We’ve shown you it’s on the website.
Ahh, so you have to be logged out, kay.
The links are in the player settings. If you are a new user you get shown what Maximus has shown you, directly and up front. I will also echo his statement on your tone right now.
Has zero relevance.
Privacy policy and Terms of Service must be shown on pages that collect personal information. A landing page that does not do anything than present a button does not need that.
1 Like
So that makes me curious, is the ToS different from Mucklet than it is for Wolfery? Only Mucklet Client seems to be open, so that means the server runs on a different codebase. The TOS and Privacy Links on Wolfery take you to the Mucklet domain.
This is, again, not relevant. Mucklet runs the system Wolfery is built on, you are accessing Wolfery as a service, and its TOS and PP is what you are agreeing to.
Same way you don’t have to agree to a terms of service or licence agreement for the server software of the host you’re accessing, backend systems that have terms or licensing relevant only to the service provider is irrelevant to you.
I’m not entirely sure what is irrelevant to what. I’m just asking questions.
You said the hosting server code is proprietary, so that would need one set of Terms. Wolfery is the name of the particular world hosted on the server, so that has its own terms of service, rules, etc.
But to access it one must use another cloud-based service—the Mucklet— which also runs on a server, thus is SAAS, thus should probably have its own terms of use.
So it’s not just the client that is in question; it’s the world server that has the database of objects which comprise the virtual world. Two different code bases. Two different services.
I’m not a lawyer but that does sound like two different services working in tandem. If it weren’t, the Wolfery world server code would also have been released as part of the client.
Are the images stored using the same server code as the textual portion? Or is that purely something related to the web-client? You said it was hosted on a server. That’s why I was saying, the Terms of Service for using your instance of Mucklet would be different than if I were to fork the code and access Wolfery from my fork. That sound logical?
No, it is factually incorrect. This is not how the GDPR legislation (which governs the application of PP and TOS in the EU, where the service is hosted) regulates this. GDPR does not deal with individual pieces of software, it deals with an entity providing a service to an end user. The combination of software, associated terms of service of that software, and any policies therein, does not apply to the end user.
You are accessing a service provided by Mucklet AB. Mucklet AB is providing you with a Terms of Service and Privacy Policy relevant to accessing that service. Which domain is accessed, where information is stored and how (other than as specified in PP) is, again - not relevant to an end user.
Heh 
I was talking about logic, not GDPR. ;3 Any government who thinks they can legislate something beyond their control is not logical. The Internet is far beyond what any particular nation can lawmake against. The cat’s out of the bag. The Internet is the most illegal thing ever invented. It’s like the Gutenberg Press.
Anyways! It’s your guys’ property. You do you.
The situation is pretty much the same with Inkbunny (except no separate client).
Technically, IB’s server-side software is called Harmony. This is mentioned in the footer. It has releases of versions, but it is not currently licensed to you (though it might someday be AGPL); it’s owned by the service provider (me).
Inkbunny’s terms of service are in Harmony’s source code (aside from policies on the wiki incorporated by reference). But the service is called Inkbunny and the terms are for it, not for Harmony. You don’t have an agreement with Harmony, or with, say the Metapix domain (also owned by me) via which images are served, or CloudFlare R2, or Oracle; they’re technical details.
I agree as a new user it was somewhat confusing because some stuff is visibly on a separate domain, but it isn’t “two entities” with subprocessor agreements. If at some point separate people start running different realms using Mucklet I imagine this might change and the terms and policies may become separate.
1 Like
Common sense and “logic” does not trump reality. GDPR is the legislation under which these things operate, whether you think that is appropriate or not.
The internet is not the wild west. It is most decidedly not lawless, it is frequently legislated in numerous ways in various countries, and thinking what one does on the internet is unprosecutable is folly.
You are, however, fully entitled to believe what you will on that topic.
That’s exactly what I said.
Hi all,
I wanted to keep the policy topic ‘clean’ for discussion and this tangented pretty hard. Not closing the thread, just splitting it off.
6 Likes
Yeah but just to keep things clear, for anyone looking at this split thread and wondering what started it, this was specifically about legal liability for hosting erotic images of fictional, impossible-to-exist in real life, non-human characters for the purpose of character profiles, which is a core component of Wolfery.
Y’know like… what’s the age of consent for a lion cub? That sorta thing.
It got to the point where I suggested, if having it on a server made the owner uncomfortable, host it somewhere else. GreenReaper offered to host it on his server (I think?) but then now we’re talking about it not being a valid “legal defense” … a legal defense for a case that hasn’t even arisen, nor do I think has an attorney even been consulted as to the possibility of that even happening.
So yeah I’m at a complete loss at this point.
Let me ask this: Are there any recent cases pertaining to the laws you’re concerned with that have been prosecuted against hosts serving anthropomorphic fictional drawings in the EU?
I see there are a lot of assumption, and interpretations of my intentions that I don’t recognize myself in or agree with. But I am happy to clarify if needed. Though, I will keep myself out of discussion if possible.
And it really is as I wrote initially in this thread:
I could ask myself exactly what sort of aspects is behind that feeling. But in the end, it does not change much for me. I wish to feel comfortable in what I store on the servers I am responsible for. (EDIT: And in extension, to be comfortable with how the game works.)
As for Mucklet, Wolfery, licenses, open-source, proprietary, infrastructure, code base, cool API gateways, and other such things, I am happy to answer to questions if you have any!
1 Like
Well that’s good to know, because the more people who chimed in on your behalf, the more I think was being assumed and conjectured.
nod
In general, I think most chime-ins are quite correct, though (haven’t read them all, to be honest >_< ).
After all, many of the posters have been around from the earliest days of Wolfery, helping me out with GDPR questions, hosting issues, networking troubles, and whatnots. So, they know me quite well.
I just wanted to clarify that - in the end - it is mainly about me feeling comfortable with what I am responsible for.
4 Likes