USEC Maule M7 - WIP

[Helmut_AUT 0]

Nice. I make a reasonable good suggestion for this aircraft and it goes under while someone (glynn) is busy stiring up a flamewar here. Sometimes this board can be so useless and petty.

[rocket 9]

Nice. I make a reasonable good suggestion for this aircraft and it goes under while someone (glynn) is busy stiring up a flamewar here. Sometimes this board can be so useless and petty.

Suggestion wasn't lost, and while I think the source asset question was perhaps was a little confrontational - authorship was and always will be a reasonable question.

I want to make it very clear : heavy use in developing this addon was made of many sources; including FSX, 3d reference libraries, etc.... I will add this was spelled out in the build notes. Also note (as I did in that), that it is not a port of the FSX model, and indeed, it falls short of being a truely faithful replica. I also called on the assistance of many, many individuals. Some of whom I forgot to credit when I hurridley released the ArmA version (before I got my ArmA2 copy and lost interest in ArmA!). I will remedy that in the ArmA2 version credits.

In terms of your suggestion, I'll definately look into that. It should be reasonably straightforward to provide this, and I have a new texture for the floats with plenty of spare room for me to put the extra components on that. Will affect the performance slightly on this version, but it will be negligible.

[Supah 0]

glynn.are you trying to settle some score?

Seconded, you are coming across like someone with a chip on his shoulder Glynn.

[glynn0 0]

Because of the way video cards break up a model to render it, I wouldn't imagine that much useful could be gained from such a model for Armed Assault. What works with Armed Assault is very, very different from what works with FSX, Battlefield 2, and games like that. Personally, from what I can tell the output wouldn't be much use beyond reference material - but I could be wrong. For me, it was much easier to use the variety of 3d library models that exist, of varying polygon complexity.

Actually you are completely wrong, models captured from 3dripperdx are very usefull in Arma. You have to use some (though not much) poly reduction and to make sure that verts are too close together (again built in to max). But a conversion for working in game takes about an hour.

---------- Post added at 01:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:41 PM ----------

Seconded, you are coming across like someone with a chip on his shoulder Glynn.

I don't know ROCKET at all. He took the model and textures from a copyrighted game (FSX) and put them into Arma , if you are fine with that then so be it.

---------- Post added at 01:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 PM ----------

glynn.are you trying to settle some score?

Why because I pointed out how he took model and textures from a copyrighted game and used them in Arma , wow...

[Blue_Flight 0]

Actually you are completely wrong, models captured from 3dripperdx are very usefull in Arma. You have to use some (though not much) poly reduction and to make sure that verts are too close together (again built in to max). But a conversion for working in game takes about an hour.

---------- Post added at 01:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:41 PM ----------

I don't know ROCKET at all. He took the model and textures from a copyrighted game (FSX) and put them into Arma , if you are fine with that then so be it.

---------- Post added at 01:44 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 PM ----------

Why because I pointed out how he took model and textures from a copyrighted game and used them in Arma , wow...

Better read what Rocket said instead of still making accusations.

Keep up the great work, Rocket!

[glynn0 0]

@Rocket: You do realize that you used FSX for MORE than inspiration. You cut and pasted numerous parts of textures from FSX into the paa file for Arma. This would definately be a violation of copyright law. Good examples that you know about are internal textures for cockpit and of course the PROP.

---------- Post added at 02:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:54 PM ----------

Better read what Rocket said instead of still making accusations.

Keep up the great work, Rocket!

I read exactly what he said and i have both the FSX version and his Arma 1 version on my screen right now. His textures are cut and pasted from various textures from FSX, not used a inspiration but cut and pasted. A good example of course is the PROP texture (and associated alpha channel) , they are identical. This would definately be a violation of copyright law. BTW, you can easily see this yourself. Download his ARMA 1 addon, extract using UNPBO, download BIS tools, use PAA viewer and open up the textures from FSX. You can easily see where he cut and pasted them from the source DDS files in FSX. Yes, he 're-arranged' some parts but that sure doesn't change the fact he TOOK them from FSX.

Edited July 1, 2009 by glynn0

[rocket 9]

They're bold asertions. But to be honest, I'm fine with that, I don't feel a compelling need to defend myself, nor should anyone else. I also think it's fine for Glynn to raise his own thoughts and opinions, regardless of whether he feels he needs to provide evidence or not. I disagree that anyone could get any model working and in game in "about an hour" that wasn't already prepared for ArmA (shadow lod, geometry, cockpit, animation, textures, shaders, etc...)

I would ask, please read the build notes that it shipped with before going too crazy!

This project would never cut it, if I wanted to sell it commerically because, by the very nature of the task, I set out to recreate the FSX Maule experience in ArmA. Under "fair use", I opted to heavily use the FSX screenshots and textures to generate my own. How far can you go on this "fair use" concept of generating textures? I'm not sure, I'm welcome to hear peoples thoughts on this. Gosh I don't recall ever saying I used FSX for "inspiration", I used FSX as a major source using images, screenshots, and cloning texture detail (such as rivets) in bodypaint. I've spelled that out in several places! Also note, not all the textures included with the ArmA1 model are *actually* used.

Last year, I came to the decision that I was going to open my work up to anyone and everyone for use and modification. There will be no restrictions on the use or edit of my work, it's there for all others to use and abuse as they see fit. If you've got a problem with my work, fine, you've said your piece. Take a gander at the source when it's released, and you can decide on your opinions then.

[glynn0 0]

@Rocket: I am sorry but FAIR USE does not allow someone to take textures from one game and put them into another , even if you credit the original author, without their permission.

[rocket 9]

@Rocket: I am sorry but FAIR USE does not allow someone to take textures from one game and put them into another , even if you credit the original author, without their permission.

You've said that I have taken the model and the textures directly from FSX, and ported them across. I deny this. FSX WAS used, along with a crapload of other sources. I supplied comparison textures.

Look mate, you've said your piece - I've said mine. I think you're picking and choosing your own facts and information to present your own picture. Presenting everything you say as fact. It's difficult to discuss because PARTS of what you say are true, FSX WAS used to generate much of the textures, but your message is so distorted.

I'm not going to debate what you think fair use is, or is not, here on this forum - because undoubtably people will get confused about where any of my MANY sources came from.

Regardless of what you say or do, I will be:

- Releasing this mod

- Crediting everyone involved

- Releasing the source for EVERYONE to use

- Trying to implement peoples suggestions, or helping them to make their own edits.

And nothing you, or anyone else for that matter, say will stop me from doing that. If you think that you'll make me upset, or angry, decide I'm not going to release it out of frustration, you're mistaken. I'll let people make their own minds up.

Edited July 1, 2009 by Rocket

[loki 1]

this is exactly why i won't post my work in the BI forums...

trolls who think they know it all.. spewing hate like its a fresh breeze..

let's clear a few things up.. shall we...

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.†The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

2. The nature of the copyrighted work

3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission.

.....

in other words.. if no money is being made... and so long as he says it for 'educational' purposes only.. he is covered..

and anything that has to be ported... converted.. configed.. and reskinned is well beyond the reasonable level.

you should ask an attorney... we did a long time ago.

Edited July 1, 2009 by Loki

[soldier2390 0]

what a shame things still come down to this! loki im glad to see you back, and i hope ppl dont run you away again. same to you rocket...just keep doing what you guys are doing if ppl have a problem...its as simple as a PM, or just dont download!!!

[adumb 0]

I’m saddened and disappointed by the outcome of this topic.

[andersson 285]

I think the outcome is good. Rocket stands without doubt and showed us what he made, how and from where. He told us he will continue with this release. Loki made a really good post so we all know what is right or not.

Some credit has to go to Glynn0 as he asked the question, he pushed it alittle to far though...

