Posted over at AI-AARDVARK

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

I just posted this over at the AIArrdvark forums:"I am going to try to cover a number of points in this message that have been up in this thread. Please note that I don't typically go to other forums and post, and doing so here is simply because of the many misconceptions that seem to be rampant in the AI community. I would like to set some things straight, and let you draw your own conclusions...First, Ben, AVSIM serves up terabytes a month. See here:http://library.avsim.net/viewstats.p...=fileperiod-30We typically average 80+ gigabytes a day and our largest day was nearly 139 gigabytes. If anyone would like to set up a system that handles that much data flow from JUST a file library, please feel free. It would give our system a break by relieving some of the load and therefore reduce our monthly bandwidth cost, which is not cheap, despite what some may tell you.Let me now dispell some other misleading or inaccurate statements made...Stewart was NOT asked to leave AVSIM as a result of any email message that we received from any author. Stewart was doing a fantastic job of assisting in the management of the library, and we felt that on another matter, that it was best to part company. I am a 55 year old senior manager in a Fortune 10 company. I know better than to act on what could be personal agendas in handling personnel issues, and so do the senior management of AVSIM.AVSIM has very simple rules about the content of the file library. One of them has to do with "protested" files. A simple protest of a file's presence in the library will result in the file being removed. Period. In our many years of running the library, we have not seen but a couple of instances where this protest policy was abused. Everyone with an ounce of grey matter would or should understand that you don't protest without justification. If you do, it will come back to haunt you, as in "crying wolf" and loss of credibility.The point is that we will respond to copyright infringement, lack of attribution, and the numerous other sins that can be committed in file sharing in our community. Just be aware that the power you have as authors can also be abused, and we see that too frequently.What do I mean by that? Well, frankly, this latest incident. AVSIM hosted the files that were downloaded (apparently - and I say apparently because I don't know that as fact, but will accept the assumption that they were). They then were apparently compiled without attribution or with prior permission.Along comes Mike T. with his review of the Frankfurt scenery. He mentions this package, and touts its virtues, not knowing that the compilation was without permission or attribution. He gets thoroughly raked over the coals in our forums and here. And then we get requests to remove files from the library and email telling us what smucks WE are.DC, you are absolutely right. There are alternatives to AVSIM and you are correct in your implicit "who needs AVSIM". Answer? Nobody. Now some personal thoughts... And please, do not hesitate to quote me anywhere you wish...I find it extremely enlightening that freeware authors are rightfully upset that their files are poached, recompiled, do without attribution, and frankly suffer from those who have no compunction in taking credit for others work. I also find it instructional that these authors also deservedly get upset when they appear not to be appreciated. Believe me, we know your pain. Why?As far as I am concerned folks, I am stating the very obvious here, and I am continually amazed and disheartened by this realization... AVSIM IS THE LARGEST, MOST OBVIOUS EXAMPLE OF FREEWARE IN OUR HOBBY AND THOSE THAT SHOULD KNOW THIS BEST, ARE THE FIRST TO SLAM US FOR IMAGINED INFRACTIONS OR INSULT - OUR FELLOW FREEWARE CONTRIBUTORS TO THE HOBBY.There are many contributors to the hobby that have departed because they felt slighted by that community. Well, you know what guys and gals? We get slighted and slammed multiple times daily, and mostly by freeware authors. Go figure.So, I am pretty disgusted by all this infantile crap. All of this could have been far less damaging to all had someone simply took Mike T's post as one ignorant of the situation (and like Mike, I did not have a clue about the package or its origins until this mess broke out, so I am as guilty as he is, so to speak). A simple email without threats and blustering, or demands for our "official" position, would have gone a long way to defuse this.But, what do we have now? AVSIM is once again the "evil empire". So be it. Someday we may react the same way that numerous freeware authors have reacted over the years... We'll simply take our toys and go home."

[RFields5421 1]

". He mentions this package, and touts its virtues, not knowing that the compilation was without permission or attribution. "I find this statement unbelievable from someone with any level of experience in Flight Simulator and/or AI, but I don't know your background. If you are not familiar with any of these, my apology.How can someone not look at the package, see PAI models, AIA models, CDAI models, Fernando Martinez models - and not know that something is fishy or wrong about the package.Maybe he is not experienced with AI, I'll grant the possibility. However, "the Adobe Traffic Pack is a full global AI Traffic offering which is a gathering of existing AI traffic sources from PAI, CDAI, FSPainter, AI Aaardvark, etc. It combines all of these extremely high quality and frame-rate friendly AI aircraft into a single area."The license agreement this person accepted clearly states the aircraft and repaints are the work and property of Adobe.The several posts later - "Let's not go overboard here. If files have been used without your permission then that is a problem you have with Adobe et al....This is the first time I've heard of any infringments"In late September or early October, your forum moderators first edited a thread to remove links to the Adobe and Tantris packages and a similar package offered by a couple gentlemen in Europe. that thread was then locked and soon removed from this web site. An action which many people applauded.In mid-December another thread promoting the Adobe package was started on these forums. I was one person who pointed out not only that the files were used without permission but e-mailed your staff asking that the links in the thread be removed. I received no response.Finally, "Today was the FIRST DAY that anyone made any claims about Adobe." All anyone asked was (1) remove the link, (2) acknowledge that the package is not the work of the "developer" and apparently contains material used without permission.You did do that - 56 hours after the original post, 52 hours after the download link was posted for the third time in a month on these fourms, over 48 hours after the first e-mail I sent, 36 hours after the first post on that thread about the source of the material.The "infantile crap" was "I am extremely disappointed that a member of Avsim Staff is seen to be publically applauding these files in this forum".We fully understand that Avsim cannot police all the downloads of their material. We also assume based on our experience had your library managers seen the package uploaded to your library - they would have raised red flags about the content.We also understand people can make mistakes. But when e-mails and PM's are ignored and people who use "Avsim Staff" in their signature continually say the benefits of the package outweigh any "let's not go overboard on this "pirate" stuff."Avsim does great things for the Flight Simulator community. It is also a large organization which everyone cannot watch every second. It is also a large volunteer bureacracy which can, and often does, ignore issues which are raised.I'm not going to take my toys and go home. I do think that is the wrong approach. But it is an understandable reaction to attacks and being ignored.Tom, if you want to see "infantile crap" or an overreaction - look to the people with "Avsim Staff" in their signature who have supported and promoted this package for over a month on several threads.Sincerely,Reggie FieldsEdit - there still at least one additional thread promoting this product which I've just e-mailed you about - the second time I've reported the thread.

[RFields5421 1]

Tom, Ken, JohnCi,Thank you for your prompt action this morning.