Board index FlightGear Development Aircraft

FIAT G91-R1B

Questions and discussion about creating aircraft. Flight dynamics, 3d models, cockpits, systems, animation, textures.

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby FighterAce » Mon Jan 01, 2018 2:33 pm

Wow, this is looking awesome! Great job guys!
FighterAce
 
Posts: 187
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 8:48 pm
Location: In the sky
Callsign: FighterAce
Version: 2017.1.3
OS: Mac Mojave

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby Thorsten » Mon Jan 01, 2018 2:34 pm

A question and a reflection for everyone ... why the accuser, not involved in this discussion?


It's New Year's day - he might be on holiday, hung over,... There's dozens of innocent reasons I can imagine at that point.

That does not mean that this should convince Thorsten in any way, obviously if he's volunteering to handle the review,


As I said earlier, I no longer am.

Like Erik said, if the original work was GPL, too - everything should be fine still.


It was not - I remember Cobe751 violently opposing the idea of publishing his creation GPL.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10948
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby curt » Mon Jan 01, 2018 2:59 pm

A couple quick comments:
In one past situation, the alleged source material was free, but not for commercial purposes, so it was straightforward to fetch the original model and compare to the disputed model in blender. In that particular case it became quite obvious that the mesh detail was identical and accusation was proved.
In a more recent case, the accusation was made by a 3rd party that someone copied and modified a commercial FSX model. To investigate fairly, it would require someone purchasing the original model ... or contacting the commercial FSX developer for help, but that risks transforming a small complaint into a much larger issue. For what it's worth, I don't really care what people do privately on their own computer, but I hope to be sufficiently informed so we can avoid putting tainted models into our project repositories. In this particular case, a youtube movie of the disputed original model showed remarkable similarities in textures and details. That's not proof positive, but a person really had to work hard to spot the differences (and many of the differences were trivial or consistent with a modified model, like a color shift in a texture, or a replaced instrument on the panel.) All of that correlated tightly with the accusation. In this case we didn't go out of our way to embarrass anyone publicly over their (semi) private indiscretions, but hopefully we are prepared with correct information if they choose to embarrass themselves at some point in the future.

For the Fiat issue, I'm just seeing this now. If someone claims to be an original author and claims someone else is copying their work, it would be very helpful to provide us with clear evidence. These investigations are tricky and often require a lot of time and effort. Here it is New Years day and the last thing I want to worry about is FlightGear politics and accusations and investigations. These things get messy and time consuming. So it would be great if the first author could lend evidence of matching details to support their claim., that would be very helpful.
Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics
University of Minnesota
curt
Administrator
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby wkitty42 » Mon Jan 01, 2018 5:21 pm

abassign wrote in Mon Jan 01, 2018 10:21 am:
Thorsten wrote in Mon Jan 01, 2018 6:38 am:If we both have near-identical files, but only I can produce a timestamped repository history showing my commits and you can not, the case is very clear.
So I believe the question is rather meaningful - do you have a repository history of any kind?
If so, we can settle the whole affair within ten minutes...


If you make this statement, then you have not read the time-stamp of the DropBox repository that I've added to you earlier:

dude, you need a paper trail... dropbox and images are not a paper trail... the commit logs from a repository are a paper trail... a paper trail that cannot be faked (if it can be faked at all)... sadly, i don't see this going anywhere because of this dispute and your apparent inability to produce the requested paper trail so that everyone will know, without any doubt, that your work is what you say it is... you are not being asked to defend yourself or your work... you are being asked to provide a paper trail showing your work from the beginning to the current point in time... this would be required anyway even without the accusation from your former friend!

