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

[nuxil 2]

you still didnt answer my 2nd question.

if i never seen this forum. but found O2 and are using it.

how would i even know that? also its not only te progam as it clerly says.

(including but not limited to any titles, computer code, themes, objects, methods of operation, any related documentation, and addons incorporated into the Program)

but seams like they need to update ther lisence. to clairfy that part.

im not going to argue more about that since i can agree on that what you make is your ip

[rexehuk 16]

you still didnt answer my 2nd question.

if i never seen this forum. but found O2 and are using it.

how would i even know that? also its not only te progam as it clerly says.

(including but not limited to any titles, computer code, themes, objects, methods of operation, any related documentation, and addons incorporated into the Program)

but seams like they need to update ther lisence. to clairfy that part.

im not going to argue more about that

I think that refers to the STANDARD BIS addons incorporated into the originally distributed software. I agree that the definition is quite blurred though, but I'm confident that is what it means.

Suggest BIS change the EULA to say

(including but not limited to any titles, computer code, themes, objects, methods of operation, any related documentation, and original addons incorporated into the Program)

Edited November 5, 2010 by rexehuk

[Deadfast 43]

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.

Incorporated = included with the software.

[nuxil 2]

Incorporated = included with the software.

but : including but not limited

I agree that the definition is quite blurred though

well we can clearly see that :)

[rexehuk 16]

Including but not limited to is just a standard legal term to protect things that may have been forgotten, don't read too much into it.

If you have such a problem the EULA, how about you be a normal person and not a troll. Send BIS an email and get it clarified for yourself, and make your point clear about the EULA being poorly worded.

The discussion is meant to be about being able to lock PBOs not a discussion over ownership of addons (although that's what people seem to want to talk about).

Edited November 5, 2010 by rexehuk

[nuxil 2]

If you have such a problem the EULA, how about you be a normal person and not a troll. Send BIS an email and get it clarified for yourself, and make your point clear about the EULA being poorly worded.

oh right who are you to define a troll.

whats wrong taking up the EULA so we can clearify it.

go say that to the x number people here that have a troll post- both yay's and nay's people.

[dmarkwick 261]

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

OK, I've been away for a day, and there's a lot for me to catch up on and respond to, which I don't feel like doing on a mobile phone.

But, I am confident that this is simply a lie.

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.

"People like you"? I know TRexian very well, and there is no-one I know who is more respectful to community rules not to mention EULAs. Trashing someone's character because you cannot concieve of a different opinion doesn't behoove you.

Edited November 5, 2010 by DMarkwick

[jw custom 56]

No, the community is going anywhere but strong.

Oh really i see new addons/addonmakers appear very often, i see new people joining community all the time. So how bad is it really going :confused:

[dmarkwick 261]

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.

I think you are getting away from what is a right. You don't have a right to encryption, just protection from theft, which is unchanged no matter what BIS do or don't do.

---------- Post added at 10:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:56 AM ----------

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.

That's not the case. No one is advocating the use of original content without permission. Unless by use you simply mean looking at and learning from.

[[aps]gnat 28]

Originally Posted by WackyIraqi

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.

Incorporated = included with the software.

No, it says

All title, ownership rights and intellectual property rights in and to the Program and any and all copies thereof (including but not limited to .... addons incorporated into the Program)

Its into, not "in".

We went through all this back in the OFP days. You pass your stuff through a BIS Tool (ie, you have to use O2 sometime in the development cycle), you loose many of your rights.

...... why do you think that other "O2" copy-cat 3d editor (and author) disappeared so quick a long while back.

Thanks WackyIraqi, I just couldn't find the EULA myself.

Edited November 5, 2010 by [APS]Gnat
typo

[dmarkwick 261]

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.

If that's what you really think then you're choosing to believe that. I don't see anywhere where anyone is showing a disrespect for anyone's work. It seems that you choose to believe that simply opening a PBO, looking at the content, and learning from it by either example or experiment, is disrespect.

Edited November 5, 2010 by DMarkwick

[Zipper5 74]

Sekra, some bad apples here have indeed been close to disrespectful to each other with minor personal attacks, but no one has specifically stated that they have no respect for peoples' work. On the contrary, I'm pretty sure everyone here will agree they are very appreciative of the work modders do for the community.

Unpacking the mods made for the community and learning from them is not being disrespectful and if you think it is, you have chosen the wrong community to involve yourself in as that is how it has been here since the beginning. Without it, the modding community would not have grown as much as it has.

[TRexian 0]

Ah yet more word games.

You basically quoted an ellipsis (attributed to me). That's not a word, nor is it a game. I'm still not sure what 'word games' you mean. <shrug>

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

No, I am reading your posts and speculating as to your ambitions. You've offered no argument to the contrary.

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

Absolutely false. And more than a little delusional. You may be confusing me with someone else, but I do not intentionally bait anyone. I enjoy a good debate, though, I will admit that.

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.

First, I have never ignored community rules as I understand them. In fact, I think the consensus is that de-pbo'ing stuff for educational purposes is allowed under community policy.

Second, I only ignore unenforceable EULAs. ;)

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.

I am not wrong in my opinion. Nor are you. Your opinion is your opinion, just like mine is mine. Other than some fundamental human nature stuff, 'wrong' is an opinion just like 'right' is. (And even that fundamental stuff is occasionally tested.)

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+?

hehe

If you get your wish, in a pretty short while, there'd be even fewer.

Plus, while I was not around in the heyday of OFP, there is a VERY steady stream of smaller addons coming out for A2. Without the current community openness, those IMHO would be unlikely to have happened.

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.

Funny - 'my attitude' is an issue because I decline to be intimidated into submission, yet, those who engage in the EXACT SAME manner of rhetorical flourishes against me are righteous....

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?

Profit? Where is someone profiting from community mods? There has been no evidence of that presented. None. People putting BI models into a free addon, yes. People putting community models into a for-pay addon? No one has linked to evidence of that.

As has been repeatedly said in the very thread; why make it easy for them?

Because it isn't happening.

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.

Ahh... again, don't be so hard on yourself - you had some very good points mixed in with all that, too! :)

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.

How did you get to a majority? I don't see a majority. Regardless, the only majority that counts is a majority of one - BI.

But it seems to me the greatest opponents still can't justify their own positions with any reasonable facts or objections.

Then I humbly submit that you are not paying attention....

---------- Post added at 01:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:04 PM ----------

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.

Ah - right, now I get you're point.

But, I think you have me right - I *am* saying that because we aren't capable of locking pbos, there is no right to do so. If there was, people would've been able to sue BI long ago to make it happen.

People do have a right to try to enforce IP and EULAs by going to court. That they don't does not mean they do not have the right to do so. But, that is different than having the right to lock the pbos.

Even the 'pbo' is a construct of BI (from what I know - maybe someone else came up with that archiving technology).

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.

You brought up other laws, I was following suit!

The Law of Unintended Consequences applies to complex systems.

I think The Law is complex enough for it to apply. I've seen it happen!

Let's not get these laws of nature confused with the legal system of prescribed behaviour.

Why not? I think there is much to be gained from cross-discipline application of certain theories.

Happier.

Well, thinner, IMHO. Happier, probably not.

[rexehuk 16]

Because it isn't happening.

You said Rock had no evidence etc etc but you are neither presenting evidence that it is NOT happening? How can you make such a sweeping statement without verifying the contents of EVERY model website and the models themselves?

The argument you made there is just ignorence, I can say RAPE doesn't happen, we all know it does... do you hear of every rape victim? No.

[Rommel 2]

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.

I just popped in after seeing this thread linked in a conversation, who doesn't do this?

Its not disrespectful, you simply just want to play the game the way you want to.

The original author may never want to modify it to what you want; and it would take a long time anyway.

If I get a car, but its not entirely fitting my needs, I don't send it back to the manufacturer claiming I want something different. I'd fix it there and then.

:rolleyes:

[Sekra 10]

Clarification: I'm not against opening and learning from them even though there are a lot better ways of doing that. I'm against opening the pbo's, editing them and then distributing them inside your clan or w/e group you play with. Because we have seen it already so many times that those edits rarely stay inside the clans they were intended and thats when the trouble begins when they start spreading. To me when you spread a version of an addon without the permission to edit it is the ultimate show is disrespect. And to say: "I do not and will not ask for permission" is rubbing it in everyones face.

@Rommel: I don't. And I know most of the people I play with don't. And most of the addon makers I know find that very thing extremely disrespectful. Specially since you would get a permission to do it if you would just ask. So what is the point of asking you will say; its showin the common courtesy and showing respect for the addon maker for the work he has done. I'm not sure how you "get" a car in your country but in here we have to pay for it to legally own it. If you loan a car from your friend it doesnt give you the right to modify it as you want. Or rent one.

Edited November 5, 2010 by Sekra

[dmarkwick 261]

You said Rock had no evidence etc etc but you are neither presenting evidence that it is NOT happening? How can you make such a sweeping statement without verifying the contents of EVERY model website and the models themselves?

The argument you made there is just ignorence, I can say RAPE doesn't happen, we all know it does... do you hear of every rape victim? No.

Asking for proof of a negative of this nature is silly. And, with rape now being introduced, surely Hitler takes one step closer to the thread :)

[TRexian 0]

You said Rock had no evidence etc etc but you are neither presenting evidence that it is NOT happening? How can you make such a sweeping statement without verifying the contents of EVERY model website and the models themselves?

hehe

Because I cannot prove a negative! :)

The argument you made there is just ignorence, I can say RAPE doesn't happen, we all know it does... do you hear of every rape victim? No.

We've all heard of at least one rape victim. Some of us know at least one. Some of us, sorrowfully, have known many over the years. (Don't worry - that's not as creepy as it sounds. Certain professions require interacting with victims.)

But, in this context, no one has been able to come up with a single example of community freeware being sold by someone other than the author. Not one. So, to be afraid of that has not happened is nearly irrational.

Oh, and on a related note, the IP rights are triggered by the creation of something creative. The medium basically doesn't matter. Microsoft doesn't have any IP rights over stuff created with Word. Adobe doesn't have any IP rights to anything created in Photoshop.

I think it is a solid argument that people who make 3d models in O2/Maya/Blender have their own IP rights to that model.

Edit: oh, and as for Hitler, I think it is only a matter of time before someone points out that my addons are crap, so I shouldn't even have a say in this. ;)

(Is this the CAfe? Frugal? Frugal?)

Edited November 5, 2010 by TRexian

[[frl]myke 14]

I have a few questions where i lack of knowledge so if someone could please shed some light in it.

Back in OFP days, was the model format openable/editable by default or was it a community tool that enabled opening/editing it?

Are there any infos about the side effect that binarized MLOD's weren't openable/editable anymore was intended or not?

Does the fact that BAF DLC is encrypted rely on the fact that there is a debinarizing tool around?

From my limited knowledge (so please please correct me if i'm wrong) it looks like BIS always tried to prevent opening/editing their content and everytime some usermade tools forced them to go a step further.

Also the fact that there is no tool from BIS to open PBO's, let alone p3d, speaks a clear language to me.

[rksl-rock 1300]

Gnat;1782501']No' date=' it says

Its [b']into[/b], not "in".

We went through all this back in the OFP days. You pass your stuff through a BIS Tool (ie, you have to use O2 sometime in the development cycle), you loose many of your rights.

...... why do you think that other "O2" copy-cat 3d editor (and author) disappeared so quick a long while back.

Thanks WackyIraqi, I just couldn't find the EULA myself.

Sorry Gnat but as has said many many times before in this thread, that clause relates to the O2 program and its supporting addons and scripts. NOT the content produced with it.

Again, BIS have previously stated:

Anything you create with our tools belongs to you entirely, you’re free to use it however you wish as long as you use it in a non-commercial way. You’re also free to allow someone else to use it or to refuse them permission to use it.

The only exception is if you wish to create something with our tools for use in a commercial venture, in that case you must contact BIS or BIA, or a company authorised to represent our rights in such matters to acquire a license.

This dates form 2005 and is still valid to this day.

Edited November 5, 2010 by RKSL-Rock
Oops fixed the link.

[[frl]myke 14]

@Rock

link doesn't work

[dmarkwick 261]

What does "going underground" mean? Closed clan?

[dm 9]

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=44973

Direct link to the post (seeing as rocks url seems to be broken)

[NeMeSiS 11]

I would like to see a poll about this. So far ive seen only a few people here with very strong opinions. The poll should be split up for addon makers and addon users.

Personally i am against locking, i learned from this community, and i think that everything i release should usable by the community to learn from. Though i released only a few small things i am not sure my opinion will be taken that seriously. However i never made a big deal out of other people using (parts of) CZM that i made myself, which did happen a couple of times. IIRC i only once spoke up when someone released some edited stuff Charon originally made, however in his absence that stuff was released after a short delay anyway. (With proper credit etc)

Edited November 5, 2010 by NeMeSiS

[rexehuk 16]

The thing I don't get in this thread.. WHY do people want access to the FULL addon?

You NEVER need access to the full model, even for learning. If you're looking at a model you're most likely thinking "I wonder how he did this bit here", if that is the case REQUEST that bit from the author, talk to him, discuss it, you'll learn more in the long run.

It's not like the addon makers on here are not friendly, most are welcome to help anyone. I really can't see an issue with addon makers locking their MODEL pbo and keeping the config pbo open so that people can build upon their mod, without infringing upon their IP (which is generally the model that they care about).

If an addon maker NEEDS to lock his addon fully, then he most likely has fair reason to, in some cases models are sold for profit and contract, disputing the makers right to protect that contact is absurd.

I agree NeMeSis that we need a poll on this.