Board index FlightGear Support 3rd Party Repositories

Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organisati

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Bomber » Sun May 29, 2016 10:34 am

Hooray.... quit calling for topics to be closed.

Maybe you should use a second sock.... from a very big person.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchel
Bomber
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:06 pm
OS: Windows XP and 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Bomber » Sun May 29, 2016 10:37 am

Totally agree....

If you go to Fgmembers forum you'd know that I'm voicing the same opinion over there, and getting some movement on the subject.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchel
Bomber
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:06 pm
OS: Windows XP and 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby skyop » Sun May 29, 2016 10:39 am

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 10:25 am:Look let's face it we're talking two different things here...


You might be right, and I've strayed far from my original point, which was that FGMEMBERS is no savior because it disregards copyright law (and justifies doing so with appalling pseudo-legal gymnastics). I'll bow out of this.
Aircraft: [ CRJ700-family | DC-10-30 ] Scenery: [ KBFL ]
skyop
 
Posts: 3047
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:40 am
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
IRC name: skyop
Version: next
OS: Fedora 23/Windows 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby skyop » Sun May 29, 2016 10:54 am

Edit: Regarding your last edit which I didn't see drafting my earlier post,

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 10:26 am:
abassign wrote in Fri May 27, 2016 11:23 pm:. 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.


Where's the concern for these people's rights ?


I'm sorry, I don't see the connection - if anything, this illustrates precisely the situation I described. Potential contributors are suppressed because commericalized ripoffs of FG, such as the likes of FlightProSim, are legally allowed under the GPL but are neither morally desirable nor in agreement with the wishes/intent of FG's authors.

Which is why I take statements like

Nothing immoral and most definitely something desirable has been done by distributing on Fgmembers....


with a grain of salt, because just because it is allowed by the GPL doesn't mean it should be done, as distributing projects against the author's wishes sows discord and makes contributors hesitant to work in public.
Aircraft: [ CRJ700-family | DC-10-30 ] Scenery: [ KBFL ]
skyop
 
Posts: 3047
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:40 am
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
IRC name: skyop
Version: next
OS: Fedora 23/Windows 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Bomber » Sun May 29, 2016 11:14 am

There is however quite a margin of difference between seeing your work distributed by another FG community repository (because that's what it actually is) and seeing your work being used and charged for in Cliffs of Dover.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchel
Bomber
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:06 pm
OS: Windows XP and 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Bomber » Sun May 29, 2016 11:23 am

skyop wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 10:39 am:
Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 10:25 am:Look let's face it we're talking two different things here...


You might be right, and I've strayed far from my original point, which was that FGMEMBERS is no savior because it disregards copyright law (and justifies doing so with appalling pseudo-legal gymnastics). I'll bow out of this.


Considering the total numbers of planes being distributed on Fgmembers what percentage do you visualise fall into that category?

That said a plane that's not been touched for 6 years, has no licence, is found on the Web and distributed via Fgmembers for the benefit of the community on the understanding that attempting to get in touch with the author can be considered to be done with good intentions.

Yes it's a bit grey, but you can download the plane already it's not like Fgmembers are distributing planes that they've acquired underhand.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchel
Bomber
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:06 pm
OS: Windows XP and 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby bugman » Sun May 29, 2016 11:23 am

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 11:14 am:There is however quite a margin of difference between seeing your work distributed by another FG community repository (because that's what it actually is) and seeing your work being used and charged for in Cliffs of Dover.


Bomber, that's purely an opinion for the content creator to decide upon ;)

Regards,
Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1465
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Thorsten » Sun May 29, 2016 11:27 am

You changed a licence.... you don't have that right.... Well you claim others dont have that right but think you do..you seem to want your cake and eat it.


You're still not making any sense, sorry. You don't even seem to know what the license headers of the Shuttle on FGAddon say, so I repeat - maybe you just read something wrong.

The licence very much does state intent.... that's it's very purpose.


No, the license states a permission to do things. GPL permits you to decorate the Shuttle with Nazi emblems - it'd be silly to claim that this would be my intention. GPL allows FlightProSim to sell your ASK-13 - which clearly is not your intention.

Licensing GPL is making a bet - that bet being that there'll be more honest developers who make use of the work, add to it and give it back in some way and less freeloaders and parasitic repositories. The bet is that most people using GPL will be different from the likes of you who confuse legal permission with respect and intention.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 9302
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby bugman » Sun May 29, 2016 11:28 am

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 11:23 am:Yes it's a bit grey, but you can download the plane already it's not like Fgmembers are distributing planes that they've acquired underhand.


