You really lost me on that one?
reskin permission from people who left?
- Thread starter picture
- Start date
You really lost me on that one?
Certainly not. I'm just trying to keep the issue of trademarks separate from the discussion of copyrights. What I'm reserving my comments to is the original mesh or creation.
Sorry leefer. Maybe it would have helped a little if you explained what you meant.
As with most threads on these forums, separate discussions often crop up. Until the other dude came along, this had been a constructive and positive discussion. Your comments are inmportant, so please let's hear them. I apologise for throwing you in the same basket, but your posts came one on top of the other.
That's okay, no offense taken and none was intended toward you. We all tend to take this issue a little overboard sometimes, but some people tend to take the protection of original meshes a little too lightly. I've put hundreds of hours into some of my meshes and offer my content for free on the DLS for all trainzers to use. I don't put it up for some to decide that they have some sort of semi-ownership just because they can't get in touch with me or that it is somehow in the 'public domain'. When that becomes the case, I'll start creating payware or just quit altogether.
Mike
Mike
johnwhelan
Well-known member
I think one of the most important things to take into account is the fact we don't have enough experienced skilled content creators and keeping them happy is important.
I don't agree with some of the comments that seem to suggest that once some one hasn't noticed an email request in their spam filter ten days later you may do what you like with the mesh etc.
There are valid reasons for not wanting your work reskinned, one problem I have at the moment is I'd updated my own models to be TS2010 error free or enhanced the steam locos but I'm unable to correct the reskins of my work by others. Some of whom seem to have disappeared.
Some reskins are not as good a quality as I'd like to see, some content creators also hold quality issue views. Rather than get into a discussion and upset some one by saying I don't think your reskinning ability will enhance my work, some will choose simply not to respond. I think that is their privilege.
At the end of the day most content creators are willing to let people do reskins however there are issues involved some of which may not be apparent at first.
Cheerio John
What UP says.....
Why not see what UP says about using their logo:
http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/licensing/index.shtml
Why not see what UP says about using their logo:
http://www.uprr.com/aboutup/licensing/index.shtml
Union Pacific owns one of the oldest and most famous corporate trademarks in the nation, as well as many other historic railroad trademarks that were acquired and are used by Union Pacific.[/font]
[FONT=Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif]In order to protect the company's trademarks from unauthorized use and potential harm, Union Pacific requires a license agreement for commercial uses of these marks on goods or for services. These restrictions do not apply to in-home model railroad hobbyists who create Union Pacific-branded equipment for personal use
So ... guess you need a license if used in payware???
[FONT=Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif]In order to protect the company's trademarks from unauthorized use and potential harm, Union Pacific requires a license agreement for commercial uses of these marks on goods or for services. These restrictions do not apply to in-home model railroad hobbyists who create Union Pacific-branded equipment for personal use
So ... guess you need a license if used in payware???
Last edited:
If I can, I will always contact the creator, for example John Whelan, Nexusdj, Emo and so on, and ask them if it would be possible, if they have a chance to maybe reskin one of there own items in a certain livery for me and I will show them a picture of what I'm after, and then hope they can do it for me.
I reskin a lot of content from Railwaves, and under the terms and conditions I cannot distribute any of my finished items due to copyright, and I follow this rule always, I use Irfanview and I could easily reskin any item from the download station I'm given and place it on the DLS or open my own website and re-distribute, but I don't as mark of respect for my fellow trainz content creators and I always respect there wishes, as I see it, without them, there would be no trainz.
However, if you cannot for the life of you, get in touch with someone who hasn't been heard on here since 2004, then there items are left on the DLS unused, if there was a way to get round this obstacle then that would be brilliant, but usually it ends up with 50 pms to one person who doesn't respond.
I have a lot of respect and admiration for John Whelan, Johnk, Nexusdj, Emo, JN114, pikkabird, Tom Young, TMZ06003, Eldavo Dave and so on, the list goes on, and they have always been there and helped me along the way when I'm stuck, and I very much appreciate them being here.
I think the solution to this problem is to bring in something similar to paintshed, however instead of paintshed, just paintshed type models on the DLS that are all white, with working bogies and so on, but can be painted in various livery's through programs such as Irfanview, paintshop pro or photoshop and so on, but the only question remains then is, who is going to make them. I believe there is a gap in the market for something like this.
Joe Airtime
I reskin a lot of content from Railwaves, and under the terms and conditions I cannot distribute any of my finished items due to copyright, and I follow this rule always, I use Irfanview and I could easily reskin any item from the download station I'm given and place it on the DLS or open my own website and re-distribute, but I don't as mark of respect for my fellow trainz content creators and I always respect there wishes, as I see it, without them, there would be no trainz.
However, if you cannot for the life of you, get in touch with someone who hasn't been heard on here since 2004, then there items are left on the DLS unused, if there was a way to get round this obstacle then that would be brilliant, but usually it ends up with 50 pms to one person who doesn't respond.
