Trainz Content Creator Program, now online!
- Thread starter n3vpolsen
- Start date
Today? :hehe:
amigacooke
Well-known member
It was my impression that a fair proportion of the posts were asking for clarification on the status of DLC items which we now have.
However, seeing as the packaging is a manual process, you can't blame automation for the creation of unnecessary pay ware items. It's not then encouraging to know that the rectification of these errors is not a high priority.
It it would be nice to know what is high priority at N3V.
However, seeing as the packaging is a manual process, you can't blame automation for the creation of unnecessary pay ware items. It's not then encouraging to know that the rectification of these errors is not a high priority.
It it would be nice to know what is high priority at N3V.
I would have thought that the answer to that one would be easy - getting the major problems with T:ANE fixed. This has been stated, in various forms and in various forums, repeatedly by many. Just look at the Trainz Dev forum.
Hi everybody.
I am adding further to my posting at #89 of this thread in regards to problems European content creators may encounter in providing content for N3V that they will receive payment for. The foregoing problems could arise where the content creator works on a regular basis for any employer and where their employment is covered under the “European working time directive legislation”.
The above directive covers all workers within the European Union and guarantees terms such as a maximum 48 hour working week and four weeks’ paid holiday per year, plus rules on the number of hours of rest workers must be given and take. Over all countries within the European Union the regulation is mandatory on both employees and employers with the exception of the United Kingdom
The British Prime Minister John Major secured a United Kingdom opt-out on the Working Time Directive when it was drawn up in 1993 as part of the Maastricht Treaty. However,Prime Minister Tony Blair then opted into the directive in 1998, with the compromise that workers could individually volunteer to be excluded from the 48-hour rule.
As I stated in my posting at #89 transport industry workers classed as “mobile workers” cannot under regulation sign an opt out agreement with their employers and are therefore strictly regulated by the 48-hour rule.
Forum member amigacooke requested clarifications on the position of persons working in the health provision industry, especially regarding the British opt out clause.
I have had a chance to look at the regulations regarding UK health workers while in the office today assisted by one of our legal secretaries. The regulations dictate that front-line healthcare providers such as doctors, nurses and some consultant categories working in hospital accident and emergency or other high dependency units can opt out of 48 hour maximum working clause. However the forgoing categories still have to comply with the 11 hour end of shift rest period and the minimum break regulations during the shift.
All other workers in European health services fall under the working time directive, but in Britain they can fully opt out of the maximum 48 hours working week if they choose to do so. Again, the above minimum holiday requirements and daily break periods still apply.
How does the above affect a forum member wishing to create content for our hobby many may ask. Perhaps that would be best put into an analogy for an example:-
A European amateur artist as part of their hobby creates a painting for his/her own enjoyment and then sometime after completion someone offered to buy that painting. In the foregoing, if sold, the time spent in creating the artwork could not be counted as work time under the working time directive as no previous contractual arrangement by the buyer had been made. It would be viewed as the artist merely sold an asset in their possession
However, if the artist prior to starting or during the paintings creation signed a contractual agreement that the artwork on completion would be sold or would be “possibly" subject to payment by a vendor or buyer, then all work carried out would be counted as part of his/her maximum 48 hours weekly total under the European working regulations.
I believe European forum members who are content creators will obviously be able to see the connection in the above analogy and asset creation for N3V or any other media producer. Of course, if the creator resides in Britain and has opted out of the working time directive regulations (if additionally working in an industry where they are allowed to do so), then the above would not apply.
Basically, hours worked in creating assets for N3V would have to be compensated by a reduction in hours worked for any other organisation under the EU directive. Forum members may ask “how would any other employer or person know if I quietly did my creation in my time off”. Well, in my experience of dealing with many cases of breach of hours regulations in the transport industry, no one ever knows such matters as the foregoing until a workplace accident occurs and the investigations start.
Invariably with the powers industrial safety accident investigators hold within Europe the facts soon rise to the surface, with all its consequences.
It has been argued that that organisation using persons who in their main occupation work under the “European working time directive” can be jointly held liable when directive infringements are carried out by those persons. The foregoing would however fall under both civil and industrial “duty of care regulations” with regard to the organisation(s) using such persons which would be a different topic.
Bill
Apologies if some of the wording in the above is not correct, as I had a problem when posting with words combining for some reason.
I am adding further to my posting at #89 of this thread in regards to problems European content creators may encounter in providing content for N3V that they will receive payment for. The foregoing problems could arise where the content creator works on a regular basis for any employer and where their employment is covered under the “European working time directive legislation”.
