[OA]Tier One Operators V3.x (now with heavies!)

[_S2_ 10]

It's ok only about 80% of the community would leave.

[Fox '09 14]

I'm confused as well, I see RH M14 pack based on BI DMR converted from ODOL, its still up but isn't that a clear violation?

it should apply to all, right?

Edited August 11, 2010 by Fox '09

[Nightrain 10]

It's ok only about 80% of the community would leave.

I know right. Only a small percentage of addon makers make models from scratch.

[Fox '09 14]

It's ok only about 80% of the community would leave.

blankquote

[_S2_ 10]

btw sorry I derailed this thread a bit, outstanding work McNools, there has been lots of love that has gone into this addon.

[scubaman3D 0]

I don't think he's talking about retextures - he's talking about releasing addons made with reverse debinarized ODOLs...but it does beg the question about retextures also, or modifying unbin'd config.cpps or model.cfgs, since many people use these data as a basis for modification.

That would make a person who desaturates the SCAR H texture and makes it black instead of tan is then guilty just as much somebody who debinarizes a SCAR.p3d and releases a custom variant. I suppose these are moral equivalents.

[mcnools 62]

I don't think he's talking about retextures - he's talking about releasing addons made with reverse debinarized ODOLs...but it does beg the question about retextures also, or modifying unbin'd config.cpps or model.cfgs, since many people use these data as a basis for modification.

That would make a person who desaturates the SCAR H texture and makes it black instead of tan is then guilty just as much somebody who debinarizes a SCAR.p3d and releases a custom variant. I suppose these are moral equivalents.

No, that's the thing, I haven't debinarized any ODOLs whatsoever, I think he's talking about modifying any content made by BIS that we don't have the license for in any way. For instance, modifying textures etc.

[Fox '09 14]

it's no surprise. oh well delete armaholic ban half the community problem solved

[Guest]

it's no surprise. oh well delete armaholic

Please let me press the button

But, indeed, this post is a bit worrying and confusing. We are hosting many (or is it ok to say almost all) of those and surely always with the right intension. But reading a post likes that makes me wonder if its worth to take such a risk as I have no way to know whats made legal or not. Unless we should open all models before hosting to check. In that case I am out of here. Up until a few minutes ago I always thought reskins were no issue at all.

I know of a great new game, mother of all red floods I think its called which could use a community site :p

Edited August 11, 2010 by Guest
added a little exta line

[Rhodesy77 11]

guys how about you all calm the f*** down and wait for some1 to clarify whats going on b4 we all say the end is near?...

[therev709 10]

Well in any case I'm downloading this and every other addon I've put off downloading just in case ;)

And you couldn't delete Armaholic, cause even if they had to get rid of all their addons, they still mirror editing tools and missions/campaigns! :D

But IMHO if McNool's or any other addon maker isn't making $$$$ off of editing and crafting new addons out of BIS material, BIS still wins because people still have to buy the game in order to play them. Addons by the community are and always will be free, its one of the, if not THE, best thing I love about this game is the amount of quality content you get with the game along with the community.

Edited August 11, 2010 by TheRev709

[_S2_ 10]

I think we are misunderstanding things here now that I look deeper into it. Basically from what I am reading, is that if you modify BIS stuff, it has to be open source and other people are free to modify your addon. If you create it from scratch, then you hold the right to not allow people to modify it. Or maybe I am completely missing the point of Maruk posting here.

Edited August 11, 2010 by _S2_

[Nightrain 10]

I don't know Cav, it seems like hes saying the community can't use models/textures from OA or ArmA 2 as reference or a base.

Mcnools:I just used models and textures from OA and changed them, just like everybody else does.

Maruk: Not correct. In fact, this approach is really wrong. And this community needs for its own sake to understand licenses more.

[BigMorgan 11]

I think BIS' lawyers need forum accounts at this point...

[mr burns 131]

I don't know Cav, it seems like hes saying the community can't use models/textures from OA or ArmA 2 as reference or a base.

How about configs? What most of us use as a base for addonmaking are in fact de´binarized (the devil) ArmA2 & OA configs. It´s the same mechanism disabled by similar routines which are now suspect to get witchhunted.

And don´t get me started on hexediting models, it´s basically also using licensed content, but has been considered fair use since the beginning of ArmA1 when the first crappy retextures were released.

Now that someone opened the box of pandora just a little bit more it´s all our fault? I cannot believe it!

[_S2_ 10]

Well as Norailgunner pointed out this threadhttp://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=66013

It almost seems that Maruk is contradicting himself. Also, why would he tell us about licensing and not even remind us of what licensing is used for Arma? Where does it state this in a plainly obvious spot, because I wasn't able to find it in 10 minutes of searching.

[Fox '09 14]

if what i'm hearing is true, I'm out, along with other faces you guys know.

[mcnools 62]

Now that someone opened the box of pandora just a little bit more it´s all our fault? I cannot believe it!

The thing is, I haven't even done anything that hasn't been done since ArmA was released, I made my old Deser Vehicle-reskins back then using the exact same method as I did now, new config, modified textures, hex-edited models to point to these textures.

And hundreds (or even thousands?) of other addons have been released using this method aswell.

[BigMorgan 11]

Perhaps BIS strongly believe beards, like women, do not belong on the front line?

(just trying to keep things light around here as the sky falls ;))

[maruk 80]

I primarily corrected a statement here that simply was not correct and mislead people about license and free usage of Arma 2 and/or Operation Arrowhead content for creation of derivative work and free redistribution, however, I suggest this topic do not divert this much off topic here from Tier One Operators release.

Also, please note that this type of problem is not only problem of BI content but generally any other content created for the game.

The fact that you can technically do something does not mean you really have rights (in terms of license, legal rights or moral rights...) to do it.

Considering BI track record with supporting our creative user base in all possible means I can ensure you that BI will continue in this mod maker and community friendly fashion.

I am going to open a separate topic for this problem as it definitelly has broader reach than just this addon (taken mostly as an example because of a claim in this topic).

[mcnools 62]

Thanks for clearing that up Marek. :)

[Chrisgs 10]

Nice work, thanks. These get better and better.

[miles teg 1]

Overall I think BI has done a good job on not taking a heavy-handed approach, but rather gently nudging the mod community in particular directions. I REALLY appareciate it that they don't get lawyers on the forums and go crazy banning people and stuff. But anyways...back to the original topic... beards... We need big heavy beards...and long hair!!! Maybe that hippie head proxy could be used from the civilian! :)

[AnimalMother92 10]

Thank you for the update McNools, amazing work.

[wld427 1705]

can we get a link to some clarification here. Cause last i asked as long as we were not backwards porting anything it was OK.....

I need to know if i have to delete project RACS as it is heavily dependant on BIS textures and model componets.