We used to run into this is the Nascar/Grand Prix Legends sim forums. Guys "stealing" others paint jobs and claiming them as their own.Then one fellow asked a good question, did the original painter make the logo's by hand or just cut and paste them? Did he credit the original logo maker or did he too "steal" someone elses work and claim it to be his own?And so on and so on.My 2 cents (I know, no one really cares what I think)....I could never understand why some one would care if a free paint they made went into a free AI package (I see lots of stuff was pulled from WOAI even). Really what gives? I could understand if someone was selling something you intended to be free (profit from your work) but seriously I do not get it why they do not want their stuff used in something like WOAI...

It's largely to do with people's motivation for doing freeware. Lots of developers start out making freeware and move on to making payware stuff after what might be regarded as an apprenticeship of learning how to do things. For some this is just the way things turn out, for others it is a definite planned approach. Lots of people have a hard time grasping why someone would dedicate such a massive amount of time to a freeware project (such as the I-Fly 747-400 for example), but for the four guys who made the I-Fly 747, I suspect the notion of it being a 'shop window' to demonstrate their skills, will have played some part in their motivation for undertaking such a task.When I do freeware stuff, my own motivation is a combination of general interest, the desire to contribute to something to the FS world, the opportunity to learn how to do such things, and occasionally the personal need to create something which cannot otherwise be found. So for me, I couldn't care less if someone used or abused anything I posted online. But for people with a plan, they may be less inclined to feel philanthropic about such matters, particularly if their work is their 'shop window' for a possible career move. In such circumstances, seeing your work end up in a product that you might not be impressed with, is not always the way you would want to promote it, flattering though it may be to have it purloined.Where textures are concerned, if you were to repaint the original textures on an FS aeroplane, although you may have some intellectual claim to what you have done, the texture upon which you based things was never yours in the first place, so in such circumstances, any ire or fury about it having been appropriated by someone else, is largely misplaced. Al

Well now you're arguing morals. Morals do not always parallel law, really. Is it truly immoral to pack freeware into an easy to install package for folks like myself (who likes flying--not screwing with traffic .bgls) to enjoy. NO! Think LOGICALLY, folks.

I would argue that it's not about morals. We all know the moral standards in our world have gone down the tubes. It's about respect, plain and simple. Or in this case, the complete lack of respect for other people's wishes and their work. If I make a widget for myself and someone comes along and says, "hey, that's really cool, can you make one for me", and I say "sure, as long as you don't share it with others" and you say "great, thanks". And then I come to find out that you actually did share it with others against my wishes, why then would I ever share anything with you ever again?Chances are, once I got burned, I wouldn't share it with said person ever again. But there's no way to ever do this with freeware in a world where there are hundreds of thousands of FS users. So what's a freeware developer to do? Punish the entire community because of the actions of a few, or keep on producing and sharing in the hopes that the vast majority will honor and respect their wishesThankfully for all of us, the latter of those two arguments has prevailed. But eventually some of the best freeware developers grow tired of being shown a complete lack of respect for their wishes (i.e. their copyright policy) and decide to either quit developing all together or to go the payware route.So for those of you legitimizing the actions of sites like Wingz of Silence or the individuals who produce these products like SKAI or Morten's AI, you are slapping myself and every other freeware developer smack in the face and essentially saying, I don't respect you or your wishes via your copyright policy. Instead you encourage the behavior of those few individuals who openly disrespect the very developers whose work they are compiling.In essence you help to drive the best freeware developers from the very hobby that they enjoy so much, then you complain when developers like Mike Stone quit the FS world in disgust over these very same issues.The problem is that no one is going to be able to enforce any copyright policy when it comes to freeware. That's why it comes down to respect. If you go out and openly copy my work and redistribute it against my wishes, there's nothing I can really do other than add your user name, screen name, handle, whatever, to my "Wall of Shame". So it comes down to individual choice. What kind of man are you? Are you one to stab a guy in the back or are you going to take the high road and respect the wishes of a developer and try to set a good example for your fellow enthusiasts. But as evidenced by the replies already submitted here, there are a few good men and a whole bunch of back stabbers. Interestingly enough, that's in parallel with the rest of life, so for me personally, I won't lose any sleep over it. But it is truly disappointing.

To call those (myself included) that want a simple installation of freeware AI "backstabbers" is crossing the line. Who gives a rat's where the things are downloaded? You released it as freeware for others to enjoy. No one's making a profit here. We all know who did the real work ("easy installation man" included). To question someone's "morals" you don't even know, have never met, because they felt your installation process to be too clunky and overly complicated is laughable. But I digress...EDIT: No, I do not digress. If it weren't for this skAI traffic guy, there's people that may never have seen the work anyway. So there. :(

First, DO NOT compare skAI to Wings of Silence. One is completely freeware, the other is pirated and cracked payware...very different in my books.2nd, the creator of skAI has never taken credit for actually doing all the work and states in the install that he 'simply' combined other FREE ai packages. (simple is relative as he put in a lot of work to make all the packages flow with each other)Point of the matter is what he did it better then any one of the packages that he used...and everything was freeware...which leads a logical person to believe that all these people are simply trying to make fs better for the community. So please explain to me how skAI, providing better AI than individual packages for free, is truly in the wrong...let alone calling people that use it all sorts of names!

red1,If you posted freeware that took hundreds if not thousands of hours to create and put in the Readme: "Do not distribute without permission." and someone did so, wouldn't you be a bit ######? Wouldn't you be a bit more ######, if you, as the developer contacted the distributor and kindly asked him to stop and he wouldn't?The package itself may not be wrong. The manner by which it was put together and distributed, many feel, is wrong.

I wouldn't be ######. I'd wonder why the hell I released my "precious" as freeware for others to download and use (or make *better*).

Zach,I kindly wasn't asking you. We know you would use whatever out there, wherever it came from, and however it got there.

Kindly, this is a public discussion. And the personal attack obviously shows your maturity. I pay for my add ons just like you. I am entitled an opinion, just like you. I kindly ask you refrain from the accusations. That's borderline slander.And Jim, you should know. I purchased ASA and sent an e-mail directly to you for support, Never answered. Thanks.

red1,If you posted freeware that took hundreds if not thousands of hours to create and put in the Readme: "Do not distribute without permission." and someone did so, wouldn't you be a bit ######? Wouldn't you be a bit more ######, if you, as the developer contacted the distributor and kindly asked him to stop and he wouldn't?The package itself may not be wrong. The manner by which it was put together and distributed, many feel, is wrong.

Yes, absolutely the creator of skAI was in the wrong by going against the wishes of the original authors. But that has nothing to do with me or me using skAI, it's the creators problem. I feel as long as this package is out there and not 'illegal' as far as concerning me using it, it would be silly to not use superior add-ons and downgrade because it's all freeware.I absolutly understand the developors point of view, yet I don't see much to be SO angry over...I still recognize whose packages im using, and I also recognize the creator of skAI for putting it all together. But I guess it's tough having the best of both worlds. :(

Would you drive a car if you knew it was stolen??? Same principle here.

Hello,Interesting but boring debate ... :)The AI's devellopers concerned will not sue the author of the compilation.So the AI's devellopers will not have any compensations .. and the compilation author will continue to update and distribute his work by the channel he want.Many will happilly use this compilationSome others will happilly use it but will deny this factSome others will not use it .. as they have the feeling to commit a illegal actionSo ..... use it or not ... the Earth still running :)Regards.Gus.

Sorry Zach no e-mails from you. I looked all the way back to May 22nd. Not sure what e-mail address you used for me.Gus,Wrongs are committed everyday, but that doesn't make them OK. We know that nobody is going to sue anybody else. Life does go on, but is it better or worse?

I personally would be interested to hear from the AI developers as to why they are against such programs as SKai.Now from what I have read the guy that put SKai together never tried to take credit for the Aircraft, flightplans, or the repaints .It seems the same way with Mortens Ai , the only thing they claim is the actual compilation of all these wonderful free ai aircraft.I am just wondering what the issues are .You can go to the library(when it is back up) and find various merges for aircraft and panels, both freeware and payware .Now the people who create these merges do it with other peoples work with no permission , what is the difference ? .I have to say that this thread has for once become a very interesting debate about the pros and cons of a very sticky issue without the usual debacle of previous threads , long may this kind of discussion continue :( Mark

Hi,From one of the WOAI Readmes:"IMPORTANT NOTICE:THESE FILES MAY ONLY BE UPLOADED TO AVSIM or FLIGHTSIM.COM BY THE AUTHOR ONLY. THESE FILES MAY NOT BE UPLOADED TO ANY OTHER SITE WITHOUT THE AUTHOR'S WRITTENPERMISSION."Now, is it RIGHT to follow this notice or disregard it and do whatever you darn please with the file?