These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Overlays, ISK Buyer Amnesty and Account Security

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ran
BalaGun
#221 - 2016-02-24 18:39:45 UTC
Hi,

What about last statement about ISBoxer?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5245807#post5245807

Hot or Flop?
Soltys
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#222 - 2016-02-24 18:40:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Soltys
The whole bullshit wording of eula is done deliberately so they (CCP) can do anything at any time as they see fit. If we followed this vague nonsense, anyone using Little Pirate's Helper or Evernus would have been banned on the spot.

What they should do is either rewrite this vague nonsense, or make an official, stickied, locked post with listed all 3rd party tools and sites which are allowed or which parts of them are allowed, e.g. which part of isboxer would be ok - despite their bullshit EULA clearly stating otherwise.

Jita Flipping Inc.: Kovl & Kuvl
Archibald Thistlewaite III
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Miners
#223 - 2016-02-24 18:44:02 UTC
Isboxer is not banned.

Certain aspects of the program will mean you break the EULA mainly the broadcasting and the videofx-dxnothing parts of it.

There is a sticky in general discussion about it if you want more details.

User of 'Bumblefck's Luscious & Luminous Mustachio Wax'
Shadoroth
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#224 - 2016-02-24 18:47:55 UTC
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Isboxer is not banned.

Certain aspects of the program will mean you break the EULA mainly the broadcasting and the videofx-dxnothing parts of it.

There is a sticky in general discussion about it if you want more details.


From my understanding, repeater pass-through of videoFX breaks EULA. VideoFX itself, as long as its not used in an overlay, should not break EULA, but it might because ~vagueness~
Som Boty
Super Mother Fan Club
#225 - 2016-02-24 18:53:45 UTC
Shadoroth wrote:
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Isboxer is not banned.

Certain aspects of the program will mean you break the EULA mainly the broadcasting and the videofx-dxnothing parts of it.

There is a sticky in general discussion about it if you want more details.


From my understanding, repeater pass-through of videoFX breaks EULA. VideoFX itself, as long as its not used in an overlay, should not break EULA, but it might because ~vagueness~



I would HOPE that this is correct, but I doubt it. waiting on CCP to be sure. but then again, they might say its okay this week and change their mind again in a few months. nothing is for sure with these guys.
Sumo Sabezan
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#226 - 2016-02-24 18:57:45 UTC
Shadoroth wrote:
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Isboxer is not banned.

Certain aspects of the program will mean you break the EULA mainly the broadcasting and the videofx-dxnothing parts of it.

There is a sticky in general discussion about it if you want more details.


From my understanding, repeater pass-through of videoFX breaks EULA. VideoFX itself, as long as its not used in an overlay, should not break EULA, but it might because ~vagueness~


As much as I wish they didn't outright ban passthrough, I could understand that as long as they still allow Video FX and not ban it entirely. Banning it entirely is just ridiculous.
Archibald Thistlewaite III
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Miners
#227 - 2016-02-24 18:58:19 UTC
Shadoroth wrote:

From my understanding, repeater pass-through of videoFX breaks EULA. VideoFX itself, as long as its not used in an overlay, should not break EULA, but it might because ~vagueness~
It does break the EULA as it changes the way the game is played. Each client should be playable as though it was the only client. By having elements of client ie; overview or HUD seperate you can't play that client without an additional client open.

User of 'Bumblefck's Luscious & Luminous Mustachio Wax'
Shadoroth
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#228 - 2016-02-24 19:01:04 UTC
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Shadoroth wrote:

From my understanding, repeater pass-through of videoFX breaks EULA. VideoFX itself, as long as its not used in an overlay, should not break EULA, but it might because ~vagueness~
It does break the EULA as it changes the way the game is played. Each client should be playable as though it was the only client. By having elements of client ie; overview or HUD seperate you can't play that client without an additional client open.


Then having multiple monitors also breaks EULA, as having videoFX without repeater passthrough is just a cheaper alternative to having every account have its own monitor.
Som Boty
Super Mother Fan Club
#229 - 2016-02-24 19:09:48 UTC
Shadoroth wrote:
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Shadoroth wrote:

From my understanding, repeater pass-through of videoFX breaks EULA. VideoFX itself, as long as its not used in an overlay, should not break EULA, but it might because ~vagueness~
It does break the EULA as it changes the way the game is played. Each client should be playable as though it was the only client. By having elements of client ie; overview or HUD seperate you can't play that client without an additional client open.


Then having multiple monitors also breaks EULA, as having videoFX without repeater passthrough is just a cheaper alternative to having every account have its own monitor.


except that the 'clarification' calls out software, not hardware.
Archibald Thistlewaite III
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Miners
#230 - 2016-02-24 19:10:18 UTC
Shadoroth wrote:

Then having multiple monitors also breaks EULA, as having videoFX without repeater passthrough is just a cheaper alternative to having every account have its own monitor.
Having multiple clients on multiple monitors is not the same as having elements of multiple clients grouped together on a monitor.

Read the devblog:We do consider overlays using elements of a second or multiple other EVE clients to be against the rules. It changes the way the game is played and grants the player unfair advantages over other players. For example, having overviews from other EVE clients as overlays on one EVE client would allow a player to get real time intel from all those other game instances without having to switch to the other windows. Similarly, overlays using elements from a second or multiple other EVE clients to allow the player to activate modules etc. on those other game instances without switching to the other client windows are clearly in violation of our rules.

I've underlined the bit I'm reffering to.

Unless I've misunderstood and you are using videofx to place whole clients on a single monitor as in say 2 rows of 3 to have 6 clients up. If thats the case its fine, its using videofx to manipulate elements of a client that breaks the EULA.

User of 'Bumblefck's Luscious & Luminous Mustachio Wax'
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#231 - 2016-02-24 19:11:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Overlays using elements of clients (or pieces to use your terminology) is what breaks the EULA. Using windowed mode does notdo that. Stop believing all the wild rumours people are spreading.
OK archibald, so what you are saying then is that this is OK, but this is not OK? And you think there's a strong enough distinction between the two to warrant the ruling and that CCP will be able to tell the difference?

See, we aren't spreading rumours, were simply pointing out how you can't ban one with the other.

Ed: Also still waiting on you providing a screenshot of your eve-o preview layout that you don;t think give you an advantage.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Sumo Sabezan
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#232 - 2016-02-24 19:12:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Sumo Sabezan
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Shadoroth wrote:

Then having multiple monitors also breaks EULA, as having videoFX without repeater passthrough is just a cheaper alternative to having every account have its own monitor.
Having multiple clients on multiple monitors is not the same as having elements of multiple clients grouped together on a monitor.

Read the devblog:We do consider overlays using elements of a second or multiple other EVE clients to be against the rules. It changes the way the game is played and grants the player unfair advantages over other players. For example, having overviews from other EVE clients as overlays on one EVE client would allow a player to get real time intel from all those other game instances without having to switch to the other windows. Similarly, overlays using elements from a second or multiple other EVE clients to allow the player to activate modules etc. on those other game instances without switching to the other client windows are clearly in violation of our rules.

I've underlined the bit I'm reffering to.

Unless I've misunderstood and you are using videofx to place whole clients on a single monitor as in say 2 rows of 3 to have 6 clients up. If thats the case its fine, its using videofx to manipulate elements of a client that breaks the EULA.


You are missing the point. If you have 3-4+ monitors, you don't need all that fancy stuff because you have the screen space to have them all there. If you only have 1/2 monitors you have to split them up in order for it to at all be playable. If they ban pass-through, but allow videofx, then we just click on the window to focus the one we need.
Som Boty
Super Mother Fan Club
#233 - 2016-02-24 19:13:23 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Overlays using elements of clients (or pieces to use your terminology) is what breaks the EULA. Using windowed mode does notdo that. Stop believing all the wild rumours people are spreading.
OK archibald, so what you are saying then is that this is OK, but this is not OK? And you think there's a strong enough distinction between the two to warrant the ruling and that CCP will be able to tell the difference?

See, we aren't spreading rumours, were simply pointing out how you can't ban one with the other.


i think what we are saying is that no one knows wtf is going on. its been nearly 24 hours and ccp hasn't made a single update.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#234 - 2016-02-24 19:15:58 UTC
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Read the devblog:We do consider overlays using elements of a second or multiple other EVE clients to be against the rules. It changes the way the game is played and grants the player unfair advantages over other players. For example, having overviews from other EVE clients as overlays on one EVE client would allow a player to get real time intel from all those other game instances without having to switch to the other windows. Similarly, overlays using elements from a second or multiple other EVE clients to allow the player to activate modules etc. on those other game instances without switching to the other client windows are clearly in violation of our rules.

I've underlined the bit I'm reffering to.

Unless I've misunderstood and you are using videofx to place whole clients on a single monitor as in say 2 rows of 3 to have 6 clients up. If thats the case its fine, its using videofx to manipulate elements of a client that breaks the EULA.
I highlighted the part of your quote that explains why layered windows are not allowed, unless of course you are ignoring the fact that windowed clients can provide that intel without switching to them.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Koenig Yazria
Adversity.
Psychotic Tendencies.
#235 - 2016-02-24 19:16:38 UTC
Som Boty wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Overlays using elements of clients (or pieces to use your terminology) is what breaks the EULA. Using windowed mode does notdo that. Stop believing all the wild rumours people are spreading.
OK archibald, so what you are saying then is that this is OK, but this is not OK? And you think there's a strong enough distinction between the two to warrant the ruling and that CCP will be able to tell the difference?

See, we aren't spreading rumours, were simply pointing out how you can't ban one with the other.


i think what we are saying is that no one knows wtf is going on. its been nearly 24 hours and ccp hasn't made a single update.


They have, they have mentioned localization, streaming and on reddit to look at this thread. Lol
Som Boty
Super Mother Fan Club
#236 - 2016-02-24 19:18:23 UTC
Koenig Yazria wrote:
Som Boty wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote:
Overlays using elements of clients (or pieces to use your terminology) is what breaks the EULA. Using windowed mode does notdo that. Stop believing all the wild rumours people are spreading.
OK archibald, so what you are saying then is that this is OK, but this is not OK? And you think there's a strong enough distinction between the two to warrant the ruling and that CCP will be able to tell the difference?

See, we aren't spreading rumours, were simply pointing out how you can't ban one with the other.


i think what we are saying is that no one knows wtf is going on. its been nearly 24 hours and ccp hasn't made a single update.


They have, they have mentioned localization, streaming and on reddit to look at this thread. Lol



yes, they said to watch this thread for an update. but there is no update.
Archibald Thistlewaite III
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Miners
#237 - 2016-02-24 19:23:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Archibald Thistlewaite III
Sumo Sabezan wrote:

You are missing the point. If you have 3-4+ monitors, you don't need all that fancy stuff because you have the screen space to have them all there. If you only have 1/2 monitors you have to split them up in order for it to at all be playable. If they ban pass-through, but allow videofx, then we just click on the window to focus the one we need.
Which is what the devblog says
Quote:
Similarly, overlays using elements from a second or multiple other EVE clients to allow the player to activate modules etc. on those other game instances without switching to the other client windows are clearly in violation of our rules.
Underlining is mine.

User of 'Bumblefck's Luscious & Luminous Mustachio Wax'
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#238 - 2016-02-24 19:27:16 UTC
stg slate wrote:
ITT: People saying all these random programs don't give an unfair advantage and they are no big deal while loosing their **** about the idea of not being able to use them anymore.

You can't use EVEMon or EFT anymore. Let's see how you react.
Catt Stevens
Karusaka Family
#239 - 2016-02-24 19:35:14 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
stg slate wrote:
ITT: People saying all these random programs don't give an unfair advantage and they are no big deal while loosing their **** about the idea of not being able to use them anymore.

You can't use EVEMon or EFT anymore. Let's see how you react.


You are a fool, if you actually read the dev blog you would understand that is not the case, but since you just want to throw rocks you choose to do so without any actual facts.

Don't worry you will catch up eventually.
Som Boty
Super Mother Fan Club
#240 - 2016-02-24 19:43:01 UTC
Catt Stevens wrote:
Primary This Rifter wrote:
stg slate wrote:
ITT: People saying all these random programs don't give an unfair advantage and they are no big deal while loosing their **** about the idea of not being able to use them anymore.

You can't use EVEMon or EFT anymore. Let's see how you react.


You are a fool, if you actually read the dev blog you would understand that is not the case, but since you just want to throw rocks you choose to do so without any actual facts.

Don't worry you will catch up eventually.


obviously EvEMon is an exaggeration, but the point is that it's technically against the EULA, so CCP could decide to ban you and if that's the case, there is suddenly a lot of risk to playing eve if CCP can just drop the ban hammer whenever they decide to change their opinion.