New Shiney Fancy Pantsy Rights and License Thread

Nonov Urbizniz

OpenDayZ Rockstar!
Staff member
Here is the briefest summary I can come up with of the recent change to the licence and the updated release of content.

- Arma modding has always had rules, and Bohemia has always shared some content publicly in what are called MLOD releases. These are sample models that allow people in the community who want to make "Mods" for the arma franchise of games. They have always been shared under a general licence that required the models ONLY be used in Arma games AND that any use of them can not be for profit.... FURTHER it states if you use the sample models, you must share the source of your modified models upon request.

- Bohemia historically will also share specifically requested items with some dev groups depending on a perfect storm of: luck, availability, luck, lack of conflict, luck, and luck.... Basically if you ask the right person, at the right time, and they have time, and no one else has already asked... you MIGHT get permission and files... IF they are willing to share what you've asked for AND it's easily accessible for them to share with you... They have other things on their plate like making games.

- DayZ is a mod, it was the work of Dean Hall and a small group of independent developers in their free time... It uses NO MLOD models, and is a true total conversion mod.

- In Arma modding, you can not in any way shape or form use another teams models, code, or assets without their permission. EVER. You will be immediately banned from the forums, blocked from all the reputable communities and shunned in general... Please see this site for more about Author's Rights:

- Private hives, Derivative DayZ mods etc, have ALL.... ALWAYS, been without permission. Until this new batch of licences was released there was no way of using DayZ code or assets in an officially approved manor. PERIOD.

- Anyone working on or running a derivative DayZ mod, even in A2, has been playing with fire, and if they were not aware of it, they were purposefully or pitifully ignorant.

Ok... so now that is the basic background... on to the specifics.

BEFORE.... There was one fairly vaguely worded license for the content released which was essentially ALL the Buildings, Weapons, Vegetation, Vehicles, from Armed Assault (Arma I). It only included one sample character model, and skeleton. and NO terrain (map) sample.

Bohemia also released tools that had another license however I'm not going to touch on that at all. The tools allow you to open and manipulate the files, and allow anyone to either build a ground up world/mod, or to slightly alter existing assets without ever editing or creating models or terrains.

NOW.... There are 3 very specific licenses. APL (Arma Public Licence), APL-SA (Arma Public Licence Share Alike), and DML (DayZ Mod Licence)

1. APL ( - You can use their stuff as a source, and do not need to share. But ONLY in Arma games, and you have to say you used their stuff and you can't get rich off it.

2. APL-SA ( - Same as above, BUT, like the old license if requested you must share the source of your altered files. For example the old license stated the buildings that our group (m1lkm8n mostly) opened and finalized have to be shared as source to anyone who requests them.... I have not had time to go through which license is now applicable.

3. DML ( - You can use their source but you can't get rich, it can only be in Arma 2, and you have to share your changes.

They are all very simple, very clear, very bold, very generous licenses. I think it is enormously generous of Dean Hall and BI to share DayZ Code and source... the learning opportunities sitting in the code represent what would normally be his property and no one else would have ever dug into or learned from.

ANYONE trying to cause a shitstorm about them not offering server files, or changing the license, or feigning shock over BI/DayZ protecting their current ventures is either stupid, or more likely attempting to manipulate the situation for their own financial gain.

Nonov Urbizniz

OpenDayZ Rockstar!
Staff member
Yeah I mean EVERYTHING as far as code additions/changes they've done is now share/share alike...

As far as I understand it this means that Origins HAS to share their server code, all their DayZ Code changes and additions.

Although after having dug through the License there are some other interesting bits...

I think they will attempt to block any persistent MP hive's that they believe are based on the DayZ hive.

The other odd thing that I'll have to do another read through with in mind to see if I missed something, but there is no longer any restriction on any of the PBO's? which is odd... I don't think the models can be touched... but I did not notice it mentioned...

If they attempt to make it somehow inherit to models/maps etc that have been wrapped up in the DayZ mod I would be shocked... but it's not very specific in the difference between code, models, art, or terrain....


Let's wait and see.
I posted on origins forum to request the server file... will see how they react.

But I don't understand why zooombies mod shutdown because of the new license? Maybe pwn0zor could explain us.


Also, could the new license apply to older version of dayz released under the old obscure license?

