RKSL Studios - WIP Discussion

[scubaman3D 0]

Bummer but I understand the decision.

Such tools have circulated privately among more seedy individuals since A1 but this is the first prolific release.

[Luomu 10]

It doesn't matter if the file is somehow protected or not, all you have to do is load the model in the game and use something like 3D Ripper to capture the model + textures off the video card data. If people are determined to steal the content they can do it.

[PuFu 4591]

It doesn't matter if the file is somehow protected or not, all you have to do is load the model in the game and use something like 3D Ripper to capture the model + textures off the video card data. If people are determined to steal the content they can do it.

True, but lets not turn this thread about "how can models be ripped" plus links, tips and tools though

[kremator 1064]

Should we ask for the same protection for island makers, scripters as well ? Can't their stuff be stolen too ?

[[frl]myke 14]

Should we ask for the same protection for island makers, scripters as well ? Can't their stuff be stolen too ?

I wouldn't disagree but keep in mind that models can be exported to 3ds format within O2 which makes it easy to use it for other games. Islands and script can't be used in other games than BIS games.

[fighterman 10]

i might sound stupid but couldn't u just password protect the p3d file

[konyo 14]

i might sound stupid but couldn't u just password protect the p3d file

Thats a good idea? But can you even do that? :confused:

And if you could, would the game still be able to play it as it has a password on it?

[Fox '09 14]

that wouldn't work.

but what they are doing makes sense , disappointing but it makes sense.

Edited August 6, 2010 by Fox '09

[fighterman 10]

can rock take them to court for breaking the EULA

[konyo 14]

can rock take them to court for breaking the EULA

I doubt it, because the law/police in england allways say the same thing. We cant do anything, untill/unless you have evidance :(

[Luomu 10]

can rock take them to court for breaking the EULA

I think he did, as he said "The knock on of which was that I got a load of legal shite which cost me quite a bit in lawyers fees."

[rksl-rock 1300]

It doesn't matter if the file is somehow protected or not, all you have to do is load the model in the game and use something like 3D Ripper to capture the model + textures off the video card data. If people are determined to steal the content they can do it.

Exactly, but this tool makes it far easier to steal a model and retain its mesh and vertex properties. Ive only tried DX grabbing twice and each time i ended up with a horrible mess that would have taken be twice as long to fix as it would to make a new model. There is a huge difference in the work and ease of use.

All they can actually do is kill all the links to the existing tool on those forums. Nothing more nothing less, especially since the tool was designed to serve a different purpose altogether(i am assuming T_D had nothing of this sort in mind when he created it), and is not breaking any EULA (AFAIK) as long as no content that has been reversed-engineered is published...

Can you tell me what the intended purpose was?

I've had several people claim that it is necessary for educational purposes, which lets face it is a pretty lame reason. You can get 99% of the info you need for modelling legitimately from the BIS ArmA1 MLODs and the BIKI. Other possible uses are for island makers to make object placement easier in visitor.

But the only other reason I can think of is to make model grabbing easier so you can edit and re-release the model. Which is against the BIS EULA included with the game and the tool. There has been enough precedents in the past to support that too.

Should we ask for the same protection for island makers, scripters as well ? Can't their stuff be stolen too ?

As Myke says they could also be stolen easily, but they could only be used within the community. And as history has repeatedly proven they always get found out.

I honestly don't know of a good way to protect our content. There are lots of options but all can be circumvented.

• PBO encryption - cracked repeatedly in the past

• P3D encryption - also cracked previously

• VBS2 style USB dongles - not practical in our world of DLC and web based distribution

Personally I'm favouring the "really big stick" approach to security. If you catch a thief beat the crap out of him with a REALLY big stick!

Seriously I think the only real solution is support the addon makers properly and make sure would be thieves know they wont be tolerated. We all know someone will try and steal stuff. But there is no reason they should be allowed to get away with it without penalty.

can rock take them to court for breaking the EULA

Its not my EULA this tool breaks.

Edited August 6, 2010 by RKSL-Rock

[Schancky 10]

So what happens from here then Rock? Are you shutting up shop? :(

[rksl-rock 1300]

So what happens from here then Rock? Are you shutting up shop? :(

I dont know to be honest mate. We will publish some of the stuff that isnt affected by the legal considerations. UAVs etc but I really dont know if i can be arsed to remake all the models. I had planned to remake/upgrade some of them but the core issue would still haunt us. So i dont know yet. I'm still rather angry that this has happened.

And I am totally crushed that all the work that has gone into the UK and Ilhas Africanos projects has been totally wasted because I just cant safely release it now.

I'm going to have a little "holiday" and decide later.

Edited August 6, 2010 by RKSL-Rock

[fighterman 10]

i might be wrong but didnt the arma underground people rip the MLODS of the BIS C130 to make a AC130. they all got banned from armahollic by foxhound i think.

heres the one im on about

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVyeEWXkF60&feature=player_embedded#!

Edited August 6, 2010 by fighterman
added

[Fox '09 14]

I don't remember that, but RH has his m14 pack, he's still here, addon pack is still up, no problems at all.

BIS DMR/m14

also, anyone remember this: http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/ODOL_Explorer

Edited August 6, 2010 by Fox '09

[fighterman 10]

no dosent ring a bell

[PuFu 4591]

That's interesting, Pufu, because you suggest to all and sundry to use eliteness to unbinarize peoples' work on the o2 forums 5 times a week. You went even so far as to say that it is impossible that I don't unbinarize the work of others.

Sorry, you got something you want to say but don't know how? Or it is just one of those post where you want to boost your post count by picking on someone just for the sake of it

Firstly, i suggested to unbinarized BIS rvmats, and configs. Please, don't mix up models with .cpp files(for your information, eliteness can not unrapify .bin and .rvmat files) . And in fact that is something i did myself, in order to aquire base classes, as well as see how the super shader works, before any sort of information about it was posted.

Secondly, IRC, i said it was impossible that you have never unbined a .bin config. I have not specified who that was. I said that because i have learned a lot by looking over the sampled files, the configs that A1 came with, and the rvmat settings as well. And i am sure others have learned the same way, especially since the information available on the biki is scarce and/or incomplete in most cases. 5 times a week you're saying? Hmm, i guess counting is very hard indeed...

Thirdly, it has been discussed before to what extent the A2 EULA goes regarding content creation, and, if you have read it, you would have noticed that it does not allow you to alter the content in any way, and that means addons as well, no matter if you change a line pointing towards a model p3d or an entire set of inheritances. But since i don't remember you releasing something anyways, i am certain you did not break any of the license agreements.

Now if you think taking models and selling them on turbosquid, no matter if those are BIS or a community member, and unbinarizing BIS configs and rvmats to have a look over for a proper understanding of those files is the same thing, then it's point of view and that's the end of it. But at least have the decency of keeping all the information clear when you post around like you have, although i doubt you are actually capable of such thing.

Can you tell me what the intended purpose was?

I am not really sure since i found about its existence not long ago myself, when looking over some other very useful tools TD made, such as moveObject etc. I guess he is the only one that can actually give you an answer. But then again, i doubt it was done so that one can easily rip content off and use it as his own, or sell it further down in some 3rd party application.

I've had several people claim that it is necessary for educational purposes, which lets face it is a pretty lame reason. You can get 99% of the info you need for modelling legitimately from the BIS ArmA1 MLODs and the BIKI. Other possible uses are for island makers to make object placement easier in visitor.

While i am one of those ppl who thinks it is easier to learn by looking over existing lines of code, for models, it's different and i do agree that A1 Sample MLODs are sufficient to get the grips of the layout the p3d file needs for it to work inside the game. As for learning to model, it won't help much, without trying it yourself, or following some tutorial or what not, no matter what software we are talking about.

Edited August 7, 2010 by PuFu

[rexehuk 16]

I think you should close yourself off from the public BIS community and make addons purely for me to enjoy.

I'm willing to exchange beer for this... For now you'll be pleased to know our group has now adopted your Typhoon as it's main Air asset :).

