To keep that site alive, someone have to bear its costs. Nothing is for free.

Apart of that, after an attempt to support the website, I stopped buying add-ons through them months ago, after sadly discovering they intent to limit the downloads of your purchased products to a no matter what number is, according to the site manager judgment or criteria, if there's any.

Also, hopefully, with the new Creator Program, the developers won't repeatedly upload updates of their add-ons after simply changing a rivet or a light pole on their aircraft and scenery to get to the number.

Edited February 17, 20233 yr by edpatino

If it's $5 for one month and $15 for three months, where's the "and profit from a discount as well?"

What about AVSIM? I used to use the file library here all the time (FSX, etc) But why not now? Am I missing something?

1 hour ago, styckx said:

All good things end up becoming about $$$

Who’s going to pay for the site maintenance?

If as a creator this worries you, just upload your files to avsim instead.

I believe that flightsim.to makes enough to fund its service from advertising (though correct me if I'm wrong).

If flightsim.to needs to charge users to survive, then that's à decision for them but they facilitate a service for creators who in the main do not charge for their work and could end up killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Personally, I am quite happy to use a free service even if it hamstrung by slow download speeds.

Finally, thanks Superspud for all of your excellent work and for the other creators who also produce wonderful addons.  I know from experience how many hours can go into these things and how rewarding it can be seeing how much enjoyment it brings.

1 hour ago, Twenty6 said:

If it's $5 for one month and $15 for three months, where's the "and profit from a discount as well?"

I wondered the same, math is off there haha

My understanding from reading the article on their site a few days back was that nothing is changing for those downloading addons if you choose not to pay for premium access.  You just get to bypass ads, timers (which you still got even with ad blockers), and faster downloads which is good during those peak times especially after a patch.  It's also not a recurring "membership".  You pay for however many months you want up to 3 and that's it.  I think of it as a way to donate to their costs, which they already had a donation thing I believe, but get to have some extra perks for it.  That's just my opinion though, and like many here I definitely hope they don't actually change the free membership from what it was and start pushing people to the paid one.  I think the fact that it's not a recurring membership with no option to make it so kind of points to them not trying to do that, but that's just how I'm seeing it at least.

3 hours ago, regis9 said:

I  have no issue paying $5/month.  I do think that content makers should be getting a better deal though…that needs to change or this will all backfire.

I don't either.  The download speed and general speed of the site is awful most of the time.

Also, there's that...:

(4.3) Licenses you are granting us: By submitting or posting User Content to the Service (either directly or through a Third Party Service) you grant this Site a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, sublicensable, assignable, unrestricted, worldwide license to use the User Content, together with all consents or waivers (if any) necessary to distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, transmit, communicate to the public and modify the User Content, by any means and in all media formats and channels now known or hereafter devised in perpetuity, and to advertise and promote such use, without further notice to, or permission from, you or any other person, and without compensation or reference to you or any other person.

Wich makes taking something out, one of your upload for example, that for whatever reason, you dont want to leave there, IMPOSSIBLE. Its gotta stay there, until the end of times, and they can do whatever they want with it. And that INCLUDES, modifying it (or not), and sell it in their store page, without you being able to do anything OR getting any royalty whatsoever. Almost sounds like stealing right....wait, it is stealing sorry.

Edited February 18, 20233 yr by leprechaunlive

34 minutes ago, flyinion said:

My understanding from reading the article on their site a few days back was that nothing is changing for those downloading addons if you choose not to pay for premium access.  

Did we have capchas above a certain limit of downloads/time until now? I never saw one, and there were days where I downloaded quite a number of files.

Kind regards, Michael

3 minutes ago, pmb said:

Did we have capchas above a certain limit of downloads/time until now? I never saw one, and there were days where I downloaded quite a number of files.

Kind regards, Michael

Yes that’s right, I think the only time I saw one was when I bought GSX and downloaded dozens of GSX files in one sitting.

5 minutes ago, leprechaunlive said:

Also, there's that...:

(4.3) Licenses you are granting us: By submitting or posting User Content to the Service (either directly or through a Third Party Service) you grant this Site a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, sublicensable, assignable, unrestricted, worldwide license to use the User Content, together with all consents or waivers (if any) necessary to distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, transmit, communicate to the public and modify the User Content, by any means and in all media formats and channels now known or hereafter devised in perpetuity, and to advertise and promote such use, without further notice to, or permission from, you or any other person, and without compensation or reference to you or any other person.

Yeah, no.
I understand their reasoning for having that clause in place. It protects them from having a mass withdrawal of creator content from their site and reducing the desirability to users of taking a paid subscription.

However, it's an awful, awful clause that will in the end prevent a lot of new content from being uploaded. Which invariably leads to a drop off in user interest and paid subs.

 

1 hour ago, omarsmak30 said:

Who’s going to pay for the site maintenance?

That's the conundrum!
Avsim appealing for donations didn't work out well in the end. So few people donate, that the library really feels like a timewarp and isn't nearly as popular.
Flightsim.com is hosting all of 509 files. NexusMods hosts 508.

Simviation's two-tier downloading doesn't appear to be succesful either. Only 240 or so files for MSFS uploaded there in the 2.5 years since MSFS was released, compared to flightsim.to's ~49,000.

So how do they pay for server costs?
I can't believe the commission from selling payware is sufficient. Hardly anyone posts that they buy from them compared to stores like Simmarket, Contrail, Orbx, or directly from developers themselves. They also wouldn't need to pursue a 'Premium Membership' programme if commission paid the hosting costs.

Hard to work out what the solution should be, yet the taking of full ownership of all content rights is going to word not allowed a lot of people and dent the site's popularity with users.

4 minutes ago, F737MAX said:

Yeah, no.
I understand their reasoning for having that clause in place. It protects them from having a mass withdrawal of creator content from their site and reducing the desirability to users of taking a paid subscription.

However, it's an awful, awful clause that will in the end prevent a lot of new content from being uploaded. Which invariably leads to a drop off in user interest and paid subs.

It's definitely tone deaf and it'll ultimately have far more of a detrimental effect than agreeing to pull files when requested. Those who do want them removed will have a very valid reason to do so almost all of the time. 

Many a term and condition is there for a good reason that many people haven't considered. I'm not really sure how that one can be justified. 

Those who wish to deny the world their wonderful art out of pure spite probably get everything they deserve. 

As for myself, I was aware of the rights thing for a while. It does put me off placing anything new and major on there. I'm not really into chucking a hundred hours of work into a black hole. 

Most of the other existing options are rather too crusty for my liking. Perhaps Pornhub is looking to diversify.

Is clause 4.3 above new or has that always been there?