DLS Content Copies ?
- Thread starter big_b
- Start date
Dinorius_Redundicus
kuid 68213
big_b
Thanks for the alert. :Y:
Several of those assets are totally unauthorised re-skins of my own creations. I will report them to N3V and have them taken off the DLS as soon as possible.
If you know who the original authors of other "stolen" assets are, you should send them a PM. I'm sure they would appreciate the alert, because it's impossible to keep track of all the DLS activity.
~ Deane
.
Last edited:
Profile of denis90. UserID: 114219.
The above basic information will make it easier for people to find his 179 assets (131 buildings, 17 scenery, 13 track objects, 6 industries, 5 people and a few more categories), all uploaded between June 20th and June 28th, 2019.
At least one asset ("Park spline") is originally made by burebista (originally named "brb Park"), as the asset refers to his/her website.
At least one asset ("Ploshadka pogruzki tovarov") is originally made by papinek (as his/her name is still part of the config file and refers to a now defunct website), though the asset also looks like a multi-industry track.
At least one asset ("RZD hlam 22") is originally made by dinorius_redundicus (originally named "Derelict iron sheets 01") and is built-in to TANE (though probably also freely available on the DLS).
The asset "<kuid:114219:1376> de B ?????? ???????" ironically states in the description "Legal distribution just on - www.trainz.ru and www.tsmteam.ru", which I think does not include the DLS.
I would not be surprised if more creators are involved, as I only checked a handful of assets.
So... yeah. I say check if some of his content looks familiar to you.
Not saying any of his uploads are illegal, but might be worth checking.
I have send burebista and papinek a PM to inform them.
The above basic information will make it easier for people to find his 179 assets (131 buildings, 17 scenery, 13 track objects, 6 industries, 5 people and a few more categories), all uploaded between June 20th and June 28th, 2019.
At least one asset ("Park spline") is originally made by burebista (originally named "brb Park"), as the asset refers to his/her website.
At least one asset ("Ploshadka pogruzki tovarov") is originally made by papinek (as his/her name is still part of the config file and refers to a now defunct website), though the asset also looks like a multi-industry track.
At least one asset ("RZD hlam 22") is originally made by dinorius_redundicus (originally named "Derelict iron sheets 01") and is built-in to TANE (though probably also freely available on the DLS).
The asset "<kuid:114219:1376> de B ?????? ???????" ironically states in the description "Legal distribution just on - www.trainz.ru and www.tsmteam.ru", which I think does not include the DLS.
I would not be surprised if more creators are involved, as I only checked a handful of assets.
So... yeah. I say check if some of his content looks familiar to you.
Not saying any of his uploads are illegal, but might be worth checking.
I have send burebista and papinek a PM to inform them.
Dinorius_Redundicus
kuid 68213
I identified 10 unauthorised reskins of my assets;
[FONT="]RZD hlam 28 - <KUID:114219:100089>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 29 - <KUID:114219:100090>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 32 - <KUID:114219:100091>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 35 - <KUID:114219:100092>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD propane 02 - <KUID:114219:100093>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD propane 04 - <KUID:114219:100094>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD propane 06 - <KUID:114219:100095>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 02 - <KUID:114219:100086>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 17 - <KUID:114219:100087>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 22 - <KUID:114219:100088>
[/FONT]
.
[FONT="]RZD hlam 28 - <KUID:114219:100089>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 29 - <KUID:114219:100090>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 32 - <KUID:114219:100091>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 35 - <KUID:114219:100092>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD propane 02 - <KUID:114219:100093>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD propane 04 - <KUID:114219:100094>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD propane 06 - <KUID:114219:100095>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 02 - <KUID:114219:100086>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 17 - <KUID:114219:100087>[/FONT]
[FONT="]RZD hlam 22 - <KUID:114219:100088>
[/FONT]
.
Last edited:
<kuid:114219:100076> RZD G-Puteec 01
<kuid:114219:100077> RZD G-Puteec 02
<kuid:114219:100078> RZD G-Puteec 03
<kuid:114219:100079> RZD G-Puteec 04
<kuid:114219:100080> RZD G-Puteec 05
Copies of
<kuid:276266:1152> CHN worker03-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1128> CHN worker01-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1151> CHN worker02-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1153> CHN worker04-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1154> CHN worker05-dispatcher
Ocemy has been advised.
