Take a look at this!

[calalily]

I am not here to argue, all I want is to be able to share my point of view without all the silly name calling you all like to do...

So don't argue. I don't force you to post - but hey, if you consider being called "for TSR" an insult, I won't disagree.

You obviously havent read EA's Terms Of Use, if you scroll down to Proprietary Rights; Copyrights and Trademarks

You obviously didn't read what I wrote - if you can't copyright it then there is no IP, no copyright.  Right now I'm reading a case that proves my point, talks about substantial use of software code - and once I'm done and know fully what it says, you can read it.  I'll give anyone the link who asks me, I'll post it on s2c, once I know all that it says and that it is en pointe.

[nohead]

The word changes in the EULA that everyone who supports paysites keeps jumping on...are simple word changes! Nothing there says sell your shite and make some cheddar. And if any one of you believes that's what it's saying, well then I got something for you:

The EULA didn't mean snot to you guys before. You claimed that it wasn't important. But now some words gets changed and it's the Holy fucking Grail! Um..hypocrisy anyone?
Bah.

So Ry, why do you think they changed it?
This is a pretty big thing to do and they hardly do it just because they like to change some words around.
And of all the things they could have changed they chose to change the noncommercial bit.

What do you make out of it?

[calalily]

That they don't want to lose customers or be in the middle of a fight - simple as that.

[SparklePlenty]

Why are they taking so long?
Who fucking knows? They're a huge company that has *more important things* to worry about, like $$. Some of you lurkers should be able to identify with that.
Honestly this company doesn't care about us. We're simply the consumers. As long as we buy and buy they could care more about dogshit. This debate is making them rich.
I really can't see them finally deciding one way or another until Sims 3 comes out.

EA has been complete up front about THAT at least. Would that the TSR trolls (yes, I am talking about you, "Never got no head, even though a little would problably clear my mind") would realize that. But still. Nohead? SimplyB? One word. Yawn.

[nohead]

Ehm, i know that you know this so why don't you get it?
They changed the EULA. This is it, nothing more to wait for.
Is it because it's not in the pirates favor you refuse to comprehend?

*sigh*

[Paden]

Um, from what I understand, they changed the damn thing to a piece of software that doesn't help create custom content, if what I read over at another forum you posted on is true, nohead, so shaddup! It doesn't affect the custom content. Jesus H. Christ, what the hell is it with trolls and Sundays? Don't get me going, you won't like me any better than you have before. It's been a bad weekend so far and I'm just itching to unload on an idiot and if you keep standing there with your dick hanging out, I'm gonna smack you with a two by four and see if it can shrivel up any more than it already is! Wanna know what happened? Suuuuure, I'll tell you! One of my childhood heroes, my oldest brother died yesterday after a thirty-eight year fight against Machado-Joseph disease. Don't know what it is? Look it up, lardbucket. My family in general is treating me like shit, the other siblings, and this is my second period in eighteen days! So, word to the wise, if you don't have anything intelligent to say, get the fuck out of here until you can make sense! Just, shut the fuck up already!

[mando]

Ehm, i know that you know this so why don't you get it?
They changed the EULA. This is it, nothing more to wait for.
Is it because it's not in the pirates favor you refuse to comprehend?

*sigh*

Uh sorry, from what I've read of the new EULA it's not in anyone's favour, and not against anyone's favour either. It is certainly not against the pirates! As well, it still notes that creators do not have control over EA's licenses or copyrights (ahem, code, for example). Like Calalily said, looks like they just want to remove themselves from the argument for financial reasons.

Edit: Thanks for the reminder, Paden. As it hasn't been applied to any product that actually creates content as yet, the old EULA is in effect still.

[Ry]

Well, nohead,  :roll:
God it's hard to resits that temptation.


