Question

[IarePINJA]

the thing is, for EA/Maxis to sue paysites, they would be spending megabucks to do so. there are many paysites out there as we all know, and the people running them and illegally selling copyrighted stuff are in many different countries. to clamp down on them would push operating costs up, which would be reflected in the retail cost of future software.

if we give EA/Maxis a list of the criminals concerned, the people's names, company names, postal addresses, physical locations and so on, it might assist them, they might send out a warning letter (cease and desist type thing?) but they might well choose not to do anything.

Consider this for Maxis as an investment, they recoup their loses and gain the loyalty of the fanbase, or they lose $$ but still gain the loyalty of the fanbase. When one of the paysite giants lose the suit, others might chicken out in the line and leave it voluntarily. Kinda like dominos. Also, cease and desist letters never work for this type. Enact legal proceedings, and the paysites will definitely not resist, with the odds stacked against them.

[mando]

Consider this for Maxis as an investment, they recoup their loses and gain the loyalty of the fanbase, or they lose $$ but still gain the loyalty of the fanbase. When one of the paysite giants lose the suit, others might chicken out in the line and leave it voluntarily. Kinda like dominos. Also, cease and desist letters never work for this type. Enact legal proceedings, and the paysites will definitely not resist, with the odds stacked against them.

I suspect, like many people, that EA will wait until Sims 3 comes out before they do anything. Taking a hard stance at this point probably isn't going to do them any good (i.e. they could lose customers from a game that is already on its way out, so legal action would be expensive and pointless). However, I'm sure they are thinking about the future and paysites are (and will be) in direct competition for the same customer base, so I doubt they would want things to continue indefinetly the way that they have been. As well, I think the acceptance of paysites is starting to change in the community as well, and I imagine that there are a few sites that are feeling the pinch to their bottom line (or at least having to fend off tons of "YOUR STUff sUCKS!" letters). People are starting to realize that filesharing was the intent of CC distribution all along, and it isn't worth it to pay a ton of cash to buy an almost valueless (and I'm talking only cash here before you get mad  :lol: ) product.

Cease and Desist letters are all about the threat of legal action and that is often why they don't work. Unless, the company is willing to follow through on the letter it can be a bit of a pointless exercise, but can be effective in some cases without going to court (for smaller things, like the earlier mentioned "Subway" set). Especially in cases where the owner of the trademark or what not is in the right, and those who are abusing it know they are in the wrong (and trust that TSR knows that they wouldn't have effective defense in something like this).

[MizzKitty]

I honestly believe that they only need to set one example and the rest will chicken out. Especially if they go after TSR or Peggy or someone equally known. If the rest wouldn't chicken out right away they would after meeting the cold front that used to be subscribers.The cost for EAxis would be negligible, really, and they might be able to convince us that they aren't just full of it.

[Ensign EO]

I'm thinking especially TSR, since people tend to point at them and be like, "Well, Maxis approved of TSR!"  But I definitely agree that going after even one of the bigger, infamous paysites will send most, if not all, of the smaller ones running.

And if they don't do much about it now, as some have said, they can always announce that for TS3, there will be no selling or general withholding of custom content, and that it's all meant to be shared.

[Land Lubber]

If EA Games are serious about this them TSR has to be their target

as every sims player has heard of TSR

eg been a bit of a duffus where custom content is concerened I for one only knew of TSR till about 18 months ago

in fact I didn'i know there where so many pay sites till I checked the booty  :oops:  :oops:  :mrgreen:  :mrgreen:  :mrgreen:

[YarrMataz]

The smartest thing, in my opinion, for EA to do would be to go directly after The Sims Resource and sue their asses off. it is large enough that this would probably deliver a message to all the pay sites and would make a good "incentive" for them to shut their illegal business down.

[JFederated]

The whole "EA has paysites on their fansite list so they must approve" thing is a crock.  Clicked any of those links on that list lately?  It's obviously not a maintained listing; several I tried were dead or non-functional.

I think there are worse paysites (those that charge per item, for instance), but TSR would be a nice fat target.  Spanking TSR would really say something.

[SnarkyShark]

So the next logical step might be to see if EA can be persuaded to update the fansite list to reflect their recent stand  (could you call them official statements ?) regarding paysites. Just doing that would send a powerful message.

[JFederated]

It would knock a leg out from under paysite owners' arguments, but it seems that listing just isn't updated at all and hasn't been for a while.  I could be wrong, I don't go to the official site too much anymore, but it was very recently that I saw those dead links.

[prattle]

The whole "EA has paysites on their fansite list so they must approve" thing is a crock.  Clicked any of those links on that list lately?  It's obviously not a maintained listing; several I tried were dead or non-functional.

I think there are worse paysites (those that charge per item, for instance), but TSR would be a nice fat target.  Spanking TSR would really say something.

There's also some links on there that are to questionable content. EA can't run their own site, as usual, and MaxoidDramaLlama's said that cleaning up the fansite list is something she plans to do in the future but hasn't gotten to yet. Whether paysites remain on there should be interesting. Then again, her position on paysites is basically "it's EA Legal's problem, don't bug me about it", and the last time I saw the drama llama she was running from some bratty teenagers who were spamming her guestbook because a story got deleted off the exchange..... :roll:

[SoggyFox]

On the other hand, a firm declaration of ' We will sue anyone still running a site for commercial purposes using stuff for our game, in a month's time.'

Consider - why would Subway, and other businesses get upset at someone selling sim versions of their stuff and name?  ITs still free advertising for them - and its not technically losing them any money - because someone is still making money off of their trademark.

However, paysites will take money from EA because after a while, people will have to decide what to pay for - custom content or a stuff pack.  So, EA is losing more from allowing this to continue than Subway or another company was losing from having the trademark on sold content.

[JoJo]

Anyhoo... Point being: You can't make everyone happy and do they really want to be known as a company who won't enforce their own rules?

EAxis' rules are the same as any large company. A. Maximize profits in the short term, while B., attempting  to insure profits for the future. Guess which has priority?
The paysite issue is a non-issue to them. They throw a token bone to each side.
They allow and encourage filesharing, yet continue to provide free advertising for paysites. That is giving tacit approval to both sides.
Fence sitting is all it is.

Oops...

[end/ derailment]

Fence sitting?..  Don't fool yourself, it's called recruiting.  EA is exactly sure of the legal ramifications of their EULA (they had floors of lawyers draw it up) and they are exactly sure how most of the masses will interpret it (they had floors of psychologists draw it up).
The reality of the EULA situation is: "EAxis" is not allowed any ownership or rights of any files compatible and/or usable in conjunction with their game insofar as they were not created with any of their tools and do not contain any of their content ('materials').  Copyrite law as applicable to computer software does not, in fact, grant any right to anyone who cannot prove that written code was actually stolen, even if the code in question is written exactly as the original copyrited code.  That is to say that if you create a piece of CC from scratch and it turns out to be exactly the same as one that shipped with the game, the burden of proof would be on EA if they were to contest the notion that one did actually come up with the content them self.  This CC issue that most of you base on your misinterpretation of a legal document on (the TS2 EULA) seems to be the basis of your piracy.  Please, get an education, look it up, go to a law library, hire a lawyer and ask it about this, or, for god sakes Just Step Up And Be Honest With Yourself And Everyone Else - You Are Doing This To Get Free Shit That You Don't Want To Pay For!
  Really, you people claim to be pirates?  Well, you are but you should stick to that instead of hiding behind a lie and convincing others of it by interpreting the shady (but legally sound) wording of the EULA.
  I don't see you offering up ISO's of the TS2 game itself...  Some Pirates, Hah!  It seems to me that over here the only thing pirated is stuff stolen from people who have no means of providing themselves with the legal recourse necessary to do something about it, and why?  Well you know why - like I said.  Don't get me wrong - I am not against piracy.  I actually I think though that the webmasters of this site propagating the propaganda that all mods are property of EA, considering that they do have such an amount of legal knowledge to host the site on the servers they do and use such other methods (which I will not expose) to cover their asses, is an outrageous display of irresponsibility - BAD FORM - They have certainly demonstrated that they do know what rights EA has regarding Custom Content.  A pirate shouldn't feel any need to rationalize or justify thievery with anything, much less lies - Otherwise the pirate is not truly free.

[Marhis]

Problem is not ours, JoJo.

We don't have to prove to be in the right: we are in the right until who officially grants us this right (EA), is not proven wrong.

Have you done anything to prove EA is wrong, or somehow proving you actually have those rights?