<kuid:114219:1357> n_man_ht 6a
<kuid:114219:100149> n_man_ht 4a
Copies of
<kuid:370528:1140> n_man_4a
<kuid:370528:1142> n_man_6a
Neoklai75 has been advised.
<kuid:114219:100077> RZD G-Puteec 02
<kuid:114219:100078> RZD G-Puteec 03
<kuid:114219:100079> RZD G-Puteec 04
<kuid:114219:100080> RZD G-Puteec 05
Copies of
<kuid:276266:1152> CHN worker03-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1128> CHN worker01-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1151> CHN worker02-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1153> CHN worker04-dispatcher
<kuid:276266:1154> CHN worker05-dispatcher
Ocemy has been advised.
<kuid:114219:1357> n_man_ht 6a
<kuid:114219:100149> n_man_ht 4a
Copies of
<kuid:370528:1140> n_man_4a
<kuid:370528:1142> n_man_6a
Neoklai75 has been advised.
Last edited:
BuilderBob
New member
While this sort of copying and distribution is to be regretted, and must be dealt with properly, the unfortunate fact is that Trainz users who want to use the multiplayer facility are forced to do it because of the erratic way in which assets that ought to have a single common source on the DLS now have multiple sources as built-in and payware, and therefore are not available to all players. Converting the asset to a single DLS source is the only practical solution. I no longer refer to multi-player as a feature of the sim because of the amount of negative feedback.
Dinorius_Redundicus
kuid 68213
I don’t see how multi-player forces any user to make unauthorised reskins of freely available assets. All my creations have always been on the DLS, never payware, and therefore available to all trainz users (assuming trainz-build compatibility). No, it’s simply breach of copyright, driven by ego, laziness, ignorance or a combination of those factors.
BuilderBob
New member
Multi-player requires a single common source for assets. If some users have the asset as payware, some have it as built-in and some have it as DLS download then multi-player will not run. And it's not just payware, but built-in that varies across versions of Trainz that ought to be compatible. If none of your assets are affected then that simply demonstrates how the copying easily spreads beyond what the multi-player users see as necessary in order to play their game, and that reinforces the importance of eliminating the most important driver of this activity.
ZecMurphy
Community Assistant
Hi All
We are currently investigating this; unfortunately this case has become one where we will require proof of ownership of the assets as in this case it appears that the uploader may have been given permission to upload by another person claiming to be the author.
We are currently working with those who have reported uploads, and hope to resolve this as soon as possible.
In regards to multiplayer, I am not sure where you have pulled that explanation from BuilderBob, however that is not the case.
So long as the asset is not modified, it can be installed from any of the suitable sources (built-in, DLC pack, or DLS) and will function in multiplayer. There is no requirement for all players to have the asset installed from the same source, just that it be from a suitable source and be unmodified.
Note, all players must be using compatible Trainz versions (ie if the host uses TANE SP3, then all other players need to use TANE SP3 as well).
Regards
We are currently investigating this; unfortunately this case has become one where we will require proof of ownership of the assets as in this case it appears that the uploader may have been given permission to upload by another person claiming to be the author.
We are currently working with those who have reported uploads, and hope to resolve this as soon as possible.
In regards to multiplayer, I am not sure where you have pulled that explanation from BuilderBob, however that is not the case.
So long as the asset is not modified, it can be installed from any of the suitable sources (built-in, DLC pack, or DLS) and will function in multiplayer. There is no requirement for all players to have the asset installed from the same source, just that it be from a suitable source and be unmodified.
Note, all players must be using compatible Trainz versions (ie if the host uses TANE SP3, then all other players need to use TANE SP3 as well).
Regards
BuilderBob
New member
That's the point. When N3V changes the asset from freeware on the DLS to built-in or payware they add things like translations and the permissions container. That causes it to be seen as modified and unusable in multiplayer. Of course one fix is for the original creator of the route to upload a new version of the route that uses the new version of the asset, but typically the original creator is either long gone or has lost interest.
ZecMurphy
Community Assistant
Hi BuilderBob
It appears that there is some confusion, or obfuscation, of the term 'modified' in this case.
In relation to content, for multiplayer, referring to 'modified' content means content that is marked as 'Locally Modified' or 'Modified' in the status column in Content Manager. IF the content is marked as such in Content Manager, then it will not be able to be used in a Multiplayer session.
