These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Client modification, the EULA and you

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#141 - 2013-04-18 15:57:11 UTC
Acac Sunflyier wrote:
Does this include a visual modification to make everything look like star wars ships?

That would fall under modifying the client.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Blawrf McTaggart
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#142 - 2013-04-18 15:57:47 UTC
pmchem wrote:
This 'cache scraping' stance is completely untenable. I am a third party dev. I help design / publish tools, such as http://goonmetrics.com, which players who don't want to lawyer-up the EULA will use. What am I supposed to say? "Hey guys, this is now officially against the EULA (where in the past it has generally been thought to be permitted by the EULA), but don't worry because it's just market data and not a botting program and there are a couple forum posts which say you'll be fine, honest. Oh but by the way if a GM wants to ban you nobody can help because it's against the EULA."

This is insanity.

CCP Stillman wrote:

In regards to enforcement, we don't have plans. It's not at the top of our to-do list. It's simply a case of while it not being allowed by our EULA, it's at our discretion whether or not the effort to enforce it is worth it or not. Right now, we're focused on botting, RMT, client modification that impact other players.


What you really need to do is to modify the EULA to be more specific. Have it actually mention things such as "cache scraping in conjunction with botting". If you make pretty much every evemon user -- nearly every player of the game -- a EULA violator, you're giving GMs or whoever carte blanche to ban as they please. "Hey this guy was cache scraping, and someone somewhere said he was botting. But we know he was cache scraping, off you go!"

Please, for the love of god and the sanity of devs who HELP PLAYERS ENJOY YOUR GAME and are TRYING TO DO RIGHT, fix it so extremely common, "CCP sanctioned" tools such as market data tools or evemon are not against the friggin' EULA.

Really, who comes up with this stuff? Would you stand for this if you were a third party dev? How can you have a policy that makes it so tens of thousands of players can arbitrarily be banned, then say "don't worry it's not a priority?" If you were an EVE player, would you want that Sword of Damocles hanging over your account?


Dude knows what he's talking about. Someone pay attention.
None ofthe Above
#143 - 2013-04-18 15:58:44 UTC
seth Hendar wrote:
Lallante wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
as a RL lawyer, you should be aware that this is dependent of the countrys, and in france, if CCP ban someone with no reason, said person can fill a lawsuit and will win, because of customer protective laws (btw, EULA are of no value at all in France).


Incorrect. While a EULA might not be legally enforceable as a contract, that doesn't prevent CCP from refusing access to its services to whoever it likes for whatever reason it likes. At best consumer protection law might get you a refund of unused, pre-purchased subscription time (doesnt apply if you use ISK bought plexs), which will be vastly less than any legal fees incurred, so good luck with that.

enlighten me. EULA is of no value at all in france


Just reread his paragraph. How would France force an unban?

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#144 - 2013-04-18 15:59:22 UTC
Acac Sunflyier wrote:
Does this include a visual modification to make everything look like star wars ships?


Those mods have always been illegal. In any case they require decompiling, which is itself illegal.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#145 - 2013-04-18 15:59:23 UTC
Uppsy Daisy wrote:
Gypsio III wrote:
Uppsy Daisy wrote:


Much more clarity is needed.

Is cache scraping to upload to Eve Market Relay or Eve Central illegal?
Is cache scraping to better manage you order portfolio illegal?
Is cache scraping to find the best trade routes illegal?
Is cache scraping to reseach the eve market generally illegal?
Is cache scraping to find out whenever someone beats your order illegal?
Is cache scraping to feed a manufacturing program with up to date prices illegal?

'Cache scraping is illegal when you use it for cheating' is not enough.


Use some common sense FFS.


Humor me and answer the questions.


The answers are "Yes" to all. This has been stated repeatedly. BTW, your last statement is wrong, cache scraping is illegal, full stop.

Now here comes the common sense part with which you appear to be struggling deeply - what do you think will be the consequences of each of those actions? Straight
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#146 - 2013-04-18 16:00:07 UTC
Blawrf McTaggart wrote:
pmchem wrote:
This 'cache scraping' stance is completely untenable. I am a third party dev. I help design / publish tools, such as http://goonmetrics.com, which players who don't want to lawyer-up the EULA will use. What am I supposed to say? "Hey guys, this is now officially against the EULA (where in the past it has generally been thought to be permitted by the EULA), but don't worry because it's just market data and not a botting program and there are a couple forum posts which say you'll be fine, honest. Oh but by the way if a GM wants to ban you nobody can help because it's against the EULA."

