Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

Copyrights for planets - a reminder.

Discussion in 'Modding' started by entspeak, Sep 2, 2016.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    I just had a very uncomfortable few days dealing with another modder who took my work, used it for his modded planet, did not ask my permission, and claimed the work as his own. Fortunately, Steam handled it, but I don't know what the exact result was. I know that this person's mod is no longer publicly available and - despite a counter DCMA claim being placed on mine - mine remains publicly available. I'm satisfied with that outcome.

    But nobody wants to file DCMA claims or to enter into awkward discussions about the ownership of their work.

    Just as is the case with block mods and scripts, modders spend days, weeks, sometimes months, doing a lot of work to get a custom planet working in SE. Sometimes modders even base their work on real world data. While not owning the real world data, the work derived from it belongs to the modder who created it. As an example, my only planet mod is based on a map created by the USGS Astrogeology Science Center. But, the heightmaps used in my mod were created by me - the USGS Astrogeology Science Center did not create them, and the map they provided does not work in Space Engineers. I spent a lot of time getting the USGS data into a format that would work in Space Engineers and look decent at the scale of planets in this game. While my work is based on that of the USGS, it is a derivative work and I can claim ownership of that work - you cannot find these particular heightmaps on the USGS site... I created them. Just as many planet modders create their heightmaps.

    The best way to handle these types of situations is to ask permission... if you don't get it, don't make a public mod using that work. You can certainly make a private variation for your friends... ideally, you should still get permission even if you're doing that. Respect the time and effort it takes to create the various maps for Space Engineers and, please, do not claim to own work that is not yours.

    If you wish to create your own planets, check out this amazing tutorial by Doctor Octaganapus.

    I may create a tutorial on how to use World Machine and other software to create planets... but, it's something I'm still learning myself.
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  2. Harag Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    913
    I wonder what's there to disagree?
     
  3. Ronin1973 Master Engineer

    Messages:
    4,824
    You may want to check Steam and the agreement as to who owns what and who can use or modify your creation. I'm not saying right/wrong. I'm just saying you should fully read the agreement and then decide if you want to post things to the workshop: publicly or privately.

    Derivative works are going to happen. People improve on coding, functionality, etc. As long as full credit and a link go to the original author(s), I find that to be fair use. Removing someone's name on an overlay @Whiplash141 isn't fair use. Whip has an epic tail of busting people stealing his stuff; especially his Weapon Sequencer (a must have IMHO).

    Fair use is modifying the mod to work better on a server or a particular situation. I've modded a planet in order to make it work for a server. I'm not going to beg permission to do that. However, I will give full credit to the author, a link to the original work, and a suggestion for people NOT to subscribe to that instance of the mod as it's for a server and not for general consumption.

    I think it all falls under intent. If your intent is to pass someone else's work off as your own. That's a no go. If you copy and paste other peoples' work into your own. That's a no go either. If you're modifying someone else's work to create a truly derivative work with full credit. Yes. That's acceptable.
     
  4. Whiplash141 Junior Engineer

    Messages:
    958
    I can not stress this more. I welcome people to modify my codes and mods to their needs. When creators go out of their way to build something for others enjoyment, all we ask for is a nod to our original work. That is our currency, appreciation. Modding/coding in SE is a labor of love, and if people continue to abuse that trust, authors will lose that desire.

    I also dislike how people attempt to defend blatant plagiarism by saying "I didn't know." Ignorance is a reason NOT an excuse.

    Sorry, I'm a bit salty... :woot: I'm a nice dude, I swear!
     
  5. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    I have read the Steam agreement - I did so before I filed the DCMA claim. The Subscriber Agreement does not allow for the creation of derivative works of workshop content and nowhere in the Agreement - or in the law for that matter - are the creation of derivative works considered "fair use." This is why Steam very clearly states that you allow Valve to create derivative works if you agree to the Subscriber agreement. It's not a part of "fair use." The guy who took my heightmaps did so because he failed at his own attempt at making that planet - I know because I saw the heightmaps he used originally. (He included his version of the planet in a "solar system" mod.) This individual was not particularly clever.