Ian Banks

New Member
There was never an implicit license for DayZ.

A couple of mods (Skarantor and Sahrani?) asked for and received explicit permission to use DayZ (older versions of it, at least), and received it with very few restrictions.

Most of the new mods (and versions of Skaranator and Sahrani that use newer DayZ versions) were moved onto a 3 month only agreement, but they still had to individually apply and receive explicit permission.

It was never (before) possible to use DayZ without receiving explicit permission, and once the three months is up for the mods that did, the only people that won't have APL-SA applying to them will be Skar/Sara (and only if they use older builds of the DayZ code).

Given that certain organisations have just been pirating DayZ all along, the licence won't change anything.

Also, keep in mind that DayZ Bounty (where you paid to join and were paid for killing) was operating for 12 months after BI announced that they were thinking about asking them not to.


Thanks for the very informative answer! People rarely take time to answer complete and informative answer to forum post! You guys kick ass!

I hope they won't try to kill the modder community since I personally think it's what kept dayz alive. Only time will tell us! But I really would like to read pwnz0r about this since he shut down zooombies.

Ian Banks

New Member
Even if DayZ SA completely dives I think the engine itself will become BIS' preferred non-milsim MMO engine. The "Life" (Island Life, Takistan Life, etc) people will go absolutely nuts over having the new features it has (most of which I don't think people quite understand the scope of yet).

Nonov Urbizniz

OpenDayZ Rockstar!
Staff member
@CommanderRetra, lol, I didn't write the license.... and honestly I think that technically a higher percentage of our work becomes public domain... but that has been our intention from the beginning anyway.

Just want to touch on a few points, that to add to what Ian said.

1. I did inquire and receive authorization from BI to use DayZ code at one point (even in A3), it was however, (I assume) not in line with what Rocket actually wanted. Our mod, has not ever been, or ever will be (afaik) an officially authorized derivative mod. We did everything we could to get these issues raised to the forefront so that solid/clear answers would be issued. I'm sure that was in the plans anyway though.

2. Zoombies, while I can not confirm, likely got shut down for use of the hive, and or for packaging a DayZ Derivative code package with the express intent for it to be used in Arma 3... the license is very well worded to ensure there is not any wiggle room.... although there are portions that are of questionable enforceability.

3. The license attempts/purports to be retroactive... This is again a legal impossibility in most any court, but that is the intention of the license. The implication is that any/all derivative mods currently being distributed are governed by it.

4. I received a notice of rescindment for ALL my specific licenses several weeks ago. There are NO special permissions for ANY group as far as I know, which I believe to be the best course of action.

In summary, I think on a lot of levels the license is purposefully obnoxious in regards to the DayZ stuff, and it also is of extraordinarily questionable enforceability... but it's his stuff... So I'm behind him and BI all the way.

I am an advocate for Author's rights... PERIOD. If an addon author, or whoever wants to not share any of their stuff with anyone... I've got their back... If a group like ours wants to share everything they do... I've got their back... Neither one is the right, or better, or cooler stance...

Respect for people and their feelings about their work isn't an optional or debatable issue in my mind.

The only thing I do not like about the combination of BI's license and contest announcement is it is pie in the sky. There are 100's of deserving modders, who put out work on a regular basis... a monthly more realistic batch of prizes on the same structure would make infinitely more sense to me. I'd rather see 50k a month being given away for 10 months than 500k ONCE.... It's as stupid a decision that could have been made.

It and the license also actively discourage genuine community efforts like Sahrani and the Building project as it makes those the ONLY non-protectable assets there are. You can not work on buildings and call them "yours" but you can on weapons, characters, and vehicles... that's just illogical. (unless I'm missing something)

Lastly, it's makes it VERY easy for critics to pick apart the company. It appears either desperate or lazy. For a company that couldn't hire 2-10 mission makers to release their flagship game with a single player campaign, it seems odd to now offer up this much money to either do the same, or completely change the game from what it's designers have "done"... before they've even finished (I hope?).

I don't know. I love BI, but I'm endlessly confused by their management decisions and direction, and most of all... their stoic response to EVERYTHING... Rapid Response is just not in their lexicon I suppose. I have a feeling someone there is a big fan of slow and st