Porting Discussion

[minilogoguy18]

I dunno why BF2 is being used as an example, neither Lucas Arts or Pandemic exist anymore, the battlefront series is fair game.

[AshuraDX]

@@Omicron Resubmit it then

[afi]

I dunno why BF2 is being used as an example, neither Lucas Arts or Pandemic exist anymore, the battlefront series is fair game.

 

Do you really think that no one owns any rights of the Battlefront series anymore?

[Mandalorian]

The only problem I see here with eezstreets suggestion is that it is a bit easy to edit a ported file slightly, then it isn't 100% ported.What percentage of change would have to be in effect for it to be ok? Hope I worded it right, my head is sore from reading this thread.

[Merek]

Yea @@eezstreet, that is saying modding is illegal.

[afi]

Yea @@eezstreet, that is saying modding is illegal.

 

Where did he say that modding is illegal?

[Merek]

Where did he say that modding is illegal?

I said that modding what illegal so I was referring to my first comment.

[Circa]

Nobody is saying modding is illegal. Porting is. If modding was illegal, why would Raven give us tools to do it?

 

So a poll then? I'll try to get some options thought out for people to vote on. Keep in mind, this is just a way to gauge people's opinions, without reading their ranting and raging posts that go in circles. It doesn't mean that it will decide the final decision.

[eezstreet]

The only problem I see here with eezstreets suggestion is that it is a bit easy to edit a ported file slightly, then it isn't 100% ported.What percentage of change would have to be in effect for it to be ok? Hope I worded it right, my head is sore from reading this thread.

The only problem I see here with eezstreets suggestion is that it is a bit easy to edit a ported file slightly, then it isn't 100% ported.What percentage of change would have to be in effect for it to be ok? Hope I worded it right, my head is sore from reading this thread.

That's a fair point, and I suppose it would be up to the staff to determine it on a case by case basis.

[Link]

Apologies for not weighing in sooner, was away.

 

I think we can all agree (At least, the majority perhaps) that using ported models can be fun and that it does allow players to get their favourite characters into other games they enjoy. Where I think the disagreement lies is whether or not JKHub supports/should support this.

 

I'm still trying to catch up on the guidelines for being a staff members, a few things have changed since my last run here, but the simple ruling is and was: Porting content is not allowed.

 

Now, I'll guarantee that there are ported sounds, textures, models and all other sorts of things in JKHub's files database, THAT is unavoidable and staff should not be expected to go through every single asset to check whether or not that is the case. What I will say though is that if a staff member is aware that a file has illegally ported content and knowingly puts it through, then that is wrong. By the way, when I say that staff members should not be expected to check all the assets of a file, I mean all of it, otherwise staff members should be checking around a file (Like skimming through a book) to ensure everything is in order. 

 

If a file is found to have ported content which was done illegally, then it should be taken down if proof of consent can't be provided by the author. I think we need a simple system that if a file is reported/flagged (Yes, like YouTube Eez ) then it should be reviewed carefully and the case should be shown to the author. If the author of the file cannot provide a defense against legitimate evidence then their file should be removed. To avoid users simply spamming the flag button, I think it should be made clear that actual evidence should be provided to flag a file legitimately.

 

Also, comments like "Other sites do it, why can't we?" are absolutely nonsensical. If you can get away with doing something evil, and you do it, then you are evil. If you can get away with doing something evil and don't do it, then that shows true merits to your character.

 

Some of you need to calm down, these "I'M LEAVING JKHUB" comments are cringe worthy and make you sound like a child, we're here to progress, not to bicker and make threats when you don't get your own way.

[Grab]

I think we can all agree (At least, the majority perhaps) that using ported models can be fun and that it does allow players to get their favourite characters into other games they enjoy.

THIS.

 

Maybe I understood u bad. So if I want port Q3 player models into JKA, must I ask Id? That's sounds so ... stupid...

