F1 2017 How did a F2002 mod from AC end up in F1 2017???

[Gergo Panker]

I think at this stage a fair-ish resolution would be acknowledging the use of the model, credit him and offering to pay for the model as an in-game asset as if it was made as contract work (rather than offering to pay for the Turbosquid model), as they have seemingly done more than just using it as reference.

 

[Ghoults]

Just out of interest do the uvmaps match as well?

It also seems he has some kind of contact with the modeller (who does not work at cm?) but not with cm. I can't imagine cm being happy about this either. It is weekend though.

 

[Oscar Olim]

Did Ferrari / FIA gave permission for this modeller to model the car and add it to a game?

 

[ltcars]

Did Ferrari / FIA gave permission for this modeller to model the car and add it to a game?

Look a little bit before your message, it was explained there

 

[gt362gamer]

Did Ferrari / FIA gave permission for this modeller to model the car and add it to a game?

Did the modder gave permission to Codemasters to use his model and make money out of it?

 

[Oscar Olim]

Did the modder gave permission to Codemasters to use his model and make money out of it?

Do two wrongs make a right?
He is profiting from someone else's (Ferrari) work in developing the car by selling a model of it without a license.

 

[Ghoults]

Some people just should not have access to the internet...

 

[AlleyViper]

I guess CM lost an opportunity to save face and do a PR stunt, even if some 3rd party is to blame (let alone decrypting a kn5 asset where the 3D model isn't openly available, even if it's a free mod). I hope the same didn't happen with VRC's MP4/4.

Other than properly compensating for the use of the F2002 asset, an explicit promise to work with SalamanderSoldier for a single classic car in the next game wouldn't have left such a sour taste.

 

[TeknoBug]

Wow is all I have to say.

A year ago or so there was a company here in Vancouver that seemed to have found a picture online for a logo and took it and the person that made it was not notified, found out that it was being used by the company and contacted them to no avail. At leat the OP got a response from someone.

 

[natedogg1867]

I guess CM lost an opportunity to save face and do a PR stunt, even if some 3rd party is to blame (let alone decrypting a kn5 asset where the 3D model isn't openly available, even if it's a free mod). I hope the same didn't happen with VRC's MP4/4.

CM probably doesnt even know about this yet and i have seen any response directly from them. What we have seen is 1 email from the 3rd party 'artist' that CM hired to create this car for F1 2017. This is hardly a direct statement from CM.

It will be interesting to hear what CM really has to say on the topic, but i wouldnt expect much. Perhaps news sites with their resources could get in touch with an appropriate person at CM, but as of now, that doesnt seem to have happened.

 

[garyjpaterson]

CM probably doesnt even know about this yet and i have seen any response directly from them. What we have seen is 1 email from the 3rd party 'artist' that CM hired to create this car for F1 2017. This is hardly a direct statement from CM.

It will be interesting to hear what CM really has to say on the topic, but i wouldnt expect much. Perhaps news sites with their resources could get in touch with an appropriate person at CM, but as of now, that doesnt seem to have happened.

The word from a Codemasters social person is "we're looking into it."

https://twitter.com/xtinamcgrath/status/923879318970884096

 

[Carlitox]

Just popping here to express my sympathy for the modeller, as I've enjoyed his work in AC for a long time now and this situation is basically corporate bullying in a nutshell.

Remember when FOM was issuing Cease and Desist notifications to F1 modders? Not only people who ripped models from the PC games (stopping that was OK), but people who made them from scratch as well! Also remember when they banned VirtualR from sharing links to F1 stuff, aside from official news from Codemasters? Or when they bullied Reiza for the Formula V10 car?

Then how come they can do the same and just apologise and pay a couple of bucks to make it all better? If any of us rips Codemaster's content, they or FOM would insta-sue. Heck, RD would pull out the mod before anything happened!

Codemasters had every instance of doing this properly if they wanted to. If they had come forward and said "We love your model and would like to offer you a payment so it can feature in our game", that would have been more than excellent. Ironically I bet that would have been met with a positive reaction from us. Instead they chose to just take it and if SalamanderSoldier had not noticed it, they'd never had paid or intended to pay anything.

I seriously hope Codemaster's comes forward and issues a public apology at the very least. This is just wrong and if the situation was reversed, the modder would've been destroyed in court.

 

[AlleyViper]

CM probably doesnt even know about this yet and i have seen any response directly from them. What we have seen is 1 email from the 3rd party 'artist' that CM hired to create this car for F1 2017. This is hardly a direct statement from CM.

You're right. Given the way the reply contained wording such as "reference for us", I thought this was the response of a CM employee under their 3D team, not a 3rd party. I've also assumed that the OP tried more CM channels without response, given that his first contact attempt on the posted chat dates back to the 18th.

Edit: Way to go, garyjpaterson!

 

[Some_Guy_Here]

That's for a non-commercial license, normally it'd be at least 10x as much for a non-exclusive commercial license. It's like how 3ds max costs $200 for students but $2000 per year for professionals using it in their job.

Salamander soldier doesn't have the commercial license to the model. Codies do. And they had to pay a lot of money for it.

The only reason this modder is even able to ask for $159 for this model is because he stole Ferrari's IP. If that model was not a Ferrari, but some generic single seater nobody would be interested in it for even $2.

It's always easy to point out other people's wrong doing, but never your own. It's human nature.

 

[Some_Guy_Here]

I think at this stage a fair-ish resolution would be acknowledging the use of the model, credit him and offering to pay for the model as an in-game asset as if it was made as contract work (rather than offering to pay for the Turbosquid model), as they have seemingly done more than just using it as reference.

I think they already did pay him for the model on turbo squid. He just won't admit it, because it would render thus whole thread pointless.

 

[Some_Guy_Here]

You're right. Given the way the reply contained wording such as "reference for us", I thought this was the response of a CM employee under their 3D team, not a 3rd party. I've also assumed that the OP tried more CM channels without response, given that his first contact attempt on the posted chat dates back to the 18th.

Edit: Way to go, garyjpaterson!

Codemasters could also have outsourced the model to a third-party artist and never had any knowledge that the third-party modeller used salamanders model as reference or more that that, whatever.

In that case, properly speaking, salamander's gripe should be with the modeller, not codemasters.

 

[ltcars]

It's always easy to point out other people's wrong doing, but never your own. It's human nature.

I think they already did pay him for the model on turbo squid. He just won't admit it, because it would render thus whole thread pointless.

Please think about what you are saying, why would @SalamanderSoldier do sth. like this?

 

[Gergo Panker]

Codemasters could also have outsourced the model to a third-party artist and never had any knowledge that the third-party modeller used salamanders model as reference or more that that, whatever.

In that case, properly speaking, salamander's gripe should be with the modeller, not codemasters.

You don't seem to understand the underlying problems.

Even if they did buy the turbosquid model, it doesn't allow commercial use, they should have contacted the original artist in the first place. But like it is stated in the response he got, the model came from a free source, thus not turbosquid.

Ultimately it's the developer's responsibility what source the model came from. They can reprimand the artist later, but that's an internal matter, it still doesn't justify what the contract artist may or may not have done and how any model is used or credited in the game. Outsourced models are still supervised by staff artists, so it should've been caught sometime during development.

 

[SalamanderSoldier]

I think they already did pay him for the model on turbo squid. He just won't admit it, because it would render thus whole thread pointless.

You think? Seriously why are you making stuff up?

 

[Some_Guy_Here]

You don't seem to understand the underlying problems.

Even if they did buy the turbosquid model, it doesn't allow commercial use, they should have contacted the original artist in the first place. But like it is stated in the response he got, the model came from a free source, thus not turbosquid.

Ultimately it's the developer's responsibility what source the model came from. They can reprimand the artist later, but that's an internal matter, it still doesn't justify what the contract artist may or may not have done and how any model is used or credited in the game. Outsourced models are still supervised by staff artists, so it should've been caught sometime during development.

You're the one who doesn't understand the underlying problem. Salamander has no right to sell that model in the first place, and if Ferrari and/or FOM wanted to, they could order him to take down the model from the web and there is no legal case.

What were talking about now is the ethical implications, and again salmamander is not in a position to throw stones at other people for doing something naughty, when he too did something naughty -- very naughty, in fact.