Copyright-infringing on OpenTTD services (BaNaNaS, wiki, ..)

[SAC]

Not that many correct assumptions there... In fact, I couldn't find any...

[Xaroth]

Not that many correct assumptions there... In fact, I couldn't find any...

It was beaten into me with a stick to never, ever, reply to a troll.. alas, I'm a slow learner.

You fail, again, to reply to any significant part of any post of the entire thread.. you claim you don't see correct assumptions, yet you take no effort to disprove them. Doesn't that make the assumptions true by default?

1) I have not seen you provide any link, quote, screenshot, etch-a-sketch of the request where -your- abuse contact information resides
2) You go on about how simuscape/libs/whatever is so much better than OpenTTD, yet I see no proof, explanation, anything regarding it.. the question asked by yexo is completely ignored
2b) Same goes for the reply from andythenorth
2c) And for the reply from Hyronymus
3) You failed to explain to me (page 1) how the situation as described posed any relation to TPB.. again, a request for argumentation with your accuations remains to be delivered

If you can't see this, then I suggest getting a reading aid, or taking off the troll mask, as it's clearly clouding your vision.


The rest of the people in the thread are (wo)manly enough to answer every remark and/or question asked, I suggest you do the same.

[SAC]

But you see, this isn't about needing reading aid or something. This is about placing a question where it belongs... And to somewhat help you there, this is TT-forums, not Simuscape!

[TrueBrain]

So to keep constructive: you claim you wanted an abuse@ 2 months ago (although it was there back then, lets go passed that): where is your suggestion? On the bug tracker we have for it? In any email address of any developer? As I am kinda curious why that never reached me? (serious questions; by your deduction questions should go to the platform they belong to, so where did yours strand? As I can only assume you did follow what you say yourself, and you did your best effort to put it at the right place? Again, not trolling, I seriously want to know where it went wrong!)

[andythenorth]

Drawing a line under this would be helpful, if possible. There's little arising from it afaict, except more friction.

Meanwhile, having joined Simuscape and read the welcome, the site rules, and many of the other posts, there's clearly a desire for it to be a friendly welcoming place, which is more supportive than the robust attitude at tt-forums.

A little live-and-let-live would be nice to see. These dramas are probably quite disheartening for those involved.

@SAC - it might be wise for you to extend your Simuscape publicly visible, no-registration-required FAQs, to outline your terms of service, and how you handle suspected abuse or infringements. It's both a legal aspect, and also helps set the tone that Simuscape is a nice friendly place. However, perhaps it would be better if that were discussed on Simuscape itself.

[SAC]

...you claim you wanted an abuse@ 2 months ago...

Nope, wrong again. I never claimed anything like that, I referred to what was stated by Hyronymus added link about the issue being brought up two months ago..

However, perhaps it would be better if that were discussed on Simuscape itself.

TT-forums related stuff are better discussed at TT-forums, and Simuscape stuff are obviously better discussed at Simuscape.

[TrueBrain]

(..)
Nope, wrong again. I never claimed anything like that, I referred to what was stated by Hyronymus added link about the issue being brought up two months ago..
(..)

Ah, that explains. It was unclear to me; I read your response as if you have given us signals it should be done. I would hate if signals like that are not received by us, but I am happy to read that was not the case. Tnx for clearing that up.

[SAC]

I could possibly have been a bit more clear, but at last nice to see that one's cleared up...

[Hyronymus]

...you claim you wanted an abuse@ 2 months ago...

Nope, wrong again. I never claimed anything like that, I referred to what was stated by Hyronymus added link about the issue being brought up two months ago..

However, perhaps it would be better if that were discussed on Simuscape itself.

TT-forums related stuff are better discussed at TT-forums, and Simuscape stuff are obviously better discussed at Simuscape.

And there you make an error of judgement: this discussion is not about something related to tt-forums.net. The discussion is firstly about copyright infringement which occured on Bananas and secondly which effects NewGRF artists, script writers and AI writers. In short: the entire OpenTTD modding community.

I cannot force you to join the discussion to find a viable solution for copyright protection on Bananas but don't you think it's a waste of time, energy and oppurtunity to let us discuss it here and you discuss it at Simuscape seperately? There is a benefit for your community too after all.

I'll get back to that beneficial part later.

[TrueBrain]

I could possibly have been a bit more clear, but at last nice to see that one's cleared up...

Hehe; yes, it is. Forums in general are such a b**** to communicate over. Cultural difference and given most of us are not native English speakers, creates a lot of breakdown in communication.

[SAC]

I can't see the error as I was referring to the question posted by Michi_cc... I should perhaps have let that one be quoted all along to avoid confusions...

