*not necessarily
#ip_rights_violations
river spear
Have you seen the watermark yet? How annoying it is?
You can sometimes not even see everything anymore because of it
It's not the best solution, that's true, but there aren't that many other options for BI to introduce paid content
hallow frigate
Is it okay to say, that players who own the DLC have to pay less ingame currency / reputation / whatever than people who don't? Else I would still find it a bit unfair for those who spend the money. And about the watermark: it really depends on the player how annoying it is. I didn't feel moltested by it at all.
river spear
You can do that, yes @hallow frigate
You spend the money on the DLCs not to have more content over others but rather to support bohemia. Also consider that some features are really only available for DLC owners
For example the upcoming mission pack spec ops DLC won't be available to anyone but DLC owners in any way
queen wing
That script already works with the Jets DLC, if they update it it will probably work on everything i just spend โฌ22 on
little crown
none of the content would exist if no-one was prepared to pay for it
tulip nexus
small watermark http://i.imgur.com/dZ5hsNQ.jpg
queen wing
and does that stay there all the time or dissapear after a while? because i still think its stupid, everyother gamedeveloper would probably ban you or something, but here its just allowed ๐ค
midnight vine
Hardly noticable... ๐ still the best DLC system i've ever seen.
tulip nexus
it stays there for longer the more you use the assets
and IIRC there's telemetry for how long you've used them, so they add up over numerous sessions, rather than going back to the minimal popup every time you restart the game
sullen lichen
how exactly can BI be fine with that
so I'll put it into our modpack and we can all use everything without buying a single DLC? (hypothetical)
midnight vine
Nope - i do not believe that this would work with APEX for the island. The rest of the stuff yes but would still leave the watermarks which is the annoying bit.
river spear
It works with everything but Apex so far
If you dont own Apex, the files for Tanoa are not on your harddrive
Meaning all objects and the terrain itself, the weapons of Tanoa and vehicles work with the "bypass" method though
faint nacelle
Why dont you want to support Bohemia and development of Arma?
river spear
They don't because they obviously get everything else in life for free aswell
faint nacelle
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
river spear
Battlefield 1 with all its things you can buy well exceeds 150โฌ
yet people complain when they buy a DLC season pass for 20โฌ
"Oh shit waddup"
cobalt creek
dumbshits ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
river spear
ArmA with all DLCs costs 75โฌ
and that doesnt count in the discounts you get when you purchase them together
cobalt creek
Thats 50% of a LIFE-Server cost each Month!!!111oneoneoneoneeleven
river spear
I paid for Battlefield 1 without any DLCs alone 60โฌ or so
@cobalt creek Everything should be free
cobalt creek
yepyep
echo orchid
i paid 80 euros for supporter edition...didn't have to pay a dime since
queen wing
@echo orchid i have never had the option to buy this supporter edition
echo orchid
how come?
queen wing
when i bought my Arma i could only buy the standard game with the first DLC bundle (back in 2014)
Or just the game itself
little crown
so more accurate to say that you missed the opportunity to buy the supporters edition
queen wing
probably then yes
little crown
right, wasn't trying to be picky, I just think that was the source of PuFu's confusion
tender hawk
It was only available thorough the BI Store and only before A3 went 1.x
pliant oar
anyway it seems my steam profile is getting new special fanbase feedback ...
fossil basalt
I like how one of the commentors personally called me out on the forums for being "corrupt", yet has just been caught "red-handed".
echo orchid
@pliant oar - some public shaming plox tnx
fossil basalt
Check the forum for "my mod was taken down" or have a look at the links above ๐. I only have sympathy for false positives.
bronze oasis
Oh wow, that is terrible.
fossil basalt
Which part? That people are thieves or that a metric butt ton of illicit mods were shut down?
bronze oasis
Its terrible that people are thieves, and that they react in such a, not really unexpected, way.
The entitlement levels are through the roof.
carmine folio
Someone's got their panties in a bunch:
You know, you're lucky some people are sticking around. Your engine is riddled with bugs, it's limited and honestly a complete waste of time. I'm surprised Steam even allowed the release of such pathetic development work. Without mods like Altis Life, Exile, Epoch Battle Royale and others, your game would be nothing. You release DLC, instead of working on the thousands of bugs in your engine.
roflmfao ๐คฃ ๐ ๐
carmine folio
Thats why it has sold over 3M copies...
echo orchid
where is that shit from?
gaunt geode
dwarden's steam profile
hybrid tide
haters gotta hate
soft egret
Kinda interesting that many People seem to think Arma is made by Dwarden alone. A few days ago some German guy told me Dwarden is the Main Dev on Arma.
tender hawk
gigglesnort Oh, I remember back when a few people vocally loathed DnA...
carmine folio
"i'm suprised Steam even allowed the release of such pathetic development work." steam pretty much let anything on these days
nova drift
Oh, drama semi-involving Epoch lovely... I don't agree with this guy.
undone pier
link?
stark silo
@undone pier I think he was referring to what @carmine folio quoted above from dwardens steam profile.
undone pier
i see
cobalt creek
(dang... wrong channel before -.-)
Dwarden Didn't you removed him before ("Kickass") ?
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=896577033
pliant oar
@cobalt creek because no report via the steam system again ?
cobalt creek
Prolly, i just didn't knew if he was removed by the previous roundhousekick or not.
anyway, he is reported again =}
carmine folio
To be honest with Kickass you should be just checking his arma workshop content once a week.
cobalt creek
sadly
faint nacelle
He is going under the radar with googledrive though so his stuff is still going around. :l
tender hawk
tbf that 'going under the radar' was always possible back before Steam Workshop, even when Armaholic was considered the hub
faint nacelle
true
cobalt creek
But that means: Ppl need to use Google, wich... yeah... just look at discord sometimes ๐
hoary pine
Honestly I wish the Steam Workshop would be the only place for mods...
But at the same time, the search feature is pretty bad.
And the Launcher integration could still be better but it's getting there I think, let's say that it is a lot better than it was.
west reef
I know this is a controversial opinion, but I think kickass does a good job on the config side of things, at least on the end user side. I mean, the work on the M4 pack with how the barrel had heat coming off of it after firing, getting a half decent flamethrower, were it not for the illicit acquisition of the models I know that there are quite a few mods that could have used a config guy like him. Of course I'm not sure if anyone wants to risk it.
That said, I do wish Dwarden good luck with keeping workshop mods clean
fossil basalt
"Hey Jeffrey Dahmer, I know you're a prolific kidnapper/rapist/cannibal, but you have such stealthy techniques... could you show me how?" Nah, no thanks.
west reef
My point exactly. He could have been quite the popular config guy, but his repeated ripping of digital assets would make him more of a liability for mod makers.
I hope I'm not coming off as supportive of his efforts because I really don't condone the theft of digital assets
fossil basalt
I can see where the temptation would come from. But as it is, anything he's ever touched is "fruit of the forbidden tree". (Or everything he's ever touched is stolen property and you'd hate to add your fingers to the evidence pile).
sinful geode
Some sort of ass apparently.
little crown
who got kicked (well his mods did, off the workshop)
waxen canopy
https://p3dm.ru/files/auto/page/21/ I only say wtf
tulip nexus
And people wonder why in #arma3_model and the Addon Request thread, people throw a fit when someone mentions "I found this cool model online; please (help me) put it ingame"
cobalt creek
Yeah -.-
stark silo
0_0
echo orchid
@pliant oar ^^
gaunt geode
This mod was originally made by Gachopin and then remastered by cervantes (Cervantes version is the one that I uploaded) . But it works for Arma 3, I will be working on it to make it fit for Arma 3 when I'm not busy. If he/she does not want it here on Arma 3 workshop I will take it off without hesitation.
a bit suspect
undone pier
@pliant oar
dusk dew
Atleast there is a lot of credit being given
tender hawk
@dusk dew Credit unfortunately is not the same as permission-to-upload
dusk dew
Of course, just more than you usually get @tender hawk
Does the original work have a license or such?
tender hawk
Whether or not there is one is besides the point, though from what I understand cervantes' if any would take precedence since it's their work that was uploaded
dusk dew
Well, unless it's stated he cannot upload, it's up to the author to shoot him a PM. Seems reasonable in his description. Certainly not a serious issue yet
tender hawk
Nah, the tradition has been that it's the author's prerogative
Not least because, to be blunt... it's a derivative of the original mod that this person uploaded
dusk dew
Sure. But nothing is stopping him from doing it if there isn't anything to say otherwise. If the author doesn't want it, he can just ask it be removed
tender hawk
cough Okay, let's try this again
The dirty little secret is that even if this were a 1:1 unaltered mod being uploaded, it wouldn't work anywhere near correctly because it's an Arma 2: Operation Arrowhead mod, not without work that the uploader purports to have done and seems to plan to do
tender hawk
Easy: it's a damn Arma 2 mod that they're passing off as an A3 thing, and any fixes will (as derivatives/modifications of the original work) necessarily be infringing on the originator's IP
fossil basalt
@torpid viperuu#1044 He cannot upload
... In particular, with respect to Workshop Contributions, you represent and warrant that the Workshop Contribution was originally created by you (or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you, by you and the other contributors, and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors).```Didn't know that was a section on the steam agreement, never really looked into the workshop that much, neato
Those models are actually pretty cool
tender hawk
One more thing: let's imagine that cervantes 'gets back in the game' but now they have to 'compete' against an unauthorized derivative of their work, that 'competition' being able to be affected by player confusion between the two...
dusk dew
Well no matter what he could have it taken down
tender hawk
Well no matter what he could have it taken down Or kju can call Dwarden in to be aware of it and let Dwarden do as he will ๐
gaunt geode
It's nearly a straight A2 port
like 90% of it is broken in some way
not sure what compelled this guy to release it on the WS
fossil basalt
What compells the rest of the idiots to re-upload someone elses work?
gaunt geode
More what compelled him to upload a mostly non-functioning mod
tender hawk
More what compelled him to upload a mostly non-functioning mod This is what would screw over cervantes if ze 'gets back in the game'
gaunt geode
Yea if he ever comes back his mod is going to have its reputation associated with this guy's upload
tender hawk
^^^ NAILED IT re: the problem with non-first-party uploads ^^^
fossil basalt
The logic of some of these people is what baffles me. In the rare cases when they email an author, they assume that after a period of no reply, that it is "ok" to use other peoples stuff . They then say that if the author doesnt approve, to contact them and explain why and it would be taken down. Now, thats like saying, "Hey, youve not driven your car in awhile. I'll take it and use it until you complain. "
tender hawk
And thus there's a reason that the server monetization rules specifically put the burden of permission on the server people to receive, not on the addon-maker/modder to deny
fossil basalt
Yup
tender hawk
I always looked at the server monetization as "on the one hand it's allowed, on the other hand we can set out rules that are meant to side with the addon-maker/modder"
fossil basalt
Another Re-upload http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=917275863
ebon ruin
I dislike how a lot of these mods from steam workshop are being deleted, I agree on not allowing people to use mods on monetized servers without paying the authors of the mods, but the main goal is to play some arma and have some fun...
