Trainz Content Creator Program, now online!

[paulhobbs]

Except that in this case N3V isn't making the package, only selling it. That's a whole different ball game.

Nope, exactly the same ball game. I doubt very much whether N3V have ever made a route for sale as DLC themselves. You can hardly blame N3V if people don't read the DLS upload agreement you have to agree to every time you upload to the DLS. The agreement itself has not been changed much in the last ten years and no amount of shouting and screaming now will change it.

Paul

 

[n8phu]

May I suggest putting your money where your mouth is and joining the program? I will be all too glad to purchase your content and requesting a full refund once I've had my fun with it.

Indeed, it will be interesting correlating who defends this versus who uses it.

 

[paulhobbs]

When you uploaded your assets to the DLS, you gave N3V digital signature rights to do what ever they wish with your assets, including selling them as included in a payware package, or route ... in essence you donated them to N3V, for them to do what ever they wish with them ... correct me if I am wrong

I'll correct you then - you gave N3V a non-exclusive license to distribute the asset as they see fit, they don't own it. You can sell the same asset yourself as PayWare if you can find people daft enough to give you money for something they could have downloaded from the DLS. Mind you looking at some of the posts here lately that shouldn't be a problem.

If this results in the dls being discontinued im QUITTING and ABANDONING TRAINZ FOREVER! i fear the next time the dls goes down it might mean it is discontinued so EVERYTHING, CAN BECOME PAYWARE! UNBELIVEABLE!

That'll teach them a lesson.

May I suggest putting your money where your mouth is and joining the program? I will be all too glad to purchase your content and requesting a full refund once I've had my fun with it.

Look at all the rich-man snobbishness overflowing from this post.

If you wish to have your cash refunded you'd need to have a reason that would stand up in court (at least in the UK). 'I didn't like the colour' or 'the creator is an idiot that has annoyed me on a Forum' probably won't cut it. You'd have to prove that what you got was unfit for the purpose that it was purchased for or that the advertising was misleading. Good luck with that.

Won't be a problem for me as I won't be joining the program anyway.

Paul

 

[paulhobbs]

Indeed, it will be interesting correlating who defends this versus who uses it.

Certainly will be interesting, you seem to assume that everybody who thinks this is a good idea will use it but in my case I'm defending it without the intention of using it.

Paul

 

[jacksonbarno]

Paul, it's not the same ball game. What they are essentially doing is providing an outlet for anybody to sell content for the game, whether the EULA of the content that's referenced allows it or not. In the past, N3V would work with partners to accomplish the same neans, but that's different because those enterprises were essentially contracted by N3V to make DLC. In this case, they are merely selling content provided by pretty much anybody who walks in the door. You should know this better than most, Paul, and no amount of shouting and screaming will make it right.

 

[n8phu]

Certainly will be interesting, you seem to assume that everybody who thinks this is a good idea will use it but in my case I'm defending it without the intention of using it.

Paul

I assume nothing sir. Please do not make accusations that have no truth to them. Please point out where I assumed that.

However, now that I have been accused, I fully expect that quite a few defending it will NOT use it.

Time will tell.

 

[clam1952]

Personally I'm not defending it or attacking it as people have been able to submit stuff for possible payware for as long as I can remember, all that's happened is they have made it a bit easier for people to send stuff to N3V to get rejected.:hehe: Not going to affect me if people submit stuff for payware or not, life goes on as normal.

 

[paulhobbs]

Paul, it's not the same ball game. What they are essentially doing is providing an outlet for anybody to sell content for the game, whether the EULA of the content that's referenced allows it or not. In the past, N3V would work with partners to accomplish the same neans, but that's different because those enterprises were essentially contracted by N3V to make DLC. In this case, they are merely selling content provided by pretty much anybody who walks in the door. You should know this better than most, Paul, and no amount of shouting and screaming will make it right.

Rail-sim were not contracted to produce Settle and Carlisle and the PLL route, we offered them to N3V. In the case of SnC we decided to go with N3V and for the PLL we decided against it. As clam has already pointed out all this new program is is an easier way to submit stuff for consideration.

Assets on the DLS can be included as they are covered by the DLS upload agreement providing N3V are doing the distribution. Nothing whatsoever has changed except that royalty shares for new assets included in the DLC but not on the DLS have been defined.

If you can't see that then we'll have to agree to disagree.

Paul

 

[wholbr]

Hi everybody.
I felt I should add a few comments in support of Verns posting at #13 of this thread where he outlined the obligations of any income derived from content creation on behalf of N3V could be liable for income tax and National Insurance deductions.

Further to the above, persons working in the transportation industry or healthcare provision within European Union countries are subject to the “European working time directive legislation”. The foregoing legislation regulates the hours that can be worked by employees such as vocational drivers and others in air, rail and road transport who carry the status of “mobile workers”. As stated the regulations also cover many thousands working in health care provision such as nurses and other healthcare assistants carrying out their duties in hospitals and doctors surgeries etc.

The directive regulates workers in the above industries to a maximum of 60 hours work in any one week but within that a worker must not exceed an average of 48 hours maximum working in any 26 week reference period. The regulations also dictate that should any worker carry out duties for more than one employer then both employers must be notified of the hours worked by the employee which jointly in both operations must not exceed the above maximum hours.

Both employers are liable under the regulations to jointly ensure that the maximum hours regulations are complied with and therefore records of hours worked by the employee for both organisations must be accessible equally to both employers. It is then their joint duty regulate the total hours worked by the employee.

Also under the regulations, drivers or other workers which fall under the classification of mobile worker or healthcare provider but operating on a self-employed basis should always furnish their contracted customers with an identifiable record of their maximum working hours or the contracting customer can be liable for prosecution under the directive.

In the above, almost all employers in the transport industry have written instruction in their contracts of employment in regard to mobile workers setting strict conditions on working for other employers or organisations. Almost all workers are not allowed to carry out work for any other body when their contract of employment with their main employer exceeds 30 hours working.

Transport and healthcare employers who encounter their employees working for other organisations without declaring that fact, are always advised to immediately suspend the employee from further work, investigate the incident and dismiss from employment when the investigation proves gross misconduct.

In the case of a vocational driver infraction of the regulation (truck,bus rail driver etc), an employer in the transport industry is again always advised to intermediately inform the regional Transport Commissioner so as to protect the transport companies operating licence. The Traffic Commissioner in conjunction with the drivers licensing authority will then take action against the offending driver which can result in suspension or permanent revoking of the vocational side of the driving licence. Similar action in the healthcare industry can be applied in regard to offending employees having their qualifications to work in the industry revoked.

The forgoing are European Union wide regulations, I am not sure how they operate on a transcontinental bases, but as the whole worldwide airline industry work in cooperation on pilots hours etc then other transport and health care services will almost certainly operate the same.

The above is not advising content creators on the forum to accept or decline the contract offer by N3V or any other media provider. It is given as advice and with respect to the many thousands that work in the transport and healthcare industries in regard to the problems that could be encountered in undertaking content creation on a part-time professional basis.

Bill

 

[paulhobbs]

I assume nothing sir. Please do not make accusations that have no truth to them. Please point out where I assumed that.

However, now that I have been accused, I fully expect that quite a few defending it will NOT use it.

Time will tell.

But I didn't accuse you of anything did I? I said you seem to be implying that you already know what the result of such a poll would be. I may have lived in Germany for 25 years but I still have an excellent grasp on the English language.

Paul

 

[amigacooke]

Hi Bill, perhaps you'd like to fill us in on the opting out of the 48 hour week provisions available in the UK?
[h=1][/h]

 

[n8phu]

Certainly will be interesting, you seem to assume that everybody who thinks this is a good idea will use it but in my case I'm defending it without the intention of using it.

Paul

But I didn't accuse you of anything did I? I said you seem to be implying that you already know what the result of such a poll would be. I may have lived in Germany for 25 years but I still have an excellent grasp on the English language.

Paul

You made the accusation that I assumed something, a completely false assumption on your part sir. Grasp of the language or not, you made it.

Again, Please show proof where I made an assumption.

 

[wholbr]

Hi Amigacooke And everybody.

Hi Bill, perhaps you'd like to fill us in on the opting out of the 48 hour week provisions available in the UK?

amigacooke, Employees classed as mobile workers in the transport industry are not allowed to opt out of the "European working time directive regulations" even in the UK. Many categories of workers in the healthcare industry are also not allowed to opt out of the regulations.

The above is a common mis-apprehension of the directive and in which many have come to grief in not knowing or not applying the directive as it should be applied. I have been involved in many cases of the foregoing and have always advised employers to take the the action as laid out in my posting at #89 of this thread.

In the road transport industry for which I am primarily involved I have no sympathy for heavy goods drivers (truck drivers) that exceed the maximum hours working regulations and put all other road users and others at risk. They deserve and should lose the vocational side of their drivers licence indefinitely.

I have been wondering where you have got to amigacooke, was getting quite concerned. I always do genuinely enjoy our good natured and respectful jousts
Bill

 

[amigacooke]

From GOV.UK

Maximum weekly working hours

Is this correct information?

 

[clam1952]

From GOV.UK

Maximum weekly working hours

Is this correct information?

Yes that's the current situation.

 

[Vern]

Another case where someone should think twice about this, is if you work in the rail industry or associated employment. Quite apart from the working hours issue, it would be very easy to fall foul of conflict of interests. If someone like myself, who works for Network Rail, decided to build a route based on an operational UK prototype I could see some searching questions being asked by my boss as to whether any data used to produce that route had been obtained through company sources (e.g. the portal which has line diagrams and gradient profiles), or even just in company time (perhaps a quick glance at Wikipedia or Open Street Map during a quiet period). You could probably rinse and repeat that for other countries, too.

Now as it happens my particular penchant for route building tends to be strange and unusual, ranging from obscure Yugoslavian narrow gauge, to the outposts of northern Europe, Siberia and the deserts of Eastern China (to name but a few). However even then I would still be very wary about putting a small second income against my primary wage and pension. Anyway, in truth, I could probably earn more working a couple of rest days (16 hours) than the 160 hours or more it might take to produce a half decent route to commercial standards. And it's all PAYE, no worries about self assessment or N3V trying to claw back twice the money they gave me over some technicality.

Re Paul's comment about grounds for a refund, don't forget Steam now offer no quibble refunds if you buy something, don't like it and request your money back within a certain timeline. N3V may well have something like that in mind, or may be forced too when people start objecting to paying £25 for some kid's oval of track round a couple of baseboards. Even without that, there's Paypal disputes or Debit/Credit Card chargebacks...

 

[amigacooke]

Good news. Network Rail is subject to freedom of information requests from 24 March 2015.

How to make a freedom of information (FOI) request.


Since payware has only just started happening in Trainz, it's good we have all these learned people to steer us through this new situation.

After all, think of the dreadful mess we could have got into if this had been going on for years and no-one had thought to pre-warn us

 

[wholbr]

Hi Amigacooke,clam1952, and everybody.
In regards to mobile workers, you will have to reference the drivers hours regulations which includes the non-opt out of the European working time directive for vocational drivers.

In regards to other workers (healthcare workers etc) then that is included in the UK amendment of the above regulations which categorise the healthcare workers which could not opt out of the directive.

I think the British amendment was known as the opt out of the opt out.

Hey clam (Malc) now that my long time "jouster" amigacooke has joined this debate we should become known as the "respectful trio" on the forum, in the hpoe that more wiil join.


Bill

 

[paulhobbs]

You made the accusation that I assumed something, a completely false assumption on your part sir. Grasp of the language or not, you made it.

Again, Please show proof where I made an assumption.

Your assumption was implicit in the statement you made. English can be tricky can't It? Probably why we spent hours and hours in school learning comprehension which seems to be a dying art these days.

Paul

 

[wholbr]

Another case where someone should think twice about this, is if you work in the rail industry or associated employment. Quite apart from the working hours issue, it would be very easy to fall foul of conflict of interests. If someone like myself, who works for Network Rail, decided to build a route based on an operational UK prototype I could see some searching questions being asked by my boss as to whether any data used to produce that route had been obtained through company sources (e.g. the portal which has line diagrams and gradient profiles), or even just in company time (perhaps a quick glance at Wikipedia or Open Street Map during a quiet period). You could probably rinse and repeat that for other countries, too.

Now as it happens my particular penchant for route building tends to be strange and unusual, ranging from obscure Yugoslavian narrow gauge, to the outposts of northern Europe, Siberia and the deserts of Eastern China (to name but a few). However even then I would still be very wary about putting a small second income against my primary wage and pension. Anyway, in truth, I could probably earn more working a couple of rest days (16 hours) than the 160 hours or more it might take to produce a half decent route to commercial standards. And it's all PAYE, no worries about self assessment or N3V trying to claw back twice the money they gave me over some technicality.

Re Paul's comment about grounds for a refund, don't forget Steam now offer no quibble refunds if you buy something, don't like it and request your money back within a certain timeline. N3V may well have something like that in mind, or may be forced too when people start objecting to paying £25 for some kid's oval of track round a couple of baseboards. Even without that, there's Paypal disputes or Debit/Credit Card chargebacks...

Vern, That is a very good point you make their in regards to conflict of interests. I firmly believe that forum members should look very closely at the legal aspects of becoming a part-time content creator especially if they work full-time for a company or organisation.

In the UK it is very easy to become embroiled in disciplinary action when you are working in full-time employment for an organisation. To put it bluntly most companies do not like their employees to be working for anyone else if you are contracted to more than 30 hours per week

Bill