Why all the locked servers?

[Steel Jaw]

OMG that means an anti-Mower script could be written... :D

[mtuckner]

Get a grip of yaself and stop whining. My server is closed because i am testing and testing to ensure I release something stable. Incase you have forgotten, guess what? we are in Beta! Every Beta version i have had to re-evaluate the mission concept or something in the mission design to make it compatible for 'now' - ie the current beta build.

 

When i did open the server to the public, it was then, now listen carefully, 're-served' by two other 'private servers'. the mission itself was essentially in Beta by virtue of the fact that A-10C is beta. I asked the fixed slots (6 only) not to re-serve. I asked them this when they cam on the server. I havn't got a problem with reverse engineering, hell crack on! we've all done it for the good and benefit of learning more with regards to the ME and the condition and action sets.

 

I'm in complete agreement with Moa. It is my right to decide whether i serve closed or open. If you don't like it or think it's bad for the community, i couldn't really give a damn. The people i fly with i know. The people i fly with are also in my TS channel. The people i fly with follow procedures and sets of SOP's.

 

When you've done and committed yourself as much as i, moa and many others have in this community, for the community, Then feel free to pass judgement, i may even listen. until then............................well you get the idea!:music_whistling:

 

I think that everyone can agree, that if you want a solid mission released with a stable bug free gold version of the game, that is clearly your right to do so. If you want a closed server, I think that is the best way to do it as said, as well as your right. Open servers lack the comms usually and are not cohesive, with a plan. Totally agreed. But your primary reason for not sharing a mission was none of those reasons, it was plagiarism. You were worried someone would learn a trick and use that trick in their mission to make something cool, taking away from your awesomeness and your, "I'm more serious and better than the rest of you" ego status.

 

In the end if you keep excellent missions "close to the chest" for just your personal wing, whether you think you are growing the community or not, the reality is you aren't in the big scheme of the DCS community. Those like MadTommy, Grimes, Greb, and COUGAR are giving the community some great missions and I look forward to everything they have to come. As stated, some people enjoy this simulation when opportunity affords. Currently, with a family, schooling, and a job it is impossible for me to create my own content so in order to pass my dollars to DCS I need a healthy, helpful, vibrant community to make this more than just a short term few mission training module. I've delved into the editor a bit, and have made some for other games such as Arma. I understand what it takes and appreciate every effort.

 

In the end, your content truly belongs to DCS in my eyes. In fact, most games with modable content have a license agreement that says just that, that your creation belongs to them. It's their software that is allowing you to create missions and content. If you want to be a hard nose and pretend you don't share creation because somehow the community is damaging you in some way, that's your issue. It just really doesn't lend to making your "wing" look all that great in the eyes of probably 95% of the users on here. It reeks of elitism and sense of superiority. But then as you said, it's your right to do so. I am sure that I and many others can live without that content anyways, and I'm not begging for you to change your position, I'm just voicing my opinion on the open forum as is my right to do.

[Heli Shed]

I think that everyone can agree, that if you want a solid mission released with a stable bug free gold version of the game, that is clearly your right to do so. If you want a closed server, I think that is the best way to do it as said, as well as your right. Open servers lack the comms usually and are not cohesive, with a plan. Totally agreed. But your primary reason for not sharing a mission was none of those reasons, it was plagiarism. You were worried someone would learn a trick and use that trick in their mission to make something cool, taking away from your awesomeness and your, "I'm more serious and better than the rest of you" ego status.

 

In the end if you keep excellent missions "close to the chest" for just your personal wing, whether you think you are growing the community or not, the reality is you aren't in the big scheme of the DCS community. Those like MadTommy, Grimes, Greb, and COUGAR are giving the community some great missions and I look forward to everything they have to come. As stated, some people enjoy this simulation when opportunity affords. Currently, with a family, schooling, and a job it is impossible for me to create my own content so in order to pass my dollars to DCS I need a healthy, helpful, vibrant community to make this more than just a short term few mission training module. I've delved into the editor a bit, and have made some for other games such as Arma. I understand what it takes and appreciate every effort.

