Soooooo, let's see, whats in those WS-Files:
https://i.gyazo.com/7e987e9bbe21378ee3c06fe8e793d32f.png
#ip_rights_violations
cobalt creek
merry oasis
only grabbing the filenames and filesizes of the pbo content (without the possibility to hash) would be only about 42GB
cobalt creek
Oh ffs, first Repo and i find my addon, lol
echo orchid
@cobalt creek bound to happen ๐
cobalt creek
merry oasis
@echo orchid the ws entries tagged with Mod are about 7.5TB (including all reuploads etc.)
echo orchid
@merry oasis alrighty, that just bellow my entire main PC space ๐
river spear
@merry oasis Can't wait for 7TB
Sadly download speed from Steam is only around 30MBit
So we're running multiple sessions to download that stuff, hope Steam doesn't get mad at us ๐
cobalt creek
Lets go: Phase 1
https://i.gyazo.com/d22538496ca4beba2f5903d6d6b4a4ad.png
pliant oar
i think this became new game for itself , @river spear when you bored, add achievements and scoring table and league tiers because some like PuFu will be tops ๐
echo orchid
@pliant oar mate, don't get me started ๐
cobalt creek
๐
pliant oar
don't worry @echo orchid you in diamond league anyway ...
merry oasis
when using hashes and partly downloads (i.e. avoiding downloads of duplicate pbos - not sure whether it could really work) it would be "only" about 1.2TB uncompressed data (the download should be even smaller because of compression)
echo orchid
talk about 6x time original content duplicates....
merry oasis
@echo orchid about 12.5 % of the pbos are unique
echo orchid
๐ถ
river spear
Will need to make it more efficient nevertheless
echo orchid
you guys might wanna put together that data
river spear
And simply look in the DB whether a hash of a pbo is already there
echo orchid
i mean for me it says a lot, i'm sure some others would like a glimpse into that as well
@merry oasis ^^
and you doode should really get a proper non r2d2 nick ๐
dull moon
how long does it usually take valve to remove a ws item?
echo orchid
for me in particular, or for the average pleb?
๐
last DMCAs pack i did was around 24h
dull moon
well, what is average pleb? im about to hit my 200th DMCA soon for today ๐
echo orchid
๐
the most i had to wait for one was 7 days
but that was long time ago
200th, welcome to the hundreds club - although i think i am pushing for the thousand myself ๐
the sweat thing to do now, would be to pull RHS from SW altogether
and see them cringe
hue hue huee
gritty path
hahaha
dull moon
that is just for today. can't recall how many i got in total. but i dought it's i the thousand. but might be close ^^
yes, pull it and hear them cry ๐
echo orchid
yeah same here, didn't reach that 1000 spot just yet
in any case, 7 days should be max
if nothing happens in 7 days, do check your email
dull moon
you know what, let's pull off RHS and CUP just for one day and see what happens ๐
also CBA
echo orchid
although as david said, i am sure some bloke in seattle is swamped
dull moon
yes, that poor fucker ^^
echo orchid
@dull moon lol, i'll keep this in mind for next april fools day
dull moon
imagine that shitstorm......
echo orchid
but not pull it, but simply replace it with some dud .pbo
dull moon
you mean like empty files?
echo orchid
chanign the main screen to "you've been fooled"
dull moon
uuuuhuhuhuhu [evil grin]
echo orchid
no, i mean a single dud.pbo file
gritty path
there would be enough tears to float the Freedom.
echo orchid
signed
cobalt creek
here wego again
echo orchid
as inyou've been fooled - signed RHS team
you've been fooled - signed CUP team
you've been fooled - signed CBA team
cobalt creek
@dull moon thx for the gif ๐
dull moon
@echo orchid i already got it marked down
http://i.imgur.com/QO6GlkQ.png
๐
dull moon
๐ ๐
dull moon
249 DMCAs in two days... why are ppl doing this?
west reef
Does this tool work with earlier uploads, say if someone uploaded my mod onto SW before I do, will this tool detect the earlier mod?
cobalt creek
In a few days it prolly will.
I run the tool to hash all the files on my Server right now. @river spear can say more to that
river spear
@west reef The tool won't prefer anyone
If you upload your content afterwards and then search for reuploads, you will find the other mod
and vice versa
dull moon
and since you are the rightholder it's no problem to take down another mod, even if the other mod was uploaded first
west reef
what about if the other mod issues the dmca first?
do we settle this outside the saloon at noon? or is this something that the mods would have to sort out
because just so you know, I have been working on my quick draw.
cobalt creek
Saloon sounds like a good idea.
afaik you can complaint against the DMCA.
dull moon
no, this can be solved very easy. if this was the case and you get a DMCA notice by valve, tell em that you are the rightholder and also send them some examples of your mod with dates
west reef
the spinny holster thing is another matter
robust abyss
Having to notify valve everytime you have a DMCA against you is going to be a pain in the ass
that's my main concern right now
river spear
The main issue is that Valve doesn't check DMCAs
They just delete the workshop mods
And it's up to the actual IP owner to prove otherwise if his own mod gets striked
robust abyss
This may force a lot of people to not bother uploading to SW
less hassle potentially
We don't know what's gonna happen in the coming weeks but It's definitely something I'm worried about
If there's a way to make it so only the original first upload could be checked, then that would definitely help
but I doubt that's even possible
not a perfect solution as any bugger can grab something from the forums and upload it to steam
tender hawk
This is gonna be important for mods where the creator has yet to upload to SWS
robust abyss
yea
tender hawk
I've already seen the gachopin/cervantes mod for A2 get uploaded by someone else to SWS as an A3 thing
grand oyster
@tender hawk Couldn't the solution be to upload it first but leave it as hidden?
tender hawk
@grand oyster Well first the author would have to upload at all...
grand oyster
@tender hawk What'd deter the author from uploading at all though?
tender hawk
If you're thinking of how an author can establish a claim that they're the author...
echo orchid
mentality 101:
https://i.gyazo.com/e760f53dcc25ea81c3ea6649fb491535.png
winged vapor
lulz
echo orchid
and why would someone copyright a mod, yeah?
blazing wyvern
this is exactly what i said before , 95% do not care about that and they take steam workshop like a free hosting service with no copyright heh
echo orchid
@robust abyss well if any of the RHS SW uploads gets DMCAed, i can hapilly and easily demonstrate that the files are original and RHS is the IP rights owner for all content
the SW dmcas are moderated, it's not just a script
also, when you fill a DMCA, you need to sign the following:
I acknowledge that under Section 512(f) of the DMCA any person who knowingly materially misrepresent that material or activity is infringing may be liable for damages.
it might happen once or twice worst case scenario, but i am pretty sure that if you do that you can actually get your Steam account suspended
not sure how many people are willing to risk it
midnight vine
๐
coral torrent
river spear
+1 for Trump
tender hawk
@echo orchid the SW dmcas are moderated, it's not just a script On the one hand that seems to be a net good, on the other hand I guess this means modders/authors need to 'get their paperwork in order' moreso than olden-timey 'oh hey Foxhound vouch for me'?
sinful geode
Why a login?
noble ether
why am I in this group
bronze oasis
Pretty much. But in my experience Valve reaches out regarding doubts/unclear things when it comes to DMCAs.
river spear
@sinful geode Some security measures
sinful geode
Yeah, but what security could be at risk without the login?
Someone crawling the crawler?
cobalt creek
bots? Maybe?
sinful geode
I'm just pretty cautious when it comes to linking my steam/google to services from less known providers.
tender hawk
An understandable consideration, although I have to imagine that so long as you're able to continue to use the crawler without a linked login...
cobalt creek
@blazing wyvern
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=927476841
https://i.gyazo.com/90cf426ebcb78c647845fd7accee4c0b.png
hybrid tide
this tool is brilliant
my addon had been live on SW 30mins and some scrub had already reuploaded
undone pier
need some advice/input please - one of our terrain maker has been using "Beton addons" (an object pack from A2 days) for his WW2 style terrain
the readme states: They can be used by other mapmakers as long as they are not modified without permission.
and
--------------------
You are permitted to install and use this software for personal entertainment purposes only. Any commercial, military or educational use is strictly forbidden withoutpermission from the authors.
You are free to distribute this software as you wish, as long as it is kept 100% free of charge, it is not modified in any way and this readme file is distributed with it.
The authors takes no responsibility for any damages this program may cause, use at your own risk.```
Beton has last been online mid 2016, and he seems not reachable via Skype or mail.
Strictly speaking from what I understand we are not allow to upload his mod to Workshop (not separately, nor integrated in a mod), right?
Does his license above change anything in this regard?That is how I understand it also. This is however, probably one of the more legitimate things that should be able to be uploaded, in my opinion. My opinion though, is not Steam policy.
chilly silo
The issue there is the deeding of rights to Steam. No one but Beton has the right to do that.
river spear
Alright guys
tight copper
river spear
Everything on the workshop is currently being indexed
But
Are there any file types that you think are unnecessary to index?