I cannot force you to join the discussion to find a viable solution for copyright protection on Bananas but don't you think it's a waste of time, energy and oppurtunity to let us discuss it here and you discuss it at Simuscape seperately?

Oh, I think we need to discuss, absolutely! I think we need to discuss how to get along in this entire TTDLX-community without arguings, bad behavior, backstabbings and whatnot, regardless if we're artists, developers, moderators, admins, members... And above all have this discussion without pointing out what has been said to someone, acted towards someone and the sort - everything with the purpose to get a fresh start benefitial for everyone...

It might be about asking for too much though...

[TrueBrain]

I love constructive replies. <3

I don't think it is asking too much; we all have one common goal: supply our community with a kickass game/content. Working towards this common goal cannot be hard, and should not be hard. I guess the most critical part is keeping communication going. As I already said, this is often hard, and takes effort. But I guess you make a very good start by this suggestion, so why not start off with it.


No clue if this is what you have in mind, but just to kick this off a bit, and to heavily abuse this thread (hell, why not, it is my thread anyway ), I have an open question for you:

What are your issues with uploading content to BaNaNaS? As far as I understand, and I do apology if I am mistaken, my understanding is that you don't want it on BaNaNaS. I rarely involve myself in these things, but today is a good day as any other, so hence the question.

I extend the same question (and with that the invitation to an open conversation) to mb: what are your issues with uploading content to BaNaNaS?


To give a small piece on my view: BaNaNaS allows you to reach all our members, and most likely 90% of your users. So this always puzzled me: why not use it?


Please, discuss (and remember, only open constructive replies; I will be very strict with any trolls that might reply; you all (not pointing) be warned )

[wallyweb]

... Unfortunately, a 'report button' won't suffice for a proper DMCA Takedown Notice, it lacks the ability to provide sufficient proof of the infringing content, plus it forces an unfair barrier (user registration) for those wanting to report infringing content.

Is orudge aware of this?
Although Simuscape does have a registration requirement, it is relatively simple and unobtrusive and an abusive poster is similarly required to register thus hopefully (although agreed not fiddle-proof) verifiable contact information. The report button is activated from the post containing any abusive material.

[orudge]

We have had a policy regarding copyright violations for some years now:

"If anyone has any complaints regarding copyright violations, please follow the process in Rule 4(e) to notify an administrator about your concerns."

"If you believe an attachment to be a violation of copyright law, please contact Owen Rudge (forum username orudge), and provide the following: a link to the topic the attachment resides in, a link to the specific attachment (if multiple attachments exist in the topic), a description of how exactly the attachment is violating copyright, and preferably a link to the original source material the copyright of which the attachment is violating. He will speak with the other administrators and moderators about this and reach a conclusion. Action may not be immediate; please bear with us on this as we have to consider all sides of the argument. Priority may be given to requests from registered forum users over unregistered users. If you are not registered on the forums, you may e-mail abuse@tt-forums.net with your concerns."

I have just added the last sentence, although the abuse@tt-forums.net e-mail address has been set up again for some years, just not publicised in the rules topic.

[SAC]

No clue if this is what you have in mind...

In my opinion I think we need to have a broad discussion about different matters so that we can find a middleway we can all agree on. We also need to have this discussion in the entire community, that is; here on TT-forums amongst members overall, inside closed areas on TT-forums, (i.e. admin, moderators and possibly developers sections available), on Simuscape amongst members overall, within our Artists Guild and also within our HQ's, (Team Management), and finally of course also within the OpenTTD.org... I've already initiated such discussions on our side and hopefully we can present some solutions in the end - from our point of view of course. But again, with the purpose to find a descent way to combine everything to the best - where needed!

It's important to understand that we're all individuals with our own personal opinions and understandings, and while we may not always agree, that doesn't necessarily means anyone is wrong. But we need to find a better way to approach discussions when arising, both to prevent people from leaving, and to prevent newcomers not to stay around at all...

What are your issues with uploading content to BaNaNaS?

As for the BaNaNaS I have to say that I have nothing against it as a feature. My personal concern is that I have no control over my files once they've been uploaded, and with control I obviously mean the ability to remove outdated files and replace them with updates ones - although the reasons for this has been explained to me by Rubidium, so I'm not sure if there's a solution available I can accept at all. Further more, I'd like to see a better layout or a better sorting/displaying of files on the BaNaNaS...

However, I have also always disliked the fact that we have files located in many places, in threads here at TT-forums as is the case also with Simuscape, on GRF Crawler, the BaNaNaS, on foreign languaged TT-forums, a few fan sites dedicated to TTDLX, and so on... All of it making it difficult to find files - especially for those who are new to the game, but in all honesty also for people used to it... I'm aware that there's a download section also at Simuscape, but for obvious reasons of course.

Personally I'd like to see ONE place where we can have most files available throughout the entire TTDLX community, and perhaps the BaNaNaS would be the most appropriate place - but then it needs some rework...

[TrueBrain]

The whole idea of BaNaNaS is to centralize file distribution indeed. It is the reason it is integrated in OpenTTD client. All the places where people publish there files are many, and with that comes frustration at the end-user.


The reason I bring up this, as a start to a more broader talk, is because it is directly in line with this thread. The violations of copyright that happen at the moment, are due to people not knowing a certain GRF is not uploaded because the author doesn't want to; they rather assume the author didn't know about it. So in short, if we can resolve your issues with BaNaNaS, and your file is available via it, it is much less likely someone violates your copyright. A win-win situation in my opinion, and hopefully others follow. (at least, that is my hope)

So I do agree that a broader talk is required, for now I would like to pick out BaNaNaS, and (wrongfully in this thread, but lets continue for a bit here) address some of your questions. I would like to go in a direct conversation with you to further address them, possible on IRC? Either way:

Although you cannot remove a file as such, you can update an existing file with a better version. This happens all the time, and is a key feature of BaNaNaS. You as author can upload better versions, as you as author hopefully keep improving your entry. The only thing you cannot do, is remove older version. And this for a good reason. OpenTTD is built on the idea that old versions still work. If you launch 0.6.3 these days, it will load fine, it will even register in our Masterserver, if you choice to do so. If you open a TTD(p) map, it will load in OpenTTD. OpenTTD is built on these fundamentals. Part of it is that you can open old savegames, and load them. This includes the grf that was used with that savegame.

So, what happens if you upload a newer version of your grf? The older one is hidden from common download (it won't show up on any mirror, it is not available via normal downloads at all). Only if you have a savegame that used that specific (older) grf, you can get it from BaNaNaS directly. This is purely meant to reduce frustration on part of the user, where he needs a specific version of a grf to play his savegame. Often newer versions change something significantly enough that it breaks a savegame. Is it this part that you have trouble with?

To bounce the ball back: what would be an acceptable solution for you if that is the issue? Otherwise, can you elaborate on your issue? If you feel like, we can continue such conversation by more direct means like IRC, but I would really like to keep this conversation going. And if possible, I would like to keep this conversation in public, as it can only benefit the community as a whole; maybe others have similar concerns and trouble.

Regarding layouts / sorting / displaying, please do indicate what you consider wrong, and where possible, indicate what would be better. I rarely receive feedback in terms of layout, which makes it impossible for me to improve.


I would really like to see one central system for GRF storage; a lot of frustration from our member base come from the lack there-of. BaNaNaS solved a lot of these issues, but reality shows a few GRFs are missing which users tend to use a lot. If I can solve that by this kind of communication, and possibly resulting changing thereof, that can only be a win-win for all of us. I am open for all suggestions, as long as you leave me free to decline ideas of course (always with arguments, I promise; but I do mean to indicate I am not a suborn SysOp that only wants his way; this is your community as much as mine, so let's improve it as much as we can).

[Dave]

(Just thinking out loud) I wonder if we could combine the features of BaNaNaS with a web-based database such as that of GRF Crawler?

That way, you could login to change and update your files.

My question then is how does OpenTTD pull the content in for BaNaNaS anyway? If it is just a database that's hosted online, how about creating a forward-facing usable site that allows one to trawl that database?

That way, you could continue to host the entire package of GRF and readme in one place. EDIT 3: You'd also be able to provide more information on a GRF.

Obviously there's a bit of work involved and in true OpenTTD fashion I'm NOT doing it haha. But maybe there's a semi-solution for you.

EDIT: Posted at same time as TrueBrain, so if he answers any of the above, I do apologise.

EDIT 2: Obviously this would be alongside the in-game service.

[TrueBrain]

Dave W: I am not opposed to the idea at all. I guess the single question that pops in my mind: if there are no issues for uploading to BaNaNaS, why would it link to something?


Don't get me wrong, I don't want to push BaNaNaS there as "solves everything" solution. I just try to get a feeling for the mindset GRF authors have. I come from a completely different world, so it is kind of hard for me to get insight

[wallyweb]

Regarding layouts / sorting / displaying, please do indicate what you consider wrong, and where possible, indicate what would be better. I rarely receive feedback in terms of layout, which makes it impossible for me to improve.

You asked and so shall you receive.
DISCLAIMER: I do not subscribe to BaNaNaS so I am not familiar with the layout as it currently exists.

1. Links to ToS and abuse reporting functions on a variety of websites have tended to be relegated to fine print obscurity at the bottom of an equally obscure web page. Ensure that if this is the case with BaNaNaS that these links be given more prominence.

