Got Bort85's Clone

[ekankal]

I have difficulty understanding N3V's approach/attitude to this kind of prank "krash_01" and other idiots are doing, for God's sake, you do not have to be a brain surgeon to see what it's about, it has to be totally unnecessary to let it go so far as to an original creator reacts when it is so obvious what is going on.
And by not taking into action IMMEDIATELY, so it's basically a signal to others that it is green light to continue with this kind of nonsense.

WAKE UP N3V.

// Erik from Sweden

 

[jacksonbarno]

I agree. How can such an obvious attempt to crash the DLS be met with such ignorance? If the DLS crashes because N3V doesn't take action, I won't be surprised judging by their reaction time on other issues.

 

[shaneturner12]

Hi Shane; What the heck is this reserved crap!? What if a bunch of other people decided to do that? I like to have a peek at what the folks have done every morning. After a couple of miles of "reserved" I just gave up.

I can't believe Bort, for one, is still a member. I hope he's not. ALL of "his" files should have been removed. I still see some. This is far worse than someone shooting their face off in the forums. I will never be a creator, but it really ticks me off when someone steals another's work and takes credit for it.

Cheers...Rick

PS Now that you're here, have a great Christmas and a perfect new year! Thanks for all you do around here!

I'm not entirely sure, but it's something for N3V to sort out. However, the original creators of any affected assets need to contact N3V in order to get the content removed.

Shane

 

[clam1952]

It seems that "Krash_01" is at it again as well, and two new fellows, "Vologda", and "er2k1017" and "zubikk" (who seems to have re-uploaded "Clam1952's" trees).

No screenies, no descriptions...seemingly "Russian" or some other former Soviet state.

I have reported mine just, Ticket number #HYY-393-32927 in case someone from N3V spots it here first, there is no reason to have cloned my assets as they are identical right down to Trainz build number and are on the DLS.

Do not download any CL Tree assets from user zubikk as these are copyright infringements.

 

[cascaderailroad]

As there are at least 4 users who are SPAMMING the DLS, and their names have been reported to N3V ... Can't N3V take action, and mass delete the users assets, by username ?

 

[CaptEngland]

Hi guys,

How about a sticky containing user names who upload this kind of thing. That should help stop the innocent from downloading their goods!

Regards.
CaptEngland.

 

[matruck]

I have reported mine just, Ticket number #HYY-393-32927 in case someone from N3V spots it here first, there is no reason to have cloned my assets as they are identical right down to Trainz build number and are on the DLS.

Do not download any CL Tree assets from user zubikk as these are copyright infringements.

At least you caught yours Clam so i'm glad but you should also start another thread on it maybe in the DLS Section to warn others about not uploading your stolen content. Quite a few probably do not read every thread here so the more you get it out there the more who will see it.
Cheers Mick.

 

[JCitron]

Is this all of 'em?

runtik
zubikk
er2k1017
krash_01

 

[KingConrail76]

Is this all of 'em?

runtik
zubikk
er2k1017
krash_01

User "Vologda" also has some questionable content, but I have not investigated thoroughly.

 

[JCitron]

Thanks.


John

 

[JCitron]

At least you caught yours Clam so i'm glad but you should also start another thread on it maybe in the DLS Section to warn others about not uploading your stolen content. Quite a few probably do not read every thread here so the more you get it out there the more who will see it.
Cheers Mick.

This is a good idea.

We can't prevent people from downloading, but at least we can warn people about the content.

 

[ZecMurphy]

Hi All
Again, for content that has been uploaded without permission, the original content creator needs to contact us. Otherwise there is no way to ensure that the content has, in fact, been uploaded without permission. Guesswork doesn't quite cut it here \

Now, if several creators contact us regarding the same user we will take further action. This has occurred several times previously, but again it requires the original creators to contact us.

If the content creator is deceased, then we may remove uploads of these items if they are reported via the helpdesk to us. However, it is still possible that permission was obtained from a family member (or before the person passed away). This situation is relatively uncommon, thankfully.

If the creator is no longer using Trainz, well it still falls back to the original situation. They still retain the rights to their content (unless they have made them public domain or similar), and as such they still need to contact us.

As to the uploads of 'reserved' content, I will be looking into this during this week and we may remove these items if the uploaders cannot give us a satisfactory answer as to why they are uploading the 'reserved' assets. However, it will take a little bit of time.

We will not remove content unless it is absolutely necessary, and for large amounts of content it does take some time to do this.

Regards

 

[stationmistress]

JCitron asked "Is this all?" Look below.

bort85, 1114 items listed, (some of which I recognize as being cloned, all at 0 bytes on the helper.
d3s, 91 items most of which are Reserved.
er2k1017, 199 items most of which are IGZD.
danzzzeg, 12 items, Reserved.
krash_01, 1982 items, Reserved.
lord9 seems suspect with 120 dodgy assets.
mixfight52, 32 items, 9 Reserved. This one I'm not sure about, some items look genuine.
pleigox3, 76 items. Pics don't match some descriptions.
runtik, 162 items.
volgda, 247 items, some meaningless pics also used by others in this list.
zubbik, 454 items.

Added
daniel104, 1 item
toco346, 1 item
winston1997, 18 items.

The majority in the list are either Russian or unlisted in the Auran website profile search.

These are all I've found as suspect. I'm not saying they're all knock-offs, I'm not a judge, I'll leave that to the more knowledgeable amongst you.

 

[KingConrail76]

One way to find "suspect" assets is to, in CMP, go to "list all", then sort by "Name"...cloned/dodgy assets will show up in the list right next to their legitimate cousins.

 

[shaneturner12]

Hi All
Again, for content that has been uploaded without permission, the original content creator needs to contact us. Otherwise there is no way to ensure that the content has, in fact, been uploaded without permission. Guesswork doesn't quite cut it here \

Now, if several creators contact us regarding the same user we will take further action. This has occurred several times previously, but again it requires the original creators to contact us.

If the content creator is deceased, then we may remove uploads of these items if they are reported via the helpdesk to us. However, it is still possible that permission was obtained from a family member (or before the person passed away). This situation is relatively uncommon, thankfully.

If the creator is no longer using Trainz, well it still falls back to the original situation. They still retain the rights to their content (unless they have made them public domain or similar), and as such they still need to contact us.

As to the uploads of 'reserved' content, I will be looking into this during this week and we may remove these items if the uploaders cannot give us a satisfactory answer as to why they are uploading the 'reserved' assets. However, it will take a little bit of time.

We will not remove content unless it is absolutely necessary, and for large amounts of content it does take some time to do this.

Regards

Hi Zec,

Whilst I respect what you are saying, I feel that delaying the process of dealing with the problem users is only going to make N3V's task worse (and may harm N3V's reputation). It may be that the original creator cannot be reached for some reason, although you probably get quite a few reports through the Helpdesk about this.

As I've stated earlier in this thread, at least one of the assets by runtik for example is a blatant clone of the Speedtree Library, right down to the number at the end being the same. I'd like to know how the original creator of that asset can contact yourselves when it's an N3V asset in the first place.

Shane

 

[stationmistress]

One way to find "suspect" assets is to, in CMP, go to "list all", then sort by "Name"...cloned/dodgy assets will show up in the list right next to their legitimate cousins.

This only works with some of the assets. A lot of them have gobbledygook as the username. With 280647 items listed, a hell of a task.

 

[Vern]

Agreed Shane, it's no good N3V just sitting on their hands and saying "that's the policy". In the face of such blatant/spamming of the system there needs to be a more effective method in place. For starters, any content which is flagged as suspicious whether by the original author or a third party should be flagged accordingly on the DLS even to reding it out in the list or preventing selection for download, while investigations are made. Given the extent to which this is happening it seems there is far less chance of something innocent being considered guily than the other way round.

And to repeat, it is creating an untenable situation for the route builders who have no way of knowing, 1. Which is the original and which is the duplicate item and 2. Whether the item is a genuine upgrade or not. The issue is if the wrong item is referenced in a route and some time down the road N3V do take action and withdraw the asset(s), the route builder and genuine users could be left with a gaping hole in their route.

