I assume you are located in the US with a legal system that is based on law suits and precedents so I understand why you want to have that in your terms for scripters, but you basically ask people to either stop posting scripts here or do an intentional breach of contract every time they post the script here too. The only thing they have as a protection is a post where you say that you will look in the other direction if they do.
The idea sounded good at first and it’s of course up to everyone to decide, but I prefer to release my scripts here for free and not breach any contract intentionally every time because I don’t want my scripts behind a paywall. If they had been free for any registered user to download and also possible to use while streaming videos, just like with scripts premium, it would have been another matter.
My scripts can be used by anyone (SLR-premium, SLR-not-premium, Subscriber to the original Studio).
I’m not getting paid (and I don’t mind).
I have absolutely no liability because I don’t believe that Studios could sue me for doing scripts. I understand that it’s different for a business like SLR, or maybe in other countries. but it doesn’t apply to me.
Option #1: I put my scripts only on SLR.
My scripts can only be used by SLR-premium.
SLR-not-premium and subscribers to the original Studio lose their access.
Essentially, as others said, my scripts are not free anymore. They are now behind a paywall. Only thing is that, by choice, I’m not getting a cut of the price.
Option #2: I put my scripts on SLR and I also release them for free on eroscript.
My scripts can be used by anyone (SLR-premium, SLR-not-premium, Subscriber to the original Studio), like before.
It’s easier for SLR-Premium members to find and use my scripts.
I’m not getting paid (and I don’t mind), like before.
I’m now living in a ‘grey zone’ and I’m liable for a breach of contract with SLR.
Let’s be clear, I’m not interested in option #1 at all.
I would be happy with option #2 if not for the last part. At the very least, the liability for the breach of contract would need to be clearly specified, like “SLR can kick you out of the framework”.
If the liability is not defined (because others studios could sue me or something), I don’t know why I would subject myself to it.
I am in the US and have followed the piracy stuff for a long time. This whole discussion misses a couple points that I have witnessed in a couple different time frames.
Creating scripts for any content can be legally attacked in law in the USA if you do not have an agreement / contract with the legal owner of the content. It is up to them if they want to pay for a lawyer. In the recent past you had to be a bigger fish for that kind of treatment as a lot of judges don’t like lawyer fishing expeditions. They have to show some lost revenue or damage to their reputation. (Porn reputation!) Any competition with script produced by the creator of original content would be loss of revenue to them. Using their name or the name of the content could be damage in extreme situations. SLR can claim that now.
So the very straight legal views provided by doublevr are not wrong IMO.
If you sign a contract to provide scripts to SLR for free or tokens or access you will have different legal requirements beyond what exist in my topic 1. For studios contracted by SLR, they say they will insulate you from prosecution.
I would read the SLR document real carefully and if joining this free offer, I would make sure i could simultaneously script unrelated to SLR content to distribute any way I wanted. Script their content for them and other content for anyone.
Yet again I think this thread took the wrong course just like the other thread that was hi-jacked by @Husky and a kind in the past.
The idea is to make things work for everyone. There are some legal and business aspects in place yet there’s always a way if people are looking for one. The intention of this thread was to look for options without getting into extreme cases.
It seems denial and blaming someone for hearing things that are not liked here are prevalent yet it doesn’t bring us anywhere.
I think everyone would be more agreeable if your solution wasn’t to put the free scripts behind the Script Premium paywall.
If someone could submit free scripts to SLR and they’d be available for free to anyone (maybe simply requiring an SLR account), then the scripter could still create a post here and just put the link to SLR instead of uploading the script here.
Currently it seems you’re asking scripters here to put the scripts they currently provide for free to the community behind an SLR paywall instead. I’m not sure why you assumed it would go well.
From a consumer point of view, I totally agree with this statement. Free should be free to access.
I have have no problems paying for scripts either, and have done so extensively.
But it isn’t really “free” behind a paywall.
I’m not against the paywall per se as long as the same scripts are allowed to be free elsewhere. It became a problem when that would be against the SLR terms of agreement that you have to sign to be allowed to publish on SLR and get your free premium access as a compensation.
It’s interesting to talk about the potential. I have yet to contribute anything to this wonderful community other than my opinion but have my problems with the bigger picture.
Maybe @doublevr could elaborate on why listing the free scripts for 0.00$ on SLR when logged in with a free account would be a problem. I don’t really see one from the technical side - if I can buy scripts for 3.99 with just a free account I also can for 0,00$.
If it would be because of Studio percentages per script then this shows a completely new problem for scripters - each free script would still take a cut for the studios from the Premium Script Subscription leaving less for the scripters.
If this isn’t the case then I personally wouldn’t mind needing to download free scripts from SLR with my free account after seeing them posted here. And I would probably check if a resub would be interesting for me much more often which is a huge gain for SLR that I think is also underrepresented in the arguments put here before.
I also didn’t quite get if the free premium would be the premium+scripts or only premium - as I see it, SLR might as well invest the additional 25% per scripter to provide them with real added benefit in return. Just giving access to their portfolio is only a mere necessity…
It looks like putting the free scripts behind a double paywall (normal subscription + scripts subscription) might create a lot of confusion for your customers. Will they be informed that some of the scripts can be accessed for free via other sources? If no they might feel cheated not knowing about eroscripts and in fact it might damage your reputation in a sort. Just something to consider when implementing feature like this.
A script available on ES or any other place doesn’t make it the same script you get on SLR. It’s like a dollar in the US, Russia or China has very different value considering what is available in that place. Like in China you can’t buy a ton of things that are available in the US. Even Facebook isn’t opening there, nor Wikipedia. Another example is a dollar before tax and after tax. The same thing can be very different within different contexts.
SLR is one stop place for a user with with very unique experience available nowhere else thanks to vast library, SLR app, Haptics connect, all the things we do on top of content and all the cool things we are working on. Another example might be Netlix having a movie that is free elsewhere. That shouldn’t be a problem for the Netlfix nor a user.
Also with upcoming update Haptics Connect will be available for active SLR Scripts Premium users.
I’m just trying to understand here, because if this proposal is a hit or miss depends a lot on the details.
Assumptions:
I create a script for a video that is available at SLR, but also at another web site (original studio or SLR competitor).
I create two versions of the script with different metadata, one version has a video URL pointing at SLR and the other version points at another web site. The points in the scripts are identical.
Would that be considered two different scripts according to your second quote and thereby not a violation of the SLR license/contract?
The second option is not viable. It’s always the same script as long as it’s the same creator even with different meta data in place.
We should be working on a contract that won’t prohibit posting scripts elsewhere. It’s on script creator own risk if any such happens and everything about that will have nothing to do with SLR.
So the first one.
It seems as important development and I should update OP with that
What I meant is that if the contract prevents from posting elsewhere, the paywall is an issue.
But since doublevr clarified that the contract wouldn’t, it seems that would leave scripters posting here in a no worse legal position than before, so that seems to be a good solution (of course, depending on the exact wording of the contract).