DC10

Dear All, I have decided to post here so you are aware of the actions by a group called UTT (United Traffic Team) which is a group which releases AI models as freeware, but also sell the sources of their models for profit. http://unitedtrafficteam.com/ Throughout my time in the FS freeware community as a painter, I have (sadly) witnessed countless attempts by people breaching copyrights (stealing other's works), selling freeware as their own product on websites and so forth - these are nothing new but what I have seen recently, in my opinion, is extremely disturbing and disappointing. I was informed that this group had reverse-engineered freeware models, subsequently modified them and released as their own work (AI and source models) (without permission or crediting the original authors). They are selling these source models for profit. The following links are dedicated to covering this matter: http://www.alpha-india.net/forums/index.php?topic=17637.0 http://talk.pafs.wf/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2837&p=25014#p25014 While I cannot personally vouch for the claims regarding the B737-200 and B747-800 AI models - I know for certain that they have stolen Hiroshi Igami's CRJ900/1000 models (which are available in the AVSIM library). Based on Hiroshi's analysis, the fuselage wireframes are nearly an exact match besides some modification work (to reduce the polygons). Below is the evidence: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10200899380910987.1073741880.1359007212&type=1&l=6cb1801994 During the development phase of the original model, it was known there were a couple of deficient areas of the model which was not fixed before release. Unsurprisingly the UTT model also have the same errors. Here is their store where they sell the model source (which is essentially a modification of Hiroshi's work without permission): http://unitedtrafficteam.com/index.php/store1/3d-models-source/item/bombardier-crj-1000-3ds-max-source-model I also became aware that they have copied a number of my textures from the CRJ900/1000 in the source model which they are selling. When confronted a spokesperson from their group claimed they did not steal other's work and were adamant that it was their original work. They then admitted on facebook to have 'simply borrowed' 5% of Hiroshi's model. The takehome message with this is - be careful of these people and it may be worth investigating if you suspect your work has been stolen. Note to moderators: maybe this should be listed on the wall of shame...

wow the model actually looks very good! nice paint too of course :)

mmmm that looks very nice!

I suspect it is Ed's skillful photoshop work :)

still in the pipeline though won't be released under posky obviously.. but.... stay tuned ;)

nice work there Darthy... I remember the good old days when I used to watch planes land at Kai Tak everyday and this dirty bird turn up every now and then... they were nice and loud too!

very nice Ed :)

fantastic shots!

There's no need to be sad because the community will continue to see freeware releases from many of the POSKY developers. There are also many other developers from other groups as well (but I believe the numbers are dwindling due to the uncertainty in FS platform after FSX). The only difference is the freeware aircraft releases will be under a different group name. There is no need to be concerned about the 787 because it will be released one day. My only regret is that the group came to an abrupt end when we were in the midst of planning for 2 major releases (one of which were the 767, the other not yet announced) for the 10th anniversary.Certainly the group has done extremely well to make it to the 10 year mark - POSKY has outlived groups such as Project Freeware, FFG, PSS, IFDG, Meljet etc. - all of which had enormous contribution to the FS community at their peak. In terms of overall downloads I wouldn't be at all surprised if POSKY have easily surpassed 1 million downloads worldwide throughout the 10 years. Throughout the 10 years we have released the following aircraft spanning FS2000 to FS2004 (and FSX):- 4 versions of Boeing 747 (the latest included the entire family of 747s)- 5 versions of Boeing 767 (the latest to be released soon)- Boeing 757-200/300- the entire Boeing 737NG series (including military versions)- 2 versions of the Boeing 777- 2 versions of Bombarider CRJ900s- CRJ700 and CRJ200- Embraer ERJ135-145 series- 2 versions of A330s- A340-200/300- C-17In terms of the portfolio of work I think this will be not be matched anytime soon and the group sincerely values the contribution and help of AVSIM and Flightsim.com for hosting our files in their file libaries so that the community can enjoy these releases.As a member of the group, my personal opinion is that I agree with some of the negative feedback from posters here and what I perceive as attitude problems or abuse of forum members. For this reason some posky team members had elected to stay away from the public forum to focus solely on development. Although the public needs to understand that the perceived 'heavy-handed' approach are sometimes due to forum participants not understanding the rules or abusing the forum system. Secondly the public are generally not aware that posky in its time have faced constant attacks and violations that we face - by people who chooses to abuse the terms and conditions of freeware (by releasing them as payware or selling these on ebay etc.) or try to attack the server by hacking etc. (which occurred on numerous occasions).As others have mentioned Angelone's post is factually incorrect, in particular his comment on donations is misleading and ill-informed.I disagree with the view that POSKY members are all rude. This is a poor generalisation and I would say half of the members are genuinely polite and courteous people e.g. Hiroshi is one good example. It would be a shame to view the entire group as rude and arrogant people.Lastly, as some of you have also mentioned, I discovered the FS community when I downloaded my first FS freeware aircraft - the POSKY 767 and 747v1 back in 2000. It was POSKY that brought me into this hobby and also into painting aircraft.

