I don`t have a written copy to post, I`d like to do it. We had a personal licensing meeting in October (?) regarding my 3D asset creation activities; While I asked him to take a look at the Steam agreement and the workshop agreement. His view was that the first, “was a fantastic way to generate money” this comment was regarding the fact that you don`t really own something you just “buy” the right to play the games through their service. Break their rules and all the games you`ve got are gone. That`s right, this deal did you exactly 0 things to do. I have to thank you, you`re not doing anything for me. On the right? And hey, when I spent three hours explaining to a number of telecommunications lawyers how the agreement works (on electronic signatures), they initially refused – and they finally agreed that they were wrong, and I was right. In a way, my one-day exhibition trumped his long experience. Everyone can be wrong. I would never advise anyone who wanted to take advantage of the workshop not to use the workshop. The choice of how they wish to concede their content is theirs.

Valve services offer are better for ArmA 3 because you get 100% coverage from the user base and easier installation for users. And there are no drawbacks other than 200mb limit and some emotional rejections at the origin of the law. That`s the point – you make an agreement so that players can download your mod via an integrated tool that distributes the possible target audience of 10% of the owners of magical 100 games. But you should also recognize that the license I signed for 1 and 1 is different from the SWS agreement. As I pay 1 and 1 for accommodation services, I have rights. I don`t have any clauses that say they can use the actual content I download. You can only use the statistics of my downloaded content. Access statistics, size, type, etc. In a way, I don`t think 1and1 will use my addons to promote their hosting…

😛 Obviously, the addition of a -ly suffix and the understanding that the law is “binding” when entering into a written agreement (a word repeatedly used in the agreement itself) has made my description of the agreement much more agonizing than I found. :rolleyes: Every website on which you host your content has some kind of user agreement – even your operating system and your tools you use have legal agreement. Dropbox/Google Drive also has similar licensing conditions. And it`s not because Valve or Dropbox or Google are nasty, it`s to protect against those who want to quickly make money on the DEUM flaw. Would you be willing to publish his interpretation of the “User Generated Content” section of the CLA? I am simply asking because it would be nice to have the advice of a lawyer instead of asking what that agreement means. And yes, from a legal point of view, ArmAholic steals it. Until they set a basic agreement for the author of an addons (there is only one for addon users), anyone can sue him. But in fact, I just don`t see the point in signing a legally binding agreement to distribute content if I don`t need it.

No one else asks me to sign something if they want to host my stuff, and I know who to talk to if I find something offensive about how they host it.