FLIGHT DECK ANAHEIM
-
I think all we should be proud of BMS Falcon 4 independient the version each one have, because the best thing of it is that we dont need to go to ANAHEIM to the flight simulation center “FLIGHT DECK” to combat in the sky, because guess what their main Flight simulator is falcon 4 bms. the intention is to show how far Falcon 4 bms has gone, they could use DCS world but basicaly it runs on internet and the requirements to run it are too high. i know maybe there are people that prefer DCS over Falcon 4 by its graphics or many other reasons unfortunately that is the tendency these days, ultimate graphics over everything else. but like an oldman, in our times we don’t need highly realistci graphics to enjoy videogames.
-
:puke:OMG where’s my barf bag? Dafuq?
-
i know is like a bad joke fot 10 min 5 for instruction 5 for a dogfight, anyway my point is that is good etnouth to set up a combat fligh center, and the last time i check top 10’s it is was on the first 3 of the top among il2 and dcs, in some dcs didnt apear
-
So, do these people earn money to give access to a free sim?
-
So, do these people earn money to give access to a free sim?
They are still running 4.32 IIRC, which they have a contract for.
-
They are still running 4.32 IIRC, which they have a contract for.
Oh interesting. I thought there was nothing legal under 4.33.1.
-
Would it be 4.33 licence prohibit any commercial usage?
-
-
BTW sometimes I wonder if it would be helpful if BMS/Tommo agreement would allow software as service type of deals. In a sense that BMS is still free but if one wants to use it for commercial/educational purpose, he’s supposed to support BMS development like provide patches, new models, maps etc…
This way ventures such as this would help BMS grow instead of being hunted down. -
I think i started a bit of polemic here, when i first learn about this flightdeck was in 2013 i think, by te time there weren’t any kind of agree and 4.32 was still aviable as far as i know. i dont know if there is an agree right now to use it, there is also a posibliity they might abandon Bms to use DCS because the intruduction of the F16 module, but i realy dont know.
-
There is no polemic. It is known, and illegal.
-
The legaly can be interpretate in diferent ways depending on which side is more hevy the balance, for example there is an artist that tacke photos that the people upload to the net and he transform them to look like instsgram photos and then sell them in art galleries, and by default heis the copyright owner of that photos.
-
The legaly can be interpretate in diferent ways depending on which side is more hevy the balance, for example there is an artist that tacke photos that the people upload to the net and he transform them to look like instsgram photos and then sell them in art galleries, and by default heis the copyright owner of that photos.
From direct and personal experience I can tell you that this is false. What you are talking about are Derivative Works which are by default an infringement of copyright unless explicit permission of the author of the original work is sought.
As a professional photographer I’ve dealt with this quite a few times. Or rather, the law firm that represents me has.
-
Actualy i have to agree with you TAZZ, ok yes it is an infringement, but lets place it our point of view, Flight deck start on 2008 Bms 4.32 was released on 2011 update 7 was released on 2013, after that Tommo, Inc, demand (Not in a court as i know) that BMS Forcefully need in order to instal and play a legit copy of bms, for me thats a kik in the nuts, it is like if i want to buy a new car i need to buy a Ford T even if im not going to use it, im not against copyright, i buy original stuf every time i can, and i see no problem in buy a game that may costme just a few dollars also i can be shameless and download it from pirate bay. if Tommo had wanted to demand Flightdeck they would have done that time ago. i mean if i use one or more of your photos saying that are mine or use it without permission you have all the right to demand me, but what will happen if Microsoft, apple, or any big one use the phots for ther products, you can demand them ofcourse, but how much it will cost you, asuming you will have little chance to win it, it worth it?, tommo may have the rights now, but for many year it was abondoned, if Falcon 4 were being upgated by the same company or selled to continue its development, it would not exist FreeFalcon open Falcon BMS and Allied Force. and now they hunt bms because the development to take advantage.
-
…I’m sort of shocked they aren’t using Prepar3D.
-
i mean if i use one or more of your photos saying that are mine or use it without permission you have all the right to demand me, but what will happen if Microsoft, apple, or any big one use the phots for ther products, you can demand them ofcourse, but how much it will cost you, asuming you will have little chance to win it, it worth it?
You’d be surprised. Being a big corporation doesn’t put them above the law, but they do everything in their power to make you think it does. If you look at the actual cases, most of the time they’re resolved by settling out of court, or arbitration (hence why some have started adding arbitration clauses, in some countries illegal). Once things are in court, they’re out of the corporation’s hands, no matter how huge and well paid their law department is. McDonald’s actually tried “stall the case to run the victim out of money” tactic in the hot coffee case, part of the reason they got slapped with such a huge penalty was because the judge noticed and took a dim view of it.
Sometimes, they’d put a CYA clause of a sort “all your pictures belong to us once you upload them on our platform”, but sometimes that’s illegal, too. If a corporation is screwing you over and breaking the law in doing so, then if you don’t get bullied into accepting what they give you and go to court, you can win. In Europe, you don’t even that much money, if you can pay your lawyer, the corporation will be slapped with all the legal fees if it loses.
-
maybe my example was disproportionate, obiously the big ones will not risk its public image, in that kind of thing, software is a compendium of many copyrighted material, all the games that follow from original Falcon 4 are based on it, maybe modifing the source code adding or changing features, basicaly is a kind of copyringt infrigment, but again it was abondoned for many years. in art ther is the appropriation that means change enough a copyrighted material to make it yours, its like paint a mexican mustach on the mouth of the mona lisa and say that is Steven mexican mona lisa. it it difucult to prove that in software even if is included the original rights on the credts, i dont know if flight deck has an agreement with tommo, i understan the angry of many becaus they are use 4.32 for commecial use without our permision or tommo, i wondering who will be the handsome one who demand them, we are a fan comunity not a software studio.
sorry it is in spanish (richard prince example)
-
Trying to enforce the IP is up to the IP owners. Indeed, the reason they’re usually so anal about it is that if you don’t enforce your IP rights, in many jurisdictions you lose them. I think this mostly applies to trademarks and not copyright itself, but either way, a situation like with 4.32 is a tangle that is probably not up to the BMS team to untangle.
Oh, and big company or not, it’s not about public image, but about the fact that judges, generally, don’t like people (or companies) trying to buck the law, and they’re the ones who decide cases, not attorneys. Companies don’t like the idea of being slapped with having to pay millions of dollars in damages, especially since McDonald’s was made an example of. There’s only so much weaseling you can pull off before even lawyers start to get disgusted, and unlike politicians, judges can’t be bought by lobbying.
BTW, appropriation is kind of murky, and it’s not about changing (that’s always derivative work), but about incorporating someone’s work into yours. Appropriating a painting or photo for another painting (assuming it’s not in public domain) without permission is frowned upon, but a soup company logo was ruled to be OK. Indeed, there had been cases where using a public domain object partially deprived the artist using it of copyright. Fair use in general, on which it relies on, is a US peculiarity that, while pretty great when it works, can be a legal minefield. This is why software uses explicit licenses, which express the creator’s wishes.
-
judges can’t be bought by lobbying?
that may be on the US, here in my side of the river is very common to do, our goverment is trying to change it but still common. there are companies that are very strict, and others that can be reasonable. it’s illegal but as far neither make a move, who cares we can discuss the rest of the year, and it won’t be solved the fact they are using it without permission of anyone.
-
Necroing a semi dead thread, but with good reason: I can confidently confirm for you that they are no longer running BMS and have switched to DCS and the Mirage 2000. They’ve also dumped their advanced courses and controls and ‘gone casual’ with just a free for all dogfight with whoever happens to be in the shop at the same time.