Where is Mig-23?

[drPhibes]

ED's not based in Russia. The headquarters are in Switzerland. No need to conform to Russian law per se.

 

 

No, the company is registered in Switzerland (most likely for tax and other business reasons). This is not the same as the headquarters being there. The address in the company register is a residential address in Lausanne (most likely related to the owner of TFC).

 

 

 

TL;DR: all the Russian ED staff living and working in Russia are still Russian. The "Société anonyme" after the company name does not change this.

[Mars Exulte]

ED's not based in Russia. The headquarters are in Switzerland. No need to conform to Russian law per se.

 

Except you DO have to conform to Russian law as respects things that belong to Russian entities. You don't get to do whatever you want just because you're in a different country. You can still be sued, and in the case of copyright, trademark, and security laws, those CROSS BORDERS. So, yeah, you very much still have to deal with it. Where your company is registered is irrelevant when you start interacting with someone else's property.

 

Doubly so since a large percentage of ED staff actually RESIDE in Russia. Even if in some particular circumstance you could bypass it on the company level, the local individuals and corporations could be arrested or have their assets siezed and operations shut down.

 

How is this even a topic of discussion? ''I don't live in Russia I can do whatever I want hurdur' yeah.... that's not how the world works.

[msalama]

OK, having been chewn a new rear orifice by an anonymous Texan I'm forced to agree with him. No, you guys are of course right, had a stoppage of cranial activity having had a couple of ales last night and thus the brain flatulence above. Can I go now?

[Torso]

Not being based in Russia would not change that.

 

IP laws etc are international. Not getting permission from the owners is going to result in legal action that WILL succeed.

 

National security services are international, too. ED are in Russia, nevertheless when people were spreading classified documents on the forums here the Swedish government still came after them.

 

Tldr : laws and government reach does not end at the border. Microsoft couldn't make a MiG-29 module either without express permission from Mikoyan and the Russian MoD.

 

You are straight up wrong here. These companies can do whatever they want..or are able too. If ED and the DCS dev staff were not actually in Russia, there is not squat Russia could do if ED wanted to put out their planes. No matter what these ALL ARE CONSIDERED WORKS OF ART.

 

This has been corroborated by multiple 3rd party devs. The ONLY license required is the one with ED. Of course getting official manufacturer cooperation is the ideal situation for module accuracy. But it is not a requirement.

 

If I started a flight sim dev company and wanted to drop Russian planes in it. Russia couldn't do shit about it if they can't send goons to my door to haul my ass away. ED staff being in Russia is sadly within goon reach. Thus why we will never see those planes. Move their entire staff out of there and no threats then.

[Mars Exulte]

You are straight up wrong here. These companies can do whatever they want..or are able too. If ED and the DCS dev staff were not actually in Russia, there is not squat Russia could do if ED wanted to put out their planes. No matter what these ALL ARE CONSIDERED WORKS OF ART.

 

This has been corroborated by multiple 3rd party devs. The ONLY license required is the one with ED. Of course getting official manufacturer cooperation is the ideal situation for module accuracy. But it is not a requirement.

 

If I started a flight sim dev company and wanted to drop Russian planes in it. Russia couldn't do shit about it if they can't send goons to my door to haul my ass away. ED staff being in Russia is sadly within goon reach. Thus why we will never see those planes. Move their entire staff out of there and no threats then.

 

No, they aren't 'works of art', and it isn't goons going to your door it's a lawsuit. Case and point, Arma 3. Most of the guns in it are real, but they are using fake names. Why? Because they didn't want to pay licensing fees to use the real names.

 

''Works of art''. Ffs, that's the dumbest thing I've seen here in a few days. They are TRADEMARKED names and terms. Hey, you want an even more close to home example? The ''M-2000'' we have because Dassault forbade them to call it a ''Mirage 2000''.

 

You guys can hurrr durrr all you want, but trademark and copyright laws exist specifically so IP owners have an avenue of recourse against people like you. And again... THEY CROSS BORDERS. Or do you think some company in Russia can appropriate the Star Trek logo and not expect to be sued because ''hurrr durrr I'm not American''.

 

-edit

Oh, here's another, GTA using real world cars without their real world names and logos. The likeness isn't trademarked. The logos, emblems, and names are. That doesn't magically change just becaude you're talking about airplanes.

 

-edit

You can probably skirt some of this if the vehicle is sufficiently generic in function, but when you get to the exacting duplication that DCS is attempting, you don't get to just handwave away the entities that own all this stuff. You're painting an aircraft. You are duplicating in exact technical detail equipment owned by another entity and slapping their names and logos on it.

 

Another example, Grand Turismo and Forza, pay EVERY ONE of the car manufacturers to use their vehicle and logos. ''Work of Art'' my ass.

Edited January 7, 2019 by zhukov032186

[SonofEil]

Or do you think some company in Russia can appropriate the Star Trek logo and not expect to be sued because ''hurrr durrr I'm not American''.

 

Not Russian, but...

 

[Torso]

No, they aren't 'works of art', and it isn't goons going to your door it's a lawsuit. Case and point, Arma 3. Most of the guns in it are real, but they are using fake names. Why? Because they didn't want to pay licensing fees to use the real names.

 

''Works of art''. Ffs, that's the dumbest thing I've seen here in a few days. They are TRADEMARKED names and terms. Hey, you want an even more close to home example? The ''M-2000'' we have because Dassault forbade them to call it a ''Mirage 2000''.

 

You guys can hurrr durrr all you want, but trademark and copyright laws exist specifically so IP owners have an avenue of recourse against people like you. And again... THEY CROSS BORDERS. Or do you think some company in Russia can appropriate the Star Trek logo and not expect to be sued because ''hurrr durrr I'm not American''.

 

-edit

Oh, here's another, GTA using real world cars without their real world names and logos. The likeness isn't trademarked. The logos, emblems, and names are. That doesn't magically change just because you're talking about airplanes.

 

-edit

You can probably skirt some of this if the vehicle is sufficiently generic in function, but when you get to the exacting duplication that DCS is attempting, you don't get to just handwave away the entities that own all this stuff. You're painting an aircraft. You are duplicating in exact technical detail equipment owned by another entity and slapping their names and logos on it.

 

Another example, Grand Turismo and Forza, pay EVERY ONE of the car manufacturers to use their vehicle and logos. ''Work of Art'' my ass.

 

 

No, you ARE WRONG. These are considered works of art. Again, this has been CONFIRMED by 3rd party devs. They know what they are talking about and so do I. Read that again just so it sinks in. They DO NOT REQUIRE sign-off/contract with/by the plane manufacturer. As for your examples, well I know for a fact that you are not correct in them due to the fact I have been in the software/gaming industry for 20yrs(starting at Sierra-Online and worked for Atari and others, and now at MS) and have many friends in the industry. In fact. One of my best friends was on the Forza team for almost 10 years and when they could not get a manufacturer to work with them, they still went ahead and got those vehicles in the game. If a manufacturer would not assist, then they went to private owners. I know this for a fact. It was his job to handle licensing if the manufacturer would participate. Not all did, sure many did/do, but not all. Hell, he called me many times to let me know they were having access issues and if I knew where to find an owner of 'x-type' car. He was trying to get me to head to their building when they had Paul Allen's Ferrari Enzo on a flatbed outside to take to the recording studio. He sent me a txt asking if I knew an owner of a Pagani at one point because Pagani was not being helpful. Guess what. The car was in the game and no one was sued. Just one example of many. Now, you can claim what you want but does not make you correct.

 

 

''Works of art''. Ffs, that's the dumbest thing I've seen here in a few days. They are TRADEMARKED names and terms. Hey, you want an even more close to home example? The ''M-2000'' we have because Dassault forbade them to call it a ''Mirage 2000''.

 

The dumbest thing you seen...here? lol! Yet you prove my point in this line above. Dassault forbade them!..Yet we have the plane. Don't we? Just altered the name...gee. Uh M-2000 name from Mirage 2000 was a huge sacrifice wasn't it. Can you not see something odd here that conflicts with your stance? In fact, isn't this why we have the AV-8B vs a "Harrier" even though it is referenced as Harrier in the module description? I think that is the case as well though I ccould be wrong about that. But if not, again, we have a Harrier in the game even is it not named "Harrier"

 

So, let me ask you this. You think ED is signing licensing deals with the weapons manufacturers? Raytheon? Hughes Air-Craft Co? Ford Aerospace? Loral Corp? Bridgeport Brass Company? Vympel? Those are just a drop in the bucket of the weapons manufacturers that DCS includes in their sim. You saying they have licenses with all of them? The answer is they do not. Because they are not required.

 

Tell, me, if I take a pic of a car/plane, make a poster of my pic and sell my posters, do I need a license from the vehicle manufacturer I am selling the picture of? Can you guess the correct answer?

 

As for your line of:

 

"You guys can hurrr durrr all you want, but trademark and copyright laws exist specifically so IP owners have an avenue of recourse against people like you. And again... THEY CROSS BORDERS. Or do you think some company in Russia can appropriate the Star Trek logo and not expect to be sued because ''hurrr durrr I'm not American''.

 

Sure, some countries do this. China has lived off of this idea for decades. You are aware of the IP theft issues in China right? You think they care about IP laws?

 

These are works of art. That is how they are classified. That is fact. Would they prefer to have co-operation with the manufacturers. Sure. That is why when they have it is a big deal. But that ain't always the case.

Edited January 7, 2019 by Torso

[Mars Exulte]

Hey, look! Once again an expert who has been working in the field for decades @@ I sure know how to pick arguments with experts EVERY time no matter where on the internet I go. You can claim insider knowledge if you want, buddy.

 

Yes, the 'M-2000' proves my point, Dassault forbade them. You have to get AT LEAST tacit approval or a blind eye from an owner, if they say 'No' then it's 'no'. It's not a 'huge sacrifice' no, but it DOES mean that IP still belongs to that entity!

 

Yes, China and Russia are known for not rigorously enforcing those laws in their own borders. Which is utterly irrelevant, as they can very easily sue a foreign entity in another country that DOES enforce them.

 

Yes, games are 'works of art'. That does not mean you can just use anybody's trademarked IP without their permission. No, maybe they don't have a license with Raytheon, nevertheless Raytheon could probably force them to change the names and/or appearance if they REALLY wanted. Lack of action does not mean lack of OPTION to take action. What you can or can't do is entirely up to the owner and whether they are interested in trying to mess with you.

[Mars Exulte]

Not Russian, but...

 

 

Yeah, you see lots of stuff like that, but it is still beside the point. It's a case of 'not worth pursuing' to the IP holder combined with a country that's not likely to enforce it anyway. That doesn't mean it can't be turned around the other way.

 

Directly copy Star Trek in a country that DOES enforce IP laws and you can expect to be sued. Just because ONE end is lax, doesn't mean the other is.

[Torso]

Hey, look! Once again an expert who has been working in the field for decades @@ I sure know how to pick arguments with experts EVERY time no matter where on the internet I go. You can claim insider knowledge if you want, buddy.

 

Yes, the 'M-2000' proves my point, Dassault forbade them. You have to get AT LEAST tacit approval or a blind eye from an owner, if they say 'No' then it's 'no'. It's not a 'huge sacrifice' no, but it DOES mean that IP still belongs to that entity!

 

Yes, China and Russia are known for not rigorously enforcing those laws in their own borders. Which is utterly irrelevant, as they can very easily sue a foreign entity in another country that DOES enforce them.

 

Yes, games are 'works of art'. That does not mean you can just use anybody's trademarked IP without their permission. No, maybe they don't have a license with Raytheon, nevertheless Raytheon could probably force them to change the names and/or appearance if they REALLY wanted. Lack of action does not mean lack of OPTION to take action. What you can or can't do is entirely up to the owner and whether they are interested in trying to mess with you.

 

A whole post of denial, ignorance and contradictions of your own previous statements...all in one post..lol. Pretty nice!

 

 

You still are wrong. Doesn't change that. And I ain't your buddy, pal. ;)

 

I look forward to the MiG-23. It's all good man. We all are fans.

[javelina1]

 

 

 

I guess they don't believe in seats for their flight deck set. Only the Turkish Kirk gets one... I watched and chuckled at this clip... nice. ;)

[SonofEil]

I guess they don't believe in seats for their flight deck set. Only the Turkish Kirk gets one... I watched and chuckled at this clip... nice. ;)

 

Yeah it’s pretty hilarious. I just put it up for fun while these two ladies have their little spat.

[Kev2go]

I guess they don't believe in seats for their flight deck set. Only the Turkish Kirk gets one... I watched and chuckled at this clip... nice. ;)

 

Dont forget turkish Rambo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

or Turkish Star wars ( FTL Indiana Jones)

 

 

 

 

Edited January 8, 2019 by Kev2go

[javelina1]

Hilarious Kev!!! LOL!

 

 

I'd lose it if they had Turkish Fonzie....

[Fri13]

If I started a flight sim dev company and wanted to drop Russian planes in it. Russia couldn't do shit about it if they can't send goons to my door to haul my ass away. ED staff being in Russia is sadly within goon reach. Thus why we will never see those planes. Move their entire staff out of there and no threats then.

 

Yes I know your post is from 2019...

 

If you think that superpowers, or even any country wouldn't have various methods to deal a state secrets publications, then you are naive.

 

Diplomats, spies, government relationships, business partners etc are common means to make such things not possible, depending the value of the information.

 

Like if someone is going to release "Who was with who and where" kind rumors, no one really cares. But if someone is going to publish information "Medical status of the king...", you can get in trouble regardless where you are. And if someone would pop-up on "Here are the engineering data of the nuclear submarine reactor...." you can bet that you are dead very soon and lots of work is done that such top secret material will never get anywhere.

 

You can laugh that it is a "tin foil hat" stories etc, but that is exactly the "tin foil hat" mentality that there ain't army of people dedicated for exactly that kind operations all across the world.

 

I could tell you stories about how FORTUNE 100 level companies has had to deal such situations, and it happens all the way down to smaller companies as well, even to local population. You can't help it, but when someone has something to lose, they easily try to get their will happen by other means than just legal ones.

Where in local population it can be just that people turn their faces away when unwanted person appears, or their business is just avoided as much as possible etc. But in high ranking business it becomes very serious and quickly.

Governments has been changed by such fake information and process, very quickly.

 

There are the sayings like "You sing the songs of the person, whose bread you eat", and "You don't bite the feeding hand" that are exactly about this sort of things.

 

Anyone can think that they are a heroic enough to stand up when "This is not legal!" or "This is not right". But they are fools when it comes to many businesses. As when you run a business that feeds your workers and their families etc, you are questioning your moral that do you bend someones "suggestion" in business how easily, or are you ready to sink with the ship if you don't bend the knee.

 

The world is controlled by maniacs, sociopaths, psychopaths and just normally twisted greedy people. Between there are lots of narcissists people filling the gaps. And they always win everyone else who has moral "to do right thing", because they don't have such limitations.

 

And when someone in such a position says "Our secrets are about to be revealed, we must protect them...." it doesn't mean "Let's run this through a lawyer and see if it is legal...".

 

So as we all know, MiG-23 is coming from Razbam. But it is not because "they are out of reach of goons". It is more like that no one cares about it so much that it is not a state secret. Could ED have done it? Yes, they are publishing and maintaining it etc. They do business with it.

 

But consider this, what if someone in ED has received a "friendly visit" from someone at some point, "suggesting" something like "We allow you to do business in this and that, but it would be unwise to do it with that and it, have a nice day". You will get the hint, and you will get the picture. And you can't say anything about it ever, than just "It just is not possible for us".

 

And someone such person just coming next to you even on the coffee shop or in a airport waiting line etc, is not unheard...

 

No one cares about people who have no value or doesn't threat others, but when situation changes, there comes all kind people visiting, friendly and possibly not so friendly.