Force feedback Joystick from Moza

[petsild]

Intervening with the smallest possible correction is proof of piloting experience.

I don't have Moza so I found it strange.

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

So I am far from an experience helicopter pilot...I have better success with OH-58D than other. So please don't take my video as how the Moza base performs.

[Hiob]

12 hours ago, petsild said:

Intervening with the smallest possible correction is proof of piloting experience.

I don't have Moza so I found it strange.

I wonder what kind of movement you were expecting? The corrections, especially in hovering, should be minute. The stick length is roughly comparable to real world helicopters (probably on the short side). You don‘t yank the stick around like in fixed wing. When the need to do so appears, you‘re probably doing stunt flying or are already in an upset attitude.

Watch this one e.g.

 

The funny thing with helicopters and FFB is, in my opinion, they are the least demanding (in regards to power) but benefit the most (in regards to realism) from FFB.

[Boosterdog]

14 hours ago, walmis said:

I'll provide some evidence supporting a possible GPLv3 violation.

 

This genre benefits from innovators and start ups. Without them we wouldnt have high end rudder pedals, collectives or a new generation of FFB at all. 

Each to their own in the choices they make but I'll be staying well clear of a company for whom even the simplest, least arduous and mutually benefical terms of an open source licence are simply things to be plagiarised and be rolled over without concern. 

[petsild]

6 hours ago, Hiob said:

I wonder what kind of movement you were expecting? The corrections, especially in hovering, should be minute. The stick length is roughly comparable to real world helicopters (probably on the short side). You don‘t yank the stick around like in fixed wing. When the need to do so appears, you‘re probably doing stunt flying or are already in an upset attitude.

Watch this one e.g.

 

The funny thing with helicopters and FFB is, in my opinion, they are the least demanding (in regards to power) but benefit the most (in regards to realism) from FFB.

In the early stages of development, the OH-6 was a wild boar that did whatever it wanted.

The latest version 1.5 is tame to control, like a sleeping kitten.

[EightyDuce]

20 hours ago, walmis said:

I'll provide some evidence supporting a possible GPLv3 violation.

I've examined strings extracted from the Moza executable, which hint at an underlying connection to the open-source VPforce TelemFFB project. Within Moza's code, we see identifiers like vp_dcs and VpAlgorithm that incorporate the "vp" prefix, a clear nod to VPforce, though they don't exactly mirror VPforce’s original identifiers. This suggests that Moza's software may be a derivative work inspired by or partially based on TelemFFB.

Given the technical leap from Python to C++, Moza likely used AI-powered tools, potentially GPT-based, to translate parts of the Python-based TelemFFB core code into C++ for their compiled binary. If Moza's code does indeed derive from TelemFFB, GPLv3 would require them to release their own source code under the same open-source license, something they haven't done.

This evidence suggests that Moza may have created a derivative product based on TelemFFB without complying with GPLv3, raising concerns about a possible license violation.

Next we see hastily 1:1 copied effect adjustment names

They even copy pasted damage variables into their export.lua (even the line endings match!)

So to summarize (thanks ChatGPT)

 

 

Guess that makes my VPForce Rhino decision that much easier....

[trev5150]

21 hours ago, walmis said:

I'll provide some evidence supporting a possible GPLv3 violation.

I've examined strings extracted from the Moza executable, which hint at an underlying connection to the open-source VPforce TelemFFB project. Within Moza's code, we see identifiers like vp_dcs and VpAlgorithm that incorporate the "vp" prefix, a clear nod to VPforce, though they don't exactly mirror VPforce’s original identifiers. This suggests that Moza's software may be a derivative work inspired by or partially based on TelemFFB.

Given the technical leap from Python to C++, Moza likely used AI-powered tools, potentially GPT-based, to translate parts of the Python-based TelemFFB core code into C++ for their compiled binary. If Moza's code does indeed derive from TelemFFB, GPLv3 would require them to release their own source code under the same open-source license, something they haven't done.

This evidence suggests that Moza may have created a derivative product based on TelemFFB without complying with GPLv3, raising concerns about a possible license violation.

Next we see hastily 1:1 copied effect adjustment names

They even copy pasted damage variables into their export.lua (even the line endings match!)

So to summarize (thanks ChatGPT)

 

 

Y'all need to chill. Consider the fact that these companies are all writing code based libraries based on the embargoed IP from the patents that just expired. Coders are lazy, and they are cooperative. If they get into a legal pissing contest their just gonna waste time and money like Apple and Samsung have been doing for the last 15 years. FFS people it's boutique FFB joystick bases for flight sims. Niche of a niche market. Hundreds of dollars are at stake! OMG!! That is not the kind of business where billions hang in the balance. Same with the RAZBAM thing.

You people don't need to be taking up rhetorical arms under the banner of your chosen liege lord of some nonsense. Frickin chill. This is the flight sim world, not an Ayn Rand novel.

Edited November 1, 2024 by trev5150

[Hiob]

Just now, trev5150 said:

Y'all need to chill. Consider the fact that these companies are all writing code based libraries based on the embargoed IP from the patents that just expired. Coders are lazy, and they are cooperative. If they get into a legal pissing contest their just gonna waste time and money like Apple and Samsung have been doing for the last 15 years. FFS people it's boutique FFB joystick bases for flight sims. Niche of a niche market. That is not the kind of business where billions hang in the balance. Same with the RAZBAM thing.

You people don't need to be taking up rhetorical arms under the banner of your chosen liege lord of some nonsense. Frickin chill. This is the flight sim world, not an Ayn Rand novel.

You don’t get it. A (comparatively) big chinese company takes advantage of code that was created by enthusiasts without credit and without making their own code public as they are supposed to. It‘s not about starting a pissing contest or a legal battle, it is about calling them out for it.

And by the way, that has nothing to do with patents.

[trev5150]

9 minutes ago, Hiob said:

You don’t get it. A (comparatively) big chinese company takes advantage of code that was created by enthusiasts without credit and without making their own code public as they are supposed to. It‘s not about starting a pissing contest or a legal battle, it is about calling them out for it.

And by the way, that has nothing to do with patents.

It has everything to do with patents and IP and GLPv3 licenses. GLPv3, in this instance, as Walmis explains, requires the base code being used to remain proprietary, which they seem to have done, or tried to do. Ripping out code from a decompiled executable (which itself is probably illegal under EULA TOS) does not meet the burden of proof that an infraction has occured. That lawsuit would go nowhere, and it would take years to go nowhere.

 

You people are not lawyers. Or you're all armchair mom's basement lawyers. This and the RAZBAM thing and the reaction of people are what make the flight sim community toxic af.

Edited November 1, 2024 by trev5150

[gdx65]

Coming back to DCS after few years of hibernation... Force Feedback is a must have..... has anyone checked TIANHANG SPACE? https://dcadf4-5.myshopify.com/

[MAXsenna]

Coming back to DCS after few years of hibernation... Force Feedback is a must have..... has anyone checked TIANHANG SPACE? https://dcadf4-5.myshopify.com/

Aaaaahhhh!!! Thank you! Seems the page was updated since I last visited. Kit for Slaws! That's awesome!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[j9murphy]

22 minutes ago, trev5150 said:

It has everything to do with patents and IP and GLPv3 licenses. GLPv3, in this instance, as Walmis explains, requires the base code being used to remain proprietary, which they seem to have done, or tried to do. Ripping out code from a decompiled executable (which itself is probably illegal under EULA TOS) does not meet the burden of proof that an infraction has occured. That lawsuit would go nowhere, and it would take years to go nowhere.

 

You people are not lawyers. Or you're all armchair mom's basement lawyers. This and the RAZBAM thing and the reaction of people are what make the flight sim community toxic af.

 

You clearly dont know what you're talking about:)

Edited November 1, 2024 by j9murphy

[trev5150]

13 minutes ago, j9murphy said:

You clearly dont know what you're talking about:)

 

How so? Use big words. Put me in my place. Show me where I’m wrong. Take us down the path for the education and enlightenment of all to see and hear. And tell us where you got your law degree from while you’re at it. 