I have a lot of respect and admiration for John Whelan, Johnk, Nexusdj, Emo, JN114, pikkabird, Tom Young, TMZ06003, Eldavo Dave and so on, the list goes on, and they have always been there and helped me along the way when I'm stuck, and I very much appreciate them being here.
I think the solution to this problem is to bring in something similar to paintshed, however instead of paintshed, just paintshed type models on the DLS that are all white, with working bogies and so on, but can be painted in various livery's through programs such as Irfanview, paintshop pro or photoshop and so on, but the only question remains then is, who is going to make them. I believe there is a gap in the market for something like this.
Joe Airtime
Last edited:
The first 2 are trademark issues, so irrelevant. The third is a total irrelevance, and design registration does not make any difference to your rights as a copyright holder - it just makes it easier to prove in court.
Paul
I’ve been reading this thread with interest, but I’m not sure I agree with all the worries completely.
The main point of copyright surely is to protect intellectual rights, largely for financial reasons. Perhaps also to ensure some control over the item/work or to avoid an unauthorised use of the work bringing the author into disrepute.
In the case of Trainz, if you copy someone’s work and re-issue it as your own without reference to the original author, that’s effectively plagiarism, (though that term normally relates to written work). In that case I can quite see why Auran might ban you from the DLS and Forums.
If you copy someone’s work and re-issue it elsewhere without the authors permission then I can see many objections from an author. Perhaps litigation might follow but if no financial gain is made its difficult to see how a financial amount could be put on such a situation. Perhaps damages if it brings the original author into disrepute? Since you will have downloaded the item from the DLS, I suppose if the author complained strongly enough Auran could ban you?
If you copy someone’s work and sell it…. Well, easy! Money to be made by the original author there! A Layer may even do a no-win, no-fee deal!
BUT, just to issue a re-skin or essential modification of an original asset that didn’t have a licence specifically forbidding it, ONLY on the DLS, for FREE and with FULL CREDIT to the original author! Come on, firstly why would the author complain. He/she put it on the DLS for Trainz users to use for free anyway. If they were touchy about modification re-issues they would have put a ‘don’t touch’ policy in their licence. And even if he/she did complain for some unknown reason, I really don’t see what they could do. Are they really going to employ lawyers on a questionable case, that even if they did ‘win’, there is no financial aspect anyway?
Obviously, if you’re thinking of re-issuing something then the first course IS to contact the author and ask permission. If they decline, even if the above is true, you would probably want to respect their wishes and not publish. So would I!
However the real issue here is in the case of those assets where the author has left the Trainz community for whatever reason. There is no permission, but there is no decline either.
I feel in that situation we should just ‘publish and be dammned’. Otherwise we lose such good stuff!
Case in point are the excellent NYCTA trains by Magicland. These do not work in TS 2009/2010 Native. I now have a personally modified copy of the R46 that I use in TS 2010. (See below). I could make this available on the DLS but only as a clone under my own kuid.
I have e-mailed Magicland for permission and I hope to get a reply…..
If I do not get a reply, what should I do?
Boat
The main point of copyright surely is to protect intellectual rights, largely for financial reasons. Perhaps also to ensure some control over the item/work or to avoid an unauthorised use of the work bringing the author into disrepute.
In the case of Trainz, if you copy someone’s work and re-issue it as your own without reference to the original author, that’s effectively plagiarism, (though that term normally relates to written work). In that case I can quite see why Auran might ban you from the DLS and Forums.
If you copy someone’s work and re-issue it elsewhere without the authors permission then I can see many objections from an author. Perhaps litigation might follow but if no financial gain is made its difficult to see how a financial amount could be put on such a situation. Perhaps damages if it brings the original author into disrepute? Since you will have downloaded the item from the DLS, I suppose if the author complained strongly enough Auran could ban you?
If you copy someone’s work and sell it…. Well, easy! Money to be made by the original author there! A Layer may even do a no-win, no-fee deal!
BUT, just to issue a re-skin or essential modification of an original asset that didn’t have a licence specifically forbidding it, ONLY on the DLS, for FREE and with FULL CREDIT to the original author! Come on, firstly why would the author complain. He/she put it on the DLS for Trainz users to use for free anyway. If they were touchy about modification re-issues they would have put a ‘don’t touch’ policy in their licence. And even if he/she did complain for some unknown reason, I really don’t see what they could do. Are they really going to employ lawyers on a questionable case, that even if they did ‘win’, there is no financial aspect anyway?
Obviously, if you’re thinking of re-issuing something then the first course IS to contact the author and ask permission. If they decline, even if the above is true, you would probably want to respect their wishes and not publish. So would I!
However the real issue here is in the case of those assets where the author has left the Trainz community for whatever reason. There is no permission, but there is no decline either.
I feel in that situation we should just ‘publish and be dammned’. Otherwise we lose such good stuff!
Case in point are the excellent NYCTA trains by Magicland. These do not work in TS 2009/2010 Native. I now have a personally modified copy of the R46 that I use in TS 2010. (See below). I could make this available on the DLS but only as a clone under my own kuid.
I have e-mailed Magicland for permission and I hope to get a reply…..
If I do not get a reply, what should I do?
Boat
Last edited:
Why can't "no" be the answer here? Why can't it be accepted that you just can't release reskins without permission either in writing from the model creator or included in the licence? It doesn't matter how hard you tried to contact the creator, it doesn't matter how long it's been.
Quit looking for loopholes to crawl through just to release something that probably isn't that good in the first place, (and I know "isn't that good"; I've released plenty of it!).
Just stop, and then reskin something you can get permission for....
Quit looking for loopholes to crawl through just to release something that probably isn't that good in the first place, (and I know "isn't that good"; I've released plenty of it!).
Just stop, and then reskin something you can get permission for....
I'm not talking about just re-skinning.
I'm talking about not losing, (for new versions of Trainz) a lot of the very good content now available.
And I'm not looking for loopholes. I'm questioning whether, (in the case above) if there is anything to 'loop' through!
Ideally I would like to see a system of submission of modified assets to Auran, for them to re-issue under the original kuid! But if not lets just get on with it!
Boat
I wasn't trying to single you out Boat, I'm just weary of the constant "what ifs" in the thread. My apologies if I've offended you.
We are going to "lose" items, let's call it "The Circle of Content". Good content is made, then Auran moves the goals...too bad so sad, but the content works for those using the program it was intended for. New programs will require new content and that's just the way it is. Those that want to use the new program can certainly make new content for it, otherwise they can just stay with what works.
Content has always been the Achilles Heel here, and it's impossible for Auran to make it all.
"Ole Red was a good dog, but now he's gone, and we had better accept it...":'(
None taken, Euphod.
Its just that I really think people are inventing problems here. I'm not looking for 'ways round things' because to my mind 'things' don't exist.
How can you be infringing a copyright with a re-skin? You're not re-issuing the mesh, your referencing, (aliasing) it. The mesh is not contained in the asset you upload, its already on the DLS! You are merely supplying an asset containing new textures that YOU have created and are YOUR copyright.
So the argument for needing any permission, (other than out of courtesy) for a re-skin doesn’t hold water to me. If the original ‘licence’ specifically forbids this, (which I think is unreasonable and not in my view in the spirit of Trainz), then OK, leave it…. but otherwise, it’s not a ‘loophole’, it’s just Trainz!
What I want to do - re-issue the whole asset including mesh to make it TS 2010 may be a different issue and open for debate. But I don’t agree that we should just say goodbye to decent work. I also find it difficult to understand why people object to doing this in the case of departed creators! Again, if an individual author has made it clear that it’s a no-no then fine…. (Still not my view of Trainz though!)
Happy days,
Boat
Then you are making a 'derivitive' work.
https://secure-b.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p22_derivative_works.en.htm
The relevant part of this being:
"Legally only the copyright owner has the right to authorise adaptations and reproductions of their work - this includes the making of a derivative work."
Mike.
Mike,
I don't think you are!
To make a 'derivative work', surely you would have to publish the whole thing, including the mesh. (A full clone might be).
But in the case of a re-skin, you are only publishing completely new textures. The final user is combining these into a 'derivative work' perhaps but only for their own use.
Is that any different from someone using a DLS asset in their map/route? The route doesn’t reproduce the original asset, it merely attaches it. So does a re-skin!
Plus, if we want to take the copyright laws to the nth degree, did anyone contact Toyota (or whoever) when they made a model of one of their cars?
Boat
For the love of God this is so easy.
If you don't have either a specific statement in the original license -OR- specific written permission from the creator then you can't release anything derived from an original work.
End of story. No ifs, buts, maybes, or what-abouts. You just can't. Forget that it is illegal, because for a surprising number of folks in this thread that seems irrelevant. It's also immoral. Oddly enough not too many people seem worried about that either...
Andy
If you don't have either a specific statement in the original license -OR- specific written permission from the creator then you can't release anything derived from an original work.
End of story. No ifs, buts, maybes, or what-abouts. You just can't. Forget that it is illegal, because for a surprising number of folks in this thread that seems irrelevant. It's also immoral. Oddly enough not too many people seem worried about that either...
Andy
Boat
You're really reaching for straws now. It's apparent that nothing is going to change your mind, so we're just wasting our time.
Andy is completely correct. Right vs wrong is not always the same as legal vs illegal, so if you don't agree that it's illegal, then accept the fact that it's just plain wrong.
Mike
You're really reaching for straws now. It's apparent that nothing is going to change your mind, so we're just wasting our time.
Andy is completely correct. Right vs wrong is not always the same as legal vs illegal, so if you don't agree that it's illegal, then accept the fact that it's just plain wrong.
Mike
Last edited: