45 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

There has been some back-pedalling but the damage is done I think.  Trust has been lost. All unnecessary and pure self destruction. 

I am sure the site will survive and will build back over time, but there has been some poor decision making and lack of judgement. 

Good thing you’re an opinion of 1. I think this was typical needless drama started by one guy that snowballed into ludicrous speed. I very much enjoy flightsim.to and never lost trust nor think any damage that will be in anyway meaningful or lasting was done. I for one will continue to visit and purchase from there.

Got Friends and all their products are gone from flightsim.to

1 hour ago, KL791 said:

. Tomorrow I will take care of my day time job and then prepare the Version 4 of Global AI Ship Traffic.

This is more important than anything!!! Thank you Kaii🙂. 

 

 

Edited February 21, 20233 yr by Lord Farringdon

2 hours ago, KL791 said:

Tomorrow I will take care of my day time job and then prepare the Version 4 of Global AI Ship Traffic.

The only important news in this thread😁

Some of this seems legit and some out of proportion.

Even though there may be some fault here it just feels like American cancel culture all over again.

7 hours ago, B777ER said:

Good thing you’re an opinion of 1. I think this was typical needless drama started by one guy that snowballed into ludicrous speed. I very much enjoy flightsim.to and never lost trust nor think any damage that will be in anyway meaningful or lasting was done. I for one will continue to visit and purchase from there.

What?  Like me and all of the creators that have since removed their stuff from the site.
I am not too fussed about fs.to actually, but if it upsets the creators of the really good stuff we get for free, then I will always fall behind the creators, not a website with difficult TOS's.

This 'drama' was initiated by them and nobody else, they made the change. 
So don't send your vitriol this way and make it personal by saying 'Good thing you’re an opinion of 1'.  Appalling.

Edited February 21, 20233 yr by bobcat999

Great to see that flightsim.to is in discussion with the creators. Hopefully the issue can be solved now.

 

Edited February 21, 20233 yr by Tim-HH

6 hours ago, Sonosusto said:

it just feels like American cancel culture all over again.

What on earth does any of this discussion have to do with "cancel culture"? Nobody is "canceling" anyone. Creators are raising questions. This is completely legitimate. 

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

 Like me and all of the creators that have since removed their stuff from the site.
I am not too fussed about fs.to actually, but if it upsets the creators of the really good stuff we get for free, then I will always fall behind the creators, not a website with difficult TOS's.

Exactly, and it appears flightsim.to is listening. 

1 hour ago, bobcat999 said:

This 'drama' was initiated by them and nobody else, they made the change.

The "change" was there since 2021.
Now, a few stumbled over the ToS which they have signed and overlooked obvisiously. (Some already agreed, that they have never looked into it)

But the drama started and we can see, that FS.to is now willingly to change some controversy parts.

 

Hope that the content creators now change their opinion, because it seems they get mostly fullfilled what they wanted. If that doesn't happen, I also agree that this whole dramas purpose was only to make a drama. 

I´m not a creator, but FS.fo is the first really usable and organized download site in my 25 years of flight simming.

All your downloads nicely sorted, updates offered when available.

I dont care to check 20 (or more) different sites to check if there are any new updates.

If creators want to delete their stuff they should do so and it's my loss that I maybe cant use them anymore in the future but there is enough to enjoy and I will get over it.

 

 

 

Ignore, wrong thread.

Edited February 21, 20233 yr by Zangoose

2 hours ago, guenseli said:

Hope that the content creators now change their opinion, because it seems they get mostly fullfilled what they wanted. If that doesn't happen, I also agree that this whole dramas purpose was only to make a drama. 

What reason should there be for this when you read the last sentence?

Most of freeware developers don't have money for lawyers or know better things to do with it. The next dispute against unknown persons in Tonga is only a matter of time.Why should one do that to oneself?

 

Edited February 21, 20233 yr by simmershome

30 minutes ago, simmershome said:

Most of freeware developers don't have money for lawyers or know better things to do with it. The next dispute against unknown persons in Tonga is only a matter of time.Why should one do that to oneself?

 

There is no "unknown person in Tonga". The domain is registered by a known person in Germany, as we all know, I think. The .to domain can be registered from everywhere, even from Germany.

Edited February 21, 20233 yr by crimplene

Many of the offended “creators”, at least of airport mods created using the MSFS SDK, may be making inaccurate assumptions about the IP rights they have in their creation.

I have exactly one file uploaded to flightsim.to, a reworking of my home airport to layout new taxiway paths to correspond to new construction that took place in 2018. I laid grass over the old taxiways that no longer exist, fixed the type and positioning of the PAPI lights to correspond to reality, changed the numbering of the taxiways and signs to reflect the actual numbering, added a new terminal gate and ramp lighting etc. All of this was done using MS-supplied assets within the SDK airport editor - there is no “original artwork” created by me.

For situations like this, the SDK itself has terms and conditions that read similar to flightsim.to:

“Changes. If you make any modifications, contributions or changes to the Software ("Changes"), you hereby grant Microsoft the perpetual, royalty-free, worldwide and irrevocable right to freely copy, modify, distribute and otherwise use such Changes, including sharing the Changes with the MSFS community. You represent and warrant your Changes will not violate any applicable laws and will not infringe on any third party intellectual property rights.”

I am speaking only of mods to existing default sim objects, not original work. Aircraft repaints can certainly be seen as original artwork or original IP, as can aircraft models created from scratch in Blender, and aircraft systems built from scratch in either JS or WASM - (not re-purposing existing avionics like the new AAU1 G1000/G3000).

People who do airport mods in X-Plane and submit them to the Scenery Gateway, do so with the proviso that those mods will eventually become part of the default XP scenery. There is no “right of deletion” once that happens.

A similar situation will undoubtedly apply if and when MS implements their own Scenery Gateway for MSFS.

Flightsim.to is not a charity. I am sure they have substantial costs associated with hosting and distributing files to a broad audience at absolutely no cost to content submitters. I certainly have no problem with their plan to institute an optional subscription model for content downloaders, offering faster download speeds and no advertising. For those who choose not to participate, advertising is an inevitable part of a “free” service, just as it is with YouTube for non-subscribers. Flightsim.to has to recoup their costs somehow.

 

I am so looking forward to the good old days of having 25,000000000000 bookmarks for each product website......can't wait 😔