Shame all this has happened to you Rock and I'm sure it will have knockon effects with UKF etc... hope you won't leave us as it will be a huge loss.

[PuFu 4591]

So you're saying that unbinning some files is okay but others is not? I like your perspective. It's self serving. I should adopt that.

To some extent, yes that is what i am saying. It is related to the scope of it. You cannot sell a config, and you cannot do harm to other ppl work by using a config created by BIS.

In my experience, the sample files and helpful people have been sufficient.

I guess those helpful people that have also shared their knowledge on the biki have learned it from GOD himself, or from some seminars BI held...And i am not talking about specific issues, but the core structure of BI configs, values and what not. (do remember the amount of information (or in fact the gaps in what was) available on biki some years back, right after the release of A1 for instance)..

Is altering the command line switch altering the core data? I think not. Interesting argument, though.

I guess you should read again the EULA that you have agreed on with when installing A2. And no, i am not talking about shortcut target line here.

AFAIK, we're talking about the capability to open content that should not be opened. It's either right or it's wrong. The only reason it might be wrong is because that allows for the possibility that someone might abuse it. This is what this conversation is about.

Yes, content that should NOT be opened. I would have guessed that one could have learned that not everything is only good or bad, black or white in this world...

Which files comes under this category? Everything that BI has released binarized for instance? Well then, i guess every retexture, every config fix and edit that comes out in the form of an addon should be banned, and their creators hanged, since it modifies the core data, or files that have been released with another structure. Hex-editing is also bad since i changes patch of a file that has been prior binarized....

I just found it amusing that out of one side of your mouth you're recommending unofficial tools to crack into files to anyone who's starting up addon making

Because there are no official tool to unpbo a file, is there? OR you are saying that a pbo shouldn't be opened in the first place..

Everything outside BI tools is unofficial i guess, is it not?

If those tools you are talking about, such as KG cpbo, PS plugin, eliteness, armaedit and whatever else are so harmfull to this community and BI developers, why are those released here? Why are those so freely talked about on those forums? Why are those getting support and in depth explanation, even from current moderators? Why are those linked on the biki, when its content is monitored?

, and out of the other you're saying that it's wrong if this behaviour progresses to a point where it become inconvenient to your friends.

It has nothing to do with friendship here, or my relation to RKSL, Rock or whoever else...

I guess it is very hard to understand where i see the no-crossing line at by reading my previous posts? In my mind there is a huge difference from using a config to learn its structure to selling a model on a 3rd party website.

When you recommend that behaviour to someone you don't know to what extent they are going to take your advice, since you and your ACE tag have pretty much recommended that behaviour.

Not sure if i can follow..You are saying that i should be not linking to any unofficial tool, not share any of my previous experience outside BI Official Tools, because when i do that and ppl see my (former) signature, they would go and rip configs and models apart (using eliteness) and release it without permission or sell it?

I created my first config for the CWR Trabant with the help of some friendly people, OFPEC, the wiki, and the examples. If I can do it, anyone can. I have no special talents in that area.

That is great indeed that you were able to achieve that, and that there were friendly ppl with more knowledge to help out. I know that it is important to skip some of inevitably trial and error steps by having someone's guidance.

But then again, do you actually feel that all those tools created by the community (with the exception of the one Rock has been talking about, and some others) are there to spoil/ruin the modding community or aid us to an extent and speeding some of the workflow?

Edited August 7, 2010 by PuFu

[Fox '09 14]

should we make a thread about this? i think what has been said is over, and we should just talk in a thread dedicated to the topic.

[[aps]gnat 28]

And I am totally crushed that all the work that has gone into the UK and Ilhas Africanos projects has been totally wasted because I just cant safely release it now.

Sorry, I dont understand. In the end EVERYONE'S 3d model can be ripped, from ANY game or program, one way or another, with or without tools that might be targeting a specific community etc.

Everything can be reverse engineered (its only the amount of effort required that varies how offen a rip happens)

Such tools existed for many many games, including OFP, for ArmA, and now for ArmA2

The fact that a tool exists shouldn't mean the community should implode.

As a hobbist, if I spent 500 hours making a 3d model that ended up being ripped, I'm entitle to be pissed and feel hard-done-by just as much as someone who does it for a living.

Quite frankly, IMHO, if you do make models for a living, and one of those models might be something you might want to sell one day, given these obvious risks, why the fuck would you put it in ArmA ?!

If the consideration is your concerned that someone else copyright etc could be breached/lost, I think it fair to say "The file was resonably protected" at release.

But to me, my model (obviously not in the same class) are also at risk, but I'm resigned to the fact, and its a risk I'm willing to take.

And lets face it, BIS was willing to do so too, by releasing their ArmA1 model pack.

Configs, Scripts, Model.cfg, RVMATs etc are NOT something I'm concerned about.

People can copy and rip as much as they like (I prefer they use them to LEARN), CREDIT where due, but ultimately they are NOT similar to 3d models because these files are only used with the BIS products, no one (almost no one) can make money from my sweat and tears with those.

Personally I'm favouring the "really big stick" approach to security. If you catch a thief beat the crap out of him with a REALLY big stick!

Yeh, agree. When it boils down to it though, its probably the only true protection we have.

[rksl-rock 1300]

@ Pufu and Max power. Get a room or go outside and cool down. Either way take the bickering elsewhere please.

Gnat;1710339']Sorry' date=' I dont understand... [/quote']

I'm sorry you don't understand. I really don't think it can be much clearer. Please read what I actually said again.

Gnat;1710339']... Quite frankly' date=' IMHO, if you do make models for a living, and one of those models might be something you might want to sell one day, given these obvious risks, why the fuck would you put it in ArmA ?! [/quote']

Quite frankly why shouldn't I use the models i create? TBH the ones I use in arma are ones that I created for myself and just happened to sell. That's why they all have the clause for "non commercial use". You wouldn't catch me using commissioned models in ArmA.

Gnat;1710339']...In the end EVERYONE'S 3d model can be ripped' date=' from ANY game or program, one way or another, with or without tools that might be targeting a specific community etc. [/quote']

The distinction here is the ease or ripping. Not the fact it can or cannot be done.

Gnat;1710339']If the consideration is your concerned that someone else copyright etc could be breached/lost' date=' I think it fair to say "The file was resonably protected" at release. [/quote']

And again you've proved you didn't read exactly what I actually said. When this tool became public i could no longer say that the models were "reasonably protected". So, since I had previously told people here that they were going to be released I thought it was at least courteous of me to explain why they will now not be released. Most people have clearly understood that.

Gnat;1710339']But to me' date=' my model (obviously not in the same class) are also at risk, but I'm resigned to the fact, and its a risk I'm willing to take.[/quote']

Gnat;1710339']

And lets face it' date=' BIS was willing to do so too, by releasing their ArmA1 model pack. [/font']

There is reasonable risk and there is unreasonable risk. When BIS released the game the tools did not exist.

I know the tool exists so it would be stupid of me to release the affected model wouldn't it.

Edited August 7, 2010 by RKSL-Rock

[raikitsune 10]

That really does blow hard about the MLOD thing. It's a shame that once again someone in the community has shat all over the thing that keeps the community together so strongly, the addon makers. I hope this all gets resolved but from what you've said rock i can't see any way around the legal position you find yourself in either. Its not as if even the removal of the tool from the forums and sites will stop the potential proliferation of it and also the risk to the models and thus the contractual terms that were agreed to at the production of the models. :( Ahh well, just glad we at least have some of your brilliant work to play with in the game.

Hope it all gets sorted out.

Per Ardua.

[[aps]gnat 28]

Meh, I was speaking in part to your situation, and rhetorically to the community situation the others are debating.

I admit I'm mixing too much in that post and not helping the situation.

If a public link to the tool was dropped, then I'd suggest models are then "reasonably protected", because in part anyone could have developed a tool anytime.

I've been deliberately avoiding discussing the actually tool in other posts, simply because the more people who know about it, the higher the risk of "problems" like this developing, as well as other non-community people arriving simply to rip models, and nothing else.