The above directive covers all workers within the European Union and guarantees terms such as a maximum 48 hour working week and four weeks’ paid holiday per year, plus rules on the number of hours of rest workers must be given and take. Over all countries within the European Union the regulation is mandatory on both employees and employers with the exception of the United Kingdom
The British Prime Minister John Major secured a United Kingdom opt-out on the Working Time Directive when it was drawn up in 1993 as part of the Maastricht Treaty. However,Prime Minister Tony Blair then opted into the directive in 1998, with the compromise that workers could individually volunteer to be excluded from the 48-hour rule.
As I stated in my posting at #89 transport industry workers classed as “mobile workers” cannot under regulation sign an opt out agreement with their employers and are therefore strictly regulated by the 48-hour rule.
Forum member amigacooke requested clarifications on the position of persons working in the health provision industry, especially regarding the British opt out clause.
I have had a chance to look at the regulations regarding UK health workers while in the office today assisted by one of our legal secretaries. The regulations dictate that front-line healthcare providers such as doctors, nurses and some consultant categories working in hospital accident and emergency or other high dependency units can opt out of 48 hour maximum working clause. However the forgoing categories still have to comply with the 11 hour end of shift rest period and the minimum break regulations during the shift.
All other workers in European health services fall under the working time directive, but in Britain they can fully opt out of the maximum 48 hours working week if they choose to do so. Again, the above minimum holiday requirements and daily break periods still apply.
How does the above affect a forum member wishing to create content for our hobby many may ask. Perhaps that would be best put into an analogy for an example:-
A European amateur artist as part of their hobby creates a painting for his/her own enjoyment and then sometime after completion someone offered to buy that painting. In the foregoing, if sold, the time spent in creating the artwork could not be counted as work time under the working time directive as no previous contractual arrangement by the buyer had been made. It would be viewed as the artist merely sold an asset in their possession
However, if the artist prior to starting or during the paintings creation signed a contractual agreement that the artwork on completion would be sold or would be “possibly" subject to payment by a vendor or buyer, then all work carried out would be counted as part of his/her maximum 48 hours weekly total under the European working regulations.
I believe European forum members who are content creators will obviously be able to see the connection in the above analogy and asset creation for N3V or any other media producer. Of course, if the creator resides in Britain and has opted out of the working time directive regulations (if additionally working in an industry where they are allowed to do so), then the above would not apply.
Basically, hours worked in creating assets for N3V would have to be compensated by a reduction in hours worked for any other organisation under the EU directive. Forum members may ask “how would any other employer or person know if I quietly did my creation in my time off”. Well, in my experience of dealing with many cases of breach of hours regulations in the transport industry, no one ever knows such matters as the foregoing until a workplace accident occurs and the investigations start.
Invariably with the powers industrial safety accident investigators hold within Europe the facts soon rise to the surface, with all its consequences.
It has been argued that that organisation using persons who in their main occupation work under the “European working time directive” can be jointly held liable when directive infringements are carried out by those persons. The foregoing would however fall under both civil and industrial “duty of care regulations” with regard to the organisation(s) using such persons which would be a different topic.
Bill
Apologies if some of the wording in the above is not correct, as I had a problem when posting with words combining for some reason.
Last edited:
amigacooke
Well-known member
Are software developers using Steam working for Valve, or just using a distribution platform?
Are content creators working for N3V, or self-employed and using a distribution platform?
Do the 48 hours regulations apply to the self-employed?
Why are those who were entirely indifferent to payware before the new Trainz Content Creator Program suddenly quoting legislation at everyone?
Answers on a postcard or, perhaps more reasonably, in further posts
Are content creators working for N3V, or self-employed and using a distribution platform?
Do the 48 hours regulations apply to the self-employed?
Why are those who were entirely indifferent to payware before the new Trainz Content Creator Program suddenly quoting legislation at everyone?
Answers on a postcard or, perhaps more reasonably, in further posts
Not everyone is quoting legislation.
Just those that know about these things because it's related to the work they do.
And why now?
Well, in my opinion, it's because the new system makes it much easier to submit content as payware, and a lot of people will think that it's going to be easy to sell the work they've done for a quick buck.
Not that it's going to be easy for them to get N3V to accept the submitted content if it's not very good (although that will probably depend on how desperate for funds they are), but people will think it's going to be easy at first.
I believe those that are quoting legislation are only doing so to prevent people getting involved in something that's not as simple as it seems, and may have repercussions with regards to their primary employment.
hopefully that will mean only serious teams of creators take the plunge, with quality products, rather than every Tom, Dick & Harry.
To be honest, I've wondered for years how many Payware creators are actually declaring their Trainz earnings for Tax purposes.
I wouldn't put my house on it being 100% of them.
Brian.
amigacooke
Well-known member
But Brian, are N3V actually employing content creators, or are they self-employed?
It was unfortunate how Bill forgot about the UK opt-out until he was reminded of it
Last edited:
ZecMurphy
Community Assistant
Good Morning all
Content creators are not employed by N3V through this agreement. In fact, there is no obligation from either party to release the content (well, until it's actually made available for sale).