sorry for the google translate italian:
Amico, hai bisogno di una scia di carta ... dropbox e le immagini non sono una scia di carta ... i registri di commit da un repository sono una traccia cartacea ... una scia di carta che non può essere falsificata (se può essere falsificata del tutto) ... purtroppo, non vedo questo andare da nessuna parte a causa di questa disputa e la tua apparente incapacità di produrre la traccia cartacea richiesta in modo che tutti possano sapere, senza alcun dubbio, che il tuo lavoro è ciò che dici che è ... tu non ti viene chiesto di difendere te stesso o il tuo lavoro ... ti viene chiesto di fornire una traccia cartacea che mostra il tuo lavoro dall'inizio alla data odierna ... questo sarebbe comunque richiesto anche senza l'accusa del tuo ex amico !
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 5630
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby Richard » Mon Jan 01, 2018 6:20 pm

wkitty42 wrote in Mon Jan 01, 2018 5:21 pm:you need a paper trail... dropbox and images are not a paper trail... the commit logs from a repository are a paper trail


A set of commit logs, if available is one way to show mesh development - however if these aren't available then it is a moot point. In any case I suspect that a comparison of the mesh be the only way to realistically prove this. Anyone who's done any serious 3d modelling will know that although the item being modeled may be the same any two given meshes for any 3d model will be different, there is a style that you can detect from how the mesh is built.

My view is that the originator of the complaint must provide substantive evidence to make a claim of copying. In the absence of this evidence there is no case to answer. Until evidence is provided nobody should be making any judgments.

If the complainant provides evidence, then the defendant has the right to view and reply to the evidence; and then an impartial person can decide.
Richard
 
Posts: 706
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 10:17 pm
Version: Git
OS: Win10

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby Hooray » Mon Jan 01, 2018 6:44 pm

indeed, that sounds like a good idea to me - i.e. have the people involved in this describe exactly how the whole thing is structured/built, and see if it matches the description or not - it's probably akin to coding (or even writing), i.e. someone who spent literally months coming up with said work, should have no problem at all describing how the whole thing is put together to substantiate such claims.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11329
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby Thorsten » Mon Jan 01, 2018 6:57 pm

My view is that the originator of the complaint must provide substantive evidence to make a claim of copying. In the absence of this evidence there is no case to answer. Until evidence is provided nobody should be making any judgments.


Sorry - does this mean you advocate committing stuff in the presence of a claim but absence of any evidence of stealing (and removing from the repo when such evidence is produced later)? Or does not making judgements mean not committing for now (and waiting for a reasonable period of time whether any such evidence is produced later)?

It's all nice and fine to quote 'in dubio pro reo' - who wants to stick his neck out and apply this principle in practice, taking the risk that the claim is substantiated later? A judge in a court proceeding can't be prosecuted for making an error - but you can.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10948
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby Hooray » Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:04 pm

I don't disagree with that, but I think that some of the requests here are a bit unfortunate - numerous contributors have contributed features prior to the git/cvs days. I think that's even how the "local weather system" took shape originally (?)
Thus, asking for a "commit history" may be more far-fetched than some of us realize.
I mean, someone could just as well claim that you took ALS or EarthView from him (assuming you don't have a commit/posting history to make your case,) - and we'd face the same dilemma.

So this is not just a theoretical scenario where we need to tread carefully for the sake of the safety of the project, but also one where people have to act in a reasonable fashion, to avoid that the project is harmed by not questioning such allegations and asking for evidence that supports such accusations, i.e. not welcoming contributions due to certain allegations.

Not having any insight at all in the development of this aircraft (or even the shuttle originally), I can honestly relate to the dilemma, but I think it should be possible to deal with this in a reasonable fashion, while also learning a lesson from it (as in, maintaining a commit history and sharing progress by "releasing early & often")
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11329
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby abassign » Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:11 pm

wkitty42 wrote in Mon Jan 01, 2018 5:21 pm:dude, you need a paper trail... dropbox and images are not a paper trail... the commit logs from a repository are a paper trail... a paper trail that cannot be faked (if it can be faked at all)... sadly, i don't see this going anywhere because of this dispute and your apparent inability to produce the requested paper trail so that everyone will know, without any doubt, that your work is what you say it is... you are not being asked to defend yourself or your work... you are being asked to provide a paper trail showing your work from the beginning to the current point in time... this would be required anyway even without the accusation from your former friend!


My dear, you see that you have not understood much of the problem is that the accuser must bring the evidence not the accused!
The fact that the prosecutor (Cobe571) has not delivered his files to allow a comparison cancels his accusation.
The law is very clear in this, both Italian and European law, but I also think the American legislation on the matter. Think about it for a moment, how do you declare that a work has been copied from yours if you can not access your work, explain it to me, if you know you do me a huge favor!
With this behavior Cobe571 can declare its any future work on the G91, would you like this fact? I repeat, to avoid this problem, the law simply says that if you present a complaint of plagiarism you must do it only if your work is visible to everyone!

For the speech of your "paper" necessary to know if the work is yours or not ... well it does not solve anything of nothing because I could have filled my GIT in an illegal way with another's material, do not you think? Does a GIT contain only work steps, not all the work and if that first step contains plagiarized files?

For this reason we have inserted a book extracted from our chat, you will see what we discussed, is in chronological order, with a method of work absolutely different from that of Cobe571 (... I followed for two years the work of Cobe571 and I must say that it was not easy ...).

We did not use the Cobe571 files because rightfully the CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 license did not do it, but I never gave anyone the Cobe571 files because I did not want them to be taken as an example of work. I have never considered the working method of Cobe571 according to my wishes for the G91R1B. I wanted something more, to use the material more freely and to increase the polygons very much to increase the quality of the project, to adopt a more careful choice of biographical sources and to ask, to those who piloted the real plane, comments, additions etc.

If you have written a patent, which has many similarities to the problem we are dealing with, the regulations require you to read the literature (for example other patents, publications etc.) and mention them in your work, if you do so will be the patent auditor do it for you! Obviously I learned some techniques from Cobe571, many things can do well, but at the same time I gave Cobe571 other information and about 80% of the information material (partly bought with my credit card by Aviologs), as it is natural that it happens between people who collaborate on a project. I tried to convince you, to adopt a mixed license for the G91R4-GINA as Cobe571 asked me this, here is the discussion:

This post is interesting as it clarifies the position of Cobe571 and his will, like mine, to work for that project with a mixed license, which unfortunately was not accepted.
abassign wrote in Fri May 27, 2016 11:23 pm:G91R4 the project is going ahead :) !
The 3D model continues to be developed by cobe571, and I continue with the FDM and lighting effects. Cobe571 currently is working on the landing gear and I hope soon to be able to start making the opening/closing mechanism. The ejection seat is ready and the interior of the cabin. Missing textures that are in development.
The license of the 3D model developed by Cobe571 is Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0
The license of FDM, NASAL, XML is GPL
This is an interesting experiment in "mixed-license" for FGFS. The reason for this approach is to prevent the 3D designs, developed for FGFS projects, they can become a part of commercial projects. Too many excellent 3D designers are not interested in developing quality projects for FGFS precisely because they believe that the GPL is used fraudulently by commercial companies in the field of flight simulators.
It would be interesting to have a repository for FGFS "Not Free", similar to what exists in Debian. In this repository can therefore be inserted projects with mixed license.
I think the quality has a cost and this cost must be paid somehow. Cobe571 is spending hundreds of hours on the project of G91, for him the model is a kind of "calling card" that can help him to find clients for his work as a 3D modeler. I hope that the example of this project could lead to other good 3D modelers themselves to divesting their works under CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 license.


As you can see I have always played a very active role in the project, but then ending the relationship with Cobe571, I was sorry to abandon over a GByte of information material that I had accumulated (and bought) and the experience of managing such a project.

At this point, when I thought that now the project had ended up in nothing, Cobe571 had promised to publish it, but never did ... When Massimiliano asked to start working on it.
I have managed many SW and research projects for the industry, so I know that the most important thing is to start well. I asked Massimiliano to work on the front landing gear as Cobe had just sketched it ... Massimiliano showed me the hydraulic jack, I liked it a lot, so I decided to help him go on, after the front cart we moved to the front of the aircraft, then the first part of the fuselage, I made the engine etc ... all documented in these images that follow, in chronological order, the project and that show that the project has been entirely developed by us.

This is the project development book, I invite you to look at the images, which are in chronological order, I think it's clear that this is a development that starts from a hydraulic jack to finally get a plane!

