reskin permission from people who left?

[hyderpotter]

Why do you need permission for something that's freeware? If anyone can download it for free on the DLS, why get permission, as long as you acknowledge the original creator. That's something that's always bothered me, people being all uptight about getting permission for stuff that everyone already has, or has open access to.

Just my thoughts and questions.

-Joe

Who owns freeware?

To establish rights, one must first establish ownership. In the case of software, authorship equates ownership; tangible, original works, including software, are copyrighted upon release. Thus, even free software is subject to publishing and licensing restrictions imposed by the copyright owner.
I do not fault Matt for his misunderstanding. Not many people know this aspect of copyright law. To his credit, he has been judicious about getting permission before redistributing others’ works. If anything, the situation pointed out the need for me to post a more explicit license agreement (more explicit than nothing!) with my freeware. The situation was ultimately resolved by me giving Matt permission to distribute an updated version of my program.
Closing points

• Freeware isn’t automatically in the public domain.
• Software is automatically copyrighted by author upon release.
• Freeware can be subject to license restrictions. Read agreements. If you publish freeware, write an agreement.
• Always ask before republishing someone else’s work. The worst that can happen is a “no” answer. Sometimes, asking permission can lead to new friendships.

http://www.fcsuper.com/swblog/?p=75

 

[Red_Rattler]

Changing part of Euphod's "copyright image" to "copyright song":

You do run the risk of a lawsuit if you are using a copyrighted image to earn money. You could be prosecuted for any use, make no mistake, but the risk is greater if you are profiting from the use.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...burra-tune-judge/story-e6freuzr-1225826670441

In general, though, very few companies object to their trademarks being given free additional exposure, so long as they are not presented in a derogatory way.

And this is where showing simulatored more realistic derailments are an issue. Some (or many) train companies WON'T give permission if they know you that you will be showing simulator derailments if they have their logo on the item.

 

[airtime]

Below is the most information about Copyright (C)

• These days, almost all things are copyrighted the moment they are written, and no copyright notice is required.
• Copyright is still violated whether you charged money or not, only damages are affected by that.
• Postings to the net are not granted to the public domain, and don't grant you any permission to do further copying except perhaps the sort of copying the poster might have expected in the ordinary flow of the net.
• Fair use is a complex doctrine meant to allow certain valuable social purposes. Ask yourself why you are republishing what you are posting and why you couldn't have just rewritten it in your own words.
• Copyright is not lost because you don't defend it; that's a concept from trademark law. The ownership of names is also from trademark law, so don't say somebody has a name copyrighted.
• Fan fiction and other work derived from copyrighted works is a copyright violation.
• Copyright law is mostly civil law where the special rights of criminal defendants you hear so much about don't apply. Watch out, however, as new laws are moving copyright violation into the criminal realm.
• Don't rationalize that you are helping the copyright holder; often it's not that hard to ask permission.
• Posting E-mail is technically a violation, but revealing facts from E-mail you got isn't, and for almost all typical E-mail, nobody could wring any damages from you for posting it. The law doesn't do much to protect works with no commercial value.

If you want an indepth llok at the above article, click on this link... http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I did find this out though...

According to US copyright law, copyrighted content is legal to change to accessible format as long as the original title holder does not provide access in the format that is needed, such as for blind people being able to access material in Braille or in audio format. Because of that, and the efforts of many volunteers running scanners, a large library at Bookshare.org is now available to them to be able to access current newspapers and a lot of book titles.

Ah, this will allow us to make MP3's of everything that's not available as an MP3!! Well, maybe not.

"It's all legal thanks to a provision of copyright law that allows the disabled to access content they couldn't get in its original form."

It sounds like the loophole is specific enough to only include the disabled.

This means if the content can only work in Trainz 2004, and you then adapt it to be able to work in Trainz 2010 only, then the content may belong to you, as the origional content was specifically made to work only in Trainz 2004. I am looking to verify this more, so please bare with me on this, if anyone can verify this, then I'd be very grateful. Basically all I'm saying is, there are ways around copyright, you just have to find them.

The content was created for Trainz 2004, if it doesn't exist for Trainz 2010, then you maybe able to use the shell of the creation and change or adapt 80% of it to work in Trainz 2010 including bogies, try and choose bogies or something similar that are not included in Trainz 2004, but are included in trainz 2010, this then will prevent it working properly in trainz 2004 and show errors, but will work perfectly in Native mode in trainz 2010. This is possibly one of many ways around copyright, but please check first just to make sure. Either that, or try your best to contact the creator and ask to buy the entire creation from them, this then becomes yours to do what you wish.

Hope this helps

Joe Airtime

 

[Dermmy]

This means if the content can only work in Trainz 2004, and you then adapt it to be able to work in Trainz 2010 only, then the content belongs to you,
Joe Airtime

Man - did you get that wrong!

 

[airtime]

Man - did you get that wrong!

Did I Dermmy, I am sorry I was trying to make a point that there are loopholes and ways around everything, I know there is a way of getting around the copyright law.

Here in the UK we find loopholes in virtually everything, speed cameras are calibrated wrong compared to varous car speeds and car lengths and time of day, position of the sun upon the vehicle can reflect light at high speed which sets off the camera and so on, and handheld ones give off false readings, as the police officer follows the car, this then bumps up the speed of the vehicle, to make the car seem to go faster than it actually was.

Thank you Dermmy for letting me know that I think I might have explained it wrong, but there are ways of getting around this copyright law, it's just trying to find the right loophole and the right way to explain the way around copyright.

Joe Airtime

 

[Dermmy]

Sorry Joe, maybe I was a bit curt, but what you were saying is exactly the same as if you proposed that you have a copy of 'The Sound Of Music' on video tape and if you can get it on Blue Ray before MGM does then it belongs to you. Mate, they would come after you with tanks

Andy...

 

[airtime]

Sorry Joe, maybe I was a bit curt, but what you were saying is exactly the same as if you proposed that you have a copy of 'The Sound Of Music' on video tape and if you can get it on Blue Ray before MGM does then it belongs to you. Mate, they would come after you with tanks

Andy...

Yes I have to agree with you there Andy, your right, I'll have to build stronger walls around my house..:hehe:

I don't agree with stealing content from our superb creators and adapting it to your own, I don't condone that, it's not right, and I'm not a fan of anyone who does it.

But lets say something has been left on the DLS, that has been there since trainz began, but unfortunatly has never been updated or adapted due to illness or a passing of a trainz friend, then it would be nice to keep this item going as a mark of respect to those that left us. It saddens me to see these superb items slowly dissappear from trainz, because there is no one there to look after them and keep them going throughout the trainz series.

Yes new ones can be made, but why take months to make something, when it's already made, but just needs a dependencie to get it working like new. It's sad to see items which were built to be used in Trainz left on the shelf to gather dust. This is the only and main reason I would like to find a way around the copyright law, so as to keep our long lost trainz friends items going, instead of being forgotten.

Thank you Dermmy for your reply, it's always great to bump into good friends from time to time...

Joe Airtime

 

[Euphod]

I'm old fashioned, yes, but...

...I find myself disappointed by some of what I read in this thread. What ever happened to respecting the law? Now days if you don't want to pay for something, you just go to a torrent and download it for free. Nevermind someone else worked to create it and deserve compensation for that work, nevermind the law says it's illegal...the law is for chumps, whay pay for something you can get for free? Now it's "how can I circumvent the copyright law?", before it was "just go ahead and do it and probably nobody will complain...what are they going to do...take you to court?"

I feel sorry for you guys that don't respect anything or anyone, that can't bend the knee for any authority.

 

[Johnk]

Snippet: According to US copyright law, copyrighted content is legal to change to accessible format as long as the original title holder does not provide access in the format that is needed, such as for blind people being able to access material in Braille or in audio format. Because of that, and the efforts of many volunteers running scanners, a large library at Bookshare.org is now available to them to be able to access current newspapers and a lot of book titles.

G'day Joe. I also find this a bit odd. Copyright applies to the content, not how that content is produced. I agree with Derrmy in that taking a 2004 product and converting it to 2010 would indeed be a breach of copyright.

Hey, but let's look at this realistically please?

You build a UP locomotive for 2004 and it's a beauty. But I use 2010 (which I don't) and it won't work. I contact you and you're not excited about upgrading, nor are you prepared to give me permission to do so.

You may may think you own the copyright to the locomotive, but do you?

• Did you contact UP and gain permission to use their corporate design?
• Did you seek exclusive permission from UP and was that granted?
• Did you contact Blender or gMax and demand exclusive rights to various design techniques?
• Did you register or trademark your design?

Probably not!

So I come along and discover the same set of plans on some obscure Internet site. Following Blender and gMax conventions, I design an identical locomotive and even use the identical (unauthorised) UP photo which shows the locomotive covered in the same graffiti you used on your model.

Side by side, both locomotives look identical, but who is the copyright owner? In fact, has copyright even been breached? Even if I stole your gMax drawings, could you prove it? I'm afraid not!

The only people who have a case here are Union Pacific and the person who took the photo. Would they seriously come after me, a 14 year old at school who just loves trains? Of course they wouldn't.

I hate to say it guys, but copyright when it comes to Trainz, is more a matter of ego than reality. Provided you're using the stuff for personal enjoyment, do what you like. If you wish to share something that belongs to someone else after you've tinkered with it, seek their support. If they ignore you, distribute it with the following disclaimer:

"Before releasing this modified item, I sought permission from the person claiming to be the original owner. As he failed to contact me to confirm that he is indeed the original owner, I'm releasing it anyway. If you are the original owner and disagree with my decision, I will remove it from circulation immediately."

You see this disclaimer on the Internet all the time and I also use it when I want to use a photo but can't locate the original author.

If you wish to sell the stuff, forget everything I just said.

Source: 14 years as a member on the Copyright Committee of a major Tertiary College in Australia - and common sense.

 

[airtime]

Hi there Johnk, it's always great to hear from you, and I do agree with your post above,

It is difficult at times to contact some of our trainz friends as they have either left us, or they have become too ill to be bothered about trainz, or even worse a loss of one our great creative engineers.

One day we won't be here, but our future fellow young trainzers will see content that hasn't been touched in years, but looks absolutley fantastic and perfect for there route, it just needs a little tweak here and there, but can't be touched in case it breaks copyright rules, this superb content gets left abandoned and shelved, it's just so sad.

I do agree with this piece you posted...

"Before releasing this modified item, I sought permission from the person claiming to be the original owner. As he/she failed to contact me to confirm that he/she is indeed the original owner, I'm releasing it anyway. If you are the original owner and disagree with my decision, I will remove it from circulation immediately."

I think this disclaimer would cover you, but only as shareware not payware, maybe this is the way forward to bringing classic trainz content into modern trainz use.

Great to hear from you again Johnk, hope your ok

Joe Airtime

 

[Johnk]

G'day Joe. Thanks for your comments.

Most of those great content creators may have been kids at school who have since grown up and found other interests Many may not give a "hoot" about Trainz anymore.

As you say, their creations are too important to waste. By bringing them up to scratch, you're not doing them an injustice, you're doing them a great big favour and keeping their work alive.

I guess the question is, to what level are you taking that? Are you sayig it's your work, or a are you saying it's the work of Jimmy Whoever, and I'm just getting it to work for him with TS2009? Is that stealing something, or just helping someone to keep their creation alive and workable?

It's a good question, because I'm involved with a small group who are doing the exact same thing. Look out for words like TARM and MADE in the very near future. They may well make this thread totally redundant!

Regards,

John

 

[airtime]

Hi Johnk,

I think it would be best to say,

The creation was made by the person who origionally created the item, and all credit goes to them.

And was updated by the person who took the item and made it work for todays simulator.

That way you acknowledge the main creator who made the item, and the person who updated it to work today.

I don't think you can do anymore than that, and if the main creator gets in touch, pass the full CDP onto them, and they have the new completed working item, and they don't have to fiddle with it to get it to work right.

Joe Airtime

 

[johnwhelan]

There is one way to get a reskin done when you can't get permission but some one else does have permission to reskin.

Create the reskin then ask the person who does have permission to upload it.

Cheerio John

 

[Johnk]

Joe, I just wrote that from inspiration rather than a legal sense. It would be great if one of the legal folk in our Community could pen a nice disclaimer on our behalf. He or she doesn't have to guarantee anything, but simply support our wish to move on.

JW's suggestion has merit, but how does one find such a person? They may also feel as though they're being asked to cart someone else's suitcase through customs.

 

[leeferr]

I'm sorry, but it seems that some of you have rationalized this issue in your own minds and are now trying to convince the content creators that you have the right to steal our creations. It doesn't wash with me. This issue has been discussed many times in the past, but it still keeps popping its ugly head up.
Also, trademarks (e.g. the UP logo) and copyrights are not the same and shouldn't be treated the same in these conversations although there are similiarities between the two.

Mike

 

[Scitimar]

I'm sorry, but it seems that some of you have rationalized this issue in your own minds and are now trying to convince the content creators that you have the right to steal our creations. It doesn't wash with me. This issue has been discussed many times in the past, but it still keeps popping its ugly head up.
Also, trademarks (e.g. the UP logo) and copyrights are not the same and shouldn't be treated the same in these conversations although there are similiarities between the two.

Mike

And always a similar group ... the ones who won't take the time to learn to to build their own models and textures .

Guess it's easier to steal and get ya little egos stroked ...

Sci

 

[picture]

I do believe this thread has gone slightly off topic from my original question. However I now I have my final conclusion. I will wait until Magicland gets back and gives me permission to release it or if he doesn't then my observation reskin will never be released to the public.

Matt

 

[Johnk]

I'm sorry, but it seems that some of you have rationalized this issue in your own minds and are now trying to convince the content creators that you have the right to steal our creations. It doesn't wash with me. This issue has been discussed many times in the past, but it still keeps popping its ugly head up.
Also, trademarks (e.g. the UP logo) and copyrights are not the same and shouldn't be treated the same in these conversations although there are similiarities between the two.

Mike

Woo on there Neddy(s)! Nobody here is talking about stealing anything. And are you suggesting that it's perfectly acceptable to abuse a corporate logo as long as nobody abuses you? It certainly sounds that way. Or maybe you're both just "fishing"?

 

[Scitimar]

I do believe this thread has gone slightly off topic from my original question. However I now I have my final conclusion. I will wait until Magicland gets back and gives me permission to release it or if he doesn't then my observation reskin will never be released to the public.

Matt

I've got a better solution ... learn to build your own models , it's not that hard and it doesn't need to be perfect . Do it for yourself and have the satisfaction of knowing you did it all ... The first one is the hardest .

.

 

[Johnk]

I've got a better solution ... learn to build your own models , it's not that hard and it doesn't need to be perfect . Do it for yourself and have the satisfaction of knowing you did it all ... The first one is the hardest .

.

You definitely are fishing, or should I say TROLLING!