.

 

[Fingolfin]

Section 3 of the EULA "Use of Third Party Content in Custom Games." gives Blizzard the authority to remove any map containing 3ed party IP (like Star Wars). They don't need to claim full ownership of your content in order to do that. YouTube, Facebook, and every other content service require you agree not to post material that infringes copyright. But they don't have to claim full ownership over your submissions.

It's not about who owns the content, it's about who distributes it. With a peer to peer system, you as a player are the one hosting the content. This is not very different from modding in general and should fall under fair use. With the current system though, maps need to be uploaded and stored on Blizzard servers, which not only gives them the power to curate content, but also the legal responsibility to do so in the same way as YouTube has the responsibility to remove copyrighted content.

 

[Nightmare2077]

Personally, I don't think the ownership clause is as big of an issue as the copyright clause. By changing the hosting architecture from p2p to server based, Blizzard find themselves in the position of having content related to copyrighted IPs on their servers. This makes them legally responsible to remove it, or they might receive hefty fines. This is already an issue for SC2 where map makers have been asked to remove my Star Wars models from their maps.

Oh, no problem whatsoever. I only spent a few thousand hours making my Warhammer mod over the last 10 years, it's totally okay if now it becomes unplayable.

Additionally, everyone can play it in the old Warcraft 3 client, just launch the classic and pretend reforged doesn't exist, that's an entirely valid option!

Long live Warcraft III Unforged!

 

[Paillan]

Oh, no problem whatsoever. I only spent a few thousand hours making my Warhammer mod over the last 10 years, it's totally okay if now it becomes unplayable.

Additionally, everyone can play it in the old Warcraft 3 client, just launch the classic and pretend reforged doesn't exist, that's an entirely valid option!

Long live Warcraft III Unforged!

Please keep discussion around TOS. Also yes, you are allowed to not sign and use an older version of TOS you did sign, but blizzard might say TOS is retroactive (which btw it isn't).

 

[Nightmare2077]

Please keep discussion around TOS. Also yes, you are allowed to not sign and use an older version of TOS you did sign, but blizzard might say TOS is retroactive (which btw it isn't).

Isn't the copyright clause a part of ToS? Or it has to do with EULA but not ToS? Sorry, I'm not a lawyer ('not yet a lawyer', at this pace).

My complaint is that my Warhammer mod de jure must/might become unplayable by people - period.

I understand that most mods do not use (are not based around) 3rd party copyrighted material, therefore my situation is not a common one. It is a grave one, however. Hundreds upon hundreds of my life's hours (both past and future) are on the line. I've not yet grasped whether I should panic or not.

 

[EdgeOfChaos]

There will never be a map like DotA again, you won't become rich from a WC3 map. Also no one's going to go to court with Blizzard. They have billions and can afford it, you probably can't. In the American legal system the person with more money typically wins. They'd drag it out and make you spend hundreds of thousands in fees. It doesn't matter if the contract is legal, that's why companies are comfortable creating possibly illegal contracts like this. Only possibility of any legal action is a class-action lawsuit over the game in general or another larger studio defending their IP (such as Valve vs. Blizzard).

The more concerning part is no longer being allowed to use 3rd party models/skins/etc. in your game. This would affect a massive amount of WC3 games, and with Blizzard intentionally centralizing custom maps (must be hosted through cloud) I would assume that they plan to abuse this. There's no doubt that a large factor of Reforged was taking control of custom games. You aren't allowed to play the games you want anymore, only if uncle blizzard says you can.

Older versions of WC3 still work fine. I would encourage people to refuse to buy Reforged if you have a problem with the changes. The reason why gaming companies keep doing this kind of thing where they release a half-made game with ridiculously harsh EULA is because people keep buying it. There have been so many examples in the past years yet everyone still pre-orders and buys games like this. Maybe gamers were just made to be abused for their wallets.

 

[DrakPanda]

I would assume that they plan to abuse this.

was it ever abused in sc2? or sc remastered? same EULA

 

[Paillan]

Isn't the copyright clause a part of ToS? Or it has to do with EULA but not ToS? Sorry, I'm not a lawyer ('not yet a lawyer', at this pace).

My complaint is that my Warhammer mod de jure must/might become unplayable by people - period.

