Files Area Changes

Do I really have to use exactly the same readme as in the template?
And about site rules: why torrent sites are illegal? I made my stuff and share it using torrent protocol, and uploaded a torrent file to some torrent tracker, so now I am not allowed to share a link? Sounds unfairly.

Where does it say anything about torrents :blink:? Torrents themselves are perfectly legal.

That readme is just a quick example, you can of course include your own (I'll reword that bit later) 

Quoting with left formatting:

• Links to torrent sites or otherwise illegal software

What if you have a file that has no readme or clues to who created it so you can ask to upload it?

Do I really have to use exactly the same readme as in the template?
And about site rules: why torrent sites are illegal? I made my stuff and share it using torrent protocol, and uploaded a torrent file to some torrent tracker, so now I am not allowed to share a link? Sounds unfairly.

I think they are talking about torrents that are harmful with content that will cause someone issues such as they listed illegal software or DDoS stuff.

@Bacon, if they meant this, then it should be written. Guessing in such questions is a bad way, imo, because I gave an example with a legal way and which fits the rule.

So all ported/ripped content isn't allowed now?

(What about HapSlash etc models that rip from movies with their sounds)

Eww, penalised spelt with a z in the rules. I would have expected more from a Brit who rewrote them *glares at Link*

So all ported/ripped content isn't allowed now?

(What about HapSlash etc models that rip from movies with their sounds)

If a file is reported to have ripped content by the original author, and evidence is provided, then it will be taken down.

Nothing has changed, we've just written it in black and white and made a procedure

@Bacon, if they meant this, then it should be written. Guessing in such questions is a bad way, imo, because I gave an example with a legal way and which fits the rule.

Ah that, that wasn't re-written and was there from the beginning I believe. We'll gladly clear that up as well shortly

I'm going to be away this weekend, could another staff do that please?

.

:/

That was exactly the problem with the old system. It was entirely subjective and up to the staff members. I disagree with this solution, it solves nothing. I like the credits section, but the rest of the changes aren't really anything new.

I liked one thing which eezstreet said after my thoughts about Steam system in porting discussion:

"I suspect that a clause stating that the legal responsibility of files belongs to the uploader might suffice though."

And I think that's how things have to be done.

I believe that is why we ask for people to confirm they accept the submission rules which state that. It is only subjective in the sense that the staff cannot check every file to confirm whether it is ported because 1) we do not have the time and 2) not the resources, and most importantly 3) an omniscience of knowing whether or not something is indeed ported or not. This is why we have to rely on the community and authors to point these things out if they notice and have issues with it.

I love the addition of the credits section. Is there a way to go into files already submitted and add that content, or is that something we would have to submit to staff?

Also, in regard to the ripped content, the example of the ripped sounds from the movies is quite illustrative of the policy, I think. Considering there was a huge rip dump made public by LucasArts when they folded, they should be ok to include in models, reskins, maps, etc. But, who is to say that Disney won't step in and claim that LA had no right to dump it? That's why there's policies in place for removal, I imagine, cases like that.

You can go back and edit your files, you should have full rights over them unless anything changed whilst I was a staff last time 

By the way to sum the issue up in a sentence: Upload your files as normal, and if a request from another author whose work you've used makes a claim (With good evidence), your file will be taken down.

This is the same approach Google has with YouTube content uploaded. 

So some commas would be nice here:

• Any content illegally ported from another game will be denied if reported if discovered by our staff or if reported by another user.

Like so:

• Any content illegally ported from another game will be denied if reported, if discovered by our staff, if reported by another user, or discovered by any other means.

Are you serious...

Another readme...

Oh and what if the content is only partially ported?

The readme was required before these changes o_o

And as we said, if any content that is owned by the original author is reported (With supporting evidence) then it will be taken down, else, it stays up as we cannot verify if every file inside a .pk3 is legal or not.

 

So some commas would be nice here:

• Any content illegally ported from another game will be denied if reported if discovered by our staff or if reported by another user.

Like so:

• Any content illegally ported from another game will be denied if reported, if discovered by our staff, if reported by another user, or discovered by any other means.

Fixed, although I simply entered "if reported" twice in error, so commas aren't needed

So what you're saying is, as long as you don't get caught, you're fine.

So what you're saying is, as long as you don't get caught, you're fine.

Guess that's kind of how the real world works.  

Though I hope your consciousness weighs you down into admission if you attempt such treachery people.

So what you're saying is, as long as you don't get caught, you're fine. 

We simply cannot check every single file for copyright infringement, it's up to the author to check his/her files and credit those who he used content from (And ask permission themselves, unrelated to JKHub). If a report is made, and it is genuine, then we'll take swift and immediate action to take the file in question down.

Any content that is obvious to us e.g. if Eez uploaded a map by Sith-J-Cull and claimed it as his own or if Futuza uploaded that well known ported Master Chief model, then we'd deny it immediately, otherwise we'll always do our best but things will definitely slip through at times... we make it clear that it's the uploaders responsibility to make sure this is all in order beforehand.

As I said in the porting thread, this is how Google operates with YouTube content and I believe it is fair to both sides. 

/me is still butthurt that nobody listened to foolproof plan

Futuza uploaded that well known ported Master Chief model, then we'd deny it immediately, otherwise we'll always do our best but things will definitely slip through at times... we make it clear that it's the uploaders responsibility to make sure this is all in order beforehand.

Hey now, let's not bring up past sins. Master Chief and I have reached an understanding and I don't want you tearing down all of our hard work.  

Okay cool. If ANY files on this site are taken down/off the site because the author requested it, you just let me know. I don't think anyone is that petty.

Okay cool. If ANY files on this site are taken down/off the site because the author requested it, you just let me know. I don't think anyone is that petty.

Why would we let you know? Are you the Emperor of Files? It may not be about being petty. Someone may have made a mod they wanted exclusively on a different site. Just like there are exclusive files on this site. I wouldn't want something I uploaded with the intent of being exclusive to JKHUB appearing on a different site.