Ajour and CurseBreaker Addon Managers No Longer Maintained

[kaminaris]

I disagree.

If the addon author effectively says - "I'm only going to distribute my addon via a paid distribution method" - that is a violation of the policy the way I read it. The policy specifically doesn't say the author is only "prohibited from requiring compensation from the end-user" - I think that requiring a portion of the ad revenue fits the description. The 'otherwise' is there specifically as a catch-all.

Its very different than the Zygor/TSM model and your Youtube example doesn't apply as there isn't a 3rd party policy in effect generally.

Dude, you have no idea what are you talking about. There is nothing to disagree about here because in the end, addons are INTELECTUAL PROPERTY of their authors.
So I can charge for my addon regardless if blizzard likes it or not. The ONLY thing they can do about is to block the addon within game.

NOBODY has the right to distribute other people intellectual property (DMCA), unless the license permits it.

In fact "stealing database" from cursforge is copyright infringement itself. Which is why the change should have been implemented long time ago. So that karens won't feel entitled to other people work.

The amount of mental gymnastics here is staggering.

- - - Updated - - -

I guess time will tell that

Time has already told us, people don't give a shit about stuff being free, they want software that WORKS. Hence loonix didn't move from their 1% spot in years. The only good thing about what came from it is some software that managed to be good despite being free, git is one example of that.

Does WowInterface have payouts? I don't recall ever hearing a dev say one way or the others.

No they dont but that is besides the point. Interface sucking doesnt have anything to do with payouts.

So you don't think software could ever be made to trivialize it? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Difference of opinion we'll never agree on.

It has been already trivialized, its called cursforge app.

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

Unfortunately, many websites that use ads don't care to make sure that they are safe or user friendly. The idea in theory of ad revenue is fine, but flashing, videos and sound that are hard or impossible to turn off, pop ups, screen overlays etc are all a terrible experience for the average user, and whats worse is how much of the screen is often taken up by ads. Not to mention data breaches, which OW is known for, and malware, etc being transferred through ads.

People that work on add-ons aren't in the wrong here, and I wouldn't say Overwolf is necessarily is either. But I don't trust Overwolf to make the experience safe or user friendly.

[Drusin]

Time has already told us, people don't give a shit about stuff being free, they want software that WORKS. Hence loonix didn't move from their 1% spot in years. The only good thing about what came from it is some software that managed to be good despite being free, git is one example of that.

Issues aren't equal.

No they dont but that is besides the point. Interface sucking doesnt have anything to do with payouts.

Whether or not an interface sucks is a matter of opinion.

It has been already trivialized, its called cursforge app.

Not for git, which time will tell if it happens or not.

[dzd]

addons are INTELECTUAL PROPERTY of their authors.
So I can charge for my addon regardless if blizzard likes it or not. The ONLY thing they can do about is to block the addon within game.

NOBODY has the right to distribute other people intellectual property (DMCA), unless the license permits it.

Are you a lawyer? The confidence you talk about such complicated issue seems a bit fishy. If you are not lawyer stop posting things like this.

Things get a bit different when you are making money out of someone else's IP and you have to operate under their EULA, ToS and w/e else

[Chakah]

So I can charge for my addon regardless if blizzard likes it or not. The ONLY thing they can do about is to block the addon within game.

"ONLY" - lol. Not sure what the point of writing an addon that Blizzard blocks would be exactly.

Good luck writing a WoW addon w/o using Blizzard's intellectual property. Read the policy - they can take legal action against a rogue addon author if they get mad enough.

In fact "stealing database" from cursforge is copyright infringement itself. Which is why the change should have been implemented long time ago. So that karens won't feel entitled to other people work.

Using a public API was, is, and never will be, 'stealing'.
Hell, even 'scraping' is legal https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/0...ng-public-data

You really should educate yourself a bit more before claiming to be an authority.

[kaminaris]

Are you a lawyer? The confidence you talk about such complicated issue seems a bit fishy. If you are not lawyer stop posting things like this.

Things get a bit different when you are making money out of someone else's IP when you have to operate under their EULA, ToS and w/e else

I work in a software company, yes we do have dedicated lawyer for that. Things aren't different. As an author you have 100% rights to your code.

Things WOULD be different if you would copied a pieces of code from blizzard interface UI. Then they can sue you for infringement (any time actually) but they don't do that.

But most people write addons without bundling anything from blizzard. If you are not developer stop posting things like this.

- - - Updated - - -

"ONLY" - lol. Not sure what the point of writing an addon that Blizzard blocks would be exactly.

Good luck writing a WoW addon w/o using Blizzard's intellectual property. Read the policy - they can take legal action against a rogue addon author if they get mad enough.

Most addons are written like this. Stop talking about things you have no clue about.

Using a public API was, is, and never will be, 'stealing'.
Hell, even 'scraping' is legal https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/0...ng-public-data

You really should educate yourself a bit more before claiming to be an authority.
Does OW pay you per post? Seems like a good gig.

It was not public api, it was reverse engineered api. It is you who should educate yourself.
https://medium.com/overwolf/our-stan...e-19f4559a322a

CurseForge does not have an official API for 3rd parties who want to download files from its servers. The way some addon managers operate today, is by reverse engineering the calls between the Twitch Client and the CurseForge backend. A good analogy is someone reverse engineering the Spotify app to stream songs from Spotify’s servers without receiving Spotify’s or the artists’ consent to do so.

[dzd]

I work in a software company, yes we do have dedicated lawyer for that. Things aren't different. As an author you have 100% rights to your code.

I give you a free advice: there is a reason why your company has dedicated lawyer.

[kaminaris]

I give you a free advice: there is a reason why your company has dedicated lawyer.

Ill give you one too: developers have to work with lawyers in order to avoid possible intellectual property issues. Code however as long as it's not copied or you are not using any libraries bundled inside, is your intellectual property.

[dzd]

Ill give you one too: developers have to work with lawyers in order to avoid possible intellectual property issues. Code however as long as it's not copied or you are not using any libraries bundled inside, is your intellectual property.

Perfectly true, you own the code you write (at least on your free time), but taking a leap from that to claiming that it's perfectly fine to sell add-ons for a game where their EULA/TOS prohibits against selling them.

I used to be young and naive developer too, but when you get older you are no that sure about legal issues anymore.

[kaminaris]

Perfectly true, you own the code you write (at least on your free time), but taking a leap from that to claiming that it's perfectly fine to sell add-ons for a game where their EULA/TOS prohibits against selling them.

I used to be young and naive developer too, but when you get older you are no that sure about legal issues anymore.

Its not a leap because you dont have to use anything from blizzard to write addon (again, most addons are written like that since their code is garbagio) and blizzard cannot claim their copyrights to function names. Lua is not their creation either.

Its pretty funny when you pull the card "I used to be young and navie" against someone who has 20 years of development experience

[dzd]

Its pretty funny when you pull the card "I used to be young and navie" against someone who has 20 years of development experience

Ok let me fix: old but still naive, which is kinda sad. It's so dumb how confidently you are focusing on the coding part while ignoring the issue that you are selling product that's intended to run inside someone else's product, which makes it not so obvious problem. But this is enough wasting my time. I just ask one thing: stop being so overconfident when it comes to legal issues.

[kaminaris]

Ok let me fix: old but still naive, which is kinda sad. It's so dumb how confidently you are focusing on the coding part while ignoring the issue that you are selling product that's intended to run inside someone else's product, which makes it not so obvious problem. But this is enough wasting my time. I just ask one thing: stop being so overconfident when it comes to legal issues.

Sad is that you don't have a clue and still say nonsense. "intended to run inside something" doesn't mean shit. This argument will not hold a candle in court.

And the not so obvious problem is actually obvious if you actually spend more than 2 minutes thinking about it. Otherwise any java app would be owned by oracle by now.
You can write java app (which is and will always be a "plugin" since it runs under their VM) BUT there is an open source version that also can run it too. Meaning plugin is not restricted to what it has been written for as you could simply write similar environment that would also be able to run it.

https://wpmayor.com/protecting-premi...sed-reselling/

Plugin or standalone app does not matter, your code is protected by default.

Situation ONLY changes if your code is bundled with 3rd party libraries because in this case you are obliged to abide their licenses, most problematic are virus licenses such as GPL.

[dzd]

And the not so obvious problem is actually obvious if you actually spend more than 2 minutes thinking about it. Otherwise any java app would be owned by oracle by now.

I didn't know jdk/jre EULA prevents you from selling java apps, but I guess you learn something new every day.

You are making a leap from you owning a piece of code to you 100% able to sell it, but that's just simply not true. It's hard to tell what kind of laws apply in different scenarios. Cryptography would be the simplest example.

