[JScones]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

It has been my experience with years and years of flight simulator modding that when anyone creates a mod for flight simulator there was never any hard feelings if that persons mod was taken and slightly changed or improved or tweaked and then reposted as a new mod AS LONG AS credit was given to the original modder.

Lehmann is right, there are too many fuzzy lines out there and not enough codes of conduct to cover everyones actions.

I'm gonna rant on the SH3 to SH4 "conversion" (for want of a better word) trend that seems to be happening at the moment.

I've noticed with the many conversions of units from SH3 to SH4, numerous modders are quick for the glory, but slow to recognise the source. A few people come to mind.

In other words, I agree with you. If I released something and someone added it to a bigger package, even tweaked it, I wouldn't mind. I wouldn't even expect to be asked for permission. However, if the credits merely read "Converted by me, oh, and BTW, thanks to the GWX team", I wouldn't be happy, especially when the full credits are in the GWX manual for all to see. I mean, in six months time that ship I worked on for three months becomes remembered as merely "the ship X converted to SH4".

Now, whether the underlying files belong to Ubisoft is irrelevant (in a purely crediting context). The fact is someone from the community (objectively) "improved" them. Their contribution should be remembered along the way from taking "SH3: the mediocre subsim" to "SH3: the great subsim".

Also, some people make snide remarks when guys like Sergbuto or the Kpt try to address this lackadaisical behaviour. These guys should be supported by the community, not ostracised. And it's usually only the non-modders that get on their high-horse and blame these guys for "ruining it for everyone". To them I say, "come back after you've sweated on making a mod only to see it credited as 'Converted to SH4 by X'". Ironically, it's the snide remarks from the few that stop the many "real" modders from continuing. One can only then convert so many units, if you know what I mean. Simple narrow-minded thinking.

Perhaps even more concerning to the original modders (although it should be the players that are concerned) is that it's not just the credits that are given lazy treatment, it's the "conversion" as well - in some instances only half the job is done. Did anyone not think that the original modders may have ideas for importing their models, with the attention that is deserved, into SH4? Nup. Easier just to hammer it in and get it out "because they can".

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Though i noticed many similarities between RealUBoat and GWX they are two completely different animals suited to two completely different play styles, i have used both mods extensively. was there inspiration drawn from Real Uboats for the creation of GWX? maybe there was and myabe there was not.

All i know is that there are only so many ways to draw a stick figure and have it come out looking NOTHING like the other guy's stick figure - if that makes sense? or what i guess im trying to say is that since SH3 is based on historical events and everyone is shooting for some level of historical accuracy these mods are going to come across with tons of similarities.

Many people seem to forget this VERY valid point.

Various people have "claimed" GWX files as theirs. I'm sure people have also claimed parts of RUb, or NYGM, or WAC as theirs too. Simple fact is, if we asked twenty people here to tell us when, say, 7 Flotilla started operations, all twenty would go straight to uboat.net and come back with the same answer. Why? Because history is static - it can't be changed. So just because one mod has an IX with 22 torpedos and another mod comes along with the same, it doesn't give anyone the right to accuse the second mod of "mod theft" on that basis alone.

Originally Posted by Chock

On the subject of sending emails and PMs to modders to ask permission for inclusion of their mod, a failure on their part to respond should not be taken as a blanket permission from them that you are good to go.

My preference is to contact them as per their preferred channel outlined in their readme file. I always state my wishes in the affirmative. In other words, "We're planning on adding this to GWX, with full credit to you of course, pls let me know if that is not acceptable". If this is done via the modder's preferred interaction channel, then I have no problem using the mod if they do not respond. I must admit though, that every such email or PM I have sent has been responded to with a positive "go for it!".

Originally Posted by Chock

I think if people make stuff available, they kind of forfeit the right to treat it as 'their ball' which no-one can tamper with...

I agree. Once it's out there you can do nothing about it, and it would be naive to think that you could continue to control its use.

However, from a social perspective, some sense of moral decency from subsequent users would be appreciated, and that is what I see as being argued here. Or if not, then it's what I'd like to see as being argued here.

Originally Posted by Chock

While I'm sure you took the trouble to contact a lot of modders if it was hoped that their work was to be included, I seriously doubt anyone phoned up Peter Gabriel and got his permission to use the intro to Sky Blue on the loading screen, so there is a copyright issue with GWX before you even get to the simulation part that goes way beyond upsetting a modder. Similarly, I doubt Wolfgang Peterson or Bavaria Studios got a call, and there are most definitely some sounds from Das Boot in GWX too.

This is a good point, and one which would certainly undermine any "we ask everyone for permission" argument (for the record I am against the use of copyrighted material for this exact reason). But, we seem to be combining numerous different moral issues here. I would like to see credit improvements first from the minority of "offenders" before tackling copyright infringement, which opens a totally different can of worms going right back to the basic "can we even mod these files?" (and indeed results in a new thread on the topic every few months or so with no resolution, but copious amounts of personal flaming and "bush-lawyer" sproutings.