So what i can understand from ppl in these forums on ripping models and tracks is that it is ok to do it to CODEMASTERS, FORZA,ECT.... but its not ok to rip something from some1 who has made it for any other sim ? CAN SOME1 EXPLAIN TO ME THE DIFFERENCE ? Tim could you please tell us what you think on this subject.
No difference to us. We close by request and/or when we notice them having already been asked. Sent from a mobile device using Tapatalk
It's not okay regardless of the source. If the author of the work hasn't granted permission to convert the vehicle/track, one should respect that decision.
Some forums like No Grip demand a DVD check for cross conversion. Then you have your sites that just do not care and put up anything. Anyway people in glass houses should not throw stones Alot of you rFactor users never seemed to worry driving ripped GPL community stuff and posting it everywhere not that long ago. ? To make it worse they are the ONE community use nothing of ours and rip no one.
Very good questions. I find this whole area confusing to say the least. Much of it depends on how you define "ripping". I would say that taking content from Codemasters, Forza, etc. would simply wrong. When it comes to tracks, however, making a track based on another modder's track is more of a grey area.
I agree completely with the first part; no one should use actual content from another sim. Making your own version of their track would be different. The second part I'm not sure of. While it would be appropriate to mention the modder whose work you are basing your own from, I don't see why permission is required. Again, I'm not talking about taking someone's work, making a couple of changes, and calling it your own. I mean building a model or track based on the work others have done. I think people get way too hung up on this whole notion of "ownership", much to the detriment of sim racing.
What is to be unsure of? ISI cometh off the mount with tablet sayith: Thou shalt not use other peoples work without permission. Because you don't agree with law, is no justification to break said law.
If you are only using someone's work as an inspiration from which you are creating your own, then you have created something that you can call your own. However, if you take something that someone else has created and modify it, the original parts still belong to those that created it and thus should require getting permission to use. There are other legal issues involving likenesses, but that is normally for people or how a car looks rather than something like a track where anyone can get images of the track from google earth or old pictures to create the same thing. As far as "getting way to hung up on this whole notion of ownership" thing, consider if you had created something that took 100's of hours to make and someone else came along and took your work and spent 20 minutes changing little things and calling it their own work, would you be upset? There is a reason that there are national and international copyright laws in most countries. How many of the people that currently devote their time creating things do you think would continue to do so if they felt that it would be used by someone else without permission? In order to help keep the modding community alive we need to consider the time and rights of those that have created original content above those that just "rip" other peoples work.
So what the people on the "It's fine to steal a modders work" -side of the fence are saying, is that if it was FREE to begin with you can do whatever you se fit with it ? Now that's a fine way to get the Pay-MOD scene going then, good job on that If you are not required to pay money to download and use a MOD/Track, then atleast have the decency to pay RESPECT! Also, read about http://creativecommons.org/ and "Common law copyright" - I actually urge all modders to use CC-licenses, it's easy and free.
For me if there's a grey area when people modify an existing mod/track it's when they give full credit for that base. If you publicly acknowledge the original modder, are you taking anything away from them by releasing your own modifications to their work? If you look at pretty much any published reference work they don't need permission to use previously published material, but they must acknowledge and reference that original work to avoid legal action. So if modder A makes and releases a track, modder B comes along, pulls it apart, makes changes or perceived improvements, and releases it with full credit given to modder A - what harm is done? That's not a rhetorical question - I'm really curious. When someone releases a track they don't really get anything from it - there's no payment for the mod, they don't 'own' the right to model that particular track (obviously, since someone else can do their own scratch-work of the same track and no one complains [usually]), and whether 1 person downloads it or 10000 people download it makes no material difference to them. So what is someone else taking away from them if they modify it? If you're modelling to gain respect from the community, and the second modder credits you, you shouldn't be losing much respect providing the new version indicates how much of the work is yours. If you're modelling to benefit the community, the new version may be an improvement on what you had, so everyone should be happier. Is there something else modders are looking for? On the other hand, taking someone else's work, modifying it, then releasing it as entirely your own, is obviously wrong. I would imagine doing the same with commercial content (which is probably also licensed) would be another matter entirely as far as litigation goes. But there must also be some legal considerations if someone starts doing pay mods of an actual location without obtaining the right to model the track.
And you guys wonder why people are making paid mods. Because you sure as hell don't respect anyone doing it freely, it would appear. Then that's what they should do. It's not about "loss". We give this forum to you for free, that doesn't mean you can do what you want with it. Unless someone explicitly states they allow it, it is THEIR WORK, not yours. The EULA of every game and simulation you play, has rules on how you can use the software, it's the work of whoever made it, not yours. You don't have the right to do certain things, morally and/or legally. Same deal. It's nothing to do with free versus paid, and it's nothing to do with whether it's real of fantasy content, the basic element here is who did the work, and what ownership and control they choose to have on their work.
Doh It is a act of respect. Who is the fiend, the ones that makes it ? ...or the one attempts to get around it and does not respect peoples wishes ? lol oh dear what a arguement
The fact that there are a lot of people that don't feel they need to respect others rights in regard to content they create unless there is a price for the content is the reason that paid mods may be the way of the future, not Tim's comments on how people are addressing the issue. The simple fact as Tim stated it is that the issue isn't about money or fame or anything else like that. It is about a person's right of ownership of something that they have spent time creating. If others don't respect that right then they are basically saying that they don't respect the person that created the content. In the case of mods for rF2 or any other game for that matter, if I created mods and felt you were showing disrespect to my property, then I would either stop providing the mods or start to charge for them so that some of the people who only view paid for mods as ones that have ownership proof that I owned them. Ultimately, it is your call on what you do DD, but don't expect anyone else to respect you or your creations in return if you choose to rip off someone else s work.
Good point. As I said, I think it's pretty clearly a "rip off" if you simply take someone's entire work, make a couple of changes and call it your own. I think most of us find that morally reprehensible. That is the real question, isn't it? Who's work is it? Say I create Trois-Rivieres for rFactor2. Unless I get licensing or permission from the people who own the rights to that track, I'm infringing their copyrights. So now someone else comes along and takes what I've done and make some improvements to the track and puts their name on it. I really have no legitimate complaint. It's like calling the police when someone takes the bicycle you stole. So which one is the rip-off when both of us are at fault? Now, if I create a track based on Trois-Rivieres, which looks similar but not exactly like it, then I can legitimately call that MY track and it would automatically fall under copyright. Case two: Say you've made a decent version of Thruxton. I come along and make another version built on your work, with some corrections and graphical changes. I say in my readme that I've used your version as a base. Have I ripped off your track? Or have I created a legitimate derived work? That is a very important point. What is the harm? Copyright exists to protect creators of original work from harm. If you are not a professional track or car model maker, and you freely give away your work, then someone who infringes your copyright is doing no harm to you. At that point Copyright is just a word. No argument here. I'm not advocating stealing someone's work. As I've said throughout, anyone using someone else's work as a basis for their own should credit them. At the same time, I get upset when someone puts out an unlicensed track or mod and slaps "Copyright blah blah. No coping of anything here blah blah" all over it. I find that just as offensive. As for the pay ware, I'm all for it. If you are good enough and go to the trouble and expense of securing all the necessary licensing and permissions to create a legitimate track, car, or mod, then you have every right to charge for it.
Don't include me in your payware / rip analogy. I would have nothing to do with the ...... If Tim had any respect for AUDI and BMW as intellectual property owners he would not allow certain stuff on here. He has taken the low road, that is ISI right and choice. It is also my right to speak my mind. I do not agree with "unofficial officially accepted payware, never will. Developer you should always "seem" to be beyond such things. Huh ? What about GPL rips they have many fans and people I respected as stand up guys and they do not care anything about permissions ? What are you on about
Not Exactly. If you made the models from scratch you are entitled to control distribution of those models, even if the subject being modeled is copyrighted by someone else. The model itself is your IP. If someone looked at your model, and made their own model they have the same rights to control their own IP. Take a look at Turbosquid.com Tons of models being sold by artists that do not hold the original rights to the subject being modeled. Grabbing a model from TS, does not mean that you can reupload it to TS and resell it as your own.