This is insanity.

CCP Stillman wrote:

In regards to enforcement, we don't have plans. It's not at the top of our to-do list. It's simply a case of while it not being allowed by our EULA, it's at our discretion whether or not the effort to enforce it is worth it or not. Right now, we're focused on botting, RMT, client modification that impact other players.


What you really need to do is to modify the EULA to be more specific. Have it actually mention things such as "cache scraping in conjunction with botting". If you make pretty much every evemon user -- nearly every player of the game -- a EULA violator, you're giving GMs or whoever carte blanche to ban as they please. "Hey this guy was cache scraping, and someone somewhere said he was botting. But we know he was cache scraping, off you go!"

Please, for the love of god and the sanity of devs who HELP PLAYERS ENJOY YOUR GAME and are TRYING TO DO RIGHT, fix it so extremely common, "CCP sanctioned" tools such as market data tools or evemon are not against the friggin' EULA.

Really, who comes up with this stuff? Would you stand for this if you were a third party dev? How can you have a policy that makes it so tens of thousands of players can arbitrarily be banned, then say "don't worry it's not a priority?" If you were an EVE player, would you want that Sword of Damocles hanging over your account?


Dude knows what he's talking about. Someone pay attention.


Not he doesn't. He is assuming that CCP want him to develop tools like Goonmetrics. He doesnt even consider that maybe they dont.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#147 - 2013-04-18 16:00:32 UTC
Uppsy Daisy wrote:
Jackie Fisher wrote:
I'm pretty sure all the members of the security team are looking forward to telling Hilmar that they have enforced the EULA and perma-banned 400k accounts for using Evemon. Big smile


Don't worry, it's ok.

They are only threatening them all with bans, it's absolutely fine!!

... by telling you specifically that EvEMon and similar programs are NOT what they are going to enforce the EULA and TOS on.

Now if you want to look at them as say "I don't care what you just told me, I'm telling you that you said the opposite." then I don't know what to tell you. Big smileBig smileBig smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Callic Veratar
#148 - 2013-04-18 16:01:16 UTC
Entity wrote:
CCP Peligro wrote:

Please, consider the fact that cache scraping can be used for illegitimate purposes which are damaging to the overall health of the game,


Cars can be used to run over people. I don't see the government issuing blanket threats to car drivers.


Really, these things are all over the place around here.
Rengerel en Distel
#149 - 2013-04-18 16:01:24 UTC
They could have saved themselves a lot of trouble simply saying cache scrapping is legal, while using that information in scripts/bots whatever is still illegal. Much like the eve uni guy that used scrapping + java scripting for a market bot, it's not the scrapping that allowed anything, it was the script that broke the rules.

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
Kazanir
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#150 - 2013-04-18 16:02:20 UTC
CCP Peligro wrote:
Entity wrote:
CCP Peligro wrote:

Please, consider the fact that cache scraping can be used for illegitimate purposes which are damaging to the overall health of the game,


Cars can be used to run over people. I don't see the government issuing blanket threats to car drivers.


Hi Entity! There are no blanket threats here, I'm sorry you see it that way.

We've stated our intent numerous times, and I'll do it again; the policies are in place to protect the well being of the game. We'll use these policies to get rid of cheaters, and I'm sure you don't want them around any more than we do.


Pmchem and Entity are absolutely correct to be upset by the way CCP has handled their public statements here. Cache scraping should not be against the EULA. It has been used for dozens of completely legitimate purposes since the dawn of (eve)time.

If someone is using cache scraping to do Bad Things, then CCP should...

BAN THEM FOR DOING THE BAD THINGS!

This is hardly a revolutionary stance. There is no reason whatsoever to make cache scraping against the EULA but with an, "Oh, we're not enforcing this really we promise," note. Doing this doesn't provide CCP any additional tools to ban cheaters -- if they know someone is cheating they should be able to ban them for cheating. Period.

All these statements and this EULA policy do is sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the legitimate player base.
IgnoreTheDroid
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#151 - 2013-04-18 16:03:07 UTC
Lallante wrote:
IgnoreTheDroid wrote:
Cache scraping is against eula... except we won't enforce it on some things that use it but we will allow the players to guess at what is allowed..


Glad we got a nice clear and concise definition of what is allowed and isn't.


That's the whole point. If you give people a clear, definitive explanation of what is allowed, smart, bad people will immediately set about exploiting the **** out of the loopholes.

CCP is using deliberately open-ended language in the same way that in many countries, criminal laws do. They want there to a grey area SO that they can approach each case on its own merits and dont have their hands tied when they have to deal with a clearly abusive case which is "technically" on the legitimate side of a clear dividing line.

Its a good policy and one I wholeheartedly agree with as a lawyer.



That's where the nice clause of "we can ban you at anytime for any reason" comes into play. People are going to find and exploit loopholes no matter what. This isn't going to stop it at all. All it is doing is making legitimate players worried that their actions are now a bannable offense because there is no clear statement on what is allowed and isn't.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#152 - 2013-04-18 16:03:27 UTC
Uppsy Daisy wrote:
Jackie Fisher wrote:
I'm pretty sure all the members of the security team are looking forward to telling Hilmar that they have enforced the EULA and perma-banned 400k accounts for using Evemon. Big smile


Don't worry, it's ok.

They are only threatening them all with bans, it's absolutely fine!!


CCP shall remember that players too can threaten, remember walk in station and the mass unsub that followed? nobody want's to go throught that again right?
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#153 - 2013-04-18 16:03:32 UTC
People arguing that it needs to be clearer what is legal and what is illegal are completely wrong.

The whole point is that it needs to be sufficiently broad to allow CCP to take whatever action it feels necessary to safeguard the game, and not have its hands tied because someone has found a particular angle that is "technically" within the EULA but in practice is highly abusive.

If you are worried that your actions might be deemed cheating, unfair, exploits, gamebreaking, or otherwise circumventing a deliberately designed game limitation, then don't do them.

If you are not so worried, chill out. You aren't going to be banned for a technical breach.

Getting hung up on what does or does not technically break a EULA is completely missing the point.
Jack Haydn
Magellanic Itg
Goonswarm Federation
#154 - 2013-04-18 16:04:36 UTC
What do you have an EULA for, which is supposed to clearly outline the terms of business between company and customer, if you completely erode and undermine said EULA, making it essentially useless and leave the user to guess what one can do and what not?

This is extremely pitiful customer service, CCP.

I hope you will come up with more clear terms and I hope you are going to tell us clearly "Yes, XYZ is ok, ABC is not." It's absolutely fine to change the terms later on, as long as you give people grace periods to adapt. If you want to allow multiboxing now, but want to ban it later, no problem! Inform people, give them a month to adjust and then start handing out bans. It's not like anything you say now is set in stone forever. This game is constantly changing on all fronts. But for gods sake, please be clear and specific.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#155 - 2013-04-18 16:04:42 UTC
IgnoreTheDroid wrote:
Lallante wrote:
IgnoreTheDroid wrote:
Cache scraping is against eula... except we won't enforce it on some things that use it but we will allow the players to guess at what is allowed..


Glad we got a nice clear and concise definition of what is allowed and isn't.


That's the whole point. If you give people a clear, definitive explanation of what is allowed, smart, bad people will immediately set about exploiting the **** out of the loopholes.

CCP is using deliberately open-ended language in the same way that in many countries, criminal laws do. They want there to a grey area SO that they can approach each case on its own merits and dont have their hands tied when they have to deal with a clearly abusive case which is "technically" on the legitimate side of a clear dividing line.

Its a good policy and one I wholeheartedly agree with as a lawyer.



That's where the nice clause of "we can ban you at anytime for any reason" comes into play. People are going to find and exploit loopholes no matter what. This isn't going to stop it at all. All it is doing is making legitimate players worried that their actions are now a bannable offense because there is no clear statement on what is allowed and isn't.



Its going to stop legitimate players taking comfort from EULA wording to justify using a cheat. This eliminates much of the market for such cheats, which in turn discourages their development.
Bekari
Perkone
Caldari State
#156 - 2013-04-18 16:05:03 UTC
Lallante wrote:
Blawrf McTaggart wrote:
pmchem wrote:
This 'cache scraping' stance is completely untenable. I am a third party dev. I help design / publish tools, such as http://goonmetrics.com, which players who don't want to lawyer-up the EULA will use. What am I supposed to say? "Hey guys, this is now officially against the EULA (where in the past it has generally been thought to be permitted by the EULA), but don't worry because it's just market data and not a botting program and there are a couple forum posts which say you'll be fine, honest. Oh but by the way if a GM wants to ban you nobody can help because it's against the EULA."

This is insanity.

CCP Stillman wrote:

In regards to enforcement, we don't have plans. It's not at the top of our to-do list. It's simply a case of while it not being allowed by our EULA, it's at our discretion whether or not the effort to enforce it is worth it or not. Right now, we're focused on botting, RMT, client modification that impact other players.


What you really need to do is to modify the EULA to be more specific. Have it actually mention things such as "cache scraping in conjunction with botting". If you make pretty much every evemon user -- nearly every player of the game -- a EULA violator, you're giving GMs or whoever carte blanche to ban as they please. "Hey this guy was cache scraping, and someone somewhere said he was botting. But we know he was cache scraping, off you go!"

Please, for the love of god and the sanity of devs who HELP PLAYERS ENJOY YOUR GAME and are TRYING TO DO RIGHT, fix it so extremely common, "CCP sanctioned" tools such as market data tools or evemon are not against the friggin' EULA.

Really, who comes up with this stuff? Would you stand for this if you were a third party dev? How can you have a policy that makes it so tens of thousands of players can arbitrarily be banned, then say "don't worry it's not a priority?" If you were an EVE player, would you want that Sword of Damocles hanging over your account?


Dude knows what he's talking about. Someone pay attention.


Not he doesn't. He is assuming that CCP want him to develop tools like Goonmetrics. He doesnt even consider that maybe they dont.

if they dont, they are out of their minds then
pmchem
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#157 - 2013-04-18 16:05:17 UTC
Lallante wrote:

Not he doesn't. He is assuming that CCP want him to develop tools like Goonmetrics. He doesnt even consider that maybe they dont.


Except that their blanket statement also covers, you know, EVEMON. If CCP doesn't want you doing something, they should come out and be specific in the EULA -- not make things which they clearly don't have a problem with offenders too.

p.s., goonmetrics was not the first and will not be the last tool which specifically uses market data. eve-central, eve market data relay, etc, are used by far more people.

https://twitter.com/pmchem/ || http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/community-spotlight-garpa/ || Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
IgnoreTheDroid
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#158 - 2013-04-18 16:05:30 UTC
Lallante wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
as a RL lawyer, you should be aware that this is dependent of the countrys, and in france, if CCP ban someone with no reason, said person can fill a lawsuit and will win, because of customer protective laws (btw, EULA are of no value at all in France).


Incorrect. While a EULA might not be legally enforceable as a contract, that doesn't prevent CCP from refusing access to its services to whoever it likes for whatever reason it likes. At best consumer protection law might get you a refund of unused, pre-purchased subscription time (doesnt apply if you use ISK bought plexs), which will be vastly less than any legal fees incurred, so good luck with that.


Laws are different depending on where you live if you didn't know. e-Lawyer detected. Not everyone has the same consumer protection laws.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#159 - 2013-04-18 16:05:57 UTC
Lallante wrote:
You aren't going to be banned for a technical breach.


It happens all the time.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Esmilis99
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#160 - 2013-04-18 16:06:41 UTC
Lallante wrote:
IgnoreTheDroid wrote:
Cache scraping is against eula... except we won't enforce it on some things that use it but we will allow the players to guess at what is allowed..


Glad we got a nice clear and concise definition of what is allowed and isn't.


That's the whole point. If you give people a clear, definitive explanation of what is allowed, smart, bad people will immediately set about exploiting the **** out of the loopholes.

CCP is using deliberately open-ended language in the same way that in many countries, criminal laws do. They want there to a grey area SO that they can approach each case on its own merits and dont have their hands tied when they have to deal with a clearly abusive case which is "technically" on the legitimate side of a clear dividing line.

Its a good policy and one I wholeheartedly agree with as a lawyer.


You are a crappy lawyer then. Rules have to be clearly defined. If its unclear, then either side can use to its advantage (in RL scenario, if theres an ambiguity, the best lawyer wins). Now in a situation CCP GMs are the judges, and a player has zero chance of defense, it can easily get out of hand. Saying that everything is against the EULA just because CCP doesn't want to leave any gray area for criminals to abuse is exactly the opposite of a good policy.

Remember that you cant discuss petition results, and technically any random CCP GM can go on a ban spree whenever he wants, and players banned have no way to reverse the ruling because they are technically breaking the EULA. It's not enough for a GM to post to a forum "yeah, trust us, you are breaking the rules but we wont do anything".

I cant believe how many gullible naive people are playing this game. I kind of expected some more brains from the players of EVE, where you are encouraged not to trust anyones random ramblings in the forums, and look at things that actually do matter.