This is not grey, but pure black. The FGMEMBERS organisation may want to do this, but it is illegal, pure and simple.

Regards,
Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1465
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Bomber » Sun May 29, 2016 11:32 am

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 11:23 am:
That said a plane that's not been touched for 6 years, has no licence, is found on the Web and distributed via Fgmembers for the benefit of the community on the understanding that attempting to get in touch with the author can be considered to be done with good intentions.

Yes it's a bit grey, but you can download the plane already it's not like Fgmembers are distributing planes that they've acquired underhand.


Sorry no its not it's a moral issue....

Are Fgmembers in your opinion distributing old planes that no longer work with the present version of FG in the hope that they get updated. Doing so with good or malicious intent at heart ?

There's been so much talk about respect around here that it's time we talked about the possibility of respecting the original authors intentions to add to this community.

Is not keeping his work hiden away in a dark corner of the web because maybe in the meantime he's died possibly not respecting the authors wishes ?

Simon.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchel
Bomber
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:06 pm
OS: Windows XP and 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Thorsten » Sun May 29, 2016 11:35 am

Hello - it's illegal. Is that so difficult to grasp?

Whatever the intention of the original author may have been, it's not up to you to guess. If you have no permission by the copyright holder, you can't license it yourself.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 9302
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Bomber » Sun May 29, 2016 11:39 am

Thorsten wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 11:27 am:
You're still not making any sense, sorry. You don't even seem to know what the license headers of the Shuttle on FGAddon say, so I repeat - maybe you just read something wrong.
.


Quit prevaricating....I don't need to know the header then or now... however

Did you or did you not change the licence from GPL2 to GPL on the shuttle?

It's a simple question....please respect this community by answering unequivocally.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchel
Bomber
 
Posts: 1935
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 7:06 pm
OS: Windows XP and 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby bugman » Sun May 29, 2016 11:40 am

Not only can you not license it as a 3rd party, you also cannot distribute it as a 3rd party.

Regards,
Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1465
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby skyop » Sun May 29, 2016 11:41 am

Back on topic. :wink:

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 11:23 am:Considering the total numbers of planes being distributed on Fgmembers what percentage do you visualise fall into that category?


Basically any plane with an "undeclared license" and a "temporary CC-BY-NC-SA" label. Is this all of them, or even a majority? No, but that misses the point, which is...

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 11:23 am:That said a plane that's not been touched for 6 years, has no licence, is found on the Web and distributed via Fgmembers for the benefit of the community on the understanding that attempting to get in touch with the author can be considered to be done with good intentions.


I don't doubt the intentions were good. But the fact that these copyright violations happened is indicative of larger issues with FGMEMBERS. Yes, we've had some GPL violation incidents in fgdata/FGAddon too, but none involved something as blatant as making up licenses - that would simply never fly. Israel, with all due respect, seems to have a gross misunderstanding of copyright law and licensing. These legal problems, in addition to the author respect problems I also outlined, will always make FGMEMBERS controversial.
Aircraft: [ CRJ700-family | DC-10-30 ] Scenery: [ KBFL ]
skyop
 
Posts: 3047
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 12:40 am
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
IRC name: skyop
Version: next
OS: Fedora 23/Windows 10

Re: Distribution of unlicensed works by the FGMEMBERS organi

Postby Hooray » Sun May 29, 2016 11:41 am

Bomber wrote in Sun May 29, 2016 10:34 am:Hooray.... quit calling for topics to be closed.
Maybe you should use a second sock.... from a very big person.


Almost certainly, the topic has already been reported - and it will undoubtedly not take very long to review this discussion in the context of the forum rules:

  • Our FlightGear community is diverse, and we must all respect each each and be tolerant of other opinions, particularly if they differ from or own. While politely disagreement is expected, to avoid flame-wars if it is clear that you are not going to changes someone's opinion, agree to disagree and stop. Moderators may lock topics that are considered to go around in circles.
  • While differing opinions are fine, facts are facts. Continual disagreement with facts is considered trolling.
  • Don't feed the trolls. If you consider someone is making a contentious post just to get a reaction, report it to a moderator rather than responding.
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: 11100
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

PreviousNext

Return to 3rd Party Repositories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests