No.
Nothing personnal emka but too much of this.
How can those screenshots prove anything ? c'mon, no guides, no curves, no reference bitmaps, only some polys that could have been laid down by "retopo" another model...
Actually it's the type of screenshots that raise a lot of doubts, when that should be the opposite.
Nothing personnal emka but too much of this.
How can those screenshots prove anything ? c'mon, no guides, no curves, no reference bitmaps, only some polys that could have been laid down by "retopo" another model...
Actually it's the type of screenshots that raise a lot of doubts, when that should be the opposite.
I dont really like bimmers but this is one of the best handling road car around. Great job.
plz realize that most players dont know about your context, and only see the offensive polarity of the insult.
As u wrote, the culture is different, and it is my target, as an admin, to make it possible for people from different cultures to have fun together, without wasting time in misunderstandings or creating conflicts.
You got my point so I unbanned you, no big deal.
As u wrote, the culture is different, and it is my target, as an admin, to make it possible for people from different cultures to have fun together, without wasting time in misunderstandings or creating conflicts.
You got my point so I unbanned you, no big deal.
What i do find ridiculous is to have to use insults to talk to your friend. I wouldnt want such friends.
There is a !pm command for private messages, public insults fuel more offenses, keep them private.
There is a !pm command for private messages, public insults fuel more offenses, keep them private.
@tim
alright apologies for the misunderstanding, i didnt expect that you werent using open licenses, for the simple reason that it makes your post quite irrelevant : it is obvious that authors publishing under closed/copyright license can do what they want with no exception.
There is no question here, the issues occur with open licenses.
Maybe Tomfuel could specify the license of that mod he wanted to use in his league.
alright apologies for the misunderstanding, i didnt expect that you werent using open licenses, for the simple reason that it makes your post quite irrelevant : it is obvious that authors publishing under closed/copyright license can do what they want with no exception.
There is no question here, the issues occur with open licenses.
Maybe Tomfuel could specify the license of that mod he wanted to use in his league.
Lets remind that anyone can distribute a CC work.
LFS is a bit special, it's like a bitorrent server. We can delete a mod from LFS, but it probably is already copied on many client machines and anyone of them can become a new distribution/diffusion point for that work.
The author cant forbid/bypass/control this, because of the open license.
LFS server can thus become an independant distribution point and keep the mod for public access, even against the wish of the author. Maybe an exception can be made with the NC clause, but even then, one of the devs could privately (no business) manage a repository.
: u cant steal something that has been made freely distribuable.
timdecnodder's input is the stereotypical answer from someone who should think beforehand and never publish under CC. He obviously didnt understand the spirit of an open license.
LFS is a bit special, it's like a bitorrent server. We can delete a mod from LFS, but it probably is already copied on many client machines and anyone of them can become a new distribution/diffusion point for that work.
The author cant forbid/bypass/control this, because of the open license.
LFS server can thus become an independant distribution point and keep the mod for public access, even against the wish of the author. Maybe an exception can be made with the NC clause, but even then, one of the devs could privately (no business) manage a repository.
: u cant steal something that has been made freely distribuable.
timdecnodder's input is the stereotypical answer from someone who should think beforehand and never publish under CC. He obviously didnt understand the spirit of an open license.
From a technical perspective, when we release (publish) a work with a Creative Commons license, we cant go back : we cannot forbid use and copy of the published work afterwards.
We can remove that work from locations we have access to, but nothing more : if someone make another diffusion point available, we cant forbid that.
Applying this to LFS mods system :
- once a mod has been made public, it shouldnt be possible to remove public use of that mod
- an author should be able to delete/hide a mod from his published mods list, but if that mod is public, it shouldnt be removed from the ingame mod list.
Once again, when we publish under CC, we forfeit our rights on use and copy (usus and abusus), we only keep the right to make profit from it (fructus).
That published work is not totally ours anymore. Keep this in mind when releasing a mod with a copyleft/public domain license.
We can remove that work from locations we have access to, but nothing more : if someone make another diffusion point available, we cant forbid that.
Applying this to LFS mods system :
- once a mod has been made public, it shouldnt be possible to remove public use of that mod
- an author should be able to delete/hide a mod from his published mods list, but if that mod is public, it shouldnt be removed from the ingame mod list.
Once again, when we publish under CC, we forfeit our rights on use and copy (usus and abusus), we only keep the right to make profit from it (fructus).
