Need to Change the Fair Use Agreement?

[+Dave 2,318]

I have been getting pms from modders that have been having their stuff uploaded as a "new" package. With the original modder not getting credit. The fair use agreement does state that credit must be given. So far Wrench had to change the way his mods are used. Sundowner might change his, and the use of TMF stuff without permission is forbidden. So my question is, does this agreement even work? If not, are there any better ideas? If this is fine how do we fix this issue?

[+Stary 2,426]

Dave I think we might consider going back to the old way, with original author's permission requirement (given he's still active and around)

I've seen some mods based on mine work around too, I'm ok with that as long as the new mod bears some acceptable level of polishing which sadly not allways is the case

[+ravenclaw_007 7,206]

i think it is pretty clear , if one does not give proper credit to the original creator or claims it as his own work it is piracy and the rules for piracy are clear as well

 

so i dont think that we have to change the Fair Use Agreement but make clear what are the result of such violation

[+Stary 2,426]

but what can we do? Ban the poor soul? That would be way to much in my opinion..?

[+whiteknight06604 931]

I think part of the issue might be that there are alot of newer modders here who prob are not as familiar with the rules. the old timers were the ones who made the rules and know and understand them and know the original authors. the newer guys have prob not "familiarized" themselves the same way with the rules and prob don't have the same understandings and friendships with the original authors.

[+Brain32 265]

Yeah I noticed some too, true re-edited, just some parts used etc. but still.

Truth be told I really don't give too much of s*** but really, can it be that hard to just write my very short name and a simple credit. Most people that use my stuff even go ahead and ask me over PM which I really don't require, that's uber fair, but not writing down 5 letters and two numbers just makes me think the offender though I will not notice a part of my work in theirs which is silly, I was looking at my sh** so many hours I know every pixel so...it's just silly.

I don't report because I'm one of those types, and especially in case of an overall cool stuff I don't want to ruin it for the others.

 

As for the question on how to change FUA I say as with any "law" - add sanctions, I don't know if this forum has that capatibility but on the Croatian forum I moderate there's a time-ban option, we can ban people for 24hrs or 72 or a week, whatever we choose...

Edited September 16, 2012 by Brain32

[+malibu43 142]

Well, if it's really a matter of folks just not knowing the rules, why don't we just let them know when it happens and ask them to correct it?

 

Punishment is only appropriate for those that we "remind" of the rules and still refuse to abide.

 

Maybe we could put something in the fair use agreement that "suggests" not to make very minor edits to someone's work and then release it as a new version without asking permission of the author. I've seen some instances where long-time modder X releases Plane A, and then someone new I've never seen before rereleases it a day later as a Plane A Edited because they changed the loudout.ini or something like that... just a thought...

[+Dave 2,318]

We can ban people too for the amount of time like that. I do agree we maybe need to brief the noobie modders on looking at the fair use agreement. My goal is not to make this soooo restrictive that modding is a pain, I also do not want new people discouraged from modding. However people who mods are being used do need to be respected. This has been a slippery slope for years and do not want the community to appear like were a bunch of assholes either. Keep the ideas coming.

[+Sundowner 4,501]

What my main gripe is that a specific mod have been completely "overwritten" on the basis that theirs is better, as if to say , ignore the old one its crap, no body should be able to just stomp across some's work like that.

Folks generally pm me just to be polite and ask if they can add or change something which like Brain32 says is usually not needed.

[+SupGen 78]

Just my two cents; personaly, I think a lot of the "offenders" may just not have read the agreement. Perhaps when new members join they should have to read it before being accepted?

[+russouk2004 6,951]

If anyone missuses the agreement files etc...restrict their download\upload capabilities if they consistently abuse the files?

any way to add a popup when people upload or download a modders agreement file.? saying please credit author etc?

Edited September 16, 2012 by russouk2004

[+russouk2004 6,951]

I might add that lots of people DO pm me or ask in forum if they can alter or use summat.

[+Stary 2,426]

simple thing would be fair use agreement window pop-up on file upload, so the newbie users have to agree to it to proceed, after receiving modder status screen would be no longer needed -reason is that everyone started as not modder with his/her first uploads

Edited September 16, 2012 by Stary

[+SupGen 78]

simple thing would be fair use agreement window pop-up on file upload, so the newbie users have to agree to it to proceed, after receiving modder status screen would be no longer needed -reason is that everyone started as not modder with his/her first uploads

 

Absolutly, just make them actualy read it, not just click a box that "says" they read it.

[+Gunrunner 313]

So far the real problem seems only to be with newcomers either repackaging recent stuff with their minor tweaks or really old stuff (some of which should not be redistributed here, but usually that's filtered).

 

A way to solve that would be not to allow members to upload mods before they either reached a certain level of activity on the boards (and we can hope, have learnt how we do things here) or have been explicitly tagged as modders by either a moderator or other known modders (that one is my favorite option as it forces newcomers to engage in conversation with old timers and limits the spam inherent to tying anything to board activity).

Edited September 16, 2012 by Gunrunner

[+Erik 1,731]

I can lead a horse to water but I can't make it drink.

 

SEE THE WATER

 

I would leave it at that for now and continue our process for approval / removal of files.

[+EricJ 3,929]

What my main gripe is that a specific mod have been completely "overwritten" on the basis that theirs is better, as if to say , ignore the old one its crap, no body should be able to just stomp across some's work like that.

Folks generally pm me just to be polite and ask if they can add or change something which like Brain32 says is usually not needed.

 

I agree on that wholeheartedly as I may have plans for one mod and well... sometimes it's a cool modification/enhancement, but in the long run it mucks with your whole Evil Plan.

 

And I definitely support a checkbox for people when they upload mods. If they don't read it you can sock it too him/her when he/she messes with your stuff.

[Wrench 9,417]

mostly, its the fact they DON'T read the FUA, DON't read the 'Before Uploading a Mod" sticky

 

yes, a checkbox; anything to give a bit more control

 

EDIT: opps, missed Erik post. Man, I LIKKES that!!!

Edited September 16, 2012 by Wrench

[+malibu43 142]

What my main gripe is that a specific mod have been completely "overwritten" on the basis that theirs is better, as if to say , ignore the old one its crap, no body should be able to just stomp across some's work like that.

...

 

+1

[+Dave 2,318]

Good idea Erik.

[Capitaine Vengeur 263]

I vote for the 'Three strikes and you're out" rule. There a strike is when obvious plagiarism can be proved, and no agreement can be found for the plagiarist to amend "his" work with credits and apologises. Then, time for the administrators to take steps. First time, a moderate didactic warning to the novice or absent-minded. Second time, a severe ultimatum to the one now suspected of genuine dishonesty. On this step, sterile yet intelligent "modders" unable to propose an original work should understand that they'd better stop uploading.Third time, well, too bad: "Walk the plank and say 'Hello brothers' to the sharks!"

[+suhsjake 11]

Instead of banning the poor soul (unless he had malicious intent), just disable the mod download until everything is sorted out/corrected then issue an infraction. Accumulate to many infractions, temporary ban, if it persists, then permaban.

[+daddyairplanes 8,609]

a shot to the kneecap for the first offense, between the legs for all others (given most of our members are male.)

and the beatings will continue until morale improves or Dave comes back to SF!

 

seriously though like Eriks idea, plus possibly the moderator that approves a file could send the link to it prior to approval.

[+Veltro2k 6,315]

My two cents here also....Nothing personal against the moderators and all due respect, when someone uploads a file for approval, take It up for a spin is something feels familiar maybe do a check and if something offensive is found, may a little polite note saying thank you ,but sorry due to the fact .... Too rough ?

[+Veltro2k 6,315]

What my main gripe is that a specific mod have been completely "overwritten" on the basis that theirs is better, as if to say , ignore the old one its crap, no body should be able to just stomp across some's work like that.

Folks generally pm me just to be polite and ask if they can add or change something which like Brain32 says is usually not needed.

 

I agree with this also..The same reason I scrapped many projects when I saw that someone else was working on one...(F-108 also scrapped due the Fast has one) my way of showing my respect, and if you would like to colaborate with the original creator to better a model, even better..for instance My bear project got off the ground because Amokfloo gave me the base and all credit was given to that fact on the finished project.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Veltro2k