Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
vektorboson

Recent development...

Recommended Posts

sry ppl, but this discussion has become a farce .. you r far away from the topics intention ... very sad sad_o.gif

-----

well maybe its naive, but "accepting the world as it is..." is a rather sad attitude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

Copyright exists from the moment you make some original work. That is law.

Licenses are a contract defining the changes to the copyright law and its protection that the originator of the work wishes to make. It varies the copyright protection from the standard international contract that existed the moment work was originated.

Licenses are very easy to understand.

They tell you how you may use someone elses work.

Remember that, someone elses hard work.

If the person tells you in their licence you have to use it while hoping on one leg and shouting "I like mice" then that is what you must do to use their hard work.

No if buts or maybes; it is the law.

If you dont do as required by the licence and then use the work you are breaking international copyright law and can be sued for it. It is exactly the same law that protects music and film and all the software you use from OFP to Windows XP.

The licence is the contract you have the maker of the work you use. That includes any part of that work. In music it is just four notes of a melody.

[EDIT]A GPL [/EDIT]Open source means if you use it to derive work ie copy it in a major way it has to be open source too. It is the law.

No if buts or maybes; it is the law.

If you use [EDIT]A GPL Open source licensed peice of work [/EDIT]to learn from and make your own work that is fine but dont copy the file of say a heli script by addon maker x covered by [EDIT]a GPL[/EDIT] open source licence and put it in your helicopter without making it [EDIT]a GPL open source licensed peice of work[/EDIT] because if you did you just broke the law.

No if buts or maybes; it is the law.

Some interesting points

If your work is derived from another's work say you copy the file of say a heli script by addon maker x and put it in your helicopter you have no control over it the original owners work is still there work and you can not give another person rights over addon maker x's work. So if I copy the Dido's music I can not put my copyright on it. It is still Dido's work.

If the addon maker x has a heli script and he makes the whole of an addon with it free to do what you want with in their licence. Then you use it to make a heli and copyright it. You copyright only exists for any part of the addon you made. Anyone can then copy your addon if they wish removing your part of the work and replacing it with their own and copyright that. They are in the same position you are. Your copyright only exists for that part of the work you originated.

If you take a piece of work that some one has said you can use any part of but they have broken the law and taken it from some one elses work that is protected by copyright and varied by licence you are also breaking the law too. It is the same as recieving stolen goods.

I will write some more on this later

Kind Regards Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're not going to be able to change the world, so if this community saddens/sickens you that much, I'll pass on the suggestions from other threads similar to this one:
Quote[/b] ]Leave...

Well, very nice indeed. rock.gif

Jesus, what poisoned this community that much? OFP is a game, no more no less. No one earns money with addon creation except for BIS, everyone knows who BAS, CSLA, BW-Mod, etc. is and what they created.

Yes, I know that it is very time consuming to create models, collect/choose/modify appropriate textures, write configs and scripts. Nobody is forced to do this. With addon creators working against each other this community is definitively falling apart... sad_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Open source means if you use it to derive work ie copy it in a major way it has to be open source too. It is the law.

One minor sticking point...GPL, and not the generic term 'open source' is what you just described. GPL is a license model. The BSD license model is open source too, only it states you can do what you wish with the derived code - even sell it.

I have released all of my work with no license agreement, but if I did bother to include one, it would be a BSD style license agreement with no advertising clause.

What we have here are different people advocating which license model they think is best, and I don't see anything wrong with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Toadlife

Yes I agree that is a GPL open source licence I will edit my post to reflect that

But on releasing without a licence.

I have released all of my work with no license agreement, but if I did bother to include one, it would be a BSD style license agreement with no advertising clause.

It is not as you describe it; open for anyone to do what they want with.

It is in fact covered by the full weight of international copyright law. They cant even look at it wow_o.gif never mind use it or download it but by publishing it you allow them to look at it as that is an implied licence but they still cannot use it wow_o.gif as that would mean making a copy but if you the originator and only the originator put an addon on a download link that was public there is an implied licence for everyone to use the addon but not to publish it on another download link but if you asked for mirrors you have licensed them so to do.

Not putting licence with things is not very nice.

Kind Regards Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is in fact covered by the full weight of international copyright law. They cant even look at it wow_o.gif never mind use it or download it but by publishing it you allow them to look at it as that is an implied licence but they still cannot use it wow_o.gif as that would mean making a copy but if you the originator and only the originator put an addon on a download link that was public there is an implied licence for everyone to use the addon but not to publish it on another download link but if you asked for mirrors you have licensed them so to do.

Not putting licence with things is not very nice.

Kind Regards Walker

I agree - if you don't imply any terms upon publishing something, people have the right to view it (in OFP terms play with it) but no other rights. Technically, additional rights must be implied by the author for any other type of use to take place.

When I said I released my work with 'no license' I meant that there was no real formal license attached, nor did people have to agree to any tpe of license to download my work. I actually do put a statement at the end of one of my missions that states anyone is free use any part of my mission and need not give any credit to me. So in essense, I was implying a sort of license, minus all the lawyer-speak.

I simply don't take the work I do that seriously. It's just a game to me.

Only a few months ago, some guy from the UK messaged me on MSN and told me how much he loved my mission 'Dead by Dawn', a mission that I made and released way back in October 2001. Since that mission was so ancient, outdated, by todays standards, I suggested he download my newest mission on my site. He then told me that he didn't knwo where my site was and that he got the mission of a PC Gamer UK CD rom.

Was PC Gamer UK violating copyright law since I never specified that anyone could distribute my mission? Perhaps, but I don't really care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, if you think some people don't take pleasure out of a position of prestige on the addon mforums, you're mistaken. People love to have good things said about them. Speaking for myself, while I script/make addons out of and for the sake of my own madness, it does give me a good feeling to know they're being used and enjoyed by others.

I'm all for community development; I learned a lot from OFPEC and hope others have learned from me. I try (wihtin my capacities) to document my scripts and encourage people to open them.

VB's right that encrypting an addon isn't going to help, since to rip off a model, a potential thief has to have a skill set beyond that necessary to defeat encryption.

Still, I'm uneasy about a completely open-source model, and not for the specious reasons Deadmeat trots out.

Here are the ugly facts as I see them:

A) not every addon maker has the same amount of talent or social skills.

B) the popularity of addons hinges on:

1) Reputation of the maker

2) Reception of addons by a subset of the OFP community

3) unicity of addon.

C) there are addon compatibility issues.

Reputation is essential. As with wine, many people judge addons by their labels. If you doubt me on this, consider how BAS week went over. Heck, I remember a UA development thread (pre-release) where we mentioned the names of all the addon groups that had contributed resources. People actually posted "woohoo, a BAS howitzer!"

Addonmakers need to protect this resource, and some addonmakers would rather not have their name associated with crappy addons. (Don't look at me; if it has tubes or rails, I'll make it work). Furthermore, a good addon team will optimize their work for certain conditions. If Nagual makes a 6000-poly tree, then uses it sparingly lest it kill FPS, chances are he's not going to want someone to distribute a jungle of his trees; people are going to associate his work with crappy performance.

The reception part is a little obscure, so I'll explain it. The success or failure of an addon doesn't depend on the community as a whole, but on a smaller group that downloads and plays with many addons (again, here's where reputation matters). For individual addons, many people play with them in mission editor, slapping down the addon and a bunch of targets. The values that make a contribution successful to this crowd are how it looks and how it kills. The easiest way to make something look good is give it nice 2048x2048 textures and 20,000 polys. Then boost the lethality, and you've got a winner. The problem is it doesn't play well.

If an addon is unique, it gets more downloads than otherwise.

In addition, there are technical issues. For example, right after release, there are inevitably going to be bugs. Distributing a buggy model makes cleaning up the bugs a problem.

And there's the compatibility issues. If someone releases an addon and screws up the tags, their addon might break yours. We already get enough "my addon is broken" nonsense.

Finally, there are some specific problems. In my case, Unified Artillery is a system designed so that any number of addonmakers can make their units "plug in", and the whole thing will work. The only requirement is that the obelisk be there. For this to work, I have to maintain central control over the core code. If I let each mod group make their own obelisk, and each obelisk had its own set of requirements, I'd lose the "unified" part of "unified artillery". In addition, with all those extra scripts, the whole thing would be more bloated than it currently is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
If the person tells you in their licence you have to use it while hoping on one leg and shouting "I like mice" then that is what you must do to use their hard work.

I plan on doing this for my next release wink_o.gifbiggrin_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I swear to God, if one more person posts in this thread claiming that GPL or another open source license is removing or preventing the rights of an end user I will come to your house and slap you over the head with a bucket of common sense.

If you want to see GPL and other open source licenses in action, you are very welcome to visit http://www.sourceforge.net/ and http://www.freshmeat.net/ .

Thousands of open source projects and derivatives of those projects, and the best thing of all is: It works perfectly.

The only person so far to give a good reason in this thread not to open-source addons is Dinger.

I do agree that completely open source things ("Here, have it all!") would probably cause issues, much the same issues that Dinger mentions.

But on a smaller scale, things would work just fine.

Swedish Forces Pack (which I'm involved with) have shared in the past, and probably will share in the future, models, scripts, textures and sounds with other addon teams.

We see something that we like (such as a script-effect) or something we need (such as a model), and we ask the author of said thing if we can re-use it and perhaps modify it (mostly that's the case with the scripts) for our purposes.

Not once have we been turned down.

Not once have we turned down an addon team that wants to use our things.

And the main reason I have for participating in this thread is that I don't want the above to change. I want addon teams to work together and share things for the common good.

Because, let's face it, there is no point in reinventing the wheel.

As for which open source license that is best suited for distributing addons and scripts, that's a whole other discussion really.

And nothing says you can't use different licenses from time to time.

Write a good script that you don't want to see closed down, use the GPL.

Write a good script that you don't really care if it's closed down, use the BSD license.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good stuff Dinger.I was saying similiar things quite a few pages back.

Vecktorboson (forefather to ofp open source) just was worried that things are steering towards a hiding of addons.

But it's not ,especially with recent additions including Bis demo models and wrp object viewer.

And just because addonmakers don't want to give out their best work, they prolly will show you how and have other work that they are willing to share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good stuff Dinger.I was saying similiar things quite a few pages back.

Vecktorboson (forefather to ofp open source) just was worried that things are steering towards a hiding of addons.

But it's not ,especially with recent additions including Bis demo models and wrp object viewer.

And just because addonmakers don't want to give out their best work, they prolly will show you how and have other work that they are willing to share.

Hi Guys

I agree Bratty and Dinger

I think the main things that have come out of this are.

All addons scripts islands etc. need a licence.

It can be any licence the originator of the work wants a GPL, a BSD, a "this is mine no one else can copy my stuff grr.", a "hoping on one leg and shouting "I like mice" licence there may have to be a virtual hoping for the diasabled and vitual shouting too, the licensor is not responcible for injuries while hopping or shouting in pursuannce of the licence, clause biggrin_o.gif " or any other flavour the originator likes. It is their work.

You can not vary anothers licence. If it is GPL you can not make a derived work from it without it being GPL. That is the law no if buts or maybes.

You can use GPL to learn from and then make your own addon or script as long as it is not a copy it can then be any licence you want. It does not then have to be GPL.

Any one who takes a GPL piece of work rolls it into their work then puts a "this is mine no one else can copy my stuff grr." is breaking the law.

The sollution to that is to make two pbos and refer to the GPL section from the none GPL section. You seperate the GPL section off and publish it with the GPL. Your section can have the "this is mine no one else can copy my stuff grr." licence. This is simple referencing. The only cost is the two pbos.

A BSD license lets the user do what you want with your work. Including make there own "this is mine no one else can copy my stuff grr." but it does not affect any part of the work derived from the BSD license; because you can not vary anothers licence.

Where there are issues of compatability the originator needs to maintain control of the addon (as described by Dinger)

We as a community should all share our techniques.

We as community should write more manuals proper readmes and descriptions.

Hidding of addons by Binarising and encrypting your work to protect it does not work, do not worry Vecktorboson. Anyone who thinks it works is a stupid fool and deserves all the losses they suffer for not licencing it correctly.

The only protection your work has is its copyright and your varience of it know as your licence.

Kind Regards Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not once have we been turned down.

Not once have we turned down an addon team that wants to use our things.

This is what I was originally trying to point out:

99% Of addons ARE "open-source" you just have to ASK for the contents first.

What I was trying to point at was the futility of "enforcing" open source upon people with some kind of license. Its just nonsense, and not-needed.

Speaking for myself, and I expect many other addon makers, all we seek is the common COURTESY that you ASK us before ripping our work to shreds. Not because we dont want to share the knowledge, but because of the reasons Dinger posted, and for a portion of pride.

Its NOT about greed, its NOT about selfishness, its about trying to keep a standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same thought Speedy..

Anyway, here is how I feel on the situation. I have not seen many cases of ripping off other peoples models, or textures, or CPPs, or scripts and calling it their own work.

However, the people that spends the time to make these things daily, including myself, see alot of community members often being very straight forward with their work in rude ways. If you have something bad to say about something, don't say it at all. I believe most people in the community can point out if a 13 yr old child is posting a comment;

"THis map sucks! DIE [insert authorname here] YOU N00b! LOL OMG!!!1"

An example would be OFP.info. Most of us Mature people go there just about more than once every day to see what's new. However the children look at a screenshot and if they dislike it, they need to make themselves noticed, or make themselves feel good about themselves and tell everybody how much they dislike the addon, and how crappy it is to them. Well guess what kiddos, you try better, we dare you. If it's one group of people who have completely set the bar for quality work it's BAS...yet still, people bitch about something bad, and they pick it apart...REALLY HELPFUL MORON, instead why don't you explain what could be improved in a future addon? Everything user made in OFP is not carved in stone, it can be changed, and that's what Flashpoint was meant to be like...

Thankfully Tigershark kept one of the best quotes ever heard, from Schoeler.

"So while constructive criticism or comments are probably appreciated, they should be given with these ideas in mind. What you are criticisizing is somebody's labor of love, produced solely for you to enjoy, at the expense of countless hours, with no reward. The reward to the maker is that you enjoy what they have made. If you don't, it can be disturbing and hurtful, so make sure you critisize tactfully and respectfully, and not rudely or stupidly." - Schoeler

I only make missions and addons to hear the good things people have to say about it. It's very disheartning to hear "This shit sucks, get a life you sl*t" when I worked long and hard for somebody to use it, and hopefully use it in one of their missions.

Thankfully, almost all very active participants in OFP are kind. They understand how things go around here. Everybody else who is a lame jerk does not stick around very long...as long as we all have at least.

As for encrypting a PBO addon of mine.

Would I ever? Of course not.

What if somebody used my addon and was inspired by me to make an addon of their own, but have no idea how?

I don't care if somebody rips off my work, they are only screwing themselves, and they don't have the feeling of true accomplishment and succes as us true addon and mission makers do when we release something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think while Dinger was spot on with a lot of his observations, I think this is indicative of the OFP community becoming involved too much in interpersonal politics.

What ever happened to just making stuff?

It's just sad to see that time has come and gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What ever happened to just making stuff?

Addonmaking involves much more than just 'making stuff'. As nearly every addonmaker will point out if you give them half a chance, addonmaking represents a drain on time, resources, and emotions. What that means is that an addonmaker has a good bit of himself tied up in his product, and that means that he is going to take anything involved with that product seriously. When you mix passion like that with competing personal agendas (or just imagined competition) you will always run into problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the fact that more and more addonmakers encrypt their work. It means that the addon-user can't tweak or change certain things like the config.cpp to fit their own needs and for their own use.

I myself quite do this quite often since I don't play MP, and therefore don't have to worry about it causing problems.

I'd like to have the possibility to so if I choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@ April 04 2004,20:51)]
What ever happened to just making stuff?

Addonmaking involves much more than just 'making stuff'. As nearly every addonmaker will point out if you give them half a chance, addonmaking represents a drain on time, resources, and emotions. What that means is that an addonmaker has a good bit of himself tied up in his product, and that means that he is going to take anything involved with that product seriously. When you mix passion like that with competing personal agendas (or just imagined competition) you will always run into problems.

Sure it is a drain of time. But it is a little bit weird to speak of "products". Sounds commercial... rock.gif

First of all, since nobody --directly-- earns money from addon creation, we do this as hobbyists(*), not as professionals. Every addon maker volunteers to give up some free time, just to improve OFP. Now this goal (improvement) could be achieved more effectively by not blocking each other.

I assume we still have a community? Notice the "comm(on)" in it? By bringing in terms like "license", "law", "product" and behaving like corporations (encryption --do you fear industrial espionage?) simply destroys the community. Just because the "common" is neutralized and distrust is spread.

Guys and gals, OFP is still a game! We are gamers with interest in creative gaming (i.e. addon creation). No more, no less...

(*) http://dict.leo.org/?search=hobbyist wink_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

erm tell me if im wrong but i thought anything you created using Oxygen was officially Bis's rock.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
erm tell me if im wrong but i thought anything you created using Oxygen was officially Bis's rock.gif

For the record , and help the discussion.

Here is the license you must accept before installing Oxygen

Quote[/b] ]IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY:  THE ACCOMPANYING PROGRAM (WHICH INCLUDES COMPUTER SOFTWARE PROGRAM, THE MEDIA AND RELATED DOCUMENTATION IN PRINTED OR ELECTRONIC FORM) IS LICENSED TO YOU ON THE TERMS SET FORTH BELOW, WHICH CONSTITUTES A LEGAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND THE BOHEMIA INTERACTIVE STUDIO S.R.O. ("BI STUDIO").  BY OPENING THIS PACKAGE, AND/OR INSTALLING OR OTHERWISE USING THE PROGRAM, YOU AGREE TO BE LEGALLY BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITH BI STUDIO.  IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO USE THE PROGRAM.

This legal document is an agreement between you, the end user, and BI Studio, for BI Studio's Oxygen and Oxygen Viewer tools, which includes computer software and associated media, electronic documentation, and any upgrades, modified versions, or updates of the software licensed to you by BI Studio, (collectively "Software"). BI Studio is willing to license the software to you only upon the condition that you accept all of the terms contained in this agreement

GRANT OF LICENSE

A. BI Studio grants to you a personal, nonexclusive license to make and use the Software for the purpose of designing, developing, testing, and producing non-commercial game content for PC CD-ROM game Operation Flashpoint provided that you are the only individual using said Software and provided that you do not modify or alter the Software. You may also make personal copies (either in hard copy or electronic form) of any electronic documents included with the Software only for your personal use.

B. You acknowledge and agree that BI Studio is not obligated to provide technical or other support of any kind for the Software.

C. You acknowledge and agree that BI Studio is providing you the Software free of charge in order to allow you creation of non-commercial game content for Operation Flashpoint only and you agree to not commercially exploit any game content you may create using the Software without  BI Studio's prior written permission.

Copyright/Proprietary Rights

You agree that BI Studio and/or its licensors own all right, title and interest in the Software and in all patents, trademarks, trade names, inventions, copyrights, know how and trade secrets relating to the design, manufacture, operation or service of the Software. All rights not expressly granted herein are hereby reserved by BI Studio. Unauthorized copying or use of the Software, or failure to comply with the restrictions provided in this Agreement, will result in automatic termination of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall change BI Studio's or any of its licensors' ownership rights to their respective intellectual property, including but not limited to the Software.

Restrictions

You agree not to rent, lease, modify, adapt, translate, reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the Software or otherwise attempt to discover the source code of the Software.  You agree not to distribute the Software, any of its parts, or any sample files provided by BI Studio for use with the Software without the prior written permission of BI Studio.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT AND OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAWS AND TREATIES. BI STUDIO OR ITS SUPPLIERS OWN THE TITLE, COPYRIGHT, AND OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE SOFTWARE. COPYING THE SOFTWARE EXCEPT AS PERMITTED BY THIS AGREEMENT IS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT UNDER THE LAWS OF YOUR COUNTRY. IF YOU COPY THE SOFTWARE IN VIOLATION OF THIS AGREEMENT THEN YOU ARE VIOLATING THE LAW. YOU MAY BE LIABLE TO BI STUDIO FOR DAMAGES AND YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO CRIMINAL PENALTIES.

REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES

BI STUDIO DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. BI  SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER FOR THE RESULTS OBTAINED THROUGH THE USE OF THE SOFTWARE.

IN NO EVENT WILL BI STUDIO BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER PARTY FOR ANY SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, WHETHER BASED ON BREACH OF CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), PRODUCT LIABILITY, OR OTHERWISE, AND WHETHER OR NOT BI STUDIO HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

This Agreement represents the complete agreement concerning this license between the parties and supersedes all prior agreements

and representations between them.  It may be amended only by a writing executed by both parties.  If any provision of this Agreement is held to be unenforceable for any reason, such provision shall be reformed only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable and the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected.

*edited to add the bolded and underlined words according to the original document form

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah so Bis owns all the stuff we make,but then it gets to ...

did the addonmaker use O2 to make the model or just to add the necessary OFP stuff

And they obviously didn't make the textures in O2

But by using O2 you agree that it is theirs...hows that work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bratty

Can you show me the bit you refer too?

Kind Regards Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote[/b] ]You agree that BI Studio and/or its licensors own all right, title and interest in the Software and in all patents, trademarks, trade names, inventions, copyrights, know how and trade secrets relating to the design, manufacture, operation or service of the Software. All rights not expressly granted herein are hereby reserved by BI Studio.

I think this is the bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×