#ip_rights_violations

1 messages · Page 71 of 1

night kiln
#

no issues here, i got pulled from a conversation from an entirely different discord so I was interested in why

manic laurel
night kiln
#

i am well aware, which is why i cleared everything up, thank you. 😋

sour lava
#

Not sure what's exactly happenned, but if some1 has "stolen" stuff some of you have created and that "bandit" will not take it down, then can't you just inform Steam about it?

manic laurel
fluid jewel
stiff jasper
#

now I understand why it was said it is both DynaSound and JSRS compatibile Hmm

fluid jewel
#

first clue was when I loaded the mod up to check it out how it compares to JSRS and saw an error pop up that mentioned JSRS

#

he didn't even package JSRS correctly

stiff jasper
#

only suppressors sound cool (but it is the same sound as JSRS), everything else is either worse than vanilla or just the same

faint nacelle
#

any kind of changes could also be done with just simple config patch mod and required addons

#

these repacks are just sloppy

stiff jasper
#

repacks are easier than reading a whole one page of biki and writing the config by yourself, because you just copypaste a pbo wedoalittle

pliant oar
carmine folio
#

Ok so I wanna make a bsg mod

#

Probably would include a landable Battlestar

#

And I want to know if I do it will I get my soul sucked out by universal

#

And if so, how do I get around that

echo orchid
#

you contact universal

earnest mirage
#

Better to ask for permission First...
Companies don't have mercy

faint nacelle
#

is this honestly real question or are you just trolling

upper wing
#

if you contact universal and they give you the green light then you're all good
if they say no, they say no, no going around their IP protection for your own sake c:

carmine folio
carmine folio
faint nacelle
#

it has not come up before but due to timing and wording it did not sound real.

#

and no it would not be alright

#

also due to technical limitations of the engine most of what you wanted to make there is impossible

hushed niche
carmine folio
#

Just something I can land on

faint nacelle
#

Wording of your previous post gave different impression. Anyways, not the topic of this channel.

hallow yew
#

Can I get unbanned from the Arma community hub?

manic laurel
hallow yew
#

um

#

2 days ago

#

ripped mods lol

manic laurel
#

hahaha

hallow yew
#

is that a yes?

manic laurel
#

no, you said lol

hallow yew
#

bummer

jovial turtle
#

his case was pretty convincing ngl

hallow yew
#

this guy gets it

dull moon
#

ripped mods lol
you're lucky it's just a ban

faint nacelle
carmine folio
#

What are ripped mods

manic laurel
#

here it is the act of taking a model from another game (without permission of course) and porting it into Arma (without permission of course)

carmine folio
#

O

dull moon
#

and, taking it from one arma mod to put it into another arma mod (also without permission)

sour lava
manic laurel
#

"lol".

sour lava
#

Never thought stealing (or a fraud?) would be that fun. Good for him. Bad for his victims 😢

stiff jasper
#

he's a Robin Hood

tired spade
#

Is that a Laugh Out Loud or My hands are up - Don't shoot? 🤔

manic laurel
#

we don't know! \o/

carmine folio
#

people are mad that bohemia sets the rules for their mods

#

for some reason

echo orchid
#

it isn't their mods to begin with

half cosmos
manic laurel
#

stealing back from thieves, yes
stealing for the sake of stealing, come on…

jovial turtle
#

very despicable thing to do

earnest mirage
#

Theft is theft, No Matter what has been stolen

charred basalt
#

@long idol I would recommend you remove this modpack, it contains many mods that do NOT allow re upload to the workshop such as Zeus enhanced, backpack on chest, grad trenches, immersion cigs (i think?), Breaching Charge, there is also a mod signed by bad benson [Enhanced movement just checked] which i know for a fact he does not want re - uploads

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2511368728 - link to mod pack
https://prnt.sc/1ov1dsp - proof
https://prnt.sc/1ov1np4 - proof 2
https://prnt.sc/1ov1spv - 3
https://prnt.sc/1ov1ytx - 4

#

This also means contacting my friend to get his mod is also the wrong thing to do just a FYI

dull moon
#

grad trenches license (snippet):

    circumstances other than the ones described in this license. If your granny
    is about to die because you can’t reupload, you better start measuring the
    coffin.```
#

@abstract vapor and @weak schooner might want to have a word with you

weak schooner
charred basalt
weak schooner
#

Oh yeah. Thanks! Still don’t get why people still do that. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

#

I thought audio was talking about the macabre humor in our license 😇

long idol
#

Oops

#

Sorry, and thanks for the heads up, I'll be sure to delete said mods when I get home

manic laurel
long idol
#

To pack it so that Arma doesn't have to load too many mod(s)

sinful pivot
long idol
#

Oh well

long idol
#

Anyways thanks for letting me know, I might take some time since I'm not home but I'll be sure to take the mentioned mods down

manic laurel
charred basalt
long idol
long idol
#

Again sorry and thanks for letting me know

soft egret
#

It explicitly tells you that in a popup message when you try to upload a mod, impossible to miss and not know

long idol
#

👍

carmine folio
#

Bruh this guy is L ing me after I said bohemia has their own choices when it comes to the workshop

#

And that even if a 3 year old screenshot says otherwise, they still cant use 'private' clothing

manic laurel
#

huh… okay, I guess?

#

I am not sure this is the channel's topic though ;-)

carmine folio
#

Nah it was about ripped modern warfare shit

#

Couldn't get the pack though

manic laurel
#

if people are giving you poop you can direct them here so we can answer their questions.

faint nacelle
#

@gloomy scaffold this is yours? please remove your reuploads.

gloomy scaffold
#

Uh what map didn't we get permission for?

#

I had two of my guys go ahead and ask

#

each author for their terrains

manic laurel
dull moon
#

same for @stable ferry

latent mesa
#

Nope, why

dull moon
#

see above

manic laurel
#

this ↑ (Outshadow) guy says his guys asked author guys for reuploads, and got all the permissions

dull moon
#

i'm pretty sure G.O.S terrains are also out of scope

#

namalsk, napf and esserker
also a nope

#

just...
take that whole thing down

gloomy scaffold
faint nacelle
#

you probably want to have a serious talk with your friends

#

about being idiots

dull moon
#

why repacking all this in the first place??

manic laurel
#

like, now @gloomy scaffold

gloomy scaffold
#

I am doing it rn

torpid hull
#

LOL

manic laurel
#

If you do not want your map in the mappack then please contact Outshadow by either discord or steam account. Thank you!
also tells me you were not exactly super asking 😬

a reupload is a no-go, unless it is allowed by the author, not the other way around. Thanks

stable ferry
#

👀

gloomy scaffold
#

I am getting my guys to get actual photo proof of each person that gave us approval. Would that be suffice to put it back up then?

#

I am taking it down rn but after proof then it's fine correct?

dull moon
#

no

faint nacelle
#

have you heard of Steam collections

dull moon
#

just

#

don't

manic laurel
#

use collections, get the up-to-date versions, profit

stable ferry
#

I don't think a comment on a workshop page that was not responded to counts as "permission". 😬

dull moon
#

lol

manic laurel
gloomy scaffold
#

👍

river skiff
#

Didn't even know they couldn't do this stuff

sinful pivot
# manic laurel use collections, get the up-to-date versions, profit

On the topic of this, cause it's the only real reason I believe is valid for re-uploading. If you want a specific version, or just don't want to leave you group vulnerable to the dreaded 5gb mod update on game night, how else are you meant to stop that without getting everyone in a group to turn off all auto updates? Can you even turn off auto updates for workshop items?

faint nacelle
#

as harsh as it sounds, your inconvenience does not warrant reuploads. On the contrary you cause trouble for the mod maker when you have wrong version of the mods in use and your setup breaks in future and you start asking "wy tis no worky"

#

its up to the mod maker to allow or not allow reuploads

sinful pivot
#

I get the inconvenience that mod makers who get asked about issues that are fixed in future versions. Our group maintains an A3sync repo for that very purpose and the first thing we do if a mod is breaking is see if an update has fixed it. Often it does, but also often changes made are conflicting our break in other, worse ways.
It is an awkward gap in functionality with steam in general

faint nacelle
#

That is the nature of mods. not all of them are always going to work and be compatible. But it is unreasonable to even expect otherwise since mod makers work on their own projects and visions.

Its a simple thing most mod makers ask (some dont mind or care), that their version is used and others are not reuploaded so that they can work on their mods in peace. Mod makers do not own the users anything, they do the mods as hobbies and we have already lost way too many makers to the ignorance of users who cant find it in themselves to respect this.

sinful pivot
#

It was at no point did I say anything to the contrary of that. My issue does not lie with the unreasonable request that mod makers do more than they want or make their work compatible with other mods, any more than they want to. The issue I have lies in the very idea of respecting that mindset, and moreso an issue with steam making it difficult to respect it without having to completely circumvent steam or authors wishes entirely.

manic laurel
#

a local copy can be made and the launcher used to use it @sinful pivot 🙂

soft egret
soft egret
scarlet patrol
#

hey question
can you pay someone to teach you how to import stuff in the game?
or does that count under the same rule about not monetizing arma tools?

manic laurel
#

I think the latter

soft egret
#

The teacher would be making money by using the Arma tools, which they don't allow

#

The Licensor also specifically prohibits the use of the Program for other purpose than designing, developing, testing, and producing non-commercial game content for computer games developed by the Licensor only.

Teaching not allowed 😄

Mainly
"you are not entitled to:"

Exploit the Program or any of its parts for any commercial purpose

scarlet patrol
soft egret
#

eh

#

You want to know a BI dev with a discord account?

scarlet patrol
#

oh I don't
but someone claims he did to justify doing what I asked before
which I highly doubt happened

scarlet patrol
soft egret
#

most, not all

scarlet patrol
#

so no way to know if ecco is a real dev?

soft egret
#

Ah, I didn't understand your question. A bi dev called "acco".. or "ecco"? what now?

scarlet patrol
#

acco my b

soft egret
#

There's no acco on the official nor unofficial BI discords and I never heard that nickname internally

scarlet patrol
#

sounds good
it would have been an issue only if it was real
because in that case he'd be giving false info to people

wary hollow
#

There is a guy named Ondra on the DC who has acco as the orignal nickname though. Who appears to be from BI according to the CSLA discord and IIRC this discord too.

soft egret
#

oh

#

Discord search didn't find him 😁
yeah well then

scarlet patrol
soft egret
#

I just got a screenshot of the conversation. They didn't say "yes you can" they said "I think"
I'll ask legal for clarification

#

Legal is not online right now.
But I have this related question from a while ago

slack_Dk4Fi4qjTB.png
#

I think that basically answers your question?
Or do you want me to specifically re-ask about directly being paid to teach others.

This question already answers paid teaching videos, so I think the answer is already clear?

scarlet patrol
#

I'm not the one that needs convincing

#

so yeah sounds good to me

delicate hamlet
soft egret
#

There was a very similar mod months ago.. with ripped warthunder models think_turtle
But this one atleast has different models.
Best way would be to report it to Gajin

delicate hamlet
#

would you believe me that it is from the exact same guys?

soft egret
#

I don't remember the guys of the last one

#

You can reach gajin at legals@gaijinent.com

delicate hamlet
#

thanks.

#

it is indeed from the same guys. CLV mods are "managed" by user Flyingtarta and Rafastein who btw are not in this discord anymore prob because of ban. Last time they basically admitted ripping from wt too and decided to take down the mods. This time it looks they are going legit since their discord shows "wip models" but I cant actually confirm or deny this assets are ripped too.

soft egret
#

Flyingtarta
Ah yeah that guy was already banned 4 times on here, for content theft. Specifically ripping from war thunder

#

@pale phoenix do you have any relation to that?

final lagoon
pale phoenix
final lagoon
# soft egret You can reach gajin at `legals@gaijinent.com `

On the initial stages of the mod we did try contacting that mail address several times, but we never had any response. So adding the response from the admins here AND the fact that Gaijin never gave us a response, we decided on starting again 😛

soft egret
#

Ah you were involved in the last chatter about ripped war thunder models and wanted to remove them all.
Do these originate from your team too?

final lagoon
#

Yup

soft egret
#

Sorry I'm replying before i read the latest messages

#

These models don't seem to be uploaded by your team though?
Are they from a third party?
Are they the old ripped warthunder models or is it a new mod with no ripped content?

final lagoon
#

All the available CLV mods on Rafastein's workshop are made by us. There are no assets from WT anymore.

pale phoenix
soft egret
final lagoon
#

Yes, his steam name is El Polaco.

soft egret
#

Ahh, okey.

#

Thanks then.
@delicate hamlet if you get a reply from ganjin saying that some of their stuff is in there please notify me

delicate hamlet
#

sure thing, if they reply I'll let you know.

delicate hamlet
dull moon
#

However, we cannot guarantee that this mod will not receive a DMCA infringement notice, and if the mod is taken down, we will find a way to re-upload it. Please remember to make a backup. If you like it, we would really appreciate it if you could give us a thumbs up. Thank you

charred basalt
#

Cheeky

faint nacelle
#

maybe this is one of those lose workshop privilege situations

half cosmos
#

it's just a china moment

broken hornet
#

Stupid question, but for a mod do you need to include a license file in the distribution or is stating the license on the workshop page sufficient?

manic laurel
steady hatch
#

The strict one?

manic laurel
#

the strictest one, as in "no touchy/no repro/no nothing"

broken hornet
#

if i dont need to include a file that works fine

stiff jasper
#

well you can just write "this mod is under APL-ND license" in the steam description and give a link to external website and it would be enough

manic laurel
#

it's better for people to not say "I didn't know!" but nothing is mandatory yep

broken hornet
#

thats what I did so far, I just noticed other mods like ace include the actual license as a file

stiff jasper
#

it's just creators will to do so, also it's included because the code is developed through GitHub and it has some slightly different rules

coral torrent
manic laurel
sour lava
soft egret
#

Thats copyright in general

sour lava
#

In school we learned somehing about CC but for me this is always been clear: If you don't know if you are allowed to publish, you do NOT publish. Ever.

soft egret
#

exactly

sour lava
#

Too bad there's ppl in every scene (and in everywhere in real life too) who say "Nah, it's so little thing. Nobody cares."

brisk nexus
#

anzus.life, you love to see it

manic laurel
#

haaah, thank you.

brisk nexus
#

I should be able to make my workshop work not be able to be used by anzus.life right?

#

like if i release it on a open source license but say everybody but anzus.life can use it

manic laurel
#

license can exclude people yes

#

it obviously won't prevent them from trying to use it

brisk nexus
#

kk thanks

supple forge
cedar flint
vocal patio
#

RBC mods has stuff from HLC, VSM, DeltaHawk and KA

cedar flint
limpid veldt
#

idk if this is the right place to ask but im looking at the licensed data licenses. and im confused on DPL and APL, almost besides adpl-sa every download has DPL and APL, does that mean that can be used in dayz and arma? someone also told me APL turned in ADPL some time ago

stiff jasper
limpid veldt
#

i was reading off the wiki

#

but that answers that

stiff jasper
#

each license says that you can't transfer the content between games made by BI unless you're the author/rightful owner, so no moving Arma workshop mods to DayZ and vice-versa

limpid veldt
#

im talking about the arma licensed data, they have APL and DPL on the same downloads

stiff jasper
#

oh right, missed that part

soft egret
#

someone also told me APL turned in ADPL some time ago
no it didn't. A new license was created and lots of content re-released under that license.
APL content is NOT ADPL content. You CANNOT use APL content in DayZ.

almost besides adpl-sa every download has DPL and APL, does that mean that can be used in dayz and arma?
There is a difference between SA and not SA.

DPL and APL on the same mod would basically be a ADPL license, so you can use it in DayZ and Arma yes.
But a ADPL license doesn't exist, only a ADPL-SA.
Thats why for things that BI doesn't want the -SA for, they list both DPL and APL seperately.

worldly meteor
# 
Mods included:
____________________________________________
Actions:

Advanced urban repeling
Advanced repeling
Dual Arms
Swim Faster
Advanced Towing
Advanced Sling Loading
Enhanced Movement
Helo Dust Kick up
Ladder Climb x3
---------------------------------
Weapons:

Anti-Materiel Rifle
StarStreak Shoulder Launcher
-----------------------------------------------------------
Military Vehicles:

Boeing CH-47F V1.17
X66-Mammoth Tank
HMCS
Ships
Subs
Naval weapons
Arty
Nuke
Fight For Freedom!
UH-60 pack
Secret Weapons
----------------------------------
Uniform:

TRYK Uniforms
----------------------------------
CARS:

Audi R8
Dodge Demon
Dodge 1500/2500
Ferrari 458
Ferrari LaFerrari
Ford Mustang
Ford Raptor
Hummer H1
Koenigsegg Agera
Lamborghini Aventador
Mercedes-Benz E63S
Pagani Huayra
Nissian GTR
Bugatti veyron
Porsche 918 Spyder
Lykan Hypersport
Can-am ATV
LAMBORGHINI MILLENIO CONCEPT CAR
FORD VELOCIRAPTOR HENNESSEY
Renault RS01 GENDARMERIE
6 x 6 All Terrain Vehicle
----------------------------------
#

Is this OC or just a rip of other people's mods?

vivid wave
#

Full of rips

worldly meteor
#

I hate people who do this. Like collections on Steam exist for a reason. Shit like this just means that you have people downloading heaps of gigs of mods they already have. And also fucks over the actual devs of those mods.

#

Hopefully you all can DMCA this or some shit.

vivid wave
#

Ever met one who complains why my Mod is not working. He uses pirated Mod

#

Logic.

worldly meteor
#

Nevermind, I just read that Firewill doesn't give a shit about what people do with his mods.

pseudo cliff
sudden hare
echo orchid
stiff jasper
#

"compressing" the mod list means nothing, arma loads the same and has same errors

random marsh
#

It makes life easier for server admins. Packaging multiple mods together whenever possible is a good practice.

soft egret
#

wuht?

#

Opposite.
Packaging mods together makes updating them harder.
Will break the mod information in Arma Launcher so your players cannot simply enable your modset

dull moon
#

it also causes conflicts if an outdated repack runs along an up do date original

manic laurel
#

and makes you download twice 😬

carmine folio
#

I can see it being easier especially on Linux servers. Obviously it's not a valid reason to repack mods.

whole fjord
#

Mobile game battle warship using Somalian pirate Arma3 footage for some reason

soft egret
#

Please report to the email in channel description

hushed niche
faint nacelle
#

ripped assets == near 0 development cost => crappy game that is not really playable => add microstransactions to leech money from gullible users AND/OR add data miners to get data you can sell to someone AND/OR place adds for near free revenue

vivid wave
#

Modpack which pirates a lot of third party Mods, will never never never never never, make one's life easier. Period.

compact stump
#

As if the appearance and character movement didnt give it away, then they show the liberty, something unquestionably unique to arma 3

random marsh
vivid wave
#

No. There's no case by case situation, it always is BAD to maintain/for player/for Mod makers. Since Workshop can update Mods automatically, you simply doing a worse workaround

random marsh
#

Yes. Certain small mods that do not update often or at all that allows reuploading in their license are the ones my unit puts into a single package. Instead of having to deal with several small mods it's just one medium sized one, especially if you run different modsets.

dull moon
#

use workshop collections ¯_(ツ)_/¯

#

ez pz, lemon squeezy

random marsh
#

Whatever floats your boat

echo orchid
random marsh
vivid wave
#

That fact is completely false. It never be true. If you love to run into a problem go for it. We have a hammer for you.

stiff jasper
random marsh
random marsh
echo orchid
stiff jasper
#

I'm using FASTER on my bare metal and never had any issue with simply downloading mods and using mod presets, I can't imagine how bad the server or its admin must be to pack multiple mods into one and make people download the same things again.

random marsh
stiff jasper
#

I'm not going into that discussion again, you'll get what you ask for ¯_(ツ)_/¯

soft egret
#

This is a horse that has been beaten many times.
Ah yeah. @kind sand did you ever get a reply from Valve? Its been two months

carmine folio
vivid wave
#

Reuploading Mods just offer disbenefit for EVERYONE.
For the uploader (the pirate), it is an unneccessary work. Also it is a theft.
For the original uploader, get stolen, is obviously bad for the author.
For the users, the Mod is out of the support anymore, so can't get any updates if the pirate don't. Which is a completely nonsense inconvinience.
Also this leads to some issues which caused by the version mismatch.

Ever heard that, some complains that one of my Mod doesn't work properly. Because he uses a stolen one and version mismatch of the required Mod.

Think about it. Is there any superiority on steal a Mod and pack into a Modpack? Never.

carmine folio
#

Can you even read?

vivid wave
#

Read what?

carmine folio
#

How is it a theft if the uploader has got the permission?

carmine folio
# vivid wave Reuploading Mods just offer disbenefit for EVERYONE. For the uploader (the pirat...

"For the uploader (the pirate), it is an unnecessary work. Also it is a theft." If it makes it easier for him it's not unnecessary, also not a theft.
"For the original uploader, get stolen, is obviously bad for the author." - Since it doesn't get stolen this also doesn't apply.
"For the users, the Mod is out of the support anymore, so can't get any updates if the pirate don't." - If someone went through the effort of packing the mods together to use them why would he not update it?

manic laurel
#

now, why is it a bad thing?

  • search field rendered useless (10k+ reuploads, no thanks)
  • people downloading 5 times the same thing for one server uses one WS item, another uses another (same item, different upload)
  • people complaining to the author about an obsolete, non-updated version of his creation (that's on him for allowing it)

so that's it, the only potentially viable reason I could see is for everyone to have the same version of a thing and not risking an update 10 minutes before a game

#

@carmine folio just to be clear, reuploading the exact same thing and packing it with other stuff are two different things 🙂

thorn iron
manic laurel
thorn iron
#

i hope so because people that have asked for genuine permission to re-upload something shouldnt be called "pirates" or be told by other users here they will be banned when they have tried to follow the rules

#

theres plenty of rippers and rule breakers we shouldnt jump down the throats of those looking to go right way

coral torrent
#

99% of the reuploads/repackages found on the workshop are without permission, because as a mod author it is not very clever to give such permission ever. That is why we will always assume the default case of doing it without permission.

manic laurel
thorn iron
faint nacelle
#

Big quantity of those people saying they have permission do not actually have it. Mod makers would like to concentrate on the making of stuff instead of this crap. Dont you start blaming the makers for being tired of this. Thats just wrong.

thorn iron
# faint nacelle Big quantity of those people saying they have permission do not actually have it...

where did i blame mod makers? where did i said they are not allowed to be tired of this? thats what happens on this discord, words get twisted and people pile on. Being respectable to people doesnt go out the window because some people in the community are bad eggs. The guy said he followed the licences of the mods and had permission, just because a lot of people lie doesnt mean he is instantly a liar.

manic laurel
#

correct.

#

also note that "I had a friend ask for permission" also reeks of lie, so there are two aspects of the same coin

thorn iron
#

yes thats an instant red flag but the person above didnt say that he said he had permission and followed the licences of the mods, he also acknowledged that re-uploading without permission was wrong and against the rules

manic laurel
#

then we are not talking about that case? 🤨 I am not sure to follow

thorn iron
manic laurel
#

he said so, so nothing will happen
it would have been different if he said e.g "I do it anyway because it's easier for me"

unknown.png
#

and, unless I am wrong, @random marsh is still here 😃

thorn iron
#

the problem is he didnt say "I do it anyway because it's easier for me" and people were still hostile towards him and a moderator indirectly said he was a "pirate"

manic laurel
#

yep
I believe something has been lost in translation; because POLPOX doesn't accuse wrongly, and he also knows to shoot on sight
so I guess something went wrong in the process

#

I believe he mentioned a general "usual reuploader" and not aglos himself

carmine folio
#

"That fact is completely false. It never be true. If you love to run into a problem go for it. We have a hammer for YOU."

thorn iron
#

i could see wires getting crossed if there was a translation issue, but allowing users like @stiff jasper to make blind accusations and threats shouldnt be allowed

stiff jasper
#

why am I being pinged and stop putting your fiction into my science.

manic laurel
#

let's not turn this into a dramafest nor a fight, let's remember the channel's topic.

vivid wave
#

I should apology that my wordings in English is not really well to express what I think about this, but hey

#

How come someone likes to do an unnecessary job?

#

That's what I still don't understand yet

thorn iron
manic laurel
# thorn iron im sorry but i genuinely dont know what you're asking

I think the question is "why do people think packing multiple mods at once is easier than having a modlist in the launcher"

pros:

  • 1 line in the launcher
  • everyone has the same version without surprise update

cons:

  • everything else

now, why is it a bad thing?

  • search field rendered useless (10k+ reuploads, no thanks)
  • people downloading 5 times the same thing for one server uses one WS item, another uses another (same item, different upload)
  • people complaining to the author about an obsolete, non-updated version of his creation (that's on him for allowing it)

so that's it, the only potentially viable reason I could see is for everyone to have the same version of a thing and not risking an update 10 minutes before a game

fallen gale
manic laurel
#

Okay, I think we solved the other issue.

for "why (legally) repack", let's go #offtopic_arma thanks

vivid wave
#

I know pointless thing can be done by someone. Point is, it is likely to get illegal (along with the fact that it is a pointless effort)

#

Anyways what Lou said is true

thorn iron
#

but its legal and feelings/opinions dont matter

manic laurel
random marsh
kind sand
void rapids
manic laurel
dry quest
manic laurel
#

I forgot to mention in the video to credit the developers of ACE3 for the inspiration and UI icons for the new EMS UI. It will be changed to be different before release.
(from the description)
lul ^^

stiff jasper
leaden cipher
#

From their discord 😎

#

And reading a bit on their discord the ACE devs are pointing out that they need to follow the licence that can be found on the ace github.

faint nacelle
#

👍

leaden cipher
#

I'll just tag @red haven to read up here as he is also in that discord 😉

red haven
#

As you noticed, I already wrote the dev. We only have an issue with the icons being taken straight from ACE3, they can copy the layout. We won't take action if they changed the icons when this update is released.

#

Thanks for the heads up though!

near vapor
#

Should I be reporting Disney IP that I see on Arma's Steam workshop?

charred basalt
stiff jasper
random marsh
charred basalt
#

Oh okay thanks for the clarification

soft egret
#

Its a copyright violation to take others stuff without permission, so yes

#

I assumed anything not actually copyrighted was considered fair game / public domain
Nono opposite, you automatically own the copyright to your own content

#

I think you are mixing that up with Trademarks or Patents, you have to apply for a Trademark.
But copyright you get automatically

#

That is a optional extra, not required

molten kraken
#

I don't understand, isn't copyright the process behind this symbol " ©️ "?

soft egret
soft egret
dull moon
#

if no license is attached, the strictest of all applies.
a creator has to mark his creation explicitly as copyright free in a license, or it will not be copyright free.

#

as soon as something is created, it is copyright protected

soft egret
#

Your "registration" thing is a US specific thing

#

Your content is copyright protected and you can go to court about it if you wish.
No need to register anything

molten kraken
soft egret
#

IF you are in the US, and IF you want to start a lawsuit

#

DMCA protects you either way, doesn't care about registration.
If you want to sue someone for damages then maybe

#

but I'd say its hard to sue for damages when someone stole your free mod and didn't make any money with it

#

And a copyright violation

#

within a framework for taking legal action
A DMCA is a legal action afaik

dull moon
#

it is, and also the first step in a legal case before court

soft egret
#

Just because specifically US doesn't want to waste the time to process a lawsuit over something that has not enough monetary value to the creator to officially register it, doesn't mean its not illegal.

dull moon
#

even if no copyright is registered, if it comes to a case and the original creator can proof the creation is his, it stands as registered

soft egret
#

It is.
Its called a "derivative".
Modifying someone elses content doesn't make the result yours.
Your modifications are yours, but the original you modified is still owned by someone else

#

Thats why licenses are so important in open source.
You cannot safely take anything and modify it unless it has a license that specifically permits you to do it, or the author specifically permits you to do it (gives you a license)

#

If the author says "yeah I know, I don't care" then good for you. But he can at any point in time say "take all my stuff out now."

Then you are left with your own modifications, but they'll be mostly useless without the original

#

Everything in your mod is an unprotected derivative of someone else's copyrighted material
Its not if you made it yourself

#

which leads me to question whether your mod itself is in any way protected from being used without license.
If you made your mod yourself, its your copyright

#

Making your own 3D model and Texture is still your own 3D model and Texture. No matter if you use it in a Arma mod or sell it online on some 3D Model website. Its yours

#

Writing your own script is still your creative work, your copyright protected work.
No matter if its a script for a game, or a book you wrote, or a movie script.

#

when you've literally been making edits/additions to a game you didn't create.
Again.

Your modifications are yours, but the original you modified is still owned by someone else

If your mod adds new characters and vehicles and weapons. These are all yours.
Just because they can be used in a game doesn't mean thats not your content

#

when they, so far, appear to be legally unprotected derivatives based on other copyrights.

I don't understand your thinking.
On one hand you said "its all derivative so the game company owns it" and then right behind it you say "noone owns it and its unprotected"
That doesn't make sense

#

Hundreds of times. DMCA's a filed every few days at minimum

#

my admittedly light research suggests that mods to existing work are not distinctly separate, protected works, and that the original copyright holder (the game company) can nuke the mods at will if desired

#

As I said.
Content you create == yours.

If you paint a painting, its yours.
Just because you put it in a frame so it fits neatly in a art gallery, doesn't mean its not your painting anymore.

#

I have the right to prevent you from using my content.
You can remove or replace all my content and continue your project and i have no right to stop you if you're not taking anything thats mine

low pebble
#

And this ^ is the case even outside of the US.

#

If you take my stuff, use it without permission for something or to base it off upon, i have a right to take legal action even tho i'm on the other side of the world.

soft egret
#

Neither did I say this.

which leads me to very much question whether the mods themselves can be considered copyrighted work or require licenses to reproduce when they, so far, appear to be legally unprotected derivatives based on other copyrights.

#

I said that when you don't have the copyright to the material you're using to create a derivative, the original copyright holder has legal recourse to take action against you.
Yes of course, when you took someone elses thing, he can take action against it.

But noone else can take action against your own content that you own.

#

Feel free to do that.
But as I said over and over again, content you create is yours.

Which would suggest, since you don't own the original content you're modifying, that someone else can modify your modification without permission.
They still need permission from the original copyright owner at minimum

low pebble
#

Just because for example the code engine allows me to write stuff in sqf it doesn't automatically mean that BI owns everything i write to run on their engine.

#

Should be the most dummed down version of any explanation ^

soft egret
#

But to be clear here.
A game mod is not "since you don't own the original content you're modifying"
You're self made 3D model and self written code is NOT a derivative of the game that your mod happens to work in.

#

Again to repeat myself.

If you paint a painting, its yours.
Just because you put it in a frame thats owned by a art gallery so it fits neatly in the art gallery, doesn't mean its not your painting anymore.

#

yes. Thats correct

#

But your connection
between
"drawing a hat on the Mona Lisa doesn't make it a new painting." == "Drawing your own painting and putting it on a someone elses frame frame means its not your painting anymore"

is not correct

molten kraken
soft egret
#

since they use Bohemia's function to work?
They don't.
And no programming languages don't fall under copyright protection.
Bohemia cannot protect the syntax of SQF

#

would something like the ACE Medical system be considered wholly independent work?
Well its made by a group. But yes the group owns the code they wrote, the icons they created

molten kraken
soft egret
#

That is part of the language

#

Like spoken language, thats not protectable

molten kraken
#

So like Java and their native functions?

soft egret
#

Like any programming language

soft egret
# soft egret > would something like the ACE Medical system be considered wholly independent w...

Back to that.
They Don't own the script commands they use indeed, or the functions they reference from other places.
But they own the way they've chained these together.

You also don't own the chemical composition of the paint you used to draw your painting, you probably don't own the patent to the special brush you used.
But you still own your painting.

Now there can indeed be limitations.
If the owner of your paint or paint brush says you cannot use it for an commercial purpose, then selling your painting would be a problem.

Like how Arma 3 Tools forbid to commercially exploit anything you made with them.
But just because the creator of the mod doesn't have the right to sell it, doesn't automatically mean that the creator cannot also forbid you to sell your derivative of his mod.

Even IF Bohemia said "Anything you make belongs to us" that would still mean you'd have to ask Bohemia for permission.

Your work doesn't magically become a unprotectable free for all just because it's a derivative of someone else's work.

If you write software that runs on Windows also doesn't mean that you don't have copyright on your work just because it uses windows features, that'd be ridiculous.

hushed niche
#

Oh hell yeah I got some IP debate to read through today, it was getting quiet in here

#

I won’t get too involved into this debate because I’m admittedly a bit confused as well, but with artistic properties such as music, games, mods, films, etc.

If you are the creator of the work and have the files on a computer that prove that it originated from your computer you have implied copyright, which isn’t as strong as copyright you applied for, but it’s certainly better then nothing

#

It’s basically the same concept of being the deed holder to a piece of land

orchid stump
chilly silo
#

You can register your items for copyright. And if you have something intended for commercial use its a good idea but its not actually required providing you can prove that you are the original author of it. Bottom line: Archive your source files. And keep a record of you development.

"Screen shots matter kids" 😛

fluid elbow
#

Why do we have such discussions repeated every week or month 🙈

Is it really that hard to ask any original author for any permission(s) or doing any kind of stuff yourself?

Or if you are not sure about anything of any kind of mod / addon, just ask the author... 🤷‍♂️

soft egret
#

So yesterday Kalinex made the statement that you can’t hold “copyright” on something unless you register it.
Btw I didn't know about this being a thing at all.
But when I literally googled "copyright" the first result was a website that says you need to register (because they make money off of it so ofc they want to tell you that you need to register) and was confused for a second.

chilly silo
soft egret
#

So I can see how people easily can come to that conclusion when they don't research past the first result, and don't see the fact, of a company who makes money off of copyright registrations saying you should register, as questionable.

chilly silo
runic wraith
hushed niche
delicate hamlet
soft egret
#

As we discussed extensively yesterday and as Rock already said, yes

delicate hamlet
#

I can't say for sure, but aren't patents the one that actually have to be registered?

soft egret
#

Patents and Trademarks

hushed niche
#

Alright I got a slightly different one because I was a bit confused by this

#

I got into a debate with someone the other day who implied they didn’t have to follow DMCA protections because the law in their country doesn’t give protections to ‘mods’ aside from the fact I highly doubt this is true, what is the actual precedent of that, I assume when you agree to steams TOS you agree to follow american IP law?

delicate hamlet
#

I asked the same thing a couple of months ago

#

regarding the ownership of original weapon manufacturing belonging to a country

#

in my case, the national weapon manufacturing services do not care about recreating the likeness as long as you cant create functional devices from them.

#

but then we have to default to bohemia and steam tos

chilly silo
# hushed niche I got into a debate with someone the other day who implied they didn’t have to f...

When you use the Steam service - ie by creating an account you agree to abide by the laws of Washington State for all matters relating to its service, so buying games, customer rights and steam workshop use. Its literally in the first paragraph.

https://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/

Its important to note that the agreement is between you and Valve. Not you and 3rd parties uploading content to the Workshop. Anything Arma related that isn’t on the workshop is usually governed by the laws in the region where it was created.

As for where DMCA applies. Well, DMCA applies to the US. Article 14 of the Electronic Commerce Directive applies to the EU. You will find each region around the world has their own "Copyright Takedown Request" system. But nearly everyone calls it DMCA. It’s just catchier.

https://arma3practicalipguide.blogspot.com/p/dmca.html

If someone fails to reply to a "DMCA" notice (regardless of what it’s called in your region) go straight to the Host. They are the ones that have the obligation to follow IP laws. Even Chinese and Russian Hosts comply more often than not.

runic wraith
# hushed niche Think it’s that but also new people come in and don’t scroll up (myself admitted...

Thats the part I don't understand. We all know people don't like to read through things, but many of them come in wanting to argue a point (which they are so sure they are right about) when they haven't even taken the time to do any worthwhile research into it. Maybe one quick Google answer and they believe they have it all. Modding isn't some new practice that started with arma3, nor are these questions the first to ever be asked, and a little digging can bring them to the same conclusion they get here for the most part. Its almost like they think arma mod authors are the first to ever try and protect their work.

manic laurel
#

I must say it is often "it should not work like that", or, after digging a bit, "it prevents me to do what I want"

hushed niche
chilly silo
hushed niche
#

Some people refuse to accept it when I try to explain this stuff is purposely vague that’s why court exists to allow for interpretation

chilly silo
#

There is an entire industry built up around this specialised part of law. No one involved wants to be too simple

hushed niche
#

Tbh I love IP/entertainment law, I find the complexities of it fascinating

manic laurel
molten kraken
chilly silo
# molten kraken If I use blueprints or take measurements directly from an original item to make ...

No. It becomes a breach of their IP (patents and any other protected info etc) ;P

in our context of making a 3D model from engineering plans of something in the real world. it would never be legally considered a "derivative."

Now if you were to take their plans and make a new car based on their plans... then it becomes a derivative.

A 3D model based on those plans doesn't affect or impact on their established business. Now, how you got those plans that is a legal issue. 😛 But even if you used the original drawings to make a 50k poly model of our hypothetical 2001 Toyota Corolla it would still be your artistic representation.

#

However if you took their Original CAD models and parred it down to a 3D model suitable for arma. Then its a derivative.

molten kraken
#

Just to make sure I understand:
So if it's drawn blueprints (obtained legally) and I make an arma model out of it (1:1 scale) it's an artistic representation.
If I port the original CAD into an arma model (so still 1:1 scale) it becomes a derivative.

chilly silo
#

yes

#

You take the official drawings and make a model you are still making judgement about what to include. You are unlikely to be able to completely recreate a 2001 Toyota Corolla in exact details. Its you version of their product.

#

You take their original model and try cut it down for use in Arma - you are making a derivative of their model.

molten kraken
#

So the difference is if I use something from the same making process?
As in drawn blueprints is paper and model is computer based, but CAD is computer based and model too.

chilly silo
#

Not in the way you mean

molten kraken
#

So CAD blueprints can be used the same way as drawn blueprints?

chilly silo
#

The difference is you making a unique model out of nothing. Vs You taking another model you did not create and converting/modifying it for your needs

#

You own your 100% unique creation.

#

You do not own Toyota's CAD model you converted to make a "new" derivative work.

chilly silo
molten kraken
#

No, I'm serious

#

as in blueprints, the thing with exact measurements used for production

#

you can drawn them on paper or use a computer to help you draw them which is CAD, hence my confusion when you said CAD the first time

chilly silo
#

One process is the act of you creating something from scratch using reference information. (measurements, pics, 3 view drawings etc)
The other is taking an existing model and making a derivative of it. Using part of that model to make your own.

#

CAD in this instance Im refering to CAD engineering 3D models - eg solid works , Catia etc.

molten kraken
#

So if parts of it (the 3D model) is not made by me it's derivative, otherwise it artistic ?

molten kraken
chilly silo
#

OK lets start from scratch...

I make a model of a 2001 Toyota Corolla. - I use images off the internet as reference and dimensions from Wikipedia.

It is not in fact a a 2001 Toyota Corolla that we can drive around. That model is my artistic representation of a 2001 Toyota Corolla.

NOW...

If you were to take my model and convert it to represent a 2010 Toyota Corolla. You would be making a derivative of my model wouldn't you.

molten kraken
#

That part is ok for me

chilly silo
#

Ok so the part you are getting hung up on is CAD vs Blueprints then?

molten kraken
#

yup

#

where you use real measurements given by the manufacturer

edgy matrix
molten kraken
chilly silo
molten kraken
#

so it's about who made the first piece of the 3d model then?

chilly silo
#

Yes

molten kraken
#

Sorry for being long on the understanding side, and thank you for the explanation

chilly silo
#

Its ok. I'm glad we got there in the end 😉

faint nacelle
#

no this is not the place @stone dawn

#

we cant really help with that

stone dawn
#

ok, is there a place where some one can help?

faint nacelle
#

if you have some sort of contract you can maybe take that up to court

#

but other than that there is nothing anyone else can do to force it

stone dawn
#

thats a little extreme

stiff jasper
#

depends on where are you from, but contacting a lawyer with a written agreement you and the other guy made would let him help you write a letter to get the money you deserve, however the outcome depends ONLY on what you agreed to

faint nacelle
#

and is there enough money to hire a lawyer

stiff jasper
#

a one-time lawyer "gig" might be enough

stone dawn
#

it's only a £80 ish job

#

and whats the definition of a written agreement

stiff jasper
#

I have no idea how your country laws work but whenever you want to do something for a money or you pay for it, you make a contract - any formal or non-formal written agreement between you and the other person, at least you should. If both of you agreed to a rule that "you will be paid even if you don't finish your job" or anything similar, then you have a chance to get your money back through writing a "demand for payment" letter

#

but if you didn't make any agreement regarding what would happen if one side drops out, then it may be way harder and not worth those 80 quid

stone dawn
#

we did agree for payment

static ember
#

If someone falsely claims DMCA on your content, wins due to steam giving you no chance to respond, then you file counter-claim and win that, will steam takedown the content thats òpposed to the winning content

Ie: He took ours down, we have proved this to be wrong, our counter-claim is processing, upon completetion will his offending content be removed.

Also, if it isen't and we fill DMCA and he's stupid enough to file a counter-claim (btw the kid is 15) whats the court process?

soft egret
#

our counter-claim is processing, upon completetion will his offending content be removed.
No, DMCA onto your content and DMCA onto his content are completely seperate processes

#

whats the court process?
Talk to you lawyer they'll know

static ember
#

smiledislike exhausting

coral egret
#

I am still not convinced. I'm very well aware that a modder or a modder team will not fight through the courts, which costs much money and a lot of time, over something that is in the end for free and for the only best possible result, that they don't have to take it down.

#

But that doesn't mean, that it's actually not lawful. There is the fair use without a need for agreement for transformative and deriviative work. Also games in general are more seen as art. Further there are no (at least to me) known cases.

#

And to make it a little personal: Intimidating someone with possible unbearable costs and than concluding that they folded "because they know their wronging" is a method, that is pretty nasty and one should shame for that

leaden cipher
#

Well do a search with "Disney" and you can see how long this wheel has been turning around in this channel.

And as long as it is "see no evil, hear no evil" no actions are taken that far by BI besides keeping it away from their social media channels and don't advertise SW related content.

So best is to read back on what has already been discussed as not many will reply as like I said this wheel has been turning around for years flaming on and off every few months. And people get tired of having the same Q&A's every few months.

dull moon
#

There is the fair use without a need for agreement for transformative and deriviative work
there is no "fair use" in arma modding

#

this does not apply. never

coral egret
#

Then name me a lawsuit, when everything has been discussed so often

covert depot
#

So just saw some cringe thing that my friend sent me

#

Someone's ported all the 3CB stuff into Roblox

#

is that a violation or within terms of use

#

they're using it for a unit and have about thirty members

#

wouldn't surprise me if he starts selling the stuff he's ported too

dull moon
#

last link is directly arma related

#

even though it's from the UK, same applies to EU, US, Canada and many other countries

covert depot
#

If he was to go about selling said ports, where does this change?

hushed niche
coral egret
#

The most important part is at the beginning, which is to my understanding actually true. "Fair use" is a defense and so the judge (or the court) decides it validity.

dull moon
#

People in Arma are crazy bro
we just demand our rights to be respected

#

not crazy...

coral egret
#

Actually it would probably be quite good if a modding case were taken to a court

covert depot
#

I mean it would be horrible for your stuff to be taken without credit or permission. Imagine putting work into something to get screwed over. Lots of people put work into these mods above what you could expect @hushed niche

dull moon
coral egret
#

We all know, that it's not the creators who make the trouble

coral egret
dull moon
#

i do

hushed niche
#

That was not what I meant please don’t ban me I just meant the idea of going to court over a video game mod with no actual monetary worth (unless a court says it has worth idk) is a little out there for me but I respect your right to do so

(I do not wish to start a debate as this is not the right channel for this, if you wish to discuss it further please Dm me)

coral egret
#

Then tell me

dull moon
#

look at all the DMCA takedowns on youtube

#

same matter

coral egret
#

No it's not the same

dull moon
#

it is

#

fair use is not bound to modding

covert depot
#

Anyone got a tag for any 3CB peeps?

leaden cipher
hushed niche
coral egret
#

but it is to be put into context and commercialising makes for a harder case

leaden cipher
coral egret
#

What if H&K decides to take down MP5s

covert depot
coral egret
#

What about all those Counterstrike, Battlefield, Halo(!), Dune etc mods?

covert depot
#

I just tagged one of their core developers so just going to see if they want to follow up

tulip nexus
#

Still talking about star wars mods? No such thing as fair use without it being commentary or parody as audiocustoms says. They own the names and likeness of their IP in all forms of media. Entertainment is their core business and people using their IP to create free alternatives to their products directly inhibits their ability to profit from their property

coral egret
#

A such mod is not a free alternative to their products. That would be if someone were to attempt to rebuild an existing star wars game

#

Also it's not just star wars

#

What about that halo mod then? Halo is a game

steady adder
#

Thanks for the report @covert depot , much appreciated.

faint nacelle
tulip nexus
#

MS handle their IP differently than Disney and have made statements that they are okay with the IP being used for fan-created content

faint nacelle
#

they explicitly allow Halo universe Fan stuff

coral egret
#

Smart move

#

Counterstrike? Battlefield?

tulip nexus
#

On the contrary tons of Star Wars mods for different games over the years have received C&Ds

coral egret
#

Stellaris has quite many SW mods

dull moon
faint nacelle
#

Honestly @coral egret you are just beating a dead horse here. Whats your goal? if you want to get definite answers, consult IP lawyer

covert depot
#

We love a good evening ip rights discussion 😅

coral egret
leaden cipher
tulip nexus
dull moon
#

any case that has IP, copyright and fair use involved

covert depot
#

If you want to stay safe, make something original and make it yourself

dull moon
#

no matter if modding, film, music...

covert depot
#

Don't steal shit and ideas without clear permission

dull moon
#

modding is a creative art, the same as making a movie, writing a song or creating a painting. so all the laws and rulings that apply to that also apply for modding

coral egret
dull moon
#

it also explains the use of trademark, trade dress, ect

coral egret
#

I read this already and look, I have no problem when BI decides that they don't want a certain content.

faint nacelle
# coral egret That didn't go to court

No one here can say its ok to use Disney IP. If you are interested in that, you ask Disney or dont and make a SW mod and then if Disney comes knocking, you can take them to court if you like.

covert depot
#

I mean I've even seen people get in trouble for using the British Armed Forces logo as its protected under crown copyright

coral egret
#

I don't want to make such a mod and I don't want anybody to say that it's ok. But I'd be happier, if ppl could resisting pointing to others and claiming, what they are doing were not ok.

faint nacelle
#

someone steals a purse or a car, Imma call them out just as well.

dull moon
#

i'd be using a fat ass laser pointer to point to people who 🦆 💩 up that makes my life as a modder miserable

coral egret
faint nacelle
#

what do you mean? all 3 of them is wrong

coral egret
#

Oh my ...

faint nacelle
#

blobdoggoshruggoogly you can naturally have different ethics. thats your right.

leaden cipher
# coral egret That didn't go to court

If you know you are on the losing end....... why go to court? That would only be a waste of money, they tried to talk, but Disney and EA contracts made it impossible.

tulip nexus
# coral egret That didn't go to court

No shit it didn't go to court. They desisted as instructed by the letter. Do you think anybody is dumb enough to receive one of those from Disney's legal team and just ignore it?

covert depot
#

Nah gotta fight disney

#

It's like darth vader and all those troops at the end of rogue one

#

Darth Vader being the Disney Legal Team

coral egret
#

What I understand is, that even if they were right, Disney would go the distance, they couldn't afford. That doesn't mean that they were "wrong" though

faint nacelle
#

but they are though.

#

but you wont believe anything we say. So please go ask IP lawyer for legal point of view.

dull moon
#

disney is not known for precision strikes. when they start bombing law suits, they take every fucking bit, person and company they can get.
and to be honest, nobody here wants to get caught up in disney cluster bombing the shit out of modders and BI

#

everybody looses

coral egret
#

That is understandable

dull moon
#

so: 🦆 star wars mods and anything else related to disney

#

are we done now?

covert depot
#

oh god here come some long paragraphs

coral egret
#

As I wrote. I fully understand a "we want to avoid an expensive lawsuite" but not a "those are filthy thieves"

faint nacelle
#

IP rights are same for me and Disney

#

if Disney wants to do things like they do Im gonna respect that

leaden cipher
# coral egret I read this already and look, I have no problem when BI decides that they don't ...

Who says they don't like the content? Maybe developers love it also and actually play SW mods but only play it "in the shadows" to make sure BI does not get backfired by Disney as BI than could be directly linked to support the SW themed mods . I am sure Disney knows about Arma 3 SW mods and for whatever reason just have not ordered a takedown, and as long as that stays that way the longer people can enjoy the SW mods.

tulip nexus
#

it's legally called IP theft, what else are you going to call people that do it, that makes semantic sense other than "thief"?

#

It's not a matter of judgement, just linguistics

faint nacelle
#

and it would be great if Disney did not take such approach. I like star wars too (well more the old stuff anyway). but they did what they did and unless that changes, their IP is no touchy

coral egret
dull moon
#

you don't, we do

coral egret
#

Also I think it's called IP infringement or violation

leaden cipher
#

Well I am sure if any of the first take down letters drop on the floor by the people creating Disney IP related mods (as example) they all would take it down instantly as they know they will lose a fight in court 😉 hence the reason why there are not many lawsuits about the Disney IP, everything is already in writing and in their domain and covered by many laws. Taking on a giant while you are a small ant....... well that takes (very big) balls..... every lawyer (or lawyer team) would advise you not to take that step 😉

coral egret
random ocean
#

how do i report a violator

faint nacelle
#

if its about BIs content you can send email of your findings to the email address in the channel description.

#

Or if its about a mod you can reach out the the mods author

carmine folio
#

what is to be done about IFA3 Lib reuploads

chilly silo
# coral egret Also I think it's called IP infringement or violation

Legally "infringement" would be to use someone's trademarks or registered designs without permission.

it becomes "IP theft" when you use their content/models/textures to make your own derivatives.

As for Modding cases going to court. I've done it several times. In every case bar two the Offender was told by his own legal team to settle before judgement. The other two.

  1. Was the first case a company used my mods in a commercial product. I lost the case at that time because I was not aware of my rights and what i needed to protect myself. Also at the time (mid to late 90's) the legal system was not setup for Digital formats at the time. The Judge did not understand what mods were and treated the case as plagiarism (Which has different rules than IP theft). The courts now understand "Digital Art" and software much more now.
  2. The second case made it all the way to judgement. While i did not make a profit the offender ended up paying all my costs.

Yes it can and does come down to money at times. But that is no reason to justify theft. It doesnt matter if its Disney or Joe Bloggs. Stealing from someone is wrong.

Now if you want to get into "Fair use" (and no theft is included) over the outline of a StormTrooper, or Yoda etc. Then I may agree with you, Disney's reaction is a bit extreme. But when you are impacting on their potential to license their IP to Video game makers etc you are providing free competition that may impact their profits. Why would they tolerate any competition when they dont have to?

(Sorry to whoever it was complaining about long paragraphs 😉 )

coral egret
#

Hm, you are talking about US laws?

chilly silo
#

US or UK, EU, AU it doesnt matter. The standard is set by the Berne Convention.

#

"Fair use" details vary - there is no 100% definition of what is and is not "Fair use" but there are several 'tests' you can try. But in every scenario we've been through here and in my own experience Fair-use does not apply when it come to Arma modding applications. By the guidelines setout in any region of the world. Its impossible to claim fair use when making derivatives of someone else's work.

coral egret
#

To my knowledge it does matter a lot, since the EU just in 2019 release the new directive, that this summer was transformed into national laws

chilly silo
coral egret
#

In certain countries the copyright was always with the creator and that couldn't be traded

#

While in the US I think a creator can transfer it to another entity and then becoming a violator of his own creation, which is if I remember correctly the case with Ultima (it's again with EA now I believe)

chilly silo
#

Because there was something about the Fair use of trademarks in works of art. Its even case law now. But Fair use rarely works when you use parts of someone else's work even when you consider it "Trans-formative". Legally and from experience that transformation has to be essentially creating a new product.

chilly silo
#

Ownership is always established via the Moral Rights clauses in IP Law. But it is possible to License a work in such a way that your "deed your rights" to a 3rd party. Effectively transferring the creator's right to further control his creation. Thats got plenty of contract case law behind it.

coral egret
chilly silo
#

I'm getting a bit lost as to what it is you trying to achieve. What point are you trying to prove or question do you want answered?

chilly silo
coral egret
#

None, since it is a directive. The national laws that followed are relevant and those had to be effective this june

chilly silo
#

OK but again, What is your point?

#

What scenario is it that made you post?

coral egret
#

That a possible violation or theft is to be determined by a judge for a certain case and that it is not as simple as stealing "a purse or a car"

chilly silo
#

Ok so how do you define theft?

coral egret
#

Personally?

chilly silo
#

Yeah lets start there

coral egret
#

If something is missing afterwards, while in illegal copies it actually became more

chilly silo
#

Ah word games.
Definition of theft in the common sense is to take something that does not belong to you. Agree?

coral egret
#

Of course it's word games. That's something you asked for. However there is a difference in "taking" and "using".

#

Some things can naturally not be taken, but illegally used

chilly silo
coral egret
#

Yet there is a difference in stealing a book and illegally copying a book.

manic laurel
#

good thing IP theft exists then, making both theft (of different kind of course)
thank you for participating, have a great day

chilly silo
# coral egret Yet there is a difference in stealing a book and illegally copying a book.

Not when it comes down to Moral Rights.

You've touched on the "Moral rights of a creator" eariler saying that a creator cannot transfer ownership etc.
Which implies that the Creators rights are a "thing". By as you claim "illegally copying" something intangible you think its all legal.

But you are stealing the Creators right to be identified as the author and their right to decide who and how their creations are used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_rights

#

As for stealing vs copying.... this is exactly why Copyright Exists.

#

if i copy a book an rename it... does it mean i wrote the book?

chilly silo
#

Why not let it air out.

manic laurel
coral egret
#

Are we bow talking about intellectual property or creator's rights?

chilly silo
#

IP is a catch all term common used to cover many areas of law. Creators Right aka Moral Rights are covered in IP

coral egret
#

Ok, are we talking about creators or trademark holders

chilly silo
#

The question is who are you talking about? I'm trying to answer your specific claim

coral egret
#

Since following your example I would have bought the rights of the book, then changed the title

#

Which still wouldn't mean that I wrote it

chilly silo
#

Ok key part "bought the rights of the book". You've been deeded the rights to control the Ip of that book. Fine but the Author of the book is still identified. Perfectly legal.

#

Whats your issue?

faint nacelle
#

Buying the book and buying rights to the book are different things too.

coral egret
#

What we are talking about, would be a book by a fan which has some same characters and plays in the same world galaxy, but has a different story and is probably worse written

#

And then consequently uploaded to some website

chilly silo
# coral egret What we are talking about, would be a book by a fan which has some same charact...

OK, now this is more complicated than "buying rights". You see this comes under both Copyright and Fair-use legislation. And this is where it gets complicated by definitions of what is Disney's Creative Property (Ie the story and lore of your universe eg Disney and Star Wars) and the property of You as the "Fan Fiction" creator.

Incidentally, the same scenario cannot be applied to arma models as the definition of the product is wildly different.

(Sorry guys this is going to turn into a loooong essay 🙂 )

Staying with Star Wars and the "Story" analogy, You are creating 'derivative fiction' based in the 'Star Wars Universe' based on your own wish to see a different outcome etc. The result is that you are creating Fan Fiction which is permitted under Disney's Use of their IP policy.

If you were to break any of their terms, ie try and make it into a Film longer than 10 mins or has a budget over a set value, try and sub-license your work. Profit from it any substantial way.
OR
...damage the reputation or negatively impact on the perception of the characters in such a way as they determine you are damaging their IP or Values they can sue you. And have the legal right to do so.

its their policy to allow Fan Fiction. But its also their policy to prevent you using their creations in a way that displeases them.

#

But again, this application of "Fan Fiction" derivative does not apply when you are dealing with software, models, trademarked items etc.

if you take a model from Battlefront II. Port it and convert it to Arma. Its still their model. Even though it sold millions of copies. The model is still their IP, protected by Moral Rights and Copyright.

#

You "copy" that model, convert it and change it for whatever reason. Anything you create from it is a derivative.

#

And without specific permission it is regarded as theft. Regardless of where the original model is still in the Archive at EA Games.

#

The issue here is one of definitions.

#

Is it possible to steal something and still have the original in possession of the creator?

well its the reason Copyright and Moral Rights exist. So yeah I think its obvious that its a real "crime"

coral egret
#

Here the question lies in what is "taking a model". Had you reversed their code and adapting that code base, I think, it were a case like many cases are argued against unwanted mods by game studios who don't want mods - namely some sort of hacking.

chilly silo
#

OK in fair use law in the UK and US there are clauses and case law about "conversion". Specifically in the UK Section 29:4 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 states: “It is not fair dealing—(a)to convert a computer program expressed in a low level language into a version expressed in a higher level language, or (b)incidentally in the course of so converting the program, to copy it,“

coral egret
#

But if you build one it's not really taking it from EA's game. That would be like the case with Activision and the humvee

chilly silo
#

The argument being that you need to hack the model to get it into a format that you can edit. hence rendering Fair-use as a defence impossible.

coral egret
#

Why? If you model it yourself, you don't hack anything. BI could claim, that you hacked their model to end up with that trooper

chilly silo
crystal coyote
#

@chilly silo Can we chill lol

chilly silo
#

And in the case of AM General and Activision the ruling was more about the "infringement" not theft of a tradmark.

chilly silo
coral egret
chilly silo
coral egret
#

That is what I said

#

Not that it's "clear as glass"

chilly silo
#

But not what you claimed about how its impossible to steal something when the original still exists

coral egret
#

That was a word play. I wrote that too

#

Also I'm referring to what I wrote yesterday

chilly silo
#

The argument i suppose is what is "stealable".

chilly silo
coral egret
#

No, it was about being absolute sure, that "SW mods are not allowed"

#

Because they are "theft"

#

I was pointing to fan fiction and got a respons stating more or less that this is not allowed either

#

Also I should say, that I'm no native english speaker. That IP theft is really labeled different here, since a theft is a physical act

chilly silo
# coral egret No, it was about being absolute sure, that "SW mods are not allowed"

Ah ok i hadn't seen that specifically.

In that scenario, You have two directives under Disney's policy. And possibly a third depending on how you want to spin it.

  1. If you were to take models from existing Products for use in you mod. Its IP Theft. You are making unauthorised derivatives using their IP.
  2. If you are making your own models. Its still an infringement because of the breach of terms Disney's IP usage policy (i dont have the exact wording I would need to go find it) meaning that you cannot make any product that competes with existing licensed Disney products. in this scenario computer games.

And this is a reach, but i have read case law similar to this not long a go... And this is a US thing:

  1. By creating a Free mod that replaces, or competes with an existing or future game, format or mechanic set out in the Disney owned IP some courts may rule it as "theft" of potential profits. (I think it was Florida where it happened)

Like I said its a reach, but the US IP system is all about the money when it comes down to it.

#

Specific to SW Mods. Infringement or Theft its pretty irrelevant as Disney's IP usage Policy prohibits the use of its IP in this way without authorisation.

coral egret
#

1 and 2 I was aware of, 3 sounds very US to me, especially that blank "future game".

chilly silo
#

if you want a definitive answer on that. Please talk to Disney and tell the mods what they say. I would love to know myself but having attempted to do legitimate licensed stuff in the past with Disney IP I'm 99.9% certain of the response.

chilly silo
coral egret
#

That might have been a point, since I pointed out, that a company is not making laws and is not interpreting them either. They can state, what they think ok or not. That doesn't mean that they would succeed with it before court, it merely states that they would possibly open a case.

#

Of course courting over a free mod is somewhat unlogical, since the best result would be a status quo

chilly silo
coral egret
#

The Activision case is here an interesting one, because had a modder asked AM general, if it were ok to include that humvee into a mod, they would probably have said "no". Resulting into many saying that this demonstrates that it is "IP theft", because that is AM general's claim, and the modder would almost certainly have folded or as some like to read it "proofed".

#

In a court however that wasn't how the judgement fell, even though we are talking about a big commercial success here

chilly silo
#

Well the Activision thing was about the unlicensed commercial exploitation of a trademark. Not about its free use to describe an artistic representation of a real world item. (word play i know - but they are two very different things)

coral egret
#

Wasn't it exactly about depicting a real world model and as a side note also about giving a negative connotation? And was the judge not stating, that this real world image had artistic value insofar as it helps with immersion into a realistical as possible modeled world?

#

While on the other side the Fallout 4 "red sox case" was about the rights on that logo hold by the MBL. That in my view was a "real" trademark case

#

And I am of the opinion that that last one cannot be compared with a (again) a storm trooper

chilly silo
# coral egret Wasn't it exactly about depicting a real world model and as a side note also abo...

They tired that line but ultimately the ruling said that "negative connotation" was not in the control of Activision, that the HMMWV brand was used as a common descriptor for that class of vehicle and had become generic. much like Hoover for vacuum cleaners.

The debate about the model was never about the model itself. Only the breach of the Trademark and registered Tradedress used on the model. Ie the embossed doors and placement of wipers.

chilly silo
coral egret
#

Then I guess it depends on how they described that shape and form.

chilly silo
#

Its Disney, you know they did all of it 😛

#

Right i have to go offline in a few. Chemo is over and im being moved into another room with no 4G reception. Have fun.

coral egret
#

I wish you all the best and you you get much better

chilly silo
#

Thanks. Hope i helped you out in some way.

coral egret
chilly silo
#

bbl

coral egret
#

Yeah, also I doubt Disney would forget contracting such things. Interesting however is, that UK deemed he hadn't made enough profit to transfer the case to the US. That is interesting

covert depot
#

Hey is openly admitting to porting stuff from arma 2 a no-no

#

same guy that ported all the 3cb stuff i was on about earlier ^

faint nacelle
#

Big nono

manic laurel
chilly silo
#

Only if its the Licensed Data packages isn't it? Nicking A2 community content and porting to A3 is out of order afaik.

manic laurel
#

ah yeah no, community content defo a no-no

chilly silo
#

Yeah, i think it needs clarifying somewhere. Ive had it in the past where someone said "The BI Mods and BI legal say i can forward port A2 content". And ive even been linked to the post a few times.

#

Common sense says, its BI owned content the post refers to but not everyone can understand unless its spelled out in very big letters.

delicate hamlet
#

such a great convo you had there RKSL Rock, definetly a bit clearer about the big D stuff. Thanks for the read.

chilly silo
#

Glad it helped

faint nacelle
manic laurel
#

oh

faint nacelle
soft egret
faint nacelle
#

not to roblox tho

manic laurel
#

only if Roblox gets bought by BI though

crystal talon
twilit pilot
#

What's this?

vivid wave
#

If you don't know what they are, are nothing for you

wheat wave
delicate hamlet
#

Does anyone knows whats the handle for usp team?

faint nacelle
#

@delicate hamlet for what purpose?

delicate hamlet
#

to contact them?

faint nacelle
#

is it IP related?

delicate hamlet
#

it is

#

I wanted to inquire about a mod that is not mine but recently had been dmca'd by usp because of a situation regarding asset theft

faint nacelle
#

its probably not really public business

delicate hamlet
#

I know, that is specifically what I wanted to talk about.

faint nacelle
#

Well they frequent here I suppose. They can contact you if they want to hear more.

delicate hamlet
#

thanks

echo orchid
#

@runic wraith ^

runic wraith
#

@pliant oar I know I need to let the dmca process finish its course, which were all filed by our team for including ripped assets of ours, but I would like to see about having a workshop ban placed against this user if possible: https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198282252052

random ocean
kindred viper
faint nacelle
undone pier
#

@faint nacelle why?

faint nacelle
#

I thought you had a handle of things IFA. My mistake

vivid wave
soft egret
dusty nimbus
vivid wave
#

Modifying existed/binarized p3d is

dusty nimbus
#

So I can re-texture vanilla assets freely, but I cannot do anything to the models?

vivid wave
#

Yes. Of course the “freely” has some restrictions (like noncommercial and Arma only)

dusty nimbus
#

Ok thanks!

fallen gale
#

ironically google gives you the reuploaded one when you google "arma 3 australia"

dull moon
#

even the "original" from Aussie uses ripped CUP Core content

hushed niche
dull moon
#

no

#

we never gave permisson.

#

he even changed all names and paths, but a hash check back when it popped up proved that it was indeed CUP content that was ripped

#

we never got around to DMCA it

#

all text based files had a different hash, but all model files had the same hash as CUP Terrains Core 1.10 (iirc), and did not match the hash of the arma 2 public data pack

coral egret
#

I always thought CUP uses the arma 2 models?

faint nacelle
#

They are updated versions of Arma 2 stuff (the ones that have not been remade already.)@coral egret

There are quite a lot of misconceptions still floating around about CUP.

coral egret
faint nacelle
#

No worries, just correction of misinformation.

hushed niche
dull moon
#

no problem

hushed niche
#

It is too quiet here

leaden cipher
# hushed niche It is too quiet here

Well that is actually a good thing 😉 but silence here does not mean nothing is happening, there are mods being flagged on a daily basis just not discussed here.

hushed niche
#

Tbh I just really like the ip part of it it’s really interesting to watch people work through stuff

zenith bloom
vivid wave
#

DMCA is not something to violate but a process. You meant EULA or something, I guess

glacial fox
#

@zenith bloom I have contacted the content uploader, I was informed he has proper rights to the models.

soft egret
#

I was informed he has proper rights to the models.
There's stuff from Mondkalb in there, so I'm pretty sure he doesn't, even if he thinks or says he does

kindred viper
#

Yea that dudes reuploaded so much stuff in there

zenith bloom
#

At a glance it seems a bulk of it are mods that have generally allowed re-uploads thus far. Also its my understanding that "mods" which only consist of scripts are covered differently under Bohemia's standards due to the fact that theoretically anyone could come up with a similar script rather naturally.

unborn parrot
stiff jasper
#

what APL has to do with the fact the guy has no permissions

unborn parrot
#

?? To what

#

APL allowed me to reupload the stuff that’s in there

#

I’ve been pretty sure to check every thing is under the correct APL license

#

That has everything to do with this

stiff jasper
#

so you are 100% sure you have been granted a permission, in any way applicable, to use mondkalb stuff?

unborn parrot
#

What modkalb stuff

kindred viper
unborn parrot
#

I mean that was taken from our previous unit pack which never raised any issues in 2 years

#

But I can remove that

#

Don’t think we use it anyway

stiff jasper
#

getting no flags/DMCAs doesn't mean you have the privilege, unfortunately. If you need those mods/scripts packed there you can contact Mondkalb and ask, he could approach you differently and actually let you repack his work

#

but it's safer not to have those, you'll keep your reputation and account history intact

runic wraith
#

Love how people like to play dumb until evidence is presented, then its like 'oh right, that'

dull moon
#

¯_(ツ)_/¯

unborn parrot
dull moon
#

ofc you didn't know who he was because you never verified or even cared for what the source of the content you reuploaded is.
this is not "i take what the fuck i want" - land, this is "shit yo, stuff got licenses yo, respect that yo" - land

unborn parrot
#

I wasn't lying when I said I've been pretty sure to check everything is under the correct APL license, since that (and some other stuff that's also being removed) was from our previous pack and hadn't raised any issues for years, I had assumed it was fine

#

if I hadn't, why wouldn't I just repack Radio Animations for TFAR or VCOM AI or TFAR into our pack?

#

or pretty much every other dependency we have

runic wraith
#

Assumed it was fine? Did you not read the part where he says 'no reuploads'? Did you think that doesn't apply to you or figured you would just reupload anyways until something was said about it?

unborn parrot
#

Once again, I never knew who mondkalb was nor did I ever go onto his steam workshop submission to see that in the first place

#

since it was in the previous pack and in some others i've seen I was assuming it was fine

#

since I was just told it's not okay, it's been removed from our pack

indigo thorn
#

What's the process for reporting repeat offenders who re-upload content they don't own?

faint nacelle
#

DM Dwarden

runic wraith
#

@pliant oar After speaking with Steve from SPS weapons, I would also like to report that same user as we have already DMCA'd them twice before for reuploading USP content on 8/31/21 and 9/8/21. While this could have been relayed through DM, I see no reason that these repeat offenders shouldn't be exposed publicly.
https://steamcommunity.com/id/Synder12

azure pine
#

just informing myself
i've heard starwars units violate IP rights, and i'm pretty sure i know a starsim unit, how do i report one? what kind of information do i provide for the email?

leaden cipher
#

@azure pine you did not read everything ;) it is a bit different: yes SW sim mods (used by units) are officially breaking Disney IP but there is a tolerance level as Disney has not taken legal actions (yet): so no advertising of SW sim on official BI social media to make sure BI does not officially support/advertise it as company , of course if Disney sends a take down letter to BI or mod-teams because they are breaking the Disney IP it would mean all mods must be taken down from the workshop and other links or lawsuits can follow. So the units/mods are "save (for now)" in the dark shadows of Arma 3.

faint nacelle
#

so just like the Sith

leaden cipher
# faint nacelle so just like the Sith

Sith is from the SW universe so...... same thing counts ;) but I guess once letter from dinsey drops....... well a big broom will be going trought the steam workshop cleaning up all SW related mod/addons.

random marsh
azure pine
#

close, but i'm kocgum c;

manic laurel
#

pleeease take it to DMs, thanks.

haughty torrent
faint nacelle
#

no they should seek permission from IP holder

#

or not break IP rights

haughty torrent
#

But if permission isn’t given by disney why isnt there IP rights violations placed by the arma community? If someone uploads assets from another video game this community would drool at the opportunity to DMCA even tho said video game may not even care or have taken any legal action

faint nacelle
#

the community does not do the DMCAs, only the IP holder does.

#

we just do not condone IP theft

#

There should not be anything odd about mod makers respecting IP rights of other makers were they game company or another modder.

#

and it would be quite nice if users would respect those too and not support IP theft

#

Disney might one day crack down on mods too. It is up to the mod makers to bear that risk. Nobody here however can give permission to use Disney IP

haughty torrent
#

Hm, so for example if someone posted idk Tarkov equipment, only battle state games has the right to file for the DMCA?

faint nacelle
#

Yes. BI can remove such content though if they deem it inappropriate

haughty torrent
#

By BI that would be bohemia.net members? Curious to where the line of inappropriate starts to ensure fair treatment towards all ip violators

vivid wave
#

Yes

crisp plover
#

I like Star Wars mods sadly what they are doing for the Star Wars mods is wrong

delicate hamlet
delicate hamlet
# haughty torrent But if permission isn’t given by disney why isnt there IP rights violations plac...

A week ago there were some equipment from a mod from New Vegas that had some contradicting licensing stating that they cannot use the mod content in other games unless asking permission from the creator of og mod, and then used some derivative licensing that stated that they can do whatever with models. At least In my case, I pointed this out for the ws uploader in A3 and all comments went haywire.

grim dagger
#

found this, it's using a model from OFP

fallen gale
#

it's allowed (?) thonk

vivid wave
#

Outside of Arma, so no

#

...isn't it?

fallen gale
#

¯_(ツ)_/¯
it uses Arma CWA, which afaik is allowed

manic laurel
fallen gale
#

oh meowsweats
I thought it was an Arma mod...

spare osprey
#

For additional questions feel free to ping me

analog pine
random marsh
torpid hull
faint nacelle
#

well not even mostly

#

but the fans of those themes make the most noise when their favourite mods are scrutinzed

analog pine
manic laurel
#

maybe for a good reason.

faint nacelle
runic wraith
analog pine
#

I don’t think that is a true statement tbh

torpid hull
#

No its just something ive heared not saying its true

runic wraith
#

Well seeing as how ripped assets made up the majority of that mod, I don't see how that would even make sense. There wouldn't be anything left...

hasty gale
#

both versions of swop the older and newer versions have ripped assets

haughty torrent
# runic wraith Do you have some source or proof for this statement, or just saying what sounds ...

I mean same can be said about most of these failed law school experts. All I have seen in this channel is cherry picking on who needs to gain permissions. The recreation of licensed Disney products = zero permissions gained. Use of military unit insignias, seals and symbols = zero permissions gained. I see those corners cut all the time yet bash others for the corners they have cut. Would be better for the community if an actual standard was followed and not cherry picked

hasty gale
#

issue is swop didnt recreate the assets they took it from EA's BF2 or in the case of the older version the OG BF2

runic wraith
#

Not sure if you just didn't read what was being replied to or if you just completely misunderstood. Obtaining permissions has nothing to do with this or what I was replying to, it was the usage of ripped assets

#

No cherry picking there or room for misinterpretation

analog pine
#

I think everyone understood what you where saying, just at this point it just feels like cherry picking if it has “Star Wars” content in the mod. Yes, SWOP was definitely ripped content which is not okay but you can’t hold the other mods to same standard just because they are Star Wars. If the Star Wars mods where a real problem in the community, I assume Disney or BI would of done something to protect their ip.

faint nacelle
#

Problem with Star Wars is Disneys public statements to prohibit use of SW IP without a license. Most other themes dont have such blanket statements and due to smaller popularity pop up so often and some IPs like Halo even allow it and encourage it (as long as creations are original and not ripped)

So far it seems nobody who has tried to reach Disney for permission to make mods have received an answer or permission since nobody has ever reported back on their questions.

Nobody here can say "yeh its ok to make Star Wars mods" because what disney has stated and there is no evidence to contradict this.

#

people making star wars original content mods know this very well and risk the possiblity of Disneys actions.

#

It definitely would be favouritism agains IP owners wishes to show greenlight to SW mods. Which would in turn make every original content maker here a target for rippers and content thiefs to make claims on the original content because the makers said its ok to break IP owners rights

haughty torrent
chilly silo
#

Ripped assets = Assets such as models and textures taken from another source without permission

#

"Unauthorised use of registered Trade marks" ie unit insignia etc is a different thing altogether. And in many cases - ie Military units most have a policy you should not use them without authorisation. However a lot of organisations also have a policy of turning a blind eye until your use of their symbology and branding becomes an issue for them. or your representation could be confused for an official presence.

haughty torrent
haughty torrent
chilly silo
#

Its the common sense definition. Im not sure there is a legal definition of ripped. But if you substitue "Ripped" for "Assets converted from one format to make it editable without the consent of the IP owner and author" (ie the common understanding of the term 'ripped' or 'ripping' in this context. it seem logical.

haughty torrent
#

Which is why i stated there needs to be a set standard not one that is cherry picked

chilly silo
chilly silo
#

You can say the same for almost anything if that were true. ie shoplifting or stealing cars

haughty torrent
haughty torrent
chilly silo
#

Regardless of if you get caught or not its illegal. But in the caseof using a unit badge for your milsim unit that replicates an existing real world item in a computer game, then legally atleast - there is not much opportunity for for Mistaking the - for instance - US Army for a Milsim unit posting pics of Arma3.

chilly silo
#

This is their commercial use guide. it touches on fair use clauses.

haughty torrent
chilly silo
haughty torrent
#

“These emblems, coats of arms, initials, symbols and other military identifiers (hereafter referred to collectively as "Military Service marks") may not be used without prior written permission. Some Military Service slogans and acronyms may also be protected and require prior written permission before use.”

chilly silo
#

I cant speak for the DoD (as I did not ask for that specific answer and they did not replay anyway). But if you want to follow the strictest sense - then yes - no one should use an existing patch. However as i repeatedly said - this is not what constitutes ripping.

#

And your pedantic insistence suggests you have an agenda. So lets be honest and tell us what is is you really expect to achieve?

haughty torrent
#

My point again is that very few if any are going out of their way to even “ASK” for permission to use these trademarked items. However im very positive that if USP or any other user was asked by the DoD to remove said item they would do so in a heart beat to respect the law.

chilly silo
haughty torrent
#

So I believe same should continue to happen to those that post other assets without permission, the individual should be reached out to and educated not shamed in the community because they “didnt ask” when its a very common theme for others to not “ask” the bigger organizations

sinful pivot
chilly silo
#

You see there is a LEGAL argument about what constitutes artistic freedom and artistic recreation and its intent. That is what that ruling is about... it allows the unauthorised use of a Trademark as long as its in another form other than the original context. Now I'm not a judge or Lawyer, but that ruling seems to open the door to answering your question. As its about how and where you can use someone's trademark in a way that does not impact on their product or brand. Now here is vague part... is a military unit's badge operating in the same legally defined area of business as a milsim unit pretending to be this unit in the virtual universe that is Arma on the Internet?

Well my opinion, given all the research i've done writing that blog page and all the question i've asked (the DoD never replied to my emails) is that In the strict application of the law. No one should be using an registered trademark. Again My opinion. In my experience, it brings more trouble than its worth and sparks pointless and endless debates from people that have an agenda to screw someone else over.

But case law and precedent seems to suggest that until there is some legally warranted/actionable infringement - ie anything that defames the brand or impacts on the Trademark owners registered area of business (see the 45 trademark areas) it can be said it not so much tolerated than ignored UNTIL it becomes a problem. This is not to say its legal, just that its generally not actioned.

But again none of this is "Ripping" as we all - Ok the majority as you don't - understand it.

chilly silo
haughty torrent
#

I don’t care about what you are considering ripping or not, using other peoples work or what is trademarked is against the law in most cases so why should this be treated any differently?

sinful pivot
#

Was just a straight take down request. It was before my time in the unit, but I believe that our site used to be the top result in google when you searched for "SOCOMD", and our website domain didn't help. Our pictures from facebook still show up near the top when you search it

chilly silo
haughty torrent
runic wraith
chilly silo
# sinful pivot Was just a straight take down request. It was before my time in the unit, but I ...

Yesh that's similar to what i've heard with a couple of British units and what i was told by MoD media person informally when i asked. Searches for unit names etc were matching gaming unts rather than the real thing.

It was while ago now - 2019 ish - but the lass i was talking to said she could never give a formal reply but her experience was they would not bother taking action if it was clear that the site or social media account they were finding was clearly a game site and used variations of the logos. But she did periodically issue warnings and suggestion to 'infringers' that they should change the logo enough to be noticeably different etc.

sinful pivot
#

then by 2015 we were using custom graphics

haughty torrent
# runic wraith Of course we would remove them when asked to do so, same can't be said for these...

I understand that which is why i stated you would, but its like we all have acknowledge that there is an extremely blurry line when it comes to using military trademarks and some sources highly suggest to outright not use them all together as doing so can not be defined as “legal”. Yet many mod makers still go abouts and do so without permission knowing its not legal. Just because you haven’t been caught doesn’t mean what you are doing is legal. So i think “rippers” shouldn’t be bashed and shamed because they “knew what they were doing” but instead educated and perhaps the community does a better job leading by example when it comes to asking for permissions

#

Seems hypocritical to demand people ask you for permissions then turn around and make mods that are using trademarked items that you have not acquired the permissions. (Not saying you are doing this but as a whole community)

chilly silo
# haughty torrent Gotcha, i get that i am mixing up terms but it just wasnt part of my full argume...

Ok but it really seem to be that it was from your replies.

If its any consolation to your arguement, I dont think anyone should use Trademarked brands. But honestly my main concern is about ripping/stealing models. But even in real world law - as opposed to "BI discord policy" - the penalties for Ip theft and non-commercial infringement of a trademark are hugely different.

Theft in any form is not tolerated here.
Trademark infringement is frowned up. But few regard is on the same level as theft.

chilly silo
# haughty torrent I understand that which is why i stated you would, but its like we all have ackn...

So i think “rippers” shouldn’t be bashed and shamed because they “knew what they were doing”
As a repeated victim of rippers I am always going to disagree with you. I think they should be publicly shamed. Its about the only real punishment there is on the internet.

In the past (A1 to early A3 times) when it was all brushed under the carpet it cause massive divisions in the community. So much so the majority of established modders have left the scene in the last 7-8 years. I've been in this community since 2002. About 80% of the people i came up with have left due to increasing theft and poor attitudes.

I welcome the zero tolerance against people who rip mods. But I don't think someone using a logo is in the same league. Don't get me wrong I'm not condoning it. But its not quite the same as ripping my models to use as their own or sell them.

As for the policy here - This is BI's discord. They can set what ever rules they choose. if you disagree contact BI directly and make a case for changing them. until then we all follow the rules or we leave.

runic wraith
#

Strange concept. Thieves shouldn't be bashed and shamed, but rather educated on something that is common sense. All because we are creating artistic representations of trademarked items which hasn't caused any issues. And just so you know, we did contact some of the companies whose products we were representing, and every one we interacted with was fully supportive or at least gave permission. While none of the rippers whom have taken assets from us have ever once requested permission first.

#

Direct Action literally sent us high quality reference pictures for the plate carrier we were modeling, as well as images for their logo

#

But in your thinking we are in the same boat as rippers? Wtf?

stable zealot
#

I believe there is also a precedent for public use of war assets in favour of an accurate historical representation of war as seen in the Activision/AM General ruling

#

I'm also personally all for not putting real military emblems, patches, insignia onto items seeing as I didn't personally earn that beret or rank slide. Wear all the gear sure, but to me ranks and accurate emblems are not so necessary to enjoying the game so I don't personally feel the need for them to be included. If it was decided tomorrow that using accurate military emblems was in breach of copyright, I would personally have not issue complying with that. To me the important part is the gear, and to an extent accurate manufacturer markings such as having the right Colt stamps and serial numbers on the M4 you're making.

south egret
#

View on this also differs a lot per country. For instance in Finland military emblems are set to be public domain since they are seen as part of an official statement or representation. Here any ban for false representation applies only to the military uniform. For example one can wear army uniform without insignia, however with insignia it would be illegal for non-active service. For communities I do know that FDF has actually reached out to modders and ARMA 3 units for cooperation. There was one mod team which was openly approached by the military for active cooperation.

#

So some of the militaries are instead more of positive for their portrayal in the game, but this is quite case-per-case thing here.

#

I do know of some personnel whom have played said mods and one I've worked on (NF, WW2 setting) and they were more than happy about them being represented historically. Also resources and much of help have been provided by said people. At some point their newspaper actually advertised ARMA 3 milsims.

sudden folio
#

Hi what is up brothers.
I'm currently developing a uniform mod, which I plan to release soon. However, since this is just a uniform mod, I feel it wont be that interesting for the workshop preview page if it just shows the uniforms without all the gear. My question is, would it be okay if I include screenshots of loadouts with vests, weapons etc from other mod in conjunction with my uniforms in the workshop preview page?

#

i.e the borrowed assets are not included in my mod at all. They are only used to show example loadouts when used in conjunction with my mod, and will also be explicitly stated in the description

stiff jasper
#

as long as

  • all screenshots are made by you
  • you don't include any ripped stuff within your mod
    you're safe and good to go
soft egret
#

There are some mods that forbid sharing of screenshots (oh heavens..) but thats only really really rarely an issue

stiff jasper
sudden folio
#

Alright thanks a lot! heliswagger

tribal crest
#

Hey, a question regarding IP rights

#

So to state the obvious, anything that isn't yours that's distributed by you in mods, workshop etc. is bad

#

In this case, music

#

But what's the general consensus regarding say, fan compositions/remix/etc. of copyrighted soundtrack?

#

As well as things distributed in mission PBOs

#

Someone I know is considering putting music in a mission PBO and I wanted to get the authoritative take here to advise them

#

I'm fairly certain the answer is "no" but just wanted to get it here

crystal talon
#

Unless the original is under an open license, the answer is probably no

#

you'd otherwise have to more or less remake it from scratch and be different enough from the original, or the original author would have to be dead for however many years needed for copyright to expire.

#

the one potential exception would be parody, but that wouldn't be solid ground to stand on

chilly silo
stable zealot
#

I know the OPTRE team has successfully recomposed Halo music that's had a big tick of approval, might be worth investigating the measures they took to differentiate their content allowing it to be "their own"

faint nacelle
#

That said, Halo IP does have quite special status of fan content endorsement from the IP owner

static ember
#

Skimming this chat, as someone that went through having my mod ripped and the process of getting it back.

If someone is simply naive to what there doing, then educating them about the actual rules and regs is beneficial.

But is someone is doing it in a malicious act and is continuing after trying to educate, then by that point they cannot claim to be naive and in my personal oppinon if they don't want to be educated then banishing them is the only option?

#

I must admit most people using arma mods have more or less no clue about the actual IP rights etc.

static ember
stable zealot
#

Most people I know are over "educating" the hundreds of people who don't bother educating themselves

delicate hamlet
#

there is no such thing as over education, enforcing EULA is always the right thing to do. It's like if someone took a car from a dealership and them claim that they didnt knew that doing that is stealing. They are obviously not being ignorant.

half cosmos
sinful pivot
#

The people who do it knowingly for the shits and giggles don't learn. Even at the threat of legal action they'll back down until the coast is clear then do it again

stable zealot
#

Yeah, sure there's some people who respond to a simple "hey please stop that" and are keen to learn, but they're 1/100, and the 99 others have ruined it.

frail smelt
stable zealot
#

lol

hushed niche
# tribal crest But what's the general consensus regarding say, fan compositions/remix/etc. of c...

Ooh ooh I know this one!

If you wish to release a remix/cover of a copyrighted song you need to first ask permission from the owner of the song’s rights (this could be the artist but it’s more likely the label or the publisher) and if they give you permission you must then pay mechanical royalties.

If your remix contains audio from the original song, you must apply to get the sample cleared and that is gonna come with a pretty hefty price in some cases

wispy frost
# stable zealot Yeah, sure there's some people who respond to a simple "hey please stop that" an...

thats the point. but since a lotta people just ripoff mods without even asking and mentioning i also do understand modders quite well that act hard against those violations even if its sometimes a bit too hard in my opinion.
i suppose everyone can just do his or her best. i also asked a modder if i can put his mod as part of mine and it was no problem and we talked a long time and it was really nice. now im legally allowed to do nearly everything with this mod, found a new friend and even know what his next work will look like.
and thats how it should be

soft egret
#

Why do people need to be educated after they were found to have uploaded stuff without permission?
There is a VERY clear message before EVERY addon upload to the workshop in the A3 Publisher tool that you have to confirm

explorer_0NYet2N5So.png
#

Everyone who uploaded to the workshop in the last half year (since this message was added) has already been educated and just ignored it.
Why would it help if someone else would try to educate them again

manic laurel
#

maybe you should add "4 real tho" at the end of this message, dunno

soft egret
#

!purgeban 842870626717139005 0 racial slur username

edgy coralBOT
manic laurel
soft egret
manic laurel
#

most likely cranky people who couldn't stand being corrected on intellectual property rights 😄

#

I love that "oh let's go say the n word, that'll show'em!" is THE thing that came to their mind 😆
we have all the time and all the hammers in the world, gents 😎

compact stump
#

maybe just ask for permission before uploading peoples stuff, is it really that difficult of an aspect to comprehend

wispy frost
manic laurel
#

as I often say you already have the no, asking only risks you a yes

wispy frost
faint nacelle
#

in case that is attempt at humour, you failed quite miserably.

crystal talon
#

first message in the discord

#

probably a troll

manic laurel
#

so, attempt at humor, attempt at justifying ripping, what was it 😄

#

ah nevermind, you're just part of the troll gang

#

!purgeban 756875382170452019 0 ip troll, praising ripping 3D models

edgy coralBOT
manic laurel
#

ez pz, 🍋 squeezy

faint nacelle
#

ah

manic laurel
#

☁️ 🧹

runic wraith
#

Why all these ripped mods keep taking USP stuff then?

manic laurel
#

¯_(ツ)_/¯

#

it's so poop they have to steal it!

#

so they can be 30k times poopier! 😄

spare osprey
crystal talon
#

Random question, but aren't you supposed to be forced to accept the rules before being able to post messages?

manic laurel
#

not yet, it's in testing phase
you are anyway not allowed to ignore them 😈

spare osprey
#

I would guess the google drive they link use is ripped content

steady hatch
#

The mod itself is not ripped therefore it’s out of the arma dev’s jurisdiction

manic laurel
#

not really out no.

steady hatch
#

You yourself can’t take down his deviant art page

manic laurel
#

nope, but we can at least prevent him from posting anything in the Workshop.

#

deviantart itself being out of reach though, I agree

steady hatch
plain rivet
#

Didn’t someone rip USP, like, last week?

manic laurel
#

what is this channel today 😄

steady hatch
#

^

manic laurel
#

you may think it's pointless ¯_(ツ)_/¯

steady hatch
#

It is

#

It doesn’t stop anyone

manic laurel
#

you must not have been following recent events then

#

that and DMCA'ing reuploaders/rippers, and workshop-banning plenty of recidivists, but hey

steady hatch
#

If it worked then people wouldn’t rip for fear of punishment

manic laurel
#

so because it does not work 100%, it's useless… interesting thonk
the goal is to make ripping less visible, more risky, of course it's not cleaning everything up, in what kind of wonderful world do you live 😄

#

just that money makes people go back at it, because some players are OK with paying for ripped content in illegally monetised servers

#

if you have better/complementary ideas, we are of course all ears

faint nacelle
#

you probably could report those serves for discord safety for distributing stolen IP

#

is this really what you want?

#

ah

#

good bye then

manic laurel
#

last chance to say "it was a joke!"

#

so you can report these discord servers 🙂

#

ETA?

#

I don't see anything in this channel.

#

post them here yeah

runic wraith
# steady hatch Oh btw siege no one is ripping your stuff anymore

How strange. The IHPS helmet was our most recent addition released and it was ripped, but I'm sure that was just for the meme as thats what you guys do best. Oh and gotta be good at screenshots too, makes the stuff you're using look better than what people actually get. Regardless, every item you use of ours just makes it easier for us to DMCA and that doesn't only apply to the workshop.

steady hatch
#

Siege please stop focusing all your energy on dmcas please update your old models and improve your mod

dull moon
#

and then the drive gets a DMCA.
not so long ago a notorious "life community" got the big boot. multiple DMCA strikes on users on the workshop, google drives and even the website hoster.

manic laurel
#

so the only good directions according to you is:

  • allow everyone to do anything
  • prevent modding
    ?
dull moon
#

which get's a DMCA also in no time.

manic laurel
#

1/

  • BI as a company could not encourage or allow that
  • it kills creativity and BI wants to support its modding community
    2/
  • Arma = modding, deal with it - if they were to remove modding from A3, I believe you would be the first to complain
#

(you could now already)
you are openly saying "stopping modding makes people leave Arma"… can you see the issue in your reasoning now?

spare osprey
#

I don’t understand why you don’t join the team and put work into the official mod instead of ripping it.

#

I mean some of you have talent

manic laurel
#

so you complain yet provide no solution 🤷‍♂️
that's what I don't get. instead of helping each other, it's shooting in others' feet, and not even for the lolz, just in a "I want, I take" manner

there are smarter things to do, as @spare osprey states ↑

karmic root
spare osprey
#

I’m not going to BS and say I haven’t made a “unit mod” that was not the best approach. I think many start this way.

spare osprey