That published work is not totally ours anymore. Keep this in mind when releasing a mod with a copyleft/public domain license.
Last edited by turbofan, .
Demagogue : (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogue):
A demagogue (...) is a political leader in a democracy who gains popularity by arousing the common people against elites, especially through oratory that whips up the passions of crowds, appealing to emotion by scapegoating out-groups, exaggerating dangers to stoke fears, lying for emotional effect, or other rhetoric that tends to drown out reasoned deliberation and encourage fanatical popularity.Demagogues overturn established norms of political conduct, or promise or threaten to do so.
From there we can connect to populism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism)
(...)defines populism as an ideology which presents "the people" as a morally good force and contrasts them against "the elite", who are portrayed as corrupt and self-serving. (...)
@Slayer4712 U fall for a demagogic ad...
Check ur facts before spreading false narratives.
Those guys got angry because i banned one of their "friend" who felt above the rules, protected by a divine vip/clan member status.
Then they harass me for unfair ban. Talk me about corruption yes...
You can always dream, but the most common political system for uneducated ppl is clannism (wich connects to xenophobia). Kids dont build democracies.
This group of mutineers uses pervert practices and methods, u have a perfect example in the ad above, but u can add insults, defamation, coming on server to crash and spam their server ad, and even banning me as i didnt remove them from admin status.
Up to you if u think it's a good way to handle issues, I dont.
Springtime cleanup !
I thought u were smarter than this.
Well now, there will be a reason for your ban. Guess.
Well now, there will be a reason for your ban. Guess.
SQUEAKYRC
Vehicle mod: SQUEAKYRC
Details page: https://www.lfs.net/files/vehmods/3A93DB
SHORT DESCRIPTION:
DESCRIPTION:
COVER SCREENSHOT:
Details page: https://www.lfs.net/files/vehmods/3A93DB
SHORT DESCRIPTION:
DESCRIPTION:
COVER SCREENSHOT:
@sunchaser
I did not see the crash. But I saw the tchat.
That crash was probably a mishap and even if it wasn't, a revenge move is not the best answer.
Next time, when you feel bullied, please report the bad guy on the live tchat, an admin is probably online.
Your ban length is 12h, no big deal, try again tomorrow.
I did not see the crash. But I saw the tchat.
That crash was probably a mishap and even if it wasn't, a revenge move is not the best answer.
Next time, when you feel bullied, please report the bad guy on the live tchat, an admin is probably online.
Your ban length is 12h, no big deal, try again tomorrow.
U finish the whole thing in the night ?
wow geeeeeeee !!
U should contact world guiness book of records for the fastest modelling of a car ever.
Ahem...
wow geeeeeeee !!
U should contact world guiness book of records for the fastest modelling of a car ever.
Ahem...
The good old witch hunt spirit again.
Guys, why do u even care ? what do u want to prove ? you're on a mission for god ? Why not clean ur own ass first ?
@Amelis32: Vimas was banned 12h for targeting and crashing on purpose.
Very nice job, handles as expected, shading/texture is great.
So nice it would have deserved a more detailed mesh, like subdivide smooth.
Fun story is I always despised that car, it is so ugly and drives like a slug, but that's in the real (past) world : )
Can't wait ur next mod already !
So nice it would have deserved a more detailed mesh, like subdivide smooth.
Fun story is I always despised that car, it is so ugly and drives like a slug, but that's in the real (past) world : )
Can't wait ur next mod already !
We are definitely in a post-truth era.
@H3Dmylove :
Let me guess who you are voting for, if you are old enough...
But trumpish tactics wont work with us. You can spread all the lies you want,
the simple experience of an environnemnt where racers, drifters, bikers, gansta ricers, etc... can make the 3d world a lively and relaxed place, will destroy any false narrative you try to build and spread.
You are keeping to be offensive, offense has no place on JaR. It is good that you are permanently banned.
Maybe you could spend some time reading about philosopher kings instead of wasting it here.
That old book from Plato for example, The Republic, as it is the main guide for the basic management of the server.
File closed.
@H3Dmylove :
Let me guess who you are voting for, if you are old enough...
But trumpish tactics wont work with us. You can spread all the lies you want,
the simple experience of an environnemnt where racers, drifters, bikers, gansta ricers, etc... can make the 3d world a lively and relaxed place, will destroy any false narrative you try to build and spread.
You are keeping to be offensive, offense has no place on JaR. It is good that you are permanently banned.
Maybe you could spend some time reading about philosopher kings instead of wasting it here.
That old book from Plato for example, The Republic, as it is the main guide for the basic management of the server.
File closed.
JaR is not offering paid unbans, this is a myth.
How can you even think about such wicked and pervert thing ?
Perversion has no place on JaR.
Plz get lost with propagating such lies, or I will ban you, preemptively.
How can you even think about such wicked and pervert thing ?
Perversion has no place on JaR.
Plz get lost with propagating such lies, or I will ban you, preemptively.
oh well, I wrote "TURNS INTO a witch hunt"
I didnt make u directly responsible for it (turns into)
I know your intent was not a witch hunt, but that what it looks like for many users : overdone and destroying modder's motivation.
file closed for me !
then let me refer you to this thread
https://www.lfs.net/forum/thread/97013-Model-sources---which-are-OK-to-use-and-which-are-not-accepted
i can read
"No derivatives allowed means that you cannot make any changes to the model and noone else can make any changes to the model you have submitted to LFS - applies only for CGTrader, 3dlancer, free3d and 3dcadbrowser websites with their Royalty free license"
"The list of OK sites for LFS mods:
Quote :
Sketchfab - Creative Commons licenses, except BY-ND and BY-NC-ND
CGTrader - Royalty free license, no derivatives allowed
3dlancer.net - with Royalty free license, no derivatives allowed
blendswap.com - Creative Commons licenses, except BY-ND and BY-NC-ND
free3d.com - Royalty free license, no derivatives allowed
3dcadbrowser.com - Royalty free license, no derivatives allowed
Automation game - CC BY-NC-SA "
why are those sites listed as ok sources when those specific licenses explictely forbid derivatives or commercial use ?
I dont want to continue write here again, am wasting time with this. Do what u think fair and good luck !
Last edited by turbofan, .
The issue here is not retopology in itself, but the fact that the modder states it is his original work.
It would the same issue for an imported model under CC BY for example.
But it would be perfectly ok to "retopo" that same CC BY model, when the original author's name is provided.
In short : retopology can't be claimed an original work, a license must be provided as for the other imports.
-------
Am sorry that I can't find any BY SA mod with forbidden derivatives. I feel confused, I wouldn't write such an assertion only to bother people. I must have been mistaken, or idk what happened.
In the same idea of consistency, I would disallow licenses which have a NC and/or a ND equivalent clause.
disallow ND (no derivative) because of the removed wheels problem I wrote in my previous post, unless the modder keeps the wheels and sets an invisible material... but almost all imported models need some fixes, stitches, up axis rotation, etc, wich modify the original mesh, and thus breach the no derivative clause. It is impossible to handle geometry checks in the long run.
disallow NC (no commercial use) because a LFS mod is used in the commercial context of LFS, wich is a business that hosts and sells access to download the mods for use in the sim, and displays some ads from IRL companies (bmw...). (authorization from author is needed for commercial use)
It is a bit of a pity that this mod import story turns into a witch hunt :
- you are not legally required to check the validity of the licenses. You act with good faith when you simply trust the provided source license.
You can't be responsible of being misled by the uploaders/hosts. At worst you will be asked to remove the mod if infrigement is proven. No big deal.
- most people making mods are only expressing their passion, I doubt there is any intent to bypass the copyright rules, or make the reviewers work hard(er). People just don't know how copyrights work, they are creative and excited and try alternate ways to make mods faster, without documenting and learning about copyrights mechanics. They are not working against LFS, but FOR LFS. That's what I see and read online. Dont misunderstand.
Why not witch hunt pirate photoshop/3ds max/ users ? and the same copyright tracking on textures and blueprints ? that would be much more consistent.
A last thought about importing parts of copyrighted materials. In the case of music (hiphop and rap are great examples), it ok to sample, or "extract a quote" of copyrighted materials.
It should be same for mods : creating a whole mod from many parts of copyrighted works should be acceptable.
In the end, why not make it all simpler and just relax the witch hunt ? We will never be able to handle the copyright checks in the long run. If it was possible, the copyright issues on uploaded models in 3D meshes databases would be already insignificant; because stolen source material wouldn't be so much abundant for download in the first place : they would be easily filtered out by the repository website.
It would the same issue for an imported model under CC BY for example.
But it would be perfectly ok to "retopo" that same CC BY model, when the original author's name is provided.
In short : retopology can't be claimed an original work, a license must be provided as for the other imports.
-------
Am sorry that I can't find any BY SA mod with forbidden derivatives. I feel confused, I wouldn't write such an assertion only to bother people. I must have been mistaken, or idk what happened.
In the same idea of consistency, I would disallow licenses which have a NC and/or a ND equivalent clause.
disallow ND (no derivative) because of the removed wheels problem I wrote in my previous post, unless the modder keeps the wheels and sets an invisible material... but almost all imported models need some fixes, stitches, up axis rotation, etc, wich modify the original mesh, and thus breach the no derivative clause. It is impossible to handle geometry checks in the long run.
disallow NC (no commercial use) because a LFS mod is used in the commercial context of LFS, wich is a business that hosts and sells access to download the mods for use in the sim, and displays some ads from IRL companies (bmw...). (authorization from author is needed for commercial use)
It is a bit of a pity that this mod import story turns into a witch hunt :
- you are not legally required to check the validity of the licenses. You act with good faith when you simply trust the provided source license.
You can't be responsible of being misled by the uploaders/hosts. At worst you will be asked to remove the mod if infrigement is proven. No big deal.
- most people making mods are only expressing their passion, I doubt there is any intent to bypass the copyright rules, or make the reviewers work hard(er). People just don't know how copyrights work, they are creative and excited and try alternate ways to make mods faster, without documenting and learning about copyrights mechanics. They are not working against LFS, but FOR LFS. That's what I see and read online. Dont misunderstand.
Why not witch hunt pirate photoshop/3ds max/ users ? and the same copyright tracking on textures and blueprints ? that would be much more consistent.
A last thought about importing parts of copyrighted materials. In the case of music (hiphop and rap are great examples), it ok to sample, or "extract a quote" of copyrighted materials.
It should be same for mods : creating a whole mod from many parts of copyrighted works should be acceptable.
In the end, why not make it all simpler and just relax the witch hunt ? We will never be able to handle the copyright checks in the long run. If it was possible, the copyright issues on uploaded models in 3D meshes databases would be already insignificant; because stolen source material wouldn't be so much abundant for download in the first place : they would be easily filtered out by the repository website.
Retopology means polygon reduction, it's only a trendy word for an old technique. Retopology is not about reconstructing polys from an existing clean model. That would be simply called a reproduction, or a derivative.
In the case of LFS mod, 'retopology' as it is used, is a form of plagiarism, it is no gray area, it is just fully wrong when it comes to licenses that forbid reproductions or derivatives.
"Plagiarism is the representation of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work." - Wikipedia.
By the way, do you realize that any imported object wich has wheels in its mesh, needs them to be removed for making a mod in LFS, and as such, the mod will be a derivative work simply because the original mesh has been changed ?
Yes, it's very unlikely that an author gets angry from having his object's wheel remove to make a mod, but still, it's a breach of "no derivatives" licenses.
So if u want to be really clean, the only choices are private agreement or public domain / CC BY / CC0 and some other uncommon free licenses like "license art libre" (https://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/), wich explicitely allow reproductions and derivatives.
edit :
it is also wrong in LFS to forbid derivatives when original model is CC BY SA or equivalent.
As it is now, LFS is breaching the SA clause.
CC BY SA want us to name the author and share any derivative work with the same license, so derivatives must stay allowed in LFS, as the original license states.
In the case of LFS mod, 'retopology' as it is used, is a form of plagiarism, it is no gray area, it is just fully wrong when it comes to licenses that forbid reproductions or derivatives.
"Plagiarism is the representation of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work." - Wikipedia.
By the way, do you realize that any imported object wich has wheels in its mesh, needs them to be removed for making a mod in LFS, and as such, the mod will be a derivative work simply because the original mesh has been changed ?
Yes, it's very unlikely that an author gets angry from having his object's wheel remove to make a mod, but still, it's a breach of "no derivatives" licenses.
So if u want to be really clean, the only choices are private agreement or public domain / CC BY / CC0 and some other uncommon free licenses like "license art libre" (https://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en/), wich explicitely allow reproductions and derivatives.
edit :
it is also wrong in LFS to forbid derivatives when original model is CC BY SA or equivalent.
As it is now, LFS is breaching the SA clause.
CC BY SA want us to name the author and share any derivative work with the same license, so derivatives must stay allowed in LFS, as the original license states.
Last edited by turbofan, .
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG