PMBD

I is a newbie :oops:! Pardon me for anything really touchy I say.

How did all the paysite controversy start? Was it because the creators thought they made art, and as art is a profession, they were really deluded into thinking they had the right to charge, or was it just greedy b******* like Thomas who got the idea that they could charge sheep for stuff that should be free? Does anyone have a clear idea or theory? Can anyone answer the question, or does no one in PMBD know?

Also, which paysites are still blooming and which are rotting?

RetailSims claims to be closing in one of those legal threats and hate mail to PMBD, but the closing date in December, is it THIS year or LAST year? If it is last year, why would RetailSims be still online?

Would EA ever take legal action against paysites and their owners?

[I just love history, btw]

And Captain Jojoba, I dislike you calling me a troll. I would never troll, I seen how "cruel" you guys were to those beasties. More like I was laughing though.

I apologise for calling you a troll, mkay? Would you accept some rum? Pirates dont really say sorry...but we do give out rum  :wink:



From what I know, it started from SimsFreaks and TheSimsResource. Who started that they needed the money to pay for the bandwidth..and then loads of others jumped on the bandwagon and the paysite era (as it where) started



You can see some of the already dead paysites here (http://paysites.mustbedestroyed.org/booty/inactive_sites/)...and when one gets destroyed we celebrate a killmark :)

But it depends what you mean by rotting and blooming...paysites cant really bloom in my opinion. They all stink. So all rot. TSR espicially!

Yay! More rum! :D

I meant blooming as in they're raking in $$.

But about RetailSims, can anyone answer my question?

She had one payset that appeared in the booty, so she decided to shut her site down.
But only a short time later she was back.
And some months later she decided to go completely free because she needed her paypal button with different options for another, not sims-related site.

There were a few Sims 1 paysites but it wasn't a big issue as it is now.  

It wasn't until the game code was cracked and the community came together to beta test new objects and clothing/hair meshes that CrecheBaby removed the clothing meshes that we helped her with and put it on her site, SimChic.  Of course everyone was outraged but she stood by her greed.  

Other early paysites that come to mind are TSR and WDS.  TSR didn't even credit the tools that were made until people bitched.

I don't think EA will ever directly go after paysites.  They'd lose some of their Sims fan base, and they really don't wanna do that.  I do believe though, that they will continue to issue statements and keep the exchange open.  That way they don't alienate any of the fans and they still make their stance on paysites quite clear.

They're probably losing some by not doing it as well. People who might go "well... if THEY can break the EULA so can I" and then they torrent the game.

It's not like the interest for The Sims 2 is low. Far from it. They have a huge fan base. (many of whom don't use the community at all, but those aren't the one in question...)

I'm not a happy little trooper either, and my frown is getting so bad that I won't even bother to torrent anything. If all this isn't fixed by Sims 3 then I'll simply not bother. I was here since the TS1 base game, so personally deciding to boycutt TS3 is a big deal  :P

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]

K first post  :oops: please don't shot me, make me walk the plank, whatever  

first I don't think EA Games will ever go after TSR  (shame)
as wayyyyyyyyyy back when The Sims 1 was the game to have
 
Maxis actively promoted TSR in fact it was from "a today is Sims day" at the official site I followed a link that lead me to TSR and it was part pay even then

and the rest as we shall say is history   :roll:  :roll:

second re The Sims three no way I have given this cash cow more than enough
all expansion packs for Sims 1
and all expansion and stuff packs for Sims 2
me thinks they kill the fatted calf   :oops:

Maxis and EA are not the same.  Maxis might have looked the other way, but that doesn't mean EA will.

True True

hopefully this will be the case, however I for one am very skeptical  :cry:

I don't blame you for being skeptical. One way to look at it though, is that with the introduction of stuff packs (expansions that revolve primarly around new object and clothing content), EA may now be looking at paysites as possible rivals for consumer dollars. If so the days of paysites might just be numbered. Either way, stay positive. As I understand it very few other modding communities have to deal with the leeches that the Sims community has to deal with. So we know that life without paysites is more than possible.

Glamour Sim just started to butcher up all the meshes that came with H&M with their horrible textures and selling it. Maybe a shortcup would be point H&M to Glamour Sims direction and see what happens?
Stupid maxoids (that's some pleonasm for ya!) seem to be all pro-paysites anyway. Does not mean EA Games share their pro-paysites opinion or even that their opinion matters in this subject.

Here's an incentive for them to sue. $$$.  :lol: Who doesn't like $$? It can buy rum!



