Should You Use CurseForge? CEO Explains WoW App’s Privacy, Feature, Ad Changes

[rhorle]

Addon's were never supposed to be a source of income(atleast for wow) just because some people discovered a way to exploit loopholes doesn't mean they deserve that money nor do those addons need to exist if a person doesn't want to work on it anymore for what ever reason.

Never supposed to be according to who? Blizzard has no problems with donations or other sources of income tied to addons as long as they don't go against the stated policy. For a vast majority it will never be a sole source of income though. The few like DBM are the exception rather then the rule.

[qwerty123456]

And this is where you are wrong. Addons are suppose to be free but nobody said about hosting them, making catalogue and application to automatically update them.
Its not a loophole, exploit or anything, thats dumb to assume so.

You do know what a loophole is right?

[Magical Mudcrab]

Addon's were never supposed to be a source of income(atleast for wow) just because some people discovered a way to exploit loopholes doesn't mean they deserve that money nor do those addons need to exist if a person doesn't want to work on it anymore for what ever reason.

Can you specify what you mean by loopholes? Unless the addons are hidden behind strict paywalls, there is no violation so far as I'm aware. Monetization by platforms through advertisement and non-essential subscriptions, and monetization by addon authors through donations and using specific platforms are not loopholes, they're motives to pursue the objectives of serving and developing content.

[qwerty123456]

Can you specify what you mean by loopholes? Unless the addons are hidden behind strict paywalls, there is no violation so far as I'm aware. Monetization by platforms through advertisement and non-essential subscriptions, and monetization by addon authors through donations and using specific platforms are not loopholes, they're motives to pursue the objectives of serving and developing content.

"An ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules." I'm not saying there is a violation. If you have a "free" addon but the only way you can access it is through a 100$ service clearly the addon isn't really free but you aren't technically breaking the rules either. Thats what a loophole is.

[rhorle]

"An ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules." I'm not saying there is a violation.

What overwolf is doing though is not using a loophole in the rules. The rules allow for Addon authors to accept donations. They just can't do from inside the addon. Hosting websites are also allowed to have ads and website subscription services just as long as you don't have to pay to download an addon. You can earn income through addons but it just has to be done a certain way.

Most authors won't see much. But some have turned it into a respectable source of income. They are the exception rather then the norm though.

[qwerty123456]

What overwolf is doing though is not using a loophole in the rules. The rules allow for Addon authors to accept donations. They just can't do from inside the addon. Hosting websites are also allowed to have ads and website subscription services just as long as you don't have to pay to download an addon. You can earn income through addons but it just has to be done a certain way.

Most authors won't see much. But some have turned it into a respectable source of income. They are the exception rather then the norm though.

Exactly what the definition of a loophole is......

[rhorle]

Exactly what the definition of a loophole is......

So anything done within the rules is a loophole? Going the speed limit is a loophole? Loopholes are things that allow you to do something that is not intended. Blizzard never fully restricted earning income from addons so it isn't a loophole to earn an income from an addon.

[Magical Mudcrab]

"An ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules." I'm not saying there is a violation. If you have a "free" addon but the only way you can access it is through a 100$ service clearly the addon isn't really free but you aren't technically breaking the rules either. Thats what a loophole is.

What you've described is a paywall, which does violate the ToS.

B. Applications May Not Charge Premiums To Use The APIs. “Premium” versions of Applications offering additional for-pay features are not permitted, nor can players be charged money to download an Application, charged for services related to the Application, or otherwise be required to offer some form of monetary compensation to download or access an Application when those features use the Blizzard Developer APIs. Likewise, Applications may not include interstitials soliciting donations before features or functionality becomes available to the player. Also, players may not be required to watch a video advertisement before accessing a feature or function of the application.
...
H. You May Not Use The Blizzard Developer APIs Or Data For Marketing Or Monetization Purposes. You may not use the Blizzard Developer APIs or Data to market or promote Your or a third party’s products or services. You may not display, distribute, or otherwise disclose the Data in any advertising or promotion or use the Data to target any advertising or promotion. You may not sell, license or otherwise transfer any Data (including anonymous, aggregate or derived data) to any ad network, data broker or other advertising or monetization-related service.

- Source: BLIZZARD DEVELOPER API TERMS OF USE

Essentially, addons must be provided in-full and players cannot be forced to pay money or provide monetary compensation in order to download the addons or gain access to premium versions or access additional content. Any instance in which compensation is forces is against the ToS and, as far as I'm aware, neither Overwolf nor Curseforge violates the ToS in this way. Addon authors who do should be called out for their actions, though they will be within the overwhelming minority of authors.

[qwerty123456]

So anything done within the rules is a loophole? Going the speed limit is a loophole? Loopholes are things that allow you to do something that is not intended. Blizzard never fully restricted earning income from addons so it isn't a loophole to earn an income from an addon.

No dude. A speed limit loophole would be something like if the law says the speed limit on the road is 55 and you drive 200 in the ditch. Technically you aren't doing anything against the law in this situation.

Again here is the definition: "an ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules."

[rhorle]

No dude. A speed limit loophole would be something like if the law says the speed limit on the road is 55 and you drive 200 in the ditch. Technically you aren't doing anything against the law in this situation. Again here is the definition: "an ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules."

Right. There is no ambiguity or inadequacy in the rules regarding income. You can accept donations or earn income as long as you do it a certain way. That isn't a loophole it is simply following the rules.

[Addiena]

Nothing to do with lazy, imagine that people don't want to manually check and update their 50+ addons daily.

We're living in 2020, you don't need to impose self-inflicted challenges over trivial shit.

You already did by having 50+ addons, funny you talking to me about self inflicted pain.

and updating daily . .yet another thing you imposed upon yourself.

- - - Updated - - -

Why did you use a forum post when you could have visited us all in person? Convenience. Its why we have transportation rather then walking every where. Why we have stores rather then growing everything ourselves. Why we have entertainment services rather then just entertaining ourselves. People are not lazy for using a manager. People just don't need to do it when a program can do it for them.

Spending 10 seconds to click "Update All" allows people to get to other things, like the actual game, faster.

in other words, im lazy but I felt the need to justify that laziness so it would appear valid and I could feel better about it. Truthfully I dont need these 50 addons but I cant be arsed to to this shit myself, so ill just use this program to do it for me.

[rhorle]

in other words, im lazy but I felt the need to justify that laziness so it would appear valid and I could feel better about it. Truthfully I dont need these 50 addons but I cant be arsed to to this shit myself, so ill just use this program to do it for me.

It isn't laziness it is being smart. Doing something the long way out of a weird principle is silly. I can update all my addons in less then 30 seconds and get to actually playing the game and enjoying myself. All while you are still manually downloading and "installing" the addons. Why are you so threatened by an automated process that you have to be so demeaning to those that use it?

[bluspacecow]

Essentially, addons must be provided in-full and players cannot be forced to pay money or provide monetary compensation in order to download the addons or gain access to premium versions or access additional content. Any instance in which compensation is forces is against the ToS and, as far as I'm aware, neither Overwolf nor Curseforge violates the ToS in this way. Addon authors who do should be called out for their actions, though they will be within the overwhelming minority of authors.

First off what you quoted is for users of the battle.net web API as is such is irrelevant to this discussion.

Secondly there is no ToS we are covered by the blizzard EULA. Which has nothing in it about addons at all.

Lastly if you were meaning the UI policy those are only guidelines and not legally enforceable.

[Magical Mudcrab]

First off what you quoted is for users of the battle.net web API as is such is irrelevant to this discussion.

Secondly there is no ToS we are covered by the blizzard EULA. Which has nothing in it about addons at all.

Lastly if you were meaning the UI policy those are only guidelines and not legally enforceable.

You're correct as Blizzard, as of yet, does not seem to released a full set of specific guidelines in the same depth as they have for their battle.net API; however, it's essentially the same set of policies as outlined in their Post on the UI and Macro forum. The Developer API ToU essentially covers the same material, the only difference is the disclaimers and legal notifications at the bottom of the page.

Why do you think that it's not legally enforceable? If it's not enforceable, then there's no point in actually having the policy and no reason that any addon cannot be monetized however anyone chooses.

[rowaasr13]

Why do you think that it's not legally enforceable? If it's not enforceable, then there's no point in actually having the policy and no reason that any addon cannot be monetized however anyone chooses.

Because they aren't - Blizzard is not a government and can't make arbitrary laws (same goes to 90% of all EULA in existence). It's a moot point though, because those rules are "enforceable" by Blizzard blacklisting non-compilant addons.

[bluspacecow]

Why do you think that it's not legally enforceable? If it's not enforceable, then there's no point in actually having the policy and no reason that any addon cannot be monetized however anyone chooses.

* All addons by default are copyright of their addon authors. They can be made without any Blizzard UI code in them so they are not derivative works. Blizzard can not unilaterally impose distribution rights on something that isn't their property in the first place.
* The UI policy contains none of the features and language that's inherent to user agreements.
* The UI policy isn't listed in Blizzard's legal section of their website nor is it mentioned in any of the documents within this section
* The document states up the top of it that it's guidelines only. I don't think guidelines can be enforcable in a court of law.
* The document doesn't constitute a contract as it has none of the terms and conditions typical in a contract document.

Blizzard can only control their own playground.

They can stop an addon from loading , they can alter the Lua API breaking an addon or they can politely ask an addon author to change their code so they aren't doing something Blizzard doesn't like.

But come after someone as they're selling a for pay addon in a court of law ? They'd be laughed out of court.

[Magical Mudcrab]

* All addons by default are copyright of their addon authors. They can be made without any Blizzard UI code in them so they are not derivative works. Blizzard can not unilaterally impose distribution rights on something that isn't their property in the first place.
* The UI policy contains none of the features and language that's inherent to user agreements.
* The UI policy isn't listed in Blizzard's legal section of their website nor is it mentioned in any of the documents within this section
* The document states up the top of it that it's guidelines only. I don't think guidelines can be enforcable in a court of law.
* The document doesn't constitute a contract as it has none of the terms and conditions typical in a contract document.

Blizzard can only control their own playground.

They can stop an addon from loading , they can alter the Lua API breaking an addon or they can politely ask an addon author to change their code so they aren't doing something Blizzard doesn't like.

But come after someone as they're selling a for pay addon in a court of law ? They'd be laughed out of court.

I understand what you mean; however, the reason why I'm a little iffy is because while Blizzard does not own Lua, I don't know what license or agreement their APIs are used under and what specifics that might entail, so I've taken the guidelines to be a stand-in for license limitations. Take the React.js framework, for example, which originally gave Facebook the right to revoke your license if you were in competition with them. I assumed Blizzard likely uses a license which allows them the right to revoke an individual's ability to use the API if they did not comply to the guidelines set by them, which could then have legal ramifications for some license infringement or DMCA suit; however, I'm not a lawyer, so the feasibility or legality of something like this is a bit outside the area of something I can meaningfully weigh in on.

[kaminaris]

I understand what you mean; however, the reason why I'm a little iffy is because while Blizzard does not own Lua, I don't know what license or agreement their APIs are used under and what specifics that might entail, so I've taken the guidelines to be a stand-in for license limitations. Take the React.js framework, for example, which originally gave Facebook the right to revoke your license if you were in competition with them. I assumed Blizzard likely uses a license which allows them the right to revoke an individual's ability to use the API if they did not comply to the guidelines set by them, which could then have legal ramifications for some license infringement or DMCA suit; however, I'm not a lawyer, so the feasibility or legality of something like this is a bit outside the area of something I can meaningfully weigh in on.

No there is no such thing. Blizzard doesn't have license for using their in game lua api as it is given for any addon to actually work (No you cannot create even simplest addon without their non-built-in lua functions).
And since addons are allowed by blizzard, they can only take this right away and turn off addons, legal action is out of question.

They could however take action against people distributing their interface code, but they are not doing it.
They could take action against people using their interface code in different game but so far it didn't happen.

[Magical Mudcrab]

No there is no such thing. Blizzard doesn't have license for using their in game lua api as it is given for any addon to actually work (No you cannot create even simplest addon without their non-built-in lua functions).
And since addons are allowed by blizzard, they can only take this right away and turn off addons, legal action is out of question.

They could however take action against people distributing their interface code, but they are not doing it.
They could take action against people using their interface code in different game but so far it didn't happen.

Just to clarify, I'm not stating my reservations as a means to disagree, rather it's to outline where my headspace is at. I'm more than happy to defer in this circumstance and take what's being said on good faith.

[Masternewt]

Shady company tells me they aren't shady. I'm convinced.

Pretty much this. Pass on Overwolf from me as well, WoWUP until it's available, if nothing else, I'll update manually.