Items on DLS with out permission

[Vern]

I think we're all aware of the procedures that are in place and that there is an element who thinks it should all be a free for all anyway.

However when content producers continue to see their work copied, plagiarised, butchered and re-uploaded frankly it's about time N3V got off their collective butts and came up with a system that affords those freeware authors who wish it, at least a measure of the protection they now rigorously apply to their own payware DLC at source.

 

[cressjl]

Not a very high frequency compared to other download sites and perhaps people are over reacting. We are always going to have this problem in a community that is so open to all users to make their contributions. It is perhaps a price that has to be paid to avoid the alternatives, such as a restrictive site where only a few "approved" members can contribute.

I totally agree with this assessment. And you are right about what you said in your post about "junk." Sadly, I have paid good money for routes that, well...

I will admit that I have suggested that N3V consider defining uploads to DLS as Open Source. I wouldn't think that this is a "free for all." However, there is a wide range of views across the membership of how closely assets they have created should be guarded. This is a strange environment to newcomers who see the DLS as one big toy box, and the cost of the download ticket providing them the "right" to pretty much do what they want.

Many members are joining that are excited about how to create new content and to modify existing content. This is a tough learning curve in itself. They won't be thinking too much about whether they should, or even can modify an asset that they downloaded. One run through the wringer like this will pretty much guarantee that they will dump this place in a hurry.

Don't get me wrong, this example is a clear violation under any circumstances, and was dealt with appropriately.

On the other hand, making sure that new members (customers) are clearly informed as to what their limitations are in modifying existing assets needs to be clearly stated by N3V, and especially noted as part of the uploading process to the DLS. This will ensure that the pool of contributors grows rather than shrinks to an exclusive few.

 

[sterrett]

I think we're all aware of the procedures that are in place and that there is an element who thinks it should all be a free for all anyway.

However when content producers continue to see their work copied, plagiarised, butchered and re-uploaded frankly it's about time N3V got off their collective butts and came up with a system that affords those freeware authors who wish it, at least a measure of the protection they now rigorously apply to their own payware DLC at source.

It's strange, don't you think,that if you find the need to reskin or modify an asset an email to the original creator to ask permission either seems to generate the reply "You're Welcome" or"Please Don't - I'll modify the item myself if you tell me what you want."

In all the time I have been with Trainz, I have had nothing but courtesy from the community. Granted, former members of old assets who have disappeared from the Trainz community don't always respond, in which case I would consider reskinning or modifying the asset was okay for my own purposes. However, I consider the work belongs to the original author and, while I might privately send the modded asset to someone by email or share it through supplying a link to my private "Google Drive" if it was needed to run a layout I had uploaded fair and reasonable, I would never publicly make the work available through the DLS without permission. (I'm thinking of items like the Romanian Track System (RTS) package which are currently unavailable).

As with most things in life, when it comes to hobbies for pleasure, you have to look beyond the legal arguments and decide if something is "fair and reasonable". Stealing someone's work and passing it off as your own is neither!

 

[cascaderailroad]

Stealing someone's work and passing it off as your own is neither!

Kids nowadays (and adults) have no rational concept of this plagiarizum, they just think: "I'll make a better version, and everybody will absolutely just love it" ... damn the torpedoes ... full speed ahead !

“I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots.” Albert Einstein

 

[cressjl]

In an era of freeware, trialware, shareware, open source, public domain, et. al., it doesn't surprise me that there is growing confusion. The fact that software such as LibreOffice is surpassing expensive Microsoft Office in brilliance doesn't help either.

More specifically, there is a variety of attitudes among members here as well, some who share freely and others who lock down everything. Sadly, many fail to realize that common courtesy demands that we obtain permission before modifying someone else's content, period.

And well, about the quote: http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/03/19/tech-surpass

 

[Saieditor]

It appears that all the 'billvu' assets have been removed from the DLS.

Rob.

There is a new collection of (assets) there with the billvu tag.
do a white search, he is filling the first two pages mostly, atm.

 

[Azervich]

What I don't understand is how can he upload in build numbers that are not supported such as TC3, TRS2004 and TS2009? I smell something fishy. lol

Cheers.

 

[oknotsen]

What I don't understand is how can he upload in build numbers that are not supported such as TC3, TRS2004 and TS2009?

The thing is:
A few months ago N3V made the change that people can upload old content from unsupported versions.
This should, however, all end-up in a repair queue for the Content Repair Group (CRG) and not be listed until they have had time to fix / up-version it (which could take months or simply never happen, so should be avoided if you can) to TS12 or TANE.
The problem is that these assets apparently do show-up and can be downloaded via the website, which should not happen.
In other words: A bug / mistake that should (and eventually will) be solved.

 

[steviez]

Talking of copied assets how many versions of City and county USA or Roswoth Vale or British Midland are there surely these are copies of the original or am I missing the point here ? The download station used to well organised clear and concise now its just quite frankly a bloody mess with any Tom Dick or Harry uploading what they want whether it be 1 length of track or a full rip off of someone else's content or asset. I think the DLS needs a rethink in regard to asset security and provision to stop the above happening through some sort of vetting process surely ?

 

[steviez]

Still 41 assets with username billvu on the DLS

 

[pware]

Talking of copied assets how many versions of City and county USA or Roswoth Vale or British Midland are there [?]

For British Midlands there are 182 so far with 43 of those in just the last 12 months. Some of them are "Autosave" which is something that has often appeared in route uploads and has always puzzled me. A few are multiplayer variants. A lot of them have the same thumbnail image, which I presume was the original image, quite a few have no thumbnail at all and some (based on the thumbnail alone) appear to be a completely different route but are using the same name.

The download station used to well organised clear and concise now its just quite frankly a bloody mess with any Tom Dick or Harry uploading what they want whether it be 1 length of track or a full rip off of someone else's content or asset. I think the DLS needs a rethink in regard to asset security and provision to stop the above happening through some sort of vetting process surely ?

A point that many, myself included, would generally agree with although I doubt that the DLS was ever "well organised clear and concise" with the constant complaints in these forums since day 1 about how assets are named and/or described by their creators. The CRG has, in my opinion, performed miracles in sorting through some of the mess and getting assets working in TS12 and T:ANE but their efforts are an indication of the herculean task ahead of any individual or group who attempts to do any sort of vetting and weeding of assets currently on the DLS.

The current process of accepting new uploads for the DLS, if I understand it correctly, is largely an automated one which checks for compatibility and technical issues only. A human based vetting process would be very time consuming and probably by unpaid volunteers. How would you check for non-technical issues such as "quality", assuming you could come up with the definitions?

Given the current fever over plagiarism on the DLS, I have no doubt there would be demands that uploads are also manually checked against ALL existing DLS contents and payware for copyright violations. One of the N3V people in a post a few months ago outlined the technical difficulties in using automated software to check for "originality" in uploaded assets.

Would users be happy with the resulting long wait for their uploads to appear, which could easily stretch for weeks or months while vetting takes place? I am certain that many would end up posting their creations elsewhere to get a quicker turnaround at the expense of little or no vetting.

The problems with a reliable vetting process are far too numerous - how many times do Youtube, Facebook, etc get it wrong?

 

[SailorDan]

The problem is that these assets apparently do show-up and can be downloaded via the website, which should not happen.

No. The statement was that they will not show in the regular DLS listings but may still be downloaded as a dependency. That means they will not appear in Content Manager listings but will appear in searches at the white pages.

 

[euromodeller]

What about a contributor registration scheme.

It could state in the registration T & C that content submitted is original or a modification that has been approved by the original creator.

It would be less of a task to vet creators than vet every downloaded asset.

Just a thought

Graham

 

[ZecMurphy]

Good Morning All
My apologies for not replying the other day. As several creators contacted us, all of this users content was removed from the Download Station, and a warning was sent to them regarding uploading content without permission. If we receive any further reports regarding content that was uploaded by this user without permission, then further action can be taken (i.e. permanent banning from MyTrainz).

What about a contributor registration scheme.

It could state in the registration T & C that content submitted is original or a modification that has been approved by the original creator.

It would be less of a task to vet creators than vet every downloaded asset.

Just a thought

Graham

The current DLS upload terms and conditions require that the content was either created entirely by the uploader, or they have received permission to upload the content. As such, content uploaded without permission is in breach of the DLS T&Cs and will be removed when reported by the original creator.

Unfortunately, manually checking every upload is impossible, both in practicality and in time. There is no way to know that permission was given for that upload, and it is impossible to know who created every asset (so I wouldn't know if the uploader made it, or someone else made it). Automatic checking is easily fooled, as it only requires you to change a couple of things and it will then appear as 'different'.

Regards

 

[cascaderailroad]

You should hire cascaderailroad as an asset screener .... I work for cheep ... beernuts and Yeunglings

Free Skype UN: cascaderailroad (I'm not always on Skype ... but when I am ... I drink Dos Equis)

 

[Red_Rattler]

There is a new collection of (assets) there with the billvu tag.

And how is that, as I thought that he/she would not be able to upload again? He/she obviously knows what they are doing.

And I note that he/she has uploaded the various NSW 3801 locomotives.

 

[NSWGR_46Class]

The 38 he is has is a ripped of NW J class - he is getting better at least he replace the thumb nail to bette one

But sure as eggs the 60 class is stolen - ?-01 ?-02 ?-03 --- once again how did he manage to upload to the DLS with out a thumbnail - and he change the description in the config

And how is that, as I thought that he/she would not be able to upload again? He/she obviously knows what they are doing.

And I note that he/she has uploaded the various NSW 3801 locomotives.

Download Page

?-01

 

[NSWGR_46Class]

the 60 class has been ripped off and backdated <kuid:540717:1> which is the same as kuid <kuid:73150:100061> <kuid:540717:2> which is the same as kuid <kuid:73150:100062> <kuid:540717:3> which is the same as kuid <kuid:73150:100063>

 

[pcas1986]

... once again how did he manage to upload to the DLS with out a thumbnail ....

Because he is accepting the warning that faulty assets will be sent to the Content Repair Group. There are 105 of "his" assets in the CRG faulty asset list. Curiously, there are 69 showing on the DLS white pages.

 

[Azervich]

Hi Paul,

The extra stuff in the list could be from last year when he did this, at the same time they banned his account from the forums, because he's a repeat offender maybe N3V could block his kuid from uploading for a while, just a thought though.

Cheers.