First of all respect your statement there Kennet.
I understand where you are coming from as there's a difference of importing material than doing the proper work to make sure things work. Been there.
In reference to your statement about modding, have been modding since BF 1942 as far as my start with map and AI mesh creation, to simple Poly's. Real basic stuff like buildings and static objects. Circa 2002-3
Then got into it deeper with BF2 and got a little more into python editing and scripting, again more map creation stuff and Ai mesh making. Actually my first experience with Max was patching open poly's. Circa 2005-6
After that expanded into ArmA 1. I found a mod that included some
Rockeye Cluster Bombs..unfortuantely it caused some issues and the developer dropped it. I saw the models needed a little bit of work and the scripts caused a lot of performance issues. (Yes I started with a mod that someone started and decided to complete it since it was a simple Rockeye CBU...little did I know what I was getting into something very complex. I before starting asked the group for permission and they approved as long as credit was given). I smoothed it over for gameplay and realism (they had 244 bomblets spawn from a cluster bomb, where 75 did the trick and with a bit of effects tweaking, also they were impossible to aim so in tweaking the vector formula in the script I was able to make them a bit easier to aim when dropping than a crap shoot). I also updated their models and closed open vertices that cause quite an issue in the game engine. Also started with mission editing where you made your own scenarios in a sandbox enviro.
Circa 2007-9
From there when ArmA 2 came out I converted my own content (expanded
Cluster Bomb SUU's) and the content with permission (Again gave ArmA Tactics credit when they were gone by that time). I even made my own models to expand the addon or mod. I also worked on a mod team creating content for the NZ and Australia defense force for the game. My interest has somewhat died out due to real life obligations, but can see myself revisiting it.
Circa 2009-12
I also have friends (high school and college) here in Austin that have been around the "world" in the game development industry (meaning laid off from one and then went to go work for another...from EA to Activision, to Blizzard, then back to EA...you name it). Was an active member of the IGDA for a couple years but focused my time elsewhere not being a professional in that industry (had an interest to hop off the IT bandwagon and get into Game Development).
So in affect I hear things about what game developers and publisher are and aren't responsible for. It's nothing new. As far as ripping content for profit,
there's no grey space for that.
I'm also all about someone getting the credit where due. I've had personal experience with that-
I was burnt when a larger mod team asked to use my content and got no mention (neither did the originators for the script back in ArmA 1) yet they used my CBU models...finger in their face was my mod had better models and Textures:
Original:
Updated and newer models and textures:
Well IMO being burnt like this, I saw that this mod team
did give credit where due and in many circles this was good enough as far as credit is concerned. They have no idea who the individual is that did the car and I'm sure if they knew they would give full credit to that individual instead of the company. I'm honestly surprised they gave credit at all...for this there's merit in that quite honestly.
I also see this as Post development work...after the fact the game has been released and the developer nor publisher wasn't hurt in their profit margins. Since this was Post development it wont discourage artists, if anything probably encourage a few out there.
I decided to call the source and see what a few friends that do work in the industry thought on this subject a little while ago over lunch. I asked their take (2 artists, 1 programmer)...I basically combined what they all said:
"More than likely the artist will feel happy someone used their models that they did years ago..."
".. I'd feel flattered if someone used my content for a mod I already got paid for, companies don't care about us"
"...if anything communities and modders care more about what we do than the upper management so more power to them especially since one entity (EA) wants to hold on to a license monopoly to screw other companies, and really you the consumer."
"It's the best thing a mod team can do is provide a mod that has content like that. Now to go the extent of another game's content isn't actually genius and I don't encourage it. I could see paying for a model from turbo-squid so there's not another thing people can complain about....but people will always complain"
"In a sense we get paid for our work, mod teams do it on their free time, and those models can be complex and tiring....I'd see it as a quicker to market strategy honestly. You're a hobbyist not a paid employee so why waste copious amount of hours of your free time that others will usually complain about your models anyhow. Most mod stuff gets torn apart by the community and it doesn't surprise me people are tearing into this instead of just enjoying it. After all there's a bit to be said what you guys are able to get away with and we can't."
I like that word my friend used, a hobbyist...perfect.
As far as my statement being simple about IP, it's just that. We as "hobbyists" are not upheld by the same rules and legalities as a commercial entity would be so the IP argument is mute when it's not stealing someone's hobby work for their own and calling it their own. That's messed up...but to use a model that's no longer used and that cash cow has been milked...hmm, think I'm good with that.
I'm good with it as it's using dead content and reviving it for use in a modification for a game.
Yet, I see where you are coming from Juris, in a very technical manner where an entity can be held liable IF this was used for profit. But this isn't for profit, and like you its beating a dead horse that there's no liability. In a certain realm it's not stealing, nor affecting profit margins, or discouraging artists from doing their work. If anything people "steal" and rip MP3's daily. Mix artists use other artists music in their mixes, etc, etc. So to state "steal" or "stolen" is like calling half the inventory of a pawn shop stolen. It's pretty strong language and equivocal. I'd like to say "recycled" since it's not in use, so please let the point be taken, Forza 4 is EOL, end of life. (This content for Forza is 2-3yrs old now, which by industry standards that's ancient and the industry and artist have surely done 5 projects since then, especially due to EOL).
My perspective might be seen as "blasé" and careless....well it is because I'm more worried about other things in a certain sense but do show respect where respect is due. If there was a legal precedent (which really there isn't), it's good that people like you keep us in check and we do keep our heads about it....It's not like I did not question this at the beginning but instead of thinking I'm dancing in the grey area, I feel clear of it from really logically thinking about it from both spectrum's and understanding an industry perspective and reasoning on it as a "hobbyist".
If you really boiled it down to legality and morality of the issue there's really nothing. If anything there's more of a moral dilemma on what the game companies do these days that should get our focus, If someone isn't stealing for profit, and the models are available in the public space (Google it it's not hard to find an abundance of those models BTW) and only furthering the use of an artist's expression of an entity of real life, than where's the debate? If anything I'd say it's homage to the original artist:
"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"
So with that said the Russian or whomever did this, did this out of love for the car and love for the game. I don't see why we can't appreciate that. It's good to bring about concerns of IP and raise an eyebrow at this.
Plainly summarized:
If this were a company caught for stealing IP, different story, a mod team stealing content and calling it their own..surely a slap in the face. But...a fan that was so enthused to get a 3D model and content to work in a great game; well I give the guy a hand clap for B+ work, but not a standing ovation. Then again this could have been a conceptual test before doing his own actual model. I've known some to do this in order to cut development time...using a "mule model" as a feasibility study.
(EDIT: Verious speeling erors...)
