Freeware DEM / Payware DEM

[cascaderailroad]

I understand that all Trainz creations, whether they be freeware, or payware, are copyrighted by a creator, and can not be re-distributed, nor sold for profit, without the explicit written release permission from the original creator.

If a person such as Fishlipsatwork is no longer active on the forum, and can not be contacted, and if another person uses his DEM from the DLS ... can the freeware DEM, be inturn sold for profit, as Payware ?

Does a DEM creation, have the same copywrite protection, as any other freeware Trainz asset does ?

And if not ... why not ?

I do not believe that a config file wording can be construed as a "Freebee" right for someone to release a route as Payware, making profit off of someone elses work, of creating a DEM.

It is my understanding, in that if I took the Fishlipsatwork Horseshoe Curve DEM, or a DEM made by a Jerker, that I could not turn around and sell the route as payware, as the DEM was not my original creation ? ? ?

Just because I made substantial changes to the DEM, does not really legally make it "Mine", to sell as payware, to make a profit from ... this is my interpertation of copywrite protection of Trainz assets.

In addition: If I put a mailbox by GFisher on my DEM, or a blade of grass the Greenery, and sold the DEM for profit ... My DEM would be a copywrite infringement.

Just as if I took a creation of Dave Snow, and made substantial changes to it ... I could not ethically, nor legally, sell it as payware, and make profit from the asset.

 

[Williamb73]

I hand made my map and do plan to sell it. I thank the creators who make the models of building ect, but I'm doing the elivations and super detailing so I will charge simply for the time I spend placing the assets.

I don't know how this contribute to your post but at least someone replyed!

Cheers, William

 

[cascaderailroad]

Yes ... I can see if you actually made the DEM from scratch, all by yourself ... that is a whole different ball of wax.

But if you used a track on your DEM, a track made by someone else, and sold your DEM for profit, using that persons track ... wouldn't that be copywrite infringement.

Just "thanking other creators", is not enough ... when a monitary profit is being made off of their work.

I would think that all the assets used on a Payware DEM, would all have to be custom handmade by the DEM maker, by the seller of the DEM, to be legal.

Some would say that placing that persons kuid in your routes config file, is merely referencing the assets kuid ... as the actual route assets CDP's are not being directly redistributed along inside the DEM CDP payware package.

 

[clam1952]

My view of payware and not necessarily shared by others is that I would have to have created virtually everything myself, firstly to avoid all the agro that seems to go with copyright these days and secondly, I wouldn't feel comfortable in making money out of other people's work anyway.

Having been down the road of taking an enjoyable hobby and turning it into a money earning activity and finding out that what once was a relaxation becomes a chore and eventually no longer any fun, I'm not likely to be making that mistake again.

 

[CaptEngland]

I agree with Cascaderailroad. Of course, if someone got permission to use someone's assets on a payware route, well that would be different.

I take it that someone may of been a bit naughty Cascaderailroad? Or is this just an general question?

Regards.
CaptEngland.

 

[RRSignal]

I understand that all Trainz creations, whether they be freeware, or payware, are copyrighted by a creator, and can not be re-distributed, nor sold for profit, without the explicit written release permission from the original creator.

If a person such as Fishlipsatwork is no longer active on the forum, and can not be contacted, if another person uses his DEM from the DLS ... can the freeware DEM, be inturn sold for profit, as Payware ?

Does a DEM creation, have the same copywrite protection, as any other freeware Trainz asset does ?

And if not ... why not ?

I do not believe that a config file wording can be construed as a "Freebee" right for someone to release a route as Payware, making profit off of someone elses work, of creating a DEM.

It is my understanding, in that if I took the Fishlipsatwork Horseshoe Curve DEM, or a DEM made by a Jerker, that I could not turn around and sell the route as payware, as the DEM was not my original creation ? ? ?

Just because I made substantial changes to the DEM, does not really legally make it "Mine", to sell as payware, to make a profit from ... this is my interpertation of copywrite protection of Trainz assets.

In addition: If I put a mailbox by GFisher on my DEM, or a blade of grass the Greenery, and sold the DEM for profit ... My DEM would be a copywrite infringement.

Just as if I took a creation of Dave Snow, and made substantial changes to it ... I could not ethically, nor legally, sell it as payware, and make profit from the asset.

The second part of your question about mailboxes and grass is pretty well settled; a route only references those objects. As long as you don't actually include them, then you're not infringing on anyone's copyright.

As for the DEM, I can see why you're asking. This is where copyright law is very gray, because, a DEM could be considered an "interim copy" from which something else is made. Courts have gone both ways on this issue, some deciding that a work derived from another are infringing, while others have decided they are not. There's a good write-up here:

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/property00/respect/winickexcerpt.html

As a practical matter, it's undoubtedly less headache, and would produce better results, just to get TransDEM do the work yourself. You'll pay off the cost of TransDEM in no time. It detracts from the hobby to have to worry about such grayh areas.

 

[cascaderailroad]

I agree with Cascaderailroad. Of course, if someone got permission to use someone's assets on a payware route, well that would be different.

I take it that someone may of been a bit naughty Cascaderailroad? Or is this just an general question?

Regards.
CaptEngland.

No ... I just sat up in bed in the middle of the night, and said outloud: "Damn, I can't sell my DEM, I dint' make it myself" !
My wife said: "Shad' App' ... And stop dreaming about Trainz" !

When the morning sky is absolutely beautifuly breathtaking ... and you remark: "Man ... Thats a Pomme Sky 13" ! ... You are too much, into Trainz.

 

[nugget2225]

i would say don't do it, just create the dem yourself, i just had discussion with someone else about this topic. i created my own dems and i am gonna use dave snows buildings in the route, he said as long as i don't package his content to sell it that as long as it stays on the download station he is fine with that, so in my mind i build my route, i sell it, then whoever buys the route will simply need to download the needed assets from the download station when they install the route. i believe though, i cant remember who but one of the trainz websites had a group of dems and they didn't care what you did with them but i would'nt to be safe, just my opinion.

 

[geophil]

As a practical matter, it's undoubtedly less headache, and would produce better results, just to get TransDEM do the work yourself. You'll pay off the cost of TransDEM in no time. It detracts from the hobby to have to worry about such grayh areas.

There is a commercial license available for TransDEM for those who do payware routes.

 

[Vern]

The general concensus in other sims is that if the original author cannot be contacted, but has made it a condition his work cannot be used or referenced in payware that still stands. There is no such thing as abandonware.

With regards to this referencing of freeware content/assets in a payware product (as opposed to distributing it) this is a grey area which N3V appear to condone but not everyone (myself included) necessarily agrees with.

Besides, doing payware presents certain challenges over and above freeware. You leave yourself open to criticism at the slightest issue as soon as goods start changing hands for money, even if it's only a few £/$. With freeware you can get away with caveat emptor or used as is, but if you sell something which an end user may have trouble with they are going to expect support...or a refund. If you are doing payware then whatever you are making needs to be the best of the best, people are not going to buy a shonky product. So consider is the minor amount of money you are likely to make (which you should also be prepared to pay income and where applicable sales/VAT tax on) really worth it compared to the joy and pleasure of making something shared for free with the community?

 

[backyard]

I take tips...

 

[mcguirel]

The general concensus in other sims is that if the original author cannot be contacted, but has made it a condition his work cannot be used or referenced in payware that still stands. There is no such thing as abandonware.

With regards to this referencing of freeware content/assets in a payware product (as opposed to distributing it) this is a grey area which N3V appear to condone but not everyone (myself included) necessarily agrees with.

Besides, doing payware presents certain challenges over and above freeware. You leave yourself open to criticism at the slightest issue as soon as goods start changing hands for money, even if it's only a few £/$. With freeware you can get away with caveat emptor or used as is, but if you sell something which an end user may have trouble with they are going to expect support...or a refund. If you are doing payware then whatever you are making needs to be the best of the best, people are not going to buy a shonky product. So consider is the minor amount of money you are likely to make (which you should also be prepared to pay income and where applicable sales/VAT tax on) really worth it compared to the joy and pleasure of making something shared for free with the community?

Great Advice To Anyone who moves forward with content creation in one or many categories that can be of opportunity. I have personal experiences, past and present, that the above statement holds very true among other aspects of my past not forgotten or let go of even after two years. Just a word of advice not heavily related to the topic but feel I want to express without harm, be careful to any reference regardless of the context to anyone or any organization. Furthermore, your first content model may also not be what you choose in the future therefore make sure it does not limit you to new opportunity.