Content that is marked as 'built-in', 'installed, Payware', or 'installed from DLS' in the status column is all multiplayer compatible. It does not matter which of these three status indications is shown for the same asset, it will work as expected in multiplayer. This means that a player with the DLS version of an asset can play a multiplayer session with another player who has the asset installed from a DLC pack (generally this should mean it is marked as built-in, but in some cases could be marked as 'payware' for various reasons).
As per my previous reply, all players must have the latest version of the asset installed. So if one player has <kuid2:12345:9876:1> installed, and the latest available version (from any of those three sources) is <kuid2:12345:9876:2> then they will need to install this newer version. There may be cases where a DLC pack has a repaired version of an asset that is not yet on the DLS; there may also be cases where a developer decides to make an updated/improved version of an asset a part of a payware pack.
If you have a reproducible case where this multiplayer does not work when the same asset (with the exact same AssetID number; not assets with different revision numbers) is installed from different sources that are multiplayer compatible, then please report this to us so that we can test this.
Regards
It appears that there is some confusion, or obfuscation, of the term 'modified' in this case.
In relation to content, for multiplayer, referring to 'modified' content means content that is marked as 'Locally Modified' or 'Modified' in the status column in Content Manager. IF the content is marked as such in Content Manager, then it will not be able to be used in a Multiplayer session.
Content that is marked as 'built-in', 'installed, Payware', or 'installed from DLS' in the status column is all multiplayer compatible. It does not matter which of these three status indications is shown for the same asset, it will work as expected in multiplayer. This means that a player with the DLS version of an asset can play a multiplayer session with another player who has the asset installed from a DLC pack (generally this should mean it is marked as built-in, but in some cases could be marked as 'payware' for various reasons).
As per my previous reply, all players must have the latest version of the asset installed. So if one player has <kuid2:12345:9876:1> installed, and the latest available version (from any of those three sources) is <kuid2:12345:9876:2> then they will need to install this newer version. There may be cases where a DLC pack has a repaired version of an asset that is not yet on the DLS; there may also be cases where a developer decides to make an updated/improved version of an asset a part of a payware pack.
If you have a reproducible case where this multiplayer does not work when the same asset (with the exact same AssetID number; not assets with different revision numbers) is installed from different sources that are multiplayer compatible, then please report this to us so that we can test this.
Regards
Dinorius_Redundicus
kuid 68213
...or is still active and objects to language and privileges tags being added. Perhaps I'm the only one feeling like this.
IMO, until the English-only status of the main username tag starts being enforced, I don't think N3V should be inserting non-English language tags. And the privileges tag should not be in there if the original didn't have one.
N3V also sometimes increments a kuid's version number without asking or even informing the original creator. If it happens to an asset that only goes into an edition of Trainz that the original creator doesn't buy, the change remains unknown to the creator who wrongly assumes he/she has the latest version of every asset they created.
Dinorius_Redundicus
kuid 68213
My helpdesk claim resolved.
I just received word from Helpdesk that several Denis90 assets (author ID 114219) have been removed from the DLS, these being unauthorised re-skins of my assets (author ID 68213) as per the following list;
<kuid:114219:100086> RZD hlam 02 = <kuid2:68213:25013:1> Derelict culvert pipes 01
<kuid:114219:100087> RZD hlam 17 = <kuid2:68213:27062:1> Derelict iron sheets 01
<kuid:114219:100088> RZD hlam 22 = <kuid2:68213:27062:1> Derelict iron sheets 01
<kuid:114219:100089> RZD hlam 28 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100090> RZD hlam 29 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100091> RZD hlam 32 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100092> RZD hlam 35 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100093> RZD propane 02 = <kuid2:68213:25062:1> Derelict propane tank 07
<kuid:114219:100094> RZD propane 04 = <kuid2:68213:25062:1> Derelict propane tank 07
<kuid:114219:100095> RZD propane 06 = <kuid2:68213:25062:1> Derelict propane tank 07
Other creators please note - in contested cases such as this, it may not be enough to simply show that configs have obviously been derived from yours, or that thumbnail images and file names are identical to your originals. In order to completely establish the identity and ownership of the meshes, I needed to supply N3V with copies of my original .gmax files.
The lesson is that if you want to help N3V protect your copyright, it is a very good idea to keep copies of your original 3D source files.
I thank Zec Murphy for doing such an in-depth investigation, which included contact with the re-skinner to get their side of the story, all within 3 business days.
.
I just received word from Helpdesk that several Denis90 assets (author ID 114219) have been removed from the DLS, these being unauthorised re-skins of my assets (author ID 68213) as per the following list;
<kuid:114219:100086> RZD hlam 02 = <kuid2:68213:25013:1> Derelict culvert pipes 01
<kuid:114219:100087> RZD hlam 17 = <kuid2:68213:27062:1> Derelict iron sheets 01
<kuid:114219:100088> RZD hlam 22 = <kuid2:68213:27062:1> Derelict iron sheets 01
<kuid:114219:100089> RZD hlam 28 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100090> RZD hlam 29 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100091> RZD hlam 32 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100092> RZD hlam 35 = <kuid2:68213:25012:1> Derelict tyres 02
<kuid:114219:100093> RZD propane 02 = <kuid2:68213:25062:1> Derelict propane tank 07
<kuid:114219:100094> RZD propane 04 = <kuid2:68213:25062:1> Derelict propane tank 07
<kuid:114219:100095> RZD propane 06 = <kuid2:68213:25062:1> Derelict propane tank 07
Other creators please note - in contested cases such as this, it may not be enough to simply show that configs have obviously been derived from yours, or that thumbnail images and file names are identical to your originals. In order to completely establish the identity and ownership of the meshes, I needed to supply N3V with copies of my original .gmax files.
The lesson is that if you want to help N3V protect your copyright, it is a very good idea to keep copies of your original 3D source files.
I thank Zec Murphy for doing such an in-depth investigation, which included contact with the re-skinner to get their side of the story, all within 3 business days.
.
ZecMurphy
Community Assistant
Unfortunately, for built-in content, it has previously been a requirement of regional publishers that all content include regional translations. Without this, the regional publishers simply would not publish Trainz in local languages because it has incomplete translations. I faced this with several of my assets, which needed to use newer tags in their cab views to support translations when TANE was in development.
At the current time this is not a simple or straightforward thing to enforce. We have looked at this previously, and the technology was not reliable enough to avoid rejecting legitimate names repeatedly. This may be looked at again in the future, but I cannot say when or if this may happen.
We have unfortunately seen delays in releasing internal updates to DLS content onto the DLS. We are working to make this happen quicker, however there are still cases where it may take time to occur.
Generally these updates occur when we need to fix errors on assets, which is far less of a problem these days. From memory we can avoid increasing the revision number when adding/updating translations in assets, but if the asset needs any other changes or fixes for it to work then it may need to have the revision number increased. In that case we would work to make the update available on the DLS as soon as possible.
We are still human though, and there is a chance that some assets may slip through the gaps. If anyone becomes aware of updates to DLS assets that are built-in, and aren't yet on the DLS, please contact us so we can look into it. Keep in mind that there may be cases where a creator may provide an updated asset as an exclusive asset for a release, in which case it would be up to the creator to place it onto the DLS or not.
Regards
ZecMurphy
Community Assistant
Not a problem
I'm glad we were able to verify and resolve this fairly quickly for you.In this case the uploader did contest the copyright claim, so it did require us to investigate further.
In this case the first step was to verify which assets were duplicated, so we could do a comparison. I also inquired about the source files just in case there was any ambiguity when reviewing the uploaded assets against the original assets, however it's rare that we need to verify the source files in a situation such as this. In this case, after reviewing the two assets, the assets themselves would have been enough for us to act, but the source files definitely do give extra proof that the content is yours.
Regards
Dinorius_Redundicus
kuid 68213
Thanks for both replies Zec.
I suppose I'll never get satisfaction regarding the lop-sided treatment of English username versus username-xx tags and the cluttering up of configs. So be it.
Regarding the deleted Denis90 knock-offs, they're still listed as "Available for Download" but an attempt to actually download them is met with "Asset removed due to a terms of service violation..". Do they stay listed forever or do the assets eventually get removed from the list? I'm just trying to understand the process.
.
I suppose I'll never get satisfaction regarding the lop-sided treatment of English username versus username-xx tags and the cluttering up of configs. So be it.
Regarding the deleted Denis90 knock-offs, they're still listed as "Available for Download" but an attempt to actually download them is met with "Asset removed due to a terms of service violation..". Do they stay listed forever or do the assets eventually get removed from the list? I'm just trying to understand the process.
.
Last edited:
This question has been raised before. They will eventually be removed but in the meantime the "Asset removed due to a terms of service violation.." message will be there to inform users who are looking for the asset why it has been removed and (probably) to indicate that N3V do take action. If they simply removed the assets and left no indication as to why there would be posts claiming that N3V have removed assets "for no good reason".
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked