>This version of FS sounds great .... I don't have to buy much>payware :-lolThat's what I'm hoping and thinking all along. The only problem is that SOME 3rd party people will make it EVEN BETTER and it will be hard to pass on some of those! Really, to me being a RW VFR pilot, Ultimate Traffic, Point Lighting & EVEN better scenery would be my choices.Carmine http://forums.avsim.net/images/wave.gifhttp://img155.imageshack.us/img155/7118/phoenixtp8mg.jpg

>This version of FS sounds great .... I don't have to buy much>payware :-lolPeople say that every version and yet...

>This brings up an interesting question; who owns the idea of>an add-on? If the development team takes an idea from and>add-on do they owe anything to the developer of that idea? >Say they create an interface similar to FSUIPC, do they>compensate the developer, or is it just considered normal>evoloution of FS and the add-on developers must find new ways>to upgrade the sim?>>I've wondered about this since hearing about the camera views>and other enhancements that are similar to current add-on>upgrades for FS9, though it doesn't matter to me either way,>some add-ons may become obsolete with FSX and I'm curious as>to how the add-on community adjusts to this.>>Ian. In my limited understanding of this area, if you create a new idea (i.e., a process or application of a pre-existing process) then you need to hold a patent on it. If you release your new idea without a patent, it becomes what is called "prior knowledge", and so is free for everyone. This is a different concept to a copywrite, where your work can not be used or reproduced (e.g., a plane model or paint scheme). I doubt any of the addon companies file for patents but it is standard to copywrite your work.So in your example, it would appear to me that a way of gaining new camera views is an idea and so patentable (although I doubt it's been patented), whereas a new paint scheme for a plane is a piece of work that would be covered by a copywrite, thus you couldn't 'pinch' that.