I don’t want to say it, but feel I have to…
Here it is, possibly the most controversial situation that I’ve dipped my toes in here and I am freaking scared to say it, but I feel the need to stick up for both creators and users.
As my mama always said, “keep your side of the glass clean, baby.”
Who owns the rights to The Sims Mods and CC?
The first unfortunate truth is that according to EA User and Licensing Agreement (EULA) EA maintains all rights to creative content under their umbrella. (See page 20, citation 147 of “Mod Money, Mod Problems: A Critique of Copyright Restrictions on Video Game Modifications and an Evaluation of Associated Monetization Regimes”) This is one of the most strict user agreements in the gaming industry.
William & Mary Business Law Review argues within the opening of the brief; “These circuit holdings affirm or establish the following key principles: video games are copyrightable works, video game mods can be derivative work, impermanent mods that do not affect underlying game code do not necessarily constitute infringement” (see page 7 citations 24-26), although EA’s EULA is unlike any in the gaming industry, which maintains rights to all mods and CC.
However, EA Games representing The Sims has never seen a day in court against creators. Thus, this distinction, while clearly states in its EULA, has not been argued nor ruled upon by a judge or jury and neither has such a litigation been ruled upon by the Supreme Court, keeping the lines between EA and creators ever less clear.
See page 21 Citation 153, which directly follows the support of the EULA, that this sort of infringement on creators is unethical and infringes on creativity. See quote below:
“The consequence of this status quo is troubling, enabling rights holders to outright lift content from non-commercial mods and incorporate it into commercial games without attribution or compensation to the original creator. For an industry heavily built on mods and where modding is a significant pathway into industry careers, this ever-present threat of exploitation and erasure can be devastating to individuals and chilling to creativity.”
To summarize; when we are sitting here arguing about EA’s right’s to ownership of material created for use within The Sims (2,3,4), we should be arguing against their right’s to creator’s ownership by EA as we would a novel that is created on the Windows computer program, Word (See page 20, 21 citation 148).
This sort of law is exploitative when it comes to agreements between large companies and small creators. It is also not right for The Sims users to exploit CC Creators either out of creating or to release their content for free.
“It is also not a right for The Sims users to exploit CC Creators either out of creating or to release their content for free or Early Release.”
For us, we should be arguing AGAINST the ownership of CC by EA as it the most infringing Licensing Agreements for creators and the rights to content should 100% be the creators as in other design communities with a 60% rule; if 60% of the original content was altered the rights belong to the new creators, not the original developer. Legally, this is not the case with EA.
But the argument against creators in relation to ownership by EA including of; bullying, entitlement to their content or mass redistribution is not for users to fight. The argument that EA owns CC is solely between the creator and the developer. Users do not have a right to exploit, bully, or demand early release of content or infringe on the compensation for product by slandering creators, which includes publicly naming creators who are “in question” as it infringes on their monetization.
To put it bluntly; users do not have a right to re-upload paid or Early Release content or use EA’s EULA as a means to demean creators and infringe on their small business. This is theft and/or slander, and the right’s to usage ONLY belong to either the creator or EA. Users do not represent EA, thus they do not have a right to re-sell, re-upload or re-distribute in mass quantity.
“To put it bluntly; users do not have a right to re-upload paid or Early Release content or use EA’s EULA as a means to demean creators and infringe on their small business.”
Slandering of creators because a user thinks that they do not own the right to their product is not okay. This doesn’t mean users aren’t allowed to point out EA’s user agreement to them, but they do not have a right to infringe on the monetary compensation for a product or their small business. Thus, saying, “let’s not support Early Release or Paid Creators” and citing those names, or re-uploading doxed or even un-doxed images can be considered slanderous, as well as posts to rally others to call out or not support/ruin the business of a creator, is not okay.
If it’s going to be released in two weeks for free what’s the difference if it’s re-uploaded in rebel groups or in mass?
The legality of Early Release access are solely the rights of the buyer and the creator, BUT that does not give the right to mass produce and allow or supply pirating of content. What’s actually being sold by the creator is “Early Access” to the product, and if that product is given away before it is free it infringes on the compensation for Early Access to the creator.
This is why TSR is able to allow and charge for Early Access to CC. They do not have a right to resell or re-distribute for compensation, but they have a right to sell “Early Access” to content. The amount of time for early access is solely up to the creator/legally authorized supplier. The “Two Week Limit” was stated by retired SimsGuruDrake and is not legally binding unless EA wants to seek legal damage of their product. To be said; TSR has every right to track down and seek legal compensation for any public release or re-uploading of their creator’s Early Release content.
“You have so many Patreons and I think you make enough money so what’s the difference if I upload your content?”
This is an actual comment in a 5 paragraph long rant sent to a creator who simply asked in one nice sentence to a Patreon as to if they were re-uploading their CC. The user went on to say that since the user supported the creator for years the user had the right to re-distribute as pleased. The user stated that buying a piece of clothing from a store meant they owned that piece of clothing just like the creator’s CC.
and uhhh record screech… “you make enough money”… like uhhh imagine someone coming into a restaurant and not tipping because they think a waiter made enough money for the night, or better yet, they convince your boss that you don’t need that raise.
***EDIT: “I bought it, so I own it and no one can tell me what to do with it.”
However, this statement is not only wrong but illegal. This isn’t taking a shirt off your back and handing it to a friend, this is reproducing and redistributing a product that goes against the TOU (Terms of Use Agreement) between a user and a creator when signing up for their account. The same can be said of a, let’s go 90’s for a moment, redistribution of a CD. Sure, you can give it to a friend, even that’s a gray area as you’re not removing it from your mods folder and giving it to them on a drive, it’s a copy where you keep the original, thus a redistribution. Especially to be said, you can’t pirate it and allow others to download it in mass.
This also, in the same “shirt” analogy, does not give a clothing purchaser the right to;
A. Copy and redistribute a shirt or article of clothing in the exact same design.
B. The right to unlimited amounts of shirts to be given away to friends and family.
Sure, you can give it to a friend, even that’s a gray area as you’re not removing it from your mods folder and giving it to them, it’s a copy, thus a redistribution.
This is simply explained; you are limiting the potential monetization for that creator of said product. If their Patreon price is $3 per month per user, then uploading a creator’s monthly content to say… 50 users, that’s $150! I don’t know about you, but not only would I love to see that $150 that I worked hard for in my bank account, but that could easily be the difference between a weekly grocery trip or a medical bill that needs to be paid. No matter how much a creator is making it does not give a user the entitlement to redistribute their material
The average SINGLE American citizen requires an average monthly income of $4,400 to pay their bills, buy groceries and be able to store %10 in savings. I guarantee that only the top designers are earning this and are working their butts off.
No matter how much a creator is making it does not give the user the entitlement to redistribute their material.
This is similar to music pirating, think back (if you’re old enough) to the big lawsuit between Metalica inc. took (shitty) legal action against more than 300,000 alleged fans! They sued their fans for pirating their music on Napster and other sites. But still, pirating of material is illegal.
Why should I support Creators who lock up their CC behind Paywalls vs. Free or Early Access?
The bottom line is users don’t have to support creators who lock up their CC. But that doesn’t give users right to that content, only the developer, EA, owns the rights to the content and they are the only ones who can legally take and re-distribute creators content.
Users don’t have to support creators who lock up their CC, but that doesn’t give them a right to bullying creators, re-uploading their CC, or slanderous actions against them.
But, why is it locked up? Think back, to two years ago nearly to the day. Lockdown. Coronavirus. People were getting buried in Central Park because NY ran out of space in morgues and cemeteries. Students were moving back into their parents’ comfy homes while older adults (yes Sims gamer’s ages range from pre-teen, naughty-naughty, to 60+) were facing homelessness and starvation.
Even taking the latter out of it, creators take hours, and days to create content. Some creators pride themselves in being able to release content for free, but that’s the key term, “being able”. Creators who charge for access to their content do so because they would otherwise not be able to compensate for their time and energy to create content and thus, there would be none of their content. 3D designers in general do more than the average re-color creator and often times the work, money, and time to learn these programs are unsurmisable.Even so, I am in the process of recoloring the 4-tier wedding cake and that’s going to take over 12 hours to do!
Creators who charge for access to their content do so because they would otherwise not be able to compensate their time and energy to create content and thus, there would be none of their content
Most creators who charge for content create very high-poly, skilled content that simply can’t be compared to others’ CC. They also can’t be uploaded to TSR due to this reason. The file size of their content is also rather large, with some downloads ranging from 250MB-2GB. Most computers can’t process this sort of content nor have the storage space to house it. These creators buy high-quality computers and purchase expanded storage space via external hard drives, iCloud, and more. They often times don’t use SFS or scary download sites and have to buy storage space in safe spaces for users to comfortably download. The compensation for these purchases in some cases can be dire, otherwise, they wouldn’t be able to create.
Okay, but Early Access creators are “good” and Pay Wall Creators are “bad”, right?
Early Access creators are revered in some cases and in others, they are demeaned. They oftentimes (this is a case-by-case basis and not representative of every creator) feel pressure from all sides. They want everyone to have access to content but also may face financial trouble and sway between locking up their CC and Early Release.
Creators are NOW pressured to give Early Release or release their content for free by rants, slandering, DM’s, and even name-calling or denouncing in a “Cancel Culture” attitude. As stated above, there are creators who simply cannot afford to create content or release it for free at any time because, well, how the heck are they going to eat and pay bills?
Imagine someone showing up at your work and demeaning you or holding up signs that slander you while you stress about keeping your job and paying the bills. Or even better yet, you’re constantly being told that you make too much and don’t deserve it because if you were a “real creator” you’d have a “real job” for a “real company”. This is what’s happening to these creators, now, around the clock!
Imagine someone showing up at your work and demeaning you or holding up signs that slander you while you stress about keeping your job and paying the bills.
But why don’t Pay Wall creators just get a job?
“Pay Wall” creators may have pre-existing illnesses or other life circumstances that either prohibits them from working entirely or being able to work during a pandemic. Many creators, such as myself, are often hospitalized, spend days to weeks to months bed-ridden, and have no one to help pay the bills. We don’t have parents or anyone to help us battle filing for unemployment and some refuse to file because we either can’t handle the work or have too much pride or a small job that prohibits qualifying for financial assistance.
Releasing of Pay Wall creator’s content or slandering, bullying, or forcing out of business by infringing on their monetization is not okay.
Why am I seeing that creators are copying other creators and are now sending malicious software or tracking users?
There is an unconfirmed allegation against a few creators. Whether or not these allegations are true or false, has yet to be determined. It’s scary when you believe you’re being targeted with spyware! However, I subscribe to creators, and never once have I questioned if they are actually spying/tracking content
It’s scary when you believe you’re being targeted with spyware!
Nearly every creator has come out and stated that they do not use tracking, virus, or spy software and in regard to Second Life copies, said accused has spoken to the creator who has stated that the CC was not a copy. In other cases, the CC was taken down, but this is a deal between the creators and not the user’s fight to belittle creators or try to stop them from creating.
On Second Lift & 3D meshes; I know of a situation where a creator is very much in question of where their 3D meshes come from, but now other creators who publicly upload tutorials on how to create 3D meshes are being accused, and that’s where there needs to be a line drawn.
On using other designer’s 3D meshes; The legality of this is solely between the original creator/original legal supplier of a mesh. Any alarms that should be sounded should be by DM’s with the creators, both OG and new. However, slandering, like calling out publicly via posts or even by word of mouth can be illegal. If a creator either has permission or later receives it, anything that was said about them “stealing meshes” is slanderous. Allegations are allegations, and need to be redacted in situations of approval, but simply calling them out a creator and name-calling for “stealing” a mesh is another.
Nearly every creator has come out and stated that they do not use tracking, virus, or spy software.
Many of these allegations, as mentioned, do not supply any evidence of any creator ever using spyware and many are being made by the same users who have sounded off alarms previously about the creator not owning their CC and/or have been accused of re-uploading for the mass in rebel groups.
These kinds of allegations are very real and should only be made if a user is 100% sure that a creator has done the aforementioned and has proof. Sharing email addresses between creators to warn them of users who may be leaking content is completely understandable. Why would you want someone in your store who stole clothing from the retailer next to you? Ever worked retail? Remember those pictures of suspected thieves in the break-room with their names or any additional info? This happens when someone is suspected of theft.
But, I can tell you as someone who has issues with leaking and after having spoken with other creators, we simply don’t have time to track down leakers. Some of the suspected leakers get blocked or DM’d, but we don’t share email addresses or personal information, or publicly call out our users. We DM them in private and ask.
I saw a post warning against Download Links. what’s up with that?
For me, I always guaranteed easy non-SFS downloads for Patrons, which meant I posted a link to download my content via Google Drive, in which I pay for extra space. I always had my downloads open to “anyone with the link”, however, I shared the link to download on a Patreon post and went out of town for a weekend. Over that time I received over 50 requests for that file from non-patrons. I STILL receive requests for that file on a daily basis because the link, which was behind a Patreon post, was shared. Since, I have to email directly to Patrons to grant access to only Patrons and non-patrons cannot access those downloads, even with a link. This is to protect me and my content.
I can also see on Google Drive when a file link has been shared and by whom. I have never shared who the original leaker was and only sent a DM asking them to stop, but I had no response. Just because a creator only emails links to downloads shouldn’t be a red flag, that should be a showing that they most likely value their content as much as your information.
If a creator sends a link to download their content in a zip file DOES NOT by any means signify that they are sending “tracking software”, which is also a costly, highly enhanced business software! The average creator does not have this software and the only leakage of information was apparently done via Worksheet in a closed group of creators to warn them of possible leakers. I am not saying I support this, but this is the truth, as an image of a suspected shoplifter in a retail break-room.
Just because a creator sends a link to download their content in a zip file DOES NOT by any means signify that they are sending “tracking software”
IF someone is sharing a user’s personal information who are suspected of leaking CC then that user has every right to stand up for themselves and can do so, if they are not guilty. Leaking personal information does go against Patreon’s TOU and that user has every right to file a legal action or make a complaint against them. But again, that is between one user and one creator and Patreon.
Blankly accusing creators of sharing personal information is just as defamatory as leaking personal information. If you post with a creator’s name, whether or not they have shared personal information, that is slander. Until they are found guilty by said platform (Patreon) they are assumed innocent. Warning a friend about joining a creator’s Patreon is one thing, but rants with their information are just as wrong and the first-mentioned can still be seen as slander. Furthermore, if someone is said to have shared personal information and has not, then that in itself is slander as well.
Accusing creators of sharing personal information is just as defamatory as leaking personal information.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
I want to be very clear though; using tracking software or doxxing is not okay. This should not happen and should never be accepted.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
To Summarize:
There are many creators’ content that I love but do not have access to because I simply can’t afford it. But I don’t use EA’s rights to the content as an excuse to pirate it or bully creators into releasing it for free. This sort of entitlement I simply can’t understand. The fact that we aren’t fighting for creators’ right’s to their content and financially supporting them (if possible) is beyond me. There are many wonderful free creators out there to download from and often times all you have to do is wait two weeks for content. Just because content “was free before”, “I never had to pay”, or “it’s going to be free anyway”, is not an excuse.
“don’t use EA’s rights to the content as an excuse to pirate it or bully creators into releasing it for free”
If EA wants to, which at times they do, take action against creators for monetization or locking up of CC then that is between them and the creator (If Metalica wants to sue, they will). But us, running around, sounding off alarms or trying to force creators out of creating is just silly.
I really hope that after you read this you decide to disengage in slandering, liking, or re-sharing posts that attack the very creators whose content you’d like access to or just “don’t like”, “don’t agree with”, “think is illegal”, or for whatever justification is in your mind. We’re all people, we all have feelings, seeing rants about you online or even a single comment can make someone feel regret, sorrow, and emotions that are very real.
We’re all people, we all have feelings, seeing rants about you online or even a single comment can make someone feel regret, sorrow, and emotions that are very real.
EDIT: As I have, please leave users’ and creators’ names out of the comments. This post is not in regard to a single situation, this is in regard to current accusations against alleged creators that are all hearsay and are slanderous.
FAAAAUUUUCCCKKK I need smoke a joint now…….
Liked my rant? Feel free to tip me on my Ko-Fi! Shit took a day to write LOL but was happy to do so!
Check out my Free Builds here and Patreon Builds along with Early Release and publicly Released CC Here
PLEASE READ! She got to the heart of so many things!