That IS an excellent way of losing some fans. Tommy, Atwa, LyricLee and others aren't what I really call fans, I'll call them...... hold on.... lemme search through the dictionary.. dolts. Maybe some sheep will cry at EA for bringing down TSR, GlamourSims, Carla Niven, but then the stuff not submitted will (mostly, unless those driven by money quit their creative works) definitely be submitted to those fansites like MTS2 and others, I see absolutely no reason why EA should just take a passive-aggressive stance on an issue pissing off the entire fan community for several years. Nothing is lost and $$ is gained. I suppose the money they earn could feed off the lawyer's fees, and once they show the EULA, its pretty much a walkover, even if they bring up the bandwidth arguement(charging for bandwidth), our site can testify to counter that. Unless its... a conspiracy! *swigs rum to weed off unwanted thought*

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.

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).

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

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:

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

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.

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".

I really wonder if it would be such a good idea to get EA/Maxis into that at all.
Sure the EULA states that you cannot sell stuff, but it also says you cannot reverse engeneer and disassemble game contents. This means SimPE and all custom content will have to go too cuz from the beginning on noone was allowed to rip things apart. If the EULA should kick in, then it will as whole and not only the pay part! Then all content will have to leave the net, free or pay, mods as meshes and hacks. And we will be left bare bones with the game, bodyshop and Homecrafter and CC from only made with it.
And this would be like peeing in the wind. And a very high price for seeing those greedy Paysite owners to back off....

EA won't let that happen.  They know that cc is what keeps the game fresh and fun.

I think the difference is that that would hurt the community, not help it. Everyone making stuff for the fun of it (whether that's the fun of making stuff or playing the game with that stuff), access to all of this content for anyone who plays the game and can go online - that means a happier community. People happy with the games will speak more highly of them than someone who doesn't, meaning their friends/readers/listeners will be more likely to buy it.

TS2 is (pretty obviously) a very open-ended game, no goals, few characters. So, extra content just allows it to more personal and customised. This improves the game, meaning more people buy it and are happy with it in the long term (this is really important for a game where you're expected to buy multiple expansion packs).

So, acting against paysites =  better for community = better for sales, whereas acting against cc-makers in general = worse for both.

The point of my post: I don't think we have to worry about EA going after SimPE etc. because this would be completely against their best interests.

Well, but that is exactly the point that gets ignored when people point on the EULA and run to EA to complain!
There is just black or white! The EULA WILL take effect on SimPE if it ever should take effect on pay sites. Cuz it states NO selling and NO reverse engeneering. This means SimPe and all custum Content is against the EULA.
It is one thing to share that stuff freely so that everyone has fun, another is to put pressure on EA about the EULA! The EULA states that already opening of the packages and changing them is against it, and so is SimPE and any programm that makes meshing and the insert of it into the game illegal.
You can't ask Maxis or EA to only make a part of the EULA valid and leave the rest untouched.... so EA goes after paysites, EA goes after SimPE and CC with is not an item made with BS or Homecrafter....
Endresult=no happy community cuz all is gone!
Share freely, take custumers away, yes.... involve Maxis/EA, no!
I'm not the first who is saying those things, but it seems it gets ignored all along the way.

I'm pretty sure EA can tell their lawyers which parts of their EULA to enforce and when. I really don't think it's illegal somewhere to disregard your own copyright/intellectual property? Your argument rests on someone other than EA sorting out the matter of the EULA for this game :S

What I'm saying is, if EA get rid of SimPE and SimPE-made cc, they're shooting themselves in the foot. Yes, they suck at testing their games, but they're not stupid, so they wouldn't do something that hurts them (or, they wouldn't actively, at least).

Is SimPe really considered reverse engineering, tho?  I honestly don't know.  It seems more a tool that can only be used for TS2, like Homecrafter and Bodyshop.  And they aren't making money off of it or using it as is for other games or apps as far as I know.

If SimPe is reverse engineering, wouldn't mods and hacks also be?  Are they going to shut down people like Crammyboy who helped them to figure out the portal issue causing the NPC slowdown bug that shipped with the base game?  Paladin for revealing flags and such in SimCat?

Or people who make chairs for sims?  It's an interesting point raised, I just don't know how that stuff really works.   :oops:

I have a feeling that the "reverse engineering" bit is in there more as a defense against ripping the code of the game off entirely and recreating your own "Sims" game for sale. For example, company A may see that the Sims is making a ton of money and instead of developing it's own outside code based on the idea of the Sims (which would be much more costly even if the idea is ripped off), they take EA's original code and try to monkey it out and reuse it to create their own game without permission.

Technically, hacks and the like would be reverse engineering of a sort, however I'm sure that EA knows that banning such a thing would be shooting themselves in the foot. Most programs like these help to keep players interested in buying and playing the Sims. I know that I would have lost interest a loooong time ago if I didn't have hacks to correct problems and create new gameplay features. Paysites, on the other hand, are taking money directly out of EA's pocket in that they are creating, for sale, a product that EA itself is trying to sell. The one is worse than the other, I think.

That's the part that gets me - paysites have been picking EA's pocket for years, lol.

I guess it's cheaper than paying employees to make content.

I suspect that the custom content made by freesites is more than enough to help encourage interest in the Sims games.

I never paid for content while playing Sims 1, and have confessed to buying ONE donation set from 11dots, when what I would have far preferred to donate to her instead. I had no option to donate to show appreciation, and did not know about PMBD at the time. Of course, I found it four days later! (ARRRRR!!!! of annoyance goes here)

The custom content issue seems so cut and dried. As mando said, in what way are we misinterpreting the "non-commercial use" portion of the EULA?

All attempts to weasel out of that one are simply specious. I'm sorry, but if there is content that cannot be accessed without money exchanging hands, it is pay content, and commercial by definition, and no matter how weasely one is about trying to claim it is for bandwidth (there are free alternatives) or is a "donation" to support the site (a donation is something give without expectation of a gift in return; once donation money nets a donator an item no one else can have without donating, it is a sale), taking any money, in any amount, for Sims 2 game content is not allowed by EA's EULA.

I want to kick MAXIS in the seat of the pants for letting the camel stick his nose in the tent in the first place, because without that little caveat back in the days of Sims 1 that a small donation fee would be okay to defray bandwidth costs, paysite owners would not even have that much to point to in an attempt to justify their illegal financial screwing of the community as a whole.

Obviously, even the most expensive servers and bandwidth costs are more than covered by the amount of dosh sites like Peggy's, TSR, Rose and others rake in from the fans who don't know any better.

Why people do not read legal documents when presented with the opportunity to do so just amazes me. For god's sake, EA could have claimed a right to your first born, and you didn't even bother to check that out? And you compound the error by refusing to go email EA or read the EULA yourself?

I note that paysites have had as much opportunity to write EA as we have had, and whereas pro-freesite people have posted several emails from EA that make their feelings clear, I have yet to see one pro-paysite person produce a verifiable letter from EA that excuses their activities that are in defiance of the EULA.

In fact, we have seen paysite owners try to claim that the EA letters were Photoshopped (and other such crazy nonsense) rather than accepting THEY ARE WRONG. I think that amazes me most of all. They would rather pretend that someone went to all the trouble to mock up a letter from EA than acknowledge that THEY ARE WRONG.

How deluded does a person need to be, to come up with that?

The "my chilluns must be fed!" argument is my second-most favourite stupid pro-paysite argument. I fail to see why engaging in illegal activities is the best solution for adequately taking care of one's kids. Hopefully one would not sell drugs, or pirated software, to feed and clothe the chilluns. What values does that teach kids? Do as I say, not as I do? There are so many legal ways to make money from home, be it AVON or Tupperware, or being a professional bridal planner, organizer, personal assistant, babysitter, music teacher, proofreader, editor, et cetera, et cetera.

Alternatively, there's always option of solving two problems at once and selling them.

But then you don't get to try A Modest Proposal Roast with barbeque!

You're such a smarty pants, you Jonathan Swift dropper, you.

The whole point I don't think people seem to be getting is A) What was done on the Sims 1 was done when the game was owned by Maxis, not EA. It is under new ownership now, and EA is quite a bit bigger and better equiped to handle legal battles than Maxis ever was. B) It doesn't matter if anyone thinks EA's TOS are illegal or not. It is a legal binding contract "YOU" agree too. No one twisted your arm to agree to the terms for installing their game. If they ask for your first born child and you agree to it, you have to give them your first born child. It's a contract. Just ask any woman that has decided to be a surrogate mother and then decided they wanted to keep the child. They have never been allowed too. Contract laws are some of the strictest laws in many parts of the world. Contractual law and copyright law are 2 totally different things. These paysites want to pound their chest and say my copyright, well good luck trying to fight a contract with a copyright lawyer...I'm sure he/she won't mind taking a few thousand from you first before they tell you need a contract lawyer and by the way, you may very well own copyright to your own work, but you don't have a leg to stand on because you agreed by contract that everything that goes into EA games, belongs to EA which makes you no different than a ghost artist that works for a well known artist and that artist signs off on their work. No glory and recognition for ghost artists.

Now they've done the let's make everyone paranoid thing and say they are going to go after free sites. EA doesn't want to go after free sites they are doing just what EA wants sharing the content for free. EA knows about SIMPE, they also know about several mods/hacks, etc...The difference is freesites are not dipping their hand in the till. Oh then there is the argument of everything SIMPE etc...goes against the TOS.

Oh well, once again it is up to EA to choose which parts of their OWN contract they wish to enforce and which parts they don't. I'd love to be a fly on the wall and hear anyone try that argument in court, but your honor they're doing the same thing, their just not charging for it. It's not fair they go after just us! Wahhh! I'm quite sure those that were sharing music and got singled out felt the same way, but that argument didn't hold water in court. No money has been made off of SIMPE, where I went to school 0-0 still =0. No money to be made there. But dipping your hands in the till and taking money from EA's wallet without their permission, without a licensing agreement is quite a different story.

Oh and PS: Ignorance of a contract you agree too is 0 grounds for violation of that contract.

Any lawyer stupid enough to make that statement couldn't have passed the bar. The EULA clearly states that making content with their tools and distributing it is allowed, just not charging.

EA is involved whether they want to be or not. They got involved when they made the game. Their views on paysites (though it could be very much debated how much of this is Maxis and how much is EA, or how the heck we started with a game made by Maxis and ended up with the Sims Division of EA to begin with) have changed from moderately supportive of paysites in the Sims 1 days, to ambivalent, to moderately disapproving of paysites these days. Why they've changed their mind, I couldn't tell you, but I could make a few guesses.
As for "OMG EA's going to go after SimPE!", I also doubt it because of how much custom content helps sales of Sims games, but I don't know how EA feels about the program. The object creator for Sims 1, Transmogrifier, wasn't made by Maxis, but was approved by them and had their terms of use attached. Even if EA does have some grudge against SimPE, at this point they certainly couldn't stop custom object creation in Sims 2 even if they wanted to do so.

I'm tired just sitting down and complaining and biding our time till EA does legal proceedings. Or maybe they're too busy with Spore to actually sue.  :)  *lots of hope* Or maybe not  :(  *downs rum in sorrow* I just can't stand the paysites, especially the stuff they make don't even work properly sometimes, or are just ugly. How could PEOPLE PAY for that stuff?

And Jojo, heres some crap you might want to know about your pro-paysite stand. (Pardon me if you changed your stance)

*Paysites have never started an open campaign to eradicate us. (Reason? Doing so would make publicity to us.)
*Any mention of PMBD on any paysite will most likely get your ass banned (For "advertising")
*What Lorelei said (excellent job on that *thumbs up*)
*Paysites have only sent cease and desist letters to us, and not many of them do.(2 possible reasons. 1. We could find out where they were and dig up more dirt about them. Then, in the middle of the night, we would send pirates to capture them and make them walk the plank. 2. They know it won't work.)

What does this show, paysites KNOW they are in the wrong, but they refuse to stop it, because they don't believe EA would sue them. But I worry... what happens if TSR, Peggy and others PAID EA so that they would turn a closed eye to them. *sweat sweat sweat*  :shock: I need reassurance.  :cry:

Thanks!

And to pro-paysite people:

Have you tried writing to EA yourself?

Why not?

Do you fear that calling attention to your activities might cause them to look into your activities sooner than later?

If you truly feel that you are doing nothing wrong, then ask EA directly what they think, and don't waste time dealing with middlemen like us.

Do feel free to post screenshots of your correspondence here.

Do you need contact information? Just ask.

We would LOVE for you to write EA and get told directly that your activities are illegal. Maybe then you'd stop trying to argue with us, which is futile. and start arguing with EA, which is even more futile but will save us the aggravation of repeating the same very simple concept over and over again to you.

If any item of content is unavailable unless money exchanges hands, it is a sale.

Commercial profit from Sims 2 content is against the contract you signed, which is a legally binding agreement.

If you sell anything designed specifically to work for the Sims 2 games, you are breaking the law.

Don't like it? Write EA.

Please.

Here's a handy cut and paste letter to send, but feel free to write your own:

"Dear EA:
I run a Sims 2 fansite. Its address is http://yoursitehere.whatever.

I offer X items on this site. X items are free for anyone to download, and X items are available only if the visitor to my site pays me X amount of currency.

Is it okay for me to sell X items for X amount of currency?

I do this because insert excuse / reason here. Is this against the terms of the EULA I (supposedly) read and clicked "I agree" to when I installed your games?

Please advise. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,
Yournamehere."

There you go. Now please go ask EA directly. Be sure to go to the parent company site for the most accurate and swift responses, as it is the parent company who will set the terms for all other satellite companies involved with the Sims 2 games worldwide.

Cheers.

Oh man I almost wish I had a paysite so that I could copy and paste that letter and send it, just to read the reply...
Then again, I guess I could always just say I am thinking of starting a paysite.

Hopefully you'll let us know about the reply you get, Lace.

Paysite owners seem to lack common sense, so it wouldn't surprise me to see one of them complain to EA "I can't sell your property to feed my chilluns, because of mean pirates.".  :roll:  

 I would like to be a fly on the wall when THAT letter rolls in. :lol:  :lol:

That they replied to you to tell you they'll be, erm...replying to you sort of doesn't leave me expecting too much from these people :roll:  :lol:

 :lol: That made me laugh.

Looks like they just want to leave everything to us to deal with. And grab some money on the way. They should open a paysite.

Oh, wait...