ECML merge - out now

[jpilborough]

Back to the route itself....

anybody else got it and willing to post a review?

Nope as I am not paying some guy a subscription to his website to access free content

Sorry if this a stupid question, but I am baffled by all this anger, and repeated complaints about "paying for freeware content". Am I understanding the situation wrong?

If an author releases content that was previously free, but you now must pay for access to it then it is no longer freeware, but that doesn't make it evil or wrong, it just means things have changed. The author always has the choice under what terms they wish to release their work, and they can change it at any time. It's not a common situation to go from less restrictive to more restrictive distribution, but it happens, both with software and with train simulator content.

Would you also refuse to buy the Just Trains "Scottish East Coast Mainline" on the grounds that it was previously freeware(I believe)?

[Devon91]

Unless I'm mistaken the SECML route was still the same person that had made it originally,so he benefited financially directly from it (isn't he still active on Facebook under the same name?),totally different matter,surely?

[gptech]

jp, whilst the choice of "freeware or payware" is one the author can make, in this case of this offering that decision has been made by someone other than the author. That is effectively saying "I can, and will, take any item of freeware, make even the tiniest change to it and it becomes all my own work which I can then charge for"

[IronBidder]

jp, whilst the choice of "freeware or payware" is one the author can make, in this case of this offering that decision has been made by someone other than the author. That is effectively saying "I can, and will, take any item of freeware, make even the tiniest change to it and it becomes all my own work which I can then charge for"

Except by making something freeware/public domain the author(s) are effectively renouncing ownership of it. I know you may say "but there were conditons attached", but I doubt they are enforcable in any practical way.

Put something in the public domain and effectively it's your gift to society.

[alanch]

jp, whilst the choice of "freeware or payware" is one the author can make, in this case of this offering that decision has been made by someone other than the author. That is effectively saying "I can, and will, take any item of freeware, make even the tiniest change to it and it becomes all my own work which I can then charge for"

Except by making something freeware/public domain the author(s) are effectively renouncing ownership of it. I know you may say "but there were conditons attached", but I doubt they are enforcable in any practical way.

Put something in the public domain and effectively it's your gift to society.

I think you really need to check the law on that - the author does retain ownership unless it is explicitly given into the public domain, and the majority of freeware does not do that. For example, this was packaged in the WCMLV5 distribution on UKTrainsim:

This route (WCMLv5) is Freeware and always will be.

I will take a very dim view of anyone who tries to make money from it in any way, shape or form.

You may use this route or any part of it, or any of the assets, in any freeware project, but it would be nice if you asked me first.

You may also host this route on any website with the provision that it remains freeware.
However, I would ask that you contact me before hand to check for any updates.

Have fun.

Andy
tunnelvision@live.com

[IronBidder]

I think you really need to check the law on that - the author does retain ownership unless it is explicitly given into the public domain, and the majority of freeware does not do that.

The problem is the practicality of enforcement The commercial value doesn't justify litigation, and I suspect you'd have a job persuading a court to reestablish rights to something your previous actions showed you didn't want to effectively control.

[rfletcher72]

and I suspect you'd have a job persuading a court to reestablish rights

Are you or others willing to take that risk?

[AndiS]

jp, whilst the choice of "freeware or payware" is one the author can make, in this case of this offering that decision has been made by someone other than the author. That is effectively saying "I can, and will, take any item of freeware, make even the tiniest change to it and it becomes all my own work which I can then charge for"

I think we all need to go and get some facts, or someone has to go and bring them here.

1) Is the stuff you get for the subscription really the whole payware stuff? I would assume it is just the tracks, for all routes so merged.

But just like with reskins, you will need the base products.

Then it is not a distribution of freeware or payware, but the distribution of a derived product that complements the original products. For this you need ask the authors for sure, but you are not turning freeware into payware if you produce a paid-for complement to a freeware item.

2) Are we sure that the authors have not all agreed? I cannot think of a situation where someone puts work into such a project without first establishing the consent of all those who have any right to veto, thereby voiding his effort.

It is true that enforcement is a difficult issue, but this holds for both sides. If I ever were to produce anything based on some other person's work, how can I be sure the he is not a lawyer, or friend or relative of competent lawyer. Or a law student who explores the issue as part of their homework.

I guess I would first have them sign that they will not charge anything afterwards.

[chrisonline]

I think you really need to check the law on that - the author does retain ownership unless it is explicitly given into the public domain, and the majority of freeware does not do that.

The problem is the practicality of enforcement The commercial value doesn't justify litigation, and I suspect you'd have a job persuading a court to reestablish rights to something your previous actions showed you didn't want to effectively control.

Are you implying that if litigation is not a worthwhile proposition, then no one should worry about ignoring the developer's rights? This isn't about whether litigating is wothwhile or even enforceable, but the fact that a developer retains rights and a "community" such as ours - even self-policed - should resepct that.

[gptech]

AndiS.... can I take it you missed Darre Porter's comments about it?

[IronBidder]

Are you implying that if litigation is not a worthwhile proposition, then no one should worry about ignoring the developer's rights? This isn't about whether litigating is wothwhile or even enforceable, but the fact that a developer retains rights and a "community" such as ours - even self-policed - should resepct that.

No, I'm not saying that just because you can get away with something it's right.

What I'm suggesting is that freeware developers/contributors have maybe got to be less possessive of their work. What motivates people to provide freeware? Generosity? Recognition? The hope of reciprocation by others? Development of the hobby for the greater good? Probably all of them to a degree, but all of them require letting go and allowing the community to make of their labours what they will. So if somebody puts a lot of time and money to using that freeware to develop a revenue stream that allows free fast hosting of material and provides some structure and reward for focused development, is that such a bad thing? Is it automatically a net loss to the community? Is it not in fact still a part of community based development, which is about experimenting, building on the work of others, and to innovate and to move things on?

I don't know AT from Adam, but from his videos he seems committed to developing the hobby of Train Simulation, so as I said before, let's pause and wait a bit to see where this goes.

[Yamsi]

As a subscriber to ATS & a very happy downloader of the ECMLMerge I am reading the comments on here as impartially as I may.

I also view when time permits the twice weekly Twitch streams Alan Thomsom holds.
I don't know what personal views Alan Thomson holds about UKTS but not once has he critisised it. Not once has he made comments he cannot substantiate.
May be what is said on here has not reached his ears.

I have as I say the ECMLMerge & this is the file brakedown of what you get :-

1 zip file @ 416,773Kb (1.22 GB uncompressed)

ECMLMerge-v1.0 contains...
1 Assets file containing 3 folders. 1 x ECML @ 107KB; 1 X RSC @ 1.33 MB & 1x SP202D @ 13.3MB
1 Contents file 1.2GB

I have not driven north of Peterborough on the merged route yet, as I am doing other stuff, but What I have driven loads well (resonable quickly), looks good & has reasonable frame rates. I've not compared what I have driven with the ECMLS yet, but If he is filling a need in the market he will be a success. It's a case of 'watch this space'. I don't think he's done yet.

Yamsi

[class377fcc12]

ECMLMerge-v1.0 contains...
1 Assets file containing 3 folders. 1 x ECML @ 107KB; 1 X RSC @ 1.33 MB & 1x SP202D @ 13.3MB
1 Contents file 1.2GB

What's in the RSC folder then? I can't say I've got the route and have little intention to do so unfortunately.

[Yamsi]

What's in the RSC folder then?

The RSC folder contains 1 folder - 'ECMLS', which contains 1 'scenery' folder, which contains 1 'Misc' folder, in which there are 1 x support_post.bin & support_post.GeoPcDx files & a 'textures' folder containing a'TM_signal.TgPcDx' texture.

Further to what as been said & 'assumed' above see here

This video is hosted by YouTube, a site which is outside of the editorial control of UKTrainSim and as such Parental Control is strongly advised.
To view the video, click on the PLAY button.
If you click anywhere else on this video, you will be taken to a YouTube page, where you may find yourself subjected to content that you feel is offensive.
If you feel THIS video is inappropriate, please report it to a moderator immediately for prompt action. and you want to be at 37 minutes in.

Yamsi

[class377fcc12]

What's in the RSC folder then?

The RSC folder contains 1 folder - 'ECMLS', which contains 1 'scenery' folder, which contains 1 'Misc' folder, in which there are 1 x support_post.bin & support_post.GeoPcDx files & a 'textures' folder containing a'TM_signal.TgPcDx' texture.

Further to what as been said & 'assumed' above see here

This video is hosted by YouTube, a site which is outside of the editorial control of UKTrainSim and as such Parental Control is strongly advised.
To view the video, click on the PLAY button.
If you click anywhere else on this video, you will be taken to a YouTube page, where you may find yourself subjected to content that you feel is offensive.
If you feel THIS video is inappropriate, please report it to a moderator immediately for prompt action. and you want to be at 37 minutes in.

Yamsi

I don't think anyone ever assumed that they'd be bundling other developers assets, but if there's a Geo file in there it doesn't look great for them...