Consider this for a minute.

Imagine if Andrew Heighway had instigated this kind of EULA before shipping out the first lot of Alien machines. Imagine if the community had been legally prohibited from creating the fixes and workarounds that enabled them to see and play the machine at its best. If there hadn't been this level of community support to help put things right with those early games, do you think there'd be any interest now in the machine getting a second life? You think the collector's market wouldn't be hit hard, more reluctant to buy rare games that they might have no legal right to tinker with in the future, even if they did work perfectly now?

An extreme example, but I hope one that illustrates how short-sighted this could be.

This is why modern machines in movies and TV shows chime like an EM.

Let’s see what Stern does with its actions. Do they go after the maker of Pinbrowser? Do they go after Mezelmods? Do they try to shut down streamers?

Lots of grey areas that I don’t think they can enforce OR it wouldn’t be cost effective to attempt in a court room.

"not commercially exploit "

Does this mean theese machines are forbidden to earn money on location?

Here's the list of upcoming pinball themes for 2021. Enjoy pinheads!

Now that is a really good question! If I own the game, I would assume part of the game price includes licensing fees for the music/videos/whatever are shown during gameplay. I don't understand why I could set up the game in location, but not be allowed to stream a video playing my game.

Bally/Williams never had any problems with streaming, although many of their games also contained licensed music.

If this is so big problem for Stern, maybe they should use MIDI renditions of music clips. I am quite sure nobody plays the games to just hear the original music performances (which are available in Youtube anyway).

You're rebroadcasting the music to an audience without permission from the copyright holder. That wasn't the intended purpose of the device.

Live streaming wasn't around in the 90s. Youtube only first came online in 2005.

Most of the music found in 80s-90s games was composed specifically for the game. Right now, the driving force behind this shift with live streaming is the RIAA, and since they (likely) don't own the composed music in 80s/90s pins, they probably won't flag it. The RIAA is mainly focused on music tracks, so pins with band/movie themes that include a band's music are going to be swept up in the net.

There are different forms of copyright. Copyright for the actual recording, and copyright for the written music. Just transposing the copyrighted song into a different format doesn't usually get around that unless the written music is in the public domain (most music written after 1925 is still copyrighted. Only music written before 1925 is in the public domain).

So, converting "welcome to the jungle" into a midi song would not get around copyright restrictions.

I heard the podcast, Gary said we loosed a license holder. They don't want customers that abuse there products.
So I hope it has nothing to do with the Jp movie clips because then Stern have lost a lot game licenses from Amblin for Jaws and reruns for Jp and upcoming games like bttf.
So I am curious what that license holder is they lost.
One things shure Stern is furious.

ForceFlow, I understand that.

But somehow I feel sad that the current trend of licensed themes brings all those problems along.

When you play with someone else's toys, you have to agree to certain conditions in order for them to allow you to play with those toys.

I suspect that in the future, streaming rights may start to appear as a negotiation point in licensing contracts, and a "live streaming" mode option may appear in games.

and if true, frankly this is exactly what is wrong with the laws around it. If I bought it, I will do as I choose with it. It hurts no one. It is all about lawyers pocketbooks. It's not like Stern is selling it, or the people in question are selling it either.

Of course. But if I pay big $$$ for the toy, I don't consider it to be someone else's but my own.

Anyway, OK... I understand if I buy a CD, that doesn't give me rights to rebroadcast it. Funny that we now have to face these kind of things with pinball games

I meant that if stern licenses a theme, they have to abide by the rules set forth by the licensee.

True. And a broader license would of course cost more, making the games even more expensive.

Stern has probably done research on licensed vs. non-licensed themes, and found the licensed themes to bring more revenue.

Yep--it's much easier to sell a game with a theme that already has an audience, rather than trying to build a theme and an audience for it from scratch.

And what part of his defunct company would be trying to enforce that eula?