Obviously this is a bit extreme example, but the problem in add-on case is this: Blizzard has this API that let's you make your own modifications to the game UI, but their EULA says that you have to distribute them for free and you are not allowed to sell any premium version of them. Can they enforce it is the question. Tbh I hope that's something you can't ever enforce, but I wouldn't be that sure. It's just not that easy question to answer.

Stop comparing apples to oranges.

Oh and please, spend more than 2 minutes thinking about legal issues.

Also what the hell is that link? How can you take leap from it's being illegal for someone else to sell your code to you being able to sell your code? What is the connection between those 2?

[kaminaris]

I didn't know jdk/jre EULA prevents you from selling java apps, but I guess you learn something new every day.

More like you did not understand what I wrote.

You are making a leap from you owning a piece of code to you 100% able to sell it, but that's just simply not true. It's hard to tell what kind of laws apply in different scenarios. Cryptography would be the simplest example.

Its not hard. You are able to sell your own work, in 99% of cases at very least. And this one isn't even remotely outliner.

Obviously this is a bit extreme example, but the problem in add-on case is this: Blizzard has this API that let's you make your own modifications to the game UI, but their EULA says that you have to distribute them for free and you are not allowed to sell any premium version of them. Can they enforce it is the question. Tbh I hope that's something you can't ever enforce, but I wouldn't be that sure. It's just not that easy question to answer.

It is, they can't. Because they don't own function names. And that is the only common thing between addons and wow. Assuming of course you won't use blizzard assets or pieces of their code. I simply know this as I have been thru similar case before.

Plugins are not derivate work.

Stop comparing apples to oranges.

Oh and please, spend more than 2 minutes thinking about legal issues.

Also what the hell is that link? How can you take leap from it's being illegal for someone else to sell your code to you being able to sell your code? What is the connection between those 2?

You still dont understand what intellectual property is. I've spent a lot more on this than you that is for sure.

[dzd]

I simply know this as I have been thru similar case before.

So why don't you talk about those cases and explain why they are similar, or even better link to precedent case that's exactly this case? Why are you talking about unrelated things?

[bluspacecow]

Obviously this is a bit extreme example, but the problem in add-on case is this: Blizzard has this API that let's you make your own modifications to the game UI, but their EULA says that you have to distribute them for free and you are not allowed to sell any premium version of them. Can they enforce it is the question. Tbh I hope that's something you can't ever enforce, but I wouldn't be that sure. It's just not that easy question to answer.

Technically speaking the UI policy isn't part of the EULA that players sign.

The EULA is a contract between Blizzard Entertainment and the users of their platform. The UI policy is never referred to in it , nor is it linked in the section devoted to Legal documents at their website (most aptly titled their "Legal" section). The UI policy is never displayed to someone when they first write their first addon and doesn't appear anywhere in the process of creating and updating an addon. In fact the only time an addon author even knows it exists is if they visit the UI forums for assistance and happen to run across it.

How can something like that be binding if addon authors don't need to even agree to it in order to create an addon ? Surely if it were as binding as you say it is (on the level of the EULA) then surely they would have some chance to actually agree to it ? It then wouldn't be possible to load a new addon in game without agreeing to it.

The EULA does say you have to adhere to all in game policies. However addons are created outside of game. In fact with wowless and a decent IDE it's possible to write one that runs in game without ever touching the wow client.

- - - Updated - - -

More like you did not understand what I wrote.
Its not hard. You are able to sell your own work, in 99% of cases at very least. And this one isn't even remotely outliner.

The right to sell a work is part of copyright.

Then again Blizzard is free to block your addon from loading or , which as the case sometimes is , messily break the underlying API things the addon relies on.

It's your addon but it's Blizzard playground it has to run in.

It is, they can't. Because they don't own function names. And that is the only common thing between addons and wow. Assuming of course you won't use blizzard assets or pieces of their code. I simply know this as I have been thru similar case before.

IIRC There was a lawsuit Nintendo had against an group working on an emulator that decided that. The Judge ruled that Function names and variable names of an API are not unique enough to be copyrightable.

Plugins are not derivate work..

Derivative works must contain significant portions of the original work to be derivate works.

By this definition it isn't possible for Addons to be derivative works - you don't include significant portions of the wow code base , significant portions of the UI code or significant portions of the Blizzard addons in them. Many of the Blizzard addons are just hooks to internal UI code anyway.

In fact it's 100% possible to make an addon that will load up in game and run just fine with a single Blizzard related function or variable used. People forget that Blizzard didn't write the parser or LUA language - they just transplanted a Lua parser in with their custom additions. That's how it's possible to have an addon that doesn't use anything of Blizzard's API.

It's actually one 75% of all wow players out there are already using every day - take a bow for LibStub. This little beasty is part of the ACE framework and is used to load the latest version of a wowace library into memory. Even works in Elder Scrolls online as well as that game also has a Lua parser.

[dzd]

Technically speaking the UI policy isn't part of the EULA that players sign.

Are you sure about this? Because my only point is that it's annoying when people are so confident about legal issues without giving any real thought into them. Especially if you are from US. It's really hard to tell sometimes what kind of bs you are agreeing to when you accept EULA.

Surely if it were as binding as you say it is (on the level of the EULA) then surely they would have some chance to actually agree to it ? It then wouldn't be possible to load a new addon in game without agreeing to it.

The EULA does say you have to adhere to all in game policies. However addons are created outside of game. In fact with wowless and a decent IDE it's possible to write one that runs in game without ever touching the wow client.

When did I say that I think the EULA is binding in this case? You even wrote the reason why I think it probably isn't. Again my point is, be careful when you are giving other people legal information.

[kaminaris]

The right to sell a work is part of copyright.

Then again Blizzard is free to block your addon from loading or , which as the case sometimes is , messily break the underlying API things the addon relies on.

It's your addon but it's Blizzard playground it has to run in.

That is exactly what i said.

IIRC There was a lawsuit Nintendo had against an group working on an emulator that decided that. The Judge ruled that Function names and variable names of an API are not unique enough to be copyrightable.

Heard about that too.

Derivative works must contain significant portions of the original work to be derivate works.

By this definition it isn't possible for Addons to be derivative works - you don't include significant portions of the wow code base , significant portions of the UI code or significant portions of the Blizzard addons in them. Many of the Blizzard addons are just hooks to internal UI code anyway.

In fact it's 100% possible to make an addon that will load up in game and run just fine with a single Blizzard related function or variable used. People forget that Blizzard didn't write the parser or LUA language - they just transplanted a Lua parser in with their custom additions. That's how it's possible to have an addon that doesn't use anything of Blizzard's API.

It's actually one 75% of all wow players out there are already using every day - take a bow for LibStub. This little beasty is part of the ACE framework and is used to load the latest version of a wowace library into memory. Even works in Elder Scrolls online as well as that game also has a Lua parser.

Yep. I am fully aware since I barely used blizzard code myself. I even wrote my own UI library cause blizzard one sucks.

[hulkgor]

Dude, you have no idea what are you talking about. There is nothing to disagree about here because in the end, addons are INTELECTUAL PROPERTY of their authors.
So I can charge for my addon regardless if blizzard likes it or not.

I chuckled. You go man.

[Chakah]

When did I say that I think the EULA is binding in this case?

Blizzard seems to think so: https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...t-policy/24534

7) Add-ons must abide by World of Warcraft ToU and EULA.
All add-ons must follow the World of Warcraft Terms of Use and the World of Warcraft End User License Agreement.

The mental masturbation of envisioning a hypothetical developer of a popular addon for WoW who has never played the game and doesn't care if Blizzard blocks it is rather amusing, but ultimately pointless. They don't exist.

In fact with wowless and a decent IDE it's possible to write one that runs in game without ever touching the wow client.

wowless uses wowcig to pull XML from 'http://us.patch.battle.net:1119/'
So, you are downloading Blizzard's code from Blizzard's website and are likely subject to Blizzard's TOS and other rules.
In your scenario, its a trap... lol

Again my point is, be careful when you are giving other people legal information.

Very true.

But, back on topic -
Blizzard's policies clearly support a notion of amateurism for addon developers, in the same spirit as the NCAA or Olympics used to have (rip).
OW is attempting to parasitically capture/create a financial market. Its obvious to me that they plan to 'boil the frog' - these initial restrictions are
just the beginning. They should be recognized and resisted as the privacy-invading and amatureism-destroying menace that they are.
Keep in mind that WoW addons are only a small portion of what OW is trying to control. The Minecraft community is much larger and also a portion is not happy with these changes.

Patreon is a good solution, but what I'd love to see more was an in-game way of rewarding popular developers with free game time or some other goodies.
OW rewards program just feels like RMT boosting to me.