    Modifying code to make something work with a server and giving full credit is one thing. Most often, those are private mods shared among friends who play on a server. Offering it up as a public mod is another thing. Taking someone's heightmaps, creating the same planet... right down to naming it the same thing, claiming the work as your own, lying about doing the work, and generally being a douche about the whole thing is also something else.

    Asking for permission should be the rule, not the exception.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    Ugh. Well, it looks like I'm going to have to defend myself from the DCMA claim - Steam just banned my planet for violating the Terms of Service. Thankfully, I have all the documentation to support my mod. Hopefully, Mercury will be back up soon.
     
  7. Draygo Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,297
    Steam user agreement does not prevent modders from applying reasonable copyright protections to their original works. Obviously we are allowing use by uploading them as public, but that does not mean we lose the right to defend our work. And we can even submit DMCA claims for people violating our intellectual property.

    Here is a very informative post on the subject. While it applies to skyrim mods it can be applied to any SE mod: https://www.reddit.com/r/skyrimmods...sing_and_mods_coming_from_a_gamer_with_a_bit/

    If you are a modder, it works to your advantage to include copyright information with your upload. It is not required but it can help your defense.
    --- Automerge ---
    This is pretty standard procedure for steam. They often take a cursory look at something and ban it then ask questions later. I assume you filed a counter claim and relevant notes. They have the timestamps and edit history of both mods so it shouldn't take them long to figure it out.
     
  8. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    I filed the original DCMA claim and the other modder then filed one against me in retaliation (or one of his friends - because I had a few of his friends claiming it was wrong for me to have filed my claim). It's a strange process because it looked like everything got sorted out - the notice about the DCMA claim that was made against mine was removed, the other modder's work wasn't public anymore, and then, suddenly, a few days later, the ban hit.

    Yes, in my DCMA claim against GhostXV's mod (which he published last week... the day after he'd posted a comment on my mod, while mine was published in the beginning of July) and in my support ticket about the ban of mine, I explained that the USGS Astrogeology Science Center allows for use of their Digital Elevation Map of Mercury without restriction so long as you cite them as the author (which I did and he didn't), that I'd created a derivative work because you can't simply take the original image and plop it in as a heightmap in Space Engineers, the exact process I used to create that derivative work (it isn't as simple as cutting up the original image into 6 tiles in Photoshop - which is what GhostXV told me he did for the heightmaps in question), that it is reasonable for me to claim a copyright on that work, that GhostXV and I had a chat about his mod and how it was impossible for him to have achieved work identical to mine by using the process he described, that he claimed he'd had these heightmaps since planets were first released in SE (which is impossible because the USGS didn't release the complete height data for the entire planet of Mercury until just a few months ago.) I had screen grabs of these chats. Basically, I laid out the strong evidence that he had taken my heightmaps, done some darkening of a few craters in Photoshop, and used them in his mod - which he called "Mercury HD."

    The biggest problem with this whole mess is that workshop items for Space Engineers are a crucial part of a world - especially custom planets. People build bases on them and when it gets banned, the planet just disappears out from under them. So, I feel bad for my subscribers.

    And, I've put my work on Venus on hold (the heightmaps for which will require much more extensive editing in World Machine) because I don't want to do all that work, put it up and have Steam claimed it violates the ToS.
    --- Automerge ---
    Ah... ban lifted. Unfortunately, the issue hasn't died, though. While GHOSTXV the offending mod was removed, his friend has decided to put it up again under a different name for a mod pack. Time to defend my work again.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2016
  9. Shroom Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    5
    Mr. Entspeak,

    First of all, while you have every right to defend your exclusive ownership of your intellectual properties, this does not give you the right to lash out at other workshop modders who upload mods similar to your own simply because you came up with the idea first.
    I have been working on an overhaul for my private server which includes a full realistic analogue of the Sol system. I had posted about it on reddit to find people willing to help and GhostXV, a modder active on the workshop with some very popular uploads who almost exclusively builds planets, messaged me to offer his help and we have been working on a new set of planets to flesh out the solar system. We decided to start with Mercury as we had been over the list of planets to work on and thought Mercury would be extremely simple to start with. After deciding on how to lay out the internals and give it a realistic ore distrubition with a heavy iron core, Ghost threw together a model for it and, as he always does, used NASA heightmaps as the basis for his design. It was quickly finished and ready for Ghost to add the final touches. With one day left on its design, with Ghost working on meteorite distrubution and ore content, I was looking through the workshop to see if any other Sol system planets had been created in SE, and I found your 'Mars to Mercury' and Mercury mods. I showed this to Ghost, and we commented our critique on your take of Mercury as we did not find your scale to be realistic, in doing so mentioning what we were doing with our take on Mercury. You quickly took this as an affront, deleted my comments, and then blocked me, while lashing out at me and Ghost in the comments on your mod page.

    When Ghost uploaded his own Mercury, you began arguing with him about how he stole your work, making up bogus claims how his work could "not possibly" have been his own original content based on some technical observation you later redacted. The only similarity between the two versions of Mercury is that you both used NASA heightmaps to base the layout on. Have you even compared the two side by side? They look absolutely nothing alike. Here's a screenshot of the surface of each to show how completely different they are:

    http://images.akamai.steamuserconte...769/561C78DFEE8ABB518157B5DEE23B5D0C6BF35D91/

    http://images.akamai.steamuserconte...974/E7271EE90331B5EC38CB000957A03E971EB8AB83/

    Later on, I noticed a DMCA claim warning plastered across Ghost's mod page, stating that someone was claiming his submission as their own original content. A day or so later this had gone past the dubious 'scrutiny' of Steam's judgment and had been banned from the workshop. This actually caused me to lose the planet I had added to my server and required me to find my placement all over again, costing me my own time and effort.
    In response, I filed the same claim on your own upload, as I was not going to stand for you bullying and harassing us over your petty insecurities. There would have been none of this had you not started it. As a result, your own original work got taken down as well, proving how blindly Valve handles such takedown requests.

    Due to Steam support's ongoing failure to communicate, Ghost has not been able to upload to the workshop since his submission was removed. The removal of his submission was supposed to come with a 24-hour workshop upload ban, but has caused him to get errors when he tries uploading anything in Space Engineers ever since. Ghost gave me the files for his Mercury. Having completely original content given to me by its creator with his permission to upload, I uploaded it to my own workshop as one of the many coming mini mod packs I will be uploading to supplement my server overhaul. I named it nondescriptly as a numbered resource for my server mod set which I don't intend to be distributing or supporting publicly, with credit given to GhostXV in the description despite him not requesting this, along with the original steam ID for the workshop item that was banned.

    You have now filed a claim on my upload, despite this being completely original content that you have absolutely no claim over, nor has any proof been provided to support this. There has not been any information from Valve documenting evidence or reason to support the claim either, because it doesn't exist. Both mods were created entirely independently from each other. Please stop harassing us. I don't want to use your Mercury on my server, I want to use the one Ghost & I made.

    -Shroom
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. mojomann71 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,803
    Just out of curiosity I opened both mods up, and from what I see they are structured different.
    I am not familiar with modding / making planets, just blocks, to me it appears that they are not the same.
    I could be wrong.. just my two cents. :)
     
  11. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    The structure of the mod is not what is at issue. It is true that Ghost's version has completely different textures, completely different biome map, and the configs are different. The DCMA claim I filed is only with regard to the heightmaps. It would be like taking one of your modded blocks, retexturing it and changing the configs.

    Now, I hate to say this, but I think you're being misled. This was Ghost's explanation of his process for creating these heightmaps:

    Here is where he claims to have had these heightmaps since planets came out for Space Engineers:
    First, my heightmaps are based on the complete height data released by the USGS on May 6, 2016. Prior to that, the topography available for Mercury was incomplete. I know... I was frustrated when trying to work with it. So, I was ecstatic when the complete topography was available.

    Second, this is the height data as presented by the USGS Astrogeological Service Center: http://astropedia.astrogeology.usgs...mbs/Mercury_Messenger_DEM_Global_665m_max.png
    Just so you know... the top edge... on a sphere is reduced to a single pixel. That's right, the entire top edge is what would be the center of the UP tile. Look at the formation of craters in the upper right:

    [​IMG]

    On my up tile, those craters look like this: https://flic.kr/p/M1mRny
    And, because you need it, here's Ghost's: https://flic.kr/p/L7hy2D (edit: corrected link)

    Except for the darkening of a couple of craters, Ghost's Up tile looks identical to mine. But, it is actually impossible for him to have cut the USGS image into six 2048 x 2048 tiles and rotate the tiles, blend them... all that Ghost describes and achieve this. It's just not possible. You see... because of the disortion, when you wrap the USGS image around a sphere, the top edge becomes a single point. He couldn't possible have cut this image into 6 2048 x 2048 tiles and ended up with tiles that look even close to mine.

    This is why the heightmaps he used are mine. He couldn't have had these heightmaps when he claims he did and it is impossible to achieve what he claims in the way he claims he did it. He may have used the mix and match height data that existed prior to May... but he didn't have these.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2016
  12. mojomann71 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,803
    Thanks for the explanation, like I said I wasn't up to par on planet mods. :)
     
  13. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    I don't like that I had to file a DCMA claim against Shroom's mod. But, I will always defend my work.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2016
  14. Shroom Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    5
    Okay, but, you just linked the same thing twice. I still fail to see any comparison or proof of anything.
     
  15. GHOST 2 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    5
    i just gotta say when u posted to keen forum you explained exactly how i did it here let me explain again scape look it up where i edit 3d hieght map then we move to photo shop where i can change left and right horizontal because they wont line up right another thing you probably didn t do, then add emboss which u didn t do then cut the whole hieghtmap into 2048x2048 16bit png size are you still with me entspeak.... cause for your first planet you certainly don t know photo shop or Scape at all which can be used also considering my pics come up photo shop pics only open with photo shop once saved, also here s the best one when did i even sub to your mod cause i m having a hard time figuring out how i stole your work hmmmmm... it doesnt seem to me there s any proof on your side even in keen forum you have your own work showin obviously you dont have any thing that justifies infringment but one or two craters but you have since changed don t lie to people and slander modder s on assumption s then go make up some big story like walt disney also why were you reported too entspeak, same reason if anyone here plays Space engineers check out my planets decide for yourself i was taught by Doctor Octoganapus and Angel on how to do everything on planets which was even before a tutorial came out also my first planet uploaded dec 3 2015 so going on forums to get away from me so i cant defend myself is immature bro good job
    --- Automerge ---
    he doesnt show rest of chat either defending myself lol what a joke
     
  16. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    Oops... yes. I've edited the post to correct the link to Ghost's Up tile.
    --- Automerge ---
    You want the entire chat? Are you sure about that? Oh, Ghost... I really do love the part where you say you downloaded these heightmaps as torrents before NASA released the complete height data for the entire planet to the public. That's a good one. :tu:

    Okay. Here you go:












    That's where the conversation ended.

    Now, I've watched the Doctor Octaganapus tutorial that you mention - I've recommended this tutorial to others. His process for the heightmaps works fine for the situation he describes - he's mirroring the edges. He covers the process you describe of blending, flipping horizontals, etc... at about the 15 minute mark.