MarvLoco did a great job of giving context to this situation by using what Gary said on the Super Awesome Pinball Show:

The licensors some of them are saying "what's going on here?" and others are saying "you've got a bunch of thieves for customers, so we don't really wanna be in your business anymore." so we'll lose some licensors over it. We are required to tell the licensor if we know of anyone infringing the copyright like using their logo in an accessory and their going to start chasing after, so you guys making accessors might get a nice warning from us please stop that and Disney or somebody they take this seriously, they're going to make an example of some people. If you make something that isn't the licensor's great, but if you're using the licensor's stuff? That's that. It's somebody else's property. You played somebody else's music without a license ah nah nah nah no, now that's not good.

I think we can take away from this:

• Stern has had problems with licensors that poses a business risk
• Stern is motivated to protect the IP of the licensors to protect their relationships with these entities
• Licensors have taken notice of accessories that infringe on their intellectual property
• Licensors have taken notice of code modifications that infringe on their intellectual property

From this I think it's clear that those who create IP infringing physical or software modifications for games can expect to receive a cease and desist. What's unclear is what Stern and/or licensors intend to do about streamers:

In view of the rights held by third-party owners of Authorized Content (e.g. music and video clips) You will not stream your gameplay of your Stern Pinball Machine without Stern Pinball’s prior consent.

The ongoing DMCA enforcement efforts on Twitch inregaurds to the use of copyrighted music may be enough to make the licensors happy, in which case nothing new happens. However, the licensors may want more rigerous enforcement since music isn't the only thing being infringed on.

without Stern Pinball’s prior consent

This is the part that stands out the most to me as it implies there are or will be circumstances underwhich Stern would both be able and willing to consent to streaming "Authorized Content". What thoese circumstances would be is something we can only theorize. I wouldn't be surprised if new licensing agreements Stern enters into included Stern having a set number of hours that they can allow the game with all of it's "Authorized Content" to be streamed for promotional purposes. For example, there might be enough authorized hours to allow for a reveal stream.

To circle back however, what us streamers really don't know is what if any enforcement mechanisms will be used beyond what's already happening because of the DMCA. It could very well be that the point of this clause in the EULA isn't so much about stopping unauthorized streaming as much is it is about allowing Stern to have a reveal stream without running into DMCA problems themselves.

Stern has killed online pinball before it even begins (on their machines at least). Probably a good thing. I wouldn't subscribe if Stern 'do a Deeproot', indeed it would be another reason to not buy Stern.

I could easily see streaming privileges limited to Stern Army members/locations or paying Stern Insiders only.

"bunch of thieves". Bunch of BS. Basically, it's the typical lawyer speak flex. The idea being 'we'll sue you into being broke because we can'.

Once again, it's a step in the direction of, I simply won't buy your product if you subscribe to such nonsense. As a pinball manufacturer, I don't 'need' you to live. Yes you are stuck in the middle, but maybe you should expand upon what you are doing rather than throw your customers under the bus. The customers pay your bills, not the license holders. Be interesting to see where this goes, because people aren't going to stop doing what they are doing, and in the near future overly bullsh!t and overbearing ToS's will come under much higher scrutiny than they have in the past.

What we need are judges who actually throw these frivolous cases out and fine those who bring them. We KNOW what copyright protections are for, and this isn't the intent.

Okay this might be a stupid question (or just coming from a stupid person haha) but if in theory Stern is paying a license per machine shouldn’t that be somewhat taken into consideration for a live stream? In other words if you need yet another license to live stream would you be able to get a reduced rate? Otherwise it might seem something like a double tax if you will.

My argument would also be the live stream is the content of a person playing. That’s the intent. If I were to stream my Metallica in attract mode with their music playing that would be more of an illegal distribution.

I understand another argument about buying a movie and watching it at home versus showing it at a business.

I do like the idea of a live stream mode for pins if this is going to be an issue. Maybe limit to one song and understand going forward this may be the case.

that's not how licenses work. CPR wants to make addam's family playfields? You need the addam's family license, and every actor's permission (and license) if they are part of the artwork on it, plus the license from Rick and planetary pinball, and possibly royalties to the artist.

Has any one actually received a cease and desist letter from stern?

So I'm guessing this is somehow related (and I am only speculating here) to that guy who hacked Stern's SPIKE code, put in the endless hours of hard work, and released the incredible modified JP code with the movie soundtrack & actor's voice callouts. Then streams of the modified code gameplay get posted, then get flagged by the YouTube bots. Eventually this gets the attention licence holder..... who say "What are these monetized pinball streams doing using our intellectual property...... and why does this game we licensed to Stern feature assets that were never negotiated as part of the original licencing agreement? What the hell is going on here?"

If this is what happened (again I'm only speculating), then this likely would have created a huge headache for Stern, who wouldn't be too happy about their SPIKE code being hacked in the first place. Hence this new EULA is released to reign in the rulebreakers, offer Stern some legal protections, and thus agreeing to the licencees wishes in order to maintain relationships & obtain future licenses from them.

The 21st century are certainly interesting times for fair use & copyright infringement laws, that's for sure. SCOTUS is going to have to get involved & rule on it at some point.

No, because when you license content - you license it for explicit purposes and uses. The companies are smart enough to not give out blanket 'do whatever you want' terms.

When you start broadcasting and distributing the content - that is a very different use case then using the content for an in person experience just within the application of the machine. There is also the problem of people using the content for promotion/commercial interests w/o explicit consent.

Just because Stern licensed some content, does not mean Stern (nor any downstream licensee) has carte blanche to do whatever they want with the content.

I really think new stern systems are going to stop you from editing the code by using mmc memory and not removable SD cards, if you want firmware updates you will have to connect your machine to the internet and it will install the new firmware it self. There won’t be any easy way to get access to the firmware in the future like there is now.

It's much simpler than that...

When you license someone's content, they expect you to protect and ensure it's use is kept to the legitimate and approved uses. It's why Stern never offered the 'customize your game' software to start with. This all predates streaming.

The difference is largely how high profile the problem has become. Both streaming and distribution are issues causing this to become far more visible and problematic. With more and more people distributing not just scripts, but whole images of modified stern software... that becomes a huge problem for the topic of ensuring the approved game stays as approved. People have gotten more and more brash with disregarding the fine line between 'self modification' and 'distributing illegal works'.

Now if this were just happening in people's basements or deep within the hobby... Stern can probably claim some level of ignorance and as long as it stays on the down low, it's no big deal unless someone gets their feathers ruffled. But now we have streaming... and stuff from people's basements are going everywhere, and easily caught up in automated dragnets. Now, there is much more light on everything that happens.

Throw all these factors in together... plus maybe some individual content owners getting pissy... and you can see how 'what has always been there' becomes a far more high profile issue.

Easier thing to do is start with verified checksums and signed images. Which they'll have to do anyway when they start consuming content from the web. Otherwise it's braindead simple to fake the update servers to put whatever you want into the update process.

Yea that thing has existed for years, since computer games has used it to stop from cheating at online games.

I still havent had anyone with a view on if this means the end to have games earning cash on location.

On the whole, hey we altered the songs beatles play or similar.
If i´ve allready bought theese songs, what is stopping using and playing them while i play pinball?

The same things that prevent you from taking those CDs you bought and using them as a DJ, or playing them as background music in your shop, etc without paying additional royalties.

Playing music for yourself is not the same as broadcasting or making 'public performances' of it.

We don't know 100% but really makes zero sense that they would do such a thing since that is still a large portion of the consumer base and the license holders know this as well before they make the agreements.

That i can understand, but this eula says i can not change anything, not really in regards to going public with it or not.
So basically if i own the blu-rays of jurrasic park, why shouldn´t i be allowed to se them on a screen?

No one likes a RAT.

Message from the Freeeek Kingdom.

The constraints on modifying the game are not the same discussion about what you can do with your blu ray. You are changing the topic with this hypothetical question.

You want to play your blu ray privately on a screen - you are entitled to do that. When you start talking about putting that in your pinball machine, it's not a question of what your blu ray license entitlement is, but about the terms of use for the pinball software and it's modification.

Aren't there plenty of you tube musicians showing off their cover tunes? Maybe some are not "up to snuff". They can get sued for that?

Any new pin requiring mandatory connection to a network is DOA for me. I will never buy one. The can shove those up their asses.

Typically as long as you aren't monetizing them it's not a big deal, but it seems to be hit or miss.

