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

[Zipper5 74]

Tl:Dr

Encrypting a .pbo =/= binarization of a model

Of course, but this topic is about locking PBOs, not encrypting models.

and cracking said encryption requires a completely new program that does a completely different thing.

Rarely does that stop people if they're dedicated enough to spiting you.

(I just realized "spiting" could be mistaken for "spitting". :butbut: )

[rksl-rock 1301]

Thats pretty naive thinking.

Well since our stuff is already being stolen thanks to <censored> and the various <censored> and as Dwarden has already said; "theft is inevitable".

But as myself and others have said some protection is better than none.

Edited November 6, 2010 by W0lle

[Zipper5 74]

You mustn't forget, Rock, that a lot of great community content is also being made thanks to <censored>. It's a double-edged sword.

Edited November 6, 2010 by W0lle

[rksl-rock 1301]

You mustn't forget, Rock, that a lot of great community content is also being made thanks to <censored>. It's a double-edged sword.

And alot of community content is being stolen thanks to <censored>.

Edited November 6, 2010 by W0lle

[Zipper5 74]

Yes. As I said, it's a double-edged sword.

[jw custom 56]

Well since our stuff is already being stolen thanks to <censored> and the various <censored> and as Dwarden has already said; "theft is inevitable".

But as myself and others have said some protection is better than none.

For a protection to last 2 years it must be extremely powerful and extremely well implentet.

I think the only people a protection will keep out is people like most in here(including me) who peeks at code yet DONT steal, just looks and learn. So if thats what you wanna accomplish then sure yeah a protection is better than no protection.

The people who steals and sell they'll find a way, they always have.

Edited November 6, 2010 by W0lle

[Baff1 0]

But it isn't their actual model or work is it. It is an inaccurate representation. By making a representation you aren't claiming rights to their design, trademark or brand. It is an artistic creation, done by your own hand.

You aren't "claiming rights" to their design, you are simply infringing them.

The owner of that IP has the rights to protect it if they see fit to.

If they don't want you to make a model of their design, they can stop you.

As previously discussed there are many reasons why they may want to do so.

Not so many in our example of a Eurofighter but very many in our example of a VW Golf.

The rights to make money off that design, in the case of an Airfix model...(and also the VW).

And the rights to protect the brand integrity also in the case of a VW. That image is their image.

If you put up a billboard of a car that looks like a VW being involved in a traffic accident, it damages their income. They have the right and the ability to prevent you from using it.

To control and protect their IP.

As a point of intrest, Airfix, do not own the property rights to their models. According to Airfix, "Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners".

They make them under licence.

For example..."The group holds the rights to produce branded toys for the London 2012 Olympics".

Airfix, simply did the same thing you ask people to do with you. They asked the owners first.

I do agree however that encrypting or locking models will greatly diminsh the use of them by others. Maybe a decryption program will be eventually released by someone, but that will take some time to happen if at all, and even if it does not everyone will use it. Making it harder will reduce the amount of occourances.

Edited November 6, 2010 by Baff1

[rksl-rock 1301]

I'm in a rush so excuse the quickie reply.

As a point of intrest, Airfix, do not own the property rights to their models. According to Airfix, "Designated trademarks and brands are the property of their respective owners".

Key part in bold. Nothing about the design of the model kit itself. And as ive previously said many times if you dont use their branding or trademarks you infringe nothing.

[Baff1 0]

That rather depends on whether or not they have chosen to protect the design as well as the trademark or brandname.

It's their IP. There are a number of ways they can register their IP to protect it, including the design. It is by no means limited to just brandnames or trademarks even if that is the most common form of protection.

In our example of VW Golf, the design itself is registered. It is not just the brandname and trademark they are seeking to protect.

There's a .gov link above somewhere with all the details of IP registration.

Edited November 6, 2010 by Baff1

[rksl-rock 1301]

That rather depoends on whether or not they have chosen to protect the deisgn as well as the trademark or brandname.

There is a distinct difference between the design of an aircraft anf the the design of a model respresenting that aircraft.

Right i'm to see some old mates for the weekend. Have fun guys.

[Baff1 0]

Yes there is. One is an original creative design, and the other is a copy of it.

Have a good one Mr.

[whisper 0]

And my "precious commercial creation" will be available to A2 for free. As will others. And I promise you anything that gets released in a PBO by us either is 100% ours or fully credited with permissions. UNN and I won't do it any other way.[/font][/color]

I'm not eager to hide anything. Just protect it from the unscrupulous scumbags that keep trying to sell it.

Please stop making accusations about my intent. You may not like me but you can at least try to remain civil.

Touché

Suddenly it doesn't feel so good to be accused of evil intent when you perfectly know you are absolutely clean.

Honestly, if it ever comes to live, I won't trust any encrypted content

Yes it could be misused, but as other have already pointed out this community is pretty good at spotting theft. (even though the ones that spot it often get attacked). And as others have also pointed out the Mods here often act as arbitrators. They are often the final judges. If people refused to show proof to the mods when challenged then the same result as you catching a thief happens. They get banned.

The best way to spot it is to have the original creator comparing his model, script or whatever, with the theft version.

Which is impossible if encrypted.

You'll be left guessing. "Mmmh, this shape really looks like mine".

I'm not even going on how to prove scripting thievery once encrypted....

As said above, the ONLY people you are going to hurt with encryption are the casuals needing to peek into work, you are not going to deny anything on professional thieves. You even are going to help them more if they want to release content on A2 as their own.

I realise this has been asked before but i never saw a reasonable answer. Why do you need to access the MLODs without asking the author? There are official samples out there and all you need do is ask the author if there is something you want to know

Because the few times back then when I did so in 2003/2004, it was to take a quick look at something to understand the mechanism, a 10 minutes affair. I'm not entirely stupid, n'en déplaise à certains, when it only takes me a few moment I won't go hunting somebody who has certainly many other things to do than answering every little question about "how did you change your recoils" (if I take FDF as an example), etc... (omg, yes, I just admited looking into FDF code checking how they did their recoils, what a sin!).

If the matter is more complex than expected, yes, I'll go ask the author.

And of course if my intent is to reuse I'll ask for permission. Again, you don't seem to think we are fair, but we indeed are fair users of other's work. Now that you tasted how it feel to be the accused, you'll maybe town down a bit your point of view on us who want to avoid over-protection.

EDIT : I don't know where you got the idea I don't like you, btw. That's not the case. I just dislike the solution proposed, which while looking like a solution, will have evil side-effects.

I'm afraid you're going to have to separate your professional stuff from the ArmA one .Again, nothing wrong with the professionnal stuff at all in my eye, but it's professional and thus should be kept for professional and for your true customers, which we aren't.

Maybe reworking it for public release is an option, from what I read above about IP, 10% change on the content is enough to claim it as "original".

#3 - Again I agree. Except its disgusting and demoralizing to addon makers that the players, people who have never made an addon in their life, are saying that they shouldn't have the CHOICE to protect their work. Like I said before, we need a new thread, with ONLY addonmakers allowed in the discussion.

@Everybody who says it will become mandatory, please pull your heads out of your asses for a moment, and look up the definition of "choice", or "option".

1) you should check 1st who is writing here. It is very possible one of the 3 aircrafts on your sig originally comes from a team I have been part of, just to take an example. You are not higher than anyone else here.

2) instead of telling us to "pull our heads out of our asses" and that we are basically dumb, try yourself to see the picture a bit farther than just under your nose, and think some steps ahead :

your "option" will end up being not an option when people realise they won't have a choice to release things as open, because thieves will be able to hide their theft behind encryption. Encryption will become mandatory even for people only asking for Credits for reuse.

Edited November 6, 2010 by whisper

[JdB 151]

Releasing a high-value 3D model as a free game addon seems reckless to say the least.

While I do not agree with most of the things you have written so far on this subject, I partially agree with this one, although from a different perspective. It also holds the "solution" to the problem imo, though not with a favorable outcome for the sizable part of the community that uses addons from certain addonmakers.

Make an addon just like you would normally do, then when it's finished, keep the full addon to your self (whether for commercial use, games with your friends or just for the sense-of-achievement value), and the model file(s) that actually is publicly released in the addon has the first resolution lod (most detailed model) removed along with a stripped down version of the cockpit (in case of an aircraft) or interior, and if it were my addon, also a texture file that was shrunk by 50% as well from the size that it was intended to be. It will look slightly better than an OFP addon, and the community can take it or leave it, they didn't want better protection and so, get less quality as a result.

You'll be left guessing. "Mmmh, this shape really looks like mine".

Not entirely. Thieves are generally out for a quick buck, and are either lazy, unskilled when it comes to actually making an addon or both. I've proven many unauthorized uses of I44 content simply by pointing out identical effects on the textures (I don't mean similar, but really identical) like highlights, shadows, scratches, mud etc. You would have to rework the entire texture(s) to remove those easily spotted clues, but most thieves don't possess the skill to rework the texture without it showing their crude editing. For models, it can be as simple as finding the imperfections in the model (hardly any model is ever 100% accurate, no matter how hard we try). If you've got 2-3 or more mistakes that show up on both models ingame/on a screenshot, it's easy to figure out what caused it (and I can tell you that it is not the extremely tiny chance of two addonmakers both only using one faulty reference picture when making an addon, and that one picture being the same for both of them).

I keep seeing this argument about learning "I need to take a peek in the model to see how something was done" (not an actual quote, but many people here have said things to that extent). A lot of those people have been around since 2006-2007. That's 3-4 years. Now my question is, what addons have you publicly released that contain models you made? What publicly released mods have you worked on that included models you made from scratch? In other words: What have you given back to the entire community since learning from other people's models to warrant that access to model files that you consider yourself to be in need of?

That's not a flamebait, it's a genuine question.

Edited November 6, 2010 by JdB

[whisper 0]

But isn't it better to be able to actually compare in O2 than point out similarities?

And you talk about 3D shapes, but what about scripting?

EDIT : And if we must fill a questionaire before being authorized to have an opinion, since the years you mentioned, most of the (bad) code I produced is publicly available, bare some anti-TK/hack things.

The latest is fully visible on DH. That's not much, but that's on par with my free time

The oldest work is being a little part of a mod team back in OFP days

Not counting the not so visible work I try to do as support for community

Edited November 6, 2010 by whisper

[xxbbcc 6]

While I do not agree with most of the things you have written so far on this subject, I partially agree with this one, although from a different perspective. It also holds the "solution" to the problem imo, though not with a favorable outcome for the sizable part of the community that uses addons from certain addonmakers

<snip>

It will look slightly better than an OFP addon, and the community can take it or leave it, they didn't want better protection and so, get less quality as a result.

I agree with you that the potential result is not favorable to the community, however, it's only the addonmaker that has a choice in this matter. It is an erroneous belief that any encryption will protect the models.

I keep seeing this argument about learning "I need to take a peek in the model to see how something was done" (not an actual quote, but many people here have said things to that extent). A lot of those people have been around since 2006-2007. That's 3-4 years. Now my question is, what addons have you publicly released? What mods have you worked on that were released publicly? In other words: What have you given back to the entire community since learning from other people's models to warrant that access to model files that you consider yourself to be entitled to?

Admittedly very little, because of lack of time. I routinely have 10-12 hour work days, so I have very little time to even play the game. Whenever I do have time and see something interesting, I want to keep the ability to go "hmmm, how did he do that?"

As I wrote several times already, I do not care about access to models in .pbo-s - I care only about configs and scripts for the most part. I wouldn't even be against some encryption on the models (not the .pbo!) but history shows that such encryption is nothing but a futile effort.

[JdB 151]

But isn't it better to be able to actually compare in O2 than point out similarities?

And you talk about 3D shapes, but what about scripting?

EDIT : And if we must fill a questionaire before being authorized to have an opinion, since the years you mentioned, most of the (bad) code I produced is publicly available, bare some anti-TK/hack things.

The latest is fully visible on DH. That's not much, but that's on par with my free time

The oldest work is being a little part of a mod team back in OFP days

Not counting the not so visible work I try to do as support for community

I have never had to show wireframes to prove theft to any moderator or site admin in all these years. Most cases of theft are plainly obvious. I can imagine that it would be different if there were a commercial interest at stake, and legal action is introduced.

I didn't say you need to fill out a questionaire, also I talked about work that involves making models, since that has been the main subject of debate (many people arguing that they need access to models to look at how things were done) and not code. I agree with what some people have said, that for code it would be even harder to determine theft, even more so in court, even without encryption.

[Mark XIII (DayZ) 18]

I've also said I'm happy for people to open HiFi up and look and fiddle, as long as it stays at home and don't get shared out. You can learn alot from other's work that is true. However, learning is one thing, using/manipulating something because it saves you time is just lazy.

After reading some of the utter shit on this thread I'd be happy to use some form of lockable pbo but I don't honestly think it would stop these fools. So if I ever get round to finishing my final project for this game it may well stay on my HD for 'friends'. At the end of the day thats pretty sad, but if you think about it why should I go to so much effort producing a readme, chasing up permissions etc when some of this 'community' think that BIS forums is actually facepunch forums.

All of this comes down to one thing alone. Respect, or more to the point the lack of it. I'm not talking about blowing up peoples arses, I'm talking about respecting someone's hard work...

[Zipper5 74]

No one here has said they don't respect any addon maker's work, Mark. I am confused as to why people here are still making such assumptions since there is nothing here to suggest it. Is it because people disagree with your opinion that you believe they suddenly don't respect you? People are, simply, genuinely concerned with the probable negative repercussions of addon makers starting to lock their PBOs from the public.

[Sekra 10]

To use again a car theft comparison (notice, I'm not comparing the type of the stolen item, I'm comparing the actual process of stealing), currently we are leaving the car unlocked and with the keys in the ignition. All you have to do is open the door and start the car. You all agree that almost any 12 year old can do that, right? Providing a locking system to pbo's would at least lock the doors and remove the keys from the ignition so that you at least need some sort of skill to steal the car.

When it comes to scripts, that is the only thing that could be "hidden" in the pbo so that we can not see whats inside but I'm sure there could be some kind of a compromise or a system made to verify the scripts too. The biggest problem in my opinion is naturally the theft and selling of models but almost as equal of a problem in my opinion is the usage of models without permission. Let it be from OFP / Arma 1 / 2 / OA / other games models you are using with edited configs or scripts.

If we were to provide a more secure way to provide (even just the) models to the game I believe it would draw more modellers to the community and we would not have to re-use old ofp or w/e models without permission just because the original author cannot be contacted for w/e reason anymore. And I would like to again emphasize the fact that just because you cannot contact someone doesn't give you the right to use one single pixel of their addon without permission or port it to A2 / OA. And if we had more modellers providing models we wouldn't even need to port them.

I also believe this would increase the amount of co-operation people would have to have. It so often seems that people are in a great hurry to release anything they've done let it be missions or addons. And then you end up having 10 different versions of the mission or addon floating around with an update coming every 2 days and constantly updating things is really stressful for server admins for example specially when it comes to addons (I speak of experience here) and having anyone playing on your server use the right version. If you "have to" befriend a few addon makers just to learn how they did something in their addons it would provide as a great source of information for the starting addon maker how to do things correctly. Now you have no need to "be social" with other addon makers since you can try to recreate what they have done just by trial and error from looking at their code. And then after 5 released "addons" they learn that you have to actually look for errors in your .rpt file too. At least I have learned a hell of a lot more and faster with talking to the addon makers I know than I have ever learned from looking at scripts or configs.

@Zipper5: I believe it should be quite obvious already that a lot of people even in this thread admit that they edit stuff for their clans / gaming groups without permission. And every now and then these edits spread out of their intended audience and even find their way to the original addon makers... And thats when things get.. sad.. Very much because the original addon maker knows that there is absolutely nothing to do to stop the distribution of the edited addon.

Edited November 6, 2010 by Zipper5

[Zipper5 74]

@Zipper5: I believe it should be quite obvious already that a lot of people even in this thread admit that they edit stuff for their clans / gaming groups without permission. And every now and then these edits spread out of their intended audience and even find their way to the original addon makers... And thats when things get.. sad.. Very much because the original addon maker knows that there is absolutely nothing to do to stop the distribution of the edited addon.

Just because they edit stuff without permission doesn't mean they don't respect you. I highly doubt any of them are deliberately undermining you.

All they have to do if they find stolen work being published on this forum is PM the person responsibly asking for an explanation, and if that doesn't work, then inform us moderators and we'll deal with it, usually by closing the thread and removing the download link(s). If it's on another forum, get in contact with its administrators.

[dmarkwick 261]

So in that case it's okay to snoop around in other peoples work?

This goes onto my list of "posts I wish I'd made" :)

[CarlGustaffa 4]

:D

No, we have to obtain permission to prove our stuff is stolen.

Otherwise we would just be disrespectful. :o

Jeez...

At the end of the day, for me, is that by the amount of snooping around I actually do, I would spend more time hunting and waiting for permissions than I would producing. Such as the thing I recently got permission for and was sent the needed resources. While waiting I have build a little system to use it. When I got it, it turned out I can't use it due lacking .p3d from another addon (of his). And I need to stay addon free in the mission (it's a major thing).

Was the addon released, I could disrespect his request not to poke around, and immediately figure out there was no way I could use it. But I would respect him to ask to include it, unless I was a bad guy intending to "steal" and claim as own - which most of us aren't. If I didn't, or forgot (mistakes happen), any dispute would be easily settled.

Saves questions and speeds up developing time significantly. This process took about a month, which he had very good reasons for of course. I myself have had these "I'll answer that later" which then is forgotten all about. Seems to me those for are most interested in halting all progress. When you get to the level of calling yourself a super-guru, you'll make everything you need without looking at anything. But for those learning, at almost any level, learning by seeing everything being put in context is the only way. Tutorials are great, especially for the complete beginner, but for the intermediate, nothing beats poking.

Edited November 6, 2010 by CarlGustaffa

[Zipper5 74]

Please do not mention software that enables piracy and/or theft. You have been warned.

[Mark XIII (DayZ) 18]

so do we break into the house next door to borrow some sugar or do we ask first....

[nuxil 2]

so do we break into the house next door to borrow some sugar or do we ask first....

i could actually do that. i live in such a small place no one needs to lock ther houses or cars.

i could basicly walk in to my neighbors house when hes not home and borrow some sugar. and leave a note that i'll come back later with new sugar to them.

again. stop with this stupid comparisons.

breaking into houses. cars. etc etc.

Edited November 6, 2010 by nuxil