#using ‘content’ and ‘creators’ solely to avoid excluding anyone

[ainulindaelynn]

@staff

After reading the strategic plan posted today, I want to offer some constructive criticism about retaining users from someone who's relatively new around here.

I joined Tumblr less than a year ago and agree that there’s steeper learning curve than other social media sites... but am a bit baffled by the disconnect. I want to be clear about what made this site hard for me as a new user and propose some easy fixes, because I think it’s pretty straightforward.

Suggestions in blue.

1. Confusion about Reblogging

The etiquette for reblogging was the most anxiety-inducing part of getting started. The language was a bit confusing, coming from non-tumblr blog culture. It also took me a while to understand that there was a difference between reblogging and reposting. There's (rightly) so much animosity for reposting, but to an outside perspective, they seem like the same term, which discourages engagement. Once I realized reblogging is the norm and creators ENJOY reblogs - that it's not theft and their name stays attached, linking directly to them - everything became simpler. There are always three names floating at the top of a post, but who the extra two are is something you pick up along the way without explanation. Understanding earlier would have been a game changer. A few more tutorials at launch would have made a huge difference: This is your blog. You REBLOG things here - that's normal. And here's the basic structure of a post. That would have made the transition a little smoother. Also, if you want to go above and beyond, adding a quick blurb about the difference between reblogging 👍 and reposting 👎 would probably ease tensions on a few fronts.

In short, Tumblr is ahead of most other mainstream SM sites when it comes to prioritizing creators > content and long-term, that's a strategic advantage. Keeping that culture in place requires a little more explanation on the front end though.

2. Confusion about Interacting

Another thing that baffled me in the beginning is that on other sites, hashtags are largely ignored except for organizational purposes, so I didn’t even notice people were leaving their commentary there at first. Now that I know, I actually LOVE that quirk of this site. It’s an introvert’s dream. Every other social media site is pushing other people's opinions in your face all the time. It’s exhausting. Here, I only see people’s comments if I CHOOSE to. If I want, I can interact with the content directly without being distracted by the noise around it. This is a huge draw, not only as a scroller, but also as a poster. I never (NEVER) post on any other site, because I know it’s going to bring it to the top in everyone’s feed and I don’t want to bother with everyone else’s opinions ABOUT my opinions - the endless cycle that inevitably leads to conflict in common spaces like this. Every post will be scrutinized and picked apart on other sites. Here on tumblr, I can put my thoughts on a post and no one sees it except the original poster and people who are *actively* curious about what I think. It’s a system that allows less pressure around posting and fosters more diversity of thought. It creates an environment that makes contributing easy. It’s very, VERY freeing and very, VERY rare in social media.

I wouldn’t mind seeing some rethinking about the way tags are handled if it supports the search engines, but now that I understand the way Tumblr uses them, I actually find this to be one of its greatest strengths and can’t imagine a way to preserve that quality while rearranging the tag system. As is, adding an ‘Anatomy of a Post’ tutorial like I mentioned would clear confusion about this and point new users toward the easiest way to interact with a post.

3. Confusion in Connecting

I did struggle to connect to content and communities at first, but it stemmed from a basic lack of understanding about how the site works. Once I found the pathways, other users pulled me in. Connection actually happens more easily here than on any other site I’ve EVER been on. Tumblr has incredibly useful tools for this; they just aren’t explained to beginners. The tag system is a great entry point. When I realized that I could search a tag and chronologically see EVERY SINGLE POST that had ever existed for it, it was magical. Now that I follow tags (and know the Your Tags tab exists… 🙃), new creators pop up in my feed all the time and get pulled into my communities seamlessly.

A quick tools tour at launch would solve this. And the ‘Anatomy of a Post’ tutorial I mentioned earlier would highlight the spot you can see other people who reblogged the same content. These connection points are easy to use, they just need to be more visible at the start.

That’s all, honestly.

Those are the only barriers that slowed me down in the beginning. They can ALL be solved with a few beginner-friendly tips on launch:

Intro to Dashes (Following, For You, & Your Tags + a brief personalization suggestion)

Intro to Search Features (basics + following tags)

Intro to Your Blog (basics + encouragement to personalize if the bots issue isn’t going to be resolved, because let’s be real… being mistaken for bots is probably why most people quit early these days😉)

Anatomy of a Post (basics + ways to interact)

Restricting the algorithms to the For You tab is really refreshing coming from other sites. It’s there if I want it, but , I can breathe here in a way I can’t on any other site. And honestly, the other reason I’m still around is that people are fucking weird here, which means I have freedom to be too. Any changes that don’t take those two strengths of this site into account risks losing the center and disintegrating the core. Foster a personalized experience. Prioritize avenues that let people interact at whatever level they’re comfortable. Support creator culture. Those are the things that make this better than the competition.

Oh, yeah, and if you're still reading... the organizational tag system needs some upgrades and these pornbots are killing us. Thanks, bye xD

[theshengfiles]

Sheng as a decolonizing tool

By Charlotte Simons

While preparing content for this blog over the past few weeks and talking to my Kenyan friends over WhatsApp about what Sheng meant to them on a personal level, I kept coming back to the conclusion that Sheng in many ways functions as a decolonizing tool: it is a hybrid of different languages – African languages as well as European ones –, appropriated and made their own by those who use it, to the extent that it is no longer understandable to those on the outside. In many ways, it functions like a secret language.

Octopizzo: “Sheng is the only language that you can speak with a hundred people and you will never even know their tribe.”

It also transcends the different ethnicities living in Nairobi. No matter if a youth is of Luo, Kikuyu, Taita or Kisii descent, all young people speak Sheng. Octopizzo, whom I interviewed for this research project, explained to me over the phone: “Sheng is our second language, for all of us. (…) Sheng is the only language that you can speak with a hundred people and you will never even know their tribe.” Instead, the type of Sheng people speak is mostly determined by the neighbourhood that they’re from in Nairobi. The type of Sheng spoken in the Eastlands or Westlands, for instance, is different from the Sheng spoken in Kibera.

On the one hand, Sheng transcends the division between different ethnicities, while on the other hand, it emphasises the beauty in Kenya’s ethnic diversity by appropriating words from all the different languages that can be found there.

According to Octopizzo, Sheng in recent years has been appropriating less and less English words, and more and more words originating from native Kenyan languages, like Luo. When I asked him about the reasoning behind that, he replied: “Sheng has changed a lot in the last ten years. (…) People are starting to be proud of being African.” According to him, music artists in Kenya used to really hide which tribe they came from. Their fan base would be ethnically diverse, so as a musician, you would want to avoid solely focusing on your own ethnic group. 

“But now, people are starting to embrace who they really are.” This essentially means that on the one hand, Sheng transcends the division between different ethnicities, while on the other hand, it emphasises the beauty in Kenya’s ethnic diversity by appropriating words from all the different languages that can be found there. Sheng really went through a transformation in recent years. According to Octopizzo, it originated in Kibera and mainly started out as “a crime language. And then it became too popular. (…) Now, it’s being used by banks and big corporations advertising in Sheng to attract young people,” which he isn’t particularly a fan of himself, although he fully understands the power that Sheng holds: “The young people of Kenya don’t even know how they did it. It’s so powerful.”

Although Sheng is an exclusive language, once you’re in, anyone can contribute. “With Sheng there is not one creator. Some kid in, like, Siaya, can come up with a word and it spreads and we use it.”

And although Sheng is an exclusive language, once you’re in, anyone can contribute. Octopizzo explained: “With Sheng there is not one creator. Some kid in, like, Siaya, can come up with a word and it spreads and we use it.” The main reason he himself invents new words and then spreads them via his music, is because it creates curiosity amongst his audience. “Like, ‘Oh, what do you mean?’ (…) With Sheng, the lesser people know the new words, the cooler. Once many people know the new word, it becomes uncool – and we switch.”

Another reason behind the invention of new Sheng words, as Octopizzo explained it, is to exclude certain people from following the conversation, such as the police, or older generations. “If parents are starting to know the slang, we switch. They don’t have to always know what’s happening.”

He concludes: “Once you start using it, it’s like being a coder. And I’m the master coder.”

[neptunecreek]

Copyright Filters Are On a Collision Course With EU Data Privacy Rules

The European Union’s controversial new copyright rules are on a collision course with EU data privacy rules. The GDPR guards data protection, privacy, and other fundamental rights in the handling of personal data. Such rights are likely to be affected by an automated decision-making system that’s guaranteed to be used, and abused, under Article 17 to find and filter out unauthorized copyrighted material. Here we take a deep dive examining how the EU got here and why Member States should act now to embrace enforcement policies for the Copyright Directive that steer clear of automated filters that violate the GDPR by censoring and discriminating against users.

Platforms Become the New Copyright Police

Article 17 of the EU’s Copyright Directive (formerly Article 13) makes online services liable for user-uploaded content that infringes someone’s copyright. To escape liability, online service operators have to show that they made best efforts to obtain rightsholders’ authorization and ensure infringing content is not available on their platforms. Further, they must show they acted expeditiously to remove content and prevent its re-upload after being notified by rightsholders.

Prior to passage of the Copyright Directive, user rights advocates alerted lawmakers that operators would have to employ upload filters to keep infringing content off their platforms.  They warned that then Article 13 will turn online services into copyright police with special license to scan and filter billions of users’ social media posts and videos, audio clips, and photos for potential infringements.

While not everyone agreed about the features of the controversial overhaul of outdated copyright rules, there was little doubt that any automated system for catching and blocking copyright infringement would impact users, who would sometimes find their legitimate posts erroneously removed or blocked. Instead of unreservedly safeguarding user freedoms, the compromise worked out focuses on procedural safeguards to counter over-blocking. Although complaint and redress mechanisms are supposed to offer a quick fix, chances are that censored Europeans will have to join a long queue of fellow victims of algorithmic decision-making and await the chance to plead their case.

Can’t See the Wood For the Trees: the GDPR

There’s something awfully familiar about the idea of an automated black-box judgment system that weighs user-generated content and has a significant effect on the position of individuals. At recent EU copyright dialogue debates on technical and legal limits of copyright filters, EU data protection rules—which restrict the use of automated decision-making processes involving personal data—were not put on the agenda by the EU officials. Nor were academic experts on the GDPR who have raised this issue in the past (read this analysis by Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon or have a look at this year’s CPDP panel on copyright filters).

Under Article 22 of the GDPR, users have a right “not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her.” Save for exceptions, which will be discussed below, this provision protects users from detrimental decisions made by algorithms, such as being turned down for an online loan by a service that uses software, not humans, to accept or reject applicants. In the language of the regulation, the word “solely” means a decision-making process that is totally automated and excludes any real human influence on the outcome.

The Copyright-Filter Test

Personal Data

The GDPR generally applies if a provider is processing personal data, which is defined as any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (“data subject,” Article 4(1) GDPR). Virtually every post that Article 17 filters analyze will have come from a user who had to create an account with an online service before making their post. The required account registration data make it inevitable that Copyright Directive filters must respect the GDPR. Even anonymous posts will have metadata, such as IP addresses (C-582/14, Breyer v Germany), which can be used to identify the poster. Anonymization is technically fraught, but even purportedly anonymization will not satisfy the GDPR if the content is connected with a user profile, such as a social media profile on Facebook or YouTube.

Defenders of copyright filters might counter that these filters do not evaluate metadata. Instead, they’ll say that filters merely compare uploaded content with information provided by rightsholders. However, the Copyright Directive’s algorithmic decision-making is about much more than content-matching. It is the decision whether a specific user is entitled to post a specific work. Whether the user’s upload matches the information provided by rightsholders is just a step along the way. Filters might not always use personal data to determine whether to remove content, but the decision is always about what a specific individual can do. In other words: how can monitoring and removing peoples’ uploads, which express views they seek to share, not involve a decision about based on that individual?

Moreover, the concept of “personal data” is very broad. The EU Court of Justice  (Case C-434/16 Nowak v Data Protection Commissioner) held that “personal data” covers any information “provided that it ‘relates’ to the data subject,” whether through the content (a selfie uploaded on Facebook), through the purpose (a video is processed to evaluate a person’s preferences), or through the effect (a person is treated differently due to the monitoring of their uploads). A copyright filter works by removing any content that matches materials from anyone claiming to be a rightsholder. The purpose of filtering is to decide whether a work will or won’t be made public. The consequence of using filtering as a preventive measure is that users’ works will be blocked in error, while other (luckier) users’ works will not be blocked, meaning the filter creates a significant effect or even discriminates against some users.

Even more importantly, the Guidelines on automated decision-making developed by the WP29, an official European  data protection advisory body (now EDPB) provide a user-focused interpretation of the requirements for automated individual decision-making. Article 22 applies to decisions based on any type of data. That means that Article 22 of the GDPR applies to algorithms that evaluate user-generated content that is uploaded to a platform.

Adverse Effects

Do copyright filters result in “legal” or “significant” effects as envisioned in the GDPR? The GDPR doesn’t define these terms, but the guidelines endorsed by the European Data Protection Board enumerate some “legal effects,” including denial of benefits and the cancellation of a contract.

The guidelines explain that even where a filter’s judgment does not have legal impact, it still falls within the scope of Article 22 of the GDPR if the decision-making process has the potential to significantly affect the behaviour of the individual concerned, has a prolonged impact on the user, or leads to discrimination against the user. For example, having your work erroneously blocked could lead to adverse financial circumstances or denial of economic opportunities. The more intrusive a decision is and the more reasonable expectations are frustrated, the higher the likelihood for adverse effects.

Consider a takedown or block of an artistic video by a creator whose audience is waiting to see it (they may have backed the creator’s crowdfunding campaign). This could result in harming the creator's freedom to conduct business, leading to financial loss. Now imagine a critical essay about political developments. Blocking this work is censorship that impairs the author’s right of free expression. There are many more examples that show that adverse effects will often be unavoidable.

Legitimate Grounds for Automated Individual Decision-Making

There are three grounds under which automated decision-making may be allowed under the GDPR’s Article 22(2). Users may be subjected to automated decision-making if one of three exceptions apply:

it’s necessary for entering into or performance of a contract, 

authorized by the EU or member state law, or 

based on the user’s explicit consent.

Necessity

Copyright filters cannot justly be considered “necessary” under this rule. “Necessity” is narrowly construed in the data protection framework, and can’t merely be something that is required under terms of service. Rather, a “necessity” defence for automated decision-making must be in line with the objectives of data protection law, and can’t be used if there are more fair or less intrusive measures available. The mere participation in an online service does not give rise to this “necessity,” and thus provides no serious justification for automated decision-making.

Authorization

Perhaps proponents of upload filters will argue that they will be authorized by the EU member state’s law that implement the Copyright Directive. Whether this is what the directive requires has been ambiguous from the very beginning.

Copyright Directive rapporteur MEP Axel Voss insisted that the Copyright Directive would not require upload filters and dismissed claims to the contrary as mere scare-mongering by digital rights groups. Indeed, after months of negotiation between EU institutions, the final language version of the directive conspicuously avoided any explicit reference to filter technologies. Instead, Article 17 requires “preventive measures”  to ensure the non-availability of copyright-protected content and makes clear that its application should not lead to any identification of individual users, nor to the processing of personal data, except where provided under the GDPR.

Even if the Copyright Directive does “authorize” the use of filters, Article 22(2)(b) of the GDPR says that regulatory authorization alone is not sufficient to justify automated decision-making. The authorizing law—the law that each EU Member State will make to implement the Copyright Directive—must include “suitable” measures to safeguard users’ rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests. It is unclear whether Article 17 provides enough leeway for member states to meet these standards.

Consent

Without “necessity” or “authorization,” the only remaining path for justifying copyright filters under the GDPR is explicit consent by users. For data processing based on automated decision-making, a high level of individual control is required. The GDPR demands that consent be freely given, specific, informed, and unambiguous. As take-it-or-leave-it situations are against the rationale of true consent, it must be assessed whether the decision-making is necessary for the offered service. And consent must be explicit, which means that the user must give an obvious express statement of consent. It seems likely that few users will be interested in consenting to onerous filtering processes.

Article 22 says that even if automated decision-making is justified by user consent or by contractual necessity, platforms must safeguard user rights and freedoms. Users always have the right to obtain “human intervention” from platforms, to express their opinion about the content removal, and to challenge the decision. The GDPR therefore requires platforms to be fully transparent about why and how users' work was taken down or blocked.

Conclusion: Copyright-Filters Must Respect Users' Privacy Rights

The significant negative effects on users subjected to automated decision-making, and the legal uncertainties about the situations in which copyright-filters are permitted, should best be addressed by a policy of legislative self-restraint. Whatever decision national lawmakers take, they should ensure safeguards for users’ privacy, freedom of speech and other fundamental rights before any uploads are judged, blocked or removed. 

If Member States adopt this line of reasoning and fulfill their legal obligations in the spirit of EU privacy rules, it could choke off any future for EU-mandated, fully-automated upload filters. This will set the groundwork for discussions about general monitoring and filtering obligations in the upcoming Digital Service Act.

(Many thanks to Rossana Ducato for the exchange of legal arguments, which inspired this article).

from Deeplinks https://ift.tt/2Ihf0WJ

[jamesbyerj]

Win prizes in our Red Dead Redemption 2 Screenshot Competition

Share your best screenshots of RDR2 on Nexus Mods and win one of three prizes in our RDR2 screenshot competition running from today, 29th November until 16th December! Simply upload them to our [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/images/add]image share[/url] and select the competition category "Screenshot Competition 2019". We will be judging the screenshots based on artistry, humour, and originality. Bonus points if you are showcasing mods! [b]Please note that only screenshots uploaded on the date of the competition launch or later are eligible to win prizes. Changing the category on a previously uploaded screenshot will NOT enter the shot into the competition. This is to avoid giving older screenshots that already received endorsements/ratings an unfair advantage.[/b] [b] Prizes[/b] 1st place: [b]£50 Steam Gift card[/b] 2nd place [b]£25 Steam Gift card[/b] 3rd place: [b]£10 Steam Gift card[/b] [b]How to enter the event[/b] [list=1] [*]Create at least one ingame screenshot of Red Dead Redemption 2. [*]Upload your screenshot to the [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/images/add]public image share[/url] ([url=https://help.nexusmods.com/article/28-file-submission-guidelines]site rules[/url]) apply.  [*]Make sure to choose the screenshot contest category "[b]Screenshot Competition 2019[/b]" [*]That’s it! Simple! [/list] [center][img width=850,height=850]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1574071719-195362678.jpeg[/img][/center] If you have seen some of the screenshots players have been sharing since its PC release, you know as much as I do that [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/images/]RDR2 is one beautiful game[/url]! The PC version has only been out for a few weeks, but already we are seeing amazing screenshots from talented people making the most of photo mode. Check out some of the best shots from our image share gallery showcasing the best of Red Dead Redemption 2: [center][img]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1574074572-2011998104.jpeg[/img] [img]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1574074567-1314987995.jpeg[/img] [img]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1574074575-1162124634.jpeg[/img] [img]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1574074569-39663061.jpeg[/img] [img]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1574074578-1878694869.jpeg[/img] [img]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1574074585-1692317267.jpeg[/img][/center] [b]Jury Selection[/b] We will be picking winners from the top-rated images uploaded to the contest category in the week after the closing date. We won’t necessarily be picking the most popular images, but our final selection will reflect the overall ratings from the community to an extent. So, if you see a screenshot you particularly like, do leave an endorsement to give them a better chance at being picked! Bonus points for originality, humour and - especially - if you are showing off your modded/altered game like in this example: [center][youtube]ojwSDF5_1-o[/youtube][/center] [b]Tips and tricks[/b] First and foremost, check out our [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/images/]image share[/url] for some inspiration.  To give your screenshots a unique look, feel free to use one of the [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/mods/categories/5/]many ReShade presets available[/url] on our site. Next, you might want to get your game set up with [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/search/?RH_ModList=nav:true,home:false,type:0,user_id:0,game_id:3024,advfilt:true,search%5Bfilename%5D:hook,include_adult:true,page_size:20,show_game_filter:false]Script Hook[/url] which will allow various fun things such as the ability to spawn items, vehicles, actors. Oh, and it also makes it possible to play as any character in the game - including animals! Consider using [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/mods/60]Red Dead Freecam[/url] to move the camera exactly where you want it. Lastly, you can use the [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/mods/55]Red Dead Redemption 2 Save Editor[/url] to unlock outfits, weapons, or items to enhance your character before taking a screenshot of all your fancy gear. [b] Install mods using our mod manager Vortex[/b] As of a recent update, you can now use [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/site/mods/1]our mod manager Vortex[/url] to easily install and uninstall mods that might help you create the perfect screenshot! [center][url=https://www.nexusmods.com/site/mods/68][img width=300,height=375]https://staticdelivery.nexusmods.com/mods/110/images/93729/93729-1575024850-1273651828.jpeg[/img] [/url][/center] With that being said, we wish every participant the best of luck and we are very much looking forward to seeing your screenshots! [b]Participants - Entries - Screenshots[/b] [spoiler] [list] [*]Participants are required to submit at least one (1) screenshot (i.e. an image taken in-game) in order to enter the event and become eligible for winning a prize. [*]Submitting several screenshots is possible, however, prizes are limited to one per selected winner. [*]All entries must be submitted between Friday, 29th November 2019 and Monday, 16th December 2019 04:00 PM (GMT). [*]Screenshots must be uploaded to the [url=https://www.nexusmods.com/reddeadredemption2/images/]public image share[/url] under the contest category. Screenshots uploaded to a different category are not eligible to win prizes. [*]Only screenshots depicting game content from the specified game “Red Dead Redemption 2” are valid entries. [*]You must be the copyright holder i.e. creator of the screenshot(s). [*]Screenshots must not include artwork from other creators without explicit permission. [*]Screenshots may feature game content as well as mod content. Our site rules apply. [*]Featured content must conform to our site rules (inappropriate content) and must not feature adult content such as nudity, swearing, sexualised content, extreme violence and gore. [*]Entries found to be in violation of any of those rules and/or our general terms and policies will be disqualified. [*]Disqualified entries will be removed from the final selection and any awarded associated prizes will be revoked. [/list][/spoiler] [b]Prizes - Jury Selection[/b] [spoiler] [list] [*]In total, three (3) Steam Gift Cards will be given away as prizes during the event. [*]One (1) £50 Steam Gift Card will be awarded to the first place winner. [*]One (1) £25 Steam Gift Card will be awarded to the second place winner. [*]One (1) £10 Steam Gift Card will be awarded to the third place winner. [*]The Nexus Mods Jury will be picking the winners from some of the top rated images. However, the jury reserves the right to pick any image regardless of rating/endorsement status as winner. [/list][/spoiler] [b]General Terms and Conditions[/b] [spoiler] By submitting a competition entry, you are agreeing to be bound by these terms and conditions. [list] [*]Promoter name. Black Tree Gaming Limited incorporated in England and Wales with company number 06360077 of 10 Southernhay West, Exeter, EX1 1JG  (referred to throughout this terms as the “Promoter”, “we”, “us” and “our”). [*]Deadline. All competition entries must be received by the Promoter by no later than the Closing Date. All competition entries received after the Closing Date are automatically disqualified. [*]How to Enter. You may enter by submitting a screenshot in the correct category. You must complete this initial entry to be eligible to win. You do not have to pay to enter the competition, however, you are responsible for any phone or internet charges you may incur when entering. If you are unsure about these charges, you should contact your phone or internet operator before entering. Entries will not be acknowledged and we do not accept responsibility for entries that are lost, delayed or which we do not receive. [*]Eligibility. You must be aged 18 or over at the time of entry in order to enter this competition. We may require you to provide proof that you are eligible to enter the competition. No purchase necessary. You must enter the competition yourself. Entries which are incomplete, removed, corrupt or ineligible will not be accepted. We reserve the right to verify any entries and winners and may refuse to award prizes and/or disqualify you if you make or attempt to make any entry to this competition which is in our reasonable opinion contrary to these terms and conditions or by its nature unfair to other entrants. This might include entries which are made by automated means, fraudulent, made in bulk, made on behalf of another person, or made by hacking, cheating or deception. You must comply with the laws that apply to you in the location that you access the competition from. If any laws applicable to you restrict or prohibit you from entering the competition, you must comply with those legal restrictions or, if applicable, refrain from entering the competition. [*]Prize conditions. Prizes are subject to availability with no cash alternative. Prizes are not negotiable, exchangeable or transferable. The winner(s) will be contacted via Private Message on the Nexus Mods website or the email that you provided on the Google Form. You must claim your prize personally within 1 month of the Closing Date otherwise your claim will become invalid (you are solely responsible for this). The decision of the Promoter is final. We have the right to substitute any prize for an alternative prize of equal or greater value. [*]Excluded participants and entries. Employees of the Promoters, its holding or subsidiary companies, its agents or suppliers or anyone else professionally connected with the competition, or members of their families or households. The Promoter will not admit entries which: are automatically created by a computer or bot or script or other automated technology, created in bulk, have been altered or forged or tampered with, are illegible or incomplete or which generally in Promoter’s reasonable opinion are inappropriate to admit. [*]Selection of winners. The winner will be chosen by the Nexus Mods team. If you did not provide a valid email address when entering we may choose a new winner. [*]Ownership of competition entries and intellectual property rights. The Promoter does not claim any rights of ownership in your competition entry. The promoter is granted a non-exclusive, worldwide, irrevocable license to use, display, publish, transmit, copy, edit, alter, store, re-format and sublicense the competition entry and any accompanying materials for its marketing or other commercial purposes. [*]Data protection and publicity. If you are a winner of the competition, you agree that the Promoter may use your provided information to announce the winner of this competition and for any other reasonable and related promotional purposes without any payment to you. You represent that all of the information which you provide to us in connection with this competition shall be and shall remain complete and accurate. You represent that your entry will not contain anything (i) that is or could reasonably be viewed as harmful, harassing, defamatory, libellous, obscene or invasive of another’s privacy; or (ii) which you do not have a right to make available lawfully (including any material which infringes the rights of any other). By entering this competition, you agree that any personal information provided by you with the competition entry may be held and used only by the Promoter, its affiliates, its agents and suppliers to administer the competition. [*]Limitation of liability. Insofar as is permitted by law, the Promoter, its agents or distributors will not in any circumstances be responsible or liable to compensate the winner(s) or runner(s)-up or accept any liability for any loss, damage, personal injury or death occurring as a result of taking up the prize except where it is caused by the negligence of the Promoter, its agents or distributors or that of their employees. Your statutory rights are not affected. The Promoter will NOT accept responsibility for competition entries that are lost, mislaid, damaged or delayed in transit for any reason or in any way. [*]Social media. You acknowledge that the competition is in no way sponsored, endorsed, administered by, or associated with Google, Facebook, or Twitter. You agree to release Google, Facebook, and Twitter from any responsibility to you in relation to the competition. [*]General. (a) We may use the information which you provide in entering this competition to contact you for the purposes described in these terms and conditions. We will process and store your information in accordance with our privacy policy which can be found at: http://help.nexusmods.com/article/20-privacy-policy [*](b) We may wish to transfer all or a part of our rights under these terms to someone else without obtaining your consent. You agree that we may do so provided that the transfer does not significantly disadvantage you. (c) If there is any reason to believe that there has been a breach of these terms and conditions, the Promoter may, at its sole discretion, reserve the right to exclude you from participating in the competition; (d) The Promoter reserves the right to hold void, suspend, cancel, or amend the competition where it becomes necessary to do so; and (e) These terms and conditions shall be governed by the laws of England and the parties submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England. [*]For questions, Please contact support@nexusmods.com [/list][/spoiler] Published first at Win prizes in our Red Dead Redemption 2 Screenshot Competition