Edited November 1, 2024 by trev5150

[j9murphy]

1 hour ago, trev5150 said:

How so? Use big words. Put me in my place. Show me where I’m wrong. Take us down the path for the education and enlightenment of all to see and hear. And tell us where you got your law degree from while you’re at it. 

 

maybe you could explain what the relevance is of "code based libraries based on the embargoed IP from the patents that just expired" to the issue that Walmis brought up?

Walmis is not asserting a patent was infringed on, he's stating he owns the copyright to the source code and has chosen to release that source code under GPL (not making it "proprietary", that was your word not his).  GPL requires that the source code for all derivative works must also be released into the public domain.   

Walmis asserts that there is evidence that the source code was copied , and that the derivative work by Moza was not placed in the public domain as required.   He didn't threaten legal action, although it would be within his legal to right to do so under copyright law since he is the copyright holder, and since gpl is a license not a contract - which is an important distinction in many countries where IP is concerned.  This brings us to the question - is copyright law in once country enforceable in another country?  Maybe, but there's a lot to unpack there, and its beyond the scope of this conversation.   

Looks like to me that Walmis has chosen just to call them out with the hopes that either 1) Moza will release their source code into the public domain so that we may all benefit (the original intent of GPL), or 2) that people think twice before purchasing Moza FFB hardware given the likelihood that they infringed on his license.

I tried my best to give a thoughtful response to your 3 posts, so that you might have a better understanding of the issue.  Hopefully, that has happened:)

Edited November 1, 2024 by j9murphy

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, trev5150 said:

How so? Use big words. Put me in my place. Show me where I’m wrong. Take us down the path for the education and enlightenment of all to see and hear. And tell us where you got your law degree from while you’re at it. 

If they took the code and translated it into a different programming language, then this is no more legal than if I translate Harry Potter to a different language and sell it as my own. That's obviously not legal.

By default, copyright law doesn't grant permission to distribute someone else's code (or derivations of such), but the GPL gives permission, as long as you follow the rules. Moza didn't follow the rules, so then they don't have permission to distribute. Easy as.

The only real question I see is whether the evidence presented so far is sufficient in a court of law, but copying variable names that refer to VPForce seems like it has a good chance of being regarded slam-dunk evidence. And it's likely that with a little digging, far more evidence can be found.

Anyway, this is a big legal risk to Moza and buyers of the base, since at any point, Walmis can sue and force Moza to stop providing their software, as well as ask for a substantial claim. And the courts are unlikely to see this as an accident, and willful copyright infringement can result in a $150k claim in the US alone. And Walmis can sue in the EU and other places as well.

Even if Walmis doesn't want to run the risk or put in the effort, any other FFB competitor can at any point take on all the risk & effort of a court case, if they team up with Walmis to run Moza out of town with tar and feathers.

PS. All of this has been known for a long time, and there is already an established method to copy the functionality of existing code, without running the risk of getting sued.

Edited November 1, 2024 by Aapje

[Hammer1-1]

and this was one of the reasons why I didnt want to buy from a chinese company; they have a nice habit of ripping off other companies property for their own benefit. Didnt think it would be Walmis' software though...wow.

[j9murphy]

59 minutes ago, trev5150 said:

First you answered a question with a question, so you’re disqualified. 
Second I did not at all say that Wamis asserts that this is directly a patent issue. I stated that these subjects are related. Strike two. 
I do think this little investigation is an attempt to instigate a fight between the two companies. Certainly it is causing the sht to be stirred here. 
Why you think Moza should publish their effort publicly when we’ve already established that the GPLv3 license forbids them from doing so indicated that you’re suffering from a brain injury of some sort. Strike three. You’re out. Go sit in the corner and color in your coloring book. Try not to eat the crayons. 

 

Well, I tried.  A Mark Twain quote comes to mind here, but I wont bother... From the license itself....

1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty; keep intact all the notices that refer to this License and to the absence of any warranty; and give any other recipients of the Program a copy of this License along with the Program.