Why can't we just play some arma?
bronze oasis
Shit is simple, you just gotta read the TOS you signed for the Workshop.
"When you upload your content to Steam to make it available to other users and/or to Valve, you grant Valve and its affiliates the worldwide, non-exclusive, right to use, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute, transmit, transcode, translate, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and publicly perform, your User Generated Content, and derivative works of your User Generated Content, in connection with the operation, distribution and promotion of the Steam service, Steam games or other Steam offerings."
fossil basalt
@ebon ruin They are being deleted because either:
- Only the Author may upload (All others are PROHIBITED without original or co-authors expressed consent)
or - They are stolen assets.
... In particular, with respect to Workshop Contributions, you represent and warrant that the Workshop Contribution was originally created by you (or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you, by you and the other contributors, and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors).```@fossil basalt You're getting much hate http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=917145177 dorionite wrote: Well because that asshole FM probably reported this and is now jerking off because of how happy with himself he is, all I can say is send me a DL or at least tell us how to port it over ourselves, everyone with the exception of Hitler Youth over here (FM) wants this in their game, I'm sure I'm not the only one that got a massive erection when they first saw this so thank you.
bronze oasis
An impossible task to some
tender hawk
"Nice to see people liking it. We'll be working with Gachopin and cervantes mod. Soon or later it will be standalone."
This really didn't help the uploader's case. ๐
ebon ruin
Shouldnt upload content that doesnt belong to them.
read:
Shouldn't have fun
grand gorge
๐ฉ
fossil basalt
Remind me to check your Workshop Nigel.
blazing wyvern
lol
ebon ruin
You are free to do that, not really your fault. If that makes you feel better in any way. Some people are out there for profit, some are out there to play some arma and have some fun... and then there is you, trying to feel better about themselves by being "justice warriors". I hope you actually make someones day by getting their mod off workshop.
fossil basalt
There's nothing "justice warrior" about it. There is "right" and there is "wrong". If someone uploads another's content to the Steam Workshop, they have violated the EULA. There is no grey area.
Burglary, home invasions, auto theft.... they happen everyday, should we stop reporting / prosecuting them because they're just going to happen again tomorrow?
ebon ruin
Sure thing bro. This is on par with home invasions
fossil basalt
Theft
ebon ruin
๐
fossil basalt
Key term is "theft"...
ebon ruin
Theft implies somone loses something. It's copy pasta, it's copyright violation
fossil basalt
Go on then, slap your name on a Harry Potter book or The Diary of Anne Frank ..
vast notch
@ebon ruin What if you spent months or even years creating a thing, then one day you walked past a store and they were selling your thing, the thing that you never got a penny for or credited for?
cobalt creek
I gave up to try arguing with logic. Some ppl just don't get it. ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
cobalt creek
*bitchslap*
ebon ruin
DB, I wouldn't mind. If I made a script and somone used it and I see people playing with it and having fun, I will feel good, because I helped them have fun in a remote way.
vast notch
@ebon ruin Neither would I, but we're not talking scripts here, we're talking mods or parts of mods and models
dusk dew
However in this case he gave the guy all the credit and told people to rate him on armaholic or whatever. Atleast there wasn't a nail in the coffin ๐
cobalt creek
At least, BUT that doesn't change anything :/ Imagine you would allow that and other would hear of it.. puh... dat drama
river spear
@ebon ruin You are the 0.00000000001% that does not care what happens
If you dont care, noone does anything wrong when they take your work and reupload it, since you allow it
but if an author says he doesnt want it uploaded, noone is allowed to
ebon ruin
Sure, I get that. And I also understand that the rest are driven by profit etc.
river spear
Not all of them, but thanks for assuming that
I can assure you that are people that are not driven by profit
and still, they'd rather not have 2 million reuploads on the workshop
echo orchid
where did this bloke pop up from?
fossil basalt
Does make me laugh....
tender hawk
@@fossil basalt Once again the wisdom of Bohemia's explicitness on monetization rules manifests
proud flicker
"When you upload your content to Steam to make it available to other users and/or to Valve, you grant Valve and its affiliates the worldwide, non-exclusive, right to use, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute, transmit, transcode, translate, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and publicly perform, your User Generated Content, and derivative works of your User Generated Content, in connection with the operation, distribution and promotion of the Steam service, Steam games or other Steam offerings."```
Was there ever a definitive summary of what exactly this means for content creators using Steam WS for releasing content? When it first appeared I remember there being a lot of black/white painting about the issue. One side claiming that uploading to Steam WS is basically disowning you from your content, and on the other that its all just legal shenanegans to cover their butt, and that they never had acted on this clause.
All I do know for sure is that my IP is my IP and steam can say what they want there, IP remains mine until I die or sign a contract to hand it over.@proud flicker they limit they reach 2 paragraphs down:
Notwithstanding the license described in Section 6.A., Valve will only have the right to modify or create derivative works from your Workshop Contribution in the following cases: (a) Valve may make modifications necessary to make your Contribution compatible with Steam and the Workshop functionality or user interface, and (b) Valve or the applicable developer may make modifications to Workshop Contributions that are accepted for in-Application distribution as it deems necessary or desirable to enhance gameplay.
proud flicker
Ha, thought so. Thanks!
grand gorge
the funny thing is that nigel is right in that it's not theft, it's copyright violation
the un-funny thing is that nigel thinks copyright violation should be allowed ๐ฉ
echo orchid
is not really copy right violation, is Intelectual Property theft, which is still theft
not really the same thing
fervent needle
Bad thing is people also get ego boosts off of stealing stuff, such as protecting it and trying to reupload it again or on other accounts. It wasn't even theirs to begin with yet they feel attacked when it gets taken down in the first place
Adds fuel to the fire
echo orchid
i just DMCAed 3 "modpacks" on steam yesterday...: ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
cobalt creek
anybody got a fast Inet connection?
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=917877304&searchtext=
~10GB
soft egret
12MB/s fast enough? There are probably people here that can get that faster
cobalt creek
I got 2-3Mb/s, sooo
soft egret
downloading now :u
echo orchid
yeah, over 10MBs here, but you don't need to download it all to test out what pbos are in
cobalt creek
When renamend -> Opening it -> Full DL needed ๐ฆ
yep
@soft egret
So many
CUP, CBA, DAR
soft egret
Will be moved to /workshop/content/107410/917877304 when download is complete
echo orchid
yeah but to check just the pbos you don't need to download it all
soft egret
They have a teamspeak folder.. But I see no TFAR or ACRE pbo yet
cobalt creek
Yeah, you can cancel the Download already
echo orchid
i leave it a couple of megs to make sure it populates all pbos, i leave it to download only if i have suspicions
soft egret
CBA JointRails and ASDG JointRails XD N00bs
I have the bandwidth. Doesn't hurt me to download it :u
echo orchid
@blazing wyvern ^ they have some of yours as well
fervent needle
Wasnt there like a pook helicopter mod for A2?
soft egret
There are still new pbos appearing
fossil basalt
@drowsy hound is still around
cobalt creek
fossil basalt
@wheat wave another CUP stealer
fervent needle
I dont understand why all these lifemod servers pack all the mods into one, wouldnt players get sick of downloading 7-10 gb per server?
wheat wave
theres a lot of other stuff, probably easier to manage it all like this AND not having to deal with autoupdates from steam
i mean, this guy must have like 300 or 400 pbos in that mod
669 it seems
soft egret
Download is complete. :u
fossil basalt
2 thieves 1 CUP ๐ฉ
wheat wave
:^)
blazing wyvern
like 99% of car addons are ripped from forza ๐
cobalt creek
As usual ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
drowsy hound
Sorry was there a question about something on my mods...? "Yes" I am still around :)
@proud flicker yes I read that "additional" clause to mean they aren't going to "own" your stuff. I believe also that the RHS pack prescribes to that same understanding based on what I have read of their distributions. Regardless. A big issue I have with redistribution is that now someone has a different version, probably a broken version, and you get "YOUR MOD SUCKS" because of it. I get a bit upset about that.
fossil basalt
19:11 GMT @drowsy hound
echo orchid
@drowsy hound - for RHS, it is unlikely for that to happen, especially because most pbos are linked together
and is much harder to pull stuff out
that said, on SW there should be only one RHS upload, the official one...i need to wrap my head around SW API, there are ways to querry specific strings
drowsy hound
Thought I read that on their discussion thread
echo orchid
@drowsy hound - i am the one who deals with all RHS infrigments, besides bulling polies, so i should know
@wheat wave http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=843828157
RHS and CUP, will DMCA it myself when i get back home later on today
wheat wave
there we go again
thanks for report
jeez wtf 19gb modpack?!
i checked the workshop page and read it was only 2gb
no wonder it was taking forever
echo orchid
SW page never shows the real data of the pack after the first pushed update
echo orchid
blazing wyvern
cradit - thats a fact!
fossil basalt
Makes me want to v0m1t
river spear
I dont know what kind of problem you have
Looks like original content to me
cobalt creek
Yeah, very original
faint nacelle
someone made it.
cobalt creek
"just" not him ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
hoary pine
Do you want 40 pages of Copyright infrigment ?
Just search for " *Life " in the steam workshop
Those Arma 3 Life server admins are a plague...
First page of the workshop today http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=916257561
CUP, JONZIE, CBA and many more...