firstly it's not right to call the mods a ###### since if we don't like them or the rules we can vote with our feet (or a mouse click, perhaps :-lol) that wasn't necessary. Geofa makes quite a good point on the previous post and I don't see it as a personal attack as such. I mean if I dont like how this forum is being transformed I would vote with my feet and go somewhere else, and not agonize myself over the rules which were set here.second. The mods need to realise that the vast majority out there do not deliberately violate the rules to make the mods' lives harder. A simple misunderstanding, for example, could have been resolved through a PM or email. What could have been a misunderstanding is not a deliberate violation of the rules. There is no need to keep going on and on for pages and pages on something that keeps side-tracking this topic or diverting from its original purpose - I am sure a simple reference to the rules wouldve been more than sufficient for Corey to understand why his earlier post was gone.

actually I found it very hard to find out which screenshots of the pairs were from FSX - I honestly could not tell, until I looked at them for more than 30 seconds. So in that case I think there isn't much of an improvement in FSX shown from these screenshots..I mean, to be fair with FSX, there are improvements, but not much are evident from these screenshots. Which brings me to my second point - if from a visual perspective, the difference isn't particularly great - i find it very hard to justify a purchase of the new sim and the investment involved with a new PC system that is capable of running it smoothly - at least for the moment (my computer at the moment certainly would NOT be able to handle FSX). I would rather wait until a point in which I am confident that there are hardware and graphic cards available to run FSX smoothly 100% of the time (30 fps+), not to mention more add-ons.

>Nice, but why so dirty?The only reason it looks so dirty is because the belly is painted so dark - the stuff on the fuselage naturally resembles dirt :-lol

glad to see your problem fixed there Mike :Di am a believer that these sort of problems will simply disappear 1 or 2 years from now as hardware advances. Also there will be add on packs to improve the overall look and that's when we can tap into what FSX can truly offer as a platform.

>Unfortunately taking off or landing on the wrong runway and>to some extremes the wrong airport happens quite often. indeed it does, the most significant example was the Singapore Airlines 744 at Taipei :(

>Do you resize the textures in your project as well,blow them>up to from a 640x480 resolution to 1280x1024 and want me to>judge them? Probably not, because it would look pretty darn>ugly>I certainly did not want to #### you off, but I do get touchy>when your fellow developer buddy bashes another product with>pointless arguments about the quality of the textures pointless arguments about the quality of the textures? Getting touchy? - what's all this - some people don't bury their heads into to sand. When i buy payware I'd expect the product to match both the price expectation and what they have promised.Patrick, do you really expect when you say outrageous things like these that 'some' readers here who have spent 2 or 3 years working on a freeware release not to get ######? especially when you said>Freeware developers develop add-ons, because of the fun for the >hobby. well, how FUN is it to have some people saying some of the things that you've said?And is someone else who makes a valid judgement (at least to themselves) of any product based on the screenshots any less worthy than the opinions you have to offer?The point is if you're willing to pay for the product, then that's fine. Some people who own this 'product' have complained. Other people have complained about other products. At the end of the day the principles of Caveat Emptor still applies.>How many freeware add-ons have been widely announced only to never >see the day of light?And why are you bringing this in? what relevance does this have to the whole issue? Is this only restricted to freeware add-ons? I think if you do a bit of research, the answer is no. It happens to freeware, and it happens to payware.