Discuss the Minecraft franchise beyond gameplay. Share feedback and ideas about the overall Minecraft experience and topics that don't fit into a more specific category.

← Minecraft Franchise
38
Follow

Strengthen the control of the Minecraft EULA in mainland China

MC's EULA is still applicable in mainland China. It is due to the lack of effective legal control, so a considerable number of players have not complied with it. There are the following: 1.Many players in the java edition sell mods there 2.Community is full of contradictions 3.etc I hope Mojang Shanghai Studio can increase its legal business，in order to create a better community
Avatar
Registered User shared this idea

7 Comments

Post a new comment:

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Date Votes
Sorted by oldest
  • 1
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    If selling Java Edition Mods is evidence that mainland China lacks “effective legal control”, how do you explain SpigotMC’s dedicated Premium Resources section, where paid Minecraft plugins have been sold openly for years?

    And before arguing “plugins are not mods”: in the context of the Minecraft EULA, Mojang explicitly includes plugins within its definition of “Mods”, so they are relevant to a discussion about EULA enforcement.

    Paid Minecraft mods and plugins are clearly not unique to mainland China. They exist openly in international Minecraft communities as well. So why is this being presented specifically as a problem of Chinese law, rather than a broader question of how Mojang enforces its own EULA?

    Framing a global issue around one country in this way does little to improve EULA enforcement. Instead, this kind of framing risks marginalizing and stigmatizing an entire national community within the global Minecraft ecosystem, while creating hostility where there should be cooperation between players and developers.

    If paid Mods violate the EULA, the consistent position should be to ask Mojang for clear and uniform enforcement worldwide, rather than presenting the issue as evidence that mainland China lacks “effective legal control”.

  • 1
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    我只能说网易把中国版mc管的太烂了，游戏不能离线启动，宣传图用ai制作，模组付费的强制定价到3块，免费的模组进行搜索根本就是查无此人（甚至原封不动的输入一遍免费模组名字也不行），而且在官方的模组都要钱的情况下，还不能自己导入模组（这点其实是对的），而且这还是一年前网易工作室人员大换血了一波后的结果

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    非常支持

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    Yeah,it's very difficult to understand why some people sold modpacks in a high price,such as Guangzhou Baiqie Chicken (“广州白切鸡”）.So, I think it's worthwhile to use Minecraft EULA in Mainland China.

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    I'd like to add context as a player in mainland China. EULA violations here aren't isolated — they've become widespread and normalized.

    Examples:

    1. Mods re-uploaded to Chinese netdisks (Quark, Baidu Wangpan), stripped of original links and licenses — often tied to the netdisks' "new-user acquisition" campaigns, where uploaders embed referral links and earn rewards for every sign-up they funnel to the platform.
    2. Custom skins/models for cosmetic mods sold openly.
    3. Developers gating mods behind paywalls on patronage platforms like Aifadian (爱发电).

    My real concern is the attitude: for many here the EULA is a dead letter, treated as nonexistent, while paid mods are defended as legitimate creator income. This steadily erodes the share-first culture of China's Java modding community.

    我想以一名中国大陆玩家的视角补充背景。这里的 EULA 违规并非个例，而是已普遍化、被视为常态。

    例如：

    1. 模组被重新上传至夸克、百度网盘等，剥离原始链接与授权；这常与网盘"拉新"活动挂钩——上传者嵌入自己的邀请链接，每拉来一个新注册用户便获得现金或会员奖励，使二次分发变成牟利漏斗。
    2. 为外观模组设计的皮肤/模型被公开售卖；
    3. 开发者通过爱发电等平台将模组设为付费墙，付费者方可下载。

    我真正担忧的是态度：对许多玩家，EULA 形同虚设、被当作不存在，而付费模组却被辩护为创作者的正当收入。这正持续侵蚀中国 Java 模组社区"共享优先"的文化。

     

  • 0
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    I vote in favor of this, but I need to clarify one point. This is merely an agreement between players and the official organization. So, assuming a player breaches this agreement, it would be difficult for the official organization to impose penalties or take similar measures. This is especially true for cross-border breaches. Unless there is a subsidiary or similar entity to punish the player, which currently seems unlikely. Take China as an example: NetEase holds the official license for Minecraft there, so it would be nearly impossible for the company to establish a subsidiary in China. Would they do the same in other countries? I’d say it’s hard to say—the same logic applies. If taking such action benefits the company, they’ll do it; if not, they won’t. (For instance, when M Company sued a leaker, they did so through their subsidiary in the leaker’s country. This was largely because their interests were harmed, and it was also to protect the community.) Now let’s look at the issue of charging for mods. If we set aside the practice of charging for mods overseas, NetEase’s decision to charge becomes quite easy to understand. Of course, it’s about making money (the Bedrock Edition has done the same). What business is it of the official team if NetEase makes money? Right? So if they were to force this issue, it might backfire.

  • 1
    Registered User commented
    Comment actions Permalink

    网易真他妈傻逼了，又违反forge LGPL开源协议。