#ip_rights_violations

1 messages Β· Page 66 of 1

chilly silo
#

You would have to ask kickass

soft egret
#

hcpookie also got one, he posted his on the forums

carmine folio
#

silly me, I went to the BI website and read their agreements here,
https://www.bohemia.net/community/licenses/bohemia-interactives-tools-end-user-license
and read this line,
"addons incorporated into the Program) are owned by Bohemia Interactive a.s. (the "Licensor") or its licensors. "
and interpreted that to mean they own the addons...
The source you list for a counter to that isn't a rep from BI (as far as I know) I'm going off what the company officially says on its website and in it's user agreements.

soft egret
#

"incorporated" incorporated.

#

Not 3rd party created

chilly silo
#

The source i listed WAS the BI community manager for over 10 years. And look at the date...2005. He left BI 5-6 years ago

carmine folio
#

Yep just looking now. Says "Arma 3 support team". Forums seems like a reasonable place to go given its not more specific or no contact details are given.

chilly silo
chilly silo
# carmine folio silly me, I went to the BI website and read their agreements here, https://www....

@carmine folio The Tools licence relates to the Arma 3 Tools. Theres another licence that relates to the Game files too. And another Steam agreement as well as 3rd party Plugins. Physx and sound libraries etc. Its complicated but no where does it say anything about 3rd party custom made content in the Core game's licences.

The exception is content derived from the games files, specifically using the Licensed Data Packages. If you edit a core or DLC file without permission that you are using BI files without consent and BI could claim partial ownership ...at least technically. But unlikely as they would just ask you to remove it.

carmine folio
#

Which is why I was asking what is the grounds for a lawsuit if you do not have a copyright on the mod itself

fallen sandal
carmine folio
#

Merely a license to work under someone else's copyright

soft egret
soft egret
chilly silo
# carmine folio lol I had a whole thing typed out going into detail about this but you kinda sai...

But you are't using BI content. You are working inside a framework of permitted modding. Unless you actually incorporate their content, IE BIS have a policy allowing you to open and modify some content. specifically the Licensed Data packages. They even give you the open files in the form of Licensed Data Packages. Allowing you to modify these files under certain conditions set out in their licences.

But if you make totally unique content that refers to but does not directly incorporate their files you own it. And you can dictate the terms under which it is used.

chilly silo
fallen sandal
#

cheers, that makes sense

chilly silo
#

np

carmine folio
chilly silo
carmine folio
#

The mod needs Arma to run....

chilly silo
#

LMAO

#

again you dont understand the legal bit here. Yes addons need arma to run. But the addons are not part of the Game and the Addons do not have to have parts of the games original files to work,

carmine folio
#

everything you create belongs to your OS provider now πŸ˜›

chilly silo
#

HAHA

#

Addons only reference the game files.

#

Actually the OS joke is a good analogy. Microsoft owns Windows. Adobe owns Photoshop. Microsoft doesnt own Photoshop does it?

carmine folio
#

i dont know ^^glad you like the analogy

#

but maybe its also the guy who mined the ressources in your pc

rustic copper
#

The workshop is something else though... Because you have to give full rights to Valve when you upload something, meaning Valve becomes responsible for everything uploaded to their platform.
That said, the uploader still holds ownership and is therefore (legally) accountable, which is why you can DMCA strike content "not owned" by an uploader

carmine folio
#

Why call it a mod then

#

as in a modification of a program

chilly silo
#

No it modifies the way the game environment appears or is used.

#

It is in no way changing the original core files

manic laurel
chilly silo
#

and if it doesnt use incorporate copies of the original content then its property of the 3rd Party Author.
AND even IF you use BI owned stuff from the Licensed data Packages , under the license terms in those packages you still have the right to be credited as the author of your work. Providing you follow the terms of the licence. BIS still dont own sole rights to your creative efforts.

#

And just for clarification:
There are conditions of using the BI Toolset that allows packing of 3rd party content for use in the game. Specifically:
No commercial use, No training or educational use and so on. BI do not claim ownership anywhere just clarify what is and is not allowed when it comes to creating 3rd party addons.

manic laurel
chilly silo
#

kk

hallow idol
#

For the record I didn't say (or mean?) it was deliberate or anything like that, meant only that it was unfortunate but could've been discussed/found out before it happened, since at least to me it makes sense.
Claiming something as "impossible" and shutting down peoples concerns - and then it happening - puts a bad light on the point of the 'good thing' here

gray siren
#

can we confirm the the VME PLA mistake cant happen again?

#

every one says it was unintened and due to steam tools and how they work. So as steam changed the way they work or is the risk still there

eager ravine
#

what?

strange elm
#

accidents are accidents there will always be a risk. you cant delibritely stop future accidents from happening

#

not 100% but you can take measure s

eager ravine
manic laurel
gray siren
#

thanks

scarlet patrol
#

wow
that guy in the SW frontpage is just... wow

leaden adder
#

What’s going on?

faint nacelle
#

@scarlet patrol que? there is no chat in the workshop

scarlet patrol
#

check the frontpage mods

faint nacelle
#

dont see anything funky

scarlet patrol
#

oh it has been nuked

leaden adder
#

What was it?

scarlet patrol
#

that was fast
a guy had just posted an empty mod full of links for "private mods"

leaden adder
#

How did that get to the front page

faint nacelle
#

if its viewed a lot that can happen. Id expect that guy to lose his ability to publish in workshop quite soon

runic wraith
chilly silo
# 
Insta: @just.ukaf.things Youtube: Tali Hunting Club``` He seems to think a lot of himself doesn't he.
crisp osprey
#

fat l

#

fuck me I can taste the salt from my computer

runic wraith
#

'Joining British Army Parachute Regiment, British Army Ranger Regiment And A Future In The 22nd Special Air Service' Was probably meaning for his milsim group

strange elm
#

didnt you know?... playing Arma makes you elligable for special operations groups.

chilly silo
strange elm
#

he also posted some links in the Hotch's Static Pose Pack mod comments, even friend requested me... i took a look at the mods, the are all ripped and.... id have to say ugly. not subscribed anymore jsut wanted confirmation xD

runic wraith
wary hollow
quasi flame
#

Yall see that TFL released all their ripped trash?

#

Google drive link

#

some random apparently was selling it to people

wary hollow
#

Oh, well someone screenshotted my message smugfox

strange elm
#

what up with this surge in Ultra modern operator stuff anyway? stolen or not there are so much more better and interesting time periods, factions and gear that need some love, and to be put on the workshop xD. ugh sometimes i get tired of multi cam, crye, bump helmets. just a rant of mine. but yeah i hold the highest disdain for people that sell mods, thats why i absolutely hate private, stolen mods, it doesnt build the Arma 3 community as a whole, it only builds up the individual getting the money, and the community that draws players in my holding private mods exclusive for the communities.

hot kestrel
#

Would I be allowed to use this mod, or is it illegal?

#

(It's a workshop upload of an Armaholic mod.)

vivid wave
#

Of course not

rustic copper
soft egret
#

with permission maybe.
But doesn't look like it has permission

hot kestrel
#

Ooh, got it... Thanks folks πŸ™‚

mystic rock
#

I'm the original modder for that pack. I didn't even know it was on ArmAholic in the first place.

#

Taken down as the group it was made for died.

plain rivet
#

If it’s on the workshop, it’s safe to assume most mods are

pale shard
#

Hopefully im in the right channel. Do you guys sort permission if you use a mod as Dependencies . My mod uses my config my script only and need the original mod as dependencies , it's not for a server it's just for steam workshop with credit going to Dependencies mod creator . My config inheritance a class and the model path way only .thanks

rustic copper
#

For dependencies you don't have to worry (too much) about permissions, although it's always a good idea to check the licenses attached.
For example RHS has some stuff which is not allowed to be retextured, and keeps the right to not have it as a dependency if your mod is not in line with their (unwritten) rules.

spark bay
#

Wow, permissions for dependencies? That's going to far even for me =/

pale shard
#

Lol I did ask permission and have been granted it even though its just a dependecies , I just asked out of respect as that mod is a great mod . Thanks Grezvany13 for the reply

rustic copper
#

Rather have someone asking it once too often than not at all πŸ˜‰

chilly silo
#

@pale shard General rule of thumb. As long as your addons "references" the original. But does not include content from the original eg, textures etc you shouldn't need permissions.

If your "patch" does include a copy or derivative part of a model or texture (e.g. re-textures use an edited copy of the original files) you should always ask for permission.

#

But common courtesy suggest you ask anyway. at least in my opinion. I've made lots of mates and connections as a result.

golden smelt
#

Hello, is there anyone from BIS who I can contact regarding some OFP (yes, Operation Flashpoint aka ARMA: CWA) "legal" questions? I'm πŸ‡¨πŸ‡Ώ.

PS: I'm not looking for PR manager, but more for OFP fanboy working for BIS mainly.

manic laurel
golden smelt
#

I would like to discuss that in private with BIS people.

manic laurel
leaden cipher
#

And also for BIS (Bohemia Interactive Simulations) you are in the wrong discord πŸ˜‰ unless you mean BI (Bohemia Interactive) of course 😎 But also it is weekend in CZ and we got a huge selection of OFP veterans who can also answer most if not all questions........ otherwise as like Lou said: maybe........

golden smelt
#

I'm from OFP community, we call BI still BIS. So I'm looking for BI contact person.

manic laurel
#

contact the Community Manager (that manages the community) and he will route you towards whoever is the more inclined to answer - whether a dev, legal department, HR etc

golden smelt
#

Yeah, I was about to save us both some time (me and the community manager), but that is probably the only way.

manic laurel
#

well, we cannot help more with that level of details I am afraid

golden smelt
#

sure, np

#

In really short, we (part of today's active OFP) would like to do some stuff, which is clearly against legal terms and we would like to ask if there is any way to "legalise" those steps. All the effort is related to today's OFP community, to help keep it alive.

#

it almost died twice in recent years :/

manic laurel
#

if I get you correctly, I don't think they will make OFP open-source soon\β„’ but they may be considering it in the future

also, there was an unofficial patch v2.00 by (a Russian?) community iirc

golden smelt
#

there is no need to make it open-source actually Β―_(ツ)_/Β―

#

that patch is actually garbage (there is v2.01), it is done in really Russian way

#

it is fixing few problems, but actually destroys the unrelated part of their interest

#

and they (2.01 authors) don't want to co-operate with the rest of the community

#

I can elaborate more, but really soon we will get into "grey" zone (before entering non-legal one). And this discord is ARMA related, not OFP. That's the reason I would like to to discuss some stuff in private.

echo orchid
#

OFP has been renamed Arma something

golden smelt
#

yeah, ARMA: CWA

echo orchid
#

so this is the discord you are looking for anyways

golden smelt
#

Is it?

#

πŸ™‚

echo orchid
golden smelt
#

lol, I thought it is channel for the mission DLC

#

but looking at it again, I just confused myself that with Old Man's DLC 🀦

#

End of Life vs Old Man

#

So the final hint, can anyone help me find out a way to reach the community manager (speaking πŸ‡¨πŸ‡Ώ if possible)?

manic laurel
#

@hollow rain is the man

golden smelt
#

thanks folks 🀝

manic laurel
#

(speaking a perfect Czech)

golden smelt
#

I have seen his Twitter account, I think he moved to Czechia actually.

hollow rain
#

I exist.

#

Don't speak Czech though.

pale shard
#

Thanks @chilly silo

chilly silo
#

np

hot kestrel
paper prawn
soft egret
#

It was BIS/BIS before.
Then it was BI/BIS.
Now its BI/BISIM

manic laurel
#

& BIA (Australia)

scarlet patrol
#

that name aged bad

carmine folio
#

lmao

golden smelt
#

πŸ€” Also speaking of OFP unofficial 2.01 patch, is BI ok with that one? Is it known to BI how 2.01 patch was created?

high wharf
#

Nice to see fellow OFP-ers!πŸ‘‹

rare sequoia
junior warren
#

heard BI was on the chase but guess nothin happened

dull moon
#

nothing that went public (yet) at least

delicate hamlet
#

Hey guys, I know this is a heated topic, but what about blacklisting?
Is it against TOS?
Or a modder is free to implement anti tanper/reserve rights of use of a signed owned mod?

#

(idk if I can ping Bohemians but answer from them is desired, thanks)

carmine folio
#

If you write it you get to say who can use it and under what circumstances and in what ways. If you want to exclude its use from certain individuals then you can do that. Java for example is excluded from use in military applications as well as nuclear work. It is a license agreement so it could contain basically whatever terms you want.

rustic copper
#

There are already several mods out there which actually have SteamID's in them and prevent scripts from working. It's not really effective though, since rippers can just remove/empty the list and still use it.

Afaik are you the owner of your code/assets/etc, so if you want people to prevent it from using it its up to you. But just remember it will only slow people down and won't prevent them from using it, and most likely just annoy people who will attack you for it (in many childish ways).

winged plank
#
  1. Can I use soundtrack from a1/a2 in a3 missions and freely publish them on workshop?
  2. Can I do the same with ofp cwc, resistance?
manic laurel
#

huh I think so, but maybe you should check license of the Arma Data Packs

winged plank
#

aight

spark bay
#

It's either APL or APL-SA so using it for arma games should be fine

#

to make sure

faint nacelle
#

are the tracks part of the datapacks?

spark bay
#

I did not check all of them though

faint nacelle
#

πŸ‘

paper prawn
#

Definitive statement on game music is here: https://www.bohemia.net/community/game-content-usage-rules Most of the music can be freely used subject to our general rules, e.g. all music from Arma games. Sometimes we license music from 3rd parties and subsequently don’t own the rights ourselves and cannot give permission for you to use music or other audio from the game. If this is the case we’ll let you know, safest to check first with us. But we can confirm that the music in Carrier Command: Gaea Mission and some of the music in Take On Helicopters is not available for re-use.

spark bay
#

Would be neat to actually have a list with all tracks and wether or not they can be freely used

manic laurel
#

less' duu dis!

spark bay
paper prawn
#

Most of the music can be freely used subject to our general rules, e.g. all music from Arma games R3vo

#

The all being the relevent bit πŸ˜‰

spark bay
#

Ups, got my reading glasses on and still missed 'all Arma games'

paper prawn
#

LOL, I missed that to start with too

golden smelt
#

reminds me "Organ Works" theme 🎢

manic laurel
heady charm
#

If a piece of music is posted on Youtube under Creative Commons, would I be able to put that music into Arma?

faint nacelle
#

depends on the type of licence

#

there are many different ones under CC

heady charm
faint nacelle
#

I guess safest way would be to reach out to the creator there to make sure and get a documented permission. The Steam EULA and uploaded IP ownership is pretty strict (assuming you would upload your mod to Steam)

heady charm
#

That's understandable

faint nacelle
#

and the license description is a bit vague

#

the description of what type of license is applied

heady charm
faint nacelle
#

while it says reuse allowed, it does not lead to a proper licenese document directly

#

so best to ask

rustic copper
faint nacelle
#

is it that for sure?

#

or is that for all Youtube CC content?

rustic copper
#

Those urls's are for CC-BY (Creative Commons Attribution), which is what they refer to.
Link to the full license is available when you click on the link on YT

midnight crystal
#

Question is: What version of CC is it because there are big differences between 3.0 and 4.0 for example

#

From what I think I understood is that CC doesn't grant enough rights for the workshop eula but I never really was able to confirm

rustic copper
#

Technically no license is compatible with Valve, unless you are the IP holder (aka creator/contributor) yourself which has the rights to distribute the content without a license.

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, for the purpose of the operation, distribution, incorporation as part of and promotion of the Steam service, Steam games or other Steam offerings, including Subscriptions.
The moment a license is attached to something, you won't be able to give Valve non-exclusive rights anymore.

That said; this only applies to the Steam Workshop. If you want to share it with friends in other methods, it depends on the license itself if you're allowed to use and share the content.

faint nacelle
#

if the creator of the music is listed as contributor that would also sort out the IP holding part would it not?

golden smelt
faint nacelle
#

you will have to contact BI directly about that

#

possibly through their legal departments Email

golden smelt
#

I'm trying πŸ™

manic laurel
hot kestrel
#

I'm not sure if this is a violation or not, hence why I bring it to you!

rapid cypress
soft egret
#

There is a report button on the approved monetization list.
But I don't see any problem with doing that, these items are not gameplay affecting and the server has proper monetization approval.

rapid cypress
#

Oh right there are monetization approved servers ablobderpy

paper prawn
#

Pretty scummy to be monetizing a charity item though...

manic laurel
#

well, the player would need to have paid for it first anyway so "no money loss" hopefully

paper prawn
#

Yeah, but then forcing someone to pay for access to those items they bought to support a charity... Just leaves a bad taste in my mouth - but I hate monetization anyway

strange elm
#

just read through that Asylum forum thread..... and this is why i dont play with life servers O.O thats some heavy toxicity going. but yeah im with Grahame, monetization is scummy and doesnt grow the Arma Community in a positive direction. monetization = more private mods = less content for the Arma community as a whole.

rapid cypress
#

Yeah it does leave a bit of a bad taste in my mouth

#

Not sure where I'd draw the line though

strange elm
#

i think if the money donated, is openly documented and shown were it goes on a monthly basis id be more into it but otherwise nah people shouldnt benefit monetarily from privatizing mods, locking servers, ect.

mortal needle
# soft egret There is a report button on the approved monetization list. But I don't see any ...

Some questions to go along with your statement.
What is considered gameplay affecting?
My interpretation would be that anything that has any effect on gameplay, which would mean a uniform with a cargo space of ten would not be allowed to be monetised behind a paywall if there were no other uniforms with a cargo space of ten as technically that would effect gameplay.

How far is, and who defines 'gameplay affecting'?

#

Selling of in-game items, that don’t affect gameplay, is allowed.
Does a larger backpack size affect gameplay?
Is it game mode specific or game specific?

soft egret
swift fjord
#

@soft egret Well the problem we all see is he’s locking all black clothes behind it which is an insane game advantage at night tbh. But the main thing we all are fight for is the ICRC and he’s giving access to the art of war files for free to the donors to where they don’t need to buy it but then rest of us buy it and support the charity event and can’t use some of the part most of us what to use.

soft egret
#

"game advantage at night"
Its a life server.

#

"he’s giving access to the art of war files for free to the donors" what? he's not.

swift fjord
#

How he has it setup you can still wear the items if your donor without buy the dlc

soft egret
#

but you get the normal DLC restrictions

#

same as if you didn't donate and would wear the items

swift fjord
#

See on asylum you can still wear the items and use them if you buy them at the vendor and then store them in your houses. Which in ables you to wear them and take them off. Like the DLC shotgun we are able to not buy the DLC and store them in our houses and pull them back out whenever.

#

But I know for fact it’s suppose to make you get annoyed by making you constantly have to buy the DLC if you drop anything and force you to go buy a new one of the DLC item.

mortal needle
#

That happens because DLC restrictions do not block weapons/vehicle positions from script commands.

#

So you can still get into a vehicle without the get in action through commands.

manic laurel
faint nacelle
#

looks like it

paper prawn
#

Awful logo

vivid scarab
#

That's a Fiverr logo if ever I've seen one.

stiff jasper
#

it's from placeit, i'm 95% sure.

hot kestrel
#

Is this a violation?

faint nacelle
#

possibry

hot kestrel
faint nacelle
#

well the descriptions kinda seem to point to the direction of reuploads

rare sequoia
carmine folio
#

@rare sequoia it's their selling point

#

Also, how does it violate anything? I don't really understand that part

wary hollow
#

BiA is not allowed to post content here as they are violating the Arma EULA
From Dedmen, just scroll up, or use the search function to find more information regarding that topic...

manic laurel
carmine folio
carmine folio
faint nacelle
#

@carmine folio what do you mean?

carmine folio
#

looks like it's ripped, the glossiness on the vehicles screems not made for arma

#

but it maybe is just not well made rvmaps

faint nacelle
#

Dunno, could be either way. Maxjoiner has not always used self made stuff in the past.

patent flicker
faint nacelle
#

looks like its origianlly from need for speed17

#

so no its not legit

#

probably taken off from some "free models site"

vivid wave
#

@carmine folio Since the topic's not the scope of the channel there, I'll continue here - of course illegal importing is illegal, legal importing is legal

carmine folio
manic laurel
#

so yep, you can import models into A3; you simply cannot be paid for it if you use Arma Tools, that's it

vivid wave
#

Also keep it mind that, the tool for Blender uses some parts of Arma Tools, so the same thing is applied

rustic copper
#

Already using the PBO or P3D files (to be used for Arma) means it falls under the EULA's of BI, since it always requires Arma Tools or parts of it

dapper mauve
#

Hey guys is this the right channel to discuss about mod ripping of from other mods?

vivid wave
#

Yes

faint nacelle
#

Unless it's about "how to do it"

dapper mauve
rapid cypress
delicate hamlet
stark phoenix
#

but GSC no longer owns that property? Maybe the name, but those assets have been in the world for a while now.

dull moon
#

All the way from 2011, so this should be fine. The assets are freeware.
where is that written?

faint nacelle
#

@stark phoenix there is no official word about this as far as I know

#

just that post from a moderator of those forums

haughty beacon
#

so it is not quite "just a moderator"

faint nacelle
#

google translate on the original post seems to say that all STALKER IP and content belong to GSC

#

so not freeware

haughty beacon
#

yes, that is the stance from 2008

#

it changed due to prevalence of stalker's modding scene

faint nacelle
#

Id say this is not a reliable source due to the age of the posts

haughty beacon
#

post we're mentioning is end of page 9

well, it's the best we've got

faint nacelle
#

would be best if anyone using the assets would reach out to the IP owners for clarification

#

Its not really good enough

haughty beacon
#

nowadays, since GSC is reformed - possibly
however, this does leave a gray area of a few years, and i dont think there's that much that can be done about that

faint nacelle
#

Ok on of the russian posts mentions that content could be used BUT the user must have a copy of the Stalker game

#

so from what I gather here is that more definitive and clear answer should be sought out

haughty beacon
#

well, one of the posts mentions that mods using stalker's assets doesnt need approval of the GSC, but needs approval of the developers of the game that the assets would be ported to

but i think that's just a weird wordplay, and its meant other way around

faint nacelle
#

which is why more clear and definite answers is needed

#

instead of just claiming its ok

#

because this thread does not make it clear

#

Judging from the text, they probably would not oppose to it

#

but it is the right thing to do to confirm it

haughty beacon
#

not everyone has same opinions on this, hence the usage of their assets by modders

not much can be done about that, since well, you cant go around every single modder who used even a little bit of stalker's assets (and believe me, weapons/character models are a very small bit of what was used out of stalker, sounds (mostly ambient) etc. was used by a lot of mods and full-on independent games everywhere with no legal issues)

so while its de-jure stat is in a bit of a limbo and there is a way to solidify that if someone has the time to (i dont), its de-facto status is pretty much free-ware, especially considering that even XRay engine base code is already out there, posted by one of ex-devs with no legal reprecussions

faint nacelle
#

There isnt anyone here who can rightfully claim that to be true without official statement from the IP holder. No matter what people have done and got away with.

haughty beacon
#

yeah, it's all educated guesses, possibly the case would be lifted with release of stalker 2 and it's stance on modding, but for now the options are:
1)wait till STALKER 2 releases and look at the stance down the line
2)reach out to GSC over social media or their website and directly ask them

vivid scarab
#

Worth noting that whatever stance they take on one game may or may not apply to the other. Truth be told I really don't understand why someone hasn't reached out to them already (given the frequency this particular IP is brought up) for further clarification.

faint nacelle
#

most of the time people dont quite know how the IP stuff works

#

we try to get things right here.

hallow idol
#

regardless of their stance - it's up to gsc to dmca anything they have an issue with, which so far has never happened to my knowledge

#

and the reason why nobody has reached out to them is most likely because they are hard to reach for non-Russian speaking people, but also because "ip rights" is almost a joke concept in eastern countries, most Stalker things being made from there means the people don't care, and as seen by gsc's stance - they don't care either

paper prawn
#

That said, the statement on usage rights was made by Oleg Yavorsky - the GSC PR & Marketing Director who together with other GSC employees created Vostok Games

#

lone interesting part is the use on other games where they say that the other game's IP holder can decide whether it's allowed...

#

Over to you Bohemia Interactive πŸ˜‰

arctic magnet
#

stalker modding would not be alive without porting content from other games lul

stark phoenix
#

^ either that or people making new shit to the engine

earnest mirage
#

Yeah, one that and porting stuff from stalker, espetially buildings was around since Arma 2

#

Namalsk did it (90% of the buildings are Stalker buildings), esseker did it, Not to mention the Countless Stalker mods that try to Bring stuff i to Arma

#

And thats been more than 8 years ago

#

All im saying is, GSC never decidet to DCMA any of those mods, so its unlikely they will in the Future

faint nacelle
#

yes but that is not definitive permission

earnest mirage
#

Yeah, its not

faint nacelle
#

which after 8 years someone should be able to provide

#

if nothing else all of them break Steam EULA

novel goblet
#

That does beg the question, provide to whom?

gray siren
#

i mean send the stalker ip rights older a note and see if they do any think. Though i will bet money they do nothing.

faint nacelle
#

It is quite possible they allow it. BUT there is no proper definitive official answer available. Just random people guessing (and saying what they want to hear).

delicate hamlet
#

aside from being a rip, its a reupload. If that matters.

chilly silo
rapid cypress
random marsh
#

realistically, what can BI do about that?

manic laurel
#

sue
earn monies
build own army
buy EA
make Dead Space 4

random marsh
#

you can sue the argentinian army?

rapid cypress
#

I imagine so, or sue the government as the army is a part of it

manic laurel
#

oh, realistically

sue, perhaps
and/or get money / contract for BIAustralia, a.k.a BISim

manic laurel
leaden adder
rapid cypress
#

contract for BIA
What, BI supporting the BiA Arma unit heh ?

mortal needle
#

Probably meant BISIM

manic laurel
#

Old habits die hard

#

Fixeded

gray siren
#

The Argentinean government has been sued in the past by creditors trying to collect debt. They tried to impound a boat in africa. It did not work out since hard to get cash from guys with more guns than you.

manic laurel
#

using Arma for military training purpose is prohibited by its EULA.

vivid scarab
#

In about sixty years time they'll be talking about how this Discord was the flashpoint that kick-started Argentina's invasion of the Czech Republic.

rapid cypress
paper prawn
#

Even the Czech Army could beat the Argentine one... Brits would probably be happy to help transport the ACR to Buenos Aires πŸ˜‰

strange elm
#

so out of curiosity, when we say we cant use Arma 3 for military training, couldnt milsim unit training fall under that? ive seen some pretty well put together units with very thought out and close to real life training for there new players, i know its kind of a funny question but i was wondering where the line is trully drawn, because hypothetically some of the lessons could be taken into the real world if that makes sense just a silly question though not trying to start an argument πŸ™‚

spark bay
#

Well, kitchen knives are also allowed, although they could be used for murder.

rapid cypress
#

I imagine the line gets drawn when a sort of 'official' element comes into play

spark bay
#

I guess this rule is to prevent official institutions like Armies to use the game as cheap alternative for a training simulator e.g. VBS

rapid cypress
#

Like a nations army

spark bay
#

But to make sure read the EULA.

paper prawn
#

MILSIM would fall under entertainment and recreation, military training would not: Use the Program for anything other than entertainment and recreation purposes, including but not limited to using the Program for training, educational, occupational or vocational purposes.

strange elm
#

gotcha, that makes sense just need to make sure some starsim community doesn't start to form its own militia somewhere, when the figure out how to properly invade a planet πŸ˜‰ but yeah that makes sense sounds like an official thing with the intent to bring it to the real world is a big no no but if your boyz from call of duty want to learn how to clear a building and bound under fire,but keep it in game its more or less okay but we also couldn't do a whole history channel reenactment of the Normandy invasion and publicize the video ect.

paper prawn
#

Videos actually come under different rules ... and those rules are sufficiently vague that a mail to BI's legal department would be in order for someone looking to make money from it

#

E.g. You are allowed to put footage (screenshots and videos) of our games on websites (such as YouTube). You are only allowed to make money (e.g. advertisement revenues) from it if you add your own content to it that would be a sufficient amount of additional work/content to justify it.

strange elm
#

ah yeah that makes sense always thought about doing a twitch so thats good to know actually. thanks! xD

paper prawn
#

Streaming is probably different again πŸ˜‰

#

And before you ask, music is different where there is a blanket permission for ARMA to use the game's music in game videos (all ARMAs too)

strange elm
#

man its difficult to do anything these days aint it.... can i atleast go to the restroom without contacting the toilet manufacturer? haha im just kidding though. but thanks all of thats good to know lol

gray siren
#

I mean I am sure they could say solders are playing to get entertained

#

All so I now picture some private asking for a zeuse to unflip the truck that flew in to space after touching a bush

faint nacelle
#

They could not.

manic laurel
#

When did they become illegal
@placid orbit
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away

brisk shadow
#

@soft egret Could you accept my friend request? I have some stuff that you might want to take a look at

soft egret
#

no

rapid cypress
soft egret
#

you can also send me stuff without me accepting any friend request

brisk shadow
#

Sent

wintry berry
#

good day, so, since i've just learned that if someone post a screenshot with ripped/stolen content they get banned, now i'm scared of posting screenshots so i came here to ask if this vest is ripped content, i feel like i've seen it before in different mods but since i'm not very sure of it i'm here to ask if its actually ripped or not. i paid attention to that thing in the middle of the vest (i think it's a phone)
https://imgur.com/a/UvCn0uN

#

sorry for the inconvenience and the dumb question

faint nacelle
#

what mod is it from?

wintry berry
#

can i link the workshop link or not?

faint nacelle
#

sure

wintry berry
#

thiis one

faint nacelle
#

I believe those guys have legit self made stuff

random marsh
#

yop

wintry berry
#

oh

#

im free then

#

thanks for the help

manic laurel
#

@wintry berry just for the record, you don't get banned on sight, you get contacted first about it and asked to take it down πŸ˜‰

upper wing
#

Yeah the guy from yesterday was uuuh entitled XD

manic laurel
#

That's a difference 😁 we tolerate honest mistakes, we nuke idiots!

heavy nacelle
soft egret
#

I see TFL/FLB and ripped USP stuff @runic wraith

heavy nacelle
runic wraith
#

DMCA'd

wintry berry
delicate hamlet
heavy nacelle
strange elm
#

yeah thats wackyi dont get why folks defend illegal mods, and then act like they have a sense of morality over everything else in life, when it comes to legality... i guess some folks want there toys and dont care about anything else.

stable zealot
#

β€œI’m making improvements you should thank me”

#

If you wanna do that, join the team lol

crystal talon
chilly silo
rapid cypress
fluid jewel
#

why did they even mention RKSL in the license? that seems really random

rapid cypress
#

Propably just copy/pasted form somewhere?

fluid jewel
#

I thought so too but it doesn't match any the licenses on any RKSL workshop items

rapid cypress
#

huh odd

chilly silo
rapid cypress
#

Ah

faint nacelle
#

Pro job. /s

silent venture
#

What's this channel for?

manic laurel
silent venture
#

Thanks man

wheat wave
soft egret
#

@hazy sluice πŸ‘€

hazy sluice
#

Warthunder is different company, I'm World of Tanks, the more arcadey one :)

soft egret
#

ahhhhhh, I always mix them up

#

so close tho

#

😒

fluid jewel
#

that one was posted here already, their description even says the models are property of gaijin

rapid cypress
#

Yep ^

earnest mirage
#

dose that make them legit?

rapid cypress
vivid wave
#

inb4 β€œAll credits go to the respective authors” Β―_(ツ)_/Β―

wheat wave
#

πŸ˜„

earnest mirage
rapid cypress
earnest mirage
#

Alright, thanks

vivid wave
#

It's simply the same with β€œI stole it from there, thankfully because of this, I can give it”

rapid cypress
#

To use those models they'd have to get permission from gaijin

fluid jewel
#

if they're gaijin models, does that mean that gaijin themselves have to issue a dmca takedown?

manic laurel
#

DMCA = has to be done by the owner
Report = any user can report wrongfully used IP

fluid jewel
#

I was wondering though, does steam require an actual dmca by the official owner to be issued in order for something to be taken down?

manic laurel
#

as far as I guess, a report or enough reports and a Steam moderator is enough

spark bay
#

Last reports I did were ignored even though I was the original author

#

so dunno

manic laurel
spark bay
#

no

#

report

manic laurel
#

I believe there is then no difference with the "normal" user report

wheat wave
#

you have to file a dmca if its your stuff, not a report

spark bay
#

Β―_(ツ)_/Β―

echo orchid
#

considering the size of the IP infringements staff

#

i would say reports end up in later as in never bucket

manic laurel
#

sometimes it gets taken down
I think they process when they see a surge in reports for one item
that or big numbers of them

chrome dome
random marsh
#

shared publicly
"Only for private use"

fathom bone
#

That said, just looked at their workshop, and there is another mod there that is just the TAM as listed above

#

I have less of an issue where there is a language barrier and a misunderstanding, but once you are made aware, you do kinda need to action it

runic wraith
runic wraith
#

So where is the best place to report these repeated offenders in order to have something done about it?

dull moon
#

@runic wraith
Send proof to Dwarden that this guy is a repeat offender. He will be gone for good then

runic wraith
#

Thanks

dull moon
#

NP

marble coyote
dull moon
#

Kill it with fire!
What mods btw?

marble coyote
#

Exilemod for example and some others (don't remember every single one)

manic laurel
#

RHS dependencies too

echo orchid
#

?

manic laurel
#

not saying it has RHS reuploads, but I honestly wouldn't be surprised

echo orchid
#

i'll check

wheat wave
gray siren
#

Dont they have a discord

manic laurel
wheat wave
#

yes

wheat wave
#

i've sent it their way, thanks

hot kestrel
#

I have a quick question about IP. Would I be allowed to make a scenario based off of a movie scene or plot, like very-very-heavily based on, or would that not be allowed?

chilly silo
#

@hot kestrel Yes, because you wouldn't be using any of their IP. Avoid their logos and there is nothing for them to complain about.

You can recreate entire movies ingame if you like as long as you say "inspired by XYZ" and don't use any assets or physical IP or trademarks they own.

hot kestrel
ashen flame
faint nacelle
#

indeed. That is highy unnecessary but ACE team allows reuploads

ashen flame
#

ahhh, didn't know

manic laurel
#

but Steam doesn't (by non-members of the team), so it's "only" a Steam EULA's breach

faint nacelle
#

true

paper prawn
stable zealot
# manic laurel but Steam doesn't (by non-members of the team), so it's "only" a Steam EULA's br...

Could it not be considered that ACE is open source, and by changing and reuploading something you are considered to be branching the primary mod and adding yourself as a contributor by creating alterations? Surely there is some consideration for how "open source" content is handled?

Eg; I have content from toadie and Kiory in my weapon pack which was both open source and I gained their permission to use it. That's not uploading work other than my own, that's proper development process same as CUP and RHS.

#

I personally don't get too into IP-lawyer-land too often, but this is an interesting point

#

Does open source content with explicit permission not act as if both parties are under the same team, whether you have joined and branched their team or whether they have (for arguments sake) joined your team for the purposes of integrating their open source content to your work?

paper prawn
#

Steam's EULA doesn't take that into account. It is a grey area when you have permission from those responsible for the mod and the mod's license allows such. That is the case with ACE, where the team will give you permission and their license is permissive. However they also have requirements, such as mod naming so that no one thinks that your mod is actually ACE 3... many reuploaders of ACE ignore that one - and are wrong to do so...

#

If you have permission to upload something in your mod pack or as a server mod from the authors and follow their license requirements though, you're not going to be called out here

fluid jewel
burnt oak
#

Most people do not know CBA/Addon settings are and assume the mod comes as is.

earnest mirage
fluid jewel
#

you can just set your server to turn it off

#

and you can just set your own defaults so it will go to those anytime you make a mission

earnest mirage
#

you sevearly underestimate the motivation of the playerbase

#

Players tend to be lazy

manic laurel
#

what amazes me is people will go to the extent of downloading, opening, learning, editing the mod to remove that but not read its doc

earnest mirage
#

Yea lol

fluid jewel
#

if they're lazy, having to download, delete files and reupload it when ACE updates is gonna be more effort than just disabling features

#

the best laziness is the one that ends up creating more work for you

manic laurel
#

a lazy person will always work hard to make a task easy… that's weird but true

soft egret
random marsh
#

This mod is entirely open-source (we are hosted on [url]GitHub[ace3mod.com]), and everyone is free to propose changes or maintain their own, customized version as long as they make their changes open to the public in accordance with the GNU General Public License.
Steam Workshop description of ACE3.

stiff jasper
#

and?

earnest mirage
#

and yea

#

people rather download a mod

#

that dose stuff fpr them

#

i mean why is the non-ace remove stamina a thing

#

you could just turn it off

random marsh
# stiff jasper and?

ACE is open source and the publishers allow modification and redistribution of the mod as long as it is released under the same license. Uploading it again to the workshop is a whole other issue which I do not know enough about to speak on.

stable zealot
clever cloak
#

How Arma 3 modders escaping from manufacturers of guns/vehicles? So modders modelling same of them.

#

I think companies can sue modders for copyright.

manic laurel
clever cloak
# manic laurel Depends.

For example, if a modder makes a model of armored car in 1940s (manufacturer is still active like Fiat, Porsche, etc) and i think they can sue him

manic laurel
#

What you think is of no matter ; what is legal is ^^

clever cloak
#

Yes so im asking how modders doing mods

#

and fleeing from risks

echo orchid
#

making a 3d model based on a real counterpart is an artist representation of that real object. it isn’t much different than taking drawing that particular object.

clever cloak
#

then why games like war thunder, dcs world etc. getting permission from manufacturers to making 3d model of their vehicles?

manic laurel
clever cloak
#

yes they are named in mods too

#

cars have logos of the manufacturer company in the most of mods

echo orchid
#

yet, most mods can get away with it because there is no commercial interest

clever cloak
#

so you saying its secure? because i'm planning to make mod

faint nacelle
#

If you want to be secure, don't use the real manufacturer names or logos

echo orchid
#

it’s not β€œsecure”

#

or get permission

faint nacelle
#

Like in Arma, the names are all made up

echo orchid
#

which is possible

faint nacelle
#

That too

clever cloak
#

ok thanks

chilly silo
rustic copper
#

For military weapons/vehicles it's allowed to use their military designation but not their factory name (eg. M16 instead of ArmaLite AR-15).
If you plan to make non-military stuff it's best to use alternative names (Mercedes becomes Norcedes)

earnest mirage
#

or pretty much just scramble letters instead of KamaZ its a Zamak

chilly silo
#

Or one of my favourites. HandOver Offender.

paper prawn
#

Please though not the DayZ KAM (AKM) or UA (UN) sort of thing....

faint nacelle
#

why not πŸ˜„

random marsh
#

The UN is a licensed name/brand?

paper prawn
#

No one really knows why they changed them... Even new classnames have real world weapon names but the name in game isn't... see the relatively recently added SVAL in game that is the ASVAL in the configs...

#

I mean, it's sort of getting to be a joke among DayZ players... The VSD (SVD), the LAR (FAL), all the KAs, the 🀣 M4-A1, the USG-45 (UMP), SG5-K (MP5K), Vaiga (Saiga) and all the CRs instead of CZs πŸ™‚

#

I like that they only had to put a - in the M4A1s name though...

#

Boo to the Kolt 1911 though... 😑

fluid jewel
#

good legally distinct names are an artform

spark bay
paper prawn
#

Two world wars and they Germanized the name πŸ˜‰

spark bay
#

πŸ˜„

candid bison
#

don't forget Mlock-91

chilly silo
manic laurel
#

hence why we do not have a NATO emoji on this server (anymore) CSAT AAF FIA

paper prawn
#

Wait, what?

#

Guess TenCent didn't want that anymore... 😭

whole oar
#

This sort of stuff about the UN, etc. reminds me of this one time where in a GTASA role-play community, we were hit by Hell's Angels lawyer to cut off any Hell's Angels MC faction that roleplayed in the server.

#

His name was Fritz Clapp, the lawyer that hit us with ceasing all factions associated or about Hell's Angels.

paper prawn
#

Yeah, I'd remove that content if they came after me πŸ™‚

whole oar
#

Yeah, obviously, the faction that was running HAMC shut it down, and that omega sucked, but it was the right thing. The server's owner was super 😨 about it as well.

low pebble
faint nacelle
#

It is still their IP. In this case the one modding that into game was in fact doing the illegal thing.

stable zealot
#

Back in the time of the dinosaurs in the early days of my unit, before I joined, they were contacted by the actual IRL unit and asked to remove any logos/rename. Which they did promptly, not people you fuck with haha

earnest mirage
#

Had simmular Things Happen to mine

ashen flame
#

that's pretty interesting actually, how did they find out?

rustic copper
#

Google? Like a lot of people find stuff on the internet 🀣

ashen flame
#

why would anyone google an arma unit? especially if it's present on discord and hidden.

#

seems like a waste to have people who's sole job is to shoot down units and their names. Especially in the military

earnest mirage
manic laurel
#

I think that's more how it was

spark bay
#

They prolly couldn't stand an arma unit having more search results than the real thing πŸ˜„

earnest mirage
#

Isnt that usually a good Thing, "the enemy dosen't know this unit exists, they think we only Play Arma"

#

I Just Had to Imagine Some CSAT private googleing NATOs units

faint nacelle
#

organizations usually dont want "fake" representation

dull moon
#

hmmm... the first logo that show up when i enter the name of the german special forces unit is my old arma 3 unit logo πŸ˜„

#

task force 47

paper prawn
#

Don't think the Bundeswehr can afford Internet access πŸ˜‰

spark bay
#

"Internet ist Neuland" >>Angela Merkel<<

paper prawn
#

Wait, you can only get the Internet in Germany if you live in Hamburg?

sinful pivot
ashen flame
#

huh, imagine getting paid to look your mil unit up and strike anyone who has the same name

opal jay
random marsh
#

Yeah that's the old project zenith stuff

earnest mirage
#

the description says they had the authorization to post it

faint nacelle
#

Haha. I highly doubt that.

dull moon
#

Posting to have permission and actually having permission are two pair of shoes

tulip nexus
#

Well the issue with VSM was that they were ripped from BF4 etc. wasn't it?

dull moon
#

I think you're right

#

Parts where from BF for sure, but I can't recall which

#

The vests maybe?

opal jay
#

uniforms I think

faint nacelle
sour edge
#

thanks @faint nacelle
@worthy pond and myself will take a look to confirm

worthy pond
#

Download it M1lk and have a look for me please think this guys done it a few times now with sangin

sour edge
#

Yep will do pal. Working now so after I’ll have a looksie

sour edge
#

@worthy pondyep its sangin all right.

#

i filed a dmca through steam

#

thanks again @faint nacelle for the heads up

#

these people are annoying

faint nacelle
#

yeh its not hard to just use the original map

sour edge
#

lol he didnt even attempt to change the name

#

so pointless why not just subscribe to the original

#

i guess they try to get "street cred" by having subscribers

faint nacelle
#

possibly. dont see any other logical explanation

sour edge
#

yep

paper prawn
#

Really though, something like that, just why? Are they claiming to their peer group that they made it? Quite sad

sour edge
#

i know exactly..its so dumb

soft egret
# wheat wave https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2458453924&searchtext= th...

Here are some better comparison pictures
https://static.warthunder.com/upload/image/! 2018/08 August/TAM/thyssen_henschel_tam_01_1280h720_e4aee88b8718d46484bee3f03392c4f7.jpg
https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/1763698230699402829/FD82614D211D2463ECC5025B1CCBB7951F1AAF07/

Even down to the rust spots on the side.
Though the Arma model is missing some small elements on the side, but they would be easy to remove if you'd rip it

rapid cypress
#

yeah looks very similar

wheat wave
#

i'd say they look identical πŸ˜›

dull moon
stark phoenix
#

theoretically if it's the same vehicle modeled, wouldn't it look the same? I mean the description literally tells you where he got it, and you guys are debating it.

#

besides little details and whatnot

chilly silo
#

No these are the same. hes already admitted it.

#

They ripped them from A Men of War mod... even asked them for permission after the fact πŸ˜›

#

They have been repeatedly told that they are not allowed to do this but seem to be ignoring our advice. πŸ˜‰

#

They seem to be listening to to the original rippers rather than anyone else.

strange elm
#

so question, out of my own curiosity because id like to build a mod, obviously ripping from a game is a big no no, but what if say someone made an original model for a mod on say Gmod or another game, original model, not ripped from anything, and you asked permission from that person to use that model in arma and they granted it, would it be kosher, or is it in violation with Arma 3's workshop?

obtuse junco
strange elm
#

cool, thanks! i dont intend to be looking for other mod creators, id like to have my own stuff made im just looking for potential legal options haha

chilly silo
obtuse junco
#

As far as I know, if the copyright holder/entity responsible for the asset gives you explicit rights/permission, you should be good to use it.

#

Debate over what, specifically?

chilly silo
#

Again, I would agree. its how I read it too. But the mods here have a different interpretation of the Steam Agreement clauses.

strange elm
#

probably would be dependant on the game the mod is comming from to know what there stance on sharing there mods are.

chilly silo
#

Specifically what "on behalf of" means in this context. 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).

chilly silo
# strange elm probably would be dependant on the game the mod is comming from to know what th...

nah, its much clearer than that. As long as the original Author/IP owner grants you permission you should be good. But if the guy you are talking to is not the actual owner/controller of the rights you shouldn't be using it.

The debate is about Section 6D of the Steam Agreement, specifically about if someone that is granted permission to modify a model can actually legally upload to Steam Workshop.

Opinion is divided.

strange elm
#

gotcha! thanks for the clarification πŸ™‚

chilly silo
#

@manic laurel & @soft egret might be able to explain more

strange elm
#

its all hypothetical anyway, i havent even gotten permission from the IP to even start work yet so im just sitting on a dream lol not a pressing thing of course.

soft egret
#

If you got permission for original content, you can use it according to that pernission

#

I don't see where any problem would be. If you have proper permission you do, if not, you don't

strange elm
#

gotcha makes sense thanks!

soft egret
#

Sadly many people seem to think getting a yes to "hey can I use your model" means the same as if getting a yes to "can I take your model, modify it, put my own name onto and upload it as my own mod to the steam workshop"

strange elm
#

yeah, nah id be working with commission artists, since i dont have the know how to make anything myself so ill have a long list of credits, always credits.

earnest mirage
jovial crown
#

@soft egret i was part of the development, we dont want to steal nothing, and say it our content just want to have the vehicle in arma 3 and share with comunity.

there was ask to us to use it on vbs, and we told them to dont do that because the content isnt ours, i tried to put disclamimer for that, copy one of rskl mods ( i forgot to delete one rskl word).

i dont say we did everything right, but there was no intention to apropiate content, just want to share something we used privatly at first

#

at the end, we only propuse is to share it, remove it from workshop change nothing we still use it, but ppl who want it dont... so whats the harm to do it? we are not geting paid, we not selling it, we not even asking for donations, we always said the models arent us.

we can modify it, the model, the texture enought to donde be clear if was mede from us or if we take it from somewhere else... there is any point of doing that? i mean, that lying, we never lied about the fact we didnt made the models.

jovial crown
manic laurel
#

I am afraid that even though the spirit is not ill-minded behind the action, it still remains forbidden @jovial crown

#

To make a moot IRL comparison, it would be (not exactly) like using a neighbour's car he never uses, cleaning it, filling it up and all - not damaging the property, but still forbidden

jovial crown
#

Yes, but if your neighbor don’t go to the police ... I mean he is not complaining, he isn’t giving you permission , but either stopping you from doing it either

chilly silo
#

WOW

#

I really don't want you as a neighbour.

fiery robin
#

Yeah, you just need take care of your car properly and use it in regular manner, Rock, lol

chilly silo
#

No need, I have neighbours that dont steal.

jovial crown
#

Me neither πŸ˜’

chilly silo
#

What gives you the right to take something that does not belong to you?

upper wing
#

And in your case, how gaijin is even supposed to be aware that you're ripping their models? xD

#

like they can't do anything if they don't know about it

chilly silo
#

Because thier staff also play Arma πŸ˜‰

#

And im sure someone ratted you out by now.

fiery robin
#

I wouldn't be suprised if they really do

jovial crown
#

I won’t take this discution I just write my POV

fiery robin
#

It doesn't change the fact you are wrong

chilly silo
#

Well your name is on the upload - Ive got bad news for you. You are legally responsible for it

upper wing
#

same principal behind cops finding stolen goods in your car, you might not be the one who stole it, but you're the one in possession of it at this exact moment so you're responsible for it

jovial crown
# fiery robin It doesn't change the fact you are wrong

Sure, the only intention was to share something, we could lie saying we have permission or ever denying everything, but we chose to don’t do it, because we don’t want the credit, we don’t want nothing that share it.

fiery robin
#

And that's the problem. You shouldn't even upload this thing to the WS as per EULA. You didn't have rights to do so.

#

What's the reason between stealing somebody's work being honest and stealing another one's work while covering things up?

#

What's the difference*

#

The real difference is - stupidity.

jovial crown
#

I take don’t the mod right now, and nothing change to me, but 1000+ ppl lose a mod that want

fiery robin
#

Oh, so you feel like being a donator of stolen goods to ppl? Nice. Like contemporary Robin from Sherwood.

upper wing
#

that's the problem, something might change for you. And something you don't want to

jovial crown
#

I mean really is an overreaction saying is a steal when literarily no one is losing or wining anything

chilly silo
#

Its the law

fiery robin
#

I am pretty sure the one who already have lost something is really - you

chilly silo
#

And it exist for a good reason whether you believe in it or not.

jovial crown
#

Yea well also is the law in North Korea to be executed for listen kpop

chilly silo
#

I'm sure Gaijin will say the same

upper wing
#

but is it a steal?

#

yes

#

Does gaijin loose something?
yes, intelectual property, and use of asset in an unregulated manner that may lead to a bad reputation regarding the company.

#

and money probably somewhere in the chain.

jovial crown
upper wing
#

I do.

brisk nexus
chilly silo
#

I do - as a commercial 3D artist its these sort of things that take money right out of my pocket.

#

You are stealing from someone else. But don't be surprised if genuine creators feel the same way.

#

You steal from one of us and it undermines the rest of us.

fiery robin
#

This is the typical way of ripped models -> get ripped -> somebody is reworking it and upload somewhere else where no encryption exists -> some other abuses it and uploads it for paid 3d models service -> one poor guy buys this crap for amount of money and later will learn it had been stolen from a game. I have seen it many times and you still want to tell me no one really lost smth?

marble coyote
#

Can't you get global banned for violating like he does on top of possible law suits?

faint nacelle
#

workshop rigths may be revoked

upper wing
#

as a dev, if someone ruin and steal bits and pieces pf my algorithm, like shit i loose a shitton of money like

jovial crown
#

We will delete the content, stop trying to scare us... is quite lame

brisk nexus
chilly silo
#

We arent trying to scare you. We are trying to help you understand what you have done is wrong and why.

fiery robin
#

Actually, we are protecting you from a life-long mistakes

#

You are young now, but some day you might be VIP in your country

jovial crown
#

Yes, we was wrong for upload it

#

I have no doubt about that

faint nacelle
#

well to be clear, even making it in private was wrong

strange elm
#

i dont understand the conscept of knowing something is wrong but still trying to justify it to be right?

jovial crown
#

But still I think is an over reaction, where there is a mod on other game years sitting there, we did it in arma and everyone loses you minds

fiery robin
#

this is how human brain works all the time

jovial crown
fiery robin
#

it's called defense mechanism, @strange elm

chilly silo
jovial crown
#

Yea well Linux contributiors must cry a lot

fiery robin
#

Or pay somebody to make a model from scratch only to etc.

jovial crown
chilly silo
manic laurel
#

@jovial crown stop trying to justify it. First and only warning on this matter.

jovial crown
#

K

fiery robin
#

It was brutal, Lou, but yeah, against the rules I suppose

manic laurel
#

Yes, I don't want to see any more discussions about it.

jovial crown
#

it has no point, he is right.
mod was set to private until we find a way to upload following the EULA.

chilly silo
#

And if you cant find way when you don't get permissions?

jovial crown
#

*deleted

soft egret
#

!issuewarning 101779969457278976 content theft, uploading ripped content from War Thunder to workshop, refusing to acknowledge the issue, threatening to workaround and just try to hide illegal content but still keep using it. We have no tolerance for theft. Next notice will be followed by a permanent ban.

edgy coralBOT
zinc tinsel
#

he has his dms turned off from this server

#

@jovial crown

#

@soft egret

#

he didnt delete the mod

rapid cypress
soft egret
#

!ban 101779969457278976 0 IP rights violations (ripping models from War thunder), refusing to fix violations. We have no tolerance for theft

edgy coralBOT
zinc tinsel
#

Also is it okay to republish a mod that adds vehicles from Arma 2

#

but the models are ripped from arma 3

#

only thing changed is the physiscs

#

he did that also

vivid wave
#

None of Arma 3 assets' files are provided to the public in the Licensed Data Packages. So no

zinc tinsel
#

i meant aram 2

#

arma2 *

spiral cape
#

Like CUP?

zinc tinsel
#

he took teh models from arma 2 and repost them

vivid wave
#

Uh sort the words please? Adds vehicles from Arma 2, but ripped from Arma 3? What do you mean

zinc tinsel
#

leme resay it

#

he ripped models from arma 2 and added them to arma 3

spiral cape
#

I think he means cup vehicles with different physics

zinc tinsel
#

he just remastered the arma 2 model to work in arma 3

vivid wave
#

Modelo original: arma 2 (vilas)
Of course illegal, if he didn't gave a permission. I never think he would

zinc tinsel
#

yea

#

he Stole models from both arma 2 and Warthunder

#

he should be ashamed of himself

vivid wave
#

He will never Β―_(ツ)_/Β―

dull moon
#

forwarded to people who are in contact with vilas

chilly silo
#

He already knows Eddie/WLD pinged him a week or so ago.

dull moon
#

πŸ‘

pale phoenix
#

Written by FLYTARTA

Al del !isuewarning de dreadmen.

Flyingtarta wasn’t who uploads the mod, he can’t remove it, he is only a collaborator.

He was asleep at that time, that’s why he didn’t answer.
All mod has been deleted as requested.

Unimog has permission to be used, we asked vilas
When he said he will fix it, means, clv_vehicles has 5 vehicles and only 3 are ripped from war thunder, that content will be removed, and keep only the allowed content.
Clv_tam has been already deleted
If there is a chance to remove the ban will be nice, we didn’t make it with intentions of making any harm, we understand it, it was wrong and we deleted the ilegal content.

We didn’t hide anything, we widly told we ripped the models, because we didn’t thought that was wrong.

#

@soft egret

#

Hello, I was developing the CLV mod, I apologize if I disturb someone, there was no intention to do something wrong, I did not know, the mod has already been deleted and I apologize, only the content that we develop and the one that we have will be uploaded permission as in the case of the unimog that is not removed from ARMA2 they sent us the 3d model and we "improved"

#

I use google translator, in case something is not understood

soft egret
#

"that’s why he didn’t answer." he has answered, and refused to acknowledge the issues, and said they will just try to hide it but keep using the ripped content.
Thats why he was banned, we have no tolerance for content theft, neither for people refusing to fix issues and openly stating they'll keep using and distributing ripped content

#

Of course, first he refuses to fix the issue and states he will continue doing so. But after being banned he does a full 180Β° turn?

#

In addition he ban-evaded twice. Even one ban evade means permanent ban forever for all accounts.

manic laurel
#

@pale phoenix ↑

pale phoenix
#

@manic laurel If I just read it, thank you, I just want to add that at that time when they eliminated it, it was not there and in the end he said that we were going to delete it from the mod since he could not because I was the one who uploaded it

manic laurel
#

just wanted you not to miss because of lack of notifications πŸ˜‰

muted grove
#

Probably not the best place but I got a quick question, what is the rules on re-uploading mods to the workshop, with the mod authors permission of course. Say someone wants to make a compatibility collection to condense the amount of mods in a unit mod-list.

soft egret
#

You need PROPER permission from the author, and need to be a contributor to the content

rapid cypress
#

might be good to make that a command too btw

#

since it gets asked a lot

muted grove
#

Why is being a contributor a requirement?

soft egret
#

because steam subscriber agreement says so

#

See section 6D

muted grove
#

Ah ok.

manic laurel
#

@chilly silo The 6D part states

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. 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).

I read it as "you need to have all intellectual rights on it", not just permission (the French version helped me here)
what do you think?

muted grove
#

To me that doesn't read like what you're describing tbh.

manic laurel
chilly silo
manic laurel
rapid cypress
#

Oh it'll be good to get a deciding info from valve

muted grove
#

I'm reading that as you need to have the sufficient rights to give valve the right to host it, and as such you'd need the authors permission to do that.

Regarding contributions, that reads as you guarantee it was made by you, or by someone else and that if it's made by someone else you have their permission to give valve permission to distribute it.

manic laurel
rapid cypress
muted grove
#

If only I had access to subscript this

pale phoenix
#

Permission to use and improve the unimog 3d model

vivid wave
#

Did he gave you original p3ds?

pale phoenix
#

The author is vilas, the model was made for arma2, the interior, wheels, textures, canvas were improved to make it better for arma3, this being the only request of the author to make it better

vivid wave
#

Original p3ds. Do you know what it is?

pale phoenix
#

The model you are referring to is the one that opens in the objectbuilder, right?

vivid wave
#

Unbinalized/editable ones

#

Yeah

pale phoenix
#

If we receive that, the same above is the permission of the creator to not only adapt it to arma3 but also improve it

#

with having written permission as above, no further explanations were needed

#

@soft egret @manic laurel @chilly silo

#

this is the case of the unimog, in the case of war thunder models I am trying to delete the mod, for some reason I can't, is there another way to delete it?

faint nacelle
#

you likely need to be the original uploader

pale phoenix
chilly silo
#

Hey all I tried to do is make sure you understood what you had done wrong and what you needed to do to fix it. The moderators here have the responsibility to enforce the policy and community rules. We have the responsibility to follow it.

pale phoenix
pale phoenix
faint nacelle
#

are you sure its not already deleted?

#

perhaps you need to reload the workshop page

pale phoenix
#

I enter my profile and the mod is still (CLV VEHICLES), I put delete it several times and it does not work

pale phoenix
faint nacelle
#

it could be workshop or steam bug, you may need to ask from steams support

rapid cypress
#

Its not available for me anymore

pale phoenix
#

It is not available because I put it in private mode until I can delete it

rapid cypress
#

Ah

earnest mirage
pale phoenix
#

I tried it, it's more from armatools also try, I'll try later, maybe it's an internet problem

chilly silo
#

OK, @manic laurel & @soft egret and others.

Before i hit send on this I want to make sure we are all on the same page about what we are asking for. I believe there are three scenarios being debated about Authors granting 3rd parties permission to distribute via Steam. Are there other relevant scenarios that you can think of that need clarification?

Scenario 1) Original Author grants a 3rd party (not a pre-existing contributor) permission to distribute/reupload a specific piece of work via Steam and other services that require granting of IP rights.
Scenario 2) Original Author releases content on various sites with a Statement that the content is β€œOpen source” and anyone is free to do as they like with it. (no specific license attached)
Scenario 3) Original Author releases content on various sites with a GPL https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.en.html or MIT License https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT or similar open licence.

I'll leave it 24hrs before sending to try and ensure people have the chance to reply.

PLEASE DO NOT DERAIL OR BURY THIS EFFORT WITH USELESS MESSAGES. Let's get some answers we all want.

rapid cypress
chilly silo
rapid cypress
#

πŸ‘

manic laurel
#

does Scenario 1 cover the "reupload of reupload of reupload"?

chilly silo
#

Why would it? If the Uploader has permission from the Author, any reupload or a reupload is still illegal isnt it. No different than any other reupload without permission.

pale phoenix
#

in my case it is understood as a re-raise? if the model that you received with the permission of its author is from arma2 and requires a complete reconfiguration of the config and also modifications and additions to your model as well as to the config

manic laurel
chilly silo
#

Well in that scenario everyone can reupload cant they (in theory atleast)

#

does Steam allow infinite reuploads of the same thing, with no value added
Thats not a legal question its a practical one.

manic laurel
#

hm indeed

dull moon
#

thing is, steam demands rights for e.g. file manipulation and some other stuff that is required for distribution and promotion (item page) which only the original author can give permission to.

chilly silo
spiral cape
#

Bruh we going into some deep questions here lol

chilly silo
#

But we need the answer dont we. But can we stay on topic please

dull moon
#

yes, if stated clearly (written)
"i hereby grand you permission to use my content in your work and also grand you permission to allow steam all needed rights for file distribution and promotion"

#

(example)

#

simply "do what you want" is insufficient

chilly silo
mystic dawn
chilly silo
#

Permission here implies that the author is "donating" content to the 3rd party. Or at least to my mind it does

spiral cape
#

Do you? I believe if you upload something to the internet you should expect there will be copyright infringement and piracy. Something you will never prevent or stop. Companies now use DRM and continue to use it resulting in bad experiences for consumers. But it will never stop the piracy

If the guy is giving permission then it's permission. Also permission to reupload it with tweaked values.

mystic dawn
#

Well if you donate it wouldn't you relinquish your right to have any say over the content. Unless you add something in the initial grant saying you still reserve rights over the content donated.

chilly silo
#

Ie someone get permission to port an object. Modify it and share ownership of it with the author or the author just "gives" the content without restriction etc

mystic dawn
chilly silo
spiral cape
#

Why would people that aren't the owner of it or the person that gave permission worry about something. Like this, if there is no permission given I'd understand but here there is permission

upper wing
#

Imo there is a difference between :

  • allowing someone to do X and Y but not Z
  • donating a full copy, rights included
  • donating the « objectΒ Β» itself, making you loose your right over said property
chilly silo
#

Ok I'm already regretting asking this in such a public space.

dull moon
spark bay
upper wing
chilly silo
#

Yeah @spark bay i'm starting to think that would have been better

rapid cypress
mystic dawn
spiral cape
#

In the message it says he can use the base of his models to reupload it make it Arma 3 compatible with improved quality.

upper wing
#

Open source doesn’t means it’s every one property

rapid cypress
#

But yeah it'd be best to get back to the actual core question, so we can get some real info from valve

dull moon
upper wing
#

It’s still your IP,

dull moon
#

it is different if a creator sets up a contract that transfers all rights to the other party

#

and yes, it must be a contract

#

a legal document

mystic dawn
upper wing
dull moon
#

no. not really. if you want it waterproof, then it is recommended

upper wing
#

Yeah that’s depending on the standard i guess .-.

dull moon
#

not really modding / art related, but you get the idea

upper wing
#

Yup !

chilly silo
# pale phoenix in my case it is understood as a re-raise? if the model that you received with t...

Re-upload is usually something that already exists on the workshop.

In your case you have two separate issues:
War Thunder models. - as you did not have permission or authorisation to port the War Thunder model than it is not allowed to use upload those models to the workshop. You had broken Section 6D in the Steam Agreement https://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/#6

Vilas' Unimogs - Since you have permission to modify them you are only partly covered. It would be best to go back and talk to Vilas and ask him to give you authorisation to upload to Steam.

But that is still a possible problem as depending on how the license is read. Which is why I was asking for people to think of scenarios where the right to upload content is being disputed so we can ask Valve/Steam to clarify for us.

Steam Subscriber Agreement
pale phoenix
fluid elbow
#

Why you guys make it such complicated? πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

Open source = use it, modify it, make it better or make it bader (depends if original author wrote, credit my name for the base he did)... and this could use everyone, thats why its called open source.

If X (author) gives Y (which asked for reupload) the permission (yes you are able/allowed to reupload, but credit me in the description) can Y do a reupload. But a Z (other one) is not allowed to make a reupload, he has to ask X too if he is allowed to make a reupload.

So X has to go the same way like Y did to get permission (yes or no)

soft egret
#

"Open source = use it, modify it, make it better or make it bader"
open source != permission to modify it
Usually yes, not always

pale phoenix
#

I understand that vilas gave permission not only to modify but also to upload that modification for a mod

I mean an open permit

chilly silo
#

And a lot of people seem to think "Freeware" = "Opensource" and it really does not. (damn autocorrect)

echo orchid
#

also, a lot of people do not understand that from a legal pov, uploading to SW means, as the old fart here ( @chilly silo ) said already, sharing IP rights with Valve, and you cannot share something you don't have unless the original author does that with the one who received permissions in the first place

fluid elbow
#

Open source is anyway a nonbinarized file/folder. If its binarized its not open source

echo orchid
#

is not nearly the same thing as - yeah i got permission

cloud breach
dull moon
#

no. everyone can set up a contract

gleaming fable
muted grove
#

Straight up, y'all misunderstand the contribution language, that really only says that if you are not the sole author, or not the author at all, you guarantee to steam that you have secured the neccesary rights from those contributors to grant steam the rights to upload and all the other stuff

#

Reuploading the same mod verbatum is a practical issue, that I'm sure none of us want, what I however want is to make a compat mod collection for my unit so we have just one mod instead of 20 for said compats.

faint nacelle
#

why tho? you make workshop collection and that can easily be distributed and subscribed by your unit

muted grove
#

Yeah, but that causes clutter in the addon list, it can only get so long last I checked.

#

Plus why waste that space on 20 single 0.0015mb mods.

#

When you can combine it all into a single pbo, which is a lot more efficient.

#

My old unit ran into that issue a few years back so we had to make a custom collection mod.

faint nacelle
#

have you ever considered if you need all the mods that need the 20 compatiblity mods?

muted grove
#

My unit has 28 mods, almost a third of that is just compat files.

spark bay
#

Plus why waste that space on 20 single 0.0015mb mods
and repacking the same stuff over and over again and reuploading it doesn't waste space? Sometimes it makes sense to change the point of view for a moment.

faint nacelle
#

also people run 100s of mods too so I hardly think 28 should have any problem

#

and when stuff updates, your combination will break

muted grove
#

Sounds like a me kind of problem then doesn't it.

#

A clutter of mods, that don't need to be separate mods, do nothing but make it look disorganized.

manic laurel
#

you could "freeze" your modset, sure, but then don't complain when there is a fixed bug you encounter

anyway, "disorganised" is not really an argument since the launcher exists.

muted grove
#

Idk if it's fixed but a few years ago, adding too many mods to your modlist would result in the server being unable to read out the bikeys to check for signature matches.

manic laurel
muted grove
#

Either way, it doesn't matter. The issue is that we should be able to upload whatever we want so long as we have the proper permissions to do so and it fits with the content guidelines.

spark bay
#

you can

muted grove
#

Apparently not, because we need to 'be contributors to the original mod' to do so.

spark bay
#

yes

#

sticking to the guidelines

muted grove
#

Which is not what 6D says at all.

spark bay
#

aka eulas

#

it is

#

has been discussed many times

muted grove
#

It only says that if you're not the original author then you guarantee to steam that you have their permission to upload on their behalf.

manic laurel
#

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.
that is the part that is tricky. Anyway, RKSL Rock will ping Steam soon\β„’ to try and make sure of what it says once and for all

#

I read it as "if you are not the owner or one of the owners of the IP, don't upload it"

#

but I will gladly change my mind with evidence

spark bay
#

We will see what valve answers.

muted grove
#

You have to pick it apart. You can't read it as a whole because that's not how it's meant to be read.

manic laurel
#

…there is an and in-between, so I'm pretty sure it is a whole

muted grove
#

Notice how

#

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

#

It's saying that if there are other contributors, you have their permission to give steam the necessary permissions.

#

And in the case of just others contributing, you have secured the same permissions.

manic laurel
#

🀣

#

you represent and warrant that the Workshop Contribution was originally created by you

muted grove
#

(Or)

#

created by you (or,

manic laurel
#

you warrant that you have the permission, period

#

you don't automatically get it

muted grove
#

Yes, and if we have that permission, we don't need no contributor status on the original mod.

spark bay
#

not really

manic laurel
#

which others contributed besides you, by you and the other contributors
so you , or, you + others
again, that's how I read it

spark bay
#

thats what it says

muted grove
#

No, it's "You, others, you + others"

#

It very clearly states that.

manic laurel
#

where?

muted grove
#

You, in the pre parenthesis.

#

Others in the very first segment in the parenthesis

#

then second part, you + others.

#

(or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you

#

by you and the other contributors,

manic laurel
#

besides you = aside from you, or on your side?

muted grove
#

And in the cases of the parenthesis:
and in such case that you have the right to submit such Workshop Contribution on behalf of those other contributors)

manic laurel
#

those other contributors

muted grove
#

besides you, very clearly means besides you.

#

i.e not you.

#

Yes so.

#

If I get permission from the ace team to reupload a compat mod, (all the neccesary permissions)

#

That would fall under me having the other contributors permission.

spark bay
#

Contributions, you represent and warrant that the Workshop Contribution was originally created by ...you and the other contributors

muted grove
#

No

#

That's very much not how that reads

#

you're ignoring a huge portion of the text

faint nacelle
#

isnt besides "in addition"

muted grove
#

(or, with respect to a Workshop Contribution to which others contributed besides you

rapid cypress
#

I wonder if I can still get an arma.io subdomain from dedmen, just to make a website showing a counter of how many times discussions like this have been repeated without adding anything new in this channel sippy

spark bay
#

you can't need to be blue

muted grove
#

It can be in addition, but it's also other than you, separate from you, etc.

manic laurel
rapid cypress
muted grove
#

Elaborate?

spark bay
#

gl lou πŸ™‚

manic laurel
#

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
that part

spark bay
#

I'd rather wait for an official statment.

manic laurel
#

anyway, I'm tired (and it's late) so let's wait 48h yeah

muted grove
#

How don't I? If for example, ace gives me those permissions, then I have them.

manic laurel
#

so ACE gives you ACE authorship? alright

muted grove
#

No?

#

They can give you a license

#

that lets you give steam a license

#

That's all that's legally required.

#

So long as the license that Ace gives you, is sufficient to do what steam needs, it's valid.

#

Anyways, we can wait for Steam to reply before picking up the issue again.

manic laurel
#

but you have to be able to give Steam

the worldwide, non-exclusive right to use, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute

if you are not the owner, ACE saying "sure you can reupload" does not give you that authorship/ownership

#

since you don't manage ACE rights, you can't upload it - again, that's how I read it

muted grove
#

It's really quite simple, ace could tell me "you have a license to give steam the worldwide, non-exclusive right to use, reproduce, modify, create derivative works from, distribute[...]"

manic laurel
#

yeah
but they don't

muted grove
#

That's a completely separate issue.

#

Has no impact on this issue.

manic laurel
#

as long as they don't, you can't πŸ€·β€β™‚οΈ

muted grove
#

This issue assumes you have the neccesary rights.

manic laurel
#

that's as simple as that!

muted grove
#

So, if I secure the actual license, then I can reupload, yes?

manic laurel
muted grove
#

Then why is this an issue?

manic laurel
manic laurel
# muted grove Then why is this an issue?

we are talking about people reuploading without permission or just having the "sure you can reupload" from e.g ACE - that doesn't give rights management permission, that's it

muted grove
#

"Sure you can reupload" just needs to be a bit more drawn out.

manic laurel
#

no, as, again, they would have to give you full powers over ACE license - which they won't

random marsh
#

The license ACE operates under allows you to make a fork of ACE and distribute it under the same license. You'd then become a contributor to that fork of ACE, allowing you to "reeupload" your new version of ACE, granted you made significant changes that couldn't just be a patch. Correct?

manic laurel
muted grove
#

@manic laurel That's a straight up misinterpretation of how licensing works.

manic laurel
muted grove
#

Just because you get a license, to give steam a license to do what they need, doesn't mean you gain ownership of the mod. Anyways, let's wait for steam to clarify.

sour edge
#

I swear to god. Steam if f@cking worthless. @worthy pond you’re going to have to email steam. They are telling me your workshop item sangin post dates the content that was uploaded by the dude who doesn’t have permission to upload sangin so they won’t do anything about it

chilly silo
paper prawn
#

They have conditions on that, the simplest of which - naming it so no one thinks it is the ACE 3 mod - is so often ignored, but probably by people who didn't ask for permission first anyway...

fluid elbow
muted grove
#

Basically what I want to do yeah. Just the compats tho.

vivid wave
outer hamlet
#

Question; I see many mods copying Niarms animations and models in other mods like CUP and RHS, and I noticed on their page they have a APL-SA license, does that mean anyone can copy their models and animations and add to their mod? if so at what extent?

tropic python
vivid wave
#

AFAIK NIArms made her assets open-source

fluid elbow
# muted grove Basically what I want to do yeah. Just the compats tho.

Im not okey with such behaviour.. I mean its other's work you edit.

If such authors give permission its okey but im sure not everyone will do.

And it makes no sense if their stuff gets updated by them, while you dont subscribe it anymore you will not notice it.. thats point 1

The other point is, such workflow will not work just with a compatible patch, and with such patch you need to subscribe anyway.. makes no sense at all for me..

Also my mod as example is APL-ND so no derrivates at all.. dont know under which license other people do their stuff but easiest way and thats why such workshop exists, subscribe what you need for your Op's and for your unit..

outer hamlet
vivid wave
#

Of course under her permission, it's okay, I guess? I don't say this is her official answer or 100% legit something. Use it in your common sense/responsibility of course

outer hamlet
#

Its because big mods like CUP and RHS do that but I was not really sure if I could also do that, and if im not mistaken, I also need to make my mod APL-SA but RHS only lets specific PBOs under that license, is it fair as well?

vivid wave
#

Seems fair for me

#

But if in doubt, ask someone who has better knowledge

outer hamlet
#

Because, some mods I see have a disclaimer that does not allow any modification even when they are using a APL-SA mod and they do not put their mod under the same license

vivid wave
#

Β―_(ツ)_/Β―

fluid jewel
vivid wave
#

Well some says it's identical and tried to hide the fact it's from A3, so I'm not really sure about it. Bohemians should have its original file so could compare if it's 1:1

fluid jewel
#

actually I have certain access to one of those market sites that I can check that very easily

#

yeah looking at the textures they are very different

#

should I provide more specific proof? though I wouldn't want to just post it here

vivid wave
#

I honestly don't think so. UVs can be repacked

unknown.png
#

There're some different parts than UVs, tho

fluid jewel
#

you can see there on the left how that corner part is just different

#

also I kinda doubt someone would bother repacking and retexturing a model so completely

vivid wave
#

That's actually the point. I'm not 100% sure this is black or white

fluid jewel
#

yeah this is weird actually

tulip nexus
fluid jewel
#

some parts look oddly similar

#

either he took a A3 model, re-UV'd it and retextured it from scratch, or it's just a coincidence that the UVs are kinda similar

#

I'm leaning more to the coincidence side because they are just different enough

reef gust
#

people have done that the best way to check is to compare the two models

#

but there have been instances of people taking a model, redoing the uv, and making a new texture and claiming it as their own. it does make it slightly more difficult to track down

fluid jewel
#

someone who has access to BI models would have to check that then

manic laurel
fluid elbow
fluid jewel
#

it is very similar, but if you overlay the two the contours and edges are a bit different

#

that's also just a logical way to UV a shape like that

#

often times if you have good modelers, if they both model and UV the same shape, they can look very similar

#

I think the only way to be sure one way or the other here, is to compare the actual geometry

vivid wave
#

Oddly similar, oddly different than original

fluid elbow
#

By the way, got some bigger fishes for BI

@manic laurel
@soft egret

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ImQMtXZzoPo

https://p3dm.ru/files/auto/freight/5831-hemtt-truck-.html

At p3dm are mostly all Arma vehicles to download.. you may check it and whats to do against

Screenshot_20210429-102158_Samsung_Internet.jpg
YouTube
KILLER BOTS
Battlefield 2 mod Arma 3 vehicles BTR-K Kamysh and MSE-3 Marid Down...

I am not the author of models Arma 3: BTR-K Kamysh, MSE-3 Marid and ZSU-39 Tigris. Download link: http://www.mediafire.com/file/nuqrx8dexo29n5e/batter+Arma+3.zip/file
You need to register batter_CAST_MSE, batter_btrkx and batter_zsu39x on the map. Downloaded from here: https://tieba.baidu.com/p/6247676744?pid=127425309390&cid=0#127425309390
3d m...

β–Ά Play video
Pack 3D models
HEMTT truck
muted grove
#

@vivid wave That's almost certainly not remotely even derived from the Arma 3 vest.

soft egret
soft egret
soft egret
vivid wave
#

Am I good to go without confirm 100% it is?

soft egret
soft egret
tulip nexus
#

Comparing the UV of the Arma 3 vest to the wireframe of the Artsation vest, there are a lot of topological similarities actually. But the one on Artstation does have a number of differences. The two LPs are not the same but do appear to be derived from the same high-poly source, so I wouldn't be surprised if maybe the guy was hired as an external artist for the Marksman DLC to make that vest

soft egret
earnest mirage
#

keep in mind that there are also a crap ton of Ace variants ACEX, ACE 3 older Backups of ACE

vivid wave
#

Email sent

storm veldt
# soft egret E-Mail in channel description

Apologies for the ping, but I seem to recall there being an issue with the p3dm site in the past distributing Arma models. It is also blatantly apparent that they just hid the entries on their site instead of actually deleting it if I am reading the YT link correctly. Will send an email as well with three additional links but I do not know if there are any more links given they hid the entries. 😦

echo orchid
#

@outer hamlet
RHS doesn't take stuff from other people's mods. We have people who work with us, including @heady frigate in this particular case.
We also have an agreement between people who donate stuff to us, and ourselves, so everyone within RHS shares their IP with RHS for the A3 files formats for a very specific purpose. It took us almost a year to track down everyone who contributed to RHS along the way even before we made the first RHS upload to Steam Workshop.