• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Anti-piracy measures

arno

arno

Administrator
Staff member
FSDevConf team
Resource contributor
Messages
34,321
Country
netherlands
piracy-150x150.jpg


A topic that is now and then discussed is whether ModelConverterX makes it too easy to steal the work of others. The capabilities of the tool indeed make this possible, but there are also many genuine uses of the tool that many developers use. It should probably been seen analogue to a hammer, which can be used to build a house, but also to break into one.

A small anecdote to underline this is that I have been approach by developers in the past who complained that they expected ModelConverterX was used to steal their work. But a little while later the same developer contacted me with a feature request, since he also used ModelConverterX in his own production chain.

Until now the approach in ModelConverterX has been mainly to warn users and make them aware that they need to consider copyrights. For example by showing a warning when you export a model. Also on the FSDeveloper forum this is a topic we often stress when making modifications of work is discussed.

But now that the skin and bone animations are supported, I hope to release this new feature in a few days, I have come to the point that ModelConverterX can import and export even the most complex FSX models without features being lost on export. The fact that complex features like animations, mouse rectangles, etc. were not supported before was in a few a “feature” to make piracy less attractive because certain features that require a lot of work were lost.

So therefore, together with the release of skin and bone animations, I will introduce some measures in ModelConverterX that will restrict non-genuine use of the tool. As seen in the picture below, when the tool detects that you are not the author of the model it will inhabit export and show a warning. How to detect someone is the author is not easy of course, but the approach that ModelConverterX takes is that it assumes that you are the author if all custom animations and visibility tags are in your ModelDef.xml file. If you don’t have all entries, it is assumed the model is not your work.

Image2015-10-21-1113.16.834.jpg


I hope that the ani-piracy measures as described above are a good balance between allowing genuine developers to use ModelConverterX in their workflow and making it not too easy for people with bad intentions to steal your hard work. If you have other suggestions or ideas on this balance, please share them with me or the community.

Continue reading...
 
This is akin to creating dumb-smart hammers. Smart as in "will prevent you from smashing windows or doors", but dumb as in "will prevent you from smashing your own windows or doors (in an emergency)".

How am I supposed to modify aircraft models (almost exclusively AI) for personal use from now on?
If they've got so much as a single custom animation, I'm basically screwed.
 
This is a very unfortunate "feature". I suppose next we will find that Jon's Airport Design Editor will only load an airport that you create yourself.
 
You have not demonstrated how this change will affect piracy at all, it much more like a "feel good" measure. So the theory is that I won't be able to decompile the GSX dancing marshaller, give it a new GUID and outfit and sell it as my own? And the regular checks and balances aren't adequate? The author can now rest comfortably knowing MCX is on the job. It sounds very similar to Microsoft IE loading only "approved" pages to me.

I do not use skin and bones animations and request you continue to offer an unrestricted version alongside the new "improved" version as I am content with "unknown" animations.
 
My process in the past was to ask permission of the author before releasing any altered model. Now (assuming I'm working in FSX) I have to ask them for their modeldef file and install all those into mine. I don't know how many authors will be willing to do that? And what a mess that would make of my modeldef file.

Does this also apply to FS9 models? They don't use a modeldef file.
 
Hi all,

I hope the new feature is not as restrictive as you might fear now. Because in that case it would restrict genuine users too much and then I'll remove it again.

But I also understand the concerns of developers who want to protect their work. So this is an approach to balance between unlimited freedom and some protection.

Exporting is only restricted for aircraft with custom animations, mouse rectangles or visibility conditions. And for the moment only for FSX aircraft (when FS2004 support gets as good as FSX support is now that might change). This approach was discussed here a few months ago and I think most AI aircraft should still load fine, since they rely on the default modeldef entries.

If you have examples where this does not work and the intended usage is still genuine, let me know, because in that case I might reconsider this feature. Functionality for genuine users is more important to me than protection. But the idea is that the current implementation should mainly restrict non-genuine usage.

This is also not the same as unknown animations, this concerns animations that now load as custom_. And it should only influence aircraft, not scenery.

But as I said before, let me know if these assumptions, as discussed before in a thread here, are not correct.
 
Hi,

Sounds OK, to me, since I model mostly for FS9. :)

BTW, many AI aircraft produced these days do have custom animations, for things like steering nose wheels and takeoff flaps.
 
I've opened several of my own models with MCX & most cause the anti-piracy message to be displayed. They do contain a lot of custom animations, but the entries are in the modeldef & MCX isn't showing any as "custom_anim"
 
mmann said:
This is a very unfortunate "feature". I suppose next we will find that Jon's Airport Design Editor will only load an airport that you create yourself.
Click to expand...

No in the foreseeable future :)
 
DaveWG said:
I've opened several of my own models with MCX & most cause the anti-piracy message to be displayed. They do contain a lot of custom animations, but the entries are in the modeldef & MCX isn't showing any as "custom_anim"
Click to expand...

Humm, that's not how it is intended to work. Are you sure MCX is pointed to the right ModelDef.xml (your version, not the default one from the SDK)? The message will only toggle when certain animations, visibility tags or mouse rectangles are not found.
 
Definitely pointing to the correct modeldef. It seems to be finding all the custom animations OK, at least none are showing as "custom" which would indicate it can't find the entry. It may be a mouse-rect or visibility tag that's missing or not being picked up but I don't know if there is a way to check. I'll have a thorough look though the modeldef to see if there's anything funny going on there.
 
BTW, i've kept the previous version of MCX, so I'll probably just keep using that one for now.
Quite often I like to mod or tweak stuff for my own use which will now no longer be possible.
I'm not bothered about my own models, as I have the source files for those, I can make any changes in Gmax/Blender/3dsMax/whatever and export from there anyway.
 
I was going to download the latest version to check it out and experiment, never having used MCX, but I'll wait until this question is resolved.
 
If the method is not fool proof enough, I guess I'll have to disable it again. Then it only hurts for people who are trying to do genuine work.

And modifications for personal use is also a good point, that should be allowed as well.

So I guess those people with concerns about the tool being too powerful have bad luck in this case. It seems not possible to restrict that, without limiting genuine users as well.
 
OK, I have released a new version now without this new feature. Given the complications to get such a protection working right, without restricting real users, I don't think I'll try again in the future.

That leaves a big responsibility on us all, to only modify, export and distribute work that we have made ourselves or have permission for :)
 
Thank you, Arno!

I posted this good news in the AVSIM forum thread that I had linked to several posts above.
 
Hi Arno,

I think it might me a good idea if the maker of the model and texture can add their password through MCX and the password will get embedded in BGL file.
MCX can let other people see the model with texture, but it prevent exporting into MDL and texture without authorized password. That would be great if it is possible. I don’t know it can be true, just only suggesting.
It is like pdf file. If you don't want people to copy the text, you can set it up. They can read but cannot copy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top