Prepare to return to Wales and experience picturesque and challenging border territory with Bossman Games’ stunning Welsh Marches route, which is coming soon to Train Simulator! READ MORE
I am so happy to see this. If only we had a proper GWR 6000 or LMS 6201 to recreate Bulmer’s trips. I am excited for the route and have been for quite some time. Cheers, GWR5029
The Class 50 was made in conjunction with Armstrong Powerhouse When AP have released a product via Steam, Class 40, Class 90, Class 205 it has been a single liveried version Peter
What is in their EULA which means you won't buy the route? You can change the route for your own use if you wanted to - just not upload the changes Peter
The main issue I have is the bold part: I like creating scenarios for the Steam Workshop and it's often one of the main reasons I buy a route. There are also products on Steam which I was involved in developing. Firstly it means I cannot use any of the products I was involved in to create scenarios for the Steam Workshop for The Marches, because that would fall under 'indirect commercial gain,' as someone may purchase one of those DLCs to play my scenarios. But in addition to that, because I have other scenarios for other routes which make use of products I was involved in creating, if someone was to play my scenarios on The Marches and then, because they enjoyed them, play my scenarios for other routes, they may purchase a DLC I was involved in creating for those other scenarios; Thus that 'may indirectly result in commercial gain' and be in breach of the Bossman Games EULA. The way Bossman Games have written their EULA prevents me from creating scenarios on the Steam Workshop for their products. When a lot of the enjoyment comes from creating scenarios to share with others, scenarios which are freely available on the Steam Workshop and in fact add value to Bossman Games' product, I find it in bad taste that I should have to write for permission to create and share them. I am also suprised that DTG permit this EULA in addition to their own as it interferes with their intended use of the Workshop. The EULA is also badly written, clearly not by a lawyer and its wording probably goes beyond the boundries of what was actually intended when it was written. But still, legal action costs money, and I don't intend to fight a lawsuit for a handful of Workshop scenarios, however small the risk.
Which is understandable I think you are overthinking this. Whatever you made it would not appear in a Welsh Marshes scenario and even if it appears in a scenario for a different route then it cannot be in violation of the Bossman Games EULA as you are not making anything off the WM route.. Peter
I do overthink things, it's true. The problem is the indirect bit. If people play my DLC free scenarios on The Marches, enjoy them, look for more by the same author, find, for example, my scenarios for the Riveria line which require DLC, and they then purchase a DLC I financially benefit from to play the scenarios, I've indirectly received commercial gain. If I didn't create those scenarios on the The Marches, the hypothetical player would never have searched for other content by myself and purchased my DLC to use it. This is where the 'may' bit comes in, none of this even has to happen, it only has to hypothetical according to the EULA. This comes down to a badly written EULA, as the above is probably not what they intended when writing it, but because they didn't have input from a lawyer, they've created an EULA which extends beyond their intended scope. The guys working in contracts at a TOC I used to work at had a saying, 'if someone is daft enough to draft, without input from a lawyer, their own unenforceable contract, they'll be also daft enough to pay a lawyer to take it to court for them, so never enter into it.' If you go and look at their EULA on their website: https://www.bossmangames.co.uk/terms-and-conditions.html They have even spelt the word 'illegally' wrong in the EULA. If I was DTG I'd have told Bossman Games to either get a lawyer involved and have it properly written or get rid of it. I have no problem with people trying to protect their work, but if their work is that valuable, then it's worth paying a lawyer and having it done properly.
I don't know what you made but lets call it a Class 123 Dmu So you make a Scenario for the Welsh Marshes route that only had default and DTG stock. You make a Scenario for DTGs South Wales Coastal which includes the Class 123 - I see it and buy the Class 123. I decide to run the Class 123 on My TS2020 on any route I wish - how can you be held to blame what I do with it?
If you didn't play my scenario for The Marches you wouldn't have searched for my other scenarios, seen the SWC scenario and then bought the Class 123. So my Marches scenario resulted in a chain of events that led you to purchase the Class 123 and put money in my pocket. Therefore, I indirectly profited from The Marches DLC, breaching the EULA.
Update: I just visited the Bossman Games website and they have removed the EULA (I quoted above) from it. Now the only EULA is the one in the manual, which is a bit more reasonable:
It's obviously irrelevant now it's gone, but if that EULA was only on the Bossman website I'd assume it only applies/applied to products on the website. It really wouldn't be realistic for a purchase on Steam to tie you into to some terms and conditions on a third-party website without prominent text pointing it out. If nothing else Steam has a designated place on a product page to highlight "Requires agreement to a 3rd-party EULA" so if they hadn't done that then it's pretty tenuous anyway.