I understand that most mods do not use (are not based around) 3rd party copyrighted material, therefore my situation is not a common one. It is a grave one, however. Hundreds upon hundreds of my life's hours (both past and future) are on the line. I've not yet grasped whether I should panic or not.

Yes, copyright clause is part of the new ToS. Now the reason for it is simple. Since according to blizzard they now own all maps, if they were to own a map with copyrighted material they would be breaking someone else's copyright, meaning a potential sue for them.
As such and in order to avoid such problems, they said they would take out copyrighted material. Now, I'd like to point out that this is blizzard overeacting.
First, most companies don't even know what a wc3 map is and will never know, as such they'll never know their assests are being used, unless blizzard wants to make that specific map into a standalone game, which makes no sense. So this is just here to provoke panic.
Second, the existance of a report buttom suggests that maps won't be checked on unless reported, which while some may report maps just for shit and giggles, I would assume that most people will only report maps with truly unaceptable content (porn, nazism, etc.)

There will never be a map like DotA again, you won't become rich from a WC3 map. Also no one's going to go to court with Blizzard. They have billions and can afford it, you probably can't. In the American legal system the person with more money typically wins. They'd drag it out and make you spend hundreds of thousands in fees. It doesn't matter if the contract is legal, that's why companies are comfortable creating possibly illegal contracts like this. Only possibility of any legal action is a class-action lawsuit over the game in general or another larger studio defending their IP (such as Valve vs. Blizzard).

The more concerning part is no longer being allowed to use 3rd party models/skins/etc. in your game. This would affect a massive amount of WC3 games, and with Blizzard intentionally centralizing custom maps (must be hosted through cloud) I would assume that they plan to abuse this. There's no doubt that a large factor of Reforged was taking control of custom games. You aren't allowed to play the games you want anymore, only if uncle blizzard says you can.

Older versions of WC3 still work fine. I would encourage people to refuse to buy Reforged if you have a problem with the changes. The reason why gaming companies keep doing this kind of thing where they release a half-made game with ridiculously harsh EULA is because people keep buying it. There have been so many examples in the past years yet everyone still pre-orders and buys games like this. Maybe gamers were just made to be abused for their wallets.

Nobody said that you are going to court with blizzard. I explained the process already. You need to make your map into a game first and then blizzard MIGHT sue you.
Now if blizzard beats you too it and makes the game first, if your map truly has the fanbase to justify that, you can just tell your fanbase as a creator to not support this IP in discord groups and such. Dota 2 and League only worked so well because they were endorsed by dota 1 dev in the first case and had some of the other dota 1 devs in the second case. If blizzard makes your map into a game you may not be able to claim any rights, but you can sabotage it

 

[deepstrasz]

If blizzard makes your map into a game you may not be able to claim any rights, but you can sabotage it

Yeah right.

 

[Paillan]

Yeah right.

I mean, we have seen how terrible blizzard is at handling PR issues like Honk Kong and Refund release...
I would say you can pretty much make sure that your fans attack the game for being a TOS adquisition.
Not encouraging to do it though.

 

[GhxBronie]

Some LATAM Editors need this information translated to Spanish...maybe...
IDK.

BTOW, thanks for sharing your Laws Knowledge to us.
It really useful for the community

Greetings

 

[disruptive_]

The real flow is like this, but regarding the specific IP field, the most important here, of Copyright

1. You created something worthy of Copyright (substantially more unlikely than you think).
Copyright ownership exception? Yes/No (see your copyright law about ownership and exceptions, 99% of possibility that the exceptions doesn't apply here).
a.1) No; general rule applies: owner of copyrights is the material author (modder).
a.1.2. Has Blizzard enforced his contractual right to materialize an assingment/license over your rights? (this include bullying you into saying that they are the owners) Yes/No
a.1.2.1. Yes; you must materialize the act as it is a contractual obligation born by accepting the contract, can you actually do it? Yes/No
a............1. Yes (you haven't either renounced your rights or assigned/exclusive licensed to another person); contact a lawyer so to proceed to negotiate the assignment. You should get paid for that. Blizzard could even offer you to work for them as employee. In it this exact last case (work relation) then maybe an exception to ownership will apply in the end as i noted on point a.
a............2. No (you did the above); contact a lawyer but because you could/will get sued and/or bullied.
a.1.2.2. No; proceed to continue mapping if you want. Or else. In the meantime, Blizzard might use your IP or not. If you get too cocky or combative ("that IP is mine bro"), maybe they do as in point a.1.2.
a.2) Yes; exception applies (low chance for that to happen, i would say 0%, but see please see your law): ownership of copyrights is Blizzard's by virtue of accepting the contract, unless voided the point "1.Ownership" of the Custom Game Acceptable Use Policty in court . Contact a lawyer if you want to do it so.
2. You don't (very likely), maybe one day you will get to point 1 (see above).