If it's Something_Life and it's more than 50Mb then it's probably a copyright infrigement.
echo orchid
@wheat wave + @blazing wyvern - both of yours present:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=918793301
grand oyster
@echo orchid How long have you been the one to deal with RHS infringements? I got a document from early 2015 which was forwarded to me as my friends knew the owner but everyone believes the document was forged
echo orchid
since 2012
wheat wave
ill take a look, cheers
wheat wave
is there any way i can check steam ws mods content without downloading everytime?
amber ibex
Steamworks SDK
wheat wave
care to elaborate pls?
soft egret
But I'm nt sure if that really works. I guess you have to be using the Arma AppID to get access to Arma files
wheat wave
hmmm i see, thank you both
echo orchid
if anyone figures it out please let me know, had a look over this docs but is well above my head for now
https://lab.xpaw.me/steam_api_documentation.html
fervent needle
I swear someone here made a private tool that could query steam workshop
Search for keywords in the workshop downloads then takedown the mods that copywrite
wheat wave
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
you know, now that i think about i remember someone mentioning it in cup discord
๐ค
fervent needle
So im not insane then ๐
echo orchid
i know that someone, but for the moment he is not ready to share it...have used it a couple of times - as in asked him to do it for me
i doubt there are more than 2 people who can write such a tool atm
amber ibex
@echo orchid would be no problem to do that but do not have the time
amber ibex
there are more requests in line
one for the TS3 & arma extension to auto-kick ppl in arma who are not on teamspeak
fervent needle
Thats not a bad one for tfar
amber ibex
just that TFAR is a clientside plugin and not fully server side designed for pub servers without TFAR etc. (aka vanilla arma)
but that is all offtopic
echo orchid
@amber ibex - ๐ well, put it on that request list then if you please
even if it is the last one on the bottom
amber ibex
my todo list just gets longer and longer ๐
gritty path
it gets fun when your todo list is mostly, make todo lists, about what needs to be done.
queen wing
lol
amber ibex
such a tool requires html parsing the actual arma workshop on a regular basis
checking the steamworks SDK rightn ow
merry oasis
random workshop facts after analyzing the 280 recent updated entries with a total of 70676 files:
- 6 people managed to include their biprivatekey in the uploaded data
- the most copied file (by sha1, not name) with 44 appearances is
addons\TRYK_backpack.pbowith the sha1 off9dcc908585ff20d380139d0a114de68b284f4e2
amber ibex
mhh ... only getting status code 9 for steam webapi ... bollocks
will check the actual SDK later
river spear
@amber ibex I doubt theres a way for us to fetch content without having to download it
I can't recall that anything in that direction existed
amber ibex
initially, it would be enough to query workshop
river spear
Right
amber ibex
and that can be done with the SDK as stated via the documentation (not allowed to reveal due to you having to accept a lil EULA thingy to see it)
river spear
Let me quickly do that
amber ibex
https://partner.steamgames.com hf
goal when using the SDK will be a RSS-like feed that allows fetching the workshop via other tools
that then would process
and ... analyzing content is also no problem with the SDK Oo
so ... literally full analysis of the workshop would be possible to automate
river spear
Wait where do you see that
amber ibex
magix
river spear
oh I think I see it
amber ibex
putting all that together with proper filtering & a page where content creators could register their md5 file hashes could be done in few weeks
river spear
And then notify them whenever something pops up ๐
amber ibex
will look into it next week
now going to grab some beer
in case one is interested in helping to code: https://discord.gg/Vmech5u
and yes, notify via push notification directly to your phone so that you can get annoyed as fuck each time ๐
river spear
Sadly not a C++ guy right now ๐
merry oasis
comparing hashes on pbo level is quite doable (without having to download everything)
but when you want to detect repacking you probably have to download everything to hash the unpacked pbo content
echo orchid
@merry oasis - yeah if things is fishy, it needs a direct download
but since most people just upload the pbos without renaming them
this sort of quesrry will weed out 90% of people re-uploading on steam
@river spear - i am pretty sure it is possible to querry by .pbo name to begin with
or even part of pbo name - as in content creator prefix
river spear
@echo orchid I sadly never worked with Steamworks before so I do not know what it is capable of
but apparently you're able to get a list of files through their API
but X39 already does that ๐
echo orchid
@river spear neither have i, but i know it can be done because there is someone (i won't name him) that got it working and helped me find around 100 RHS uploads on steam (including the "private" ones)
river spear
Yeah I mean if its possible, thats a very good way to catch those people faster
merry oasis
@echo orchid with "private" you mean the ones without description?
echo orchid
no, i mean the ones that are not visible to public
merry oasis
ah, I would have expected that one needs a publisher key to access those.
echo orchid
nope, i mean i could make a private one just for my friends
so for people that are in my contact list
and people that i invite
merry oasis
it's quite puzzling that - even with the collection feature given - only about 20% of the PBO files on the workshop are unique
gritty path
meh, only so many producers and quite a few more users.
hoary pine
@4d4a5852 how did you query the workshop like that ?
I think that automatically cleaning all the reuploaded pbo would be a good start. the remaning can probably be dealt with manually.
merry oasis
@hoary pine got the workshopids from the workshop pages, use the steam web-api to get additional information, start and cancel the download with steamcmd, parse the downloaded manifest file and put the information (filenames, sha1 hashes) into a database
faint nacelle
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=920159407 @pliant oar when you get a chance would you take this down.
river spear
@merry oasis As far as I know, the vdf files don't hold information about the specific files, or am I wrong?
fervent needle
@faint nacelle is your official version on the workshop?
faint nacelle
nope
but thats 3 years old and not compatible with latest arma
makes us look bad
fervent needle
Was gonna say I dont remember you mentioning about releasing it yet
merry oasis
@river spear the information are in the .manifest files which are saved in the depotcache folder of the steam install
tender hawk
but thats 3 years old and not compatible with latest arma makes us look bad
For anyone wondering just why modders have a vested interest in going after unofficial re-uploads on Steam Workshop!
faint nacelle
yeah
its not like the ~160 subs there are a lot in general population but when those 160 complain to us when the next many times overhauled relese breaks everything it sucks ass for us.
what a lovely experience this is.
fervent needle
There is a first for everything
grand gorge
i don't mean to play devil's advocate @faint nacelle but isn't a key part of CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 the fact that it's irrevocable?
like, doesn't licensing and releasing a mod under that license count as permission to redistribute?
fervent needle
Yes they could technically redistribute under that license, which he provided evidence and the license that allows it in desc. But it breaks steam rules 6.D? @grand gorge
faint nacelle
^^
fervent needle
So he could host or upload on his own site or other means but not steam because of that rule of not being the author
faint nacelle
yeah
and its not really the sharing of it
but putting it up on steam
where it makes ppl confused a
fervent needle
And steam happens to be easy for the masses so he also gets flack for broken stuff
๐
faint nacelle
since its not officially supported release
grand gorge
In particular, with respect to Workshop Contributions, you represent and warrant that the Workshop Contribution was originally created by you (or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you, by you and the other contributors, and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors).
that bit?
if CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license doesn't count as the "right to submit" then i don't understand what does?
fervent needle
Wouldn't then a mod like cup be allowed to be uploaded by anyone then? Its under arma share-alike and they must release it under the same rules meaning anyone can use it and modify no?
But they cant because of that rule, not allowed and non contributor
So technically that rule can allow it to go both ways. You could argue that the license allows you to upload it but there is more of an argument against allowing it
grand gorge
i thought the whole point of licensing was to avoid an argument and have things in black and white though
again, i'm not trolling or being devil's advocate on purpose, just curious on the actual truth
fervent needle
No I know, but then again it makes sense on most content sources and ways you can upload but not steam
Egil - the creator of Bornholm released his map under a license like that, allowing people to reupload etc. I fixed the lighting on the map after 1.60 and uploaded it to steam and then Egil updated it the day after officially and I hid it to not confuse people (made it private)
Dwarden still took it down (respectively - rules) because I didn't have permission and it wasn't mine. I needed specific agreement/be allowed from him to upload it
Otherwise it was a no-go
carmine folio
Care to point were in steam license that breaks APL-SA license?
fervent needle
@carmine folio http://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/ 6. D was what I was pointed to
carmine folio
"was originally created by you (or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you, by you and the other contributors, and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors)"
"a) Valve may make modifications necessary to make your Contribution compatible with Steam and the Workshop functionality or user interface, and (b) Valve or the applicable developer may make modifications to Workshop Contributions that are accepted for in-Application distribution as it deems necessary or desirable to enhance gameplay."
APL-SA already gives people (i.e this includes valve) the right to modify / redist once you keep the same license.
I personally don't see any part of that agreement that violates / prevents people uploading APL-SA content.
But BI/Valve dwarden still reserve the right to remove content for any reason.
It is still good manners to ask for permission before uploading to steam workshop
grand gorge
But BI/Valve dwarden still reserve the right to remove content for any reason.
i didn't realise that, and that kind of changes everything
but to DMCA something which has been licensed under a permissive license is not proper usage of DMCA imo
DMCA indicates your willingness to fight in court, you should be very sure before you submit one
fervent needle
@carmine folio while I see what you are getting at, it still doesn't make sense because mods like CUP are under Arma share-alike yet they will get taken down if reuploaded or rehosted on workshop
Even though the license states you can, yea?
carmine folio
Only CUP Terrain is APL-SA, and BI/Valve can still moderate / remove content
Rest of CUPs is a different license
fervent needle
Ah okay
carmine folio
But like i said i don't see an issue with it.
Still good manners to ask
As for CUPS Terrains, no reason to reupload it, making people download the same content multiple times
fervent needle
Its all confusing
grand gorge
the only confusing part to me is releasing something under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 and then DMCAing it when someone shares it within the bounds of the license
faint nacelle
Well whats done is done. Im just hoping to get it out of there so it does not cause trouble for our mod.
pliant oar
if i blocked something wrongly or by mistake you can always challenge it ...
contrary to some rumors i'm open to valid arguments 
glad sparrow
gaunt geode
If you are SGT Fuller/A concerned member believing content was stolen, contact me formally explaining your situation, and this content will be removed from workshop. ๐ค
river spear
@pliant oar Isn't there a way for you to give certain people administration permissions on the workshop to allow others to remove infringing material aswell?
Obviously trustworthy individuals
gritty path
^^
fossil basalt
I've asked. Short answer, no.
gritty path
well, boo.
fossil basalt
But, if one worked for them......
gritty path
hmm..
fossil basalt
I've had no offers ๐
carmine folio
Kinda dangerous giving an outsider permission to remove steamworkshop content.
You can always file a DCMA to remove content that is yours and the person doesn't have permission/rights to upload.
Or like someone has done, make a tool to look for workshop content that is reuploaded.
fossil basalt
Yep
pliant oar
no @river spear
fervent needle
@pliant oar Could you possibly give any insight on the discussion yesterday? How should one treat CC and APL-SA reuploads of content to workshop?
Are they allowed? Or do they break the rules if not created by the author and shouldn't be uploaded as steam isn't a rehosting service
river spear
:-(
echo orchid
beating around the bush again.....
if you don't own it you can't upload it
i really don't get what is sooooo complicated
hallow frigate
@echo orchid atleast on steam. If the license gives permission to distribute you can do so - but steam asks you to be the owner or to have its explicit permission. Things as CUP are under GPLv2 which states that you are allowed to redistributed the - !unmodified! - sources. Same for stuff under CC BY-NC-ND, which is not revocable.
echo orchid
permission to distribute doesn't mean you can do that on steam, because as previously said N fucking times before, when you upload on Steam, you grant steam some rights, which you cannot do unless you are the actual OWNER
i thought we were talking about steam here
again, steam doesn't ask you to have permission from the owner
it ask for the uploader to be the owner
or have some ip rights
fervent needle
@echo orchid thats exactly what I thought
But if you read above
The chat yesterday was back and forth
echo orchid
lol...this shit couldn't be clearer
the back and forth is called beatting around the bush
fervent needle
I.e someone uploaded a mod that was cc and allowed distributions but it breaks steam rules that you arent the creator
So it should be taken down, yea?
echo orchid
it seems i need to keep reapeating myself here...
allowed distribution does not cover Steam Workshop
fervent needle
Its steam rules that I want to be clear about, because the way I see it, if you have the apl-sa or cc license on your work you still cant copy it and upload to steam because simply it breaks steam rules
echo orchid
yes
fervent needle
But yesterday people were saying no, you can because the license
echo orchid
because license what
fervent needle
Says you can share it and modify/redistribute
echo orchid
When you upload your content to Steam to make it available to other users and/or to Valve, you grant Valve and its affiliates the worldwide, non-exclusive, right to use, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute, transmit, transcode, translate, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and publicly perform, your User Generated Content, and derivative works of your User Generated Content, in connection with the operation, distribution and promotion of the Steam service, Steam games or other Steam offerings. This license is granted to Valve for the entire duration of the intellectual property rights and may be terminated if Valve is in breach of the license and has not cured such breach within fourteen (14) days from receiving notice from you sent to the attention of the Valve Legal Department at the applicable Valve address noted on this Privacy Policy page. The termination of said license does not affect the rights of any sub-licensees pursuant to any sub-license granted by Valve prior to termination of the license. Valve is the sole owner of the derivative works created by Valve from your Content, and is therefore entitled to grant licenses on these derivative works. If you use Valve cloud storage, you grant us a license to store your information as part of that service. Valve may place limits on the amount of storage you may use.
You furthermore represent and warrant that the User Generated Content, your submission of that Content, and your granting of rights in that Content does not violate any applicable contract, law or regulation.```So that was the loophole thinking but I still think it breaks steam rules so you can have it taken down and people cant reupload
echo orchid
if the the license allows modification and redistribution, then yes it's a grey area
if it allows only redistribution
then is as clear as it can be
[7:40 PM] Andrew: Says you can share it and modify/redistribute
modify/reistribute never go in the same sentence when CC licenses are concerned
dusk dew
What exactly are they referring to with its affiliates the worldwide?
echo orchid
these are the CC licenses:
http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2014-03-25-creativecommonslicenses.jpg
so unless there is CC BY license, everything else does not belong on SW
fervent needle
it was specifically Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)
echo orchid
that's what most people use yes (the one on RHS as well)
echo orchid
even better, if you have ND on, you can prohibit all other work that requires your mod as a base
in RHS case, all re-textures
fervent needle
they could reupload it and share it but not modify it
does that break SW rules though
echo orchid
no man, if encounter ND on, it means you cannot modify it, and you obviously don't own it
fervent needle
IMO, yes because of rule 6.D requiring you to be a contributor, owner, or permission
yea thats what I thought
echo orchid
You represent and warrant to us that you have sufficient rights in all User Generated Content to grant Valve and other affected parties the licenses described under A. and B. above or in any license terms specific to the applicable Workshop-Enabled App or Workshop page. This includes, without limitation, any kind of intellectual property rights or other proprietary or personal rights affected by or included in the User Generated Content.
where do you read permission ^^?
the permission part is something that has no legal bounds
dusk dew
and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors
fervent needle
echo orchid
lol....
fervent needle
6 D
hallow frigate
Poor PuFu
fervent needle
it still shouldn't be allowed on WS though
echo orchid
example: RHS has about 60 contributors, all that agreed to upload it on SW
there is a main account that deals with it
the IP is shared amongst us
@dusk dew ^^
that means i gave the one guy permission to upload it
dusk dew
I was just pasting the permission snippet
echo orchid
but we all share IP rights
dusk dew
I can see it ๐
fervent needle
But yea, I think even though stuff is under APL-SA or CC BY-NC-ND you can't reupload that to WS, even though both the licenses allow sharing, they simply put break steam rules of the workshop
dusk dew
I like this bit
Valve is the sole owner of the derivative works created by Valve from your Content, and is therefore entitled to grant licenses on these derivative works.
echo orchid
read 6d paragraph 2
sorry 6B
Notwithstanding the license described in Section 6.A., Valve will only have the right to modify or create derivative works from your Workshop Contribution in the following cases: (a) Valve may make modifications necessary to make your Contribution compatible with Steam and the Workshop functionality or user interface, and (b) Valve or the applicable developer may make modifications to Workshop Contributions that are accepted for in-Application distribution as it deems necessary or desirable to enhance gameplay.
echo orchid
to conclude for the nth fucking time:
- SW requires shared IP rights from the uploader.
- The only uploader that can share his IP with SW is the original creator(s)
= unless you are the original creator, you cannot upload anything you don't own on SW
carmine folio
Don't be comparing APL-SA & CC BY-NC_ND, they are completely different licenses
echo orchid
that as well ^^
hallow frigate
now this sucks when you've bought 3rd party models/sounds/scripts etc. for your mod xD basically Steam Workshop contents must be 110% made by yourself
echo orchid
that depends on the license you bought it with
usually transfer of IP rights happens ONLY for bespoke content
carmine folio
@dusk dew 6B 2nd BulletPoint: Clarifies / Restricts what Valve is allowed todo with workshop content
hallow frigate
Probably best would be to just make an launcher which downloads content directly from repos / sites on client so it counts as private copy. Kinda my logic xD
Of course you still can't modify then.
echo orchid
that is still called redistributing
faint nacelle
Yeah next license we slap on it will possibly grant people permission to play the mod.. Thanks @echo orchid for bothering to pitch in again.
echo orchid
@faint nacelle sarcasm?
faint nacelle
@echo orchid No! Or well the first part a bit sarcastically, but Im genuinely thankful for your effort to remind us how SW is supposed to work
sorry if it came out sounding wrong the first time.
fossil basalt
Sarcasm is difficult to get right via text.
echo orchid
@faint nacelle ahh no worries ๐ no need to appologize man
pliant oar
Over the years I've had masses of quotes from you thrown at me to justify/defend outright theft;
seems like rock has special grudge against me ...
opal lion
mmhm yeah nice so its 2017 and still arma doesn't have any reliable hassle free way for people to join a server in one click with automatic mod setup.
echo orchid
@opal lion and this belongs to IP rights violation because...?
quasi steppe
@opal lion What? Use the launcher. It tells you what mods you need, gives you the option to download the mods and selects and loads the right mods plus some nice other features. What do you want more? Mod downloads like mission file downloads when joining a server? That would be really slow or killing the servers traffic.
hallow frigate
@quasi steppe yea but you need to get these mods on the PC first ๐ if I'm not wrong the launcher works over SW which isn't an option for many.
echo orchid
@quasi steppe @hallow frigate - could you please regrain from using this channel for anything that has no fucking relation to IP rights. ty
hallow frigate
@echo orchid we're discussing how to get mods together without violating IP | Steam Agreement in reference/response to Dwardens post and yesterdays discussion.
echo orchid
hmm...because you said that SW is not an option for many, may i ask why sw is not an option for the many?
hallow frigate
Because to upload to SW you need to be the owner of the work as you pointed out yesterday. So you can't make your modpack even with authors permission - and most authors don't want to upload to SW themself which is why collections often aren't an option.
echo orchid
yeah but there are community made alternatives to that one, including launchers that support custom repository
in any case, most original authors do have their content on SW
so collections is very useful then
hallow frigate
Yea, I get your points. But for example I got permission from 3rd party companies to use their work in ArmA and aswell I've agreements people like maxjoiner (for his mods) ^^ sounds I've bought for story mode aswell can't be used in SW. Of course I'd like to save my community / players the time to install stuff like PlayWithSix or to setup/update it themself which is where SW with ArmA Launcher has its great strengths. But you're right PuFu ๐ it's just how it is.
opal lion
@quasi steppe please use your brain before you talk to me.
dusk dew
:/
fossil basalt
@opal lion Please read the channel description before posting.
pliant oar
@opal lion @quasi steppe @hallow frigate no point drag non-IP related issues there ... if you want comment on official Arma 3 Launcher then use #arma3_launcher channel
atm. we don't have channel for discussing arma 3 workshop because it would just end mostly in IP or drama disputes flamewars
west reef
@pliant oar can you look at http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=922374496, I'm not sure if it contains any ripped models like the last one
grand gorge
i recognise at least 3 of them from hitman games
cobalt creek
wow.. he re-uploaded it for the 3rd time now?
fossil basalt
Some people are .... idiots?!
cobalt creek
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
west reef
It didn't help that he was on the front page of SW
fossil basalt
Either way, he still got the smackdown.
carmine folio
That damn FM guy. Deleting everyone's SW uploads without warning. wtf! ๐
cobalt creek
๐
wet wing
Speak of the devil look http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=922374496
and hes still illegaly redistuibuting the illegal stuff
cobalt creek
BFGfreak - Yesterday at 7:56 PM
hallow frigate
Are there any further consequences to uploading illegal content to SW or does it just get deleted?
echo orchid
ban fo' life
opal lion
Instead of using this for your amusement and laughing at people day after day you could also shut up and start working on the underlying fundamental issue. Ask yourself why people upload stuff to the workshop over and over again.
echo orchid
- because they cannot read shit
- because they don't care about what they read and other people's right
- because they are self-entitled asshats
bronze oasis
I think those points just about sum it up, yea.
People assume that just because a mod requires no payment, then they can just do anything they want with it.
opal lion
I think you're entirely mistaken. To join a modded arma server, a player needs the mods. Any external application like arma3sync, six launcher etc is an extra hassle only a quite small percentage of players is willing to go thru. Before the steam workshop, you had two options hosting a server: no mods/vanilla, or put some website URL in your server title and hope people will hit your website, read your guide, etc.
Now with the workshop there is another option: Use the workshop and armas vanilla launcher to get the mods to players
But obviously lots of mods aren't on the workshop. This is the motivation for people to upload mods they don't own to the workshop: They want their players to join easily.
echo orchid
they can also choose not to use that particular mod
bronze oasis
Pretty much, yes.
If your playerbase can't go out and download a mod, then don't use that mod. How do you people think it worked in the old days?
opal lion
If you look at other games, this works flawless. Quite a few games have well done workshop integration where you just specify the workshop ID in the server config and the game takes care of downloading and even updating the mods, and you're done. Also the modding community is less ... old and complex ... than armas for other games, so you end up with the situation of 100% of all relevant/working mods for the game naturally being on the workshop.
echo orchid
if their player base is PC illiterate
bronze oasis
Those other games, such as GMOD, also generally have smaller mods.
echo orchid
so we get back to self entitled cunts then
bronze oasis
Goodluck joining a server and then having to download CUP for the first time.
