Re: Copyright-infringing on OpenTTD services (BaNaNaS, wiki,
Posted: 11 Jun 2012 09:10
Not that many correct assumptions there... In fact, I couldn't find any...
The place to talk about Transport Tycoon
https://www.tt-forums.net/
It was beaten into me with a stick to never, ever, reply to a troll.. alas, I'm a slow learner.SAC wrote:Not that many correct assumptions there... In fact, I couldn't find any...
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..TrueBrain wrote:...you claim you wanted an abuse@ 2 months ago...
TT-forums related stuff are better discussed at TT-forums, and Simuscape stuff are obviously better discussed at Simuscape.andythenorth wrote:However, perhaps it would be better if that were discussed on Simuscape itself.
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 wrote:(..)
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..
(..)
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.SAC wrote: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..TrueBrain wrote:...you claim you wanted an abuse@ 2 months ago...
TT-forums related stuff are better discussed at TT-forums, and Simuscape stuff are obviously better discussed at Simuscape.andythenorth wrote:However, perhaps it would be better if that were discussed on Simuscape itself.
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 wrote:I could possibly have been a bit more clear, but at last nice to see that one's cleared up...
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...Hyronymus wrote: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?
Is orudge aware of this?Xaroth wrote: ... 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.
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!TrueBrain wrote:No clue if this is what you have in mind...
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...TrueBrain wrote:What are your issues with uploading content to BaNaNaS?
You asked and so shall you receive.TrueBrain wrote: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.
It is not what I meant with what you quote, but I don't mind the questions, so here we go:wallyweb wrote:You asked and so shall you receive.TrueBrain wrote: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.
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.
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.wallyweb wrote: 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.