Don't discuss the aspect of the enforceability of the EULA. It is enforceable unless you challenge it in court and knowing what you are doing. This really has nothing plausible regarding the acceptation of the EULA/Policy. If you claim ownership over a map made with the Editor, then you get the notice of all the legal contracts on the installation of the program itself. Which is to say, if you made a map, you used the Editor, and if you used the Editor then you know what are the rules.

 

[Drake53]

if you made a map, you used the Editor

That's not how it works. Using 3rd party tools you can make a map without ever touching the world editor.

 

[disruptive_]

Please be more concise about those cases. Are you sure you're talking about a generality of cases?
The first time one executes the World Editor the legal advertisement of rights appears. Then the sound of a peon saying "ready to work". This happens even if you execute the old jassnewgen pack instead, which was arguably the most used Wc3 World Editor enhanced version.
You also get a mention of the custom modding tools and applicable rules on the regular Blizzard's EULA. This document appears on your interface on the proccess of installing the program, so there is little possibility of you not knowing the rules as the fact of having WC3 installed and all other related programs (ie. World Editor) means you had access to the content of the rules.
Isn't the w3x and w3m file format only possible regarding a Blizzard game? How are you gonna protect your IP interest regarding a file with a format that can only be possible in this context, in a way that separates it from a Blizzard game. It's like saying you are trying to protect "A custom game of warcraft 3" but then implying that you "don't know what wacraft 3 is at all".

Note that you could still challenge the EULA itself, even if you clearly accepted it, thus being a binding contract. What i'm trying to say is that unenforceability of the EULA will not come from you saying that you didn't know its existence or that it isn't a binding contract, but rather denying the value of some of its clauses because of X,Y,Z reasons.

 

[Drake53]

The first time one executes the World Editor the legal advertisement of rights appears. Then the sound of a peon saying "ready to work". This happens even if you execute the old jassnewgen pack instead, which was arguably the most used Wc3 World Editor enhanced version.

You talk about touching the world editor when I was talking about not touching the world editor. I guess I should have been more clear, when I say world editor I don't mean the vanilla world editor only.

so there is little possibility of you not knowing the rules

Nice joke, most people (over 90%) don't read any of this stuff. No need to ask for source, just search for 'how many people read eula' or something and you will find this number.

Isn't the w3x and w3m file format only possible regarding a Blizzard game?

Proprietary format - Wikipedia

reverse engineering of file formats for the purposes of interoperability is generally believed to be legal by those who practice it

It's like saying you are trying to protect "A custom game of warcraft 3" but then implying that you "don't know what wacraft 3 is at all".

This argument would've made more sense if you had used file formats like war3map.w3i as example instead of .w3m/.w3x, which is basically a .zip file.
I won't deny the fact if you make a .w3x file it is obviously intended to be used for warcraft III, but this does not mean that blizzard automatically gains all rights to this file and its contents simply because it's a proprietary file format. If I make a wallpaper for my desktop, then decide to use it as a loading screen, convert it to .blp, does blizzard now own my image? No.

 

[disruptive_]

You talk about touching the world editor when I was talking about not touching the world editor. I guess I should have been more clear, when I say world editor I don't mean the vanilla world editor only.


Nice joke, most people (over 90%) don't read any of this stuff. No need to ask for source, just search for 'how many people read eula' or something and you will find this number.


Proprietary format - Wikipedia



This argument would've made more sense if you had used file formats like war3map.w3i as example instead of .w3m/.w3x, which is basically a .zip file.
I won't deny the fact if you make a .w3x file it is obviously intended to be used for warcraft III, but this does not mean that blizzard automatically gains all rights to this file and its contents simply because it's a proprietary file format. If I make a wallpaper for my desktop, then decide to use it as a loading screen, convert it to .blp, does blizzard now own my image? No.