P.S. "Proof" is not some legal dissertation from a total stranger posted on a forum.

ETA:

Don't get me wrong - I am not against piracy.

I didn't get you wrong, but maybe you did. I, for one, am against piracy. Perhaps there's something you missed.

[Lorelei]

The whole pirate schtick is a joke that clearly flew right over your pointy little noggin.

Everyone else got it, I'm not sure what your problem might be.

The fact is, we are not "pirates" per se, because we do not steal that which is not legally ours. Nor do we distribute EA's property in a way that defies their EULA. EA knows about the booty, and have no complaints.

Once someone buys the pixels, they own the pixels, and can share them freely with friends. Sharing, of course, is something that is encouraged by the EULA. The fact that they had to buy the pixels in the first place is what is NOT okay with EA.

What one can NOT do, according to the EULA, is make content that only functions properly if tools specific to The Sims 2 are used, and SELL IT. If you need the .package format to make it work, or if the item in question needs the game in order to have any perceived value, it belongs to EA, legally, and EA was gracious enough to allow us to mod our games in this fashion, even going so far as to provide some tools to help us do so.

Some paysites try to get around this by saying, hey, we use Photoshop, and Maya, and those aren't EA tools. No, they aren't. But in order to convert your Photoshopped texture or Maya mesh to the game, you must make it conform to game code using tools specifically designed to work in concert with the game engine. As HystericalParoxysm once pointed out, it would be okay to make textures and sell them (though, frankly, a professional artist who has not bought the full version of Photoshop is constrained in many ways from doing this, something that was not touched upon.)

Once you create content using BodyShop, or by using other Sims 2 specific tools, and package it for the game, it is not supposed to be sold. EA is the only entity that should make money off of their intellectual property.

Especially when you get into the issue of how some content is created in the first place. Photoskinning designer logos or images of some fashion designer's work, using corporate logos without the corporation (e.g., H&M, Coca-Cola, Ford) allowing it, stealing meshes from Poser creators and concerting them, ripping off someone's photography to add detail to hair, skins, accessories, or using a brand name to sell your custom content are all rather reprehensible once you try to make a buck off of things. Be it Starbuck's, Disney, the estate of A A Milne, SubWay, McDonald's, Varga, Gucci, Chanel, Emorio Armani, Joe Boxer, Calvin Klein, Garnier, L'Oreal, Maybelline or whoever, there's a fine line between paying tribute (something some of these corporations dislike anyway) and trying to make your content more appealing by piggybacking on the hard work the corporation has done to bring their product to the public's attention in the first place.

Creators should get credit for their unique interpretations and ideas, but not for items created using brand names, nor should they insist on being financially compensated once they use Sims 2 specific tools, or make an item usable for the game.

What we do here is not piracy. That's the joke that you failed to grasp.

Now, if the EULA did not specifically and clearly state that all commercial benefit to anyone other than EA was forbidden, then MAYBE you'd have a point, but even then, no one has HAXXORED a paysite and/or stolen any content. Everything in the booty has been paid for. Again, once you buy something, you can do pretty much anything you like with it if you do not then try to repackage and resell it as your own original item. No one is being uncredited (all the better, because that will make it even easier for EA to track down those who have made the most illegal profit in defiance of the EULA).

There are several creators for paysites that we are particularly sad to see creating for pay, because their work is above the usual shit standards of the average pay item, and several of those creators have been approached and offered assistance so they can go free. We are not anti-creator. We are anti-thief.

Also, in your example about computer code, you are mostly wrong. If a case ever went so far as to be challenged in court, the copyright holder of the game the code was written to work for would win the suit by virtue of the fact that the format of the code would have to work specifically with their game engine. Sims 2 modders and hackers occasionally write hacks and mods that require tinkering with the same bits and bytes and do the same thing, but the code they are tinkering with is still EAxian. The hacker or modder who shares her or his work with the community first should get any credit due for successfully writing game code alterations that do not bork but instead enhance annoyances the game is shipped with, but when a hack changes only a few minor things, it can be difficult to track down who came up with the idea to tweak it first. Fortunately, that is not one of the major issues at hand, especially since, again, those hacks and mods typically do not work with anything other than the Sims 2 games. They thus cannot be legally sold.

The "you just want free shit" argument is specious at best, because there are some people on here who have NO paysite content in their games at all. It's usually of lesser quality than freesite work, which is typically done out of a sense of community spirit.

Not only are paysites illegally profiting in defiance of the EULA, very few of them offer any technical support. Many people have reported poor or non-existent customer service. Many people have reported deceptive marketing (images of hair meshes, for instance, that pointedly do not show the neck gaps or crappy animations or Sim-body-impaling that occur when the hair meshes are used). Many of the wealthiest paysite folks do not actually play the game.

Also, when you get down to it, our behavior, aside from some frustration, some snarky pirates indulging their inner angry 12-ness, and a few angry outbursts, has been overall far more ethical and community-spirited. For example:

* No pro-freesite people have initiated campaigns to vilify or defame other community members for activites unrelated to the community.
* No pro-freesite people have initiated (or threatened) DDOS attacks or Black Hat server hacking.
* No pro-freesite people have shared sensitive personal and financial information on a forum.
* No pro-freesite people have snuck onto other sites and tried to lure away custom content creators who create for everyone in order to make them create only for those who can pay for content.
* No pro-freesite people have refused to release creator content once the creator wishes to remove it.

Then there's the annoyance factors involved with the paysite / freesite schism in the community.

* We hate the hide-and-seek game we have to play, chasing down meshes hither and yon because some content won't work without them, and illegal paysites are holding them hostage for money.
* Some pay content has been known to actually break your game, be it temporarily or not.
* There's the issue of charging for (typically vile) recolours of EAxian meshes. What gall.
* There's the issue of paysites that make high-poly items that lag or bork your game, and which refuse to acknowledge this may be an issue.
* Or items that do not sit properly within the grid constraints of the game, and instead go through walls or Sims, or are out of scale.

Those are lesser complaints, but the so-called pirates here are fed up with them just as much. We are not only backing EA's legal rights as defined by the EULA everyone who legally bought the game in the first place was told to read thoroughly and agree with, but we are also campaigning for better content which should be free and available to everyone.

The real pirates, as far as plundering and theft go, are paysites who are stealing not only from the community, but from EA, without which there would be no cash cow teats for them to milk in the first place.

Don't like that? Then, please, by all means, find a legal outlet for your talents and skills that does not involve breaking the EULA. Good luck finding another game community to suck off of, though, as the Sims community is one of the very, very few that have tolerated, to ANY extent, the level of greed and money-grubbing the Sims community has. As a very old story would have put it, MAXIS stupidly allowed the camel to put his nose inside the tent on a cold night by allowing Sims 1 sites to recoup bandwidth costs, long before they knew what a huge success the game would be, and now that the camel has nearly evicted the camel driver, EA has a fight on its hands to reverse the situation. (Moral of the story? Keep the camel out of the tent in the first place.) With so many alternatives available these days for hosting, there is no longer any excuse for pretending that these fees are going towards bandwidth.

Need help reducing site costs? Need suggestions? Another fine service offered here at PMBD! Ask for advice, and ye shall receive. There is really no reason to pay through the nose to host Sims 2 content.

Lastly? Don't want to be our friend and share what we have graciously paid for (even though it legally should not have been sold in the first place) and offer to you? No one is holding a cutlass to your head. Please leave.

You can raid the booty or not, it is your choice, and EA is well aware of PMBD and have issued letters of approval for what we do here, and have issued letters clearly stating that any commercial profit off EA goodies is illegal, and a pack of rabid attack lawyers are probably sitting by eagerly sharpening their teeth, just waiting to be sicced on the worst offenders.

MAXIS looked the other way. MAXIS is no longer calling the shots in any significant way. EA is definitely not feeling as benign about the matter, and we don't blame them.

You may choose to share the fun, the rum, and the shared booty, or you can go take a long walk off a short plank. It's your choice.

[mando]

Nice job, Lorelei! Very clear and to the point, and answered a lot of typical paysite arguments.

I've never understood that "The EULA is invalid!" claim as it really adds no strength to the pro paysite side. Frankly, if the EULA is invalid or unprovable, then the EULA or TOS of a paysite is equally invalid and unprovable. Until someone could prove to me legally that a paysite's EULA was more legally binding than EA's, then I will have to treat any such statement as moronic.

As for misunderstanding the EULA, it is written in very clear, easy to understand language. I would love for someone to try to prove to me how I am misunderstanding the word "non-commercial".