Policy change: Sales of art for gil forbidden

[Kinono]

The ony difference between this and selling runs is it crosses a real-world line which must be what gets SE in a tizzy because they're fine with run-selling.

 

Then again, nothing would stop someone from paying real-world money for runs which seems even worse to me but that's neither here nor there.

[Hyakki]

Why not just ban selling services here period? If RPC going to prohibit gil artists from advertising they may as well prohibit cash artists as well. Offering any other kind of outside-the-game service for gil/cash would be frowned upon so why make an exception?

 

Or, better yet, retract the new policy and let those willing to take the risk to accept gil commissions continue to do so. They're aware of the potential consequences, leave up to them to decide if its worth it.

[Aldotsk]

Why not just ban selling services here period? If RPC going to prohibit gil artists from advertising they may as well prohibit cash artists as well. Offering any other kind of outside-the-game service for gil/cash would be frowned upon so why make an exception?

 

Or, better yet, retract the new policy and let those willing to take the risk to accept gil commissions continue to do so. They're aware of the potential consequences, leave up to them to decide if its worth it.

 

Just visit user's tumblr/deviantart to negotiate commissions or even skype. No one will ever notice.

 

But then again, I am not currently offering commissions atm so I can't say anything about this.

[Telluride]

Why not just ban selling services here period? If RPC going to prohibit gil artists from advertising they may as well prohibit cash artists as well. Offering any other kind of outside-the-game service for gil/cash would be frowned upon so why make an exception?

 

 

There's also the sting to this that, as was brought up earlier, this policy mostly attacks paying, honest subscribers, while the bots - which are flagrantly violating TOS policies - still manage to re-emerge and port from place to place.

[Melkire]

Why not just ban selling services here period? If RPC going to prohibit gil artists from advertising they may as well prohibit cash artists as well. Offering any other kind of outside-the-game service for gil/cash would be frowned upon so why make an exception?

 

Or, better yet, retract the new policy and let those willing to take the risk to accept gil commissions continue to do so. They're aware of the potential consequences, leave up to them to decide if its worth it.

 

As I understand it, the laws that allow us to keep a FFXIV-related site open, up, and running don't allow us to breach the ToS that Square-Enix has implemented for their IP and service. If we were to breach said ToS, the RPC could get shut down by Square-Enix due to the violation.

 

...pursuant to the Materials Use License that governs this site (which does not permit any promotion of forbidden activities in game)' date=' all threads advertising art of any sort, commissioned or otherwise, for gil are forbidden as of February 12, 2015. [/quote']

[QueenFrejyalen]

I stand by the forum's decision to prohibit things based on the ToS; I don't want to lose the entire forum because of one slip up with Square Enix about an art commission.

 

I think a trading board could work nicely to supplement gil commissions.  I will even start it or help start it.  

[Cliodhna Eoghan]

Just for the record: I've paid plenty of artists here who just... stopped posting. As it stands right now I've given someone real cash money and they never turned up with art, and there's people in front of me on the list.

 

I don't want to turn it into a witch hunt or make accusations, but paying someone and having them vanish isn't new. It won't change if things are arranged in PM.

 

i'd never do you like that warren. x3

 

but your point is valid; i've seen this happen a fair amout of times with either an in game currency of various persuasions, cash via paypal or even promises of art trades "i'll draw x for you if you draw xy for me"

 

it sucks but there's not much you can do if that person simply never returns to the place they arranged the order.

[Gone.]

A Terms of Service has never flown in court so I wouldn't even worry about enforcing this totally absurd, likely misinterpreted dialog from a GM of all people.

 

Edit: Also said GM used the words 'would' and 'may', which doesn't really mean they're actually enforcing it, not unlike how no one at Anet cared about people like me using the Combat Mode mod in GW2.

[OttoVann]

Make a subreddit for this and its all taken care of

[Haven's Fox]

So just take donations because you are a nice person and a friend wanted to help you out. Then w/e art is talked about is traded for free.

 

Don't see why everyone is flipping out. It's just a hard base line interpretation of their ToS so they can keep a consistent tone on their replies.

[QueenFrejyalen]

Yes, we all know how to do things secretly okay, we're all aware of what that is so why repeat it like you're the first to notice "omg just lie about it lol".