About reading the contracts:
As you may now, people don't even read their work contracts. People hardly ever read their lease contracts. Peopla hardly ever read contracts at all. These are often redactated by lawyers with lots of legalease. People don't care too much about contracts EXCEPT the moment they must to hold unto something as they get into trouble. Does the fact that nobody reads the contracts make a valid excuse in court? "But mr Judge my client didn't read the contract". The FIRST thing your lawyer will do is precisely read the contract. The FIRST thing Blizzard's lawyers will do is also reading the contract.

About the file things you are saying.
The reverse engineering thing you are pointing out is about copyright and not plain contracts. Reverse engineering is allowed as general rule on copyright systems, fair use if you would, because copyright systems doesn't care about functions of programs but rather the creative expression that program it may have. We all can try to reverse engineer the game and deduct all the function of the games without touching the copyright system, not just because of interoperability reasons. But the moment you publish in the market a game called "Warcraft 4" with such information is when not even reverse engineer will save you from the easiest copyright lawsuit of all time.
But guess what, the EULA says you can't reverse engineer. If you have payed some attention of what i said you will note that that clause of the EULA is a contractual clause and not part of the copyright rights. Reverse engineering the game would be contractual breach and not copyright infringenment. I hope you are starting to differentiate between "contract"/"copyright". I doubt this will even appear on the Wikipedia but you can try a Blizzard case that explains such difference (MDY v/s Blizzard). I also hope you stop just vomiting concepts.

What i'm talking about in my post are pressumptions that settle the fact that we all know and have accepted the EULA and that is hardly unlikely that you could prove otherwise if you try to defend your IP on a custom game. I really thought i was clear. You can't just reclaim IPs relating a custom map and say that you didn't know shit Blizzard and its EULA or its Editor. I'm not saying that Blizzard owns the w3x or w3m file format, i said that because such format is from Blizzard's software it would be clear (unless you prove your points) that you used some of its software. Since to install the WC3 game and plenty of their other stuff you will get a blatant notice of the existence of the EULA, it is clear that you atleast know that it exists.

Edit: Also, my friend, a computer file is not a "thing" like ie. a pistol. There is no property right over such file. Information is not a thing in fact. What we all can do with information is a contract ("i show you this piece of information only if you/as long as you do X,Y,Z). Software licenses like the EULA is precisely this. There could be aspects and acts over such piece of information that touch copyright or even other IP (ie. patents), like ie. distribute the software. Can we do things regarding IP right if such rights are present? Yes if we have the respective IP license from the author. Now understand the difference of "licensing information" and "licensing an IP right". Information is not IP. License contracts over software, and thus the term "license" itself, date from 1960 when IP was not even used (EDIT, just to clarify i'm clearly refering to the software market), generally speaking. If you are misguided you will identify the term license with "IP license" and you are kissing corporation asses because of your ignorance. But now you know the truth. Copyright protection is much much more intense than contractual protection, so for corporations it is only right to confuse you into thinking that everything is IP and that the term license is about IP, or that whenever the term license an IP is implicated. Remember the reverse engineering case i just said.
Remember, information is not a thing either. Information can give you some IP tho (repeat with me: information is not IP, but it can give me some IP). Maybe that information is contained on a real thing, and you bought that thing, like a CD-ROM.

 

[Drake53]

About reading the contracts:
As you may now, people don't even read their work contracts. People hardly ever read their lease contracts. Peopla hardly ever read contracts at all. These are often redactated by lawyers with lots of legalease. People don't care too much about contracts EXCEPT the moment they must to hold unto something as they get into trouble. Does the fact that nobody reads the contracts make a valid excuse in court? "But mr Judge my client didn't read the contract". The FIRST thing your lawyer will do is precisely read the contract. The FIRST thing Blizzard's lawyers will do is also reading the contract.

I never stated that not reading the EULA is a good excuse to use in court. I was merely pointing out that your statement 'there is little possibility of you not knowing the rules' is incorrect.

About the file things you are saying.
The reverse engineering thing you are pointing out is about copyright and not plain contracts. Reverse engineering is allowed as general rule on copyright systems, fair use if you would, because copyright systems doesn't care about functions of programs but rather the creative expression that program it may have. We all can try to reverse engineer the game and deduct all the function of the games without touching the copyright system, not just because of interoperability reasons. But the moment you publish in the market a game called "Warcraft 4" with such information is when not even reverse engineer will save you from the easiest copyright lawsuit of all time.
But guess what, the EULA says you can't reverse engineer. If you have payed some attention of what i said you will note that that clause of the EULA is a contractual clause and not part of the copyright rights. Reverse engineering the game would be contractual breach and not copyright infringenment. I hope you are starting to differentiate between "contract"/"copyright".

I will learn to differentiate between contract and copyright when you learn to differentiate between reverse engineering a file format and a video game.

License Limitations. Blizzard may suspend or revoke your license to use the Platform, or parts, components and/or single features thereof, if you violate, or assist others in violating, the license limitations set forth below. You agree that you will not, in whole or in part or under any circumstances, do the following:

1. Derivative Works: Copy or reproduce (except as provided in Section 1.B.), translate, reverse engineer, derive source code from, modify, disassemble, decompile, or create derivative works based on or related to the Platform.

Ok so we cannot reverse engineer the 'Platform' or anything related to it. But how do they define this 'Platform'?

As used herein, the term “Platform” refers collectively, and at times individually, to (1) the Blizzard Battle.net App software, (2) the Blizzard Battle.net gaming services, (3) each of the Games, (4) authorized Mobile Apps relating to the Games and the Blizzard Battle.net service, and (5) all features and components of each of them, whether installed or used on a computer or mobile device.

And even if reverse engineering the file formats was prohibited by the EULA, why would I care? There have been others before me doing it, did Blizzard take any action against them? Why is HiveWE not shut down? What about vexorian's map optimizer, or BLP lab. They work with a proprietary file formats after all.

I don't even know why I need to defend my argument here when you think anything I'm doing or have mentioned in my last post is in any way related to reverse engineering the entire game and then calling it Warcraft 4 (or Drakecraft since I need to avoid copyright after all).

I doubt this will even appear on the Wikipedia but you can try a Blizzard case that explains such difference (MDY v/s Blizzard).

Don't underestimate wikipedia. MDY Industries, LLC v. Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. - Wikipedia.

I'm not saying that Blizzard owns the w3x or w3m file format, i said that because such format is from Blizzard's software it would be clear (unless you prove your points) that you used some of its software.

I thought I already made it clear that proprietary file formats do not imply usage of their software.
Do you perhaps need an example? Oh wait, I already gave you one. Unless you want to argue that converting a .png/.jpg/whatever image to BLP1 somehow requires using Blizzard's software.

 

[disruptive_]

Nice joke, most people (over 90%) don't read any of this stuff. No need to ask for source, just search for 'how many people read eula' or something and you will find this number.

Wasn't this your comment regarding my argument that is very unlikely you ignore the EULA in court? I don't know the purpose of your comment then other than nitpick things, using Wikipedia, for the sake of it and failing doing so on a constructive way. Did you even took your time to read my post?

Wikipedia is good enough but you can't base all your sources and comments on it. Wikipedia talked about the MDY case but to really inform yourself you should read the sentence otherwise you are eating what others chewed for you.

So to make things more clear you are saying that because reasons, reclaiming IP rights to a custom map of wc3 has nothing to do with wc3 software and its EULA as "thats how it works" as a wc3 map could be separated from WC3 and its editor on a technical or logical level that i still can't buy in. Well, this is my problem then. But keep in mind that i try to give more concrete examples on every of my substantiations but you still didn't gave me a concrete case, a concrete example of how you can use such 3d party tools (which one, how, what it does) in a way that it doesn't "touch" the editor or touch WC3 at all, which was my entire point. How you can create a case on which a judge will say: this guy that created the map X clearly doesn't know the EULA, thus didn't accepted it, so such contract is not binding for him.
Maybe you are affected about the topic of the ownership of files (not formats) and in which case you should see my post above. I didn't implied, at all, that Blizzard owns the map file in your computer. My theory is that they don't even own IP rights just by virtue of the EULA (the thing you are all fearing and repeating everytime). This was the thing intended on my primitive post, but somehow i had to speak with you about reverse engineering file formats.