15 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

No, I suspect the real reason for not deleting files is because content brings users through to the site.
The more great add-ons, the more clicks on ads, and/or more importantly, the greater the likelihood of making a purchase through the flightsim.to store.

...but that reasoning doesn't make sense after reading the below statement that I didn't quote in my previous post:

4 hours ago, RALF9636 said:

However, you can still permanently hide or archive your mods.

Also, since a lot of the TOS was strangely similar to the popular site Nexus Mods, look what I dug up from a few years ago:

https://www.nexusmods.com/news/14538

Quote

TL;DR: It is our core belief that making modding easier is a noble goal, so more people can enjoy our joint hobby. We are convinced that our collections system, a project we have spent almost 2 years and many work-hours on, is the way to achieve this goal. For the benefit of this system we have to implement a change to how mod file deletions work. The change was announced to mod authors recently, and basically means that mod files are no longer deleted, but rather archived - which will make them inaccessible unless directly requested e.g. via the API. We understand that not everyone in the mod author community shares our convictions and our vision, and that is why we are granting a 1 month grace period in which mod authors can request to have all their files deleted for good by contacting [email protected].

 

I only ask myself, why doesn't any one of the flightsim.to operators take to the AVSIM forum to stop the "drama" and discuss issues with us?

I have seen several times developers turning up here to make things clear if they felt having done unjustice, and often enough this helped to clear the case.

Kind regards, Michael

I understand getting upset over not being able to delete your content, but the other stuff people bring up in the TOS are non issues, some have even been part of the Site's TOS since October 2020.

 

6 hours ago, Phantoms said:

(4.4) You grant to the Platform the right to monetize your User Content on the Service, which may include displaying ads on or within User Content. For the sake of clarity, this Agreement does not entitle you to any payments.

There have been adverts on the website for probably a year or more. This isn't new, this clause is just to allow them to advertise on the page.

 

Edited February 20, 20233 yr by Tuskin38

30 minutes ago, Funky D said:

...but that reasoning doesn't make sense after reading the below statement that I didn't quote in my previous post:

Also, since a lot of the TOS was strangely similar to the popular site Nexus Mods, look what I dug up from a few years ago:

https://www.nexusmods.com/news/14538

Archiving or hiding doesn't remove.
In fact, (with my emphasis in bold😞

Quote

(4.6) Please note: The rights you have given us remain in effect even after this Agreement ends or if we discontinue your access to the Website. We might have a legitimate interest in continuing to share or to keep available your User Content. We may permit the deletion of your User Content in our sole discretion. [...]

(4.7) If you decide to end this Agreement with us, to close or delete your User account, or if we discontinue your access to the Website, Flightsim.to will either archive your User Content, or, in Flightsim.to's sole discretion and based on its legitimate interest, transfer your User Content to an account set up by Flightsim.to if you decided to close or delete your User account. If your account is deleted, deactivated or suspended, this will not affect or terminate the licenses you have granted. 

As I said in my post from earlier today and to which you gave a like, "[...] there are justifiable reasons why a content creator may want to remove content. Denying them the right to do so is riding roughshod over the creators' goodwill when they uploaded free content to the site."

"Just because the terms are widespread (i.e. they are tech industry standard), doesn't make them any less problematic."

 

It's why I will no longer upload my photography to social media / file sharing sites.
I'm not the World's best photographer, but I have taken some pictures that a file sharing / social media giant company may consider good enough to use as advertising to boost their platform without accrediting or paying me for that picture.

This controversy is showing me is some people didn't read the original TOS either.

Specifically section 4.3, has been part of the TOS since late 2020. Word for word.

Edited February 20, 20233 yr by Tuskin38

15 minutes ago, Tuskin38 said:

This controversy is showing me is some people didn't read the original TOS either.

Specifically section 4.3, has been part of the TOS since late 2020. Word for word.

We have actually been discussing this for a long time, but only decided to react when Flightsim.to radically changed their business model and refused to remove our content behaving like a real monopolist.

I would say that flightsim.to is not really doing anything really that out of the ordinary in regards to how mod hosting sites have operated in the past. I remember spending money at flightsim.com in the FS200X days to get better download speeds than just a free user.

That being said, it does seem that flightsim.to is taking a bit of a "less respectful" approach to content creators than they should. For comparison, let's take the grand-daddy of user uploaded content... Steam Workshop. The terms for the Steam Workshop are similar to flightsim.to and any other user-generated hosting site, but they do acknowledge the severability that an author can choose to invoke (Section 6):

You may, in your sole discretion, choose to remove a Workshop Contribution from the applicable Workshop pages. If you do so, Valve will no longer have the right to use, distribute, transmit, communicate, publicly display or publicly perform the Workshop Contribution, except that (a) Valve may continue to exercise these rights for any Workshop Contribution that is accepted for distribution in-game or distributed in a manner that allows it to be used in-game, and (b) your removal will not affect the rights of any Subscriber who has already obtained access to a copy of the Workshop Contribution.

source: https://store.steampowered.com/subscriber_agreement/#6

I would prefer that flightsim.to adopt a similar stance. Choosing only to continue to exercise their rights if there is a game-specific need that requires it (as Steam outlines in (a)).

In the end, anybody who has ever uploaded content to a modding site know that the terms always significantly erode your creator rights. This is the cost of doing business and having somebody else host, maintain and distribute your work. If you feel that your rights are eroded beyond what you deem reasonable, then it is your choice to not use the service and "fly solo", pun intended.

flightsim.to probably did not have this current scenario they are in as the original game in hand when they started. They have grown exponentially since the early days and have become the centralized place because they did things right and the cream rises to the top. This is certainly growing pains on their side, I think, and perhaps, in an overzealous effort to cover all of their bases legally with their rollout of a premium service, they did not realize that their terms are indeed a bit more nefarious than most modders and content creators are accustomed to, and certainly more so than the gorilla in the room ... the Steam Workshop.

It would not affect them one bit if they simply backed off some of their terms and put them a bit more in line with what the Steam Workshop does, to be honest. However, that would include another trip to the lawyers for new language... and lawyers aren't cheap. They may decide that it is not worth it.

Edited February 20, 20233 yr by salasnet
spelling!

As I said before, I agree addon creators being upset over the delete clause, but the rest of the TOS seems fine to me. Pretty typical for a mod site.

Amazon is already the evil itself for some people:

(translated from german with deeple)

"You can delete books from your bookshelf if they have not yet been published or assigned an ISBN. If you have already published your book, undo the publication so that it is no longer available for purchase. The book remains on your bookshelf with the status "Publication undone"."

 

In other words, you can't also delete them

Much ado about nothing.

4 hours ago, Tuskin38 said:

As I said before, I agree addon creators being upset over the delete clause, but the rest of the TOS seems fine to me. Pretty typical for a mod site.

I do broadly agree with that. But as someone pointed out, widely spread doesnt necessarely mean acceptable. And we all know we are a special kind of simmers/gamers 😄 fs.to needed to be made aware of that 😛

4 minutes ago, leprechaunlive said:

And we all know we are a special kind of simmers/gamers 😄 fs.to needed to be made aware of that 😛

Nope, the contrary, some in this community have unfortunately shown again that they could act no better than some brats we see on Steam FPS game forums😅.  

24 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

Nope, the contrary, some in this community have unfortunately shown again that they could act no better than some brats we see on Steam FPS game forums😅.  

Me-0 You-1  😄

7 hours ago, pmb said:

I only ask myself, why doesn't any one of the flightsim.to operators take to the AVSIM forum to stop the "drama" and discuss issues with us?

I have seen several times developers turning up here to make things clear if they felt having done unjustice, and often enough this helped to clear the case.

Kind regards, Michael

Michael, we have known each other for a long time on forums so allow me to respectfully disagree .

Do not reverse the roles. The accused has no obligation to explain themselves, the accuser has the duty to present the case after a thorough screening of the evidences. And as Marc said above ‘Much ado about nothing’.

The .to is evolving from a freeware spirit to a pay per use model. This is no surprise. Why not ? They use terms and conditions which are concocted by overzealous lawyers (I wanted to use the word ‘demented. but some good and friendly people here may be in the legal profession 😁) ? Like everybody else, this is no surprise either.

Upthread I spoke of a snowball effect kind of thread. It starts small and gets bigger and bigger. Until it melts.

Edited February 20, 20233 yr by Dominique_K

obviously, the market will decide…