A few days ago ~1st August there was a new EULA for starcraft 2. (incorrectly dated 11th June if i remember correctly)
What im NOT going to do is mention roughly 14 legal flaws/loopholes i meticulously noted in the document. (not just with new stuff, but all of it)
What i AM going to do, is flag up a legal flaw with one of the new parts of the EULA, relating to ownership of custom maps.
Paraphase: "Maps made through the use of the map editor are no longer intellectual property of the creator, but the sole property of Blizzard. This applies retrospectively to all previously made maps, once the new agreement is accepted. The new agreement is automatically accepted without user consent, on 1st September (30 days after change), unless the user specifically deletes sc2, and sends a mail to blizzard france. The new eula is automatically accepted without user concent Regardless of whether the user clicks the Reject button upon seeing it - the previous steps of IRL mail must be followed to reject."
What i will be addressing are fundamental concepts of contract, something which may be over the heads of users who spent 2005-2009 using only Mutalisks and Reavers, under the impression they were 'playing brood war'.
1) a EULA is not a contract. a contract must be signed in person, and blizzard must know your real name. even the paypal 'contract' which had a box to fill in your name, and which deals with real money, is not a genuine contract; which is why they shy away from fighting legal action if push comes to shove. "License Agreement" and "Terms of Use" are both EULAs.
2) the DMCA says that any content which is a re-arrangement of other peoples copyrighted content, becomes jointly-owned by the copyright holders AND the re-arranger - with both parties needing to agree on the re-arranged object's usage, before it can be used for anything. The re-arragement must however be 'not trivial', otherwise the above ownership-grantage doesnt apply.
3) the power of a EULA is extremely LIMITED. a EULA can do only 2 things: a) Give the purchaser of the EULA (when you buy sc2 you are infact purchasing a EULA) an extremely-temporary super-limited right to play the game/make maps. b) Give blizzard the power to revoke the EULA you purchased, without giving your money back, for an enormous host of reasons. Infact without any reason at all, due to point 4) below.
4) part of the EULA states the EULA can be changed at any time, and that (as stated at the start of this post) you must accept it to continue playing/making maps, and that you automatically accept it unless you go to extreme lengths to reject it. blizztard can therefore change the EULA to read that it can revoke your EULA for no reason - and thus they gain the power to do so. [They could also make it more interesting, by saying everyone who isnt able to juggle while riding a unicycle is banned. There is no theoretical limit to what they can put in it with this 'changes' rule.]
5) point 5 is once again reminding you of point 3). Blizzard can put anything in the EULA that they like, but a EULA does NOT have the power to do anything except 3a) and 3b), regardless of what is put in it. This is because it is NOT a contract.
6) point 6 is a side point about real contracts. not even real contracts are criminally-binding, only civily-binding. you can't go to prison for violating a contract in itself, although chances are you broke another law too so your going anyway ^_^.
7) Under numerous standard/common/old laws: ownership of something you initially own, or would otherwise own if not for a mitigating reason making you not own it.. can ONLY be given away to someone else if you sign a _C_O_N_T_R_A_C_T_ stating you are giving that ownership away.
8) Blizzards new eula says they now own every map you ever made and ever will make. Unfortunately for blizzard, a EULA is NOT a contract - and as such does not have the power to allow you to give away your ownership. Thus the DMCA's rule still stands. As a result, you are still a shared-owner of your map.
I'll say that last bit again.
You are STILL a SHARED-OWNER of your map!
Blizzards latest EULA is legally incapable of removing this ownership.
But obviously, as repeatedly implied.. blizzard is also a shared owner too, and you can never take that away from them either
So you are copyright partners with blizzard, and they cant sell your map on their new 'Marketplace' without your concent.
Yea, nice find. Reminds me of that time, when blizzard tried to stop the selling of a WoW guide (which got immensely popular; source) made by some kid. They are a cooperation like any other.
Blizzard cannot prove you ever agreed to their EULA. Just say your mother agreed to to the EULA, not you. You then used it but never agreed to their EULA.
On August 06 2011 06:26 zany_001 wrote: Blizzard cannot prove you ever agreed to their EULA. Just say your mother agreed to to the EULA, not you. You then used it but never agreed to their EULA.
Well no, because your account is associated with you. You're responsible for anything that happens on your account, I assume.
This is a really interesting point, I'm surprised that they are so ambitious (greedy, as Barrin says) to control everything. I'm glad that they don't!
It reminds me how Facebook tried to force the fact that every bit of content on facebook belonged to them and not to their users. I believe they had to back off because of the angry reaction from the users.
Don't take it personnaly, but I would like to know if someone else, knowledgeable in this area, can confirm your affirmations.
On August 06 2011 06:31 fezvez wrote: Thank you very much dear sir!
It reminds me how Facebook tried to force the fact that every bit of content on facebook belonged to them and not to their users. I believe they had to back off because of the angry reaction from the users.
Don't take it personnaly, but I would like to know if someone else, knowledgeable in this area, can confirm your affirmations.
Anyway, thanks for sharing it with us!
The real problem is that this kind of thing is becoming more and more typical of Blizzard. I honestly do not doubt the validity of the OP for a second. Wouldn't argue with further confirmation though :D
In fact, I'm absolutely not putting into question what the OP said about Blizzard (which you can sum up in one word : "greedy")
No, I'm asking whether his conclusions about being co-owner are grounded. Because there are some legal things, and in this field, I have no clue at all.
I mean, he could've said "They said bla-bla-bla in their EULA, and because of law XXX, then you can't have a friend watching you play if he does not own a copy of SC2". (this is just an example!) What I ask for is for someone else to confirm the "because/then" part that the map authors are still co-owners of their creations.
i feel like this whole ownership based off the eula was bullshit anyway obviously they can't take your map without your permission and sell it. eula would not stop a courtroom ruling in your favor.
but. i think it's more of a ... safety net for themselves. i feel like they could basically steal/take/use anything from a custom map and claim it as their own. ideas, functions etc.
i'm betting Blizzard are pissed about their missed oppurtunity with DotA 2. blizzard dota is going to be shockingly average at best. i think it's just permission to rip off your content basically. i dunno..
On August 06 2011 06:31 fezvez wrote: Thank you very much dear sir!
It reminds me how Facebook tried to force the fact that every bit of content on facebook belonged to them and not to their users. I believe they had to back off because of the angry reaction from the users.
Don't take it personnaly, but I would like to know if someone else, knowledgeable in this area, can confirm your affirmations.
Anyway, thanks for sharing it with us!
The real problem is that this kind of thing is becoming more and more typical of Blizzard. I honestly do not doubt the validity of the OP for a second. Wouldn't argue with further confirmation though :D
In fact, I'm absolutely not putting into question what the OP said about Blizzard (which you can sum up in one word : "greedy")
No, I'm asking whether his conclusions about being co-owner are grounded. Because there are some legal things, and in this field, I have no clue at all.
I mean, he could've said "They said bla-bla-bla in their EULA, and because of law XXX, then you can't have a friend watching you play if he does not own a copy of SC2". (this is just an example!) What I ask for is for someone else to confirm the "because/then" part that the map authors are still co-owners of their creations.
a EULA wont hold up in court as i understand. like i said in my other post im pretty sure it's just a safety net for the company "you can't complain about being banned because you agreed not to hack" sort of thing. but to actually claim ownership of something you've created. even if you used their tools. i dont think a EULA holds that type of power.
This has been in the EULA for WoW since it started, it might even be in the SC &BW EULA. it just away to stop people making cash off thier stuff. then again i don't know how it will work when the bring in the SC2 marketplace if that ever takes off.
The thing is, and maybe I'm just cynical, that what's to stop Blizzard from just taking your maps anyways regardless of whether the EULA is legally binding or not? I mean they're the multi-billion dollar company with expensive lawyers. And odds are the map maker isn't going to go to war with Blizzard for the relatively small amount of money compared to the cost of what would surely be a drawn out court battle.
So, OP, it says here that you are in the UK. Does all of this stand true between US, UK, Europe, or wherever? The other side of this is a problem that we have in US quite a bit with large companies. Sometimes they do stupid crap like this to get people to believe that their rights are torn, but let's say Blizzard decides to "sell" your maps without your consent. In order for you to get anything from that you would need to file a complaint and possibly legally sue them. A lot of people, even ones who know these legal loopholes, might not have the means (money or pro-bono help) to actually get anything done, and even if they do, will it be worth it monetarily to do so?
Because of these limitations, a lot of people and companies get away with stupid crap just because most people cannot force the issue, and the ones who do they just make a quiet settlement with.
I hate when someone gives you a tool of creation then tries to claim all rights to those creations. I understand if it is a work for pay or contracted job where you are willingly giving away your creations, but in cases like this EULA, it is just greedy it seems, not to mention insulting to those who can see through this crap.
I was speaking of universally shared laws throughout the western world, and the world as a whole; rather than of any specific country. There are some things which hold true in all countries. Concepts of contract and ownership is one such issue where everyone has the same fundamentals. The DMCA is also another global-like law, because there is matching laws everywhere passed around the same time. So purely as far as legal technicalities go, in developed countries my affirmations stand. I dont know about the more shakey democracies around the world, like south america or eastern asia.. its entirely possible they have exceptions.
Physical situation realities are, however, as you said, a completely different issue. Its the same with all laws and crimes, civil and criminal.
I would very much like to answer something raised by mavsfan0041 on that issue:
The thing is, and maybe I'm just cynical, that what's to stop Blizzard from just taking your maps anyways regardless of whether the EULA is legally binding or not? I mean they're the multi-billion dollar company with expensive lawyers. And odds are the map maker isn't going to go to war with Blizzard for the relatively small amount of money compared to the cost of what would surely be a drawn out court battle.
(which is basically TheAmazombie's point too.)
Firstly, a quick side-point. In europe, in issues of an enormous giant company trying to use the work of a tiny little person; judgement precedent and judge/jury personality are EXTREMELY hostile to the giant company. This isnt true with other issues, but with copyright it definately is. In the US it is entirely possible that this isnt the case, however i know of a number of cases you have had where the court has favoured the little person,and none that i know of where they havnt.
So the issue is more one of "would blizzard just steal it" and "would the map maker ever sue", which is your direct point. The paragraph above is actually rather relevant to this. Blizzard would actually fear taking someones map without permission, because they have as much to lose as to gain, and more chance of losing than gaining.
Contraspectively - in europe atleast - the map maker has much to gain and little to lose. It is very likely if he won he would be in for a significant amount of money, and if he lost would face only a small partial legal bill. In the US, land of corperate dictatorship tyranny.. i know not if this would be the situation. I do however know that there are a disproportionate number of legally-minded citizens compared with europe, and truth be told most people would jump at the chance of sueing blizzard. Infact i would say there is more chance of them being sued by an american than a european, even if the european court is more friendly to the case.
So, realistically - I cannot see blizzard ever simply stealing your map. Stealing your map IDEA, yes. The map itself? no.
Well I hope that that's true then! I'm not sure what the legal system is like in Europe, but in America the huge companies have a tendency to grind out a lawsuit over time and just wear the individual down through legal costs over time (some stuff about Monsanto the seed company comes to mind). It gets to the point where it doesn't really matter who's in the right because the guy just can't pay his lawyers anymore. But I see what you're saying that really a map is such a small thing in the grand scheme of things that it just isn't worth a headache at all for Blizzard to steal.
On August 06 2011 17:43 Tassadar_UK wrote: So the issue is more one of "would blizzard just steal it" and "would the map maker ever sue", which is your direct point. The paragraph above is actually rather relevant to this. Blizzard would actually fear taking someones map without permission, because they have as much to lose as to gain, and more chance of losing than gaining.
Yeah, I know. I do not think that they would as they would have more to lose, I totally agree, but the main point is that companies can and have done this, so not matter what the law says, there seem to always be ways around it was really the point I was going for. I appreciate the write-up and it is great stuff to know.
Overall I trust that Blizzard would not do something like that for many reason, but as you said, there is not a ton to gain my doing so. It is just that in today's world even when you think you are protected by the law there seems to always be some kind of back door or some other way for people in a position of power to take what they want if they want it bad enough.
are copyright laws even the same in every country? if not, which one does apply? The Location of map creator? Blizzard's headquaters? The Servers the map is uploaded to?
So the issue is more one of "would blizzard just steal it" and "would the map maker ever sue", which is your direct point. The paragraph above is actually rather relevant to this. Blizzard would actually fear taking someones map without permission, because they have as much to lose as to gain, and more chance of losing than gaining.
Not to mention you can still sue in small claims court.
It would be interesting to ask LSprime about how blizzard went about using his map tal'darim and his contact with them.
Regardless, what about copyright laws? By definition the idea and design of the map before even making and publishing copyrights it. By blizzard saying all your maps are now theres, there own agreement has just broken a law, to mention that a previous maps i believe are also required to be grandfathered.
EPT