Like for example, txt, rvmat
dull moon
Mod and meta cpp
echo orchid
i would say rvmat needs to be indexed...txt, not so much
it is way easier to figure ripped stuff from rvmats rather than paa
river spear
RVMATs make up 25% of all workshop files
echo orchid
hmmm, i dunno, skip em then
dull moon
It depends on what you/we want. Fast and easy takedowns of complete uploads or pbos, or in depht search of Single Files in a pbos
What about your Server Performance on this?
river spear
25% more data just for RVMATs doesn't seem reasonable to me
Because if someone uses the RVMAT, its highly likely he uses it with some other file which he has copied aswell that is being indexed
dull moon
True
True
I think the most interesting Part for Un depht search would be rips of models (p3d)
If a model is ripped (and maybe renamed) there is a pretty big Chance that the violator also uses the rvmats with maybe alteted textures
cobalt creek
rvmats are gone now ๐
I assume .paa and .p3d will be the most searched stuff. wss & .ogg also stay in.
+I need a new Server ๐ My HDD is dying (100% activity)
dull moon
Sounds good to me. But then i guess a ripper would edit the paa first to cover his most obvious tracks
dull moon
Which they dont in most cases ๐
cobalt creek
๐
dull moon
LOOOOOOL
Just got a Mail from Valve sounding like:
Because of your high number of DCMA reports expect some delay to See results on the WS
cobalt creek
lmao
faint nacelle
They didnt call you a bot at least @dull moon
dull moon
๐
dull moon
ok, so i got home in this moment, opened up steam and got a message...
Ban for one week because i violated the EULA. reason: spam
WTF STEAM?
is enforcing my right to report real violators considered spam??
i think i pissed some dudes of...
midnight vine
That's pretty shitty, I wonder if they'll sort it out on support?
dull moon
i wrote to the support team, lets see what happens next
midnight vine
Lets hope so, can't have PuFu getting too far ahead of you on the numbers.
undone pier
@river spear @cobalt creek is file filtering mostly to reduce the amount of shown entries (interface), or DB entries, or processing (CPU/hasing)?
river spear
@undone pier Yes
Although actually extracting the pbos takes significantly the longest time of the whole process
undone pier
yes on all three or which is most relevant?
ebon ruin
You guys are doing gods work. Thanks to you there are hundreds of people who just wanted to play arma with no profits in mind(non life and dayz servers). I'm glad that all these people are able to find better communties and games to play now. ๐ I hope good comes out of all these items being removed from the steam workshop... It's pretty much their own fault for not having any money to host their own arma 3 sync :)
Fuck poor people who are trying to play arma and use steamworkshop! You guys are awesome!
gaunt geode
Someone's addon got taken down^
river spear
It's not like you can set a dependency for the object on your own workshop item or you know make a collection
There's only one reason someone would want to reupload and that's when you changed files and running that with the original item will break it
fossil basalt
Wow @ebon ruin the words you're looking for are "theft" and "falsely claiming their content is their own". As others have said, "collections" are what people should be using.
But, just for you and people of your ilk, I have provided a link that walks you through, holding your hand all the way, on how to create a collection. It even has nice, simple, easily understood pictures too.
https://www.bisecthosting.com/clients/knowledgebase/94/How-to-create-a-Steam-Workshop-collection.html
echo orchid
@dull moon nein, never
@gaunt geode if it would have been his addon, it wouldn't have been taken down
gaunt geode
someones addon that he rehosted*
dull moon
@ebon ruin
It is not about fucking up someones joy of playing arma. Not at all. Im truly Sorry for the subscribers that might have prolems for a while now because they fell for a modpack that was simply not allowed on steam in the first place. Uploading content that is not yours is not allowed. Not at all. This is written in all affected eulas and licenses. Sure, who reads hundreds of lines of legal stuff as a casual Player, but this is the least to expect of a "Provider" Or an admin
@echo orchid
I think my misstake then was to leave a comment on affected items and giving the uploaders a name. This happens if i still want to be some sort of pollite. Lesson learned, no comments anymore, simply reporting and not giving a fuck anymore
I also think this is the result of some sort of automation. I left a comment on every reported items. It took me round about 20sec to go to the Page, leave the comment and file the DCMA report. So well, every 20sec a comment over a long Periode of time... Could have triggered the Spam protection
bronze oasis
That is probably the case, yea.
echo orchid
@midnight vine lol
midnight vine
They make it out like we are doing something wrong by DMCA'ing them.
amber ibex
as i already said once ... most ppl do not mean any harm and do not know better
reality is: most people are stupid retardeds
blazing wyvern
seriously there should be a big pop up window saying "Are you a owner of this addon? If not then you are not allowed to upload it"
or something
faint nacelle
^^ exactly this
fossil basalt
Even better would be "If you upload content that you did not create, we will ban your steam account and any purchases you have made will be forfeit."
blazing wyvern
to scare their asses off lol
fossil basalt
As a promise more so than a threat
amber ibex
@blazing wyvern @faint nacelle ever rly read the messages that popup on your computer?
hint: most people just blindly click OK
blazing wyvern
@amber ibex then make it is not that simple one click ๐
amber ibex
does not changes anything but getting the user annoyed as fuck
faint nacelle
read it out loud
faint nacelle
sure it would mean you need a microphone
amber ibex
HCI tells you all you need to know about this
there is ismply no way you can tell a user that it is fucked unless you annoy him that much that he blindly ignores that part in its full
--> death of steam workshop
blazing wyvern
if he ignores it then he shouldnt be whining about banning him to not upload anything to SW
amber ibex
thing is simply this ... most ppl are stupid idiots and do not understand that they did wrong
thus you cannot just behave like total dickheads with all of them but have to, if they do contact you for negotiation, tell them nicely that they did wrong
always assume you got a stupid on the other end not one who pirates on purpose
because like it or not: those people are your "customers"
blazing wyvern
customer will be only when they start waving their dosh to me ๐
without that they are just "users"
amber ibex
they already did ... @blazing wyvern http://makearmanotwar.com/winners
blazing wyvern
that was a official competition , how you can even compare to that
and i didnt get any dosh so
amber ibex
also double check the definition of customers
though all that does not matters actually
all i want to say is: treat them as normal people not as one who "steals" your stuff on purpose
blazing wyvern
they treat authors like they do not exist so why i would even care for them ...
amber ibex
that is the whole point you do not get ...
they mean no harm
could bet some of them are not even mature
DMCA them, fine but if they do contact you, explain them the reason you did
and not with the wordings "because you stole my content" but in proper, thoughtfull length
it not even is required to answer each one separate ... a one-go template will do it
blazing wyvern
lol mate you saying that like they are puppies or something
amber ibex
you are free to continue to act like a dickhead
just told you what is the right way to do
cobalt creek
"right way to do" <- Not uploading stuff you don't have / reading the TOS
Or do you think the Policte will tell you "Hey, i know you didn't mean harm, when you stole that Bike, but you are not allowed to do it"
๐คฆ
blazing wyvern
ok , i treat them the same way as they do and i got no reason to be polite to them at all
gaunt geode
Oh no its the "you wouldn't download a car" analogy
cobalt creek
^^
gaunt geode
i need to download more ram first
cobalt creek
Okay, then this: It's common knowledge that you are not allowed to upload Music (where you don't own the IP) and share it.
Soo... where is the difference to Models/Maps/Mods?
gaunt geode
There isnt
Arma just needs an unskippable very aggressive video about illegal uploading mods when you start it
like movies
blazing wyvern
proud flicker
"You wouldn't download a car..." ๐
white moat
better version https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg
heavy moon
Maybe BI make it policy that in every SitRep that mentions the Workshop or highlights any content on it, they re-iterate the fact that only IP owners are entitled to upload their content, in a nice friendly splendid reminder fashion.
that way joe ignorant public are constantly reminded of this fact
Perhaps add additional pre-publish info screen in publisher in rgb colours so all the cool kids can understand aswell.
amber ibex
the idea of sitreps mentioning that is actually that polite way that would make users understand
the second idea ... just straigth back to how often you read those message boxes with "OK" or tick "yes i agree"
ebon ruin
I belive most mod pack uploaders etc. Just want to make things convienient for the players. Some of the reuploads have edits in them, some have exact copies ( Which in reality is bad since collections are a thing ). They mostly know the risk of their acctount being suspended because they are not owners of the content, but they hope for the good will of the content owners to not report these workshop items and greed, as the people who upload these things in most cases have nothing of moneytary value to gain from this.
The motivations are usually just fun and playing the game... Isn't that why you guys create these mods in the first place? As someone who has created plentyful of missions, I'm glad that there are people who have enjoyed playing them and I do as well. I don't want anything in return as (maybe stupidly) I don't really care for money and praise, I am just looking to have fun and make other people have fun.
I mean no offense to you all, since the hours of work, tears and joy you have put into the mods you create is truly priceless. It's up to YOU as the content creator to make sure the files are removed from the workshop if YOU wish them removed and it's your right to do so, but it's not your obligation to do so (or so I think).
