The EULA and Data Farming

[Armour]

The above statement is categorically untrue according to Michael Brookes.

I don't see where he said that, he just said it hasn't been banned. There's no point banning something that you ultimately have no control over, is there?

Not forbidden != endorsed.

Simple fix to all this: set up an IRL company called "GalNet", and make the in-game trade data property of them. They can then send C&Ds to anyone using their data. They do that kind of thing in professional sports all the time.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

I don't see where he said that, he just said it hasn't been banned. There's no point banning something that you ultimately have no control over, is there?

Not forbidden != endorsed.

And yet they have banned scanning process memory.

 

[Endziel]

This is a very interesting subject indeed. People are concerned with some occasional exploiter getting themselves Anaconda in one night, but that doesn't really affect anyone's game. But hundreds of people effectively running down all the profitable trade routes, every day for all days, now that's something that affects other people's experience as well.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

There are debugging tools that have existed for decades that were designed specifically to noninvasively monitor processes. Leveraging these programs is a trivial task.

If the argument is that scraping data directly messes up the running process, the argument is invalidated when using these noninvasive tools. However, I suspect that the condemnation of scraping data runs deeper than that and protecting proprietary and sensitive data is FD's higher priority.

Be that the case, I don't find it unreasonable for FD to lay out specifically EITHER what data is off-limits (black listing) or what data is falls under acceptable use (white listing). CLEARLY the commodity data is not off-limits.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

This is a very interesting subject indeed. People are concerned with some occasional exploiter getting themselves Anaconda in one night, but that doesn't really affect anyone's game. But hundreds of people effectively running down all the profitable trade routes, every day for all days, now that's something that affects other people's experience as well.

I don't want to speak for Slopey, but I think there was mention of fairly objective data proving this doesn't happen.

[edit] I say fairly, because I've used Slopey's program and it's not without the occasional OCR error.

 

[Cmdr Sharky]

Does that mean you do not use gimbled or turreted weapons and those that do use them are cheating? "Aimbotting" is literally is a feature already implemented in the game...

No it isn't. Gimbal and turret weapons are balanced with lower damage ratings, higher cost, higher mass, power draw, or whatever. An aimbot would be an external program that auto-aims with your ship's fixed weapons so that you get the benefit without the cost.

 

[Armour]

And yet they have banned scanning process memory.

I would guess that is just because some people may have utilised clumsy methods to get at the data, but I don't know. The specifics of how people choose to cheat isn't really interesting to me.

edit: Thanks corvinus for the neg rep. A cheat you may be, but at least you didn't put me on ignore like the last coward.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

No it isn't. Gimbal and turret weapons are balanced with lower damage ratings, higher cost, higher mass, power draw, or whatever. An aimbot would be an external program that auto-aims with your ship's fixed weapons so that you get the benefit without the cost.

You're implication was that if they didn't want it, it wouldn't exist at all. And my point was it does exist at least to a degree. I'm certainly not arguing in favor of 3rd party apps that ignore in-game physics.

I digress, but I think this is derailing the discussion. The only matter of concern is the metagame - taking data from the game and making use of it outside of the game itself. To argue that collecting commodity data or star system data is a slippery slope towards players using aimbots is completely ridiculous.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I would guess that is just because some people may have utilised clumsy methods to get at the data, but I don't know. The specifics of how people choose to cheat isn't really interesting to me.

Not endorsing something is not the same thing as saying it is cheating. Until FD officially weighs in on this you're only stating your subjective stance.

[edit] Which isn't to say your stance is invalid in any way. But it's important to note that it is YOUR stance and not FD's.

 

[MagmaiKH]

Ironically because of the improving trade-finding tools people are starting to congregate at the hot-spots.
Not a lot of people but least I am seeing people.
Maybe we'll turn this into an MMO afterall.

(HR 571 last week, Patocuda this week)

 

[Papa]

The real issue is ED need to implement some kind of trading computer for our ships! This should be in-game and any API should be for other, greater, tools besides trading. We should not need a spreadsheet tool to play a trading game???....the irony!!!

If you look at the iRacing API it's simply amazing what things people come up with. We can have telemetry and all sorts displayed on-screen while in-game. But iracing is propper hard core so maybe not quite relivant here. But the bascs are very simular. The Devs should look at how the Iracing Devs intereact with these tool developers. They very much complement each other in a wonderful way. We really need this here. Proper community building.

I am using CMDRs log. It should be in-game! Data should update everytime you enter a station. Not through some tool.

But for now the tools are the only way to trade if you want find the best routes. The community here are very clever and the Devs should exploit that fact. It could work so well here.

The poor Devs. I feel so bad saying how it is but it's true. Someone at ED need to lay down the LAW and stick to it. We need some integrety too but most importantly we need some common sense.

 

[Armour]

I suggested this a while back:

Frontier could provide would-be app developers with some kind of sandboxed VM+API that allows third-party apps to be represented in-game, via the HUD UI.

They could limit the data accessible via the API to what is supposed to be available to a pilot, and limit the local storage allowed per app. The VM could also be performance capped so as not to negatively affect general game performance. The tool developers could then go wild within those limits (obviously they would need to submit their apps to Frontier who would need to approve them).

Apps would be on a pilot's partition within the ship's computer, and new apps could be purchased, or even subscribed to, with in-game credits while docked. This would allow Frontier and the app developers to maintain control over the scope of distribution.

Imagine criminal apps, only available at unsavoury outposts and/or only accessible to those with a record. Or faction-specific apps. Or even rank-specific ones. I think that it would be a novel way to approach the issue of third-party app content, personally.

 

[CMDR_Coenen]

If you're good at trading, you don't need any extra tools. If you know how the economy works in ED, know how the interaction works with other players and NPCs, you can still do very nice trades. If other players want to use external tools to earn money, they are free to do just that. It's an open game, play it as you like to play.

I see claims that other players are negatively impacted because external tools are used. I never experienced it, and I don't use the said tools. I earn my money, see systems I've never seen before. I'm not making milions per day but that's not the goal for me. I rather see, explore and get to know systems to get good trades. I don't need the tools. If I would like to get as many credits in the shortest possible time I would use the tools. It's just how one likes to play. It's open, it's up to each individual to discover what Elite Dangerous can be.

I was involved with creating some tools during beta and never got the impression FD was against tools. They even consider creating an API for these tools at a later date and were helpful in resolving issues. What they didn't like (and they acted on it) was the negative impact the way of getting the data had on the stability of ED itself. In that way setting a breakpoint in a process is very different as to taking notes, parsing screenshots or manual entering collaborative spreadsheets. And that was the issue, not that traders use the tools. And FD shouldn't care about that: It's up to the user to decide how to play and what tools to use or not to use.

But hundreds of people effectively running down all the profitable trade routes, every day for all days, now that's something that affects other people's experience as well.

I never experienced this impact on my trading. Not even the ones in "tool-popular" places.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Be that the case, I don't find it unreasonable for FD to lay out specifically EITHER what data is off-limits (black listing) or what data is falls under acceptable use (white listing). CLEARLY the commodity data is not off-limits.

They have - all data is off limits.

 

[Snuble]

They have - all data is off limits.

Better start playing blindfolded.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Better start playing blindfolded.

Of course I should have added "in terms of examining game memory"....

 

[Cmdr Sharky]

Ironically because of the improving trade-finding tools people are starting to congregate at the hot-spots.
Not a lot of people but least I am seeing people.
Maybe we'll turn this into an MMO afterall.

That's actually a very good point. Same with the rare commodities - you're much more likely to see hollow flags in those systems. Will be interesting to see if people turn up in Ancate. That's my current cash cow, two very close stations with >Cr800 per ton profit each way.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

I asked Michael Brookes directly to address the issue that "the EULA and [his] posts seem to be contradictory in scope". His reply was that "the EULA takes precedence, but [he] will look into it."

Although I do not want to twist his response, it would seem to me that since the EULA is to take precedence over his posts, collecting any/all data from the game is prohibited regardless of the method the data has been collected.

From a legal stand point, I can understand this stance. Regardless of how they generated the data, the intellectual property rights belong to FD, and FD alone. No matter how the third party developers copy the data, it is no less copying FD's intellectual property. If this is done without permission, this is a fairly cut and dry case of copy right infringement.

However, from a consumer's stand point, this is concerning. It would mean that Armour's sentiments may stand to be true after-all: crowdsourced data is cheating; farther more illegal - at least as far as the wording of the EULA is concerned. It implies that the experience I have regarding the game extend outside of the game in a manner that is incompatible with fair-use laws (at least as far as the US is concerned as I'm unfamiliar with EU laws).

That all being said, as mentioned earlier, the intent of the EULA may be a different than the wording, and it's possible they will address this in an updated EULA. So, I still think clarification is required on this matter. I'm content at this point knowing he is working on it, but I'll wait with anticipation for another response.

 

[neXib]

I think you are missing certain elements of reading between the lines here.

No companies go around hounding people to follow their EULA to the words, it's a legal backdrop that is a rule set that should be followed. That doesn't mean anything that can be interpreted as breaking it will be actually regarded as such, it just gives them reason to if needed.

 

[ggpwnkthx]

I think you are missing certain elements of reading between the lines here.

No companies go around hounding people to follow their EULA to the words, it's a legal backdrop that is a rule set that should be followed. That doesn't mean anything that can be interpreted as breaking it will be actually regarded as such, it just gives them reason to if needed.

It's not lost on me, but that would imply that there is either selective enforcement of the rules or they don't intend on officially stating a "purpose" or a narrow expectation of user experience. I'd be fine with the latter, but would prefer some simple guidelines that 3rd party devs could follow in the absence of an API.

That being said, since an API is something they want to do, I'm not sure I understand how any of the other argument regarding the use of 3rd party tools hold any weight.

At this point it really does seem to be a case of "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission". I just think that most devs don't want to program something out that might get their user's banned seemingly arbitrarily.

 

[Sergio Smegolia]

Surely if getting any data out of the game is against the EULA then everyone creating their own spreadsheets are guilty of cheating too?

You could argue that getting data from a screenshot is not directly from the game, and if it is then so is writing it down on a piece of paper.

But I agree with the fact the FD need to clear all this up.

 

[Cmdr Sharky]

But I agree with the fact the FD need to clear all this up.

They already have. OCRing screenshots is not against the rules.