First of all, no matter what words they took out or changed, it still doesn't say it's okay to sell their content. And it is their content. You can't make things for the Sims 2 without the game and it's come-in-the-package objects, so...I don't know what you're getting at.
You can't scoff at the EULA one day then praise it to the skies the next without becoming the biggest hypocrite in the world. No matter WHAT they've changed or left out or inserted.
I don't study the EULA, I've read it, but I'm not a legal expert and I don't want to be one. Even on this issue. That's not my forte'. But I'm a very intelligent person, much more than you may think, and I'm no fool that mama raised, cuz she didn't raise them.
So let's just say this to simple it down for you:
1. EA doesn't care about us anymore than any other company does about their consumers. All they care about is selling their product and that's that. They don't want to alienate ANY of us, the filesharers OR the paysite owners. That would lose them buisness. So this little change in the EULA is more fuel for the fodder.
2. Ry thinks you're a pain her ass and you've got it out to get her goat for some reason.
3. EA will not go completely to one side or the other until Sims 3. I've said all this before why can't you people read?!?!?!?! Once they have a new game, they can allow or disallow paysites without the hassle of this. Because then it will be over, right? Sims 2 will be done and the get rich quick schemers will be onto the next game. Therefore all the arguing about this will be wasted breath and finger strength. If EA decides to say it's legal for paysites to sell stuff, then we'll all have to deal with that. But they haven't said it yet, and I don't think they ever will for the Sims 2, so...
4. I am wholeheartedly an idealist. I believe if enough people try to change the world, we will.
And this is what I want: Real Community.
I love this game. It makes my day sometimes. I'm a stay-at-home mom *with a part-time gig* I don't get out much other than for work and grocery shopping. I have a nine-year old, a one year-old and a 28 year old who trash my house. My time is spent cleaning, taking care of my children and all the other mommy things.
BUT when I get time for me, I play the Sims.
When I first entered this community I thought I would find a bunch of other people who loved the game just like me. I never expected to find a bunch of greedy bints selling content they don't own the rights too.
To me, this community should be free and simple.
I make something, I give it to you and you give it and it gets given and given until everyone who wants it has it. Everyone is included, no one feels left out because they're not *cool* enough or *rich* enough.
It's wrong to take a game, which in some cases is the only enjoyment people have, and turn it into a profit making scheme.
I also play other games. Oblivion is one. No one in THAT community tries to sell stuff. It's shared freely to enhance the games of others and THAT creates a community!
Look at the world around you.
Money creates chaos.
If you're rich, you're here. If you're poor, you're down there. *i'm from the hill and you're from the valley*
That's not fair.
And to take a GAME and introduce money into the equation creates that same class distinction. You're either rich enough to pay or too poor and shit out of luck.
Why is that right?
I paint and had a friend make them into sims paintings. They're available at SFV under mmekare's paintings if anyone wants them.
Anyways, this is my REAL work.
I painted these pictures at home with my own two hands, a couple paintbrushes and paint. I can hold it, turn it and lick it if I want to. It's *real*. But I've got them simmized and they're out there for free and I'm sharing my own personality by sharing them.
I paint my soul.
And you can have a piece of that, for free. And you can do what you want with it, give it away, share it whatever.
The real theives are those who say I MADE THIS when they didn't.
The real theives are the ones who want to make thousands of dollars off a website that offers objects et al. for download that wouldn't EXSIST without:
a. The game I already bought.
b. The objects I already bought when I bought the game.
and
c. The [programs people like Delphy etc...made to MAKE the CC and GAVE it away for FREE.

So there, that's what I've got to say right now on the matter.
If it didn't answer your questions, well suck it up. I've answered that very question in the post you pulled the quote from and I won't be explaining it anymore.

But I've got one thing left to say, Nohead.
For you.
The next time you buy a game, other than the Sims...immerse yourself into that community.
You'll see freely given mods, freely given everything. And no one left out to feel like shit. No one getting rich on the hard work of others. No huge inner conflicts about anything other than who fights better or whatever, depending on the game.
What you will see is this:
A real community where the only drama comes from 12 year olds.
People talking and sharing everything freely and without any type of class distinctions.
Like I said, a REAL community.

[SparklePlenty]

Um, from what I understand, they changed the damn thing to a piece of software that doesn't help create custom content, if what I read over at another forum you posted on is true, nohead, so shaddup! It doesn't affect the custom content. Jesus H. Christ, what the hell is it with trolls and Sundays? Don't get me going, you won't like me any better than you have before. It's been a bad weekend so far and I'm just itching to unload on an idiot and if you keep standing there with your dick hanging out, I'm gonna smack you with a two by four and see if it can shrivel up any more than it already is! Wanna know what happened? Suuuuure, I'll tell you! One of my childhood heroes, my oldest brother died yesterday after a thirty-eight year fight against Machado-Joseph disease. Don't know what it is? Look it up, lardbucket. My family in general is treating me like shit, the other siblings, and this is my second period in eighteen days! So, word to the wise, if you don't have anything intelligent to say, get the fuck out of here until you can make sense! Just, shut the fuck up already!

I am so sorry about your brother, Paden. May your brother finally be at peace, and may you find some, too. I will light a candle for him.

[Soup Parrot]

I'm not getting in on this debate. As you can see from my post count, I'm a lurker. I won't state my side in this argument, so I'm sure that my opinion matters not. However, I won't lurk and allow completely false statements be passed off as truth and read and believed to be truth by the masses.

Your CC package files are considered DERIVIATIVES you cannot copyright a deriviative.

Where does U.S. copyright law say that you cannot copyright a derivative? Perhaps you cannot copyright a deriviative, but I don't know what that is.

http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.html#derivative/

U.S. copyright law clearly states that:

A “derivative work,” that is, a work that is based on (or derived from) one or more already existing works, is copyrightable if it includes what the copyright law calls an “original work of authorship.” Derivative works, also known as “new versions,” include such works as translations, musical arrangements, dramatizations, fictionalizations, art reproductions, and condensations. Any work in which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship is a derivative work or new version.

A typical example of a derivative work received for registration in the Copyright Office is one that is primarily a new work but incorporates some previously published material. This previously published material makes the work a derivative work under the copyright law.

To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a “new work” or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself. Titles, short phrases, and format, for example, are not copyrightable.

"To be copyrightable ..." If you cannnot copyright a derivative, how could it ever be copyrightable? According to you, it cannot. According to U.S. copyright law, it can. If, and only if, it is different enough from the original work to be regarded as a "new work".

Now, I'll leave it up to you all to debate whether or not new Sims creations are different enough from the original work to be considered "new work". But I won't sit idly by and watch you say that you canot copyright a derivative when you absolutely, one hundred percent can copyright a derivative.

"A 'derivative work,' that is, a work that is based on (or derived from) one or more already existing works, is copyrightable if it includes what the copyright law calls an “original work of authorship.'"

That's in case you missed it the first time.

First off, how would you register your deriviative package. There is no copyright form. The above works that you mentioned, stand on their own. The flaw in your argument is once the content is put into a package file it cannot stand on its own. It solely relys on being in the game to be used, that is why its a deriviative. The statement I posted was from a direct question regarding this to the US Copyright office, the quote was exactly their answer. Its not the same thing as the above types of examples listed. If I bought a book, or a CD I could play these withought using the others. I can do nothing with a package file outside the game, it is no use to me.

[nohead]

Paden, have a read here.
I'm really sorry about your brother!

[mando]

Paden, have a read here.
I'm really sorry about your brother!

Nohead, we've actually heard quite the oposite from other EA sources as well. As per usual, they haven't got all of their ducks in a row. Sounds more like that was posted to keep EULA fights from starting on the BBS.

[nohead]

Nohead, we've actually heard quite the oposite from other EA sources as well. As per usual, they haven't got all of their ducks in a row. Sounds more like that was posted to keep EULA fights from starting on the BBS.

Mando, no offense but i think you are in serious denial  :lol:
Do you seriously think they are allowed to post that unless it's true?
Do you have any official statement stating the opposite or are you referring to HawkGirls' daydreaming?

[Paden]

And we all know that the maxoids have a direct pipeline to the law office? That is just what they think it means, not the word from the head man himself. Until we get that, with a cease and desist from EA legal, this debate is still going. The maxoids have a history of being on the side and in the pockets in some cases, of the paysites. Until we are represented equally, they're talking out their asses. Plus, the person who is that maxoid name could change next week, as could their views. Nope, give me a certified letter from the head of EA Legal and the company and maybe then, MAYBE, I will believe. Til then, my cannons are loaded and waiting the match and got plenty of powder and shot.

[calalily]

nohead they even say it won't be in until the ep after Bon Voyage - which is presumably their last one - so it certainly won't effect their sales much.

Not to mention you can't make a contract someone agreed to and then make all kinds of changes to it.  As it stands, paysites are breaking their current EULA, and will be when they do it with Bon Voyage.

Now argue with the US Courts.

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: MICRO STAR v FORMGEN INC

In this case, FormGen (the software creators of DukeNukem) were in litigation over an user who created new levels for the game and sold them.

Found here http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/9656426.html Bold mine.

Concerning the derivative work argument:

work will be considered a derivative work only if it would be considered an infringing work if the material which it has derived from a preexisting work had been taken without the consent of a copyright proprietor of such preexisting work.

You have their consent in the form of the EULA. You cannot claim it is a derivative work.

On charging:

every commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively an unfair exploitation of the monopoly privilege that belongs to the owner of the copyright.

This is totally enpointe, and what the law says about these things.  I'm sure a lot of paysite supporters will ignore this, but that's fine.  It can't possibly be clearer.