"For heavens sake, NO we do not need Microsoft telling us what we can use! 

We want the freedom & responsibility to choose for ourselves."

In other words, you won't be buying the new sim, since MS is telling how it looks and behave?

Just because it would be on a MS server doesn't mean you HAVE to use it, so you still have the freedom to choose not to.

"- you could not share your work due to copyright issues."

Excactly, also not everyone may have the same payware scenery, so they wouldn't be able to use it.

I still think users shouls be able to create objects and stuff, and then upload to a server (MS) so they could check that there's no copyright issues.

5 hours ago, Wobbie said:

For heavens sake, NO we do not need Microsoft telling us what we can use! 

We want the freedom & responsibility to choose for ourselves.

Simming is supposed to be all about Fun, Fact & Fiction, & we have had great fictional add-ons to have fun with!

Yes!  I have made lots of fictional fields, big and tiny.  Some I have shared, others are only on my own system so I can fly to them.  I hope I'll still be able to do the same in the new fs.

Just look at XP’s model.  They have a program in which users can manipulate airports and place scenery objects from an official object library.  Users can then upload their airport creations to XP themselves.  XP, itself, would then review it to ensure that it is better than the current default airport, and also that it was made completely with the standard XP objects.  If it passed both of these tests, they would then publish it as one of the default airports in the sim during the next update.  

However, that doesn’t deter users from creating airports with their own objects.  There are numerous freeware developers who have created amazing object libraries and also amazing freeware airports for XP using those libraries.  Obviously, they could not be used as a default airport in XP (because of the custom libraries), however, they are still accessible to download at the user’s own risk.  It’s just like anything, people must do a little due-diligence before downloading something.

I strongly recommend that a number of people on here, not familiar with XP, take a little time to review and browse through the XPlane forums website and just look at the content that has been created.  Their freeware community thrives.  And it is really great quality.  Look at the freeware sceneries by MisterX6.

I don't really understand 'copyright' when it comes to airports.  If I take a picture of a building and post the pic online, am I breaking copyright law?  If I take a picture of a city and post it, should I expect to be sued by a million different people?

What is this public likeness that anyone could hold a copyright on?  If I start a business and put a sign in my front yard, should I sue everyone who looks at the sign or only the people who find it interesting enough to take a picture of and post it somewhere?

I can understand a company like FedEx holding a copyright on their logo but how can an airport have a copyright on the way the buildings look?

7 minutes ago, sightseer said:

I don't really understand 'copyright' when it comes to airports.  

A complex legal issue for which you can have a glimpse here

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama

 

I don't think there would be an issue with the look or shape of buildings, but if you had, for example, a hangar with a logo painted on it.

I've never created ground scenery and I understand that some want absolute perfect recreations of airports but I'm perfectly OK with the 'good enough' approach that could be achieved with a scenery creator that allowed one to paint surfaces using a wide variety of textures (wood plank1, wood plank2, brick1, brick2, concrete1, concrete2, etc etc etc).  A library of textures could be available to everyone and individuals could upload their own texture collections for others to use.  The scenery creator would make it easy to create 3D models and then apply textures and add animated prefab objects (windsocks or animals maybe).

You couldnt copyright an artists conception I wouldnt think.  You might have to create Dear John tractors though 🙂 (knod to ATS)

 

15 minutes ago, sightseer said:

I've never created ground scenery and I understand that some want absolute perfect recreations of airports but I'm perfectly OK with the 'good enough' approach that could be achieved with a scenery creator that allowed one to paint surfaces using a wide variety of textures (wood plank1, wood plank2, brick1, brick2, concrete1, concrete2, etc etc etc).  A library of textures could be available to everyone and individuals could upload their own texture collections for others to use.  The scenery creator would make it easy to create 3D models and then apply textures and add animated prefab objects (windsocks or animals maybe).

You couldnt copyright an artists conception I wouldnt think.  You might have to create Dear John tractors though 🙂 (knod to ATS)

You go way beyond a "placer" like Instant Scenery was  ! What would be the use to have MS remake a Sketchup or a Blender etc. And you also have "millions" of free material textures on the Internet. 

22 hours ago, domkle said:

 

You go way beyond a "placer" like Instant Scenery was  ! What would be the use to have MS remake a Sketchup or a Blender etc. And you also have "millions" of free material textures on the Internet. 

I wasnt thinking anything complicated.  I was thinking that the AI can already create 3D models based on satelite/aerial photos but it wont put realistic real world textures on those buildings so a user could do that part using an 'available to all' in sim library of tools and textures and users could upload their own textures and models for others to use.