Terms of service IP confusion

[Evan M M]

I am genuinely confused by some parts of the Developer Terms of Service https://studio.boardgamearena.com/legal?section=tos which seem to contradict each other.

From section 6.2, it appears that the User is the owner of IP rights on the "Codes" but provides a license to BGA to exploit it in almost any way.

The User is and remains the owner of all Intellectual Property Rights on the Codes provided to BGA, provided that they cannot be qualified as a collective work within the meaning of the applicable law. [...] In this context, User acknowledges and agrees to grant BGA a licence on the Intellectual Property Rights of a proprietary nature [...]

So far, so good.

However, this gets muddied in section 7 about "Creations". The term "Creations" is explained in several places as excluding the User's Codes. But in section 7.2.2 it says:

If one or more elements making up the Creations should be considered as not resulting from a collective work, [...] BGA is the sole owner of all Intellectual Property Rights relating to said Creations and to all physical media provided or developed by the User for these Creations, including, but not limited to, any written, graphic, photographic, audio, audiovisual, process, program, sub-program, software, part of software, source code, object code and any other programming code created and/or developed, in any form and on any medium known or unknown to date.

What are the User's "Codes" if not "program, sub-program, software, part of software, source code, object code and any other programming code created and/or developed"? How can "Creations" exclude my "Codes" if the definition of Creations is so broad?

Thanks—hoping you can clarify.

Evan

P.S. "Codes" is a confusing term. I believe most native English speakers would use "Code" instead. It's not singular, it's a collective noun (as in the quoted phrase "source code, object code, and any other programming code").

[pdw3]

(neither French, nor a lawyer...) The bottom of the document says it's written in English and French, but the French will prevail if there's any confusion. Hmm, no severability clause... does French law allow the entire document to be considered invalid upon conflict if no severability?