Ain't nobody gon sit through that.
hallow frigate
Hmm, thanks gave me the idea for my next project (since I need it anyways). @opal lion most other games don't care about IP, and if no compains: no judges.
echo orchid
if it each addon maker prerogative to do whatever they please with their own creation
opal lion
I think you're again mistaken. It is technically trivial to have the mod automatically installed by the game launcher in one click, hassle free. Needlessly complicating that task and doing it manually just because "that's how we did it in the good old days" is quite a strange attitude.
echo orchid
i'm not saying simplicity is not welcome
bronze oasis
We are saying you can't just upload stuff you don't own to the workshop.
echo orchid
what i am saying the end user simplicity does not TRUMP the rights of the addon maker
bronze oasis
THe workshop is cool and all, but if a mod auther doesnt want his stuff on there, then it aint going on there.
opal lion
The problem is a social problem. Steam has shitty requirements for uploading stuff to the workshop, asking for rights they actually don't really need. Mods for arma are mostly old and done by multiple people (the big ones) and getting them on the same page is hard, too. And then bohemia is honestly doing a poor job integrating the workshop (basically it isn't integrated at all)
Well
Have you guys heard of the music industry? What happened when the internet and napster came? CDs basically died. Now the newspapers are dying.
bronze oasis
No, they actually need those rights.
echo orchid
lol....yeah CD died
bronze oasis
To ensure that nothing volitaile or against their TOS are uploaded.
opal lion
Any asshat out there can download a mod and upload it to steam workshop, mediafire, dropbox, his own ftp server, your mom's hacked tevo, you name it. You can't fight that.
bronze oasis
Yes, and said asshat can upload to anywhere, just not the Steam workship.
echo orchid
i pay 9.99 for apple music per month
opal lion
@bronze oasis yeah they can and do upload, hence this channel exists
bronze oasis
Yes, they CAN, as in they can click with their mouse.
echo orchid
stop confusing things
bronze oasis
But they CANT rightfully do so.
They do not have the right to upload to the workshop.
opal lion
Did i ever state the opposite?
bronze oasis
Anyone can go out and steal a candybar in the cornershop, shit is still illegl.
๐คฆ
opal lion
You keep explaining true and obvious things nobody ever challenged.
echo orchid
no, you are finding excuses for asshats
opal lion
It's like you read that crime is rising in your neighbourhood with candy bars stolen left and right and you say "they can't do that, it's illegal" and file the matter away.
echo orchid
i have seen recently some upload that also had a reason: this has been uploaded here to minimize the -mod string length...
opal lion
The problem of hungry kids wanting sweets and not caring about the law doesn't go away just by it being illegal, now does it?
fossil basalt
Any asshat out there can download a mod and upload it to steam workshop, mediafire, dropbox, his own ftp server, your mom's hacked tevo, you name it. You can't fight that.
Sure you can and we do it everyday.
opal lion
I'm not finding excuses for asshats, i'm explaining their motivation.
echo orchid
i don't really care about their motivation to be honest
opal lion
See, apparently everyone in this channel is really keen on stopping evil asshats stealing mods and illegally uploading them onto the steam workshop. If that is your motivation, then you need to understand the motivation of your opponent.
fossil basalt
Stupidity and Greed
echo orchid
1. because they cannot read shit
2. because they don't care about what they read and other people's right
3. because they are self-entitled asshats```I dont lose any sleep when someone gets the Ultimate Steam Ban and loses everything.
opal lion
@echo orchid "this has been uploaded here to minimize the -mod string length..." - So people violate ip rights to solve technical issues. How about bohemia solves the technical issue of -mod string length
echo orchid
that is about the vast majority of it
opal lion
See, understanding someones motivation to break a law is useful to counter it.
echo orchid
@opal lion - there is no technical issue to begin with
you can either make a .bat if you wanna use a shortcut
fossil basalt
So, to prevent murder or rape, we just make those things legal? No thanks.
echo orchid
and there are no limits via launcher to the number of addons you can simultanously load
opal lion
I don't know if mod string length is a technical issue. But i typed up a string with 64 mod names yesterday and i sure felt quite silly about it.
opal lion
@fossil basalt Your logic is flawed as always
fossil basalt
No, based on what you said, its quite logical.
opal lion
@fossil basalt I would rather say "lets stop giving people free guns to prevent murder"
fossil basalt
Sometimes it makes sense to change something around to see just how silly it sounds.
opal lion
Yeah but you changed it around the wrong way.
fossil basalt
No, its just like the "replace immigrant, refugee, insert any other label and replace it with "Jew" and see how bad it sounds" test.
hallow frigate
You basically only need an addon /alternative to the ArmA Launcher to download from other sources than SW. That you can't just steal content should be clear but players & communities simply want to keep things at one place (in this case ArmA Launcher) without weird/avoidable SW agreements.
opal lion
Well to put it blatantly, players & communities don't give a jack shit about ip rights.
Some guys here do, but you're the minority.
opal lion
Good luck Don Quijote.
hallow frigate
Well that's their problem then.
fossil basalt
They should learn not to steal. Its not a difficult concept.
opal lion
So you guys either want to keep the status quo, which is people violating ip rights every day and getting banned for it, and the only way out of this situation is for people to become angels who deeply care about the IP rights of the author who slapped a vanilla texture on some vanilla car model, called it a mod and uploaded his 600kb pride to armaholic and rather opt to not use that mod than to steal it and put it on the workshop? You want humans to change their nature. Not going to happen. So it is status quo, then. Meanwhile other games have 100% of the mods on the workshop and no mod author even thinks about not putting his mod there and everyone is happy. Well not everyone, but i would bet more people are happy with the mod situation on these kid of games than arma players are happy about armas mod situation (which is a massive clusterfuck). Basically you guys are stalling progress for the arma community to move forward to overcome these ip rights issues on a more fundamental level by eliminating the technical issues and overcoming the social issues (of old, grown mods with 50+ people involved etc).
pliant oar
@opal lion IP related takedowns happens on every game workshop ... and not just steam service, modDB and Nexus too
gaunt geode
Is "don't steal someone else's work" that difficult of a concept.
bronze oasis
Very difficult.
Some workshops are filled with stolen content, especially the GMOD workshop.
opal lion
It is going to happen anyways, it will just take more time, and the more time it takes the more time people like Dwarden have to spend on ip rights nonsense that won't make arma a better game.
pliant oar
@bronze oasis that's problem of Valve/gamedeveloper which don't care ... some even have it as 'part of theirs business' (like certain popular source mod)
bronze oasis
Yup, its really freaking sad.
One of the FoW team guys recently saw some of his stuff on there, which was made for an entirely different game.
opal lion
I'm not saying it doesn't happen at all in other games, but imagine the situation of every single mod being officially uploaded and supported by the original author on the workshop - you would take away a large incentive for people to steal the mod and upload it. I would argue most people upload mods they don't own to the steam workshop because the original author did not.
pliant oar
then don't be surprised we take down whole total conversions for game xyz or even games using our content which was stolen because 'someone saw it available somewhere'
@opal lion not every past-modder is available on workshop (especially for pre-workshop era) and thus re-uploading is quite common (and ofcourse wrong)
opal lion
@pliant oar do you rather want to spend your time on game development or on deleting the 90th upload of mr.asshats strider reskin?
@pliant oar obviously, yes.
I strongly believe in fixing social issues by technical means if possible. It just pays off.
echo orchid
@opal lion
frog: Well to put it blatantly, players & communities don't give a jack shit about ip rights.
do you want to quote myself the 3rd time?
if you spank them hard enough, they will learn to care about IP rights pretty fast
fossil basalt
My method of fixing social issues via technical means is reporting/banning thieves. Works pretty good for me. Doesn't detract from my dev time.
cobalt creek
2min for reporting (when steam is slow again)
hallow frigate
@opal lion complain to steam. If they'd make it so that you can reupload with owners permission much of reasonable anger would be gone. About people who just reupload and give a ***: no need to discuss it any futher
opal lion
@fossil basalt What really detracts from your dev time is the pesky discussions that course of action creates on discord
fossil basalt
The only distraction at the moment is that you can't seem to understand that "Stealing is bad".
opal lion
@echo orchid That might be so on an individual level, for the few guys that actually get banned. But certainly the community doesn't move forward at all. I was asked to upload things to the sw for our server by lots of players, and when i said "can't, ip rights" people were like "LOL who cares".
Actually people don't even UNDERSTAND the whole matter. Someone saw a collection i put together and was like "yeah but you uploaded all these mods" and i had to explain that my collection is basically just a link list and that other people uploaded these mods.
echo orchid
Meanwhile other games have 100% of the mods on the workshop and no mod author even thinks about not putting his mod there and everyone is happy.
there are situations when the author cannot upload it to SW because he does not own all ip rights, so he cannot share with with valve.
Basically you guys are stalling progress for the arma community to move forward to overcome these ip rights issues on a more fundamental level by eliminating the technical issues and overcoming the social issues (of old, grown mods with 50+ people involved etc).
lol....yeah, so the ones that are actually creating the content that keeps this game alive for so long, that the average Joe is using for free are the ones stalling the community to move forward? peach please
opal lion
You're asking waaaaay too much of the average arma player.
PuFu, 1. obvious 2. you're totally right
But: I doubt people discussing this matter here and clapping to any banned guy who uploaded something are actually creating mods that are used by anyone ๐
cobalt creek
I am still wondering: What's his point?
echo orchid
@opal lion again, most addon makers are doing it whatever they are doing for themselves, they couldn't really give a flying fuck about the average Joe....the average Joe is simply a indirect consequence of the original creator sharing his work publicly
opal lion
@cobalt creek I'm afraid to even attempt a further explanation, i think someone would feel insulted and that's not my intention.
cobalt creek
You just make no sense at all.
carmine folio
If I use content from another mod with the author's premission in a mod of mine, which I upload to the SW - but keep private / for friends only - is that still an IP right violation?
opal lion
@echo orchid Entirely true, and mod makers certainly don't "owe" average Joe anything.
echo orchid
@carmine folio yes
warm urchin
point: to know the motivation of people who violate the rights and think how maybe Steam could do better so that's not happening
that's how I see it
echo orchid
the private thing on SW is the biggest shit i've ever encounter
cobalt creek
I am not sure @warm urchin
opal lion
Well actually i would make the argument that Mod authors who put their mod for free on ArmAholic are handing out free crack to kids like drugdealers to hook em up and then ask for money for the second shot (don't enable people to get mods to players in an easy way)
carmine folio
@echo orchid how is it different from just having a private, undistributed copy on your PC?
echo orchid
@warm urchin Valve/Steam will never bother changing his Steam Agreement, simply because they will be open to a number of lawsuits
cobalt creek
In the beginning he mentioned something about "Ignore the Reuploader/IP Violation and continue coding" and then he comes up with "Deny it to upload" ffs?
opal lion
@cobalt creek Didn't you give up on your ArmA mod project?
And like, moved to another game?
echo orchid
so don't expect much form their part, not until commercial addons turn into a real thing (soonish)
opal lion
@cobalt creek So you quit ArmA, yet you hang around in the ArmA discord all day commenting on literally everything, mostly with one-liners or smilies without contributing anything that would move the discussion forward in my opinion. That doesn't make any sense to me either.
cobalt creek
(and yeah, i quit A3 about 6-9month ago, but came back, because of reasons.)
@opal lion If you have no clue about the topic you talk -> You better shut up.
opal lion
@cobalt creek don't worry, we all do. It's like heroin. Why you think there was ArmA 2 Free?
echo orchid
@carmine folio - it is very different - for one - SW requires you to share the IP rights of the content you uploaded with Valve, even if private
IP rights that you do not own
opal lion
@cobalt creek rude.
cobalt creek
And even when i quit Arma, why should i stop helping ppl in here?
YOU make no sense at all.
