• Hi Guest!

    We are extremely excited to announce the release of our first Beta1.1 and the first release of our Public AddonKit!
    To participate in the Beta, a subscription to the Entertainer or Creator Tier is required. For access to the Public AddonKit you must be a Creator tier member. Once subscribed, download instructions can be found here.

    Click here for information and guides regarding the VaM2 beta. Join our Discord server for more announcements and community discussion about VaM2.
  • Hi Guest!

    VaM2 Resource Categories have now been added to the Hub! For information on posting VaM2 resources and details about VaM2 related changes to our Community Forums, please see our official announcement here.

VaM 1.x Concern about removal of interactive assets and impact on the VaM community

Threads regarding the original VaM 1.x

Frief

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2020
Messages
129
Reactions
1,631
Hi everyone,

I’d like to raise a concern that currently affects not only my own work but potentially many other creators as well.

Over the last few days, I’ve been informed by the moderation team that all of my resources containing .cs files — basically, every interactive or script-based asset — are being unpublished due to alleged “license violations.”
The claim is based on the idea that some of my scripts follow the same general structure as the CUA Editor Tutorial by Hazmhox, which was released years ago as a public learning example.

To clarify:
For me a tutorial is a learning guide, not a proprietary codebase.
It demonstrates the basic structure of an MVRScript plugin — exactly the same pattern used by practically every plugin on the Hub.
Nevertheless, this standard structure is now being interpreted as “copyright-protected code,” and I’m being asked to relicense or remove everything that follows it.

The result is that all of my interactive assets — including long-standing ones used as dependencies in countless scenes — are now being taken offline.
That means many community-made scenes will no longer function.

All of my work has been created voluntarily, without payment, and shared freely to help others.
Being asked to retroactively rewrite or relicense code that follows a common VaM standard feels unreasonable and ultimately harmful to everyone who contributes free content to this platform.

If the CUA Editor Tutorial’s basic structure is now considered protected intellectual property, then every plugin author on this platform could be affected.
This kind of interpretation risks discouraging future creators from making or sharing anything interactive at all — which would be a huge loss for the VaM community as a whole.

meaning every creator who has used or learned from that tutorial would have to list it as a credit and adopt its CC BY-SA license.
That would include the majority of interactive resources currently on the Hub.

Frief
 
Code is intelectual property just like images, photos, etc. Same if I were to use one of your resources, make modifications and share it, I would need to follow the license you picked.
Based on what you wrote, that is what was asked: to follow the license terms, or rewrite, or be unpublished (potentialyl banned) for breaking a legal requirement.
 
Code is intelectual property just like images, photos, etc. Same if I were to use one of your resources, make modifications and share it, I would need to follow the license you picked.
Based on what you wrote, that is what was asked: to follow the license terms, or rewrite, or be unpublished (potentialyl banned) for breaking a legal requirement.
No, simply not in this case.

We’re not talking about someone’s creative work being reused — we’re talking about core structural elements that are defined within VaM’s own MVRScript framework.
These patterns aren’t “borrowed” from another creator — they’re part of the scripting foundation that every VaM plugin must follow in order to function at all.

If that were truly “intellectual property” in the same sense as an image or model, then every single plugin on this platform would already be in violation — because all of them rely on the same MVRScript-defined structure, not on code invented by any individual tutorial.

I fully respect license terms for creative or original work, but this is different.
What’s being called “copied code” here is simply the technical skeleton that VaM itself requires.
Treating those mandatory structures as copyrighted material is both incorrect and harmful to the community.

Frief
 
Back
Top Bottom