Insimenator.org
August 11, 2020, 07:50:25 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Insim's annual Donation Drive is on! Click here for info and to toss some money our way.
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 19
  Print  
Author Topic: Paysite Discussion Thread  (Read 44781 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
SolidGoldFunk
Site Santa!
*
Gender: Female
Posts: 669


View Profile WWW
« Reply #195 on: July 27, 2007, 05:32:33 pm »

I completely agree that we should have respect for the CC makers! I love to draw and I know I would be sick if I found my work posted some place else with someone else's name on it. Although, I WISH some sites weren't so strict with their rules, I do my best to follow them. I recently posted a couple of houses with content that wasn't supposed to be redistributed even though it was free... I misread the policy:smt120  I removed one of the homes for download and the other I fixed. I always go back to recheck policies to make sure that I'm not doing what the creators don't want me to do... if that makes sense.

Another thing I agree with is that it doesn't make sense for us to complain about it or try to get people to change their stance on it. Let EA do what they have to do to stop what they don't like about pay or free sites.
Logged

djslippyman
Member

Posts: 59


View Profile
« Reply #196 on: July 27, 2007, 06:19:14 pm »

Look I know Miros1 and I are very much at odds in our opinions on this issue.  While we're bound to both think the other is the ignorant party it does come to very much an opinion and the fact that we both think we are right.  I've backed up my opinions with what i see are "facts" or "proof".  Whether someone reads the same thing or even think they are valid is up to the reader.

I'm well aware that EA is the deciding factor and that they've been inactive on enforcing the issue.  Then again I've got heard people say over and over  "don't get EA involved! bad things will happen".  I think the biggest reason for EA not to get involved is that lawayers cost money and they likely won't recoup much if they go after a site (in comparison to what they would be spending).  Again, the argument is still rather moot if EA just sits still but I'm going by what they have actually written in print in the meantime.  

That said I'm sticking to my guns and my beliefs and I don't see them changing anytime soon.  As for MTS decision I still think its a win for pirates (see http://www.modthesims2.com/showthread.php?t=240944 for responses to see) but its all up to eye of the beholder. Some see it as a win for paysite meshes being banned from uploads and I can see that point of view as well. either way its a fair decision.

I still think the argument that smaller sites can't pay for costs with free hosting and free file hosting has been dismissed.  It all goes to whether its ok to charge for content or not; some are fine with it, I'm not.  I'm not spitting on CC creators even if they are paysites (except maybe the ones with terrible content) , I'm just saying I don't like their actions and attitudes on how they run their business  and I hope people continue to circumvent them and just get their material on PMBD. :punch:
Logged

Cheesy Simposium The Ultimate Guide for Poses and Animations Cheesy
PegasusDiana
Member

Posts: 2328


View Profile
« Reply #197 on: July 27, 2007, 10:04:32 pm »

Quote from: kathy;845626
You bring up a wonderful point and I wish to make my post as clear as possible to help prevent any misquoting that is bound to come from it. While there is a lot of sharing of pay content going on they, the pirates, don't share free content as it is redundant if it is free elsewheres. Pescado and 98% of the others have stood by this since day one. However there are some, who have taken it to the next level and has the attitude screw it all I will do whatever I want with your work regardless of what your terms are, free or pay. One site owner in particular has been caught doing this time after time and, from my understanding (and yes I verified by checking) is doing it yet again with content from this site.
Quote


Kathy who is doing that? We need to put a stop to that nonsense now. He/She/They aren't even crediting not only the paysites, but the freesite creators as well? That's just BS. I have never stolen anything from paysites. I have paid for everything I have gotten. I may not agree with what they are doing, but I don't want to start that stuff now, and not even know I am doing it! Nor do I wish to be getting stuff from freesite creators being disrespected either. Their things just being done with whatever someone thinks they can do with it. Now that really "P"sses me off, if I am going there and not even being given a choice in the matter. I know if I go to the booty I am not getting free stuff. I am getting stuff someone has paid for and posted, which is why I don't use the booty. I'd feel guilty and have to go pay for it. If someone is doing it and not telling people that's quite a different story. Because then they have taken away my right to choose. Plus from freesite creators as well? Uh uh. Someone please tell me who it is?
« Last Edit: July 27, 2007, 10:12:25 pm by PegasusDiana » Logged

We are each of us angels with only one wing, and we can only fly by embracing one another.
                                         -Luciano de Crescenzo
kathy
TRAITOR
Member

Posts: 14248

Rotten traitor


View Profile
« Reply #198 on: July 27, 2007, 10:17:46 pm »

Diana think about it doll... you'll know who I'm referring to.
Logged
miros1
Member

Gender: Female
Posts: 1037


In Miros We Trust


View Profile WWW
« Reply #199 on: July 27, 2007, 11:06:56 pm »

Quote from: PegasusDiana;845354
I just read an article about how much money they've been loosing and that they are going to be downgrading. I knew that was coming when they brought back the former CEO. I think I said it in an earlier post he's the clean up guy.


1) If their software wasn't so buggy, they wouldn't be losing so much money, would they?
2) If their "stuff packs" weren't also buggy and ugly to boot, well, ditto.
Logged

Rose/Miros
Webmaster of the Wooden Simolean
kathy
TRAITOR
Member

Posts: 14248

Rotten traitor


View Profile
« Reply #200 on: July 27, 2007, 11:37:34 pm »

Quote from: miros1;846024
1) If their software wasn't so buggy, they wouldn't be losing so much money, would they?
2) If their "stuff packs" weren't also buggy and ugly to boot, well, ditto.
lmao Agreed. In reality, possibly with the exception of Seasons, the last couple EP's have left much to be desired and added very little to the game play that I found appealing. Pets for example, we all know what a craptastic mess that was. Yes it introduced Pets for people but it is far too limiting as far as custom content and the ability to mold and shape these pets into something worthwild. Instead of only adding pets to the mix they should have added more for the family as well such as new interactions for children and teens. More content and less bugs. The same can be said for OFB and University as well. Nightlife's only redeeming quality was the car aspect and now that has been opened to the general public via the Ford Mustant and Ford Focus so I feel rather robbed there as well. Let's hope Bon Voyage isn't yet another disappointment.
Logged
wes_h
Member

Posts: 28


View Profile WWW
« Reply #201 on: July 27, 2007, 11:59:33 pm »

Quote from: Inge Jones;845283
My memory is a bit vague on this, but I seem to remember a maxoid mentioning once right near the beginning of Sims 2 that something like it was unusual for a commercial game to send out so much of the software in an open format and benefit the custom creators in such a way.


Valve (Half-Life) has made a business out of open formats and modding. Heck, they give away a huge chunk of the game and game engine source code right on the game CD (installation optional). They just never had as good a game idea as Will Wright did.

<* Wes *>
« Last Edit: July 28, 2007, 12:02:09 am by wes_h » Logged
SolidGoldFunk
Site Santa!
*
Gender: Female
Posts: 669


View Profile WWW
« Reply #202 on: July 28, 2007, 08:10:15 am »

The only reason I did get all EP's is because I was expecting something MUCH better! The PETS EP really was a disappointment. I don't like how you can't make certain animals more realistic! I mean, the Great Dane for example, Great Danes are HUGE! There is no way that a doberman and a Great Dane are close in size. I wanted to make my dogs and even the color pattern options were limited. I will get Bon Voyage but I hope it's worthwhile! I like the idea just like I did with the other EP's but we all know how that goes!
Logged

Chairman Greg
Member

Posts: 253



View Profile WWW
« Reply #203 on: July 28, 2007, 11:02:07 am »

Quote from: miros1;843881
How else was I supposed to get my shameless, self-serving plug in there, silly man?


:laugh:

No fair!  I can't slip in a shameless self-serving plug for my simmish pursuits because everything I've done lately is on the grup site.
Logged

CynaraBlade
Member

Posts: 696



View Profile
« Reply #204 on: July 28, 2007, 09:31:21 pm »

^Richard, perhaps you didn't read Numenor's thread about Pandora on S2C?

http://forums.sims2community.com/showthread.php?t=23345

At any rate, I'm thankful I never subscribed to Pandora. I downloaded some of Pandora's stuff from the Booty, and wasn't overly thrilled with it, so I decided to remove it from my DL folder. Stealing work from free creators and passing it off as your own, as everybody knows, is wrong regardless of whether you are putting a price tag on it or not.
Logged

:blob6:
charliex
Member

Posts: 8


View Profile
« Reply #205 on: July 31, 2007, 01:54:53 am »

I have a question/comment for those of you that feel that EA is the legal owner of any content packaged in their file format.

EA has taken a position against sites seeking pay for works distributed in their copyrighted file format.  What would your position be if EA took a stance against free sites distributing "adult" content in their copyrighted file format?

What if the question was no longer about others making money off of the format, but EA perceiving that their games image was being damaged by content they don't approve off, hypothetically?  Would you still say that EA has the right to make that call?
Logged
SolidGoldFunk
Site Santa!
*
Gender: Female
Posts: 669


View Profile WWW
« Reply #206 on: July 31, 2007, 03:01:17 am »

Quote from: charliex;850079
I have a question/comment for those of you that feel that EA is the legal owner of any content packaged in their file format.

EA has taken a position against sites seeking pay for works distributed in their copyrighted file format.  What would your position be if EA took a stance against free sites distributing "adult" content in their copyrighted file format?

What if the question was no longer about others making money off of the format, but EA perceiving that their games image was being damaged by content they don't approve off, hypothetically?  Would you still say that EA has the right to make that call?


I think if EA took that stance then the people who feel that way would have no choice but to abide by it. Just as they are abiding by the rule or law that money is not to be made off of their work (I'm assuming you're talking about insimadult). Although, I don't see how EA would think that since most of the adult content is for adults only.

Also, how would people making adult content ruin the reputation of EA? EA has games where adult content is included. Def Jam Icon is one that comes to mind off the top of my head since that's what my husband plays. They have games with violence and they give it a rating for a reason. So that the content doesn't get into the wrong hands, but it still does and I'm sure they know it. I don't think that that's a reasonable hypothetical question in the first place.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2007, 03:07:59 am by SolidGoldFunk » Logged

PegasusDiana
Member

Posts: 2328


View Profile
« Reply #207 on: July 31, 2007, 03:12:32 am »

Quote from: charliex;850079
I have a question/comment for those of you that feel that EA is the legal owner of any content packaged in their file format.

EA has taken a position against sites seeking pay for works distributed in their copyrighted file format.  What would your position be if EA took a stance against free sites distributing "adult" content in their copyrighted file format?

What if the question was no longer about others making money off of the format, but EA perceiving that their games image was being damaged by content they don't approve off, hypothetically?  Would you still say that EA has the right to make that call?


No matter what their stance is, even if they should decide to make it clear they do support paysites. I think we all should abide by their rules. We never wrote the game/we never marketed it. No one could be making a penny or any CC without it. We should not try to piggyback in on it for our own personal gain. If we want others to respect us, then we too must respect others. If EA had said we are going to give licensing agreements to those that wish to sell CC for our game. I would have said ok. But they did not. If designers had said it's ok to use our clothing designs to make money off of. I would have said ok, but they have not. If these websites that share their CAD objects for free with the whole community and do not make a dime said it's ok if we give them to you for free and you sell them. I would have said ok, but they did not. If these Poser artist that distribute their content for free so everyone can enjoy it had said you may sell it, I would have said ok, but once again they did not. Over and over on Renderosity and Daz they talk about not reselling their products, but are they being respected? No they are not. Linda/Enayla said post my skins on your models you may even use them and my eyes on paysites just please do not sell them. Was she respected? No she was not and now she is gone. She could have asked for donations and probably would have made a mint, I would have donated for anything she made. She is professional artist both offline as well as online and shared her things for free. She followed the rules of the EA contract, a legal contract she agreed too and had no problems in doing so. Eric, and the selling of Insim. Numenor, Helaene, etc...etc.
« Last Edit: July 31, 2007, 03:20:20 am by PegasusDiana » Logged

We are each of us angels with only one wing, and we can only fly by embracing one another.
                                         -Luciano de Crescenzo
kathy
TRAITOR
Member

Posts: 14248

Rotten traitor


View Profile
« Reply #208 on: July 31, 2007, 03:35:01 am »

A few months ago Eric caught someone selling the InSIM for $2.00. Pissed me off, it is worth more than that.
Logged
miros1
Member

Gender: Female
Posts: 1037


In Miros We Trust


View Profile WWW
« Reply #209 on: July 31, 2007, 04:14:16 am »

Quote from: charliex;850079
What would your position be if EA took a stance against free sites distributing "adult" content in their copyrighted file format?


Sorry, charliex!  File formats are patented, not copyrighted, and according to USPTO.org neither Maxis nor EA owns a patent to the DBPF format.  

Even owning a patent doesn't give you the "right" to control what gets put in your files.  All it does is allow you to control who can or can't write computer software to read and write files in "your" format, and charge a fee for the priviledge of writing that software if you desire.  

Example: The licensing fees from the GIF "writer" patents kept Unisys going for quite some time.  They chose not to issue licenses for "reader" programs to ensure the popularity of the format and keep the money from the licensed portion coming in.
Logged

Rose/Miros
Webmaster of the Wooden Simolean
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 19
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.092 seconds with 30 queries.
SimplePortal 2.1.1