Offering materials to BMS…
-
@A.S:
IF the author gives away the rights on his real source (3Dmax), that means not even he himself is afterwards allowed to change what HE originally created.
Why?
-
@A.S:
IF the author gives away the rights on his real source (3Dmax), that means not even he himself is afterwards allowed to change what HE originally created. Makes sense now?
A.S, where did you get this idea that BMS will deny the creator from changing his own product?? I mean where do you read that, exactly?
The idea is simple - If something goes into the BMS DB, then BMS will have full control over it, preferably along with the sources (be it 3D max or PSD for a skin…), why? so BMS will be able to make changes possibly in the future if a change is necessary (read my post above). Why do you think that this fact will deny the creator from changing his work?? if the creator wants to improve/change his model for whatever reason, he can do that and again submit it to BMS or not by his choice. The fact that BMS has the source, doesn’t mean that BMS now control the entire item, but BMS controls the item that exists in the BMS DB. If the modeler wants to improve the model, send it to other sim, sell it on the internet, it’s his right of course to do whatever he wants, it’s his stuff!! but he can’t ask BMS to remove the version that he approved to use. Clearer now?
IF BMS likes the 3D model and the derivatives of it (LOD1, 2, 3 etc) then the 3Dmax fils is unnessary or even useless for BMS, UNLESS they want to change something again.
BMS has no interest nor time to change or modify good items for no reasons. If the item is good and is included in the DB, it’ll probably stay this way forever. If at some point BMS needs to do a change (like again, for example using other format instead of LOD) then it’ll be able to do it without having to ask the creator for permission. And the creator isn’t able to suddenly come at some day and ask BMS to remove his stuff, sorry you approved it once, that ship already sailed.
-
This example is totally realistic and valid, and one of the main reasons the bms policy should follow this logic in this exact example. No dump about that.
But, considering a bit more your previous answer lets populate a bit the scenarios, the ones that might result in “issues” for the original creators.
Giving “all rights to BMS” just means that BMS can modify, change, suppress a part or totally the model or associated textures in case of needs without asking any authorization to original author.
It does not mean that original author can’t share his model to anyone else, modify it, update in a separate mod.
Harpoon offers his pyjama version1 to bms group, along with original files, 3ds/max, skin templates or even reference material. Probably this version1 is added right away to a future update for the community.
Next month Harpoon decides to update a bit some details of his Pyjama model, adding and a new high-res photorealistic skin. BMS receives this version2 and is included in a future update.
A little later some bms dev probably from the modelling department decides to update the pyjama to reduce polys as it makes heavy the pit and is dropping fps. So he works on it and creates version3 for the next update release. Policy:
@Dee-Jay:BMS can modify, change, suppress a part or totally the model or associated textures in case of needs without asking any authorization to original author
And here the issue arise.
Harpoon want to make new changes to his pyjama. He has his latest modification version2, but currently the model is in version3, which is created by someone else, without Harpoon been notified as per current policy, so harpoon doesn’t have the new raw model data (3ds/max) or core changelog to continue from there. He is just left behind, only has (will have) the new toy following upcoming public update release. So exactly here is the bug in the up to now collaboration, since he cannot continue updating his stuff for bms team or others (maybe theater creators; ). The version he currently has in his hands to work is old, outdated, and causes high fps in-sim.
The current policy does not cover the back-forth collaboration, only the “forth” -part in regards of the bms team. And although it is created to ensure it will eliminate issues with creators that “don’t have the time currently to work on updating their latest stuff”, and for issues kind of “I don’t want you to use my work again in future”, it does leave black the “back” -part collaboration with the creators that are active and have time and passion to update their stuff as will be instructed by the team.
If my example is wrong or somewhat unrealistic please correct me, but anyway ensure that bms devs should consider any possible theory that might result to unhappy issues between collaborations or “donations”.
-
In that case … in the “same logic” we shouldn’t keep BMS’s database and .dat files open and free to be modified?
Dee-Jay, personally i have no problem with “openess”. Everything i do is for FREE without even “anal” questions (see Janhas case).
But don´t expect this kind of mindset from everyone. If someone works many hours on a 3D model and offers the LOD files… don´t ask for his arm, if he gives you a hand.PS: Btw, that would defeat the whole purpose of an “open” and thus well progressing developement or “product”. Then it would be only a “pirate product” for few “elitists”.
Dee-Jay, remember this: Community dead = Sim dead (soon or later)
-
@A.S:
Arty, we here worked MONTH on the FO theaters, plus UI etc etc etc…and everything is FREE without drama and “license” and “rights” etc etc.
But i CAN understand that some 3D art designers have a different or an ownership perspective on their RAW data (3D max).IF the author gives away the rights on his real source (3Dmax), that means not even he himself is afterwards allowed to change what HE originally created. Makes sense now?
Do not forget that author is free to offer its work … or not.
This is why we prefer not to ask ppl.
IF BMS likes the 3D model and the derivatives of it (LOD1, 2, 3 etc) then the 3Dmax fils is unnessary or even useless for BMS, UNLESS they want to change something again.
This is the point. What is true today could not be true tomorrow.
-
I am sure you guys and Nizmo figure something working out. I prefer to make things less complicated, especially if there are no finacial interests or “legal” boundries involved or restricting
At the end of the day we are ALL community here…and work for the same goals and dreams….…. but he can’t ask BMS to remove the version that he approved to use. Clearer now?
That would be retarded I-Hawk.
-
@A.S:
IF the author gives away the rights on his real source (3Dmax), that means not even he himself is afterwards allowed to change what HE originally created. Makes sense now?
I’m sorry … No.
-
What would be reasonable to ask from BMS would be to give changes back to creator (3dsMAX files) in case the creator has in mind to make additions or changes to his model. That way BMS team will save time as some errors or mistakes or forgotten things will not have to be redone.
-
Harpoon want to make new changes to his pyjama. He has his latest modification version2, but currently the model is in version3, which is created by someone else, without Harpoon been notified as per current policy, so harpoon doesn’t have the new raw model data (3ds/max) or core changelog to continue from there. He is just left behind, only has (will have) the new toy following upcoming public update release. So exactly here is the bug in the up to now collaboration, since he cannot continue updating his stuff for bms team or others (maybe theater creators; ). The version he currently has in his hands to work is old, outdated, and causes high fps in-sim.
The current policy does not cover the back-forth collaboration, only the “forth” -part in regards of the bms team. And although it is created to ensure it will eliminate issues with creators that “don’t have the time currently to work on updating their latest stuff”, and for issues kind of “I don’t want you to use my work again in future”, it does leave black the “back” -part collaboration with the creators that are active and have time and passion to update their stuff as will be instructed by the team.
If my example is wrong or somewhat unrealistic please correct me, but anyway ensure that bms devs should consider any possible theory that might result to unhappy issues between collaborations or “donations”.
I see this question - I assure you that BMS folks will of course let Harpoon those latest sources with the necessary changes in such a case. And BTW BMS will always prefer the creator to modify and optimize his work, even after submission was made and used in the DB. Only in case of technical issues maybe, BMS modelers will involve and modify the item.
-
I’m sorry … No.
If a “licence” is provided, the original author still can edit his own original work. If the “rights” are given (or sold) to someone else, even the original author has no permission anymore to change anything. Commerce… .
But the truth is THIS: Once something is out on the i-net… it IS OUT there on the i-net …and we all know that
-
@A.S:
That would be retarded I-Hawk.
Not at all, again see the Janhas case as a classic example of what we will not accept anymore.
-
@A.S:
If a “licence” is provided, the original author still can edit his own original work. If the “rights” are given (or sold) to someone else, even the original author has no permission anymore to change anything. Commerce… .
Nope lack of trust…
This ain’t business m8 it’s a hobby… u see anyone making money?
-
@A.S:
If a “licence” is provided, the original author still can edit his own original work. If the “rights” are given (or sold) to someone else, even the original author has no permission anymore to change anything. Commerce… .
Even in commercial case, I don’t see how someone with the sources will not be able to modify his own work. If he isn’t the creator how can he have the sources anyway??
Bug again you think too much. Reasons are simple:
1. We don’t want a case like happened in the past with the F-16 pit that we didn’t had the 3DMax sources for it.
2. Cure possible future “Janhas” case.That’s it.
-
Not at all, again see the Janhas case as a classic example of what we will not accept anymore.
You didn´t understand. If someone gives you the permission to use his work and then later denies that permission - THAT is retarded imo.
PS: I don´t think to much, but i am realistic. Look, if i make a 3D model… NO questions whatsoever…take it…use it …change it… sleep with it …i dont care… but not everyone thinks like that.
This is why i think there is a misunderstanding between BMS and Nizmo … at least it feels that way reading (listening) to both parties.
-
Nope lack of trust…
This ain’t business m8 it’s a hobby… u see anyone making money?
Arty… just please read the context before replying “empty” like that. Please read the thread slow again and you will realize, that for ME it NOT BUSSINESS.
-
So …
Since it looks like we are all totally dumb ans stupid… it seems the best would be :_**BMS officially refuse any kind of external materials and will not accept any kind of contribution any more. Of course, since any BMS member could, one day, be a former member, we won’t accept any contribution from any active BMS member either.
For safety and to avoid any futures problems, we have decided to lock the database and throw the key into the ocean, and will kill all the BMS coders after the next release.**_
Guys … you are making things a bit too much complicated.
Yes … there is high chance that problems will occur one day with the future BMS members/manager (maybe some of you guys!?) once the current members will be old and retired.
But as we do every day here … they will have to deal with it and find their own solutions just like we are trying to do.
Just remember this:
You want to contribute … you can. But it is for free and with a full handover to BMS.
End.
Nothings more to consider I think.
-
@A.S:
PS: I don´t think to much, but i am realistic. Look, if i make a 3D model… NO questions whatsoever…take it…use it …change it… sleep with it …i dont care… but not everyone thinks like that.
So … those ppl should not offer their work to BMS then.
-
Dee-Jay …. relax… you are getting this totally from the wrong end.
You want to contribute … you can. But it is for free and with a full handover to BMS.
Agree (full LOD, not full 3Dmax). As i said… if someone gives you a “hand” for free, don´t rip out his “arm”.
I personally would give you the 3Dmax files, but if Nizmo has a problem with it, but still wants to share the LODs… why not? -
So … those ppl should not offer their work to BMS then.
For cry-sake…of course they SHOULD. I am advotate of COMMUNITY… meaning WE ALL SHARE … and benefit WITHOUT COMPLICATION OR EVEN RIGHTS or other nonsense.
I think, all the “rights” and “permission” discussions are stuipid infact. Sure one can ask authors for permissions (in some cases), but if someone puts something out on the net… then why he puts it out, if he doesn´t want others to use it in the first place?
I tell you why. Those kind of persons enjoy to be “asked” or “begged” for something … they are targeting “reputution” and being “a##-licked” instead of really being interested in “serving others” and open minded sharing. Personally i dont operate with people like that - at all.Just my opinion …
-
@A.S:
Agree (full LOD, not full 3Dmax). As i said… if someone gives you a “hand” for free, don´t rip out his “arm”.
I personally would give you the 3Dmax files, but if Nizmo has a problem with it, but still wants to share the LODs… why not?I’m not 100% if the 3DMax source is a must or not, but OTOH I don’t see a reason someone will deny his sources. It may or may not be a problem (maybe the 3DS to LOD exporter is enough, I don’t know really).