LFLL (Lyon Saint Exupery) Scenery

[daweed]

And I think that having scenery at one place rather than all over the place. Once TerraGit comes to full glory all that will be solved.
SHM

I imagine that u are talking about FG Member Scenery repo ... so if i understand u to keep hand on my own piece, i have to join this community..

if this is not forcing me .... what it is ...

Always don't know what is TerraGit and why it should solved this problem ..

[Octal450]

@daweed

again, your porints are valid, HOWEVER:

YOU CHOSE TO MAKE IT GPL, YOU ALLOWED ISRAEL TO FORK IT, AND YOU CAN'T LEGALLY TELL HIM NOT TO. YOU AGREED TO THE GPL WITHOUT READING IT, THAT IS YOUR PROBLEM.

sorry to sound harsh, but just "let it die".

Maybe someone should lock this thread, its not going anywhere.

[daweed]

@daweed

again, your porints are valid, HOWEVER:

YOU CHOSE TO MAKE IT GPL, YOU ALLOWED ISRAEL TO FORK IT, AND YOU CAN'T LEGALLY TELL HIM NOT TO. YOU AGREED TO THE GPL WITHOUT READING IT, THAT IS YOUR PROBLEM.

sorry to sound harsh, but just "let it die".

Maybe someone should lock this thread, its not going anywhere.

so what do you propose ?? just leave, my work for other profit ? for this team can at last say "we made it" ..

Could u just a minute stopping hiding u behind the law, and realise that there is human and work behind the scenery

But right, lock here if u want, now i have loose all my work what can i do

[IAHM-COL]

@it0uchpods.
Locking a thread as an unilateral decision, or prevent daweed to present his posture is unelegant and Curtisian in principle. And againsts the fundamentals of our Free Speech Forum.
Daweed is welcome to continue communicating with us a defense of his posture and a request of his needs; Communication is key to conflict resolution. And thus, administration should not use a bias to segregate voices -- even those dissident.


@Daweed.
I understand that you are upset because we fork without asking. We have been telling you in all possible words that asking before fork is not something you are expecting when you add a GPL notice. A GPL notice is a communication to the world that you are OK with anyone (even /Israel/) to fork, (copy), modify and redistribute (FGMEMBERS). Not only (I) can do it. You said, anyone can.
You are expecting people to only use the rights you grant them Only if they had the courtesy of re-asking permission. That is Self-entitled. Also, weird, because you can't deny permission to use the GPL rights you granted on a person/by/person - group/by/group basis.

That is where we are disagreeing.

You think that (1) I should have asked you or (2) that it was impollite not to have asked.
Both are far from the true.

No-one is hidding behind the law. The law is the law. Our behavior should allign with it. Any other attitude is unlawful.

[Octal450]

@Israel

Right I forgot I'm on the free speech forum and not the "YOU ONLY SAY WHAT I ALLOW' forum.

[jwocky]

Daweed, nobody said, any of us made that scenery. The comments in the head of the file say clearly "Daweed". Your baseless accusation therefore is slander, which is, opposite to your "situation-adapted ethics" in reading the GPL a fact that could stand in a court. So, from claiming a right, you waived before, you talked yourself into an actual legal problem here.

On the other side, as you several times stressed, you have no idea what TerraGIT does. Well, let me tell then: It allows users to load sceneries without being suddenly stuck on TerraSync problems or without waiting a week till TerraMaster has pulled the world from TerraSync. The complete updates for Japan for example was a thing of about two minutes on my computer. So, TerraGIT is a way for the users to get scenery quick, effective and reliable. You as developer of scenery should be happy that your work can be published to users unless you think, your work is so priceless, only a handful of chosen deserve to use it and nor just every FG user.

The third point is your claim, you would be forced to join this team. Admittedly, joining it has advantages, but if you don't want, nobody forces you to do anything but to stick with the license you have chosen.

The fourth point, you want to consider is TerraSync. Well, you have to make your scenery GPL to get into TerraSync. Which means, TerraSync has the right to distribute it to everybody who connects to it. TerraGIT in this is nothing else but someone who connected to it. If you want to pull back on GPL, you have to pull back from TerraSync, respectively argue with the maintainers there. However, I want to make sure, that you understand that other groups are maybe not so patient as we are with your repeated slanders and baseless accusations.

Of course, you could be smart and just let it die ... because all you can do at this point is either to change the license which is impossible retroactively but makes sure, you can't distribute it via TerraSync either, which in consequence means, you can't distribute it at all because you blocked both distribution channels, or you can just leave it GPL and well, then it's GPL and everybody can fork, modify, distribute as far as it's covered by GPL.

J.

[IAHM-COL]

On the positive side of it, Daweed already agreed he understands the situation, restored his repo:
https://github.com/daweed38/LFLL

And invited me to refork.
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-SCENERY/LFLL


I think, most of us do understand the concern he expressed that "lack of recognition" if your work is also in FGMEMBERS. Like instead of looking for "Daweed" people is looking for FGMEMBERS.
I told him his copyright notice remains unchanged, and we will not change it. (except we say, we add to it, thus we add new editors, not remove past ones)
Also if things are added we are happy to let him know.

Overall, he is just learning what the GPL code bounds him to. What it bounds us too. And the situation with all the Forum's heat makes people wary. That's all. I think we can say this is a bump jumped up. (right Daweed?)

IH-COL

[Lydiot]

@daweed

again, your porints are valid, HOWEVER:

YOU CHOSE TO MAKE IT GPL, YOU ALLOWED ISRAEL TO FORK IT, AND YOU CAN'T LEGALLY TELL HIM NOT TO. YOU AGREED TO THE GPL WITHOUT READING IT, THAT IS YOUR PROBLEM.

sorry to sound harsh, but just "let it die".

Maybe someone should lock this thread, its not going anywhere.

so what do you propose ?? just leave, my work for other profit ? for this team can at last say "we made it" ..

Could u just a minute stopping hiding u behind the law, and realise that there is human and work behind the scenery

I think you should consider scale for a second. When an artist attaches a license to a work then often there is a certain "scale" involved. So, for example, if Beyonce gives her record label the license to copy, distribute and sell her albums then that will involve MANY individual instances of manufacture, distribution and sales. The power of having a license for art is being able to attach one license which then covers MANY transactions and events.

What you are objecting to in this thread is potentially unreasonable and impractical. You already handed out your work using a license that allowed for a certain treatment of it, and you're now upset that people didn't specifically ask for the permission you already gave by attaching the license. So, you should ask yourself the following:

How many times in the last decade have you contacted someone who holds the license and rights to a work of art to ask if they really meant what the license said? Have you done it for video games? For music? For television content? For print media? The list goes on and on.

The practical reality of all of this is that we have licenses to protect creators as well as the value of art within a capitalist system. They exist so we don't have to endlessly negotiate individually during every single transaction.

But right, lock here if u want, now i have loose all my work what can i do

You didn't lose anything. You still have your work. If you wanted to sell it for profit then you indeed screwed yourself by attaching a license that gave people permission to use, change and distribute it without asking further permission.

But that just leads to another point: I really really don't see the point in protecting "property" in an open-source and non-profit collaborative environment such as this one. If I created an airport for FG, why would I want to "lock" users out of it? Wouldn't I want everyone to download and use it? Isn't that the greatest compliment there is?

Why is this a big deal to you?

[jwocky]

Ooookaaaaayyy, here comes another subject in ... recognition ... well, maybe I'm not the guy who should talk about it, I forgot to put myself as author in several planes (hey, I'm not the only one, it happened occasionally to Dave Culp too). However, it seems to be a concern for many others, be it for scenery authors or plane devs.
So, for planes we have an easy solution, write the names on the splash screens. For sceneries, it's more difficult, they have no splash screens, but maybe scenery authors can write their names on a hangar or something? Something, someone actually sees when he is there in FG?

[IAHM-COL]

I forgot to put myself as author in several planes (hey, I'm not the only one, it happened occasionally to Dave Culp too).

I remember.
Forgetting to place a name is less of an issue than forgetting to stamp the license. This has happend too (right Heiko?)

However, it seems to be a concern for many others, be it for scenery authors or plane devs.
So, for planes we have an easy solution, write the names on the splash screens. For sceneries, it's more difficult, they have no splash screens, but maybe scenery authors can write their names on a hangar or something? Something, someone actually sees when he is there in FG?

I've done that.
But if something terrasync is more obscure of "authors" and "recognition" than FGMEMBERS is. My 4 cents.