BIS, enforce your own license

[haleks 8212]

While @Siege-A's thread has been "temporarily" locked for a month and a half now, I see a lot of obvious rip-off on the Workshop...

 

Copyright protection should be enforced everywhere, not only on the forums. On one hand, we have mods being locked even before release (solely based on accusations by a rival team), and on the other, blatantly stolen content have been on the WS for months - years in some cases. For the sake of misson makers & modders, get your act together on this, BIS.

 

I'm wise enough to steer clear of Opposition mods and the like, but more than once in the past, I started working on content using other mods - only to realize later on that it was an illegal item and ended up being removed from the WS. More and more, I refrain myself from using several mods, because I simply don't know for sure that they respect the Arma 3 license...

Releasing Arma 3 on Steam as to increase offer, revenue & visibility is fine and all, but it's also making license enforcement a bigger problem with detrimental effects on the broader community, and the way this is (not) being addressed is far from satisfying.

 

Arma3 is a Steam product, not only a BI store exclusive, rules should be the same for everyone, but today the situation is this : modders who avoid the forums are basically unchecked and can enjoy all the advantages of the WS, wich has become the primary source for 3rd party content. At the moment, it takes months at minimum for illegal items to be spotted and removed, more than enough time to capitalize on increased visibility, gather more donations etc... Morally, this is quite discouraging.

[FallujahMedic -FM- 867]

Quote

(solely based on accusations by a rival team)

Incorrect. We have documented proof in each instance, this includes Siege-A. I would post it for all to see, but I am prevented from doing so. 
 

WRT Bohemia enforcing everywhere, I personally don't think they have the manpower to do it. Additionally, as of late, Valve (Steam) haven't been the most accommodating when it comes to policing the workshop. According to those at BI that I have spoken with, the tools provided by Steam for workshop enforcement are lacking in many respects. The Forums, on the other hand, are wholly controlled by BI and as such, is much easier to maintain.

On the other hand, I agree wholeheartedly that in some aspects (IP), the WS is not fit for purpose. One area in which we as the community can assist, is to report those offending items that are found on the workshop. Too many times though, the excuse we hear is "Its not my problem, someone else should do it". That answer is partially correct, it is not their "problem" or "job", but if its never reported, how do we expect it to be noticed?

Finally, you mentioned morals. Those that re-upload/rip/steal are lacking in morals. 

[Gunter Severloh 4063]

1 hour ago, FallujahMedic -FM- said:

One area in which we as the community can assist, is to report those offending items that are found on the workshop.

Yup, done it many times myself, theres this tool that can be used https://beta.workshopcrawler.com/

if modders are concerned about their mods being ripped, copied, stolen or what have you.

 

Thats the thing tho, you got people that dont look at the game they play as them being part of a community, to me if your part of a community then your involved to a degree whether you give your opinion on

various topics on the forum, create missions, mods, ect,. and release them, people are involved one way or another.

If members in the community are concerned, and sincere have been around enough to get an idea who built what mod, or have favorite missions and know the author,

same for scripts, tools, and even tutorials, then there should be an interest there to "defend" if you will another's content if they happen to see something by another that they did not create.

 

Doing the right thing means having that mature sense of responsibility and that person has to step outside their box and not think of themselves and speak up and say hey this

or that is wrong, we have a standard, a rule, and obligation here.

 

If you let stupid shit go, ignore it, then nothing happens, then you have people just doing what they want without any repercussions.

Steam/valve will respond to your reports, be it the same day or a month later, if the report is legitimate, so dont think your wasting your time if you found someone who is touting something

not theirs and you have evidence that it is not theres, steam will remove it.

[Tankbuster 1746]

I'm quite new to all this, though I was always aware it has been going on.

Is it actually worth my while using the crawler on a random but regular basis? For example, it just turned 5 reuploads of RHS USAF. Should I be reporting those? (Yes, the sixth reupload was from RHS themselves)

[pierremgi 4888]

Yep, good question. I found 2 reupload for a signed addon. What does that means. Is the signature worthy in this case?
Tks @Gunter Severloh  btw.

[Gunter Severloh 4063]

50 minutes ago, Tankbuster said:

Is it actually worth my while using the crawler on a random but regular basis?

That would depend on any content you may have on WS that you fear could be copied and reuploaded, if none then i would think that its not important,

but if you are on WS then you should keep it in the back of your mind if and when you do come across a mod or something that you know of aint the author's of

what your looking at then the webcrawler can come in handy to somewhat "confirm" that its not that person's mod or whatever it is.

 

     It aint a watch where you need to glance at it all day and know what time it is, its more like a windshield wiper, when there shit blocking your view you turn it on, lol

26 minutes ago, pierremgi said:

I found 2 reupload for a signed addon. What does that means. Is the signature worthy in this case?

Welcome, Ya the reupload is no different then the original usually but then whats the intent in question, I had found 2 previously for Kunduz Afghanistan map, and the intent on those uploads, was 1 was to fix the doors,

the other was to do that and sign the file for servers, i didn't report them as i seen no intent to harm the original author in terms of claiming it was theirs,

nontheless they should have gotten permission to do so.

 

Other uploads where mods that were never on WS but on Armaholic, then there were mods on WS but still reuploaded.

Now what i look for is the original author's page to see if he had established any licenses, notes for permissions or just notes in general like "my mod is not to be reuploaded without my consent"

Although im a go get permissions first guy, if i dont see any author notes then i see no harm in it, but then you got to look at the page too.

 

 

[PuFu 4600]

3 hours ago, Gunter Severloh said:

Yup, done it many times myself, theres this tool that can be used https://beta.workshopcrawler.com/

if modders are concerned about their mods being ripped, copied, stolen or what have you.

it isn't just about modders that are concerned or not, it is the insane amount of ripped content from other games and products that end up on steam workshop as A3 mods. I would say, from all the WS new content, around 40% is precisely that

[Dedmen 2714]

2 hours ago, pierremgi said:

Yep, good question. I found 2 reupload for a signed addon. What does that means. Is the signature worthy in this case?

Don't understand what signature has to do with this?

 

 

[Tankbuster 1746]

2 hours ago, Gunter Severloh said:

That would depend on any content you may have on WS that you fear could be copied and reuploaded, if none then i would think that its not important,

but if you are on WS then you should keep it in the back of your mind if and when you do come across a mod or something that you know of aint the author's of

what your looking at then the webcrawler can come in handy to somewhat "confirm" that its not that person's mod or whatever it is.

4

5

Ah, let me elaborate. I don't have any stuff on the WS, I'm just wondering if I could and should do this on behalf of others such as RHS. I'm not part of their team but a quick check using the crawler found a number of reuploads of their stuff. Should I be reporting them?

[pierremgi 4888]

1 hour ago, Dedmen said:

Don't understand what signature has to do with this?

 

 

Some comments here are about the way to chase ripped content and reports offending items on WS, and then, implicitly  extend the topic to Steam beyond BI if I'm right.

On the other end BI wrote:

Addon signatures are a way to reduce cheating [in Armed Assault when topic has been written]. They are used to detect data files modified by anyone else but the addon creator. They are based on strong cryptographic principles (private/public key pairs), therefore hacking around them is very hard.

Addon is signed by its creator using a private key, while the public key is used by the game to verify that the addon has not been modified.

 

So, I think, perhaps with too much imagination, this could be a tool for eradicating all wrong signed versions of an addon on Steam library, like you can kick a player with wrong signatures on checked servers.

Furthermore, if it seems so important that anybody can upload any work on Steam (actually +52,000 scenarios, +10,000 mods and 1000 servers), the "most popular", "most rated" filters are just hints for some good pages. It misses a tool for signed/updated/official authors addons (scenarios are not a real problem, just a huge growing mess!).

Perhaps it's time for something like a double key Author/steam for a specific "bookshelf" in this library, as official reference for possible check for legality and ban for copy. I guess some more work.

[PuFu 4600]

4 hours ago, Tankbuster said:

Ah, let me elaborate. I don't have any stuff on the WS, I'm just wondering if I could and should do this on behalf of others such as RHS. I'm not part of their team but a quick check using the crawler found a number of reuploads of their stuff. Should I be reporting them?

you can report it directly to myself so i can DMCA them (i will do that on this weekend anyways, i am a bit behind with rekting fu...i mean these lovely people).

[Tankbuster 1746]

20 minutes ago, PuFu said:

you can report it directly to myself so i can DMCA them (i will do that on this weekend anyways, i am a bit behind with rekting fu...i mean these lovely people).

OK will do. 🙂

[Dedmen 2714]

22 hours ago, pierremgi said:

this could be a tool for eradicating all wrong signed versions of an addon

No that has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Everyone can sign a pbo with their own key, and most people just reupload the original signatures.

[pierremgi 4888]

1 hour ago, Dedmen said:

No that has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Everyone can sign a pbo with their own key, and most people just reupload the original signatures.

The reason why I think there is something more to do with a database and a double  key on Steam. If not, the BI text I reminded has no sense.

[Grumpy Old Man 3546]

10 hours ago, Dedmen said:

No that has absolutely nothing to do with this.

Everyone can sign a pbo with their own key, and most people just reupload the original signatures.

So it's a steam issue as long as they (steam) don't care about the keys?

A simple check if the uploaders private key is the same as the keyfile inside the mod he's trying to upload might put a quick end to all this.

 

Cheers

[Dedmen 2714]

5 hours ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

So it's a steam issue as long as they (steam) don't care about the keys?

It has nothing to do with keys. Everyone can make their own keys that will be valid.

 

5 hours ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

A simple check if the uploaders private key is the same as the keyfile inside the mod

It will be if he just makes his own bisigns. Which many people do and takes literally 5 minutes.

 

14 hours ago, pierremgi said:

If not, the BI text I reminded has no sense.

The BI text talks about server signature verification to prevent people from joining a server with manipulated content, has absolutely 0 to do with steam workshop.

 

[pierremgi 4888]

10 hours ago, Dedmen said:

The BI text talks about server signature verification to prevent people from joining a server with manipulated content, has absolutely 0 to do with steam workshop.

 

Yes, I never said the contrary. I'm just asking if this could be extended to some library filters on Steam. Don't say that doesn't exist. I know. It's a suggestion. If you could take time to understand a little bit farer than the immediate bashing (how old are you?).

[Dedmen 2714]

1 minute ago, pierremgi said:

I'm just asking if this could be extended to some library filters on Steam.

Sure but.. why? Steam already has file hashes of all files on steam. And they already (atleast it seems logical and I would do it) detect duplicated files to save on storage space.

They could just block reuploads by saying "Hey someone else already uploaded that same file. This seems wrong" but then, what if someone else uploads my mod to steam before me?

 

Also as I said (multiple times now), everyone can create signatures, even if steam would verify that they match the files, so what? The reuploader signed the files with his key, and the key actually matches to the file. He is still not the author, but how is steam supposed to know?

 

Also even if such a thing could be done, we are talking about Valve, the same Valve that delayed the last DLC reveal by over 10 hours. Even if they could do it, they won't.

We have been asking about simple moderation tools for years, nothing happened.

 

Also Arma dev time has basically ended. It's nice to fantasize about what would be possible in the future but it won't help us now.

Also there is a rather big group of modders who asked themselves the same questions years ago, and thought about possible solutions and proposed things to BI. Nothing happened.

"could" is nice and all, not gonna help us tho.

[haleks 8212]

On 5/31/2019 at 1:25 PM, FallujahMedic -FM- said:

WRT Bohemia enforcing everywhere, I personally don't think they have the manpower to do it. Additionally, as of late, Valve (Steam) haven't been the most accommodating when it comes to policing the workshop. According to those at BI that I have spoken with, the tools provided by Steam for workshop enforcement are lacking in many respects. The Forums, on the other hand, are wholly controlled by BI and as such, is much easier to maintain.

 

16 hours ago, Dedmen said:

 

Also there is a rather big group of modders who asked themselves the same questions years ago, and thought about possible solutions and proposed things to BI. Nothing happened.

 

 

Yeah, obviously Valve doesn't care much about creating a sane environment for their distribution platform - just look at how they recently "clarified" their policy regarding what games are accepted or not : "anything goes unless shitstorm" sums it up.

 

But this is nothing new. One could argue that, Steam having the monopoly in terms of distribution, developpers have no choice but to accept the status quo and depend on Valve's good will...

Still, the WS is a total failure IMO : the amount of toxicity just isn't worth it. 40% of ripped content, toxic comments, combined with Valve's laissez-faire... I can't see how this could improve for Arma 4.

 

There was some pretty good solutions before the WS wrecked them all : playwith6 for instance was pretty solid, and made by the community.

At this point, and given the importance of modding for the series, I think it's more than time for BIS to start working on their own tools/softwares for mod distribution : have it bundled with a launcher, let go of the WS, handle all that stuff in-house. Arma simply wouldn't exist anymore if not for modders, and yet, everything regarding mod hosting, distribution & policing have been handled outside of BIS environment, except for what happens in our very local forum bubble.

Arma 3 has been a consistent top-seller for years, surely by now, BIS has enough ressources for that.

[lexx 1364]

On 6/3/2019 at 3:48 PM, haleks said:

40% of ripped content, toxic comments, 

 

Where are the 40% coming from? Also, which comment do you refer to? Was flying over the first page a bit but seems like normal internet banter to me. Nothing I'd consider "toxic".

 

Just curious.

[haleks 8212]

3 hours ago, lexx said:

 

Where are the 40% coming from? Also, which comment do you refer to? Was flying over the first page a bit but seems like normal internet banter to me. Nothing I'd consider "toxic".

 

Just curious.

 

That figure is @PuFu's estimation : given the time he spends on the WS to enforce RHS's license, I am willing to believe him.

As for the comments, looks like some have been removed, but yesterday it was basically 4 pages of "lol what french army?", "annoying gameplay, they always surrender" or "where is the white flag texture?".

 

I don't know about you, but I think it's a shitty attitude, and definitely  not a nice way to behave during the 75th anniversary of D-Day...

[lexx 1364]

Shitty attitude or bad attempt at humour, but that's not toxic. Just saying this, because I feel like the word "toxic" is thrown around way too lightly lately.

 

 

Anyway, workshop needs serious moderation, that's really something that needs to improve with future games. 

[haleks 8212]

28 minutes ago, lexx said:

Shitty attitude or bad attempt at humour, but that's not toxic.

 

Deriding such dramatic events, and disrespecting the suffering of a whole generation by doing so, isn't humour.

Repeating ad nauseam the same stupid so-called joke is toxic : it's easy to hide behind the "humour curtain", it doesn't change the fact that it hurts people and tramples the memory of our grand-fathers. Toxicity isn't defined by intent, it's how it affects people that makes something toxic or not.

 

EDIT :

Quote

I feel like the word "toxic" is thrown around way too lightly lately

 

Another point of view : Internet and its anonymity is having a big impact on people's mentality. It's so easy today to forget the usual moral barriers when chatting online - none of the kids in the comments we are talking about would dare saying that kind of stuff in front of a french person. I don't think the word "toxic" is lightly thrown away, it's more like more and more people are behaving way too "lightly" online.

[PuFu 4600]

15 hours ago, lexx said:

Where are the 40% coming from?

let's call it an experience based guesstimation. I would say it might actually be more than that if i were to disregard all re-textures "mods" of the vanilla A3 content, and focus just of custom made content

[Grahame 94]

17 minutes ago, PuFu said:

let's call it an experience based guesstimation. I would say it might actually be more than that if i were to disregard all re-textures "mods" of the vanilla A3 content, and focus just of custom made content

I wouldn't say that retexture mods are "mods" and not mods...? There are several excellent retexture mods of CUP and RHS assets that break no rules (though I do know that rights are reserved to prohibit retextures) and add a variety of LEO and military forces that otherwise would not be in the game.

 

UPDATE: Ah, disregard... on a reread I suddenly realized what you meant... 🤦‍♂️