Jump to content

Matt Davis striked by IVAO


Recommended Posts

Posted

Is this even a valid claim?

 

You could be making a video of the aerosoft airbus and than have aerosoft sue you because you used their aircraft in your video you are making money from, that would basically be the same thing. And for a surplus, the IVAO_MTL is a collection of FREE aircraft from the community or from developers who have vanished and the IVAO_MTL is free.

 

And completely aside from that, it is time for IVAO to grow up.

 

I have spoken, go on and have a nice day

Yes if Aerosoft, PMDG or any content provider, can enforce copyright, should they choose to, . Most don't, (as far as screenshots and Youtube videos go) but they still do own all rights to their work.

Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

Posted

My question is does IVAO actually own the rights to these models? My understanding is the MTL is a tool to install AI packages made from developers like AIARDVARK, FSPainter, etc for IVAO. Similar to what WOAI does? If so then it's these developers that own the copyrights to their models, not IVAO. They only own the rights to their own MTL tool. So do they actually have standing to even invoke a copyright claim? Or does that have to come from the AI model developers themselves?

That's also what I have heard. I have notice. Some of the Painters included in the MTL package stated that IVAO never ask them to use there liverys. But, lets wait and see,we should have the answer in about 2 days.

Posted

I would think that the appearance of IVAO MTL models in a YouTube video illustrating online flying (in general) or other aspects of flight simming, would be covered under "fair use" provisions of copyright law.

 

On the other hand, if the individual was producing instructional videos specifically showing how to use the models in ways prohibited by IVAO's rules, I can see why they might be upset.

Jim Barrett

Licensed Airframe & Powerplant Mechanic, Avionics, Electrical & Air Data Systems Specialist. Qualified on: Falcon 900, CRJ-200, Dornier 328-100, Hawker 850XP and 1000, Lear 35, 45, 55 and 60, Gulfstream IV and 550, Embraer 135, Beech Premiere and 400A, MD-80.

Posted

Just to make clear, this isn't about IVAO models appearing on a video.

 

The argument is about using IVAO models on VATSIM which has been prohibited.  (whether it should be prohibited or not, is a totally different discussion)

  • Upvote 2
Posted

I don't see a youtube video as being in violation of copyright as all you are doing is displaying using a product, even if he does make money at it, it is obviously something he enjoys doing.

 

IVAO is a very small bubble so really not worth the time/trouble in the first place, if this is what troubles you guys then sorry but maybe you should go outside and enjoy life, time is too short and your just wasting it. 

  • Upvote 1

Matthew Kane

 

Posted

all you are doing is displaying using a product, even if he does make money at it, it is obviously something he enjoys doing.

 

The videos show a combination, that isn't allowed to exist.

 

What if he made videos on how to install paid 3rd party liveries on the NGX? AFAIK that's something that PMDG wouldn't be too happy about.

  • Upvote 1
Posted

Just to make clear, this isn't about IVAO models appearing on a video.

 

The argument is about using IVAO models on VATSIM which has been prohibited.  (whether it should be prohibited or not, is a totally different discussion)

The question is though, are they IVAO models, or just a compilation of AI models from other developers, installed with their tool? If they are IVAO developed models then of course they have every right to enforce their copyright how they see fit, if it's the latter, then do they have the right to impose such a restriction since they actually don't own the copyrights to them? Unless the developers gave them that authority. If not, then only the original developers, can enforce such a restriction. In this case I would bet many of these models are available individually right here in the AVSIM library.  

  • Upvote 1

Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

Posted

This is complete B.S.  Matt has not violated their copyrights in any way, shape or form.  He is not distributing their files.  The AI aircraft are not even the subject of, or even a major part of his videos. (I have never even noticed them.)   And IVAO really does not have any rights to these models in the first place.

 

Let's see how ridiculous we can get!  Froogle makes videos of flying PMDG models.  I guess he needs to shut off his site.  He also uses Aerosoft aircraft and airports.  Ditto.

 

Someone makes a video.  On that video, they are wearing clothes.  The clothing manufacturer claims a copyright violation because the person on the video is displaying (i.e. wearing) their clothes.  I guess if you are going to appear on YouTube, you must do so being naked so you do not violate the clothing manufacturer's copyrights.

 

And when it comes to things like aircraft and liveries, who really owns the copyright?  Is it the person who made the aircraft model or the livery?  Actually, the aircraft manufacturer would claim that they own the model.  So if you want to make a model of a Boeing 737, you probably need to clear it with Boeing.  PMDG certainly did.

 

With respect to liveries, do those belong to the livery painter, or to the airlines?  There is a reason why Microsoft made up their own fictitious airlines.  They did not want to have to negotiate with real world airlines to use real world liveries.

 

Actually, copyright laws exist for the benefit of the big boys, and not little schmucks like us.  Disney does not want people making pornographic cartoons with Mickey and Minnie Mouse.  The NFL does not want people using their trademarks to take away business from their own franchisees.  Sony does not want people downloading illegal copies of their music.  These laws exist for the benefit of the likes of Disney, the NFL and Sony, not for bit players like IVAO.  The twits at IVAO really are showing a lot of hubris here!

 

Generally a fair amount of latitude has been given to little schmucks like us who want to make YouTube videos when there is no real economic harm to a copyright holder.  (Of course, don't use one of Taylor Swift's songs as your background music!)  The Big Boys are not interested in us little schmucks for the most part;  they are after the big time infringers.  (Although some of the big boys, like Sony, have been known to send threatening letters to little schmucks like us.)  Airlines are not interested in suing livery painters who use their "intellectual property" in painting liveries, for the most part; although, they could.

 

Fortunately, Matt has a simple remedy.  He can send a counter-notice to Youtube.  These forms can easily be found using Google.  After Youtube receives the form, they should restore the video.

 

Part of this is understanding how the Digital Millenium Copyright Act works.  A provider like Youtube is given a safe harbor (that is, they cannot be sued by a copyright holder) so long as they follow the requirements of the act.  Upon receiving a take down notice, they are required to remove the content.  They do not make a determination as to whether the claim is valid;  that is determined by courts (and usually Federal courts).  They just remove the offending video.  If they receive a counter-notice, in the required form, they can restore the video.  If the alleged copyright holder still feels aggrieved, they can file a lawsuit for the copyright violation.  But so long as Youtube follows the requirements of the act, they are pretty (but not 100%) safe.

 

Now, most people do not file the counter-notice, either because they are not aware of it, or because it is too much of a pain in the butt.  But once it is received, most alleged copyright holders don't take any further action for the same reasons.

 

But all of us should be thankful to IVAO for protecting us from harmful and illegal videos showing people enjoying our hobby.

  • Upvote 7
Posted

This is complete B.S.  Matt has not violated their copyrights in any way.  He is not distributing their files.  The AI aircraft are not even the subject of, or even a major part of his videos.  And IVAO really does not have any rights to these models in the first place.

 

Let's see how ridiculous we can get!  Froogle makes videos of flying PMDG models.  I guess he needs to shut off his site.  He also uses Aerosoft aircraft and airports.  Ditto.

 

 

But all of us should be thankful to IVAO for protecting us from harmful and illegal videos showing people enjoying our hobby.

Whether we like it or not, a copyright owner can put restrictions on how their work is used or displayed. As Jarkko mentioned the problem wasn't the video itself it was the use of the models on VATSIM instead of IVAO. If they own the copyrights or has the authority from the copyright holder, then they have every right to enforce such a restriction whether we like it or not You know up til recently MS wouldn't even let you monetize their gaming videos, including FS through Youtube. You had to use MS authorized sites such as machinima to do so. They have since relaxed that rule after the negative out cry against it.

  • Upvote 1

Thanks

Tom

My Youtube Videos!

http://www.youtube.com/user/tf51d

Posted

 They have since relaxed that rule after the negative out cry against it.

 

Which is exactly the point here. It is called discretion and people need to apply it, if the world was black and white then we would all be a stupid zero tolerance society, thankfully the world is more grey but too many people have forgotten how to apply discretion, Zero Tolerance is a licence for the stupid to apply stupidity in everything, people need to think for themselves. 

 

Matt making his vidoes should be of a low priority to anyone and he is not damaging anything.....really get a life people, flight sim problems are even worse the first world problems. 

Matthew Kane

 

Posted

You, or course, are assuming (1) that it is their work, and (2) they have a valid copyright claim.  It appears they have actually appropriated someone else's work and are now trying to claim a copyright on it.  Moreover, can they lay a claim to models, when the model is actually the intellectual property of the aircraft manufacturer?

 

Several years ago, manufacturers of plastic aircraft models started moving their operations offshore because the aircraft manufacturers claimed that the plastic models violated their copyrights.  That is they owned the design of, say a Boeing 737, and no one could make a model of it without their permission.

 

Similarly, railroads and airlines started asserting copyright claims to their liveries.  So if you wanted to make an HO model of  Union Pacific engine, you would have to get permission from the Union Pacific railway before you could use it.

 

So does IVAO actually "own" the design of any AI aircraft, or are they merely claiming someone else's property as their own.  Similarly, if someone make a United Airlines livery, do they own that livery, or have they simply stolen the intellectual property of United Airlines.  After all, companies like Boeing and Cessna spend a lot of money for the designs of the aircraft.  Airlines pay graphic artists a lot of money for their liveries and have a lot invested in their trademarks.  What makes IVAO think they can simply steal these items and claim them as their own?

  • Commercial Member
Posted

If they own the copyrights or has the authority from the copyright holder, then they have every right to enforce such a restriction

 

The second part is not true; you cannot license the right to enforce copyright - there was a large number of lawsuits tossed recently because the third party doing the enforcing did not own the copyright and therefore did not have standing.

 

IVAO should be grateful people are using their models - it's a good hook to perhaps get them more involved with the network as a whole. If it's not enough, then maybe they should focus on that rather than their precious "rules".

 

Cheers!

 

Luke

  • Upvote 2

Luke Kolin

I make simFDR, the most advanced flight data recorder for FSX, Prepar3D and X-Plane.

  • Commercial Member
Posted

I'm actually very familiar with the legal points that would come into play in this case (plus it's International Law, under which it is extremely expensive to pursue matters), and I can't understand why IVAO would do this.

 

The only result I can see is a temporary interruption of Matt's videos, and that seems crass to me, even akin to an attack. Shoot, what they could have done instead is have Matt promote their network. I can't be sure that the person who did this really thought this one through, one does NOT recovery from bad PR in the flight simulation community - ever.

 

I watch these types of things fairly closely, and looking at everything as a whole I have to wonder if IVAO is either slowly pursuing a commercial venture of some sort, or they want IVAO users to fly strictly on their network, or both. Time will tell. Neither of these pursuits would be good for the flight simulation community.

  • Upvote 4

Dave Hodges

 

System Specs:  I9-13900KF, NVIDIA 4070TI, Quest 3, Multiple Displays, Lots of TERRIFIC friends, 3 cats, and a wonderfully stubborn wife.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...