Jump to content

Most Stupid question...


Dgtadude

Recommended Posts

He didn't say they're right to be sayin that, of course the MTA team has to give its consent before any modding on it can begin. All he said was that as a question/argument it holds some merit and isn't as obvious and self-explanatory, hence stupid, as the rest that were posted here.

Link to post
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

He didn't say they're right to be sayin that, of course the MTA team has to give its consent before any modding on it can begin. All he said was that as a question/argument it holds some merit and isn't as obvious and self-explanatory, hence stupid, as the rest that were posted here.

It holds irrelevent merit, its a stupid defense and thats that

nuff said

Link to post
"Why do you guys call modding with MTA cheating if MTA is a mod!?"

lmao

How is that "stupid?" Sounds rather thought out to me. Although, often, it isn't thought by thoughtful people...just people looking for exuses :P but that there is stipulation, oh well, from the user base here it would definately make sense :)

because its like saying "We aren't modding MTA because the program itself modded GTAVC", which is pretty stupid. In truth you are adding onto a mod so you're modding a mod. If its their mod, its their rules.

dude , you gotta stop writting stuff like this man , my brain hurts :(

:)

Link to post
"Why do you guys call modding with MTA cheating if MTA is a mod!?"

lmao

How is that "stupid?" Sounds rather thought out to me. Although, often, it isn't thought by thoughtful people...just people looking for exuses :P but that there is stipulation, oh well, from the user base here it would definately make sense :)

because its like saying "We aren't modding MTA because the program itself modded GTAVC", which is pretty stupid. In truth you are adding onto a mod so you're modding a mod. If its their mod, its their rules.

Who says? You? Guess that wouldn't be saying much then, would it. Does MTA have explicit authorization from Rockstar to modify their proprietary, commercial product? Even if so, do you realize how many mods/hacks/changes to commercial applications are out there, and how many are, in some cases, illegal?

MTA has (almost) no control over what people do with the mod, they just have to have faith that people will want to listen to them. In some countries it is perfectly legal to even go so far as to disassemble and openly reverse engineer in a dirty environment their application. Think before you speak, sir.

He didn't say they're right to be sayin that, of course the MTA team has to give its consent before any modding on it can begin. All he said was that as a question/argument it holds some merit and isn't as obvious and self-explanatory, hence stupid, as the rest that were posted here.

It holds irrelevent merit, its a stupid defense and thats that

nuff said

It is a "stupid" defense? Sounds like you put a lot of thought into that one. Damn, why argue with a child? I'll tell you why - its a damn good laugh... ahaha ;)

Link to post

MTA is not breaking the Rockstar eula and if you crack the MTA client and use a modded version of ViceCity in MTA you are breaking the MTA eula. So calling MTA hypocrites because they don't want cheaters (which is what the argument boils down to) doesn't work.

The usage of other mods with MTA is looked upon as cheating and therefore prohibited by this EULA. To play MTA and keep your mods we recommend making a second install of GTA. More information can be optained on our forums.

Altering and/or changing the executables and/or other binaries included within this installation package in ANY possible way is forbidden.

Decompiling, disassembling or otherwise reverse engineering of ANY of the included executables and/or binaries is forbidden. You may not modify, rent, or resell for profit this software, or create derivative works based upon this software.

The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not claim that you wrote the original software.

Link to post

^ exactly. Think before YOU speak, sir.

Yes, it is a stupid defense. Saying that modding a mod isn't cheating because its a mod in the first place. Pretty redundant. Anyways, you were probably the guy who said it. Thats all I got to say about that.

NUFF. SAID.

Link to post

[KFC]KungFuGrip, I have not read the latest EULA as provided by the latest client. I do know that clients before and including v0.2 distributed during a certain timeframe (perhaps even now, as I do not know the status of an applicable EULA with these clients) are unaffected by such ruling as they did not have a clause stating that mods were unallowed with use of the client, nor a clause regarding updates for those versions.

And to those such as Ransom, Not only that, but how legally binding would this EULA really be? They could terminate service, sure, by means of some sort of blocks or legally persuing, but that doesn't seem feasable nor economical. Well, perhaps... who knows, creativity can spawn at any moment ;p

I am no legal writer and not one to necessarily look for loopholes, which is far from my intent. I just want to state that because someone says something, and because someone wants something, doesn't mean that correct - or at least applicable - steps were taken to prevent it. The latest EULA takes a small stride towards this but I am sure with proper legal knoweldge, if this EULA was valid, some sort of loopholes could be found. It isn't a license to win awards in any respect, thats for sure.

Besides...why limit ones creativity? Not to say people should go spamming servers with useless crap, but perhaps a full standalone mod, working seperately from the first one?

Its enough said when you have the last word. But..wait..I didn't hear you..what was that again? ;)

Link to post

well true, if you want to find all the loopholes and give the info on them to us, we will fix them up to cure your legal woes with our eula

yes, for a short time 0.2 was released without an eula, but fact remains that whatever the document, without the legal stuff, just play by the rules and (dont laugh bump) in the spirit of the game

Link to post

True,

This is an old thread now I guess sorry I missed that post. Xerox hit the nail on the head. The EULA represents the creators intent Rockstar cannot do much about those that break it and neither can MTA. The point isn't what the punishment is it is the "Spirit of the Game"

MTA is not going against the intent of GTAVC and as long as you don't use a cracked client or use MTA in a manner that they forbid you are not violating thier intent.

Link to post
True,

This is an old thread now I guess sorry I missed that post. Xerox hit the nail on the head. The EULA represents the creators intent Rockstar cannot do much about those that break it and neither can MTA. The point isn't what the punishment is it is the "Spirit of the Game"

MTA is not going against the intent of GTAVC and as long as you don't use a cracked client or use MTA in a manner that they forbid you are not violating thier intent.

I dont know about those legal stuff people . But i would say that mta is actually helping ViceCity . I know a bunch of people that had vicecity on the ps2 but bought it on the pc just to play mta . :D

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...