 

In the end, your content truly belongs to DCS in my eyes. In fact, most games with modable content have a license agreement that says just that, that your creation belongs to them. It's their software that is allowing you to create missions and content. If you want to be a hard nose and pretend you don't share creation because somehow the community is damaging you in some way, that's your issue. It just really doesn't lend to making your "wing" look all that great in the eyes of probably 95% of the users on here. It reeks of elitism and sense of superiority. But then as you said, it's your right to do so. I am sure that I and many others can live without that content anyways, and I'm not begging for you to change your position, I'm just voicing my opinion on the open forum as is my right to do.

 

Completely wrong interpretation.

 

If your on TS, you've read the brief, and you ask to come in - come on in. Otherwise, go find an open server and take out an A-10A or BS from 20km away in an F15 or the like, at 20000 ft, with an Aim-120 just as they take off. - ridiculous air 2 Ground fest that happens on almost all 'open' servers where the participants are not 'bound' by certain regulations.

 

My main reason for the closed server is not plageurism, but it was a reason and has been, seeing as it was my campaign mission that had been realeased. It has nothing to do with 'elitism' and everything to do with ensuring that my missions (for your information there are PLENTY out there) when they are released, are playable, stable and enjoyable.

 

Get off your high horse and understand that actually the main reason why most are having closed servers is simply because they havn't mastered the A-10C model yet. Guess what? No-one has.................................................................................BECAUSE WE ARE IN BETA!

[mtuckner]

Seriously, the high horse is your own. A closed server is fine. I said as much. Not a big deal. You said that they are closed because you don't want others plagiarizing your mission you took so long to build. That's fine too, but at least fess up.

 

You clearly said you didn't want other people to "steal" (what you perceive as theft) your mission designs and host them. You only want you or your people to host them to get glorious credit for supreme creation. The only way to do this without someone getting the mission file is to close it.

 

Laughable, but your own prerogative.

[Heli Shed]

I also see no sense in open servers, as the kind of flying this sim deserves, is not possible by just jumping into a running mission.

 

There needs to be a briefing, so that everybody knows the master-plan and his role within. Limitations, Procedures, Comms, ... There is so much that makes open servers kind of useless...

 

I could imagine missions, that are announced on public forums (including a briefing), where people can sign a slot to take part (like a LOCERF for example). This way squadless pilots could take part in a complex MP-mission. But this will have to wait until the software is "final".

 

:thumbup: +1

 

In essence not far from the DPE concept that i have been working on for 6 months. It will be on our server soon.

 

Guess what? You'll have to register on the website to see the brief and slots available, then actually get into the Teamspeak channel for the password to join the server. I have moderators that monitor the server constantly for those that are not willing to follow 'the plan', or who want to take off from taxiways, or do low flights over their mates popping flares while they spool.

 

24hrs, every day different, slots available for those who wanna fly alone.

 

 

 

I'm off for a beer - EDForums take it's toll on my patience with some.

[Steel Jaw]

I close my servers usually because we have more than enough fliers from our own squad. Dont need people who are not on our TS, who have no clue and pollute the sim with countless chat messages, interfere with taxi ops etc.

[Heli Shed]

thats it!

 

I'm off to bath myself in Lime!

 

'T'

[GGTharos]

Waaaah, elitist! :D

 

I close my servers usually because we have more than enough fliers from our own squad. Dont need people who are not on our TS, who have no clue and pollute the sim with countless chat messages, interfere with taxi ops etc.

[Heli Shed]

I close my servers usually because we have more than enough fliers from our own squad. Dont need people who are not on our TS, who have no clue and pollute the sim with countless chat messages, interfere with taxi ops etc.

 

:thumbup: +1

 

absolutely right

[Moa]

You clearly said you didn't want other people to "steal" (what you perceive as theft) your mission designs and host them. You only want you or your people to host them to get glorious credit for supreme creation. The only way to do this without someone getting the mission file is to close it.

 

Just so you know, in most modern countries if someone creates a work they automatically have copyright over it, even if it does not have a notice. The fact they put it on the web for you to enjoy does not mean that the copyright is relinquished, it just means there is an implicit 'license' grant for you to use whatever they produced.

 

Legally (in most countries, although the Internet fuzzes it a bit) someone who then reproduces or distributes that thing is infringing copyright ('stealing' as you put it) despite having the implicit 'license for use'.

 

I'm not saying this to be 'heavy' nor pedantic. I hope to be informative so that you know how the international community (WTO etc) would see such similar situations, and so that you can understand the discussion with a proper mental framework (such issues are well understood and discussed to death on the InterTubes already).

 

Since copyrights are pretty much ignored on the Web (which has both good and bad aspects) it means the only way for the creator to retain control is to restrict its spread. It is not the creator who harms the community but those who take the work without authorization. Even liberal outfits such as the Free Software Foundation (FSF) and others retain copyrights and require licensing under terms they choose. This is the only way that creative people (eg. Tyger) will remain 'incentivized' to create more good stuff for us to enjoy, which is why the principle of (limited-term) copyright is recognized universally as good (even if not always followed) and morally just.

 

You will note that those who have taken the work in this case don't even acknowledge the creator or have the common courtesy to ask permission to distribute (which would have given Tyger a chance to find mutually satisfactory terms - since he likes people enjoying the fruits of his labor). In the Internet Age this is the direct moral equivalent of 'stealing' physical goods - no one has any right to help themselves to the copyrighted work of others (not only is it immoral, it is also illegal, not that anyone is threatening legal action - so please don't panic anyone).

 

If you don't like Tyger's terms (use TS and fit in with others on his server) then you have perfect freedom to create a mission and publish yourself (note: reverse engineering is perfectly permissible, copying the bits directly is not). We all have large constraints on our time - but that is no excuse for those that 'steal'/infringing copyright especially in such a tiny community as ours. Tyger is a busy man- he has a family and children and a (more than) full time job as a Regimental Sergeant Major in the British Army (including recent combat in Afghanistan). He gave up his free time (it takes several dozen hours to create a great mission, then even more to test and tweak) to create and share his mission, on terms he would like to choose. Anyone else is free to also give up their limited free time and create a mission themselves.

 

Sorry for getting on the soapbox here - but it is annoying that people think it is their 'right' to make demands about the labor (missions, mods) and resources (servers) of others. Sure, state you would like more open servers - but that is different from essentially demanding that control of a resource ought to essentially serve the 'will of the community' rather than the creator/owner. Community created resources are a privilege the creators grant you, since they wish you to also have fun, but it is no 'right' of users. Once you create your own missions (if you stop making excuses and give up your own time, if sounds like you are very able) then you will have the 'right' (copyright) and be able to extend the privileges to others as you see fit.

Edited January 21, 2011 by Moa

[Heli Shed]

humbled

 

thanks

 

'T'

[Moa]

While I'm at it, please let me clarify that IANAL (lol, love this abbreviation, it means: "I am not a lawyer"), but here are tidbits I've picked up from discussion around the Web (these aren't legal advice, get a real lawyer if you ever need one).

 

There was a post about community made stuff being the property of ED. It is a little tricky here.

 

Stuff that "extends" LockOn/DCS, eg. LUA scripts directly embedded into LockOn and using the lowest-level interfaces provided by LockOn could be considered "derivative works" and may be subject to conditions imposed by ED (if they ever chose to).

 

It would be a very long stretch to say that stuff that "uses" LockOn but it not derivative (eg. my lottu and stats programs, which are Java, not LUA/C++ as DCS/LockOn are) would probably fall under ED's purview. Missions use LockOn/DCS but such created content are probably non-derivative (just as Sony doesn't own or have direct control over the LockOn videos that get produced with Vegas).

 

Just pointing out to that poster that sometimes community created stuff could be subject to control by ED, and sometimes it is very unlikely to be (not that ED have ever enforced such control, but we should be aware it is possible and we may either need to acquiesce to EDs rights, or intentionally build non-derivative works [as I do]).

Edited January 21, 2011 by Moa

[mtuckner]

I haven't read the license agreement for ED but pretty much all games say that if you create content for it, especially anything modded off the original code or an additional content such as a map or "mission", that it is the developers property. So just to be technically and legally accurate from a layman's view none of you have any copyrights to anything you are making.

 

To be clear, I'm just stating that I think it is poor community to not allow others to download your creation, but to bogart it on your own server and get upset when someone uses your mission instead of flattered. This is the first community I have encountered that get's up in arms if someone uses their missions for fun, on their own server, which in no way infringes on the creators server who wants a more rigid framework for flying. For crying out loud, am I seriously in the minority here?

 

I am not saying anyone is violating any legal rule or any decree by holding onto a mission for personal use. I am just saying it seems a bit small of them. Again, to clarify because people seem to think I am mad that someone wants to run a rigid server with TS and rules (which I am all for, I do the same on my own servers when I host), I am not thinking it is poor sport to host your own server with your own rules.

 

Not releasing your work to the public is your own business, but I am just saying that you wouldn't do it because people would be "flying on your hard work" is what is not good for the community. I am not talking about your own server rules here folks. I know it is a off topic but that is not my beef with tygers decision. It was that he doesn't want others running it ever.

[Headspace]

It would be a very long stretch to say that stuff that "uses" LockOn but it not derivative (eg. my lottu and stats programs, which are Java, not LUA/C++ as DCS/LockOn are) would probably fall under ED's purview. Missions use LockOn/DCS but such created content are probably non-derivative (just as Sony doesn't own or have direct control over the LockOn videos that get produced with Vegas).

Not to butt in here, but I think you're right (sorry misunderstood what you wrote the first time and edited). I'm not a lawyer (or your lawyer), obviously, but as far as US Copyright law is concerned a derivative work is something that is derived from the original work in the sense that it includes major elements of said work. Writing a program from scratch that utilizes original source code that happens to interface with an API offered to third parties is not a derivative work. If Eagle Dynamics provided you with a scripting language that was their IP, and you made something with it just for lock-on, it might be a different situation. For instance, if you reverse-engineered someone's software or took their source code, and then made your own version of the program, that would be a derivative work and would quite possibly violate your original EULA depending on what EULA it was.

 

Now, with the above in mind, look at a program such as TacView, which utilizes an open scripting language (Lua), which interfaces with several different games, and just happens to also interface with ED's product. Would they suddenly now "own" TacView?

 

Under the logic that any third party content is a derivative work, anyone who writes software which interfaces with any of Microsoft's proprietary APIs (DirectX, Win32, .NET, etc) would be Microsoft's IP. That's quite clearly false; while the APIs are Microsoft's property, the 3rd party content's copyright rests with its respective creators.

I haven't read the license agreement for ED but pretty much all games say that if you create content for it, especially anything modded off the original code or an additional content such as a map or "mission", that it is the developers property. So just to be technically and legally accurate from a layman's view none of you have any copyrights to anything you are making.

I have read the license agreement that comes with the product.

 

There is a difference between creating content on your own and creating content using the proprietary utilities provided by the game's creators. If I make a skin, for instance, in photoshop and happen to use that skin in the game, does my photoshop image--which I created--suddenly become some third party's property? I think not. However, if you use ED/TFC's mission editor to make a mission, that's a different story--and of course the EULA contains provisions for use of the mission editor and distribution of content created with such.

 

There's certainly a lot of confusion going on here regarding EULAs.

To be clear, I'm just stating that I think it is poor community to not allow others to download your creation, but to bogart it on your own server and get upset when someone uses your mission instead of flattered. This is the first community I have encountered that get's up in arms if someone uses their missions for fun, on their own server, which in no way infringes on the creators server who wants a more rigid framework for flying. For crying out loud, am I seriously in the minority here?

You should check out the ArmA community if you think that this is the only community where petty flamewars break out over who created what, despite the fact that all mission content is strictly NFR. It gets seriously ridiculous at times. The type of thing has been going on since well before people were making custom .wads for Doom.

Edited January 21, 2011 by Headspace

[Moa]

The License for FC2 states:

 

"4.1This Program may contain certain design, programming and processing utilities, tools, assets and other resources ("Program Utilities") for use with this Program that allow you to create customized new missions, campaigns, skins, terrain and other related materials for personal use in connection with the Program ("New Game Materials"). The use of any Program Utilities is subject to the following additional licence restrictions:"

 

and

 

"(f)all New Game Materials created by you shall be exclusively owned by TFC and/or its licensors as a derivative work (as such term is described under U.S. copyright law) of the Program and TFC and its licensors may use any New Game Materials made publicly available by you for any purpose whatsoever, including but not limited to, for purpose of advertising and promoting the Program."

 

In the case of using ED tools to create missions and skins it looks like there is a case for enforcement (enforcement meaning the TFC owns *all* content produced by those "Program Utilities").

 

If missions and skins are created from scratch without using ED tools then they are not subject to those license conditions (they don't become owned by TFC). Using independent third-party tools for interoperability is explicitly allowed (Section 3.1 f of the EULA) and even if there wasn't there seems to be plenty of precedents in US case law (for example), even to the point of reverse-engineering (but again, no breaches of copyright allowed). This is good as my next LockOn project is a mission generator (both a standalone version and a version which will be hooked into the my stats system => true dynamic campaign).

Edited January 21, 2011 by Moa

[mtuckner]

Well, I have seen the flaming on Arma. I do know people like to take their credit to build up their ego which is fine. I know some people go so far as to create catchy names and logos and virtually brand their little mod. People do get wrapped up in it, but at least they are making it to share in the end.

 

I'm sure there are hundreds of missions maps mods and campaigns that nobody ever sees for Arma as well. More power to them, just doesn't grow the community and attract a larger base to provide funding for more advancements of the genre and company.

 

Imagine if everyone just made missions exclusively for their wing. the 90% of people who buy it and aren't in a wing will be left with the basic missions, call the game unfinished sandbox and never buy the product again. But if it was a bustling Arma type community the game would live in infamy.

 

I'm just rallying to the cause of sharing is caring and good for all. Pardon me.

[Heli Shed]

ok..ok..ok...lets all calm down a little. I think something is lost in all the posts here.

 

simply put, i just said that my server is locked down at the minute because i have 'caught' others serving what is essentially an unfinshed mission, when i had asked them not to do so. Of course it is flattering when someone downloads a mission you have created for the community in general and serves it, thats why Dragon, Grimes, Geskes, me and many others do it.

 

But i bet even they would be slightly peeved if somone serves what was essentially an unfinished, bug ridden (through their own conditions and actions set not neccessarily the software), mission to the public, with their name all over it?

 

exactly, thats my point. This is not a flamewar by any stretch, zip off to many FPS clan sites for that. personally at my age, i cant be doing with it, but........................i do reserve the right to serve what i want, how i want and to whom i want.

 

ooppppppsssssssssssssssss....................... gotta go.

 

The bath is full now, hoping in for a quick disolvement!

 

'T'

[Steel Jaw]

[Headspace]

Moa, I think we are in agreement on how this sort of thing works.

This is good as my next LockOn project is a mission generator (both a standalone version and a version which will be hooked into the my stats system => true dynamic campaign).

Sounds awesome, looking forward to trying something like that, Moa. The IL-2 campaign generator (I forget who wrote that, but it's pretty sweet) was fun, such a thing is missing for DCS.

[mtuckner]

Sorry to hear that they were serving an unfinished project. I think the translation became muddled when you said you locked it down because of plagiarism fears.

 

Also, at the risk of sounding petty, when you said, "There are some fantastic mission designers out there. We have seen them in action for the DCS BS when it first came out (Dragon for example) and they have designed missions for the community - awesome. There will always be a place for these talented people. But, there are some of us who keep close to our chests, the concept and success of specific missions and 'don't' want them served generally to the public by other people."

 

It seemed that you acknowledged there are those who release great missions for the public, but you and yours keep them secret and within your circle of friends or wing.

 

My bad for somehow not reading this correctly, unless you are having a change of heart and downplaying your original stance. Either way, looking forward to one day seeing excellent products released from the 74th that show your expertise and skill, and further the development of the community and attracts the best and brightest to your gentlemen's club.

 

Enjoy your bath. I've said my piece and all the guys on here are intelligent enough to come to their own conclusions on what went down.

Edited January 21, 2011 by mtuckner

[Moa]

Moa, I think we are in agreement on how this sort of thing works.

 

Sounds awesome, looking forward to trying something like that, Moa. The IL-2 campaign generator (I forget who wrote that, but it's pretty sweet) was fun, such a thing is missing for DCS.

 

Since you asked, the IL-2 campaign system is by Paul Lowengrin:

http://www.lowengrin.com/news.php

 

Doing something like this for LockOn/DCS cannot be done overnight, so I'll be plodding away for months on it. Meanwhile, the new DCS mission generator looks handy in the mean time.

[Heli Shed]

Sorry to hear that they were serving an unfinished project. I think the translation became muddled when you said you locked it down because of plagiarism fears.

 

Also, at the risk of sounding petty, when you said, "There are some fantastic mission designers out there. We have seen them in action for the DCS BS when it first came out (Dragon for example) and they have designed missions for the community - awesome. There will always be a place for these talented people. But, there are some of us who keep close to our chests, the concept and success of specific missions and 'don't' want them served generally to the public by other people."

 

It seemed that you acknowledged there are those who release great missions for the public, but you and yours keep them secret and within your circle of friends or wing.

 

My bad for somehow not reading this correctly, unless you are having a change of heart and downplaying your original stance. Either way, looking forward to one day seeing excellent products released from the 74th that show your expertise and skill, and further the development of the community and attracts the best and brightest to your gentlemen's club.

 

Enjoy your bath. I've said my piece and all the guys on here are intelligent enough to come to their own conclusions on what went down.

 

Its easy to get lost in 'forum speak'. no worries. it's all cool.

 

I assure you i`m not playin my original post down., or having a change of heart. Anyway....................................I aint got one.:P

 

:thumbup:

 

'T'

[HiJack]

I have hosted open servers for all ED sims and never had much problems with players. Some teamkilling but those players will not be able to join the server again when a DCS A-10C release arrives and we can have ServMan to look after it. I have stated that when a release is here I will host an 24/7/365 open server with my own quick and easy missions. No long intros or plans, just a shootout for a couple of hours.

 

(HJ)

[S77th-konkussion]

Server running now. Get a slot while it's hot

[Devilman]

thanks kon, had both our servers up today

 

left my one open on a 'target practice' mission pershaps those who are not so good and '''''''spoil'''''' other peoples mission my get some practice in so that maybe one day they may be elite enough to join a group.

 

S77th will be hosting a mission at 8pm US EST Saturday night (Midday Sunday Australian Eastern Daylight time, 11am in QLD if your flight gear wasnt washed away) , those who want to come along and have a fly, any skill level .. most welcome too.

 

Ive been flying flight sims online offline etc for the last 23 years

 

Ive made many missions, played against many squads, pissed off a few people, and traveled to other countries to meet some others ive flown with.

 

I just think this is Silly.

 

DCS A-10 is what you make of it.

if a mission is made to be played as a co-op with the complexity as such that it requires it to be played by only those who are in that squad on teamspeak or ventrillo.. then thats how it should be played.

 

If a mission is made so that you can jump in, not read breifing follow your waypoints and shoot stuff. then thats how it should be played.

 

if your mission is SOOO good that others copy it then you should pat yourself on the back that you have inspired/provided this enjoyment to others.

 

if you get undesired persons in your server, boot em.

they keep it up ban em

if they are cheating ban em.

 

quoting EULA, seriously thats just silly..

 

the point of this being, there are many ways to fly this game.

 

fly it your way.