[glynn0 0]

this is exactly why i won't post my work in the BI forums...

trolls who think they know it all.. spewing hate like its a fresh breeze..

let's clear a few things up.. shall we...

http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.†The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

2. The nature of the copyrighted work

3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission.

.....

in other words.. if no money is being made... and so long as he says it for 'educational' purposes only.. he is covered..

and anything that has to be ported... converted.. configed.. and reskinned is well beyond the reasonable level.

you should ask an attorney... we did a long time ago.

So then based on what I have shown and what Rocket has said. Is his work fair use, he cut and pasted certain portions of the textures in question and some he took directly and converted (Prop dds file as example).

Is this really fair use. The problem is this. This isn't just Rockets issue, this issue is also for BIS (as its their forums) and of course any site that hosts it later.

---------- Post added at 07:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:06 PM ----------

what a shame things still come down to this! loki im glad to see you back, and i hope ppl dont run you away again. same to you rocket...just keep doing what you guys are doing if ppl have a problem...its as simple as a PM, or just dont download!!!

It isn't that simple. If people convert or cut/paste work from copyrighted works and then post said works to "OUR" (the community) sites, those sites MAY be liable for infringment.

Rocket has stated what he did in terms of the textures, he cut and pasted some and of course some he converted directly from FSX.

I think LOKI post said that those things go beyond fair use.

---------- Post added at 07:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:08 PM ----------

I wonder something

If someone on another forum or game takes portions of ARMA or ARMA II and creates a game. I wonder how many people who are condemning me would say the same thing to that person.

[loki 1]

@Rocket.. this is the last post i will do in your thread.. awesome aircraft b.t.w...

@troll0

last time i respond to you.. you send me a PM you want to further this with me.

read this line again....

"you should ask an attorney... we did a long time ago."

here is a good place to start....

http://www.cyberlaw.pro/general/practices/copyright.html

stop playing armchair attorney.. and go find out..

stop destroying this thread with your personal interpretations of the law.

if it bothers you so damn much.. put your money where your mouth is.

again sorry Rocket... just seen to many good and open modders leave the community because of people spouting nonsense.

[chops 111]

Great looking plane Rocket! You've obviously got a lot of talent, good to hear you'll be helping others with their work, ...teach a man to fish and all that.

glynn0, is there a copyright on question marks?

[Xtreme1989 10]

This addon looks awesome ! Good job Rocket ;)

[MBot 0]

Looks phantastic. May I suggest a variant that has a couple of WP smoke rockets strapped under the wing? Would make a great makeshift (A)FAC bird (compareable to the O-1 Bird Dog).

[Alex72 1]

ROCKET:

Amazing aircraft!!! :) Hell of a good job on that. Your work is highly appreciated. Big thanks!

glynn0:

Give it up.

[Whiskey27 1]

Luckily you are taking this troll in stride and continuing your work in getting this aircraft done. Bravo to you, and the thing looks beautiful and can't wait to give her a go... Seems like this thing in camo would fit in right with an insurgent/guerrilla spotter plane :D.

[kylania 568]

Well done Rocket, superb work as always! :)

[mikebart 1]

looks great Rocket, very polished piece of work

[Alex72 1]

Rocket:

Can the hidden selection with blood splatter be set to left, middle, right side of a tank for example so that if you hit a unit on the right side it will leave a blood splat there, and when hit again in front it leaves a mark there etc? Or does it need an object like you added this to the prop?

Im not good at this. Just trying to understand what is possible in ARMA2. :) Would be neat if marks could be left on vehicles when droven into units etc.

Alex

[mikebart 1]

Hey rocket, were you able to use a mask on the cubemap to hide areas you dont want to be shiny? assuming it is a cubemap you're using.

[norsu 180]

Hey rocket, were you able to use a mask on the cubemap to hide areas you dont want to be shiny? assuming it is a cubemap you're using.

You can do that by making non shining areas pitch black in the specular map.