2. One of the points that prompted this discussion is the timeliness of responses to abuse reports (The addition of a direct "abuse@" link was an excellent move). Apparently the statement of reasonable expectations could be more prominent. Does BaNaNaS offer an automatic email response system wherein the reporter would get an email response that not only acknowledges the report but also lays out the time frames for follow up? If not, the existence of similar functions elsewhere would suggest that it is both desirable and doable.

3. I assume that removal of any offending files extends to any archived files as well?

4. The autoresponse suggested in item 2 could also be applied to new uploads, along the lines of "This message is to confirm that you wish to upload your file. Please respond within xx days/hours so that the upload may proceed." This forces the uploader to provide a valid email address, something that a violator would be loath to do.

PS On a related note, it was suggested somewhere that copyright infringement is not usually criminally actionable and I do agree that to be the case, however if a document is directly altered then that is forgery and the violation then moves from civil to criminal.

[TrueBrain]

Regarding layouts / sorting / displaying, please do indicate what you consider wrong, and where possible, indicate what would be better. I rarely receive feedback in terms of layout, which makes it impossible for me to improve.

You asked and so shall you receive.
DISCLAIMER: I do not subscribe to BaNaNaS so I am not familiar with the layout as it currently exists.

1. Links to ToS and abuse reporting functions on a variety of websites have tended to be relegated to fine print obscurity at the bottom of an equally obscure web page. Ensure that if this is the case with BaNaNaS that these links be given more prominence.

2. One of the points that prompted this discussion is the timeliness of responses to abuse reports (The addition of a direct "abuse@" link was an excellent move). Apparently the statement of reasonable expectations could be more prominent. Does BaNaNaS offer an automatic email response system wherein the reporter would get an email response that not only acknowledges the report but also lays out the time frames for follow up? If not, the existence of similar functions elsewhere would suggest that it is both desirable and doable.

3. I assume that removal of any offending files extends to any archived files as well?

4. The autoresponse suggested in item 2 could also be applied to new uploads, along the lines of "This message is to confirm that you wish to upload your file. Please respond within xx days/hours so that the upload may proceed." This forces the uploader to provide a valid email address, something that a violator would be loath to do.

It is not what I meant with what you quote, but I don't mind the questions, so here we go:

1) you have to accept the ToS on signup. There is no way to cheat you way around it. After that, it is stated at the bottom, next to Login and Logout. I consider this sufficient, as you cannot tell me you didn't see the ToS. You had to scroll and accept it after all. I am not going to make the ToS an "in your face", as 99% of our community obeys it fine and with respect. The few who don't most likely benefit more of the additional: I am the original author, checkbox, then representing him with the ToS again. After all, people tend to ignore ToSes and just skip through (I wish people wouldn't, but they do).

2) BaNaNaS does not sent an automatic email response. We talk about such a few incidents, that we are fine typing replies to them. The fact that a reporter is impatient is to be expected, but I don't see how reporting a timeframe changes the situation. In this case we replied to mb within 24h, which should be a more than fast enough reply for anyone. I still don't understand why he considers this an unfair timeframe. All ISPs I know only reply to abuse in business hours (at least, abuse of this grade; phishing for example follow different rules), so common sense dictates you might have to wait up to 24h to receive a reply. I trust our community enough to apply the same common sense to us, and give us at least 24h to come up with a reply. I don't see the need to explicitly mention this. Of course if the amount of abuse would skyrocket all of a sudden, this will be revisited, but I am sure that won't happen.

3) of course; the only bits of data remaining are the GRFID + MD5 of the file, for blacklisting purposes. This of course is not protected by any copyright, and as such we are free to keep that information stored.

4) we already validate email address, so I don't see the point (or use) of such system. All members have to supply a valid email address on signup, so such email would be redundant.

If you have any more ideas to make BaNaNaS better, please visit the next thread: http://www.tt-forums.net/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=61265 . I mentioned it a few times in this thread already, but I am sure you simply missed it. I love ideas and welcome them, although the common vibe at the moment is that OpenTTD does more than average to protects authors from copyright violations. Of course simple non-intrusive additions can always be implemented, and more intrusive can be talked about. In all cases: tnx for your reply

PS On a related note, it was suggested somewhere that copyright infringement is not usually criminally actionable and I do agree that to be the case, however if a document is directly altered then that is forgery and the violation then moves from civil to criminal.

Far off topic, but just for s*** and giggles: there was no altering of document; the file in question does not come with a LICENSE file, only with a readme.html. So "only" the wrong files were attached to the grf, which doesn't make it a forgery, so again back to civil court (the grf was unmodified). Btw, civil or criminal, it doesn't make it okay. Never.