In the world of pinball streaming however, it is all about the clicks and ad $$. I personally have begun to really hate what youtube has become.

The very short answer is... yes

The more practical outcome is people operate in the terms the license holders allow... either demonetized or by taking their cut. Youtube/etc have already setup the systems to allow the license holders to get paid.

For cover songs, the songwriters are owed.

Is it even legal to put restraints on an item that you buy?
I can see if you publicise the changes or make money from theese alterations, but for personal use?
(ofc it may void warranties but otherwise?)

Also i´m not sure it ever has stated somewhere on a blu-ray wich device im allowed to play it on?

In the US it is..corporations own this country. I know that it is challenged and negated quite a bit in the EU. The only thing that stops it is if you just don't advertise that you did it, but...where's the fun in that? It's a 'look what i can do' world. Lots of very great things have been ceased and desisted because people couldn't help themselves from hyping their product before it was ready.

I believe in rights of owners, don't get me wrong. However, it is a severely abused system.

Criminal: Ouch. Plus you've been raped by stem toppers prices. You'll be popular in the shower.

Reminds me of the southpark episode about clicking itunes agreement.

Not my place to get into the specifics, but I know of atleast one physical mod maker who's receieved a C&D from Stern. This was over a year ago so Stern going after mod makers is nothing new.

Games 20 years ago did not feature exact movie footage on a TV screen neither a full length album worth of music at full fidelity. And they were neither modded by customers to feature any of the media previously mentioned that the equipment in question was agreed to NOT feature (= not payed for to feature).

20 years ago neither saw amature television people turning very much more than semi-pro and profitable on their "hobby". Oh and btw, potentially having world wide distribution "for free".

For better or for worse. Things go hand in hand.

I can say with near certainty that the people earning more than $100 a month from Pinball on Twitch could be counted on one hand. The cost of keeping your streaming gear reasonably up to date ensures that pinball streaming on Twitch is solidly in the red for nearly everyone. For me personally, right now my laptop is on it's last legs and I could use another HDMI camera, capture device, better lighting, and a better stand for mounting everyone... etc... It never ends. If you're all about clicks and ad $$ pinball is a terrible idea.

It doesn't make sense at all that Stern would come after someone selling a mod for their games that uses unlicensed art of another party, though. I'm not talking about firmware mods to the game, but physical playfield or cabinet mods. It sounds like Gary is saying that they can and will, but I don't believe that's in any way legal. That's for the owner of the license to come after you.

Making and selling a Tron wall clock will get Disney after you. Just because you try to use that same Tron wall clock as a topper for your pinball doesn't all the sudden mean *Stern* gets to come after you. Still only Disney's problem.

Stern also can't legally come after you for modifying YOUR OWN pinball machine, I don't care what the damned EULA says. I don't believe they can stop you from streaming it, either, short of the problem with rebroadcasting the *music* from it. And that's only because we treat music differently than any other copyright item.

--Donnie

Unless the owner of the license granted a license to Stern to produce licensed accessories or parts for that property in pinballs. Which.. they do. Also, they are expected to maintain the integretity of the assets and the approved product. So doing things like.. say... telling a translite maker to 'stop' is certainly in the cross-hairs of a company like Stern.

So stern isn't going to go after people making AC/DC toy heads. But if you were making AC/DC toy heads for pinball games... you might be getting a call.

Unless Stern was granted an exclusive license for pinball parts with that content... This comes with the territory of when Stern got into the accessory business. They would have expanded their scope beyond just protecting the content in the game itself.

This is where things get into the details. Yes, there are many topics about owner rights.. and these vary greatly by region. But not all of this is about 'stern legally coming after you' - but instead stern setting boundaries for which they can "punish" you over... like excluding you from things like online services.

Oh I'm not saying they are making bank. I was pointing out that there is a mentality now that it's about trying to make a name and money, rather than just the hobby and doing it and sharing experiences for fun. I get it, I've been in bands, so I'm not really berating it as much as it may sound.

Nintendo now allows YouTubers to use footage and monetize without joining their "partner" program. The change went into effect earlier this year I believe.