 

The forums have to publicly take a specific stand to ensure that the forums stay up.  They're just alerting us of that, and it should be publicly respected if you care about the forums.

 

a.k.a at least PRETEND that you're going to respect the rules so that the forum doesn't face any consequences.    Some of you would be terrible accomplices to real crimes, just saying.

[Delilah Scythewood]

Yes, we all know how to do things secretly okay, we're all aware of what that is so why repeat it like you're the first to notice "omg just lie about it lol".

 

The forums have to publicly take a specific stand to ensure that the forums stay up.  They're just alerting us of that, and it should be publicly respected if you care about the forums.

 

a.k.a at least PRETEND that you're going to respect the rules so that the forum doesn't face any consequences.    Some of you would be terrible accomplices to real crimes, just saying.

I agree with Queenie. Chill, folks. If you're going to do backwater dealings then at least be knowledgeable enough to not brainstorm them here for all to see.

[Aldotsk]

Just for the record: I've paid plenty of artists here who just... stopped posting. As it stands right now I've given someone real cash money and they never turned up with art, and there's people in front of me on the list.

 

I don't want to turn it into a witch hunt or make accusations, but paying someone and having them vanish isn't new. It won't change if things are arranged in PM.

 

Another reason why I dont have confidence in  offering commissions because it's likely that I'll break promises that I can't keep due to IRL times.

[Enla]

Just for the record: I've paid plenty of artists here who just... stopped posting. As it stands right now I've given someone real cash money and they never turned up with art, and there's people in front of me on the list.

 

I don't want to turn it into a witch hunt or make accusations, but paying someone and having them vanish isn't new. It won't change if things are arranged in PM.

 

Another reason why I dont have confidence in  offering commissions because it's likely that I'll break promises that I can't keep due to IRL times.

I'm pretty much the same way. I tend to freeze up when people commission me and it's never finished in a timely manner due to my own insecurities. It could very well be that enough people have complained about lost gil over these sort of transactions and SE decided to cover themselves in the event that someone decides that they are partly liable due to it happening within the game.

[Harmonixer]

The thought process behind some of these polices baffles the shit out of me. It's not the first time I've seen something like this, and I doubt it will be the last. Eitherway, it's easily worked around thankfully.

[Kellach Woods]

Why are they going after artists rather than RMT sellers?

They are not going after artists. They're clarifying a position that did not seem immediately clear to prevent having to go after artists. They WANT to go after RMT sellers as much as possible and they'd certainly rather do that than prevent any of the fine artists here making a quick gil making fanart.

 

No matter what the activity proposed for in-game cash, unless it is performed in-game, goes against the ToS.

 

At the same time, taking that kind of hard stance also helps them go after RMT customers and providers from a legal standpoint since they're showing that they're enforcing their ToS.

 

What if we openly discuss the ways we want to circumvent this policy?

That's incredibly dumb and makes life harder for most of us because almost everything on this site uses assets and art from FFXIV which is used under a certain provision that FreelanceWizard posted IIRC.

 

If it gets up to their legal department that this place's a hotbed for RMT, regardless of how "harmless" it is they'll shut that shit down and for some reason I do not want the magic admin hat to tango with S-E's legal department.

 

It tends to never end well for anyone, unless you're SNKPlaymore, and even then that case + counter-suit is still pending.

 

tl;dr :

policy's stupid but needed, don't be as stupid pls.

[FreelanceWizard]

Why not just ban selling services here period? If RPC going to prohibit gil artists from advertising they may as well prohibit cash artists as well. Offering any other kind of outside-the-game service for gil/cash would be frowned upon so why make an exception?

 

The most obvious statement is about art for gil, but yes, any post that actually (as opposed to purely in jest or in theory discussing the practice) offers a trade of in game consideration for real life consideration will be deleted.

 

Trades of art (a real life consideration) for cash (a real life consideration) don't seem to run afoul of the LGM's statement regarding TOS, so those are okay.

 

Or, better yet, retract the new policy and let those willing to take the risk to accept gil commissions continue to do so. They're aware of the potential consequences, leave up to them to decide if its worth it.

 

It's not just those people who are at risk. The license under which much of this site is permitted to exist does not permit us to actively assist in the violation of TOS. That's why posts about server emulators, bot software, and parsers are forbidden as well.

 

Frankly, the larger risk is to the site, and unless you're planning on paying for a lawyer for me, that's an unacceptable risk. Therefore, the policy stays.

 

A Terms of Service has never flown in court so I wouldn't even worry about enforcing this totally absurd, likely misinterpreted dialog from a GM of all people.

 

Edit: Also said GM used the words 'would' and 'may', which doesn't really mean they're actually enforcing it, not unlike how no one at Anet cared about people like me using the Combat Mode mod in GW2.

 

I mean, except for the WoW bots case, or the Battle.net emulator, or various private settlements of which I'm aware between Oracle and companies over violations of the rather restrictive TOS for certain Oracle online services...

 

All, please believe when I say that I think SE is doing something heavy-handed and dumb. However, please also believe me that we are subject to a license agreement with them for the very existence of this site. I love you all, and I'll take reasonable steps to fight aggressive legal dickery, but my real life takes precedence over this site. I'm not going to spend incredible amounts of my own money to fight SE's legal department. Is it likely they'd come down here with a hammer over art for gil? Probably not, but there's a lot of instances of them deciding something is a risk to them and unleashing destruction from the heavens. They are capricious.

 

The only reason I haven't cut the posts talking about "well, you can do X or Y to get around the exact statement by the LGM" is because this is, of course, just a discussion thread, the posts are certainly in jest, and no one is actually going to do any of that -- and if you do, I don't want to know about it.

 

#magicAdminHat

[Aldotsk]

Honestly, this company wasn't the first that pulled this joint before.

 

Ragnarok Online and Gravity pulled this stunt with the artists and tried to hunt down every single artists out there who were selling fan arts/commissions for zeny. They succeeded and banned lot of accounts. 

 

So with that said, I do agree that SQEnix made a disappointing decision in this case. But if I had to say that the company is the -worst-, I would disagree with that since I've experienced plenty of other companies that made horrible decisions more than this company.

[Austratus]

I don't mind, but not for any policy reasons (though I understand why and such). To me, the whole art for Gil thing seemed a little bit server-exclusive to me, so I would prefer transactions that don't involve the game.

[Kinono]

The only reason I haven't cut the posts talking about "well, you can do X or Y to get around the exact statement by the LGM" is because this is, of course, just a discussion thread, the posts are certainly in jest, and no one is actually going to do any of that -- and if you do, I don't want to know about it.

 

"The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.

Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."

 

I am a scumbag.

[Fulcrum]

I think this is a little extreme of them. Having worked for Sony Online Entertainment when RMT was being invented, back when EverQuest (the first one) was young, I find this...so incredibly extreme. Artists are not the offenders you are looking for, not by a long shot. I have fought in this war, we were the ones pushing hard for laws to be made to give us the weapons we needed to combat it, we were combatting the trailblazers of the RMT industry - the ones you need to be going after are bots, sneaky little bitches who scam your player bases with promises of power leveling but steal the accounts instead, so they can use the characters to make more gil and move more gil, and sell off items the bots can't obtain.

 

 

This is definitely an extreme that is not actually combating the RMT industry and its actual demons. I feel terrible for the artists who are being attacked by this horrible decision. You guys are not the bad guys. :evil:

[Kellach Woods]

This is motivated by legal departments, not the people who actually do shit.

[aure]

I don't get it. I really don't.

 

I'd be a little upset, but I would understand entirely if SE said that doing art for real-life currency wasn't allowed on the grounds of "even though you've made these characters, they're still ours. Hence, we're not letting you make money on our stuff in any way, shape or form."

 

Gil though? Ridiculous. By their logic of "you're using your skill to make gil, we're not allowing it" paid carries should also be against ToS, but they're not.

 

For my commissions, I want to operate an allagan platinum piece policy- but there's not enough of them in the market in Balmung to actually do it. Megalame.

[Aduu Avagnar]

the point was in game currency for out of game services.

[Michikyou]

I can understand their angle however. The Currency in game is for in game items and shouldn't have an impact on a real-life economy.

 

I know it sounds strange but - you can still pay for real-life products with real money