Thats not "rude", thats just bullshit you talk without any knowledge of anything.
opal lion
Some people handle criticism really badly.
echo orchid
@carmine folio - secondly, you ARE distributing that, even amongst friends, it is still called distribution
cobalt creek
๐คฆ that guy
opal lion
@echo orchid some countries have laws that soften ip rights. If you distribute to close friends, it is legal.
cobalt creek
๐คฆ
carmine folio
@echo orchid Hm, ok. Makes sense.
opal lion
It sure might violate EULAs, but it won't violate any law in my country if i put something on a usb stick and give it to a friend.
bronze oasis
At this point I call troll.
carmine folio
I'm going to assume that if I do get permission - then it's ok? @echo orchid
fossil basalt
Me as well and it will be dealt with if it continues.
opal lion
There was actually lawsuits about that, even with Microsoft involved. They lost.
bronze oasis
If you have permission, and you can prove that, like a written permission from the mod authoer, then it should be fine to my knowledge @carmine folio
cobalt creek
โ
echo orchid
@opal lion - yeah, except in the USA, where Valve "resides"
carmine folio
Does a chat on Discord suffice?
echo orchid
@carmine folio - nope, permission has no legal bounds
opal lion
@echo orchid There is a big difference between Valve shutting down my account or w/e and Valve sueing me in my country for copyright infringement.
first one obviously can happen, second is impossile
echo orchid
you need to have the original author sign a piece of paper where he shares his IP rights with you
@opal lion - valve will sue you in its country, not your own
carmine folio
I'm not sure how many people will go that far for a couple of line of code, @echo orchid.
echo orchid
@carmine folio i am telling you what it is required from a legal POV
opal lion
@echo orchid Sure, true.
gaunt geode
๐ฟ
carmine folio
@cobalt creek in my case it's been code ๐
hybrid tide
Fuck me is this really that difficult to compute lol
cobalt creek
Problemos, you have to proof, that you wrote that code and even then (in case of sqf) i doubt it would work out in the end.
@hybrid tide That guy just makes no sense at all ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
opal lion
Now how is the troll? You guys discuss the finer law points of ip rights violations of arma mods, while in reality jack shit happens because nobody can be bothered. The mod is deleted, the uploader is banned, and everyone moves on. (And than it happens again)
Or did i miss all the arma mod ip rights lawsuits?
echo orchid
@opal lion in any case, i am not sure what is the point you are trying to make? that Valve should remove the sharing IP clause from their agreement? because that will not happen
hybrid tide
It's really simple don't upload stuff u don't own, don't do anything the addon license says u can't do, thirdly don't be a cunt! If theses simple rules were followed the the world would be a better place
echo orchid
@opal lion you missed some sweeet Cease and desists i sent that got some servers and websites shut down pretty quicly
there are ways to deal with everything that is digital before you end in a court
or you end up in court only if you want compensations
@hybrid tide ๐ a world without cunts would be sooo gay ๐
cobalt creek
๐คฆ
hybrid tide
๐
opal lion
@echo orchid steam should just provide a hosting plattform for mods that is neutral and doesn't require mod authors or uploaders to give any rights to valve whatsoever. Ideally, of course. Also SW needs version control, obviously. Also the arma server needs integrated workshop support, by that i mean you put the mod ids in some config and the arma server downloads them, loads them and offers you config options for version control (automatic updates yes/no). Preferably you would have advanced options, such as the arma server detecting a mod update and automatically scheduling a restart that you can sync with your mission scripts as well so that when the current tasks in the mission are done, your server then puts up a nice countdown timer for players and reboots + updates mods ofc (IF you told it to) but without steam having version control i think most people would immediately choose that to avoid having to update the server mods manually whenever a player whines "my steam updated a mod without asking me, can't join server"
But i'm just a troll.
cobalt creek
Yeah, finaly blocked ๐คฆ
hallow frigate
@opal lion https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/ go and tell those who can acutally do something
opal lion
@hallow frigate Naaahhh just like people here i like to talk much and do jack.
hybrid tide
I think we've reached the point of flogging a very beaten horse here!
fossil basalt
@opal lion Yes, you are. Continue to troll and you will get to meet Don Quixote.
hybrid tide
I think fm has gone to get his brasso out, much shining to be done
opal lion
@fossil basalt How about you elaborate to me how i am trolling? Didn't i make sound and technically pretty much trivial suggestions that would improve the situations in my last message?
I am not trolling, i just have an unpopular opinion and cared to elaborate on it since i was asked to.
echo orchid
@fossil basalt +1 @opal lion if people here would do jack shit, there would be no need for this particular thread....so go play someplace else, because 1: this channel topic is different, it has no relation to Valve, and 2: you are beating the same bush wihout a scope
hybrid tide
๐ด๐จ๐จ
opal lion
Nicely asking me to drop the topic is apparently no option, rather immediately threaten with a ban.
fossil basalt
Dont steal, dont upload content that is not your own. Like I said, its a simple concept, yet youve been arguing against it for over an hour. Who's logic is flawed now?
opal lion
@echo orchid "@opal lion you missed some sweeet Cease and desists i sent that got some servers and websites shut down pretty quicly" - Do you care to elaborate?
opal lion
I haven't argued against it at all, i just argued that the whole problem could be minimized by taking a different approach than the current.
cobalt creek
I would still like to know, what his point was. ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
pliant oar
@opal lion content theft is serious issue, just like warez for developers and cheating and for creative community is content theft as dangerous as for popular mp game is cheating
echo orchid
@opal lion life communities making money of RHS. C&D their website and game server providers, send that same letter via snail mail = game servers and websites shut down, written appologies in mail box
opal lion
I agree. I argued that other issued inflated the problem of content theft (organisational issues) and i proposed to solve these issued to deflate the problem. I don't see how that is trolling or nonsensical.
pliant oar
so don't expect the issue will be ignored , in fact expect the issue being bigger problem and demanding more features (to workshop, to our titles, rulesets w/e) and more proactive approach
opal lion
@echo orchid No possible harm done taking down Life communities.
Dwarden i didn't understand that.
echo orchid
@opal lion you propose stuff in the wrong place, that cannot be done by BIS but by Valve
cobalt creek
(not that "BIS can't to anything and he should go to valve" was mentioned several minutes ago)
pliant oar
@opal lion you need realize the workshop framework belong to Valve ... so until they implement something we ask for/need, our reach is limited
echo orchid
@cobalt creek emphasising is key here
cobalt creek
*boop
opal lion
@pliant oar Why do you tell me that the framework belongs to Valve? That's obvious.
I thought we were beyond the "obvious" already.
cobalt creek
wow
hallow frigate
@opal lion or head to #arma3_launcher to request additional ways to get mods apart from sw so we escape Valves framework
echo orchid
@opal lion you're the only one that is not beyond the obvious it seems
frog: @PuFu steam should just provide a hosting plattform for mods that is neutral and doesn't require mod authors or uploaders to give any rights to valve whatsoever. Ideally, of course. Also SW needs version control, obviously. Also the arma server needs integrated workshop support, by that i mean you put the mod ids in some config and the arma server downloads them, loads them and offers you config options for version control (automatic updates yes/no).
opal lion
You're partially right. When i see you guys clapping here for banning some guy reuploading mods, i don't see an ip rights issue because that's obvious, boring and doesn't lead anywhere other than to 9001 other ip rights issues - until you solve the underlying problem. Make people not even want to upload mods, because they don't have to. My train of thoughts immediately races towards possible (technical) solutions to the organisational problem. Step back for a moment: Mod authors give their mods away for free. They want players to have it. All we are talking about is the way HOW the mods get to the players without mod authors loosing control over their content and/or having their rights infringed. But to me this is not a problem of thieves and ip rights but an organisational problem. One arguably other game communities do not suffer AT ALL which should serve as a very strong indicator that there are better solutions.
And yes, this is the wrong channel for that discussion. Yet you clapped in here and i had the urge to respond. I'll shut up now.
pliant oar
@opal lion but you do realize those reuploading mods would do it even while those mods are already on steam ?
you talking to Pufu which is from RHS which is already on STEAM ...
also, please show me 'the other game communities' which don't suffer from IP issues with 'open' workshop or modding ๐ฌ
cobalt creek
When i see you guys clapping here for banning some guy reuploading mods, i don't see an ip rights issue because that's obvious, boring and doesn't lead anywhere other than to 9001 other ip rights issues```
What? Rly?"Make people not even want to upload mods, because they don't have to" no one can force anybody to upload smth, and often they just can't cuz they don't are the IP-Owners by 100% (be it co-workers, external or 3rd party models/sounds) and they'd never get the permission for such terms.
opal lion
@pliant oar yeah, i do realise. It happened on Ark for example. I'm hosting an Ark server as well, so i know the situation there. But unlike here, the Ark community doesn't really have an ip rights discussion going on. If someone rips off a mod that is on steam workshop, and re-uploads it on steam workshop, people get confused due to two mods being present and they will actually leave NEGATIVE comments on the stolen mod and recommend people to use the official version. Also these mods are then deleted and literally nobody cares - why would they. It just removes a large chunk of the discussion in my opinion.
cobalt creek
So his point is, that we all ignore IP-Theft, because we cannot do anything against it. wth?
opal lion
@pliant oar i followed the story of RHS making its way to the workshop closely.
@cobalt creek i would appreciate if you actually ignored me like you said :/
pliant oar
Ark has exactly the same issues, obviously you just don't know about it ...
opal lion
@pliant oar i haven't seen an Ark server running a mod that isn't on the workshop.
pliant oar
because Ark didn't exist prior and can't work w/o workshop
you know Arma is older than STEAM ?
opal lion
Yeah, i do.
pliant oar
...
echo orchid
@opal lion there are still re-uploads going for RHS, on a weekly basis...i am sure there are more that are either "private" or i haven't discovered / been reported all of the remaining ones
opal lion
That explains the growth pains the arma community has with the workshop, but it doesn't SOLVE them.
pliant oar
it changes nothing, limit to one platform/distribution will not decrease the amount of theft
hallow frigate
@opal lion we understand your point. But legally they're doing wrong and can get in problems for it as soon as the any original owner says nope/stop.
opal lion
@echo orchid Does it generate ANY discussion if someone shoots down an RHS reupload? Because it shouldn't. The official one is available on the workshop, so literally nobody will be outraged. If anyone cries, you point him to the official upload, call him silly and you're done. But if the mod is not on the workshop, the whole story changes. Is that so hard to understand?
cobalt creek
๐คฆ
pliant oar
@opal lion some mods can't be legally even put on workshop, because they 'work of N people, some went MIA' and the original licenses don't allow it
in such case, no go
opal lion
@pliant oar Yeah that is extremely obvious and something i'm aware of a very long time now.
cobalt creek
"Hey, i use your car because you don't use it, without your knowledge of course."
pliant oar
in short, @opal lion why you even in this channel, you obviously not constructive nor interested in helping all you just did was create N pages of clutter ...
opal lion
I was very constructive i proposed to work towards making the steam workshop a more usable option for mod devs to prevent people uploading mods they don't own.
pliant oar
want things to change ? either get job at Valve or make something better than STEAM and WorkShop ...
it's damn easy, show us all how to do it ๐
more usable option for mod devs to prevent people uploading mods they don't own how the hell you want even do this
hallow frigate
@pliant oar nah, wouldn't even go that far. BI (or anybody else) can easily make its own SW, even if the entries just point to a external file / repo
pliant oar
because that's not million EUR solution that would be worth billions ... for video and audio, software / games industry
echo orchid
@opal lion - it does yes, i have a huge amount of hate messages received
pliant oar
@hallow frigate even then it would be not possible to prevent reuploads especially of already publicly available content
echo orchid
not that i give a fuck about it, but yes
if you ask me, the real solution is education about the IP rights, possible legal issues etc
blazing wyvern
with arma comunnity you wont ever get that xD
pliant oar
and it would be working for content not available to public only until someone reverse the system then you will be back to square 0 of violators reuploading everything they could
echo orchid
i mean the RHS has been the bad juju that was slapping everyone left and right since SW was made available for A3
opal lion
I think Steam is a company with a very large and solid revenue stream that isn't going anywhere for a long time. They have little incentives to change anything, or to cater to anyone specifically. Steam essentially managed to create a monopoly and game developers, players, etc are depending on steam and pretty much have to swallow what ever comes their ways since there is hardly an alternative. Call me a liar but when steam started out, i was immediately reluctant to use it because this is the obvious outcome of people accepting a plattform like steam. I wouldn't expect steam to do anything about the shitty quality of their client, their workshop, or any other service they have. Steam delivers the bare minimum people require to not complain, which is providing the game files to players, DRM to the publishers, and a shoddy chat client with a severe lack of features and thats about it. Why would steam ever improve the workshop? That's work, work costs money, and an improved workshop won't increase steams revenue. Simple business thinking.
And no, i don't want to work for steam, thanks.
echo orchid
recently, more and more people are actually necesary legal steps in the right direction, which means more and more people are made aware of it
which is what it should happen
hallow frigate
People will always be able to reupload - be it wherever - but it would atleast solve the SW Agreement problems.
pliant oar
and you think if we do DIY we would not have our own EULA / TOS in similar sense ? to protect us not just the IP owners
hallow frigate
but meh, we should get done with discussing unless there are some productive solutions in someones mind
pliant oar
even Nexus and modDB have ToS which most of people didn't even read ...
echo orchid
@blazing wyvern even if that education touches 50% of the ones that can't be bothered to read EULAs, or agreements, you will only be left with blind or cunts
that will still save me some time
hallow frigate
well but the important part with "or with owners written permission" can be added ;
opal lion
@echo orchid "@opal lion - it does yes, i have a huge amount of hate messages received" That is sad to hear. But doesn't it give you more peace of mind knowing you can point people to the official upload instead of pointing them to ArmAholic? For me it would.
blazing wyvern
they still upload it because they can
only way to deal with it is to limit the SW
i dont ask how lol
hallow frigate
and if you point to the repos / download sites anyways you must only check the license once before
pliant oar
what about remove modding ? that would solve all the questions and troubles ๐คฃ
blazing wyvern
what about disabling the SW
echo orchid
@pliant oar ๐
opal lion
@pliant oar would also solve Bohemia's revenue stream.
pliant oar
@blazing wyvern that isn't going to solve problems of reuploading to the <rest of internet>
blazing wyvern
well better than SW in my opinion heh
pliant oar
i was there before workshop existed and the same problem were happening on modDB, nexus, ofp.info, armedassault.info, armaholic.com w/e
echo orchid
@opal lion - getting RHS on SW was actually a heft and a bit convulted process, that said, we wouldn't have taken these steps if the bandwidth costs wouldn't have grown exponentialy
pliant oar
there will be always someone stealing someone else work, it's just all about if the IP owner fight back for theirs rights
echo orchid
and no, i don't ask anyone anything these days, i simply spank DMCAs and C&D
hallow frigate
Well yea but that's a problem that will always exists. Regardless of SW
echo orchid
also, my Steam profile is private which limits the hate messages
blazing wyvern
to be honest SW created a bigger mess than it was
opal lion
@pliant oar what exactly stops BI from implementing a small function into the arma launcher that automatically downloads mods from sources the server communicates to the launcher upon connecting? Server owners could download mods from wherever the mod author hosts it, and the mod author could simply put the download source into a definition file in a machine readable format. Then the launcher presents that source to the user, maybe with some nice html fetched from the download source showcasing the mod, and the user clicks "YES PLEASE" and the arma launcher downloads the mod? Doesn't seem like a rocket surgery solution to me and would make the workshop obsolete.
pliant oar
because workshop was adopted instead and it didn't progress as fast in terms of features/api as we hoped for
gaunt geode
Yea SW is garbage. I really miss hunting links on 14 year old websites or downloading from AH at 10s of kilobytes per second
hallow frigate
@opal lion please use paragraphs xD
pliant oar
and DIY while it seems simple, it's not so simple (resources cost (manhours))
hallow frigate
or whatever its called in english
opal lion
@echo orchid as i told Dwarden i followed the story of RHS making its way to the SW.
@pliant oar So what i proposed involved a large amount of manhours to implement?
hallow frigate
Imagine the hate when we would suddenly remove SW xD
pliant oar
frog it's simple Steam is #1 on the online distribution market and the amount of users on service itself, is important deciding factor
opal lion
@echo orchid thanks for RHS. And thanks for putting it on the SW. And no, i wouldn't rather use CUPs than RHS just because CUPs was on the workshop earlier.
pliant oar
no matter how you like or dislike it, reality is always more shades of grey than black and white
fossil basalt
Frog, this isnt your own personal "lets discuss things channel". This channel is for the discussion of IP violations prior to submitting an email to BI.... as it says in the channel description.
opal lion
@pliant oar i still don't understand entirely, if the arma launcher replaces a function of the SW in a better way, how would steam users react negatively to that? They still buy and play the game over steam?
pliant oar
replace with what ? where will be the content hosted, who makes the API, framework, web interface, who migrates all the existing content etc ?
deploying new service is just way more than 'make it'
gaunt geode
it's next to the "Optimize" button
pliant oar
and next to moar FPS dlc i bet or paid encrypt addons tool
echo orchid
@gaunt geode ๐ฅ
opal lion
I think you got me all wrong. content hosting would stay like it is, the mod author picks where he hosts. all you need to do is get the information about the mods the server is running (name of the mod, download source) from the server to the client. arma does that already. And then the launcher simply offers that info to the player. Lets say this info is an http link - he then clicks it and opens it in his browser. Done like dinner. Arma launcher would have to handle putting the files in the right spot, thats all.
blazing wyvern
you get optimize button in your nvidia geforce experience xD
fossil basalt
1 hr and 45 min later..... Yet you're not trolling.... or so you say
pliant oar
i think @fossil basalt at this point we all just giggle while crunching nachos or chips ...
hallow frigate
@opal lion only with repos. else it would be a mess when it comes to updates
opal lion
@fossil basalt sorry i didn't know responding to the discord owner is against your policy.
cobalt creek
and again that passive aggressive behaviour ๐
fossil basalt
Had you quit ages ago, as was mentioned, it wouldnt have gotten this far.
Besides, bad things happen when 2 hammers swing at the same time, it's like crossing streams. Don't cross the streams.
hallow frigate
And this moved from IP onto how to make ArmA (Launcher) better ^^
pliant oar
i still don't get what has his launcher launcher improvement idea with IP violations ... {because it would change nothing in the IP theft volume}
fossil basalt
I still dont understand whats difficult with "Dont Steal" and "Dont upload content thats not yours".
pliant oar
so the idea summarized is, everything is wrong, let's burn the house down, DIY from scratch, end with the same issues, just differently ๐
blazing wyvern
most of they guys takes the SW as hosting free service where you can upload anything
pliant oar
btw. i'm all for the DIY, one day, in distant future, with unlimited resources 
blazing wyvern
thats why they ignore all the legal shit
cobalt creek
Imagine you have to pay 1$/โฌ to open/enable your account, that can upload to the WS.
pliant oar
you need to own the game, so the initial investment isn't issue
blazing wyvern
well that didnt stop Steam Greenlight with the crappy games - that you had to pay $100 per game ๐
pliant oar
i would say 1 buck for each new upload to workshop may help against the 'spam' but not theft where violator makes already enough
cobalt creek
... and your account gets banned instantly, when a file gets (succesfully) reported for IP-Theft
๐
hallow frigate
@pliant oar but it gives communities and content makers more freedom in terms of license / redistribution permissions to people who are not the IP-Owner. And freedom is good or are you against freedom? ๐ฌ but enough of this ๐ I'm out.
cobalt creek
@pliant oar Is there realy NO WAY, to disable Accounts to upload stuff to WS? :/
pliant oar
well what about if you put public workshop download up and it has 'wider' audience than e.g. 10 , you must first pay deposit which will be confiscated for the rightful owner if something goes wrong
oh wait .... that would backfire with all the false reports trying to claim that booty ๐คฃ
cobalt creek
"succesfully"
pliant oar
no simple solution to complex problem
cobalt creek
WS sucks, lets go back to SelfHosted stuff.
blazing wyvern
^^^^^
pliant oar
simple https fetch it all ...
cobalt creek
\o/ Fetch the internetz \o/
opal lion
It is not passive aggressive behavior. You guys simply have a detached mindset in your local discord bubble. I would almost call that a bit of a Stockholm syndrome, because outside of this discord Bohemia is bashed to shit for the horrible user experience people suffer.
Yet if anyone dares to criticise BI in here, he'll be yelled at by anyone, and no i don't think you're all BI employees. You simply committed deeply into a game and can't stand the idea of actually spending so much time on something that trashy.
That's a simple psychological defense mechanism. Hardly anyone manages to be perfect and make perfect decisions, so humans need a way to cope with our failures and disappointments in life.
Also many people simply fail to understand simple logical connections between things. The solution to that is building a false reality bubble, and being confronted about that is painful so obviously it is dismissed and people are called trolls to protect that false reality bubble.
Really gets in the way of solving problems if you ask me, but probably also prevents 90% of the population drowning in depression.
Dwarden understands perfectly well how changing the arma launcher even slightly would solve the SW issue and free dozens of people like PuFu from hate mail every day, but that's just way too low on the priority list.
ArmA 3 graphics look quite poor, the game has an increasing instead of decreasing bug problem, the engine is chocked on single threaded performance which is painfully obvious on almost any server once you increase the load slightly.
The update policy doesn't help with that, introducing a bug and then refusing to roll back exposing tens of thousands of players to daily crashes ... i wouldn't worry about the Steam Workshop either in his position, tbh. Where do you go from that point? What does ArmA 4 look like? Another re-use of the old engine? Dragging along the same issues again? Or years and years of further development for a new engine which, considering BI's track record, likely will be troubled, too?
Hoping for another random success like DayZ to push sales? Nice one joking around about removing mod support by the way, on a game that literally lives on user created content because BI's content is inferior. At this point there are more jokes in the vanilla content than there are in the mods. RHS RPG7 is fantastic, DLC RPG7 seems to be from call of duty. .50 BW underbarrel ? Triple grenade launcher? You have to work hard to find such nonsense on the workshop. And then the vehicles. Locking of stabilized guns doesn't work properly, missiles don't lock properly, meanwhile ACE locking which used to be hard compared to vanilla seems like a breeze.
Hard to tell the difference between an early soviet area tank from RHS and 2035's tanks, since on both you have to manually lead your target and beyond 2km even estimate your elevation - good luck hitting anything on the move. Meanwhile real tanks from the 80's can track targets on their own and have high hit chances on flying helicopters on distances up to 4km due to advanced FCS.
VTOLs the size of a C-130 that can lift heavy trucks with rotors almost the size of the original osprey, flight model that is pretty much straight from ArmA 2's MV-22 and denies ANY sort of even remotely realistic dynamic flight?
High quality content, for sure. What does that have to do with ip_right_violations? Vanilla content is shit -> mod content desired -> workshop is shit -> leads to ip right violations. Called logical chain of thoughs, distant concept to many here.
@pliant oar "simple https fetch it all ..."
Thats what i said, and all the arma launcher has to do is display the mod source HTTP URL recieved from the server to the player. But apparently that is voodoo magic for a software company to implement with millions of euros spend and tens of thousands of manhours.
Serious asshole attitude going on here, and then you wonder why people give a shit about you and do what they want with the game/content/whatever. There is an ethical responsability if you sell someone a product with a promise, and if you underdeliver you have an ethical debt to these people. Also a legal debt, in a perfect world we would just sue BI for scamming customers, BI would go bankrupt and maybe if we were lucky another company would fill the spot of providing the niece product of a military simulator FPS.
hallow frigate
oh shit
pliant oar
enough ... 
... text preserved just for sake someone will try argue it was invaluable ...
cobalt creek
lulz
echo orchid
i do hope the ban hammer finally dropped on this bloke that all he wanted to do is vent off
cobalt creek
๐ฆ
echo orchid
lol
cobalt creek
๐ worth a try
blazing wyvern
launcher fixes everything - thats a fact!
hallow frigate
๐ฟ
bronze oasis
So that is the same guy on a new account?
cobalt creek
๐ what a ... lmao. Some ppl
hallow frigate
If this goes on the next discussion will be about removing the IP Channel xD
tight copper
fossil basalt
Obvious troll was Obvious
midnight vine
I think it probably started off as a frustrated user with a valid concern turned into a troll when he saw he wasn't getting the response he wanted.
fossil basalt
Don't Steal, Don't upload what isnt yours. If thats what frustrated him...
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
midnight vine
Yes that bit was stupid.
fossil basalt
Besides, if he had a legit concern/complaint/potential solution, his time would have been better spent writing a forum post. Also possibly a constructive email to BI and Valve.
midnight vine
Yea but that would be sensible... and this is the internet afterall. ๐
cobalt creek
... and intelligent
fossil basalt
I never said people had much sense...
fossil basalt
Soylent Green is people
cobalt creek
A song with that topic was just in my Playlist! oO Anyway, not IP-related ๐
fossil basalt
;)
Move along Citizens, nothing to see here.
hybrid tide
well that escalated not so quickly lol
nova drift
I am thankful we have Steam workshop, Armaholic, etc. to help distribute content as it would not be even remotely sustainable otherwise. We have self-hosted in the past and know how much of a burden that can be. Kids these days have it too easy... ๐ด๐ฝ
amber ibex
The fuck was going on with that guy Oo
hybrid tide
something in the water
echo orchid
@amber ibex - SW string querry ๐
carmine folio
Holy cow, what a read this morning. Sadly too early for popcorn
gritty path
โ ๐
amber ibex
Already can query the description etc
Only problem now is to receive the file or get some md5 hash @echo orchid
tender hawk
@nova drift I am thankful we have Steam workshop, Armaholic, etc. to help distribute content as it would not be even remotely sustainable otherwise. We have self-hosted in the past and know how much of a burden that can be. Hell these days it feels like it became too much of a burden for Armaholic
echo orchid
@amber ibex yeah you know what i mean ๐
carmine folio
I don't get why it seems to be so difficult to understand. I didn't make this mod, therefore I have no rights of ownership, and therefore shouldn't upload something I don't own to the steam workshop...
But I don't understand why society does 90% of the things they do anyway, so ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
fervent needle
If only BI could implement a little warning with their publisher toolset in Arma Tools then could IP ban SW uploads
You agree by uploading this that there is no content that you do not own or have the rights to [Yes] [No] then for added effect you just scan the content of their uploads against the workshop, waiting an extra few minutes to scan to stop problems later seems like it would be worth it, no?
Stop the upload at the source and not even allow them to upload the 20th copy of stolen RHS or CUP to their own little UberModPack
seems like it would solve some problems but the scope of my thinking might be off
cobalt creek
IP Ban useless
e.g. Germany -> unplug your modem -> plug in again -> New IP
OR even on demand every 24h/each time your Modem logs in, when in IdleMode (if enabled)
warm urchin
but steam ID ban you couldn't go around other than making a new account ๐
nova drift
Why is that @tender hawk? Also, props to @pliant oar for attempting to help address these issues as most Content Creators I know already struggle to spend time working on their projects let alone have time to deal with IP issues and the drama related fallout.
soft egret
AFAIK You can't ban a person from workshop. That's not in BI's hands. I think Dwarden said that a few days ago
fervent needle
@nova drift I think he is mentioning the fact of Armaholic having slow speeds for non paying members or non registered because traffic and ads have slowed so they are paying more out of pocket for hosting and downloads because of SW
fossil basalt
I do believe that at a certain point, uploaders who continuously violate Steam policy are banned.
(By Valve)
stark mulch
i can say that hosting content yourself is a nightmare. My launcher download mirrors (for non steam mod) does an easy 5TB in bandwidth a day
at about 2g/s at peak times
fervent needle
I don't doubt that its high for armaholic or was higher at a point
Not at your speeds though maca, because you have a direct line to servers as well as autodownload for mods/server joining
Armaholic required user knowledge.. Which is harder to comeby now ๐
nova drift
oh ya @stark mulch, When we first started and used Torrents backed with Amazon 3S, I had a bandwidth bill of over $1200 in just under two months.
merry oasis
I don't think that an additional warning will help that much when there are people around who not only include RHS once but twice in their modpack (and additionally have 40 meta.cpp files in their upload) - I think they just upload their whole mod folder copy&paste style
nova drift
Seems that most of these violating SW uploads are likely from Server Admins using the workshop as a way to distribute their servers "Mod Pack"?
fervent needle
exactly that^
stark mulch
im not defending them but a good number are people who just dont know any better
hallow frigate
exactly. and from those who don't know that owners permission isnt sufficient to upload to steam
stark mulch
they assume they are doing good, upload mod X to steam
nova drift
Ya, it can be about version control also. That is something SW cannot really handle
stark mulch
and lets face it, not everyone reads the T/Cs ๐ฆ
nova drift
But we should not change the rules to suit those that are lazy.
stark mulch
so imo, the less hurdles there are, get mods public the more crap/dodgy/etc content will appear, either ^^ change the rules or live with it i guess ๐ฆ
how can you change the workshop upload policy tho? having an approval system, means BIS will have to employ/pay someone to do it
pliant oar
imagine the fastest growing team subset of BI ... workshop analysis, approve and takedown strikeforce
stark mulch
otherwise it just leave the reactive system that is in place now
pliant oar
the more users and the more popular game is, the worse it will get with more stuff to examine ...
stark mulch
ye going through all the content, comparing etc, its a massive job ๐
pliant oar
look how Google failed with theirs automated systems for Youtube and Google search etc.
but maybe it's answer how save jobs, lost due to robots and automatization, let's talk to your local gov representatives, to spend some billion EUR yearly on such programs
echo orchid
[5:41 PM] Andrew: You agree by uploading this that there is no content that you do not own or have the rights to [Yes] [No] then for added effect you just scan the content of their uploads against the workshop, waiting an extra few minutes to scan to stop problems later seems like it would be worth it, no?
@fervent needle yes, that could be done i think, and it would be a good start
@pliant oar ^
at least it is in your face
fervent needle
Pls
blazing wyvern
i dont think SW can be fixed
echo orchid
you can't they say: but i didn't read that part, i wasn't aware of it
blazing wyvern
only way to deal with it is to get rid of it
pliant oar
ye but you do realize anyone can upload to Workshop, you don't need Arma / our apps, the API is openly available
echo orchid
stop being so negativistic David ๐
an extra WARNING WARNING, don't be a dock with other people's shit
fervent needle
Cropping the largest stream effects the whole pool ๐
echo orchid
won't do any harm
stark mulch
are there any other games with SW and suffer from this problem? how do they solve it?
echo orchid
@stark mulch all suffer from the same symphoms afaik, especially the very heavy SW modded ones
stark mulch
a warning isnt going to stop people who are intentionally uploading content on the sly
blazing wyvern
most other SW are flooded with ilegall stuff
stark mulch
but would make the "good intentions" people think twice
blazing wyvern
kinda like in Insurgency etc
fervent needle
warning + checking your upload against already uploaded content
echo orchid
@stark mulch precisely
fervent needle
would do a lot though
stark mulch
checking against other content isnt a worker in a desktop app
just doing pbo hash checking isnt worth it imo
pliant oar
checking your upload against already uploaded content
stark mulch
soooo easy to change a tiny bit of the pbo
pliant oar
how the hell you want to do that ? with the erm-non-existant search API on workshop
stark mulch
give me a server with a few 10s of TB on it, i can do it ๐
pliant oar
plus it takes me single conversion pass to change everywhere hashes on files packed into PBO (and PBO itself then too)
so forget about <names similarity or match> or <hashes compare>
stark mulch
can be done, u need to download the entire SW library ๐
hallow frigate
and such checks are easily avoidable <.<
stark mulch
and unpack it
pliant oar
RH this can't be fixed for any service, as long as you have any open format and any documented/open/insecure engine
stark mulch
or even armaholic, if ur sneaky
blazing wyvern
well with those other sites you can at least get rid of it faster ๐
stark mulch
its the same tho really
pliant oar
rid of what ? ...
blazing wyvern
also why keeping it when it doesnt work
pliant oar
good luck of getting rid of random torrent on Chinese server
stark mulch
he is talking of centralized mod hosting to be fair
blazing wyvern
well thats like 5% from what SW got like 80% of that
stark mulch
not random torrents etc
pliant oar
all the other services are as bad ...
hallow frigate
@blazing wyvern remove steam workshop and all the mod communities will cry loud across all channels when their servers suddenly stop working.
stark mulch
were ever u can upload mods without and approval process can be abused unfortunatly