Image

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Qott1KdouKMcqb67HYAkjAZ0eihpi1bv
Last edited by bugman on Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Quote cleanup and fix.
abassign
 
Posts: 804
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: Italy (living 5 Km from airport LIME)
Callsign: I-BASSY
Version: 2018.3
OS: Linux Mint 19. x

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby bugman » Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:54 pm

@abassign: You miss the point completely! By adding this to FGAddon - you are asking others to take your legal risk. I.e. Cobe571 could start a court proceeding in Italy - baseless or not - and have the FlightGear developers added as defendants. Then they would have travel from all around the world to go to Italy. And they would need lawyers. This is even if Cobe's claims are completely false! If you are completely blind to this risk, then you might need to see a doctor about your eyes ;)

abassign wrote in Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:11 pm:We did not use the Cobe571 files because rightfully the CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 license did not do it, but I never gave anyone the Cobe571 files because I did not want them to be taken as an example of work. I have never considered the working method of Cobe571 according to my wishes for the G91R1B. I wanted something more, to use the material more freely and to increase the polygons very much to increase the quality of the project, to adopt a more careful choice of biographical sources and to ask, to those who piloted the real plane, comments, additions etc.


Ok, here you say you have Cobe571's meshes. And you say it is under the CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 license. So you can upload these meshes, unmodified, and have someone - like Richard - compare these to your new meshes. Can you do this?

Regards,
Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1697
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby abassign » Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:53 pm

bugman wrote in Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:54 pm:Ok, here you say you have Cobe571's meshes. And you say it is under the CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0 license. So you can upload these meshes, unmodified, and have someone - like Richard - compare these to your new meshes. Can you do this?
Regards, Edward


Meanwhile, the legal risk does not exist because Cobe571 has made an accusation without attaching the evidence, in fact the risk is for him that can be reported legally by who has been accused for defamation through the Internet (maximum imprisonment 4 years).
FGROOT is a container and does not have a direct responsibility on the content, the only thing that can happen is that a judge orders to remove the files under investigation, it is called precautionary measure.
However Cobe571 has never deposited its files to a specific agency, which in Italy is called SIAE (the Creativecommons license is not recognized by the SIAE https://www.wikimedia.it/autori-creative-commons-siae/), not having done so at the time of his complaint can not legally claim anything.

As already explained if Cobe571 had acted legally correctly and without the risk of being sued for defamation, he would first have to make sure that the files he considers to have been plagiarized were passable, then communicate to us, privately, his doubt and ask for a occurs. This verification is normally done by a consultant who is instructed by the two parties (this is called a friendly resolution and is obligatory in Italy for these cases), only if an agreement is not reached to execute the complaint through legal.

If justice took place in the way you said, in Italy, a very litigious country, we would all be in jail :wink:

However I repeat it, in Italian and also European law, who makes the accusation give evidence and not who has been accused! So, by the law, Cobe571 had to make its files accessible in public, and then make the accusation directly to us privately etc ...!

A typical example that may have happened to you:
You make a speeding with the car, nobody will ever ask you to prove that your car was faster than the limit, but the police will send you a document with a nice picture that tells you: "this is the photo that shows that your speed is higher than the maximum allowed at this point of the road, you have 60 days to appeal".
If instead there was written in the communication to the poor driver:
"We accuse him of having exceeded the speed limit at this point on the road, do you must show us that it is not true, he has 60 days to appeal"

Is the question clearer for you now?
abassign
 
Posts: 804
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: Italy (living 5 Km from airport LIME)
Callsign: I-BASSY
Version: 2018.3
OS: Linux Mint 19. x

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby Mada00 » Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:21 pm

After rivers of words today I read that it is not a matter of legal aspects, yet the accusation formulated as a consequence of which the project of our FIATG91R1B is blocked, speaks of THEFT.

I completely agree with Hooray, it is ridiculous to discuss here a subject that is governed by laws that do not oblige the accused to provide evidence and so long as it is not proven that we are guilty then we are innocent and we have the right to be treated like other developers and not in a discretionary way. It can not be overlooked, however, that the request for "commit logs from a repository is a paper trail ... a trail of paper that can not be falsified" is a consequence of the "doubt" insinuated by those who claim to have been robbed.
If Cobe, who has not publicly written the prosecution, and it is unclear whether he has the will to produce concrete evidence and how much time, manages to block a development project then in addition to committing a defamation through a third party, anyone could undermine the project of any developer. The evidence of guilt is the responsibility of those who accuse or who is the spokesperson if the person concerned does not make the accusation public.

If this were the case, dear gentlemen, you can close the page and dedicate yourself to videogames.


Just to clarify that the undersigned Massimiliano Cuccarano alias mada is not an avatar, and that my skills and ability and image can not be questioned by anyone who plays around in doubt, I have to do here an obnoxious but necessary thing.

Below are the links that describe my business

http://www.massimilianocuccarano.it
http://www.archilovers.com/massimiliano-cuccarano/

I have to go back to the subject of the technique indicated by Thorsen to get a 3d base from others because I consider it absurd because it requires more skills than I need to do the exnovo job. More ability, madness or voluntary damage to another person.
If those who accuse me claim that I would have simply increased the vertices and polished must show me that the starting points of our G91R1B coincide exactly with the G91-R4 of cobe571

For an excess of my zeal and abassign, I report here a link where you can view some of the chat screens

development with images, date and time https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wlm0m83dclumb9z/AAAukxiy4J5_P8b-IEMNg8I1a?dl=0


The concept according to which our original files must be kept in security because the person who has the right has never published anything is simply trivial to understand
Mada00
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 9:20 am

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby cobe571 » Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:25 pm

The news, that a G-91-R1B, almost identical to mine was in circulation, was notified to me by an acquaintance. At that moment I was leaving the hospital, after the umpteenth cycle of therapy, and being still devastated by drugs, so I took the news for good, given the sad paths together. This does not justify my unjustified accusations; I know. Only today, that I am home again and I have examined everything; I believe that the work done by the development team is absolutely NOT the result of my work. In fact, they have done much better than I could have done alone. I offer my sincerest apologies to the development team of the G-91-R1B and I wholeheartedly congratulate you on the work done that shows their love for Italian aircraft. My sincerest apologies to Adriano, Enrico and Massimiliano. My sincerest compliments for the Great Job.

My sincerest apologies again

Patrizio ~
"According to the laws of aerodynamics, the bumblebee can't fly either, but the bumblebee doesn't know anything about the laws of aerodynamics, so it goes ahead and flies anyway."
User avatar
cobe571
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 11:28 pm
Location: (ITALY)
Callsign: cobe571
IRC name: cobe571
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: UbuntuStudio , Win10

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby Hooray » Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:42 pm

congrats then, seems like we have finally made a little progress here !
I assume everything else should be better discussed in private.

PS: quoting the last response to ensure that it will be retained "as is", should your posting be edited:

cobe571 wrote in Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:25 pm:The news, that a G-91-R1B, almost identical to mine was in circulation, was notified to me by an acquaintance. At that moment I was leaving the hospital, after the umpteenth cycle of therapy, and being still devastated by drugs, so I took the news for good, given the sad paths together. This does not justify my unjustified accusations; I know. Only today, that I am home again and I have examined everything; I believe that the work done by the development team is absolutely NOT the result of my work. In fact, they have done much better than I could have done alone. I offer my sincerest apologies to the development team of the G-91-R1B and I wholeheartedly congratulate you on the work done that shows their love for Italian aircraft. My sincerest apologies to Adriano and Massimiliano. My sincerest compliments for the Great Job.

My sincerest apologies again

Patrizio ~
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11329
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: FIAT G91-R1B

Postby swampthing » Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:49 pm

Well its good to see this has been resolved. cobe571 I wish you a speedy recovery.
www.opredflag.com
I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. -Thomas Jefferson-
swampthing
 
Posts: 534
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2015 4:10 am
Location: Missouri
Callsign: swamp
Version: 2018.2
OS: multiple

PreviousNext

Return to Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: enrogue, Google [Bot], slawekmikula, Talkless and 15 guests