2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

1. You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
2. You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
3. If the modified program normally reads commands interactively when run, you must cause it, when started running for such interactive use in the most ordinary way, to print or display an announcement including an appropriate copyright notice and a notice that there is no warranty (or else, saying that you provide a warranty) and that users may redistribute the program under these conditions, and telling the user how to view a copy of this License. (Exception: if the Program itself is interactive but does not normally print such an announcement, your work based on the Program is not required to print an announcement.)

3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:

1. Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
2. Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
3. Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b above.)

 

So why is Moza prohibited from publishing the source code?

Edited November 1, 2024 by j9murphy

[j9murphy]

@trev5150 Maybe you could help us all understand your position by articulating your argument in more intelligent terms that are relevant to the discussion, rather than just in rant form?

I'll make it easier for you, in fact, I'll even help make your point more clear so that others can better understand your position.   Which assumption(s) below are you challenging?

1. TelemFFB is Software by Walmis which is protected under the GPL license
2. Moza created a derivative work from Walmis' software
3. Moza must credit the original work and release source code for their derived work under the terms of GPL License

Edited November 1, 2024 by j9murphy

[HotTom]

Problem with new MOZA base and Thrustmaster Hornet grip:

Unboxed, installed it, put in firm wear, all  (I think) according to the rather minimal instructions. Problem is in setting up controls. I use the DCS controller and it works fine until I  try to connect with the stick grip. It doesn't recognize and of the buttons on the stick. Controls on my throttle set up fine but not the buttons on my stick.

I'm probably doing (or not doing) something really stupid. Do I need software from Thrustmaster to set up the controls on the stick. If so, where do I find them. Right bow the base and the stick controls aren't speaking.

Any help greatly appreciated!

[Mr_sukebe]

7 hours ago, HotTom said:

Problem with new MOZA base and Thrustmaster Hornet grip:

Unboxed, installed it, put in firm wear, all  (I think) according to the rather minimal instructions. Problem is in setting up controls. I use the DCS controller and it works fine until I  try to connect with the stick grip. It doesn't recognize and of the buttons on the stick. Controls on my throttle set up fine but not the buttons on my stick.

I'm probably doing (or not doing) something really stupid. Do I need software from Thrustmaster to set up the controls on the stick. If so, where do I find them. Right bow the base and the stick controls aren't speaking.

Any help greatly appreciated!

Are you sure that the connection cable is correctly plugged into the MOZA base?

[BIGNEWY]

Folks, be nice to each other 

thread moderated. 

[rapid]

Yes gone waaaaay off topic and totally derailed. 

[Thadiun Okona]

22 hours ago, trev5150 said:

Y'all need to chill. Consider the fact that these companies are all writing code based libraries based on the embargoed IP from the patents that just expired. Coders are lazy, and they are cooperative. If they get into a legal pissing contest their just gonna waste time and money like Apple and Samsung have been doing for the last 15 years. FFS people it's boutique FFB joystick bases for flight sims. Niche of a niche market. Hundreds of dollars are at stake! OMG!! That is not the kind of business where billions hang in the balance. Same with the RAZBAM thing.

You people don't need to be taking up rhetorical arms under the banner of your chosen liege lord of some nonsense. Frickin chill. This is the flight sim world, not an Ayn Rand novel.

 

What an embarrassing take on the situation..

[HotTom]

8 hours ago, Mr_sukebe said:

Are you sure that the connection cable is correctly plugged into the MOZA base?

they sure seem to be. Just reconnected. No joy.

[Deezle]

21 hours ago, HotTom said:

Problem with new MOZA base and Thrustmaster Hornet grip:

Unboxed, installed it, put in firm wear, all  (I think) according to the rather minimal instructions. Problem is in setting up controls. I use the DCS controller and it works fine until I  try to connect with the stick grip. It doesn't recognize and of the buttons on the stick. Controls on my throttle set up fine but not the buttons on my stick.

I'm probably doing (or not doing) something really stupid. Do I need software from Thrustmaster to set up the controls on the stick. If so, where do I find them. Right bow the base and the stick controls aren't speaking.

Any help greatly appreciated!

Does the grip show up in the Moza software? Are you binding to the correct device in DCS? The base shows up as two  devices, only one of them will work.