General Shaun Clarke Mods....Updates

[Mascot]

Ethical arguments aside, I'm grateful for ALL your work in keeping this awesome hobby fresh and exciting. But never lose sight that it is just a game, and we're all in this for the fun and enjoyment.

My wording here was a little clumsy, so just to clarify: my comment was directed at almost all Assetto Corsa modders. I'm totally blown away by scratch-built content created purely for the love of it, and I wish I had the skills, talent and patience to do this myself. It must be an incredibly rewarding experience seeing people enjoy what you've created and shared. At the other end of the scale, shameless car and track rips let me drive the TVR Sagaris around Mount Panorama in VR, and some of my very favourite cars and tracks are ones that would never be allowed here at Race Department.

And of course, in the grey area between these two philosophical and ethical extremes are the tweaked cars or ones that borrow parts or setups from official content. And let's not forget the blatant copies of licenced cars and tracks hidden behind paywalls that cleverly skirt around copyright issues via subtle changes to naming conventions, skins and logos, even though it's pretty much expected that a separate download will appear within hours converting them all to official branding.

Like I said in my earlier message: ethical arguments aside. I personally try not to get too hung on the complex moral turpitude because let's face it, it's unlikely there would ever have been a modding scene if all IP was respected to the very letter of the law. And at the end of the day I like new content. A lot of us turn a blind eye when it suits us, don't we?

 

[Kyuubeey]

@Mascot

You know, sim racing games and racing games in general don't really *need* to license any car names or anything. From what I understand they mainly just *feel* they have to, but not really legally. A precaution if you will: you can still sue for whatever reason.

So if they're not representing the brand officially but still make an accurate representation of a car and sell it, for me, it's okay really. Should be legally as well, even if they were using the brand name. Any lawyers here can correct.

 

[Ghoults]

This discussion that is going on here gives very mixed feelings for me. On one hand I don't approve rips but at the same I don't really blame anyone. If you are not 3d modeller it can be difficult to check where the model really comes. There are lots of sources for rips. It is also difficult to get the right permissions at times. If the model is result of conversion of conversion of some original model (3 people) then you need permission from all 3 people as it is all of their work. Getting the permission just from the last person who touched the model is not enough unless he is the person who built it from scratch. While on paper this permission thing sounds easy there are cases where people have simply vanished or it is hard to track down the paper trail. And if it is rip originally then the people involved usually want to hide it too.

And even with best intentions things sometimes go bad. In this case that seems to be the case. I don't think anybody here is accusing shaun of doing it on purpose or hiding anything. But that fact of the matter is originally someone likely made that model (or parts of it) and sold it to sms for pcars2. Either the model is owned and created by sms or the original creator simply sold it to be used for pcars. Either way that person must not be happy seeing his model floating in the internet and others claiming ownership of his work. I'm sure shaun would not be happy if this same thing happened to himself either. How would he feel about "couple of tris" - or couple of lines of physics? Not good. Nobody does.

It sucks but there are only couple ways to make it right. Fix the model and remove the ripped parts of it. Try to find the original creator of the model and if it is an individual modeller try to work a deal with him. If that person or entity is sms then that's not going to work out probably. Or just kill it (at least from rd). It is super sad as lots of work has gone into it but it is really the right thing to do if you respect the person who made the model originally. If you want you can keep sharing it outside of rd if that is really what you want to do. I am at least personally not accusing of shaun of doing anything wrong but this thing needs to be fixed.

3d modellers I feel are the most valuable people in modding as without them you can't really make any content. Their portion of the work is the biggest slice of any car or track mod and I think the models they create need to be protected as they are their property they are willing to share with us. Most of the time totally free. If we allow some grey areas of rips we will see the most talented 3d modellers leaving this hobby very quickly and everybody loses. We will see businesses take more harder lines and things become more complicated and difficult. While there is nothing wrong making a model of anything and putting it in internet there are lots of ways to make that harder for modders if we don't keep our own home clean.

 

[Kyuubeey]

@Ghoults

Yeah, what I think. The de-valuing of, often high quality AND free work, and the resulting morale hit is the biggest issue. Ripping a model won't exactly lose anyone sales or their job, but it does in some way disrespect their work. On the other hand, perhaps the original modelers don't actually care...

 

[SunBro]

I've just caught up on the discussion and i just love love love how he managed to evade addressing the gt3 having stolen parts in the model. Very crafty.

Also, i want to agree with almost anything @garyjpaterson and @mclarenf1papa says in this thread

 

[Kyuubeey]

gt3 having stolen parts in the model.

Don't you know? Just because pros are hacks and steal eachothers' work means it's okay for us modders too.

* THIS POST WAS AN ACT OF SATIRE, THE AUTHOR IS FULLY AWARE OF THE MORAL ISSUES WITH STEALING WORK, AND THE DIFFICULT STATE OF WORKING IN THE 3D PRODUCTION WORLD DUE TO IMPOSSIBLE DEADLINES

 

[Peter Kerényi]

My wording here was a little clumsy, so just to clarify: my comment was directed at almost all Assetto Corsa modders. I'm totally blown away by scratch-built content created purely for the love of it, and I wish I had the skills, talent and patience to do this myself. It must be an incredibly rewarding experience seeing people enjoy what you've created and shared. At the other end of the scale, shameless car and track rips let me drive the TVR Sagaris around Mount Panorama in VR, and some of my very favourite cars and tracks are ones that would never be allowed here at Race Department.

And of course, in the grey area between these two philosophical and ethical extremes are the tweaked cars or ones that borrow parts or setups from official content. And let's not forget the blatant copies of licenced cars and tracks hidden behind paywalls that cleverly skirt around copyright issues via subtle changes to naming conventions, skins and logos, even though it's pretty much expected that a separate download will appear within hours converting them all to official branding.

Like I said in my earlier message: ethical arguments aside. I personally try not to get too hung on the complex moral turpitude because let's face it, it's unlikely there would ever have been a modding scene if all IP was respected to the very letter of the law. And at the end of the day I like new content. A lot of us turn a blind eye when it suits us, don't we?

Hey, I wanted to write something similar, but now I don't have to. Completely agreed. Although like 99% of non-scratch built mods do not meet my quality expectations, therefore do not stay installed, I am primarily here to have fun. That's why I visit many forums. I think the problem here is that the RD core AC modding community wants this place to be clean of any "illegal" mods. If I were Shaun I would simply move my forum HQ, to where his work would be much more appreciated.

If I think myself into the situation of modellers, I understand their point. If I think myself into the situation of Shaun, I also understand his point. I, myself, just want to have fun with quality content regardless of their origin.

Regarding the data vs. driver part, as a physicist, I understand those who prefer data, on the other hand I also understand a more empirical approach, because there are just so many variables that cannot be simulated in real time - and some also have negligible effect on the overall result. As a simracer, if I had to choose between a data-based and driver-based car, I would choose the former. But if there is only one and doesn't feel out of place, I can live with that. There are just so many cars - making them all in high quality would require cloning of the modders in this community a couple of times.

If anybody wants to make a nuclear-powered car, feel free to contact me with some physics questions.

 

[Ryno917]

@Mascot

You know, sim racing games and racing games in general don't really *need* to license any car names or anything. From what I understand they mainly just *feel* they have to, but not really legally. A precaution if you will: you can still sue for whatever reason.

Incorrect, actually. The manufacturers own the IP for their branding, vehicle branding and vehicle designs themselves. Legally speaking a license is required to reproduce any/all of the above in a video game. Those paymods with altered names are technically illegal. Free mods of real cars are technically illegal, scratch made or not, too. Like with all copyright law, though, it's up to the rights holder to initiate legal action to 'protect' their IP. It's also not criminal law, it's not a crime, it's a civil matter. Most don't give a damn about video game mods, but there have been legal issues in the past; both for paid and free mods. Most mods get a free-pass because brands know how important enthusiasts are to their bottom line, but that by no means makes them all safe.

Agree with RD's policies or not, it's still an arbitrary line in the sand from a legal perspective. Unless your mod is all fictional content, it isn't technically legal in most major western countries. It is interesting to note, though, that a software developer has a lot less legal swing than a car manufacturer, so it's not that they're worried about legal action, probably. Honestly, that ruling here is based more on major sim racing community conventions than any actual legal pretense.

While my opinion on ripped content isn't exactly positive, I find it very amusing how vitriolic some people are on the subject. It's genuinely amusing. Ripped content makes you the devil, but blatant IP infringement is totally ok.

 

[After_Midnight]

I've just caught up on the discussion and i just love love love how he managed to evade addressing the gt3 having stolen parts in the model. Very crafty.

You're talking about Shaun?

 

[Kyuubeey]

Ripped content makes you the devil, but blatant IP infringement is totally ok.

I think it's more a case of the individual work being stolen than the IP itself. If you model the likeness of a vehicle yourself, you're *technically* ripping off their design, but that is okay while stealing someone else's bootleg is not okay.

 

[Peter Kerényi]

I think it's more a case of the individual work being stolen than the IP itself. If you model the likeness of a vehicle yourself, you're *technically* ripping off their design, but that is okay while stealing someone else's bootleg is not okay.

From a content creator's perspective, "stealing" (I'd rather call it copying) content looks worse. From an IP holder's perspective, it might not be the case. You, me, everybody on this forum talks about their opinions, which is closely related to their "circumstances".

Ryno (from my understanding) didn't say IP infringement is bad and using others' assets is good. He said both are incorrect technically. So the first group attacking the second is ironic from this perspective. Moreover, Shaun for example, makes no money by stealing assets, but some people do make money by doing IP infringements under the disguise of altering the content's real name and changing some details like logos, regardless of making those assets from scratch. Now, RD drew a line for what they consider legal and illegal by their ToS. They openly support and endorse the paid real content with fake names (and that's okay), while ripped content is on the other side of that line (that's also understandable). But if we want to take it seriously, let's check all the content and don't allow such content being shown in the video section, etc. Talking about this while in the main page video sidebar you openly see a ripped Fiorano from FVA in AC with a download link. (But that takes a lot of manpower to control).

Don't take me wrong, I love the high quality paid content modding teams have been making, and I buy most. I support them and I want them to continue. They are obviously higher quality than any ripped content and I prefer them. But they can only do so much. If we had a Ginetta from RSS or else, we wouldn't have this conversation.

 

[Ryno917]

From a content creator's perspective, "stealing" (I'd rather call it copying) content looks worse. From an IP holder's perspective, it might not be the case. You, me, everybody on this forum talks about their opinions, which is closely related to their "circumstances".

Ryno (from my understanding) didn't say IP infringement is bad and using others' assets is good. He said both are incorrect technically. So the first group attacking the second is ironic from this perspective. Moreover, Shaun for example, makes no money by stealing assets, but some people do make money by doing IP infringements under the disguise of altering the content's real name and changing some details like logos, regardless of making those assets from scratch. Now, RD drew a line for what they consider legal and illegal by their ToS.

[snip]

Precisely. My last sentence was a sarcastic rip on the general ideology in the community. For what it's worth I'm not bashing anyone with said ideology - hey, I'm in the community using literal Gigabytes of said IP infringing mods, too. Just putting the point out there. If you're a member of the sim racing community, your hands are not clean of the legal grey areas either, regardless of what you tell yourself or what mud you sling at other people.

Shaun does a great job with his physics. Others do a great job with their 3D models. Legally speaking, those making the models are actually in deeper water if the rights holders chose to pursue action, but they get a free pass because the larger sim racing community has basically said what it will and will not tolerate.

We're all human (I'm assuming, anyways ) and none of us are immune from hypocrisy.

 

[Kyuubeey]

To me, modeling a brand's car and presenting it in a positive light is just free, high quality advertising for the brand. I don't see why they'd especially care, unless you're making money and associating yourself with their brand.

 

[Ryno917]

To me, modeling a brand's car and presenting it in a positive light is just free, high quality advertising for the brand. I don't see why they'd especially care, unless you're making money and associating yourself with their brand.

With copyright law, if you choose to go after someone but there's a long and established history of you allowing said IP to be used without license you can lose a case. By not enforcing your copyright claims you run the risk of losing a claim where there is real harm. No manufacturer can honestly believe that a mod for a racing sim can negatively affect their bottom line in general, but they may be inclined to to enforce it if they feel like it could negatively impact future cases.

Similarly, when a commercial entity (like, say, Kunos) says they want to license their wares for a sim, if the manufacturer has a history of allowing public mods without license, that could be used against them to try to lower licensing costs.

Finally, I can't recall all the specifics of the situation (and much of it is private by law, I'm sure) I believe Enduracers was forced to halt their Porsche Supercup mod several years ago, under copyright claims from Porsche. I believe it turned out that Porsche was having their own game made with the car and so they probably wanted to keep the mod from releasing and possibly diluting sales of the game they were having made (they specifically commissioned the game, it wasn't simple another game that had a license to use their cars). I might have some of that wrong, but that's how I recall the situation - whether or not the above is accurate in this specific case, it's a potential reason for a manufacturer trying to enforce their copyright.

Ultimately IP is the most important asset a company has. That's why we have patents and why copyright law exists at all; if companies had no legal recourse to protect themselves they would have no reason to spend literal millions or billions of dollars developing new technologies. Especially at this day in age when copying something else is so 'easy,' markets are mostly global and manufacturing tech has advanced to the point that simply building a car isn't enough to make money, it's even more important to protect your IP.

When a manufacturer issues a license for a reproduction of their IP, they still retain control over how that IP is used. That's why, for instance, you can't put custom liveries on the McLarens in Project CARS - McLaren said no. For whatever reason that only applied to pCARS and not to AC or iRacing, but it's still within their right as the IP owner to do so. A free, unlicensed, mod is out of their hands - there's been no agreement to the usage of the IP or how it is displayed or used.

 

[garyjpaterson]

Whats interesting to me is its been almost a full week since images clearly depicting the infringement, and RD seems quite happy with it on their site.
I've seen other mods containing far smaller infringements been removed within hours, without even picture proof being presented.

Maybe just an especially busy week for RD staff.

 

[Ryno917]

Whats interesting to me is its been almost a full week since images clearly depicting the infringement, and RD seems quite happy with it on their site.
I've seen other mods containing far smaller infringements been removed within hours, without even picture proof being presented.

Maybe just an especially busy week for RD staff.

If it hasn't been explicitly reported they probably won't look at it; there might not even be an RD moderator reading this thread at all.

 

[garyjpaterson]

If it hasn't been explicitly reported they probably won't look at it; there might not even be an RD moderator reading this thread at all.

It has been.

 

[Peter Kerényi]

To me, modeling a brand's car and presenting it in a positive light is just free, high quality advertising for the brand. I don't see why they'd especially care, unless you're making money and associating yourself with their brand.

To you... Because you relate to that group. Let's say Porsche really advertises one of their new cars to be superior to let's say a Ferrari and indeed it is in real life. A great modding team makes a top notch free model, sounds and physics for that car, and it can turn out that in AC that certain Ferrari is faster than the Porsche (because cars aren't developed by lap times, etc.). And videos of such races, comparisons, reviews of the virtual car get on YouTube, etc. That's why they'd possibly care. It's their IP and want to protect it. It's not that simple. I might be using my fantasy a lot here, but still. (IIRC there was a story that the McLaren P1 couldn't open its DRS fully on Monza in AC, so the LaFerrari was faster... coincidence? Could be.)

I believe Enduracers was forced to halt their Porsche Supercup mod several years ago, under copyright claims from Porsche. I believe it turned out that Porsche was having their own game made with the car and so they probably wanted to keep the mod from releasing and possibly diluting sales of the game they were having made (they specifically commissioned the game, it wasn't simple another game that had a license to use their cars).

Not a coincidence that there is a free "Flat 6" mod for rF2 from them, and I think not a coincidence that the official AC forums stopped the modding sections before announcing the Porsche license.