Mckrty Posted July 10, 2016 Share Posted July 10, 2016 Thanks for the thorough explanation, PoliteRaider, you too Giggles :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krondax Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 so, dumb question, but was every skin he used stolen? or just a couple... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mavkiel Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Just a couple. But its a tad like saying, you only stole a couple cars in your parking lot. *shrugs* Anyhow not been following the drama to closely. Stole also might be to harsh a word, since I recall him saying he didn't know those assets were taken illegally. The whole thing mirrors the classified email debate here in america. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethreon Posted September 10, 2016 Share Posted September 10, 2016 He knew. Not only that, he did it again, and now keeps making accounts on nexus to advertise his mod. Sounds pretty clear to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slostenn Posted September 10, 2016 Share Posted September 10, 2016 He knew. Not only that, he did it again, and now keeps making accounts on nexus to advertise his mod. Sounds pretty clear to me.I'm pretty sure you're mixing up idlesheep with the Resurrection developer; idlesheep wasn't permanently banned and as far as I'm aware didn't reupload Modern Firearms here of his own volition. Your post pretty much describes the Resurrection dev to a T: stole assets knowingly (and not for the first time), got permanently banned, and now keeps making new accounts just to advertise his mod. This isn't the first time I've seen people mix the two up, but I really don't understand why it keeps happening; one is a decent guy that made a mistake, and the other is a scumbag that knew exactly what he was doing and still believes he did nothing wrong. The fact that both mods contained assets used without permission at one point is the only similarity, but the circumstances were completely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethreon Posted September 10, 2016 Share Posted September 10, 2016 My bad. I was looking at his bans and got them mixed up. Add a pinch of tired and you know why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeradom Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 This raises a question that I've been wondering about for some time. The first comes in more the form of clarification; if someone posts a mod with the same content, how does one know it's a different mod as opposed to just a reposting of the original under a different name? For the purposes of this question, let's assume it's someone that is established in the community and not merely someone who got banned, created a new account, and reuploaded it. Moreover, is it enough for it to be considered a unique mod just to of been rebuilt by someone else? Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I crack the formula for Coke and recreate it under the brand "Cadre Cola" (+1 to anyone who gets that reference), I don't think I'm going to be allowed to get away with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mavkiel Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 This raises a question that I've been wondering about for some time. The first comes in more the form of clarification; if someone posts a mod with the same content, how does one know it's a different mod as opposed to just a reposting of the original under a different name? For the purposes of this question, let's assume it's someone that is established in the community and not merely someone who got banned, created a new account, and reuploaded it. Moreover, is it enough for it to be considered a unique mod just to of been rebuilt by someone else? Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I crack the formula for Coke and recreate it under the brand "Cadre Cola" (+1 to anyone who gets that reference), I don't think I'm going to be allowed to get away with that. Sure you would be allowed to. People reverse engineer stuff all the time. It'd be a dick move to post a mod that does *exactly* the same thing. Especially if you learned about how to do that from another mod. Also some folks have the same idea, and simply don't realize another person has made such a mod. Just because a person got to a point first, doesn't give them any right to plant a flag and prevent others from re-creating their mod. Finally, I don't think Nexus ever wants to get in the position where a moderators have to deal with that garbage. I can already see the arguments about what upload dates to check. Like if the person used Beth.net or the site that shall not be named. Now if said person literally downloaded that persons mod and modified it, that's another ball of wax. Because at that point, without permission, stole his/her work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeradom Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 This raises a question that I've been wondering about for some time. The first comes in more the form of clarification; if someone posts a mod with the same content, how does one know it's a different mod as opposed to just a reposting of the original under a different name? For the purposes of this question, let's assume it's someone that is established in the community and not merely someone who got banned, created a new account, and reuploaded it. Moreover, is it enough for it to be considered a unique mod just to of been rebuilt by someone else? Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I crack the formula for Coke and recreate it under the brand "Cadre Cola" (+1 to anyone who gets that reference), I don't think I'm going to be allowed to get away with that. Sure you would be allowed to. People reverse engineer stuff all the time. It'd be a dick move to post a mod that does *exactly* the same thing. Especially if you learned about how to do that from another mod. Also some folks have the same idea, and simply don't realize another person has made such a mod. Just because a person got to a point first, doesn't give them any right to plant a flag and prevent others from re-creating their mod. Finally, I don't think Nexus ever wants to get in the position where a moderators have to deal with that garbage. I can already see the arguments about what upload dates to check. Like if the person used Beth.net or the site that shall not be named. Now if said person literally downloaded that persons mod and modified it, that's another ball of wax. Because at that point, without permission, stole his/her work. Not being a modder myself, I assume there's some way of telling if a mod was downloaded, repackaged and then re-uploaded as opposed to someone uploading a "unique version." In this context, an M4 made from one person would look the same as the other right? Or are there subtle differences that would be what determines if it's stolen or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mavkiel Posted September 11, 2016 Share Posted September 11, 2016 This raises a question that I've been wondering about for some time. The first comes in more the form of clarification; if someone posts a mod with the same content, how does one know it's a different mod as opposed to just a reposting of the original under a different name? For the purposes of this question, let's assume it's someone that is established in the community and not merely someone who got banned, created a new account, and reuploaded it. Moreover, is it enough for it to be considered a unique mod just to of been rebuilt by someone else? Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I crack the formula for Coke and recreate it under the brand "Cadre Cola" (+1 to anyone who gets that reference), I don't think I'm going to be allowed to get away with that. Sure you would be allowed to. People reverse engineer stuff all the time. It'd be a dick move to post a mod that does *exactly* the same thing. Especially if you learned about how to do that from another mod. Also some folks have the same idea, and simply don't realize another person has made such a mod. Just because a person got to a point first, doesn't give them any right to plant a flag and prevent others from re-creating their mod. Finally, I don't think Nexus ever wants to get in the position where a moderators have to deal with that garbage. I can already see the arguments about what upload dates to check. Like if the person used Beth.net or the site that shall not be named. Now if said person literally downloaded that persons mod and modified it, that's another ball of wax. Because at that point, without permission, stole his/her work. Not being a modder myself, I assume there's some way of telling if a mod was downloaded, repackaged and then re-uploaded as opposed to someone uploading a "unique version." In this context, an M4 made from one person would look the same as the other right? Or are there subtle differences that would be what determines if it's stolen or not? Oh there are ways of checking things that actually add new items. Not a texture person myself so can't really comment on whole loading them up and comparing them side by side. But thieves also make silly mistakes. Like file names being exact same thing. Or supposedly unique scripts being exactly the same. By their very nature thieves tend to be lazy :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts