while i agree creators should be able to set the defaults for an instance, they shouldnt be able to force things off.

also i am unaware of any legally binding licenses which require stickers to be disabled, as this could immediately be overridden by an avatar sticker system instead.

i doubt this would even be enforceable?

I disagree with this entirely.

I am not sure how any of the instance settings have to do with licensing, and I think if a instance is private the instance owner should be able to play the game the way they want to.

If the world has network features I suppose enabling some of these things against the world creators will could break some leaderboards or something along those lines, but that could easily be fixed by exposing the settings to udon, so the world creator can just block score submission.

As it stands world creators already have more power than they should, being able to disable avatar scaling, and the non-persistence of the force camera near distance setting.

If someone could explain the "license/agreement" part to me maybe I can make more sense of this....

I think it’s nice to world creator can set between Forced OFF / Default OFF / Default ON for these settings. Current state is pretty bald.

I agree with this proposal, as I believe it is more friendly to world creators.

However, I have some doubts about the argument that allowing stickers raises licensing issues. This is because everything that can be done with stickers could already be achieved using avatar gimmicks, such as world-fixed gimmicks.

Stickers simply make something that was already possible with avatars easier to do. If stickers are considered a licensing issue, then allowing users to freely choose and use their avatars should have already been a problem from the beginning.

I think that this would work well for IP protected worlds that would like to have an established brand image in vrc without too much chaos happening, but I think it would also impact 99.9% of other worlds uploaded in a negative way. Say for example, the creator of Grapple Island were to disable drones, period, across all instances. Not even in private ones. No one can possibly have fun the way they want to with the drone. And it harms nobody by doing it in a restricted instance. For non-ip worlds, I cannot support this canny.

1st edit: Maybe I got something wrong lost in context. If needed, you can explain in comments.

2nd edit: Another idea. Maybe world creators could have some sort of a way to toggle the ability for the world limitations to be completely changed for other instance types. So IP protected worlds could toggle the setting off, so all instances must abide by the same type of instance "base settings". On the other hand, another creator could leave the settings on so that they can allow people to change the base settings in other instances? Just a way to protect both sides.

it should be at the choice of the instance creator as its their experience that will be affected, also add height as a setting I can override too please.

I don't think world pens and sticker/emoji safety is much different, but honestly not sure.

If that is right, then VRChat Home's Kitty has been in jeopardy for a long time. I don't want to think so.

Anyway, I understand that what here thing is concerns that is never too simple.

So I hope a lot of world creators to be safe for that! and hope some form of clarification on how world creators are safe, or that this canny be considered.

I completely agree with this ticket, but apart from that, it should be more officially known that it is possible for a world creator to designate a mesh as an "Interactive" layer, so that only a part of the world cannot have a sticker on it.

The availability of certain features specified by the world author should not be a “default setting” but a “specification” that cannot be overridden by the visitor regarding the availability of features that the author has disabled.

I hope that the current specification is a temporary one for initial implementation (and that's what the open beta is for) and not an official specification.

World authors have been setting up avatar scaling and sticker availability as “specs”.

The “specification” should not be made the “default setting” without sufficient explanation to the creators.

Additionally, we can say that specifications that can be specified as “specifications” rather than “default settings” should not be limited to business partners.

“asset's terms of use” is certainly important, but I believe that we should discuss areas where business interests may be compromised by the possibility of overwriting, especially in business use.

There are many cases where a work is established by intentionally prohibiting certain functions, such as when a drone-like viewpoint is a privilege of paid video distribution (e.g., SANRIO Virtual Festival), or when “not knowing” is an element that makes a work established for the sake of progress.

If visitors are able to override such prohibitions, it may aid and abet criminal acts, including misdemeanors, by users in the worst case (e.g., false business obstruction, violation of honor and reputation, etc.).

I know this is a pretty niche example: putting a discriminatory or insulting sticker on a VTuber's illustration on the world or using inappropriate emojis is a clear violation of the talent's rights.

If the “default settings” are implemented as they are, the world creators will not be able to stop the infringement of their rights in advance, which will be detrimental to the creators, and will be left unchecked.

Naturally, VRChat Inc. must have considered this risk and set the restriction that changes cannot be made in non-Group public instances, but I think it is dangerous for any specification, public or private, to easily enable infringement.

I think we should seriously consider and discuss the danger that easy override of settings may lead visitors to commit criminal acts, even before “author's intention” is considered.

(Translated by DeepL, checked by a human eye with translation experience)

This kind of request goes against the terms of service. If your content is covered by this kind of restriction, it cannot be uploaded to VRchat to begin with. While there is no need to guarantee that your content must work with VRC's features, creators are not allowed to restrict user's abilities to use VRC features in their own instances. This is consistent with the rule that worlds cannot have blacklists, which world creators should be well aware of.