In this case, the sales of the assets would be considered revenue share/royalties. The creator is essentially using our website/service to sell their content, and receiving a share of the sales. In terms of the selling of the content, it's no different to a creator selling payware through a 3rd party group's website, where that group is quite likely to take a share of the sales (most places that sell this way seem to be around the 40-60% share mark from what I've seen/looked at).
It'd be up to your interpretation of this as to how this fits with your local laws/legislature. And for many, it's quite likely that they would need to include it in their tax. At least in Australia it does.
Regards
Content creators are not employed by N3V through this agreement. In fact, there is no obligation from either party to release the content (well, until it's actually made available for sale).
In this case, the sales of the assets would be considered revenue share/royalties. The creator is essentially using our website/service to sell their content, and receiving a share of the sales. In terms of the selling of the content, it's no different to a creator selling payware through a 3rd party group's website, where that group is quite likely to take a share of the sales (most places that sell this way seem to be around the 40-60% share mark from what I've seen/looked at).
It'd be up to your interpretation of this as to how this fits with your local laws/legislature. And for many, it's quite likely that they would need to include it in their tax. At least in Australia it does.
Regards
Buh-bye. Don't let the door hit ya on the way out. :wave:
Also, the DLS is fine here.
Also, the DLS is fine here.
It's probably your connection.
Zeldaboy14
Owner of ZPW.
No. Even if you did make anothjer account, that account wouldn't be able to register your serial numbers. Besides, I believe the DLS is working just fine.
I had a few problems connecting a few hours ago but the disruption, whatever it was, lasted for only a few minutes.
Have you run the Network Diagnostics in CM? When I ran it during the "outage" it failed some of the access tests but when I ran it again a few minutes later everything passed and the connection was back to normal.
Have you run the Network Diagnostics in CM? When I ran it during the "outage" it failed some of the access tests but when I ran it again a few minutes later everything passed and the connection was back to normal.
Coming back to the use of assets from the DLS in payware routes with no financial reward to the creator. Guess we have to accept N3V's intransigence on the matter and that they're not going to change, no matter how ethically questionable the practice may be. However, as a suggestion when (if!) any payware routes get submitted and accepted to go on sale, as a minimum gesture of goodwill, N3V should offer a complimentary copy of the finished route to the creators of any assets used. That is not going to cost a huge amount of money other than a bit of download bandwidth, but might go some way to keeping the asset creators (who the rest of us doing freeware rely on) sweet and not taking steps to obsolete their trees and buildings with little grey boxes or an avatar of a hand sticking up two fingers...
I don't need nor want any complimentary routes to keep me sweet,already too much sugar in the diet as it is. When I added my objects to the DLS, it was for the express purpose of sharing as far and wide as possible, not for any pecuniary gain. So mine will not be maliciously obsoleted. Only if I make a better version will I update them.
Hi everybody.
Amigacooke, I will try to answer your numerous questions requesting answers from me presented in several postings. However, I will not answer them in the subsequent order they were posted as I think that will make more sense at the end.
In regards to the above amigacooke, I was in my initial posting at #89 of this thread referring to the position of the working time directive in regards to workers on a European wide basis. The European Union has a population total of over 500 million of which the British population make up approximately 12.5%. Therefore the vast majority of the European Union working age population are employed under the working time directive and for them there is no “opt out” provision whatsoever as there is here in the UK.
As this is an international forum, I felt it was important to post on what affected the vast majority of present and possibly future European forum members rather than concentrating on the minority based in Britain.
Nice try that one amigacooke, but not quite up to your usual standard
Complicated one this one, but I will try to keep the answer as brief as I can. There have been some changes to the working time directive with regards to workers within mainland Europe (leaving Britain to one side at the present). With the exception of some specialised categories of workers virtually everyone in the European Union has to work under the working time directive whatever their working status.
In the above, a person can be directly employed by a company for part of any working week, but for the remaining part of that week work as self-employed in another occupation. However, with the exception of the UK all hours worked in both occupations has to count against the 48-hour maximum.
In Britain with its opt out provisions the situation is not only somewhat different but far more complicated. A person who is employed by a company in an occupation or industry which allows them to opt out of the working time directive provisions, can carry out other unrestricted work as a self-employed person provided he has signed the opt out forms with his main employer.
That above stated, should the self-employed work be carried out in a restricted industry or occupation where no opt out is allowed (example: - being classed as a mobile worker in the transport industry) then the European working time directive in regards to the maximum 48-hour working would apply not only to his self-employed work, but also to the work carried out as a directly employed person.
Further to the above, although in Britain there is no restriction on the maximum number of hours worked by self-employed persons, they are still regulated under the “Health and Safety at Work Act” with reference to subsection “responsibilities of workers in any workplace”.
