Do you think it's necessary for BIS providing lockable binPBO?

[rexehuk 16]

I don't see how so many people are against addon makers WANTING to encrypt their work... At the end of the day, if the addon makers are NOT happy to release their work due to fear of it being stolen, then we will see no decent addons be created (by people like Rock who's models are fairly accurate).

Big deal if you can't see their work? Drop an email along and ask how something works... I'm sure they'd drop the config.cpp to you if you're curious, but WHY would you need FULL access to his model? So you can deconstruct it and look how it made it? Maybe... but more likely you're using those tools to flog it onto a model website to make some cash.

I know if I modelled on here, I would keep my mods private or sell them to the likes of VBS2 to monetise upon them, it's all well and good giving free models (which is fantastic) but others will ALWAYS breach trust and try to profit from such sources of information.

[rksl-rock 1300]

Ok i couldnt sleep and Gnat's insinuation offended me so I've stayed up to write a reply.

Gnat;1782266']Quote from IP-Australia

The models shape is the IP of the REAL WORLD maker of the RL item

Not when it relates to an artistic representation of something. If it were the case artists' date=' photographers, modellers etc would be forever in court. Besides this issues was addressed many posts ago by baff1 and max power.

Gnat;1782266']The System(s) and the Tools which are used to get an addon onto a computer is the IP of BIS

Erm not really.

O2 certainly is BIS' IP. As is the game engine etc. However anything you create in O2 is your own IP. But you cannot exploit those models created with O2 commercially as pre the O2 EULA.

But if you make your models outside of O2 and import them, your can do what you like with the source. The packing and conversion tools are certainly BIS's IP but im not trying to claim rights over the tool or the formats. Just the content I put into them. Which according to BIS' statement is my own property.

Gnat;1782266']The technical methods of visualisation and ingame usability is the IP of BIS The model and scripts can be said to be the Copyright of the original creator.

Agreed

Gnat;1782266']The addon maker may well have copyright' date=' but is very unlikely to have IP rights. [/quote']

Sorry you are wrong . You have the full IP rights to anything you make yourself. The definitions you posted are not the be all and end all of the legal definition of IP. They are just general examples.

Gnat;1782266']Therefore peeking is not a breach of the addon makers IP rights' date=' because they don't have it[/b']

I dont think ive ever said it was. But i did say it was technically a breach of contract if the EULA forbids it.

Gnat;1782266']When someone peeks at a model or script and learns how X feature or X script command actually works or can be applied' date=' they are not breaching IP or copyright, because that feature was originally provided by BIS.

An addon maker has simply applied the tools that BIS provided. [/quote']

But if the scripts/setup is new and unique then it is the IP of the authors. it is a product of their mind and ingenuity.

Gnat;1782266']An EULA from an addon maker is fine. But an EULA can't claim something that isnt defendable fact and can't take for their own something that belongs to others (ie BIS)

No it cant but in ~50-70% of addons it isnt BIS' property you are looking at.

Gnat;1782266']And your lack of response to my eariler post I think is interesting ..........

I do wish people would stop reading things into my posts or actions that just aren't there. I am only human and i am fallible. I miss things even though I try not to. Just because i didn't reply to you doesn't mean i'm hiding anything.

The simplest way to protect your work is to not release it' date=' i see no reason to introduce encryption when an easy method is already at hand. [/quote']

Its not an option i really want to use. I've invested 7 years in the community and made a lot of promises that i would - eventually - like to keep so im trying to find a way to make that possible.

I can see why its a touchy subject though and why you're so eager to be able to encrypt, you dont want people to steal your work yet not releasing isnt really a good option as it removes the platform from which you showcase your talents and gain your authority, tough choice.

Yes, its a nice shop window but tbh its not one I need. I was already established in a more mainline and commercial area before joining this community.

I don't want "authority" or "fame". I really couldn't care less about it. Yes, I admit I like getting acknowledgement for my efforts. I'm just the same as every other person that releases something here. Its very satisfying but I'm not making addons to gain "dominance" or control over others.

I have no agenda here other than to protect my own IP and that of my friends. I'm not seeking to commercially exploit anything at all. In fact if you actually read my posts properly i'm actually trying to stop commercial exploitation.

In the end this thread will probably go nowhere, both sides to the argument are valid. Its also worth considering if its even technically possible without being easily defeatable, any discussion about the matter should really have started there.

A few people here derailed the attempt at a technical discussion but i know thats continuing in another private arena.

So lets stop the insinuations and rumours. If you want to know why i'm posting what i am, just ask me and ill give you an honest reply as i've done on every post in this thread and else where. Contrary to popular rumour I have absolutely nothing to hide.

PS I still want a pony.

Edited November 5, 2010 by RKSL-Rock

[TRexian 0]

Just because something is successful does not make it right. We are arguing about what is right here, are we not?

No, we are not. :) Well... the original post was not about what was right, but about what BI should do. I still think that is the fundamental 'topic' for this thread, even though it has gone rather far afield.

The argument is that mod makers don't have a right to lock their pbos based on pass community successes- that the success of the community supercedes the rights of the individuals that make it up.

Well... clearly, modder do NOT have the right to lock pbos now, because they cannot.

In other words, no - modder do not have the right to make a proprietary mod for BI's software.

The law of unintended consequences is an addage, not a law.

I think it is a law in the same way gravity is a law. Gravity doesn't really care what you call it, its still gonna hurt.

I lost you in you polycount discussion. I'm not sure how polycounts apply to the rights or benefits discussions.

For BI to make an informed decision about whether to implement this new feature, it would be valuable to know what is on the other side of the decision. If it resulted in uberFantastic (free) models and addons, that add value to their franchise, it might be worth it for them.

by Rock now

LMFAO - And you are objective?

Objectivity is relative in humans - I think I'm more objective than you. Or at least, have a broader perspective.

Maybe by education? Support of the addonmakers and punishment of the offenders

In the marketplace if ideas, I would (generously) say the addonmakers in this thread are split 50/50, while both sides are well-educated on the issues.

Exactly. The cost/benefit analysis made the suit unreasonable.

Its not quite that simple but I'm sure i'd be wasting my time explaining that.

LMAO - otherwise, this thread isn't wasting enough time? :)

No that's not correct. You can still get a judgment in this scenario since there is a dispute over the ownership of the material and IP.

Well, disputed ownership is different from infringement. If your singer/songwriter friend was involved in legal action against someone who really thought they had a share of the writing credit, that is different. That is more in the nature of an action to establish 'title' to something - the IP.

There is provison under law for the potential of earnings from the disputed products. But usually no damages are awarded where an accurate estimate or value cannot be made. Eg how many singles will that track sell?

Oh, there are always experts who can be hired for that stuff.

Plus, even using your own formulation of the test, what are the potential earnings of a free addon?

Zero.

And, it is pretty easy to estimate that number....

Links... none that i can easily find. It was big news at the time. It was around the same time that MS relaxed the licence on the tool set to allow expanded Payware. A lot of the freeware stuff that was out there started appearing for sale by various groups and some models were ripped and altered and resold as commercially published products.

I vaguely remember that. I was rather deep in a different community mod legal situation in that time frame....

But again, I did ALOT of research, and found nothing where a free addonmaker uses another free addonmaker's IP.

Actually it depend son the context of the case. If it is a dispute among two people about ownership its civil. But if it relates to fraud it can be treated as criminal.

But again, 'fraud' and IP infringement are different things. IP infringement is ALWAYS civil. Fraud can be either. (Check local listings.)

If an act breaks a law it can be said to be illegal. It doesn't matter whether its a civil or criminal issue.

Must be a British English v. American English thing. If something breaks a law, it is 'unlawful.' If it is criminal, it is 'illegal.'

If there is a way to both protect the content we develop and at the same time allow you to learn form it without the possibility of theft lets hear it.

I'll answer yours, if you'll answer mine!

Ok, I'll answer yours first: the current system provides as much protection within the ArmA community as you can effectively get. Outside the ArmA community, you have no protection either way.

We lock the PBO's with the actual content in it. And we leave the 2nd PBO with the config open. Would that satisfy your voyeuristic tendencies?

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you are suggesting (likely my own ignorance being exposed). What 2d pbo? Like, a config in one pbo, and the actual content in another? Let me guess - you'd basically just put your precious models in the locked one?

That still puts the decision as to what to lock in the hands of someone (like yourself) who puts their own ambitions ahead of the community. I'd say that is a bad thing for the community....

Edited November 5, 2010 by TRexian

[rksl-rock 1300]

...

Now i know you are just playing words game to get a rise. Grow up mate.

That still puts the decision as to what to lock in the hands of someone (like yourself) who puts their own ambitions ahead of the community. I'd say that is a bad thing for the community....

Ok I'll bite yet again. What are my ambitions? I'd really like to know.

[soul_assassin 1750]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you are suggesting (likely my own ignorance being exposed). What 2d pbo? Like, a config in one pbo, and the actual content in another? Let me guess - you'd basically just put your precious models in the locked one?

That still puts the decision as to what to lock in the hands of someone (like yourself) who puts their own ambitions ahead of the community. I'd say that is a bad thing for the community....

Well who else's decision would it be? Our ambitions are none of your concern. You get a top notch add-on for free to play with, be happy. What else do you want from me? If you PM me you can also get a friendly QaA session. We write tutorials and make educational videos, write software and plugins. And even then ur not happy till you got your fingers in the last thing that's left over to call our own.

The really interesting point to make derived from ur post is that using other people's work without their permission to fulfill your OWN ambitions seems to be ok with you. 'Nuff said.

[JdB 151]

Plus, even using your own formulation of the test, what are the potential earnings of a free addon?

Quite a number of addonmakers have been employed by BIS based on the work they did in free addons, and so I'd call the potential for a monthly wage monetary gain.

That still puts the decision as to what to lock in the hands of someone (like yourself) who puts their own ambitions ahead of the community.

You mean that control is in the hands of the actual creator instead of the hands of the (ab)user? What a strange concept indeed. The "ambitions" of the addonmaker are of no concern to the player. If you do not agree with their approach to file access, or more broadly their approach to modding, you can stop using the addons created by that addonmaker, no one is forcing you to download and use them. Downloading and using addons is a privilege, not a right. Depending on what creator put in the EULA/license, editing isn't a privilege at all for any purpose unless some simple conditions are met (typically for a lot of addonmakers, these would be things like ask for permission, give credit, do not pass on editable files to a 3rd party etc). It's Rock's decision whether he wants to provide all source files, require permission for editing, restrict access to the files completely, give it only to a friend or two, or make the addon, post a single screenshot in the Combat Photography thread to tease people, then delete all of the files and post about it on the forum just to piss them off. The right of the creator, and no one else'.

Edited November 5, 2010 by JdB

[max power 21]

@TRexian

Playing dumb gets us nowhere.

Someone's capabilities do not imply their rights.

The Law of gravity is not an addage and is true in all cases. That is the definition of a law. Your addage is not a legal state nor is it true in all cases, therefore it is not a law. If it is true in all cases please do show me proof.

[nuxil 2]

the never ending repeating thread

this thread is getting nowhere.

now it seams more like who gets the last post.

18:24 <iok> Sekra, all it seam like now is who gets the last post.

18:24 <Sekra> I say wolle or placebo :P

this thread would be perfect for a dramaqueen

Edited November 5, 2010 by nuxil

[4 IN 1 0]

Yes you mentioned that before yet the community is still going strong.

No, the community is going anywhere but strong.

[TRexian 0]

Now i know you are just playing words game to get a rise. Grow up mate.

Really not sure what you're referring to, as you didn't really quote me on anything....

Ok I'll bite yet again. What are my ambitions? I'd really like to know.

Odd that you would ask me... all I can go by are your statements. The ones where you state your desire to prevent people from being able to open pbos - for their own personal, non-profit edification (sometimes also known as 'fair use'). You've been rather clear about that.

It cannot be to prevent the use of the models outside of ArmA, because as has been shown, no amount of pbo locking can or will prevent that.

The ONLY people who will be 'protected' from are members of the ArmA community. Those who would open the pbos generally fall into 2 groups: those that would do so to learn, and those that would do so to re-package for ArmA. The use by the former would basically be 'fair use.' You are already protected against the latter by BI and the community policing that happens.

If I'm mistaken about something, do tell.

@ Soul Assassin

Well who else's decision would it be?

Maybe BI's? :)

Our ambitions are none of your concern. You get a top notch add-on for free to play with, be happy. What else do you want from me? If you PM me you can also get a friendly QaA session. We write tutorials and make educational videos, write software and plugins. And even then ur not happy till you got your fingers in the last thing that's left over to call our own.

First, perhaps I have not been clear, so let me reiterate. I am VERY happy with the current state of the ArmA community. (Still, even.) :) I think it does a very good job of balancing all of these competing interests. The best of any modding community with which I am familiar.

Second, I'm still not convinced that it needs changing.

The really interesting point to make derived from ur post is that using other people's work without their permission to fulfill your OWN ambitions seems to be ok with you. 'Nuff said.

Yes, just like reading an eloquently written book can inspire me to write beautifully (or try to). Or how a perfectly balanced mission can inspire me to construct a perfectly balanced mission.

It isn't like I do stuff and then keep it all to myself and my mates, as apparently some other modders do. In fact, that has been a startling revelation from this thread. I don't think it EVER occurred to me that there are people out there who do modeling and scripting and keep it to themselves.

But, dif'rent strokes for dif'rent folks....

@ JdB

Quite a number of addonmakers have been employed by BIS based on the work they did in free addons, and so I'd call the potential for a monthly wage monetary gain.

I'd call that the potential for monetary gain. And, if it was on the basis of their work - good for them. I wonder how many community pbo's they dismantled to get the expertise.... ;)

You mean that control is in the hands of the actual creator instead of the hands of the (ab)user? What a strange concept indeed.

Actual, the fine point that I am making is to keep the control in the hands of BI. They, after all, are the true creator in this conversation. They provide the framework for all this stuff.

The "ambitions" of the addonmaker are of no concern to the player.

In the context of the game, of course not. Consumers just want product, they care very little for the morality of it.

In the context of this thread, I think it is very important. It goes a long way toward explaining why people reach certain positions.

If you do not agree with their approach to file access, or more broadly their approach to modding, you can stop using the addons created by that addonmaker, no one is forcing you to download and use them.

I love Rock's addons, and respect him VERY much as an addon maker. Why would I stop using his quality addons just because I disagree with him on this rather philosophical issue? I mean, I love a good debate, but not enough to let it interfere with gaming....

Downloading and using addons is a privilege, not a right. Depending on what creator put in the EULA/license, editing isn't a privilege at all for any purpose unless some simple conditions are met (typically for a lot of addonmakers, these would be things like ask for permission, give credit, do not pass on editable files to a 3rd party etc).

We can get into the finer points of enforcing EULAs, but my opinion is that your opinion is mistaken. De-pbo'ing is not a crime, nor is it a breach of any enforceable contract/EULA.

[Edit - in the re-reading, I should elaborate on this. De-pbo'ing BI stuff and re-using it as your own would be a violation of the BI EULA. De-pbo'ing a community mod and re-using it as your own would violate the community practice, and BI has been effective in addressing that IMHO. De-pbo'ing a community mod and examining it violates nothing. IMHO.]

It's Rock's decision whether he wants to provide all source files, require permission for editing, restrict access to the files completely, give it only to a friend or two, or make the addon, post a single screenshot in the Combat Photography thread to tease people, then delete all of the files and post about it on the forum just to piss them off. The right of the creator, and no one else'.

Well, I agree only up to the point where he releases a free mod/addon. Once he's released it, all bets are off.

It is a simple decision tree. Addon makers get to decide what to put in their releases, free or otherwise. The community does a good job (not perfect, but not bad either) of enforcing the morality of not allowing people to re-package other people's work without permission. In my mind, there's simply no compelling reason to move away from that at this point in time.

@ Max Power (formerly Plaintiff1 IIRC)

Someone's capabilities do not imply their rights.

Please elaborate - with all the other stuff, I've lost track of what you might be referring to with this.

The Law of gravity is not an addage and is true in all cases.

So is the nature of unintended consequences. It would be a rare law indeed that only produced the intended effect. (Oh, and physicists actually acknowledge that the 'law' of gravity as we currently understand it is flawed in certain extreme situations - IIRC things like deep space and quantum movement. So, I'm not sure it fits within your 'true in all cases' test.)

If it is true in all cases please do show me proof.

At the risk of a significant derail, pick a (real) law, identify the intended effect, and I'm pretty confident I can show you the unintended consequence. It is simply a matter of human nature.

I'll even start you off. One of the oldest laws known to man: Thou Shalt Not Kill. Well, taken at face value, with no exceptions, it allows evil men to do evil things to a whole lot of innocent people that decide it is more important to follow that law.

But, here's the real deal - instead of a philosophical discussion on the relationship of decisions and consequences, let's bring it back around to the specific question of: a year after BI institutes the ability to lock pbos, what will the community look like?

Just like BI could not really predict what would happen when they released the A1 models (I wonder if they ever expected to see the UH-1 in GTA IV), I believe that none of us can really predict what would happen with the lock. One prediction I'd be willing to make, though, is that there will be consequences that BI did not expect.

Edited November 5, 2010 by TRexian

[rksl-rock 1300]

Really not sure what you're referring to, as you didn't really quote me on anything....

Ah yet more word games.

Odd that you would ask me...

Why shouldn't I? Judging from your posts you seem to know more about my ambitions and intentions than I do.

While all I know about you is that you've told your friends that you intend on baiting me.

The ONLY people who will be 'protected' from are members of the ArmA community.

Hey if it stops people like you who think they can ignore the community rules not to mention EULAs or other legal obligations then I'm all for it.

If I'm mistaken about something, do tell.

I've been telling you what you have repeatedly gotten wrong for the last 20 some pages and yet it makes no difference. Some people just won't accept when they are wrong.

It isn't like I do stuff and then keep it all to myself and my mates, as apparently some other modders do. In fact, that has been a startling revelation from this thread. I don't think it EVER occurred to me that there are people out there who do modeling and scripting and keep it to themselves.

With people like you around im amazed anything original gets released. Oh wait maybe that's why we only have ~15 active teams now when once we had ~200+?

I love Rock's addons, and respect him VERY much as an addon maker. Why would I stop using his quality addons just because I disagree with him on this rather philosophical issue? I mean, I love a good debate, but not enough to let it interfere with gaming....

Yet you obviously don't respect me or the others enough to actually honour our EULAs. And your attitude to people in this thread reinforces that.

Well, I agree only up to the point where he releases a free mod/addon. Once he's released it, all bets are off.

It is a simple decision tree. Addon makers get to decide what to put in their releases, free or otherwise. The community does a good job (not perfect, but not bad either) of enforcing the morality of not allowing people to re-package other people's work without permission. In my mind, there's simply no compelling reason to move away from that at this point in time.

Maybe the reason to move away from the current failing format is the fact that people are now more than ever using the tools made by the minority of community members to steal and profit form other people's work? As has been repeatedly said in the very thread; why make it easy for them?

But, here's the real deal - instead of a philosophical discussion on the relationship of decisions and consequences, let's bring it back around to the specific question of: a year after BI institutes the ability to lock pbos, what will the community look like?

Who knows, but with a little bit of help and guidance we can hope that it will be better than this one. Maybe more aware of other people's rights? Respectful of IP and copyrights? Hell i'll happily take the risk because some of the people posting in this thread aren't the type of people I want to spend my free time making addons for.

Just like BI could not really predict what would happen when they released the A1 models (I wonder if they ever expected to see the UH-1 in GTA IV), I believe that none of us can really predict what would happen with the lock. One prediction I'd be willing to make, though, is that there will be consequences that BI did not expect.

Oh no-one can, but just sitting around speculating we wont ever find out. This all started with a debate about the option to lock the PBO. It descended into insinuation, accusations, misinformed posts and a tendency for flame baiting. And of course a foray into the legalities of decryption. Spiced up with some gloriously veiled insults and innuendo. And you know what, even after all your grand standing the majority agreed that people should have the right to lock their work if they choose too. But it seems to me the greatest opponents still can't justify their own positions with any reasonable facts or objections.

Just because you can do something doesn't make it right. And to paraphrase Mr Marek Spanel. "by ignoring EULAs and IP you lose your own dignity as well as risk the source of your free addons."

Its got to be one of the all time great threads on this forum. You've been a lovely audience. Thank you and goodnight.

[max power 21]

Please elaborate - with all the other stuff, I've lost track of what you might be referring to with this.

You said BIS hasn't given us the power to lock our pbos, therefore we don't have the right to (protect our property). Because we aren't capable of doing something doesn't mean it isn't our right to. To use your later example, because we can't defend ourselves against an armed assailant doesn't mean we don't have a right to live.

So is the nature of unintended consequences. It would be a rare law indeed that only produced the intended effect. (Oh, and physicists actually acknowledge that the 'law' of gravity as we currently understand it is flawed in certain extreme situations - IIRC things like deep space and quantum movement. So, I'm not sure it fits within your 'true in all cases' test.)

You're talking about the law of unintended consequences and now you're talking about how that applies to other laws. I'm not sure what you mean. The Law of Unintended Consequences applies to complex systems.

At the risk of a significant derail, pick a (real) law, identify the intended effect, and I'm pretty confident I can show you the unintended consequence. It is simply a matter of human nature.

I'll even start you off. One of the oldest laws known to man: Thou Shalt Not Kill. Well, taken at face value, with no exceptions, it allows evil men to do evil things to a whole lot of innocent people that decide it is more important to follow that law.

A law, like the law of unintended consequences, is meant to be a description of nature, not a prescription of behaviour to avoid consequences. If a law, like the law of gravity, is not true in all cases, it is not a law. Let's not get these laws of nature confused with the legal system of prescribed behaviour.

But, here's the real deal - instead of a philosophical discussion on the relationship of decisions and consequences, let's bring it back around to the specific question of: a year after BI institutes the ability to lock pbos, what will the community look like?

Happier.

[SPC.Spets 21]

wow this trhead is a:

tl;dr

the answer is NO, simple, close...

[nuxil 2]

blablablabal

get back on track guys, this is to idiotc. stop bashing eachother with quotes.

i have a question.

let say you get the option to lock your pbo.and you release something to public, and so on.

then out of the blue you get a crash on your pc. which results in a bad hardware beyond recovery.

so you lost all your work that you had ther. including earlyer project.

so after bogught new hardware "ssd disk :p" and installed your software etc etc

you want to countinue making mod. but your stuck at one thing that took you weeks/months to figure out how you did it. there is no documentation on how you did it anywhere exept in your code.

so only way you have to fix this problem is with trail and error.

since you can no longer open your own project

reason 1. bis has never released a depbo software to the public

reason 2 bis will for sure not release a depbo-unlocker.

so where are you at now?.

because you are soo over protective you basicly locked yourself out of your own addon. + you have not really stopped thouse who want to steal form doing so.

Edited November 5, 2010 by nuxil

[Sekra 10]

one word: backup

edit: btw nuxil you stole my original idea when we talked about this in irc earlier. you asked who do I think will have the last say on the thread and I told you either w0lle or placebo. and no credit :( this is an actual proof of concept how people in here steal other peoples ideas and present them as their own with no respect to others.

SARCASM!

and if anyone except nuxil quotes this post it only proves youre a retard who is only flaming the thread

Edited November 5, 2010 by Sekra

[nuxil 2]

@ Sekra. yea sorry i didnt mention it was you who said it 1st. edit my post:cheers:

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Some people just won't accept when they are wrong.

FPDR

And that's the first time I used that one...

@Max Power & TRexian:

Gravity? For real? :D

@Sekra:

Sarcasm now is reality tomorrow if locking is implemented. You have no idea how ugly it will get with accusations. Will get is obviously an uncertainty, but with what I've seen on these forums (not this thread in particular, but addon discussions etc) regarding protectionism and forum policing without any grounds for it, scaring people away, I think will get is a natural progression.

Google search, then scroll a little down and click the cache button for the "What happened to the MAAM announcement post?" post. Apparently I can't link to a cached page. Keep in mind this is a discussion about another discussion. Although involved in modding (gauge, panels, and sounds), I was very much a bystander in all this. And we got the feeling that this community was all about "everybody being pissed at everybody". Accusations of "copyright infringements" was everywhere, from screenshots to quotes ffs. Say hello to someone, and he snapped at you - completely nuts! So many got seriously upset about this thing that went down. So, no thanks. Not again. I couldn't bare the sadness.

@Max Power:

Happier? As you can guess, I don't expect that. IF such an event went down here, it could possibly kill everything. FS managed to survive, but the userbase seems a bit bigger. Probably didn't cause a big hit in the scale of things, but it made me and some others leave that I know of.

Edited November 5, 2010 by CarlGustaffa

[WackyIraqi 2]

Who knows, but with a little bit of help and guidance we can hope that it will be better than this one. Maybe more aware of other people's rights? Respectful of IP and copyrights? Hell i'll happily take the risk because some of the people posting in this thread aren't the type of people I want to spend my free time making addons for.

Maybe its a little too late in the evening/early in the morning for me to concentrate on reading, but from what I'm gathering from the official BI Tools EULA from 2008 (the most recent revision) your own EULAs and IP are irrelevent. You do NOT own the copyright for the work by using their tools package, Bohemia Interactive a.s. does.

I'm no lawyer, nor am I wanting to get into a heated debate. I just wanted to point out what I thought (and later researched and looked up) to be the reality. If I'm misinterpreting this, please do correct me.:)

As for my source, here's the section of the EULA I am referring to.

1. Ownership: All title' date=' ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Program and any and all copies thereof [b'](including but not limited to any titles, computer code, themes, objects, methods of operation, any related documentation, and addons incorporated into the Program) are owned by Bohemia Interactive a.s. (the Licensor) or its licensors.[/b] The Program is protected by the Czech copyright laws, international copyright treaties and conventions and any other applicable laws. All rights are reserved.

Read full EULA here

[nuxil 2]

yeah i said that like 20 or 30 pages ago.

Ip has fully copyright of the model in its orginal format. but the format that comes out of O2 is owned by bis

so by claimin copyright over a p3d model you are actually breaking the EULA of O2.

Edited November 5, 2010 by nuxil

[dm 9]

Glad to see people still dont understand the IP rights regarding O2 and things you make with it :j:

(BIS has said over and over and over that whatever you make with the tools is your IP. But that doesnt help your nay-sayer argument now does it....)

[Sekra 10]

@nuxil:

---

The one thing that is really obvious that the people in this community have no respect for other peoples work. And even excluding the model thieves who sell them online. Now we all have to remember that we all come from different cultures and different backrounds. And a lot of us are not native english speakers so sometimes voicing out our opinions come out "wrong". But the further this thread keeps going the more disrespect some of the people show for everyones work.

CarlGustaffa, you openly admit that you unpbo other peoples work, edit them and then distribute them with your friends without permission from the original authors. And you claim that you have the right to do so just because you "need" it done in the next 5 minutes. Well even if there is no legal obstruction to do so, even if your morals are twisted enough to do so, you still don't see how other people see that as offensive? (Next statement is not related to your edits but in general) And after the people who get hold of these unofficially edited addons make the original authors chase for bugs that do not exist in their original addons like examples even in this thread have shown, you still don't see how it pisses off the addon makers? For me that shows complete and utter disrespect for the original author. You made a post earlier linking to that soundmod guy "who was never heard from since" (oh wow a couple of weeks weeks is a looooooong time not hear from someone). Yet in his very own thread you blatantly give the guy notice that you ripped off some of his sounds for your own library. Not asking, telling him. The way I interpret that message, and I know there are others here that see it the same way too, is that "I stole your work and theres nothing you can do about it". You are rubbing it in his face. Now I do not know about your ambitions or motives like you claim to know about others but for me you make yourself look like "I'm more important than you so I can do whatever I want with your addon." (This is actually one of the weird and twisted things I consider to be very VERY wrong in the Arma community. Just because you can't contact someone doesn't give you the right to re-use their addon without permission!) Now you also say that you "tried asking and it didn't work". Do you mean that you asked and didn't get permission to edit an addon? Or you asked and didn't get a reply? Well in either case if you still edit the addon it is a big case of FU (and I don't mean Fair Use) towards the author for not having the common courtesy of respecting the decision of not letting you edit it. In the case the author doesn't reply do you really think that gives you the right to edit it? Where does it say in any license anywhere that "if your attempts to contact the original author fail, it gives you the full right to edit the original authors work and distribute it"? Like Maruk posted in the Why licenses matter thread, "addon makers and users need to understand that the fact something is possible or easily available technically does not mean they really can take it and do whatever they like with it." You claim that if there is a way to lock the pbo from poking that there will be a elitist group of addon makers. Well the way I see you are acting on this thread makes you look like you think you are better than others are and quite honestly a little bit of a douche too in my eyes. Look back at what you have written and do you still wonder why people think of you as the "bad guy"? You say you are not an addon maker yet you would not for any reason ever give up the possibility to edit other peoples addons? Your responses alone are making me want to lock even any mission .pbo I am ever going to release in the future if this option will be given to us.

Now to clarify to everyone reading this post, I do not claim that CarlGustaffa is anything I wrote above. I am merely describing the way I am interpreting his posts on this thread regarding the matter in hand from my point of view.

It is the lack of respect that will be the downfall of any community, hell, the lack of respect is the reason my parents broke up. Even this community would be doing a hell of a lot better if more people would simply ask permission to edit and/or reuse stuff even for the common courtesy of doing so. Just because your actions might accidentally insult someone from a different culture or even someone from a different type of upbringing doesn't make the insult any less of an insult than it is. If you don't get permission to change something in someone elses addon you show respect by respecting that decision even if you don't like it. And nothing will prevent you from making an addon of your own just the way you want it. Instead of "competing in" and fighting about editing other peoples addons, how about we "compete in" and fight about creating more of our own original addons to the community?

[nuxil 2]

i was affraid of this would happen.

(BIS has said over and over and over that whatever you make with the tools is your IP. But that doesnt help your nay-sayer argument now does it....)

where did they say this? how can a newcommer to the software know that when its not stated in the EULA ?? Edited November 5, 2010 by nuxil

[dm 9]

The quoted section of the EULA covers "the program" and NOT the content created by it.

I really cant be bothered to find the post Here you can read where Placebo states (quite clearly) that you own the IP rights to everything you create (and not BIS). I will also reference this thread: http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=105256

If you dont own the IP rights, why would you be allowed to attribute "No Derivatives" to it? Clearly, if BIS owned the IP of everything you create, then ND licences would be forbidden and the community would be fully open-source. But they are not (Marek even suggesting to use them) so (much like you guys can jump to wildly retarded conclusions based on a few words of a post) we can conclude that you own the IP of your creations.

Edited November 5, 2010 by DM

[rexehuk 16]

Nuxil... ask yourself this. If IP was fully owned by BIS and they had right to steal your work and sell it commercially, why would people make addons?

Why did BIS lock their BAF pbos? To protect their time and investment and to prevent thiefs from stealing their work.

Why can addon makers not be given the same right? Because too many people who don't make addons want them unlocked... for whatever reason. If you want to learn how an addon is done, drop the author a line and show some interest and I'm sure they would send a CONFIG or part of the project, why would you need the ENTIRE thing unlocked?

Please go on ANY pirate site and search "operation arrowhead" you'll find LOADS of results. Do the same for "BAF" and you will find NONE, so you tell me that BIS protecting their property did not work?

Just because these addon makers are giving work for "free" doesn't mean they shouldn't be given the option to protect what they make. While addon makers should never CHARGE in this community, the right to stop people ripping their work (which may have commercial implications if they sell them to companies) is fair and justfied.

Edited November 5, 2010 by rexehuk

[spooky lynx 73]

Hmm... I don't see a reason to argue, guys. And, moreover, to think about addons protection. Because I remember only few cases of "reverse-engineering" of somebody's work (models, textures, scripts etc.). In all of them those people who tried to use other's work in their own projects without permission or mention were quickly identified as thiefs. So, open structure of pbo files even helps to find quicker if somebody's models/textures or any other part of addon is used without permission.