Anyway isn't CUP APL-SA, meaning it can only be shared under the same license since the assets are from Arma, which are APL-SA?
heavy moon
The point is, people should not be uploading anything that is not their own.
if they obey that simple rule, we would never be in this mess.
heavy moon
Also anyone who does so breaches multiple EULA's in doing so. Stop trying to justify the view that the workshop is free to be used by the community as they see fit. It's there for content creators to publish their content to the workshop.
cobalt creek
@ebon ruin
I mean no offense to you all, since the hours of work, tears and joy you have put into the mods you create is truly priceless. It's up to YOU as the content creator to make sure the files are removed from the workshop if YOU wish them removed and it's your right to do so, but it's not your obligation to do so
You are NOT allowed, by Steam WS TOS, to upload stuff, that isn't your IP. How do we have to repeat that?
willow star
people will not learn, they simply ignore the rules because they feel special
see: speeding, dui, etc.
cobalt creek
โ sad, but true.
bronze oasis
But they will continue to moan when punished for breaking the rules.
willow star
"punished", deleting the content isn't really a punishment
carmine folio
@ebon ruin only some of CUPS is APL-SA. Rest of CUPS is a custom license that doesnt allow for reuploads to steam workshop
There is no real valid reason to repackage CUPS Terrains anyways, you are just making end users download alot of extra wasted diskspace
bronze oasis
Well its the closest we get to a punishment
blazing wyvern
there is almost no punishment in SW , if we dont count DMCA xD
willow star
What kind of punishment do you get when you get a DMCA Takedown?
cobalt creek
And then you can get DMCA'd again
willow star
lets hope someone starts shit with valve who has the money to battle them in court
like valve getting sued by Disney because someone uploads something again and again
and then valve will end their business with you if you get to many dmcas
midnight vine
On the plus side i have slowly seen the number of mods drop from 3800/3900 to 3600 on the WS.
carmine folio
imho valve is threating the SW uploading negligently.
imagine everyone with a steam account would be able to upload games to steam.
there should be some administartion by Valve similart to games on steam but for mods on SW
You got a better chance of valve allowing game authors to ban/moderate accounts uploading content to workshop for thier particular games.
carmine folio
but it's their service, they need to moderate it
cobalt creek
The only thing we (community) can do is: Take care of it by ourself, by checking it.
carmine folio
otherwise they are contributing to IP right violations
cobalt creek
willow star
Imagine if you had to pay a 20 bucks deposit to upload mods on sw what gets lost when you get a dmca
all the life kiddies would think twice about uploading shit thats not theirs
carmine folio
nah they earn that in 5min with their server
cobalt creek
-.- yeah
willow star
then increase the amount of money by 10 bucks each time
you won't be able to keep up
carmine folio
they will just raise the entry costs to their server to "cover their running costs"
willow star
Can you upload on sw without having purchased arma3?
carmine folio
no
cobalt creek
And at a certain time, they won't be able to, since nobody want's to pay it again @carmine folio ๐
This would be the best one. 1 DMCA -> Warning 2nd DMCA -> Arma gets removed. WinWin Situation.
willow star
And the same for monetized servers^^
blazing wyvern
only possible way to deal with this , if get somebody like admin that will ban those clowns
:3
carmine folio
sry @fossil basalt you need to move to czech
heavy moon
You do know you can take DMCA offenders to criminal court, since they are breaking the law by stealing content. This comes with hefty penalties, more-so for repeat offenders.
cobalt creek
hmm... wouldn't it be possible by BI, to set those Player/User on a "Blacklist" from BE? hmm
heavy moon
just because its for a 'game-mod' doesnt make the offence any less than stealing a movie
cobalt creek
"Too many DMCA's succesfully claimed. You are banned from all Server" ๐
willow star
Activate the de-orientation from the copy protection for them
cobalt creek
But thats something only Steam can do... and yeah.. how long is the WS up? Nothing been done till today :/
heavy moon
People who have repeat offended on other game-workshops have been banned by valve from uploading to those workshops,. but thats only tied to that particular steam account heh.
cobalt creek
Rly? Where?
heavy moon
there's some stuff on the unreal forums about repeat workshop offenders and how to deal with them,. guess some crap happened there too
cobalt creek
gut gut
cobalt creek
blazing wyvern
in most SW they do not care at all
meaning all the copyrighted stuff is there
like in gmod , insurgency etc
cobalt creek
And thats what ppl use as excuse "Uh, but in gmod you can do it".
Clearly Steams fault for not handling with that stuff.
Hell, someone send me a Repo once, where you can DL Movies from...
blazing wyvern
yeah but it works ha
willow star
i wonder what would happen if i started uploading valves stuff ๐ค
would that get you banned?
blazing wyvern
no , they do not care
they even give you access to their models
HL2 , CSS other
cobalt creek
for reuse?
blazing wyvern
yes
blazing wyvern
for mods and shit
blazing wyvern
source games that i know
tender hawk
The key is 'their models'
carmine folio
i wonder if valves SW EULA would hold up in court if someone would sue them for distributing such content
heavy moon
yeah because valves IP is tied to them, steam and the workshop,. so anything you create benefits them directly,.
ebon ruin
Btw what do content creators gain/achieve with getting copies of their files off the workshop? Since it must take them some effort and time to report these things... It must be a headache dealing with 1000+ workshop uploads
cobalt creek
I know that STALKER gave their stuff out for free (and permission given for using it other Games!)
tender hawk
Honestly: control over IP and control over what version is publicly available
That last part does matter
cobalt creek
Versioning would be nice.
carmine folio
@heavy moon no it is not, as noone had the right to give them IP rights if the original uploader didn't have it
tender hawk
Versioning would be nice. Whereas it seems to me that having a 'control version that's publicly available' motive flies in the face of versioning?
ebon ruin
But don't you get control over IP as soon as you create it by default ? And if you are the first to upload to workshop, you probobly own it there as well? Does different versioning actually hurt the creators?
heavy moon
@carmine folio I was referring to valves available content
carmine folio
oh sry i tought that was a response to my sue comment ๐
cobalt creek
@tender hawk sry, didn't understood.
tender hawk
@ebon ruin In practice, gotta exercise that control over IP...
Does different versioning actually hurt the creators? In practice it can do damage to reputation if outdated versions proliferate which don't include more recent versions' bugfixes, thereby skewing the presumed quality of the addon/mod, so a modder can have a vested interest in making sure that there's only the most up-to-date version publicly available
willow star
Also DMCAing must be a pretty good feeling, another reason to do it
tender hawk
@ebon ruin And if you are the first to upload to workshop, you probobly own it there as well? Creator rights are irrespective of who uploads first, but in practice... see my previous reply re: different versioning.
heavy moon
@ebon ruin You automatically own any IP you create,. regardless of where that content ends up (unless you sign the rights over or created that IP working for some company, but for the purposes of this discussion we'll keep it to the individual).
The fact that a third party may upload & distribute that content via steam workshop (or any other means) does not transfer any IP rights to the uploader. The fact that they have done this without the IP owners consent or permission is theft/piracy.
The exception to this being that the original IP owner is the one uploading their content to the Workshop, they are the only person with the right to do this.
If some third party has uploaded someone else's IP to the workshop, the third party does not assume original IP rights, since it's not their s to begin with.
tender hawk
As an example, although to the best of my knowledge (TTBOMK) gachopin/cervantes have yet to publicly release the ol' WW2 warships mod from A2 for A3, someone else uploaded the A2 version to Steam Workshop and if I recall correctly purported to be planning additional work to get them working 'more properly' in A3, thereby stepping further into infringing (unauthorized derivative work)... but as per Uro, only cervantes (to the best of my knowledge the rightsholder for the version available for A2 and the one showing zir work on it for A3 off on the Bohemia Interactive forums) had the rights/authority to upload any version of cervantes' work to Steam Workshop
hallow frigate
Doesn't CUP include Terrains, Units, etc. from previous ArmA Versions? So how can CUP Team upload when they aren't IP owners? Or is BI Staff == CUP?
tender hawk
@hallow frigate That isn't the case, CUP = authorized derivative of the BI stuff and includes donated stuff that BI didn't make.
hallow frigate
@tender hawk but you must be the actual owner to upload to SW, perms arent sufficent. And Chernaurus, Utes, etc comes from BI or not?
willow star
Nope, you need to have the right to grant steam the rights they want
hallow frigate
Or are maps, etc redone from scratch?
tender hawk
See above re: authorized derivative, that's how Bohemia's stuff worked.
hallow frigate
ah ok
tender hawk
Disclosure: I ported Bohemia's A2 'F-35B' to CUP, with the addition of a gun pod/underwing pylons model made for me by someone else with rights granted to me by that modeler/texturer, and then I donated our combined work to CUP; I retain my rights to what I did and to that gun pod/underwing pylons model but I do not have the rights to whatever the CUP people do with it next separately from myself.
You can ask in CUP's own Discord but a TL;DR might be that Bohemia released source files for the express purpose of community porting A1/A2 stuff to A3, and CUP Team has the rights whatever they came up with from said source files.
willow star
I'm pretty sure CUP wouldn't be on the workshop otherwise
carmine folio
Steam only asks for permission to modify the content in certain scenarios, so either you need to IP Owner or the license has to give Steam the rights to modify & redist the changes etc
Arma licensed/sample data is released under APL/APL-SA depending on the content. So it is all good in that regards.
Anyway if there was an issue you would see BI update thier license, as its in BI interest for community content to be available on steam workshop when possible.
tender hawk
For additional context, Bohemia eventually released a Take On Helicopters Data Pack -- all binarized, but with explicit permission in SITREP #00104 by Bohemia to debinarize -- with contents from TKOH for the purposes of porting into A3; CUP Team has rights to whatever they derived from it and included in CUP stuff.
carmine folio
Hello, I have a question about copyrights.
if I make configs and textures, and someone takes them, puts them in his own mod and says "Hey, I made those!"
Is there something to do against that?
A way to proove that the stuff are mine and not actually his.
faint nacelle
with textures possibly if you have timestamped originals for example
configs and scripts are harder to prove
faint nacelle
all files have created/modified dates on them
and depending on how you make the textures
in photoshop for example
carmine folio
Yeah, I have for example PSD templates for all of my textures
faint nacelle
you probably have a file with all the layers you work with
thats your original
unless you packed that with your stuff
that probably complicates things
carmine folio
so I can use the "Date modified" labels to proove my actions?
faint nacelle
if necessary I think so
are your textures released somewhere without your permission?
carmine folio
No, I'm asking just in case
faint nacelle
there isnt really anything to prevent it
but if it happens you have some options depending on where they are released
faint nacelle
steam probably is the easiest to deal with
carmine folio
My guess is that Steam has a few regulations against that
faint nacelle
yes
you can scroll up this channel to get the idea
its been a hot topic quite regularly
carmine folio
Well I think it's understandable, people giving from their own time of making stuff for the community but they don't want others to "steal" their contents
Thank you though ๐
ebon ruin
Too bad you guys can't rid of all the outdated mods people with A3Sync etc. use... It's just the minority that uses steamworkshop that you can get rid of
carmine folio
A3Sync is a whole other topic than SW
echo orchid
@ebon ruin being obnoxious for no apparent reason?
fossil basalt
Since he wants to use a "can't play with my toys comment", Maybe he could learn from my kids teacher who says " If you can't follow our rules, maybe you need to sit on the naughty step until you learn to abide by them".
echo orchid
received mail from valve ๐
telling me they have taken both notice and action against the dmcas
๐
undone pier
how about RHS and CUP doing an interview with PC Gamer or so?
i guess if you were to approach the Evan Lahti guy he would be open to it
the more difficult question is whether bigger attention is useful or not
river spear
Hey, anyone here with a little bit of experience with SteamCMD?
Actually wrong channel, my bad
-> server admins
dull moon
RE: hint message "only upload if it is yours"
since publisher is the only tool to upload mods to the workshop (afaik), and this tool is provided by Bohemia Interactive, how about adding a notice that only mods that are made by the uploader / with clear permission by the creator are allowed to uploaded? a publisher message at (first) startup one has to read and accept it to continue? would this be possible and also in interst of BI?
@pliant oar
@undone pier
i like the idea, but i'm not sure if the bigger attention is also attracting more trolls and retards on this matter (DCMA)
carmine folio
there is a steam tool you can use to upload to steam workshop
dull moon
ok, didn't know that
carmine folio
not recommend because it doesn't create the meta.cpp used by arma offical launcher
dull moon
gotcha, thx for the headsup
ups, somebody seems not to be amused
http://i.imgur.com/qc09LRF.png
hallow lark
We need a large collage of angry "fuck you my mod" messages.
dull moon
ok guys, thanks to "the tool" joko and i just received an email from valve begging us to please slow the reports. they can'T get a hold on the reports from the last few days. valve want's us to limit our reports to 25/day max
hallow lark
Congrats guys, you broke valve
dull moon
no kidding, it seems like we actually did. at least the DMCA dep.
finite crescent
fervent needle
you guys are making some dude hate his job
lol
maybe it will push them do do something though ๐
heavy moon
and just think, this is only the arma3 workshop, I wonder how much stuff have been uploaded overall without the owners consent,. probably a staggering amount
fervent needle
yea for sure
I would be willing to bet that this community deals with stolen content in a lot swifter manner then other communities
if not the strictest
I saw a video step by step how to rip models from forza horizon 3 to gta v
thats a community that doesn't care
heavy moon
more-so now that community people indexed it all to check filehashes off of
fervent needle
yea
@dull moon If I were you I would send an "apology" back saying that because the creators of our game can't help us keep thefts down to the degree of their liking we had to take it into our own hands.. something like that
would hopefully light a bit of a fire there that even users see that content theft on their platform is out of control and only they can do something about it and not game creators etc
but thats just my opinion
hallow lark
echo orchid
@dull moon ๐
carmine folio
@dull moon Ad note in Publisher: we actually discussed this internally (and it was quite a heated discussion as far as I remember). In the end it wasn't implemented, though I don't know it they won the argument or I got tired, moved to something more important and forget about it completely.
echo orchid
i am actually wondering what the heat was about....considering that valve's agreement is pretty straight forward on the subject...
carmine folio
Basically the note was oversimplified valve agreement put directly in user's face. The discussion was e.g. about will someonce actually read the short tl;dr version, and would it educate some of the uploaders?
It was basically aimed at those users who don't realize that they're doing something wrong.
echo orchid
to be honest, i would put a warning saying:
<Agree> button
<Read Valve's Agreement> button```That would be enough
echo orchid
@carmine folio yeah, but is about 50% of the total
at least when it comes to re-uploads
cobalt creek
Maybe adding an even simpler "Things you didn't create -> no upload here" for the more simple minded ones.
And tbh. I haven't heard from the SteamTool before, wich is able to upload stuff to the WS before. (iirc yesterday i've heard it the first time)
cobalt creek
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
carmine folio
That simple version of agreement won't cover stuff that you can upload to steam workshop like APL-SA / GPL content etc
Regardless people will still ignore that anyways
Especially the repeat offenders
cobalt creek
Yeah, but what Wizard sayd: "It was basically aimed at those users who don't realize that they're doing something wrong."
dull moon
But something in therms of warning must be done. I also recived Letters from steam saying that they will simply delete any further reports because they cant handle the ammount.
cobalt creek
When they still upload it -> DMCA-able easily, without messaging
carmine folio
The problem is if you put that as a warning people will start saying you cant upload GPL/APL-SA content because you broke that agreement (even if it a warning)
cobalt creek
Why should they?
carmine folio
@dull moon Pretty sure steam cant choose to ignore DCMA unless they want to lose the Safe Harbour Protection and become liable. Would prob be worth getting lawyler to confirm it, if they did.
dull moon
Even if it Sound stupid, but i believe that they cant handle the ammount of the past days. It where litteraly hundreds from CUP and rhs alone. Sure they can say that they wont deal with following reports if they haven't worked out the by now received
coral torrent
Valve as company located in the US can not delte a DMCA. They can ignore it for quite a while, but they are legally bind to have a look at it. Asia or Russia can completly ignore DMCA's for example, and they do it in 9/10 cases but in the US they can't say, well i just move this into the trash and it has never existed
carmine folio
It might motivate them to implement a better system, or allow BI to ban people repeat offenders uploading to steam workshop etc
dull moon
But That's not the matter. The real Problem is, that almost nowhere is a easy to understand warning to not upload. This must be communicated via BI
coral torrent
I can understand that Valve / Steam is pissed right now, as they did not expect so many requests in such a small amount of time
But tbh, that is not BI's problem, nor the problem of the person signing the DMCA
dull moon
But it is easier and more preventive if this comes from BI directly
I'm not ok with getting rejected by steam because 90% of the violaters dont wann read and are unable to understand hundreds of lines of eula
coral torrent
I see your point, but have a look on this from another angle: I would say 70% of the workshop is uploaded correctly. The workshop holds much more missions etc than mods. And from the mods, only a few like RHS etc do not want an reupload, while all the other mods allow it
If BI would say ok, we include a disclaimer on all workshop uploads, that would just scare the people to share their work.
carmine folio
Add a tick box for either you own the content or the license allows you to upload to steam workshop. @carmine folio For the love of god have publisher remember the folder for content that was uploaded previously ๐
coral torrent
Our problem are the very few idiots who reupload the common mods like RHS, because they just do not understand how collections work.
carmine folio
Ehm, I'd guess that Valve is still using 'manual' automation, so they can scaling only by adding more people to it. That's their problem.
dull moon
I hope for the sake of all of us something will be done. Even if its only a statement by Bi.
Gotta go, having 6 Bands waiting for me. Cya later
carmine folio
@carmine folio I try to re-open the talk about the notice in Publisher, maybe the outcome will be different this time.
@carmine folio About the folder: you mean remember the folder for each Workshop item separately?
dull moon
@carmine folio
If you want i can send you the Mails i got from Valve to add to the conversation for this topic
midnight vine
The notice in publisher would be great, maybe even highlight that it can result in steam bans. Even if it doesn't solve the problem any little step helps.
carmine folio
I haven't used it since 1.70 update.
But previously when you reopen publisher to update an addon.
You need to reselect the folder each time (it doesnt remember the previous location).
If you are updating multiple addons and select the wrong folder, it can be annoying (Especially for larger addons)
echo orchid
@Arkensor#0120 - nope, you fail to grasp this: it's not like RHS doesn't want to allow re-uploads, it is NOT allowed by Steam Agreement
the same rule applies to any other stuff you upload and you don't own IP for, not just RHS btw
we added a specific entry to our EULA because it is easier to link towards my own EULA than someone's else
carmine folio
@carmine folio It remembers the last path for the dialog, which is shared between all the items. But I can teach it few tricks if time allows that, thanks for inspiration.
thanks
@dull moon Could you send me a copy?
dull moon
Sure, send me your email via PM and ill forward them as soon as im at home again
Sure, send me your email via PM and ill forward them as soon as im at home again
west reef
Maybe you should take a break for a while while the poor guy at valve catches up. Maybe mail a gift to valve labeled to the guy working on DMCA stuff.
Give him a fruit basket or something
Or maybe a mail order one night stand
tulip nexus
That's the most roundabout way of saying "prostitute" I've ever come across
gritty path
๐
undone pier
what about the opposite (too?): educate uploaders about using collections for existing uploads (best case with actual check and reference to the workshop item)
tender hawk
Oooh that's a nice idea; i.e. "want CUP in a modpack or to derive from it for your own mod? Here's where to find it on Steam Workshop to set dependencies to"
river spear
Best would be to check before they click PUBLISH whether it contains other mods and then ask whether they rather want to set it as an dependency
carmine folio
The majority of all the reuploads that combine multiple addons are prob for communities / server owners (imo)
So they decided for some reason having all the content in 1 addon is better then multiple addons (its some thinking back from arma2 days i believe)
Or they haven't automated there server to auto update steamworkshop addons.
Reminding them about steamworks dependencis / collections will have no real effect on them.
Since they decided which addons the server is running with, the client launcher(s) will download & run those addons regardless of what steamworkshop collections / dependencies are set for.
echo orchid
i still can't be able to follow this one to be honest: because as a user, i want to be able to play on multipe servers
if you require for instance CUP islands, toadie weapons etc, i can connect directly if i have them
without having to download 10gb of the same shit that i already have downloaded once
cobalt creek
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
undone pier
the one reason you want not be forced to update by official updates is control - for community events this is one of the main struggles:
arma or mod update, game/mission breaks, 50-100 ppl cant play, are unhappy and whine
however most should use arma3sync, withSix, etc for this and not workshop
river spear
If only you could select a version to use on the workshop
undone pier
@OPTiX#6431 if i am not mistaken, someone recently posted how you can grab older versions of arma3 via steamCMD (via depotID or sth)
if true, the same may work for mods too (if the respective ID is available) - for delta patching probably Steam just keeps all versions
dull moon
[insert most evil thing meme] ๐
grand oyster
inserts stepping on lego meme
echo orchid
@river spear doeeet
chilly silo
Disclaimer: Darth Revan doesn't care about Disney or developer feelings.
TS Info: 168.235.75.20:8934
Cause the Empire don't care
Star Wars Mod by others for you.
Least hes honest...
dusk dew
Star Wars return of the lawsuits
vast notch
The threat of a lawsuit is why the other Star Wars type mod got shelved iirc Star Wars: Imperial Assault
faint nacelle
threat of lawsuit is always present when using someone elses IP
echo orchid
the amount of wankers praising the IP theft is disturbing
i hope someone drop a big fucking DMCA on it
@pliant oar could you be so kind and slap that shit
tender hawk
Wouldn't that have to be Lucasfilm Licensing?
tender hawk
Nah, I'm talking about LFL Lucasfilm Licensing as the overall Star Wars licensing body within Disney
echo orchid
LFL?
fervent needle
Creating Development Team
So for people who don't already know this mod was created by a development team that basically made this mod for themselves and youtube purposes.
I really didn't care for them being selfish and inconsiderate for the community, and I damn sure don't care about Disney lawyers.
2hrs ago
Oh lord ego boost
tender hawk
ahahaha is this person saying "these guys didn't handle the mod the way I wanted so I uploaded it"?
chilly silo
pretty much
west reef
@pliant oar , I think this guy deserves a proper smite
tender hawk
Lemme guess, they stole your mod and then whoever uploaded to SWS accuses you of 'holding out' and thus uploads their derivative?
west reef
On the plus side, I think Optix littletool should have logged the .pbo's for it so we can take it down before it gets out of hand
with an ego like that and 'such an edgy name as "darth revan"' I'm sure he'll keep attempting to upload to SWS
Well it does have content originally created by you, so you can take ownership of the models themselves in these takedown cases
you don't own the idea, but you do "own" in a loose term the models themselves
dull moon
if they use content that YOU created (models, textures, ect.) and you still have the source files to prove that, you can DMCA the shit out of them. They will be forced to either take down the whole mod, or just remove your content
west reef
Come on, don't you want to unleash your inner disney?
dull moon
DO IT
๐
did you make a model that was used in the mod?
or a texture
if so, then YOU are the rightholder of this model/texture/ect and are allowed to take the mod down
then i suggest you find out what is yours and file a DMCA for your content. ezpz
also inform your former mates
hell yes
๐
midnight vine
vestal haven
I suggest we nuke russia...to be on the Safe side
hallow lark
Didn't someone say the largest portion of the last dmca wave went to French speaking uploaders?
echo orchid
@ruby pewter - you own the IP rights for the content (as in the data, as long as you made it yourself)
you don't own the Star Wars trademark
even if they have a single file of yours you are entitled to DMCA it
@BigBen#1428 - yes, i found that most re-uploads are FR as well...
then russia and china
tender hawk
... so France #1, Russia #2, China #3? You usually don't hear that in English-speaking assumptions about IP violating in Arma...
echo orchid
i cannot talk about ripped stuff just yet, but from my own experience with re-uploads that would be the order, yes
proud flicker
Why would my killhouses even need CBA. They were released during A3 alpha. CBA for A3 didnt even exist back then ๐
dull moon
but I asked them to remove it
after seeing this, trying nicely is not the way to go. burn 'em on a stake
http://i.imgur.com/2BxCx2k.png
@ruby pewter
BURN IT WITH FIRE ๐
no matter what or who, if only the smalles amount of your content is in it, burn him. this attitude a just simply a nogo
heavy moon
it also highilights the mentality of a large chunk of Steam/SW users,. proving time and again that they don't care about the legalities on not distributing other peoples content.
ruby pewter
I agree don't worry @dull moon
dull moon
it also highilights the mentality of a large chunk of Steam/SW users,. proving time and again that they don't care about the legalities on not distributing other peoples content.
โ
ruby pewter
Spot on @heavy moon
heavy moon
Also as far as derivative works go, they have the same level of cover under DMCA rules as an original IP in its own right would.
The trademark side of things is where you get into bother usually.
RedBull / RedGull being a good example ๐
hallow lark
Its crazy the amount of times you hear "you can't steal a mod" in that one thread alone.
ruby pewter
There's a lot of self proclaimed experts out there. This fair use claim is another grossly misunderstood matter that I see a lot
heavy moon
yeah
I wasnt sure about derivative works cover,,. So i just went and asked them
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
echo orchid
the arogance of that cunt managed to really piss me off
heavy moon
#triggered ?
echo orchid
plenty ^
@ruby pewter how about you share that IP with me (as in sell me any model of yours)
and i'll take care of it myself
ruby pewter
Lol
dull moon
Pufu tasted blood ๐
gritty path
lol
echo orchid
i always need to check the nickname before i reply, just in case it's someone who is actually retarded
dull moon
hahahahaha ๐
dull moon
it's sort of fun
echo orchid
BUT, for people like that cunt i'd pay to spank him
echo orchid
the answer is a lot longer than i have time now to answer
in short, the internal agreement
dull moon
@ruby pewter ๐
echo orchid
from all current and past members is that we are the keepers of that content, in case of breach we other deal with it (which is what i am doing)
tender hawk
99% aren't reuploading your stuff to take credit, just to retain control over their mod usage That's what private repos are for
echo orchid
or we remove it
tender hawk
Thanks to the scanner it ain't so 'against the current' ;) vvvv
dull moon
against the current? checking for violations and filing a DMCA is like checking and answering emails
echo orchid
understand that for mods where around 90 ppl are involved, stuff gets more complicated
90 ppl over 15 years ^
and yes, thanks to the crawler, things are way way easier, and are bound to become even so
and all in all, if i wouldn't have been one of the very few (i am not the only one anymore, i know) who was actively doing it for the past N years
we wouldn't have ended up here
dull moon
โ
river spear
Do you think it would make sense for the crawler to provide you with a link that holds information over what files have been found where?
You could use that page to link it in your DMCA so the person handling the DMCA has it a bit easier
heavy moon
you could email the valve dmca guy that contacted @dull moon and ask him
dull moon
would be awsome @river spear
i suggest not to contact the DMCA dept. directly. according to the tone in the mails they do not like us that much anymore ๐
heavy moon
well if you are asking if there is anything you can do that would make their process easier then im fairly sure they'd reply
since your helping them out
dull moon
i did... two times... no response
heavy moon
oh well ๐
I wonder how many steam users have been flagged as repeat offenders by now
dull moon
i only can guess, but it might be over 1000 offenders alone in arma 3. and repeat defenders... hmm... 15% maybe?
fervent needle
Steam employees hate him. Learn how to file DMCAs like him with this one simple trick!
carmine folio
well i guess that department is requesting a better system internally but as long as valve does not approve such thing they are just the fucked guys... i sure as hell would be pissed dealing with that all day
fervent needle
You all are at least securing their jobs.. Haha
dull moon
that for sure ๐
echo orchid
@dull moon dunno what mails you received but the tone in mine is official auto-completed one...
river spear
In Chris emails the the guy was very furious
echo orchid
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
dull moon
@river spear how much of work would it be to sort the results of the tool by date and/or name?
amber ibex
@dull moon as that stuff is a database ... it is a question of seconds to get outputs correct (SQL got the commands for it)
HTTP depends on the page implementation
gaunt geode
Napf Island rehosts: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=880337031
stark silo
thats sad because that is partially my work being uploaded as well after I removed it myself.
hallow lark
I told Eichi the other day about the Exile uploads, but he does not want to have to spend time on monitoring the SW.
chilly silo
Depends on your end game. And how much you value your own work
ruby pewter
The lack of proper governance in sws is astonishing. How can a mod with a DMCA on it still be downloaded?
echo orchid
@ruby pewter if that mod gets removed, it will be removed from all pcs as welll as soon as it is synked
ruby pewter
Yeah I get that but people can make copies and keep it. It shouldn't be available for others to download whilst this DMCA is outstanding
soft egret
If it were like that you could take down any mod instantly and cause a lot of harm
People can claim bogus DMCA's. That's dumb.. but possible.
ruby pewter
It's not take down though. It's pausing. If it's false then it resumes afterwards
soft egret
Yeah.. But you could kill all the big mods that get hundreds of downloads every day
Could only kill them as long as the DMCA is being processed. But People can just file a new bogus DMCA every day
ruby pewter
I don't think it would kill them. If people really want something they will wait. It's still visible
soft egret
Yeah but..
"Get the Mods quick and join in" "I can't. Some Idiot filed a bogus DMCA and I can't download it"
ruby pewter
A small inconvenience for a greater good imo
gritty path
i'd have to disagree with that.
soft egret
World doesn't work like that.. That's like back when you could call someone a witch...
I could say you are a murderer. You would instantly go to prison till someone can proove that you are not.
That just wouldn't work.
ruby pewter
Well actually they can bring you in for questioning which in effect means you're off the street for a period of time. No different really. If steam got their shit together a DMCA could be resolved quickly. Especially if it were bogus
soft egret
Police won't do anything to you If I just call you a murderer. Because they don't have anything on you so they also can't take you in. Atleast in Germany.. I think.. In Russia maybe
Who cares about a copyright violation on Workshop. Besides the owner of the Original? Not more than a handful of People.
Who cares about a huge Mod on Steam workshop? Tens of thousands of people.
ruby pewter
It's all in the governance process though. It shouldn't be possible to blindly claim DMCA without some form of evidence. Same with your example. If you go to police station and say "hey I think this guy killed someone and here is my evidence", pretty sure you'd be brought in.
soft egret
So saying that giving the possibility to take something offline that's used by tens of thousands of people is good because the handful of people for the handful of real copyright violations will be happy?
It shouldn't be possible to blindly claim DMCA without some form of evidence Yeah. That's why a DMCA claim doesn't do anything till the evidence is checked.
ruby pewter
I'm not necessarily suggesting that as soon as a person hits the submit button that it gets shutdown. With a better process it should be possible for them to make an initial assessment fairly quickly. It wouldn't be that hard for them to differentiate between a legit claim and a bogus one. Anyway that's my 2 cents worth. I'd rather it be more locked down to protect authors rights :)
cobalt creek
Imagine their side: They don't know who is the rightful owner. They have to check it first, or do you want YOUR Addon locked down, just because some dumbshit filled out an DMCA?
The way it is now is not optimal, true. But at least something will be checked, before they delete/disable it completely!
It's not like "Shoot first, ask Questions later"
dusk dew
How long do they really review it for? Don't they almost immediately take down the content, as to not be liable for anything?
echo orchid
@ruby pewter flag it as well, it will be less visible
in any case, a DMCA takedown can take up to 7 days for review
eventually some e-mails exchange
cobalt creek
Like @dull moon Convo with Steam? ๐
echo orchid
@cobalt creek well they had a butthurt response
river spear
What happens to a workshop object when Dwarden marks it as Incompatible?
echo orchid
DMCA has legal weight, and they can't really ignore em
cobalt creek
=D
afaik they can't download it. @river spear
ruby pewter
So case in point 7 days for people to get a hold of the content. This was just a general rant. I wasn't specifically just talking about this star wars ripped mod. The current process is better than nothing but it could be a lot better
cobalt creek
@pliant oar Optix' Question
echo orchid
@river spear you won't find it made public (in any lists), you can still download it if you have the direct ID though
cobalt creek
Still usable? Sure?
river spear
Do you think it would help to first make them incompatible then file the DMCA?
echo orchid
@cobalt creek yes, i am the biblie for steam
cobalt creek
๐
echo orchid
@river spear it needs a manual flag
and from what i know only dwarden can do that
and of course some other valve mods
river spear
Okay so we hire Dwarden then
echo orchid
๐
cobalt creek
PuFuPedia
Yep, it would be a mess, if anybody could mark that as incompatible^^
echo orchid
in short all "reports" end up in a list, david can see it as well
that said, i used to ask him to flag shit before DMCA took effect
these days my DMCAs are put in effect sometimes faster than he can flag em
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
cobalt creek
I wonder why
echo orchid
๐ช
cobalt creek
btw.: ~200 Repos were removed, in the last 7 Days (according to a SuperDuperNice List ๐ )
echo orchid
๐
cobalt creek
(Not claiming all by DMCA!)
queen wing
dayum
echo orchid
@cobalt creek btw, this made my day:
http://feedback.rhsmods.org/view.php?id=3324
cobalt creek
In your Tracker? lol
(+Oh, Mantis Bugtracker, i miss him)
echo orchid
i really wish alex finds the time to move that to phab
cobalt creek
๐ญ poor mantis
echo orchid
dying cockroach
dull moon
RE: time for a DMCAed item to be removed
in my case less than 24h already. most of the time.
cobalt creek
๐คฆ
soft egret
Someone is seriously trying to get attention...
He is http://defiancenetwork.net Which explains everything
queen wing
ofcourse its a Life server......
cobalt creek
"life"
queen wing
lol
cobalt creek
Forum -> http://armadn.enjin.com/
->
Website does not exist
This domain does not have an Enjin website assigned. Click here to create a new website.```
๐
5/7, would play.defiance? i took him down like 3 times now?
pliant oar
Incompatible flag means the item cease to be visible for normal users-view and there are some issues how it can be reach
yet it can be still downloaded manually
imagine it sort of as something one can use to hide in case of less serious infraction, while ensuring the author pays attention there is something he needs to fix
contrary to admin ban or DMCA ban which are more 'definitive'
cobalt creek
Thx alot.
soft egret
ACE doesn't care about reuploads. They are fine with it. AFAIK. And their License is also fine with it.
midnight vine
Oh fair enough, that's a shame especially since steam technically doesn't allow it. Doesn't help the problem.
soft egret
Well.. Yeah.. That's an argument. But not enough for DMCA. Could still report it to Steam.
But a lot of people have ACE reuploads because of the optionals.
midnight vine
Yea fair enough - that particular one also includes Enhanced Movement and Advanced Towing.
tender hawk
Yea fair enough - that particular one also includes Enhanced Movement and Advanced Towing. In which case you should make those respective authors aware and see if they're as fine-with-it as ACE are.
soft egret
I'm quite sure Enhanced Movement @carmine folio is fine with it.
heavy moon
its not fine, because you dont own the content and your telling steam workshop that you do. for stuff not on the workshop you should make a request to the addon author to utilise the workshop. if they refuse, you should respect their wishes, there is no grey area on this and neither should their be.
dusk dew
More boils down to people just not realising
fossil basalt
Theres a difference between "not realising" and "not reading" / "ignoring".
dusk dew
Is there an obvious notice when uploading? Or purely the section in EULA?
fossil basalt
But, even giving someone the benefit of the doubt and saying for arguements sake that they somehow skipped those few lines, it does not excuse the fact that when they are "made aware" that it is forbidden to upload content that is not theirs, they not only continue to do so, but thumb their noses up at everyone.
It has been quite awhile since I last uploaded anything, so it would be conjecture on my part at the moment.
dusk dew
Of course not, but out of the 100's of DMCAs that happen here, how many of them do?
fossil basalt
Of the 20 or so that I've personally messaged and made the "non-authorised uploader" aware ~ 90%
echo orchid
@carmine folio you are really starting to piss me off
innocent reuploaders
can you read a simple agreement with valve and a fucking license file that is provided with the mod? are there alternatives to Steam Workshop for version fucking control?
if the answer is yes and you still upload it to SW, you're a fucking cunt
simple as that
read the damn channel name: ip rights violations, re-uploading on SW without being owner of said IP rights is in its own a violation
you are trying to find justifications to innocent poor re-uploaders who have to deal with 50+ people playing together and can't handle a mod update....oh the drama
it's precisely like saying breaking and entering into your neighboard house and taking some chairs shouldn't be considered breaking and entering and prosecuted as such because you are having a big party and you lack some seats
@fossil basalt not knowing the laws does not exclude one from its effects...same here, it's up to each individual to read the license and the damn steam agreements...spoon feeder generation ffs
fossil basalt
I agree
Its sunny outside and I have cold beer.... sooo, I'm going back outside ๐ ๐บ
white moat
quick, someone chain @fossil basalt to his desk!
echo orchid
@fossil basalt might wanna stick around, i forsee some dumb reply being typed
white moat
Literally doesn't matter in the slightest what the intention is
hallow frigate
jeez keep calm and watch the language. no point in rage
echo orchid
@hallow frigate i am not raging, this is how i always speak/type
@carmine folio i don't really care about what their intention is
as long as their intentions trumps on my rights
you don't seem to be capable of grasping what i am saying: there are other ways to manage a modpack besides SW
ways that do not require IP sharing with Valve
midnight vine
@carmine folio doesn't matter if there is another side. Simply put they are breaking the rules - the WS agreement says they cannot uplaod if they don't own IP, regardless of intention they are still doing something they shouldn't.
echo orchid
i am not telling anyone anything, i am DMCAing everyone that doesn't comply
fossil basalt
you're not seeing or respecting the other side of it There is no need to, because the legality of it is Black and White
There is no "other side"
echo orchid
why would i respect someone that doesn't respect me enough to read and respect a simple license file
stark mulch
Dont people have a right to protect there own work?
carmine folio
If the reuploader doesnt have the rights & couldnt be bother to ask for permission. Why do they deserve any respect if they couldnt take 5 minutes to ask
echo orchid
not my problem
fossil basalt
Its creating animosity between those that legally upload content and those that do it illegally.
echo orchid
want that fix take it up to steam/valve
fossil basalt
Only one side is allowed to upload, not the other. So the " other side" has no leg to stand on.
echo orchid
the moment valve pulls that sharing IP clause i'll stop DMCAing
and since that won't happen
ยฏ_(ใ)_/ยฏ
echo orchid
although
- custom modpacks usually means incompatibility of sorts, that end up on feedback trackers as "major" bugs = wasted dev time hunting non-existant bugs
- custom modpacks usually means someone needs to manually download the same stuff a couple of time instead of using collections that allow everyone to run the same version at the same time
midnight vine
Why? All they needed to do was read the mod licesnse and SW agreement and they'd understand.
echo orchid
[6:55 PM] Quiksilver: i mean i get targeting thieves and people trying to use it commercially, but lil highschool billy putting together modpack for his friends to play on the weekend ... seems a bit creepy to go after those people, just sayin
the moment you write in your description that you do not take any credit for the current data you just uploaded
you know you fucked it up somewhere
hence that "disclaimer"
midnight vine
Exactly - even the a3 launcher presets you can share a html file. That is a one sync button.... so are workshop collections.
echo orchid
can you understand that for larger mod groups, sharing the IP with valve on its own means there are other strings attached?
because i remember telling you this at least once
it is a product that is provided for free, it is NOT a product that has no commercial value..
stark mulch
erm no
white moat
lol wut
fossil basalt
Alright @carmine folio I'm pretty sure I've mentioned previously that your level of trolling was getting out of hand. On the off chance that I am incorrect, let this serve as your warning. Continue to troll and it will be dealt with. End of story.
heavy moon
here here
echo orchid
this sort of excuses is running rampart through the vast majority of SW users...
but the community needs it/has priority over whatever developer wants
in 99% of the cases, that is simply not true
to end this, thank you @fossil basalt
heavy moon
its not innocent use,. its a flagrant disregard of EULA's, Licencing and using your fucking eyes you moron.
midnight vine
It takes 30 secs to file a DMCA thanks to OPTiX, hardly a waste of time.
white moat
It's not a long time, and it's not creepy and it's not the job of modmakers to shape valve IP policies.
stark mulch
thats there problem @carmine folio
white moat
You're just incrediably wrong
midnight vine
Exactly ^^ thier problem not ours.
echo orchid
@carmine folio modders are allowed to fill or not DMCA claims...it is their prerogative
if one doesn't give a flying duck about it, great, if another spends 30 mins a week to protect his IP, also his prerogative
stark mulch
i do agree, some people prob do it with "the best intentions" but those people need to learn.... via DCMA ๐
echo orchid
and if you think Valve will ever change the policy that keeps it from getting sued, then you are wrong
chilly silo
@carmine folio The thing is in the case of RHS no one needs to reupload anything. They need to create collections
white moat
Full disclosure: I was one of the people @stark mulch describes above and I did learn via DCMA. I'm happy to now help others learn as well ๐
stark mulch
"most modders who publish to SW just dont care about minor infringements"??
really, have you spoken to them all @carmine folio
i care!
chilly silo
and from what ive seen lately very few uploaders to steam actually own the IP they upload. So many car imports GTA style things
stark mulch
and most mod authors in here, clearly care too
hallow lark
And then there are people like Raven who will upload to SW because it's some sort of game to him.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/107410/discussions/0/1291817208490824395/
stark mulch
i spend time writing some cool shit and some random just takes it cos its nice, pisses me off. as it does with more authors
echo orchid
Quiksilver: Rock, sometimes modders screw up and publish something either broken or incompatible with other mods the person is using
ask @chilly silo how much time he spent trying to find a bug that wasn't there because some asswhipe edited his mods
chilly silo
which is a large majority of these reuploaded collections
echo orchid
there is a higher chance for someone else to fuck it up that the author
echo orchid
i know ๐
stark mulch
if its broken, make a mod to override the broken bits, its easy in arma
echo orchid
^^
chilly silo
If its a fix for you then its a fix for someone else. Talk tot he author
Whats unreasonable?
stark mulch
arma is designed to be overridden complete
chilly silo
then the average user need to talk to the decent modder
stark mulch
cfgpatches -> require addons
chilly silo
not just step on his work
stark mulch
if ur making a mod pack, clearly you can make a mod?
surely
well mod, its technically just a "pbo" really
white moat
well then it's tough for them
heavy moon
ignorance isnt an excuse for altering/modifying other peoples content, nor is it an excuse or legal right to upload the content - modified or not - to the workshop. your assumption that people have the right to do this itself bears on that ignorance. if there is an issue with addon conflicts inform the author / provide a fix for them, but do not go out of your way to side-step them in regard to their content.
chilly silo
"if you're suggesting the average arma SW user even knows what "cfgpatches" is, i got some bad news for ya ๐" Then they need to feedback to the author to get things fixed
stark mulch
@carmine folio your arguing a moot point, the author of a mod has the ultimate say on how it is used...
white moat
@carmine folio what is it you're saying then? What is your position? What are you advocating? It just seems like you're acting contrary to get a reaction.
stark mulch
if an author wants to stop people reuploading, that is his choice
its as simple as that
if he wants to spend time DCMAing, his choice too
gritty path
looks at all the circles on the floor, watches more being drawn..
white moat
And they are free to see it that way. What's next?
stark mulch
you make a mod and then all of use can reupload ๐
echo orchid
"targeting"? really?
heavy moon
it's called upholding their legal rights on their IP. The rights that people who upload their content breach every time.
white moat
He's offline
gritty path
you think he's offline
stark mulch
"It's creepy to want to uphold your rights" @carmine folio 2017
white moat
Unnecessarily so
stark mulch
brutal ๐
fossil basalt
@carmine folio No, you may not. You're dangling by a thread as it is.
ruby pewter
Is there a limit to the amount of times an individual can get DMCA'd?
stark mulch
1
ruby pewter
And then what? Banned?
bronze oasis
I don't think there is a limit, no.
stark mulch
why are u asking? are you planning on doing something dodgy?
are u adding content you are not sure about?
ruby pewter
No no. @stark mulch Ive been here the past few days talking about this Darth Raven. He takes me as the kind of guy who will do it again
stark mulch
the best policy is to ask the authors if you can use the content in your own mod, regardless of license imo
but SW deps are the best way forward
bronze oasis
Yea, that whole Star Wars thing was something special.
But he probably will, yeah. The bad thing is that if he does it in private, then you have no way of knowing.
hallow frigate
If I would upload my mods to SW, is there an option to disable it for collections?
ruby pewter
What people do privately you cant control but that type of brazen disregard is another thing
bronze oasis
Yea, it was very dick-ish way of going about it on his behalf. The entitlement levels were through the roof.
stark mulch
@hallow frigate dont think so
echo orchid
i see it has been finally taken down @ruby pewter
yeah, DMCA him, or anyone else each time = eventually he'll get a ban
tender hawk
custom modpacks usually means incompatibility of sorts, that end up on feedback trackers as "major" bugs = wasted dev time hunting non-existant bugs For anyone who thought erroneously that only 'clan admins' get to care about version control and not modders...
queen wing
When you politely ask someone to remove a reupload of a mod you are a dev of, and you get these people messaging you http://i.imgur.com/SxT6q7v.png great.....
well DMCA it is
tender hawk
Wondering which mod this is/was, because I was only ever aware of fullerpj being involved in USAF mod... have actually never heard of AFSOC mod
tender hawk
And lemme guess nobody on their end actually spoke to fullerpj right?
tender hawk
Thought as much
queen wing
generaly the case, i think the only mod that allows other people to upload it is ACE
but could be wrong there
tender hawk
There was some discussion about ACE specifically here
queen wing
ah well DMCA filled, sucks to be him,
cobalt creek
Sorry!
An error was encountered while processing your request:
That item does not exist. It may have been removed by the author.```
๐@queen wing
steel sinew
I was wondering about something reading this channel. Lots of guys crawl thru the steam workshop and look for mod ripoffs. But what about the actual stuff IN the mods? I've seen the same models reused over and over in various mods, obviously straight copied. Lots of stuff from ArmA2 as well. Did BIS give some general consent for using A2 models? Do people not care about user made models being stuffed in half a dozen mods?
soft egret
That will be coming soon. As I've heard
steel sinew
That has been going on for years, even on A2, before SW existed, hasn't it?
soft egret
Probably yeah
cobalt creek
Yep, checking for stuff inside .pbo's will probably come in the near Future (soon ยฎ )
steel sinew
@hallow lark thx
hallow lark
Also wise to check the licenses under which BI released each data pack and its respective restrictions.
steel sinew
Oh i'm not releasing anything based on BI stuff or other peoples stuff, so it doesn't concern me at all. I was just curious since this channel has a ridiculous amount of uninvolved people being exited about that stuff.
Don't waste your lifetime with that, Quiksilver. What are you going to tell your grandkids? "I patrolled the SW for ip rights violations". You should do something proper with your time. Like looking at these: http://imgur.com/r/squirrels
reading this discord makes me ill as well.
soft egret
And there is that Darth Revan guy again that really doesn't give a shit about copyright
bronze oasis
The Steam forums really are horrid, yea.
soft egret
Scroll down a bit
bronze oasis
In the thread you linked.
soft egret
He states that he reuploaded it
cobalt creek
and when writing him, he simply decline release and deny you guys from ever playing in this new terrain.
So, how should we handle this situation? We want to game in a cool new terrain I've spent hundreds of hours to build. Bracer says no```
๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ Bwahahaha, so sweet, so sweet.As copyright only protect up to 80 percent and it looks like you changed alot more then 80 percent
Wow
That's how it works folks
bronze oasis
Oh it most certainly is a life server thing.
cobalt creek
What else?
bronze oasis
steel sinew
@carmine folio what mod are you working on?
Wow. I guessed otherwise due to your emotional invovlement.
soft egret
I call it "Emita County" Uhm Looks at picture that says Elaine County Okey..
hallow lark
The terrain he modified. http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=15482
bronze oasis
And the world cried out "plzno"
There is already enough awfullness in the occasional "Where are the female characters?"
More bait would be 'Selfish'
cobalt creek
a fit?
it's getting better and better
BTF MODPACK - I DO NOT OWN ANY OF THESE MODS
DISCLAIMER:
this mod pack is unmonetized, we are not making any money of of this.
we do not own any of the mods that come with this neither are we using it to gain out of it, this is purely private use.
as stated in the law article 17, section 107 we are completely allowed to use these mods for own, private use.
we will not be afraid to use legal force if necessary.
if you have any complains please contact us:
-email: *REMOVED*
thank you, and have a nice day```DMCA him and wait what happens
cobalt creek
1st DMCA filled ๐ (on another one)
blazing wyvern
law article 17, section 107 we are completely allowed to use these mods for own, private use.
that is bullcrap
when it is for private use then make it private lol
cobalt creek
+I wonder WICH law he means.
grand gorge
judge dredd of course
ruby pewter
Of which country ??
queen wing
The country for Altis Life ๐
ruby pewter
Ha ha exactly
I got into an exchange on steam today about the use of ripped models. People trying to turn arma into Garry's mod.
bronze oasis
Going on the steam forums for this kinda stuff is just a bad idea, nothing good will come out of it. DMCA and move on, there is no reason to tell them or speak with the uploader, as you just get bile tossed in your face.
ruby pewter
Yeah you're probably right, it just boils my blood when people try defend it
blazing wyvern
steam forums are even more toxic
queen wing
yup, but so are the BI forums
ruby pewter
The internet is full of keyboard warriors
queen wing
yup
blazing wyvern
in BI forums you got moderators to clear shit up
which you dont get in steam ๐
blazing wyvern
well thats about asking about mod so thats common theme
queen wing
ye, but i mean people who have been active on the forums for 8 years, still spewing shit
But anyway, if someone sees a USAF mod upload on steam you got permission to file a DMCA or report it to me, that would be great!
fervent needle
Re: The terrain talk above, why didn't the guy just remake the map.. If he spent all that time on it
Or just pull out his wallet, the lifemod guys seem to have endless pockets or access to their parents credit card
echo orchid
@Brian/Foxone#2647 the only one who can fill a DMCA is yourself if the meshes in your addon are your own
tender hawk
@steel sinew I've seen the same models reused over and over in various mods, obviously straight copied. Lots of stuff from ArmA2 as well. Did BIS give some general consent for using A2 models?
For yourself, the curious, and anyone who didn't read https://www.bistudio.com/community/licenses/licensed-data-packages : a TL;DR would be that Bohemia authorized community derivatives of Bohemia's A2 content, within limits as described at that link; this authorization did not blanket permit anyone else to in turn derive/fork from any such direct-from-Bohemia derivative
tulip nexus
Yeah, people don't seem to notice the difference between the BIS assets that were released as APL and those that were APL-SA
tender hawk
Or that you can't skip over people when it comes to rights-holding
grand gorge
what is the difference between APL and APL-SA? you have to distribute your source when you use SA content?
fervent needle
SA allows you to redistribute under the same license for further modification
Other then that they are similar
carmine folio
Nope
APL you can modify & redist aswelll, the difference is with APL-SA you must keep the license APL-SA.
Pretty much all the a1/2 sample/licensed data terrain files are APL-SA.
edit: Also there is no right to the original files / source code
fervent needle
Yea you can modify apl as well, but past that you cant. My understanding @carmine folio is that with APL you cant grab it port it to a3 then release it for download but you couldn't further release the source files you created? Where -SA you could?
Or am I looking at it wrong and APL you could modify it and redistribute under your own license..?
carmine folio
You at whats CUP have done with a custom license.
fervent needle
Ah okay I getcha, makes sense
carmine folio
@cobalt creek They were probably referring to this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107
They might be fine if they host it privately, but since they are utilizing SW to host the "pack", they are bound to abide by SW Terms of Service... So their argument is invalid.
carmine folio
Fair Use really won't cover game addons, unless you try to argue its for a college course (good luck with that)
Also apparently he believes you need to register copyright works
chilly silo
@carmine folio The fair use and "private caveats" cease to apply when you share it with more than one person. That is no longer a "private" anything under US & UK/EU copyright precedent.
The fair use clause also fails to apply when you modify content with the intent to "miss use" the original. Fair Use is perhaps the most misused piece of law there is.
chilly silo
One for @proud flicker https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=931523441&searchtext=n
Hackwell 21 May @ 10:29pm
Publicity for DLC are already there with this MOD ingame. You can try new jets with Eden editor with same publicity ingame. I think it's legal as long it is available on workshop.
LMAO
gritty path
@cobalt creek see, there is another one. just that quick. i stand in awe.
gritty path
it was a continuation of the thought that people never cease to amaze me.
languid elbow
oh no, dscha is broken again
gritty path
lol
cobalt creek
Ah, yeah. I tend to forgot useless stuff (like those ppl and their dumb stuff) pretty quickly ๐
+Me is not broken again! I am always broken ๐
west reef
At least Dscha didn't hurt himself in confusion
I'm talking stupid OP Gen 1 confusion mind you.
ruby pewter
There's a good article on fair use in video games here for anyone that's interested http://www.hanleybradylaw.com/2014/09/fair-use-in-video-games-part-1-fair-use-basics/
proud flicker
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=932258400
Classic arma 2 Origins Taviana, this is not my work and i do not own this, if the owner of this mod is upset i am not bothered, i want this map to live once again.
IIRC Taviana went private access only after it was moved to some life server. Is this still so? Also, quite the attidude to show your willful ignoring of authors permissions.
river spear