If this track ever sees an update, could the wonderful modders please correct the camera on last right-hand turn (before pit entrance), as it shakes violently at the moment. Apart from that, amazing circuit and possible my favourite
I think you should do it Marc. Does ANYONE here think it's inappropriate for someone who knows how to do AIW properly to update an existing track (ISI or mod) with better AI? Why would permission need to be sought for this? It's not like the original modders hold any licenses or have any legal claim in the first place on ANY part of the track let alone the AIW. There are way too many good quality tracks out there with crap AI and no prospect of them being improved.
I'm not getting drawn into a legal argument, just simply want to know if this track is getting updated, not just the AIW but other bits and pieces already noted in this thread. Finally all the AIW I've done for other tracks is for my own private use, I never have nor will upload those edited tracks.
Er, ever heard of copyright? I know it's misused or outright abused but it does apply here. The track models and textures are the result of monumental work by the modders. The essential problem is this: With rF2 you have to repack the whole track to include a new AIW. In rF1 you could just do a new AIW, tell people to only download that and unpack to the correct dir. Not so anymore, you'll have to change the whole component and redistribute it in changed form. I do belive that constitutes a reason to ask for permission, not least because it can create huge confusion if multiple slightly different versions of the same track (possibly with the same version number) are out there. Marc, I haven't heard back. If you're doing it anyway for personal use I'll talk to the team and see how they'd like to handle that.
Yea I love this track and would love to see some more attention go into it. It's already quite nice but with a little more TLC it could be VERY nice.
Thanks for the reply ethone. I actually know quite a bit about copyright and modders have zero claim on copyright if they are using someone else's copyrighted material as their base. Was Mid-Ohio created from scratch? Even it was, the owners of Mid-Ohio would still have the claim. Modders only have copyright on fictional tracks created completely from scratch. That being said, I agree 100% on the seeking permission issue as a "professional courtesy." However, after waiting a long time if there is no answer, the default position should be permission granted, not permission not granted for something like AIW that is not affecting any of the track construction or objects or graphics or art.
If they're doing an update and ask nicely I could help them with the AIW, this track is on my "List" of AIW improvements but obviously if they are doing it then there's no need for me to do it for personal use, waste of my time!
I'm fairly certain the only person(s) to be able to claim copyright on the meshes, texture and composition would be the modders, not whoever owns the real life counterpart imitated. When I get filmed or photographed, I don't own the copyright on that piece of footage/photo. I think there was a case in the US somewhat recently (last decade I think?) about a helicopter manufacturer which objected to one of its products being used in a movie. They lost IIRC. Might be good to look that up if you're interested in that sort of thing. Anyway, my position is that the meshes and textures clearly constitute original artwork (just like a photo constitutes original artwork even thought it necessarily depicts already existing things). My first google hit for "copyright original artwork" led to http://emptyeasel.com/2008/03/18/copyright-information-for-artists-how-copyright-laws-protect-your-art/, where I found this paragraph which makes that argument in a more direct way: But I think we digress.
Maybe an update file is a good solution. Create two new mas files with the full content of "MIDOHIO_VIRTUA_LM_CHICANE.MAS" and "MIDOHIO_VIRTUA_LM_NOCHICANE.MAS" and include the new AIW files. Pack them as Update 1.92 for 1.91. The original content is untouched and fully usable (for online races) and you have the new version for offline races. I do this with a lot of tracks and it works perfect.
That was my suggestion, but of course you described in better technical terms. Another example is Carolina Motorsports Park. The author will not do any more work on the track (sad) and the original files were lost in a hard drive crash or something (even sadder). Beta 0.7 is quite usable, although it would be perfect with a few finishing touches. However, the AIW is completely bonked. Just fixing that and repackaging would at least let more people enjoy the hard work of the modder who put this together in the first place.
I tried doing that for Heartland Park Topeka once and it didn't work. A change to the "core" track .mas file (with the AIW, SCN, GDB files) required a full repackaging. It's been a while since I tried that, maybe it has been fixed.