License question concerning non-GPL aircraft.

[D-ECHO]

Hey there
I noticed that some repositories hosted by the user/organisation "FGMEMBERS-NONGPL" contain the following or similar notices concerning license:

The original author has not declared a license for this software

FGMEMBERS-RESTRICTED repository will maintain a non-commercial license until the copyright owner declares intention

(Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA applies)

(from https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-NONGPL/X-02)

So as far as my intellect goes, this means that the author published his work, usually in a zip, without adding a note about licensing (which equals to fully copyright protected, as no additional rights are granted). Following this, someone, presumably Jabberwocky or IAHM-COL (?) decided that they have the right to license someone elses work under a license they picked, in this case CC BY-NC-SA which obviously grants more rights than fully copyright-protected i.e. no license granted. How does this work? How can you *choose* to license someone elses content?

[bomber]

Let me first say I had no involvement in the decision making on this.

As I understand it these are very old low quality planes from authors no longer active in the FG community. A community who's rules allow for the sharing, distributing and modification of others work. Is it not logical that this author wished this for their work ? Would you deny them this on the grounds that whilst concentrating on the task of creating this plane they didn't understand that in later years with the licence debate becoming a 'hot potato' they hadn't specifically licenced EVERY file.... which is something no author including the original poster does yet is a fundamental requirement of the GPL licence that they work to, are we to believe your work is unlicensed ?

Following the rules is very good, but not having a 'black heart' and hopefully following the wishes of the original authors intent is better.

If it turns out to be wrong, well it was done with the best intentions for the flightgear community.

Simon

[D-ECHO]

Removed out of this toxic forum.

[D-ECHO]

Removed out of this toxic forum.

[bomber]

It's quite clear it says 'should be'...... not maybe.

Can I ask why you take the risk ?

You make it clear that you think what FGmembers has done is illegal but I'm sure you believe that what you do in taking a non licenced file from one plane and using it in another is just common sense that it's GPL.....

If you're not going follow the rules and can apply common sense, what gives you the right to say others can't, and accuse their act of being illegal ?

[D-ECHO]

Removed out of this toxic forum.

[IAHM-COL]

I would surely recomend Benedict (D-ECHO) to investigate all these claims with at least 2 lawyers: One specializing in copyright law, and FOSS practices, to get informed of important factual information, and a second one, to be used as a personal lawyer, that can give him important guidance in personal behavior.

In this thread there are indeed actions that can be alleged criminal activity, in nature:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

[D-ECHO]

That's amazing.

Faced with the question whether their questions are illegal, the only "response" the FGMEMBERS owner's can come up is attacking back. And they can't even spell a name right. I'm done with this incredibly toxic and shitty place.

[bomber]

I'm sorry you found anything I wrote toxic..... Was just questioning the logic.

[D-ECHO]

Sorry bomber, I was not clear enough. While I don't agree with your opinion, I have no problem with the way you expressed it and would consider it friendly and appropriate. The only inappropriate ("toxic") reaction was, in my opinion, Israel's.