In the foregoing it is the responsibility of every person to ensure that their working operations do not endanger other persons within a workplace or in the vicinity of that workplace. Therefore, any worker (employed or self-employed or combination of both) must ensure that such matters as fatigue brought about by their own excessive hours of work do not endanger others.
A person suffering fatigue in a workplace often manifests itself in the flouting of safety rules and regulations. The foregoing often results in the management bringing forward its disciplinary procedures against such an employee. It is often in that procedure that knowledge of an employee being involved in “external paid working activity” comes to light. Companies usually deal very harshly with such undeclared practise by way of interpreting the foregoing as gross misconduct, with all the severe consequences for the employee, who normally becomes addressed as “former employee”.
As Zec Murphy advises in his posting at #130 of this thread, N3V consider that they do not directly employ content creators by way of the present agreement. Therefore it would be for European content creators to consider their position in the light of that statement and all of the foregoing. However,(although this may be somewhat out my field) I would believe that N3V would be under obligation to ensure that all content brought forward to its platforms was produced in line with the current legal requirements of its country of origin.
In the above, if it were to be demonstrated that a European content creator produced an asset while working in contravention of the working time directive, then N3V could be judged liable under the civil and industrial “duty of care regulations” at least in the country of origin. The Duty of Care regulations have been enacted to be very similar throughout European Union countries and covers physical and material damage to persons and organisations by the action or negligence of another person or organisation.
Definitely one for the would be solicitors on the forum.
Bill
Amigacooke, I will try to answer your numerous questions requesting answers from me presented in several postings. However, I will not answer them in the subsequent order they were posted as I think that will make more sense at the end.
In regards to the above amigacooke, I was in my initial posting at #89 of this thread referring to the position of the working time directive in regards to workers on a European wide basis. The European Union has a population total of over 500 million of which the British population make up approximately 12.5%. Therefore the vast majority of the European Union working age population are employed under the working time directive and for them there is no “opt out” provision whatsoever as there is here in the UK.
As this is an international forum, I felt it was important to post on what affected the vast majority of present and possibly future European forum members rather than concentrating on the minority based in Britain.
Nice try that one amigacooke, but not quite up to your usual standard
Complicated one this one, but I will try to keep the answer as brief as I can. There have been some changes to the working time directive with regards to workers within mainland Europe (leaving Britain to one side at the present). With the exception of some specialised categories of workers virtually everyone in the European Union has to work under the working time directive whatever their working status.
In the above, a person can be directly employed by a company for part of any working week, but for the remaining part of that week work as self-employed in another occupation. However, with the exception of the UK all hours worked in both occupations has to count against the 48-hour maximum.
In Britain with its opt out provisions the situation is not only somewhat different but far more complicated. A person who is employed by a company in an occupation or industry which allows them to opt out of the working time directive provisions, can carry out other unrestricted work as a self-employed person provided he has signed the opt out forms with his main employer.
That above stated, should the self-employed work be carried out in a restricted industry or occupation where no opt out is allowed (example: - being classed as a mobile worker in the transport industry) then the European working time directive in regards to the maximum 48-hour working would apply not only to his self-employed work, but also to the work carried out as a directly employed person.
Further to the above, although in Britain there is no restriction on the maximum number of hours worked by self-employed persons, they are still regulated under the “Health and Safety at Work Act” with reference to subsection “responsibilities of workers in any workplace”.
In the foregoing it is the responsibility of every person to ensure that their working operations do not endanger other persons within a workplace or in the vicinity of that workplace. Therefore, any worker (employed or self-employed or combination of both) must ensure that such matters as fatigue brought about by their own excessive hours of work do not endanger others.
A person suffering fatigue in a workplace often manifests itself in the flouting of safety rules and regulations. The foregoing often results in the management bringing forward its disciplinary procedures against such an employee. It is often in that procedure that knowledge of an employee being involved in “external paid working activity” comes to light. Companies usually deal very harshly with such undeclared practise by way of interpreting the foregoing as gross misconduct, with all the severe consequences for the employee, who normally becomes addressed as “former employee”.
As Zec Murphy advises in his posting at #130 of this thread, N3V consider that they do not directly employ content creators by way of the present agreement. Therefore it would be for European content creators to consider their position in the light of that statement and all of the foregoing. However,(although this may be somewhat out my field) I would believe that N3V would be under obligation to ensure that all content brought forward to its platforms was produced in line with the current legal requirements of its country of origin.
In the above, if it were to be demonstrated that a European content creator produced an asset while working in contravention of the working time directive, then N3V could be judged liable under the civil and industrial “duty of care regulations” at least in the country of origin. The Duty of Care regulations have been enacted to be very similar throughout European Union countries and covers physical and material damage to persons and organisations by the action or negligence of another person or organisation.
Definitely one for the would be solicitors on the forum.
Bill
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked