4 minutes ago, robert young said:

but if you want to be consistent then your first port of call should be Asobo/Microsoft themselves who not only encrypt all of their "premium" aircraft cfg files but also encrypt the same files of THIRD PARTY aircraft producers without consulting them as to their view

Why I havn't and NEVER will purchase from the so called "Market fiasco"

wonderful, remove a mod that makes that $40 trash decent. SMH.  Im done w aerosoft. 

The last product I purchased from AS was Simple Traffic and the only reason was that AIG TC stopped working on me. I passed on the CRJ & the Twotter. I had both for P3D and learned my lesson a long time ago and put them on my black list. I never liked their attitude toward a paying customer.

44 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

I wish I was a pitchfork salesman. I could have sold a few around here.

Get your torches half off!

18 minutes ago, robert young said:

So the test is of INTENTION. If someone genuinely wants to improve something by spotting flaws in an existing product, I

I'm not sure not knowing what is in the blender.  Mods would be OK after a certain build maybe.

ns

17 minutes ago, robert young said:

If you want to be outraged about protected cfg files, fair enough give Aerosoft a hard time, but if you want to be consistent then your first port of call should be Asobo/Microsoft themselves who not only encrypt all of their "premium" aircraft cfg files but also encrypt the same files of THIRD PARTY aircraft producers without consulting them as to their views. 

 

 

I am outraged by it - I'm probably the biggest naysayer of the Marketplace on here.  Unfortunately I still like to support a few devs on there - Carenado namely...  which has been frustrating because in the past, as you know, people have fixed their mistakes and amended minor and even larger bugs.   I'm guessing MS did consult Carenado though, because they entered into a contract with MS to sell on Marketplace only.

I have written to Asobo via Zendesk regarding the locked cfg....whether or not people read it is not my business I guess?

Rob - I can understand though, that it would be incredibly frustrating for someone to change what you did when you worked so hard on a flight model.  In the case of Aerosoft I see things a bit differently.  The product in question was dumbed down to meet the "desires" of MS etc.  A user was willing to address the flight model characteristics for no compensation.  This sort of thing was never required with Realair (or your MSFS BE36 mod) as your products were the crème de la crème!!

18 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

A user was willing to address the flight model characteristics for no compensation.  

Agreed Ryan. This looks perfectly reasonable. Aerosoft are being unreasonable, but MS and Asobo are being even more unreasonable.

Also the best turbo sounds were on the RA planes. Nice job 

ns

41 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

I am outraged by it - I'm probably the biggest naysayer of the Marketplace on here.  Unfortunately I still like to support a few devs on there - Carenado namely...  which has been frustrating because in the past, as you know, people have fixed their mistakes and amended minor and even larger bugs.   I'm guessing MS did consult Carenado though, because they entered into a contract with MS to sell on Marketplace only.

I have written to Asobo via Zendesk regarding the locked cfg....whether or not people read it is not my business I guess?

Rob - I can understand though, that it would be incredibly frustrating for someone to change what you did when you worked so hard on a flight model.  In the case of Aerosoft I see things a bit differently.  The product in question was dumbed down to meet the "desires" of MS etc.  A user was willing to address the flight model characteristics for no compensation.  This sort of thing was never required with Realair (or your MSFS BE36 mod) as your products were the crème de la crème!!

The good news is that encrypted files can be bypassed, but it means creating the files from scratch, which is also a good thing, because there can't be a copyright issue there.  A free mod shouldn't be any issue at all.  In fact, the developer should steal it, if it is good and some modders have even indicated that they would remove the mod, if the developer fixed or updated their product.

I've just read the forum discussion at Aerosoft (which they have now closed to further discussion, by the way!), and I share the feelings of many there that Aerosoft are begin completely unreasonable.  They deserve the same response from the flight simulation community that was served up to Captain Sim.  I will not be purchasing anything further from their product list ... to not take on board and immediately offer a fix for something as basic as a physically impossible 20-knot liftoff would be bad enough, but to strong-arm someone who has created that fix (even though there may be some side-effects which are relatively minor) is crazy.  The mod is only of any use at all to people who have already purchased their aircraft, for heaven's sake!!!!  Further, the availability of a mod like this could easily INCREASE their sales to people who might otherwise refrain from purchasing!

They say it is a copyright issue which they must legally act upon because it includes text file content which is created by Aerosoft and is therefore not to be shared.  I say "piffle" to that.  People who use their paint kit to create new liveries are using much more Aerosoft-created content to produce the new livery than the author of this mod has used of their text files. 

Let Aerosoft know how the community feels about this ridiculous over-reach by boycotting their products until they back down.

 

Edited March 3, 20224 yr by ozzieblr

Ha ha what a joke, they will pay by loss of sales and bad publicity and rightly so

On 2/28/2022 at 7:06 AM, GSalden said:

kok say the file is copyrighted right ?

if so -  it require permission for modification and upload; Asoft must agree before being uploaded anywhere

any example of repaints or any other allowed uploads of products derivates; is because the dev have agree to free distribution of derivates; in this case As did not agree and they categorically say they hold the copyrights.

 

 

Edited March 3, 20224 yr by Marc22

ok, this has gone on long enough. It's now just Aerosoft bashing - no productive info here.

IMHO, too many are reading more into it than is there

• Aerosoft did NOT say that the product could NOT be modded.
• They stated that the modded FILES could not be distributed as they are copyrighted which IS standard procedure
• they stated that uploading the  line mods with instructions on how to apply them is fine.

so if CCM wants to just post the individual changes, all is good.