Wilco/FT - Possible copyright issue?

[Guest Water Mango]

Mike you should get out this hobby then because that's what it's all about in this game. We as aviation enthusiast take the things we love and bring them down the PC. No we don't always ask for permission and usually the original creators don't mind. Our plug either promotes the intended product in Aviation Schools or the actual product in general. Did the photographer ask for permission from Airbus or the said Airline to take pictures in that particular cockpit? After all we're talking about Airbus here. They should be the one's ready to go to court over this. Feelthere is modeling an Airbus. How can a guy take a picture of both the Airlines' and the Manufactures' property and then Airliners.net claim ownership because the said photographer submitted it??? The subject matter of the photo is out of both Airliners.net and the photographers hands. It's should ultimately be the Airlines and Airbuses property. Last time I checked none of them signed off on it. Airbus did sign off on developers doing the planes properly in the confines of Flight Simulator (that's why we have one now in FSX). Go back up the ladder Mike and you'll find even Airliners.net could be taken to task by the Airlines and/or Airbus. Did the photographer ask before he posted those shots??? The Airlines didn't authorize those shots to be given to Airliners.net neither did Airbus authorize those shots... Feelthere is giving us an Airbus and I hope they've gone through the right channels but your argument here is mute when the photographer most likely didn't ask anyone but the pilot's before he took those pics to begin with.If we're going to talk about work it took work to put something from a pic into a VC (let alone a 2D panel) anyway. Only a troll would have that informantion if you want to look at all this for what it really is...

[I132 0]

It is clear that FeelThere weighs more than a duck, and that small rocks do float. So... She is a witch, burn her!Enough already. Let the people actually involved here (if there are any) settle this issue (if there truly is one).Lets stop before the comments and non-substantiated claims and put downs get any more juvenile.For goodness sake don't you guys have a flight you could be enjoying? Be Safe,Scott

[n4gix 4,947]

>>Fullishly >By the way, it's 'foolishly' and doing so to simply slander>someone for no reason is one thing but to see this and let it>slide is wrong on many levels.He may well have simply mistyped "Bullishly," which - come to thing of it - is a rather apt description. You have the tenacity of a bulldog protecting a old bone.>It wouldn't be difficult for them to clear their name but they>are doing nothing here.That is faulty logic sir! It's not possible to disprove a negative!

[RFields5421 1]

My words, your words, not anyone else's words on this forum are copyrighted.I do have a lot of words copyrighted under my name. And I don't control the usage or distrubtion of any of them, the newspapers, magazine and other publishers who printed the words "own" them.If Feelthere took the photo - it is wrong - and on the scale of things - about equal to not putting a quarter in parking meter, or running through the yellow light rather then stopping.I do not develop FS aircraft, but this is how I would do gather material for a cockpit texture.(1) Ask for permission to photograph a real aircraft from the owner - which may well be a violation of the aircraft manufacturer trademarks and copyrights, or,(2) Contact a commercial photography library and buy photos of the aircraft cockpit. Probably cost about 10-15 dollars. They warranty that the photos were legally obtained and legal for my usage.BTW the way I read the ANet submission agreement, by submitting a photograph to them, you allow A-net to sell or distribute the photo without reimbursement or advance permission.Back on subject - the picture in question is approximately 25-40% of the cockpit main panel.Do you really believe that the "artist" - who was probably not a Wilco or Feel There employee -'lifted' the photo in question,shrunk it down to eliminate 80% of the detail,combined it several other photos to create a texture file of the entire cockpit?Sorry all I see is a bogus allegation.

[scoob 18]

for those trying to keep up ...here is the background to the papa tango/america airlines/flightsim.com/etc copyright comments being stated in places in this thread (taking us back to 1999):http://www.avsim.com/pages/0999/edit1.htm--

[DadJokeCinema 145]

Without weighing in on any particular side of the issue, I wanted to clear up a few points.If it had been a PSS or PMDG product we were talking about, the thread probably would have been best to exist in the proper support forum for that aircraft, where representatives of those companies could have handled it. Other than moving the thread, you would not have seen any Black Helicopter action out of me.I do have to agree that this thread has been pretty much all speculation. I think it would be best to keep that in mind before anyone gets a little too wild in posting accusations or insults.

[Dillon 2,194]

"The subject matter of the photo is out of both Airliners.net and the photographers hands. It's should ultimately be the Airlines and Airbuses property. Last time I checked none of them signed off on it. Airbus did sign off on developers doing them planes properly in the confines of Flight Simulator (that's why we have one now in FSX).":-beerchug What else can be said Chris, good job...

[Guest]

I dunno... the evidence is there...if you look at all the details the photograph and the VC texture are one and the same. What we don't know is why or how. Feelthere should probably say something.

[Dillon 2,194]

Brian Wilco released the product not FeelThere. Feelthere wasn't finished with it. How can anyone support something they didn't officially release in beta form. "I dunno... the evidence is there...if you look at all the details the photograph and the VC texture are one and the same. What we don't know is why or how. Feelthere should probably say something."I guess you own the actual product right???

[ErnieAlston 33]

>My words, your words, not anyone else's words on this forum>are copyrighted.Actually they are copyrighted. Your post is considered an original work and is copyrighted the second you post (publish) it.But when you make a post you've given Avsim an 'implied' non-exclusive license.>(2) Contact a commercial photography library and buy photos of>the aircraft cockpit. Probably cost about 10-15 dollars. They>warranty that the photos were legally obtained and legal for>my usage.You buy a photo, you only buy one copy. You put that photo in a product, you've reproduced and redistributed it. You can't do that without also purchasing the copyrights.It can be lot more expensive than you might think to use someone else's photo's. Your best bet is to take your own photographs if you can gain access to the cockpit (or simulator).Though another option is to hire a graphic artist to produce an image that 'looks' like a photograph.Regards.Ernie.

[scoob 18]

>My words, your words, not anyone else's words on this forum>are copyrighted.>>I do have a lot of words copyrighted under my name. And I>don't control the usage or distrubtion of any of them, the>newspapers, magazine and other publishers who printed the>words "own" them.well said. i hope avsim.com publishes a book (that will outsell the new harry potter i'm sure (Harry Potter Publishing Rights

[n4gix 4,947]

>Brian Wilco released the product not FeelThere. Feelthere>wasn't finished with it. How can anyone support something>they didn't officially release in beta form. That is indeed a very crucial fact. It may well be that what is shown in the screenshots was a WIP using a temporary bitmap.>"I dunno... the evidence is there...if you look at all the>details the photograph and the VC texture are one and the>same. What we don't know is why or how. Feelthere should>probably say something.">>I guess you own the actual product right??? Dillon, even without owning the product, it's a simple enough matter to load both images in Photoshop CS2 and zoom in on various details...Leaving aside the shadows and lighting, what are the odds that screw heads will be in perfect 1:1 alignment?Going back to my first paragraph, what leads ME towards the WIP theory is that I cannot imagine any developer not bothering to match the underglareshield shadowing - not to mention color! - of the three major panel sections!!!I do know that when I am creating VC panels in Max/GMax, I frequently use composites of actual photos from many sources as "temporary textures" for layout, size and design purposes. Afterwards, the graphics artist creates the actual textures used for the release.Given that Wilco "jumped the gun," it's entirely possible - nay, most likely! - that the WIP textures were used... :-wave

[Guest]

The WIP theory is just about the best one I've heard so far...And Dillon, I don't need to own the product to see that the details are exactly the same.

[RFields5421 1]

Actually they are copyrighted. Your post is considered an original work and is copyrighted the second you post (publish) it.In which country. Not in the United States. Copyright must be exlicity stated / claimed.You buy a photo, you only buy one copy. You put that photo in a product, you've reproduced and redistributed it. You can't do that without also purchasing the copyrights.I found three companies in a short google search which will sell digital photos of an Airbus cockpit for "unlimited reproduction and use" for average 25 cents per photo, with a minimum order of $10.

[Bob Scott 7,704]

>Bob you fail to realize we've been doing this in this>community for quite some time. Remind me, how many add-ons have you personally developed?We have not be using the copyrighted photos of others in our work for some time. No, uh uh. Wrong-o. UNacceptable.>Ask Fly Tampa, Flight Zone,>and others have they contacted every vender of every piece of>equipment they reproduced in their sceneries. What about the>companies that made the tugs, the designers of the airport>terminals, Coca Cola, etc. Ask Georender did they ask>permission to reproduce the various airports they've done in>the Seattle area. The only valid airport Georender could take>claim to is Emma Field. Everything else is open to>litigation.Different subject entirely. We're talking about taking someone else's copyrighted photo and using it in our own work without permission, not getting permission from Coca Cola to have a can of coke in the background of a photo.RegardsBob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VSantiago de Chile