So again, with all the enthusiasm for TANE aside, N3V need to seriously rethink their policy on this issue because the ultimate sanction is that people will stop using the DLS/DLS assets = no more FCT subscriptions.

 

[ZecMurphy]

Hi All
The policy is in place to ensure that ONLY content which is DEFINITELY uploaded without permission is removed. This policy is to protect both us, and the community. If we change this so that only 'suspicion' by the community is required to have content removed (which is what is being suggested...), then you open up the lovely can of worms of any member being able to have any content removed without due investigation (the investigation occurring after the content is removed). We will not do this, it is simple as that. As that is exactly what you have suggested (the system doesn't allow 'blocking' a download, only deleting it which is essentially permanent without installing an earlier backup; which can mean requiring creators to re-upload content removed when rolling back to the earlier backup). Instead, we perform the investigation before we remove the content. Remember, the content may or may not have originally come from the DLS, so we may or may not find a duplicate on the DLS.

There are a grand total of TWO parties who can DEFINITELY say that content has been uploaded without permission. The uploader, and the original creator. No one else can, for certain, say if the upload was with permission or not. Hence we require the original author to inform us of this.

Note, this does not include legal council, or transfer of ownership of the artwork/content. In this situation we may take this into account (this would be done on a case by case basis; legal council would be highly likely though ).

After the original author contacts us, there will be at most 3-4 days before we remove the content. This includes checking the validity of the author's claim (I recall a few situations where authors have given permission, then removed this at a later date dring a 'dummy spit' or similar), and actually removing the content. Generally it'll be 24-48 hours though.

As to the 'reserved' assets, there are several situations that have been discussed in the office which we think may be valid situations (a little tenuous, but we do see them as somewhat valid). As such, we are investigating this before we remove these assets. Apart from clogging up the DLS website a bit, they aren't causing any direct issues. However we are looking into this, and again we'll be looking to take action if we deem it necessary.

Regards

 

[rickf77]

I don't know if this can work here. What should be happening is each and every thing uploaded to the site needs to be looked at before it is allowed.

Cheers....Rick

 

[shaneturner12]

Hi All
The policy is in place to ensure that ONLY content which is DEFINITELY uploaded without permission is removed. This policy is to protect both us, and the community. If we change this so that only 'suspicion' by the community is required to have content removed (which is what is being suggested...), then you open up the lovely can of worms of any member being able to have any content removed without due investigation (the investigation occurring after the content is removed). We will not do this, it is simple as that. As that is exactly what you have suggested (the system doesn't allow 'blocking' a download, only deleting it which is essentially permanent without installing an earlier backup; which can mean requiring creators to re-upload content removed when rolling back to the earlier backup). Instead, we perform the investigation before we remove the content. Remember, the content may or may not have originally come from the DLS, so we may or may not find a duplicate on the DLS.

There are a grand total of TWO parties who can DEFINITELY say that content has been uploaded without permission. The uploader, and the original creator. No one else can, for certain, say if the upload was with permission or not. Hence we require the original author to inform us of this.

Note, this does not include legal council, or transfer of ownership of the artwork/content. In this situation we may take this into account (this would be done on a case by case basis; legal council would be highly likely though ).

After the original author contacts us, there will be at most 3-4 days before we remove the content. This includes checking the validity of the author's claim (I recall a few situations where authors have given permission, then removed this at a later date dring a 'dummy spit' or similar), and actually removing the content. Generally it'll be 24-48 hours though.

As to the 'reserved' assets, there are several situations that have been discussed in the office which we think may be valid situations (a little tenuous, but we do see them as somewhat valid). As such, we are investigating this before we remove these assets. Apart from clogging up the DLS website a bit, they aren't causing any direct issues. However we are looking into this, and again we'll be looking to take action if we deem it necessary.

Regards

Can I ask a question Zec? How does it work if the asset that has been cloned is one that has been created by yourselves?

Shane