    This is the process you describe... pretty much... right down to the replacing of maps. But, you could not have used this process and have ended up with heightmaps even closely resembling mine. The process described in that tutorial - which is what you claimed to do - will not work. It works fine for the situations he describes in the video, but not in this situation. Why? Because the Up tile is comprised of everything above the red line in the image released by the USGS Astrogeology Science Center. As so:

    [​IMG]

    The circled craters show the distortion that occurs with this map. This distortion occurs everywhere on the map, but is most prominent at the poles (what becomes the Up and Down tiles). This is what I was referring to in the chat. Basically, you said that, after editing the craters in Scape, you cut this image up into 6 2048 x 2048 tiles resulting in an Up tile that looks like this:

    [​IMG]

    If you look at where the words are located... they line up with the same topographical features on the original. But, no amount of blending, flipping horizontals, swapping maps, or embossing could achieve this. This is why I say that the process you claim to have used to achieve these heightmaps is impossible. There's no way you cut the image into 6 tiles and got this for an Up tile.

    Oh, but wait... no, you said you didn't use the up or down tiles because the edges wouldn't match due to the distortion, so you swapped them for another one. Right? Okay, which one? There are four other tiles to choose from. Which one so closely resembles your Up tile that you used it instead, Ghost? And why does it look virtually identical to the Up tile from my mod which isn't a modified version of another tile. Explain that, please?

    With the process I used - applied to the full image above, you get this:

    [​IMG]

    These are 5 of the 6 seamless tiles my process generates: Up surrounded by Left, Back, Right, and Front. I include the other tiles because my red line isn't perfect and some of that data ends up on the Left, Back, Right, and Front tiles. It also shows how my tiles are seamless. The small gap you see in the red line is where the left and right sides of the original map meet. It's off because the right end of my line is slightly lower than the left.

    Here is the Up tile by itself:

    [​IMG]


    You say your process isn't exact - and that's correct... even Doc admits that his process is not exact, but mine is. I don't need to blend edges, flip horizontals, swap one map for another, or any of the stuff described in Doc's tutorial with regard to the heightmaps - my tiles are seamless the moment I create them. But your less exact edges are identical to my exact ones. How is that possible? It's not is the answer.

    I did additional tweaks in World Machine to make the height data translate well in voxel form within Space Engineers. These heightmaps are derivative works based on the height data provided by the USGS Astrogeology Science Center. My mod does not use the USGS image... the process I used created new ones. Which is why my maps are custom and why it is reasonable for me to claim a copyright on them.

    You guys really need to stop this. This is the information I provided in my DCMA claim and in the defense of my mod from whoever launched the DCMA claim against me. What Ghost has said can't be correct. He downloaded these heightmaps containing this height data before NASA even released this particular height data? Come on! His description of how he achieved these maps defies logic and is technically not possible.

    Now, as I said... there were maps for Mercury available prior to NASA releasing the complete global height data in May. But, the actual height data was incomplete on those maps. They used the incomplete height data mixed with low-incidence surface imagery to complete the missing bits. I mentioned this lack of complete height data back in March in this thread: http://forums.keenswh.com/threads/suggestion-real-planets-mod.7380714/#post-1286955957. An example of this can be found in quarior14's solar system mod which was first published in Dec 2015:
    http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=576872464&searchtext=solar+system
    He's got a version of Mercury in there... it has completely different heightmaps from mine. Quarior14 credits HarbingerDawn for his heightmaps. HarbingerDawn created textures for Space Engine back in 2012.

    But, in May, NASA reported that a complete topographical model of Mercury had finally been released. And, I started working in earnest to create my mod - I documented some of that process here: http://forums.keenswh.com/threads/mercury-wip.7384249/

    So, I fully believe Ghost had something close to ready... but it wasn't with these heightmaps... it's simply not possible to do it in the way he describes and there's no way he got these images before NASA released the complete height data for the planet in May.

    I would ask you to please take this mod down and don't use my heightmaps. You do not have permission

    What saddens me most about this is that I was going to do a tutorial on my process. But, stuff like this makes me rethink that. Doc even warns people in the above video against taking his heightmaps. This is why we can't have nice things.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Mikiy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    68
    Out of curiosity after reading all this complaining here i wondered what the big deal is with converting this nasa heightmap and why its something to be so overly protective about... The whole "process" of generating the needed images of the nasa source took me less then 15 minutes, heres the details of the process:

    1) one grabs that image nasa published, as linked above.
    2) one grabs the tool nasa published to convert it, called G.Projector: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/tools/gprojector/
    3) as the tool seems to have max size of 10,000×5000 for the source, you scale the source picture down (or find a way to mod the tool, its java)
    4) disable the overlay in the tool, you set graticule style to none.
    5) you change projection to gnonomic cubed sphere
    6) to match the rotation of the pictures above you center on Lon: 50°E or something close to that..
    7) you get an image with the 6 tiles, they fit together perfectly, can cut em out, rotate em as needed and darken it a bit..
     
  18. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    Nope. This I tried months ago when I first started learning to mod planets. The "Maximum Size" image is 23040 x 11520 and won't load into G.Projector. The "Sample" is 1024 x 512 - which will load, but you end up with teeny tiles (much smaller than 256 x 256). Resizing those to 2048 x 2048 would look like absolute crap in-game. Besides, even if you could get it to import a higher resolution map, the maximum export size for the gnomic cubed sphere in G.Projector is 7500 x 3750 and it adds huge empty space to the image because it basically saves the entire window in the image and not just the map.



    Cutting the tiles out of that results in a roughly 1250 x 1250 tile which, again, you have to resize to 2048 x 2048 - which will look crap in-game.

    Most importantly, the process Ghost describes does not account for the distortion in the original NASA image..

    I'm protective of my work because I spent quite a lot of time getting Mercury to work in Space Engineers. I was going heavy on the detailed accuracy. Even going so far as to try to recreate the actual surface texture with crater trails in my biome map using 6 different shades of voxel textures assigned to the 6 shades of gray in the voxel map:



    (here is that Back Voxel Map projected over my heightmap):



    Unfortunately, that detail of the crater trails didn't translate well into voxels, so I had to abandon that idea and go with the voxel maps I have now.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2016
  19. Shroom Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    5
    Because Entspeak thinks because he was the first, he is the only one entitled to do a Mercury upload.

    It's complete bullshit and he will not bully us off the workshop.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    That's not what I'm doing. As I have mentioned repeatedly, there is a mod of Mercury that has existed on the Workshop much longer than mine and... certainly well before Ghosts. It has different heightmaps.

    Yes, I saw this post... that was less than a month ago - over a month after my mod was published.

    I deleted your comments and blocked you because you started getting snarky about a slider setting. The "scale" is not determined by the mod, it is determined by the subscriber to the mod when they paste the planet in... that is when you choose the diameter of the planet. So, your critique on "scale" is not a critique of the mod. It is a critique on the scale I recommended. I honestly don't care at what size people use the planet. I made the recommendation of 120km so that people could enjoy the fact that some of those craters are over 5km across at 120km diameter. I made that recommendation for people who might want to use the planet on its own. I was going to use that size in my custom world scenario because, as I mentioned at the time, with the massive distance between the planets there is nothing else around for reference. Now, if someone decided to make the Moon 120km and keep it in orbit around the Earth-like... yeah, that would be weird. But, all of this is a matter of taste. I respect the choice to keep it relative in size to the Earth-like - I even took Ghost's note and added that recommendation to the description. Like I said, I don't care what slider setting people choose for Mercury. But, you were acting as though this slider setting had something to do with the mod itself - which is just ridiculous.

    ??? Huh? Of course, I've compared the heightmaps side by side. I've pretty much posted them side by side. Comparing them side by side is why I chatted with Ghost in the first place.
    As I thought... First, these images aren't even of the same section of planet. Second, they only show the difference in texture... not a difference in the heightmap. In the DCMA claim they ask you specifically what is violating the copyright. What did you say there in your claim against my mod? I'll tell you what I didn't say there in either of my claims. I didn't say Ghost's entire mod. I restricted the claim to the heightmaps. I acknowledge that Ghost used different textures. He used MoonRock (vanilla), Iron, and one custom texture. There are two included, but he only makes use of one of them. I acknowledge that he uses different AO and MAT maps. He doesn't end up referencing the Red channel in the MAT map, but... that's neither here nor there. He also configured it differently in the definitions. But, all of these things are not the heightmaps. And, again, I only cited the heightmaps in my DCMA claim.

    Basically, as I mentioned to Mojomann, what he did is basically like, say... if you were to take Sage's Industrial Thruster, take his model, re-texture and reconfigure it, and claim it as your own.

    So, you filed a DCMA claim as a retaliation? Without even knowing the nuts and bolts of my mod? What part of my mod violates a copyright?

    Yes. I also put a ticket in support explaining everything I have here and also expressing my suspicion that the DCMA claim was made in retaliation... which, you've now confirmed.
     
    Last edited: Sep 10, 2016
  21. Mikiy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    68
    You've given up to fast there, the reason it didn't load was cause it didn't had enough memory.. not a big deal tho, so you launch the program like this:
    java -Xms6g -Xmx6g -jar G.Projector.jar

    and then the source will load fine..
    [​IMG]
    ..and as you can see in the screenshot, you get some bigger save dimension that will allow you some tiles of 2048x2048 too.

    Since you say it will look crap ingame... im curious, do you happen to have any screenshots of how the finished planet looks like with 512x512 or 1024x1024 tiles?
    Running a server im mostly interessted in planets that not just look good but more importantly also perform good (in terms of fps) so it would be rather interesting to see how crap that really looks and if its a worthwhile tradeoff or not, so if you got any experience on that topic feel free to share ;)

    Im not related to your case, i don't know either of you peeps so im not judging if someone copied from the other or not, i just pointed out how its rather quick'n'easy to convert that map. I find a copyright debate about the conversion of a publicly free image rather ludicrous tbh.
     
  22. Mix-martes86 Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,110
    After reading @entspeak explain himself, I'm sorry, but I am inclined to believe his side of the story over yours. He's definitely gone to great lengths to explain his reasons, specially regarding the technical details, and they seem solid.
    On the other hand, you have mostly used the argument of him wanting to bully you off (biased view, irrational/subjective opinion without proof), without going too deep in technical detail to justify yourself beyond 2 pics, of which no reasonable comparison can be drawn other than the fact that the textures look different. Admitting to a retaliation DMCA claim "just because" with no real arguments also plays against you.
    As for Ghost's post, well, I basically skipped it because of the totally not "sight-friendly" (specially for us glasses users) writing structure that makes it impossible to comprehend without getting a serious headache.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  23. Shroom Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    5
    Yes. My original DMCA letter included an explanation of every reason I was submitting the claim, and that I was submitting mine in response to yours, because if you were going to claim copyright infringement over the use of NASA's public files, then I would do the same to you. I explained that I didn't think either DMCA claim held any validity whatsoever and that neither should be taken down.

    I referenced his bullying and harassment because this drama started after I made a comment on his Mercury mod saying that his scale was off and didn't make sense, which he took personally and began harassing us over. Perhaps this explains why he is going to such lengths to stubbornly stick to his ridiculous claim. I have nothing else to argue with him over because there is no validity to his claim whatsoever. So far he has proven nothing. Several other people have commented on how they could easily reproduce the same work in a matter of minutes.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 2
  24. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    I did not file a claim that Ghost's mod was copyright infringement over the use of NASA's public files. I filed a claim over the use of my files. NASA does not offer those 6 heightmap files. As I stated in my DCMA claim, and in the defense against your misguided retaliatory one, if my mod included images downloaded from NASA, I would have no basis for a DCMA claim - I straight up told that to Steam. But my mod does not include any images downloaded from NASA. The 6 heightmap images at issue here are not available on the USGS Astrogeology Science Center's website.
    --- Automerge ---
    Well, my heightmaps were not simply converted. As, said repeatedly, they also required some massaging in World Machine to make them play well in Space Engineers. Creating 6 new different images using the data from the original and adding to them as I did in World Machine makes them each a derivative work. I can reasonably claim a copyright on those works. This is what I explained to Steam in my DCMA claim, and in the defense against the retaliatory one made against me. I don't own the original USGS image, the USGS Astrogeology Center does, but I do own these particular 6 images derived from it.

    Honestly, I didn't go into that chat with Ghost screaming "YOU TOOK MY HEIGHTMAPS!" I asked him how he did he created his. It was very casual. If he'd given me an answer that made technical sense - one that made me think, "okay, yeah... I can see how you did that," I wouldn't have given it another thought. But he lied. That's how I know he used my maps. And, frankly, that's shut the door on him being able to continue to use anything that looks virtually identical to my maps.
     
  25. rexxar Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,530
    This is a very easy claim to disprove. Open both mods, then do a binary comparison of the height maps. If they're 90% identical, they've been copied with minor tweaks.

    I don't have my computer this weekend or I'd do it. Most hex editors will do this kind of thing for you
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  26. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    This is a great idea! Thanks!

    I've never done this before, but learned that Windows does binary compare via the command line. There are definitely differences between the Up, Down, Front, and Left heightmaps. That's evident by simply looking at them. I'm not skilled enough to know the extent by looking at the mess of data the command line printed out for those. So, I ran the compare against the ones that look exactly identical - the Back and Right tiles - and these are the results:

    [​IMG]

    His files for the Back and Right tiles are 100% identical to the ones found in my mod - there is no difference. Perhaps, it would be good if someone else verified this independently?

    UPDATE: Downloaded a Hex Editor. Same result for the Back and Right tiles... no differences found... the files are identical.



    You can see here what he did. These are my Left tile and, then his Left tile in 3D where they connect to the Back tile. Nothing was changed... just swapped out the tiles.






    Apart from the coring out of some craters and the... smoothing, I guess?... of that larger impact area, nothing else is different.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2016
    • Informative Informative x 1
  27. rexxar Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,530
    I honestly didn't expect to see 100% identical files. Even if some are changed, having just one identical file is indeed content theft. Working from the same original data I'd expect to see like 40% correlation between files, but that's obviously not the case here.

    This is why we have science, boys and girls, to definitively solve internet arguments.

    Edit: I'm assuming entspeak is being honest about the files he's comparing. I'll verify myself when I get home tonight. However, I don't have any say over the DMCA stuff, that's on Valve. I'm just here to solve an argument.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  28. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    I would love it if there was independent verification of the results. Thank you for your assistance.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2016
  29. Mikiy Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    68
    So i just downloaded the 2 mods and tried to verify your result of the fc /b and got a completely different result then you.. as in tons of differences, since i downloaded both mods from steam just like earlier today, i wonder if we have the same versions... so heres some checksums:
    722041986\Data\PlanetDataFiles\Mercury\right.png MD5: 5b53b41613d152d5d18dc80f0908eab8 (6.376.646 bytes)
    758395033\Data\PlanetDataFiles\Mercury\right.png MD5: da7d5ab51ee87bc604806158ea201901 (6.371.609 bytes)
     
  30. entspeak Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,744
    That's weird. I'm going to stream a video showing my process. It's certainly possible I'm making a mistake in doing this.
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.