Microsoft Will Start Banning Players From All Private Minecraft Servers (arstechnica.com) 78
Since its initial release over a decade ago (and even following Microsoft's 2014 acquisition of developer Mojang), Minecraft has let players create private servers where they're in full control of what behaviors (and players) are allowed. Next week, though, Microsoft is set to roll out a new update that lets it ban a Minecraft player from all online play, including private servers and those hosted on Microsoft's subscription-based Realms plan. From a report: Earlier this week, Microsoft launched a pre-release version of Update 1.19.1 for the Java Edition of Minecraft, which will go live for everyone on Tuesday, June 28. That update will add the ability to report users who abuse the game's chat system and allow for "reported players [to be] be banned from online play and Realms after moderator review." On a recently updated "Why Have I been Banned from Minecraft?" help page, Microsoft notes that banned players will also get a message when they "sign into Minecraft on any platform (non-Java Edition) [aka "Bedrock"]." That message will clarify that "banned players are not allowed to play on servers, join Realms, host or join multiplayer games, or use the marketplace. They are also not allowed to access Minecraft Earth. Xbox players will no longer have access to their worlds [emphasis added]."
They don't want the liability (Score:3, Insightful)
Imagine a closed Realms server used for "grooming" of minors or outrageous racism, but doesn't get attention from law enforcement (the should be a Minecraft division or MMORG division of the FBI I guess?!). Someone complains to Microsoft and there is no process to cover it, or to manage it. Microsoft gets sued, huge negative headlines, etc. etc. and large costs.
Seems pretty sensible - after all, it is their game and their servers so they can do what they like.
Re:They don't want the liability (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but it's not their computer.
I'm not sure why Microsoft should have control over someone else's computer, when doing so without authorization is a federal felony. If someone is caught with illicit materials on their computer, it isn't Microsoft that goes to jail. I'm not sure why anyone would believe Microsoft is liable for what someone else does with Minecraft, when they haven't been held accountable for malware, viruses, terrorist planning, illicit materials, etc... that occurs using their other products.
Re: (Score:2)
what does COPA say their responsibilities are? And remember they don't have to operate at the minimum of COPA standard, they just have to meet and exceed that standard. Minecraft's revenue is driven by children, so protecting access to their revenue is going to drive their decisioning about protections they put in place.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't care what COPA, or any US laws, says their responsibilities are. They don't apply to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They don't want the liability (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but it's not your software.
Microsoft has control over whether the Minecraft software will be able to access other Minecraft software, or serve as a host for content provided to other Minecraft software. You provided authorization by installing the software, and under an authorization that's contained in the license agreement terms and conditions that you've never read.
You're otherwise in as fully in control of your computer as you were before, so you're free to engage in behaviors that would get you banned in Minecraft elsewhere, just not in the licensed environment that you definitely do not own.
Re: (Score:2)
So companies can do anything they want in your country even if not specified in the EULA?
Re: (Score:2)
No, we have laws. You know, what your country also used to have before you outsourced that to corporations.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure that your laws don't prevent private services from banning assholes for engaging in asshole behavior against others using those services. Particularly when they're still able to use the service to play in their very deserved world-of-one.
Feel free to demonstrate otherwise, however. I'd be interesting to say the least.
Re: (Score:2)
Our laws also don't prevent me from creating a service where I and my friend can be assholes towards one another as much as we please. And even ban people who don't want to be assholes.
My garden party, my rules.
Re: They don't want the liability (Score:2)
And where do you live? Germany? Try playing a videogame at all without somebody saying "papers, please!"
Re: (Score:3)
Austria.
We have the same language as Germany (ok, almost) but a very different mentality. You see, over here, the government issues laws and the populations heeds laws. They are not necessarily the same laws, though. But as long as neither side flaunts it in the face of the other, either side can pretend that they get what they want.
It's a weird form of compromise that is called the Austrian solution [wikipedia.org] (and no, sorry, that text is only available in German, nobody outside of Austria has any use for that kind o
Re: (Score:2)
Then create such a service, by which I mean literally create such a service, do not install a Minecraft server and declare it your creation.
Their garden, their rules.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but it's not your software.
Microsoft's software keeps downloading porn onto my system.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not sure what you are necessarily trying to say here. This article is talking about how MS is taking away the freedom private server operators and users of those services enjoyed before. Even if you are only trying to access your own server instance on your own LAN, with no internet involved. But even if you were connected over internet, Microsoft never acted as a host or gateway. If I connect to Hypixel, no MS owned hardware is involved in that transaction.
Re:They don't want the liability (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, it is.
If you installed Windows 11, and let them take control of your TPM2 chip, then Microsoft now gets to decide what you may and may not install and run, and from there it's barely a hop for them to decide under what conditions you may run software.
You have literally handed functional ownership of your PC to Microsoft -- the organization least qualified to be given that privilege.
Oh, I'm sure you "agreed" to that in the shrinkwrap EULA...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but it's not their computer.
It is, whenever you buy a client-server programmed game or drm infested game you have de-facto given up your computer. This began in 1997 with ultima online, until that point all AAA PC games were local applications. After UO, they starded to back end the shit out of everything and steal basic multiplayer out of games and sell them back to a gullible public under the mmo marketing moniker. That's why quake 1-3, descent 1-3, Warcraft 1-3, Diablo 1-2, still work, they were local applications. Something t
Re:They don't want the liability (Score:4, Insightful)
We play this game where Congress passes an evil law and then corporations get even more evil because they "have to", in light of the law, go even further. It's transparent bullshit.
Re: They don't want the liability (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
All serious muincrafters play in server instances, even if you are playing the game on the same machine as you run the server. That is still "online" play. Since MC is not built on always online, server authenticated, tech, I assume this code will just be baked into the game code.
Re: (Score:1)
What law? (Score:4, Insightful)
What "law"? The worst arm-twisting of the corporations happens without any actual law — when the law-makers threaten them with "punitive regulations" [washingtonpost.com], if they don't do their bidding — such as suppress the opposition's "hate" speech.
The CEOs then fall in-line because avoiding such punishment is their fiduciary duty, among other things... This whole power to regulate is an awesome way for Congress to side-step the First Amendment, very convenient...
Re: (Score:2)
It took off with He Shall Be Named, progressed to banning entire websites at the network infrastructure level, and has now reached the point that even paid for products are being altered retroactively to implement political correctness filters and punish those deeme
Re: (Score:1)
Yes... Normally, though, the private corporations resist such pressure for fear of losing customers. Or even users. But the threat of regulations is more expensive, than losing a percentage of those... Dorsey didn't like it [vox.com], but had to let it happen, for example.
I think, we need to apply the it to the situations, where government is using others (be it corporations or foreign gove [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Now, that we're done with the "right to an abortion", maybe, this can be the next big legal fight...
Unfortunately, that ruling regardless of what side you take on it, would most likely limit any attempt to use the courts for the purpose you proposed. The SCOTUS ruling was that the US Constitution granted no inherit right to abortion, therefore the courts could not prohibit legislation from the states / fed. Under the same guise, The US Constitution clearly states that the rights it contains are restrictions on the US Government only. Therefore, the courts could not prohibit the independent actions of pri
Fight the power (Score:5, Informative)
You can get your minecraft fix for free by playing any of these free alternatives [opensource.com].
Re: (Score:3)
If that's the case, isn't the better response to block these private servers from Microsoft's public server listing? Let these people have their private servers, but Microsoft doesn't have to advertise or support them. This seems like a really heavy handed thing to do.
Re:They don't want the liability (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems pretty sensible - after all, it is their game and their servers so they can do what they like.
Except these aren't their servers. Sure, some are Microsoft-hosted, but there are thousands of private and individual hosts out there who run Minecraft servers in private data centers, or even locally on their own LANs. To draw an analogy, it'd be one thing for Wordpress to say "if we're going to host your blog, we're not cool with X, Y, and Z content", but it's something entirely different if Wordpress says, "if you run our software on your own servers, we're going to block anything you publish anything about X, Y, or Z". Microsoft appears to be saying that they're going to do the latter, which is crossing a major line.
Supplying the software doesn't entitle them to manage all instances of it. And if you think otherwise, then you have to ask "what's next?". Microsoft PowerPoint shuts itself down if it deems the content unacceptable? Microsoft Excel won't even launch if you work at a company embroiled in a legal battle with Microsoft? This is an incredibly dangerous precedent to silently accept.
Re: (Score:2)
This whole discussion, including your comment, seems ignorant of the fact that Microsoft's minecraft server software is not the only MC server software. So even if the 1.19.1 official server software won't let banned users play, it is pretty clear that their account still exists (otherwise they can't be notified) and the question is what do the other non-official server versions do with that info? If microsoft includes a ban requirement in the terms of service for accessing their account-authentication AP
Re: (Score:2)
That is the liability issue with this. Judges can take one of two stances with online liability.
1) You attempted to moderate the content. Congratulations you have now accepted liability for everything done with said software.
or 2) You attempted to moderate the content. Well at least you tried, its not your fault these bad actors circumvented you.
Re: (Score:2)
But this isn’t even necessarily online content. A parent hosting a Minecraft server on the LAN to play on with their family could find that their child is unable to play because of a Microsoft ban over something the kid said when playing with friends on an entirely different server. It’s fine if Microsoft wants to provide this blocklist as an opt-in feature that server operators can use, but turning it on by default for servers that aren’t even publicly accessible is both unconscionable an
Re: (Score:2)
but there are thousands of private and individual hosts out there
Most likely hundreds of thousands to millions. Since most are completely private, I doubt anyone really has any idea and there is likely no way to tell. But for example, my niece and nephew dont play online but to play together they need to host lan servers on their tablets.
Re: (Score:3)
after all, it is their game and their servers
They're deciding what can happen on private servers now. And people bought this game with part of the premise being that they owned their copy of the game. Now they're finding out that they don't.
If Microsoft took this step to avoid lawsuits, they fucked up.
Re: (Score:2)
No they didn't. Nobody who's ever even begun to read a software EULA can reasonably hold the impression that they own their copy of the software. They own a revocable license.
Microsoft is potentially banning users from mutiplayer use of Minecraft. It's a common industry practice, whether you consider it a good practice or not really doesn't matter, and Microsoft is certainly not fearing lawsuits from people
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Notch promised publicly that when he was done he would give away the source code, not sell it to Microsoft.
Microsoft, as the new owner of the software, should be forced to fulfill Notch's promise. Anything else is fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
Unilateral promises are not enforceable unless you can show detrimental reliance [cornell.edu]. Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As I read it - this ban would stop the client from working on _ANY_ server, not just Microsoft's servers.
Consider this, a small circle of friends has their kids playing on a _PRIVATELY_ owned server. This is NOT Microsoft's server. Somehow one of the kids gets banned -- perhaps their account was hacked (look at all the people getting their instagram and facebook accounts hacked), or more simply someone trolls them and reports them for egregious behavior that triggers the ban -- now that kid is not able to a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Okay, so why stop at minecraft then? What if MS bricked any Windows device that transmits any kind of wrong-think?
Due to their telemetry, MS has the ability to detect this wrong-think, and act accordingly. For example say a bad person jokingly says the magic no-no naughty word privately to a friend -- MS could then prevent that device from accessing the internet.
Brilliant. With their reach and scope, MS could be the internet's hall monitor and keep it safe for POC's, non-CIS genderedkin, and all other ma
Re: (Score:2)
This could also apply to private servers. Microsoft also forces Windows to update, and I think it's for the same reason. Sure, if you dig deep enough you can probably disable it. With Minecraft Server you will probably always be able to hack it with mods to disable the reporting feature (assuming it relies on the server somehow, and isn't entirely client-side, which would be problematic but it sounds unlikely they did it that way). But if there is an incident and Microsoft is sued, now they can show their s
Re: (Score:1)
you can get around it anyway same way they used to mod minecraft shimming new classes into the jar; can use that to redirect the login/authentication on the client/server.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would there be any liability?
Re: (Score:1)
The only reason servers validate against the minecraft signon servers is because people had no reason to disable the code.
This will definitely be needed/used on servers like 2b2t.
Not the cloud I was promiced (Score:2)
Today Cloud Computing, is just a glorified version of a remote hosted model, were the company has control of everything it hosts.
Back about 15 years ago or so, Cloud Computing, was promised as an upgraded version of Distributed Computing, Much like Bit Torrent but for general secure storage and processing, Where you PC was hooked up to a network of other PC's that would share resources with each other with room for vast redundancy.
However people wanted access to the Cloud, but didn't want to share their res
Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (Score:4, Insightful)
I see we have reached the extinguish phase.
Yep, next up, "your" desktop. (Score:2)
I'm sure it will come with some "But think of the CHILDREN!!!" Apple CSAM shit too - you know, as a pretext for anti-piracy, just like the TPM 2.0 requirement. M$ has been buying a LOT of gaming IP, I'm sure they'd like indefinite healthy rents for the rest of your life.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Embrace, Extend, Extinguish (Score:1)
My thoughts too. First they make Java version free with bedrock too. Now this. I'm a little alarmed.
That said the Minecraft servers I run are not vanilla servers but the downstreamed moded server software (papermc in my case).
Oh Goodie (Score:2)
Fuck any and all personality.
Now before I go completely off the handle, I would like some clarification. The post and article aren't completely clear.
Can you join a private Minecraft server directly? Like type in an IP:Port and off to the races. Cause if its that, M$ can continue to fuck themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Then this is no surprise.
Microsoft wants no one to fun or be themselves. They want to only think like a good Microsoft drone.
Re: (Score:2)
Minecraft servers (well, at least the java ones -- that's the only ones I'm familiar with) have always validated that the client connecting is logged in with a valid Mojang, er, Microsoft account.
That said, this could be turned off, but it opened the server up to abuse as accounts were not validated in any way. (Of course, this also allowed people to play even without an account at all -- they just had to download the client from somewhere, and now they can play Mic
Since Microsoft controls the authenticati
Luckily, you can still install an old version (Score:4, Informative)
Minecraft was better back then anyways...
Re: (Score:2)
Many of the best mods need older versions of MC
Misleading headline (Score:1)
The headline makes it sound as if Microsoft is banning private servers.
The description says that Microsoft is just enforcing bans on players who've abused others to be banned across all types of online play, including online play on so-called "private" servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft is effectively private servers, because now users can be banned for engaging in specific activity on your "private" server even if you wish to allow that behavior there. Now all servers are governed by Microsoft's idea of how MC users should behave.
FUD? (Score:1)
I think at the moment there is a lot of FUD. Look at this headline. It sounds like Microsoft is just going to ban everyone. Other posts on reddit focus on a permanent ban screen as if everyone is going to start seeing it every day now.
It's my understanding this system is based on or at least similar to similar systems implemented elsewhere in the Xbox Live ecosystem and in Bedrock as well. I have heard Bedrock players similarly unhappy with their system and some players complaining about false bans.... but
Re: (Score:3)
Poor kids. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Just in case (Score:5, Informative)
And as usual, when you're sufficiently fed up with MS and its proprietary bullshit, try the Open Source alternative [minetest.net].
Re: (Score:2)
minetest is an impressive effort, but it's not a direct replacement for minecraft, and when I've tried to make it that in the past I've never really been able to get a satisfactory set of addons which accomplish it convincingly.
In particular, people play mc because that's where the people are.
NYI (Score:2)
Want freedom? Use FOSS. No excuses, this is why. (Score:3)
Games are toys.
Games are not necessities.
Don't like proprietary rules? Vote with your feet/keyboard etc.
Stop wanting what inherently sucks not to suck because trying to fix an enemy system merely rewards the enemy with revenue it would not otherwise obtain.
It's Minecraft, get a life instead.
Dear Microsoft Shills (Score:2, Insightful)
Please tell us again how Microsoft has "changed", and that our jokes from the 90's are irrelevant.
MS is Going to have one Hell of a Battle (Score:3)
I don't think the average observer will realize how big of a war this is going to start, so as a avid Minecrafter and observer of the general ecosystem I till try to explain.
One thing I want to start off with is the technical limitations of this. MC is not a heavily phone home game. Basically everything is done client side, that is why all servers have huge issues with cheating, even online most things are done on the client. And other than signing in once, you almost never talk to the MS servers, even when playing online. Furthermore, he was a huge history of using non new versions. Most servers are stuck on modified 1.8.9 (like 5 year old MC), Hypixel for example is built on a very very modified 1.7.x but allows clients from 1.7 to the latest version. We have been just picking and choosing what version to run for the entire life of MC, and for online play is often does not matter too much, so MC will basically have to start forcing people to use the modern version if they actually want any control, but almost no serious servers run the modern version.
Secondly, how important online play is. Even ignoring the huge communities around Hypixel and the like. Even ignoring that friend groups and communities often house their own semi private to private servers to play together. Serious MCers will often play in private solo servers for many technical reasons. Also as something explicitly called out, realms is advertised and used primarily as a private instance. you pay MS to host your solo world so you can join from anywhere and invite your friends over. These are not public lobbies.
Thirdly, there not only is a large adult community playing MC, but we have a long history of ostentatiously adult online communities, which we call anarchy servers. Some of the oldest, longest running, most famous, and most popular servers explicitly allow things that will soon be bannable offences.
TL;DR: Yes millions of MCers are 12 yos, but we have a huge community of adults that explicitly require some of these bannable offences to continue playing the games they play and hosting the servers they host. And MS is going to have huge technical and legal troubles trying to prevent consenting adults from hosting and joining their servers, some of them hosted on their own LANs.
I was around when Microsoft first appeared. (Score:2)
Microsoft account? (Score:2)