Following this line of thinking we should remove a lot of skins on this site, because they use sounds from other games or films, and talking "Thats not 100% ported, because model is self made" is unfair for people who want port oryginal "things" or they are not modelers.

I still can't understand why some people care about this... Some people are taking this business too serious.

[Lamented]

I think we can all agree (At least, the majority perhaps) that using ported models can be fun and that it does allow players to get their favourite characters into other games they enjoy. Where I think the disagreement lies is whether or not JKHub supports/should support this.

 

Also, comments like "Other sites do it, why can't we?" are absolutely nonsensical. If you can get away with doing something evil, and you do it, then you are evil. If you can get away with doing something evil and don't do it, then that shows true merits to your character.

 

Well said, SiLink. The first highlight above in the quote resembles the opinion I have about ports.

 

Secondly, I'm not trying to sound unethical. I merely inquire why JKHub is currently the only JK-affiliated website reprimanded for hosting these kinds of files, as far as I know. I don't think that using a port would necessarily make me evil. I look at it as a chance to enjoy something exclusive, port or not, because it's now in a JKA format and I can play with it, and enhance it anytime I want to. Also, when it's a character that no one but you are willing to model but you simply don't have the understanding to model, it's something you kind of... die for.

 

I remember every six hours a day getting on my PC and searching up, "JKA Savage Opress model". When I finally saw it, I literally cried. (I know.)

 

Anyway, I'm sure you guys got the idea, apologies for using the term paying the price, I don't believe I was using the right words.

 

And I also apologize for my outbursts earlier. It was uncalled for and my profanity has no place in this thread. I just got extremely angry that an entirely port-free file of mine was deleted.

 

But sorry, guys.

[Link]

Using ports doesn't make you evil I was basically saying that if you do something taboo and/or nasty (That affects other people negatively) and you do it only because you know you won't get caught, that makes you a bad person in my opinion. 

[Circa]

THIS.

 

Maybe I understood u bad. So if I want port Q3 player models into JKA, must I ask Id? That's sounds so ... stupid...

Following this line of thinking we should remove a lot of skins on this site, because they use sounds from other games or films, and talking "Thats not 100% ported, because model is self made" is unfair for people who want port oryginal "things" or they are not modelers.

I still can't understand why some people care about this... Some people are taking this business too serious.

It's illegal. As in, against the law.

 

Well said, SiLink. The first highlight above in the quote resembles the opinion I have about ports.

 

Secondly, I'm not trying to sound unethical. I merely inquire why JKHub is currently the only JK-affiliated website reprimanded for hosting these kinds of files, as far as I know. I don't think that using a port would necessarily make me evil. I look at it as a chance to enjoy something exclusive, port or not, because it's now in a JKA format and I can play with it, and enhance it anytime I want to. Also, when it's a character that no one but you are willing to model but you simply don't have the understanding to model, it's something you kind of... die for.

 

I remember every six hours a day getting on my PC and searching up, "JKA Savage Opress model". When I finally saw it, I literally cried. (I know.)

 

Anyway, I'm sure you guys got the idea, apologies for using the term paying the price, I don't believe I was using the right words.

 

And I also apologize for my outbursts earlier. It was uncalled for and my profanity has no place in this thread. I just got extremely angry that an entirely port-free file of mine was deleted.

 

But sorry, guys.

jk2files.com and Lucasfiles.com both rejected all ported content. In fact, you couldn't even talk about porting on FileFront, or they'd lock the thread. Deviance, you may re-upload your Maul, since there hasn't been evidence to show that it is a port. But you admitted that the Savage model was ported. We will try to get in contact with @@khameir about his Maul, if in fact it is not ported.

 

[Ory'Hara]

its not illegal, its not againsty the law, its just that the corporate empire doesnt want anything to be moddable, mot

[Lamented]

Deviance, you may re-upload your Maul, since there hasn't been evidence to show that it is a port. But you admitted that the Savage model was ported. We will try to get in contact with @@khameir about his Maul, if in fact it is not ported.

 

Thank you.

 

But if Savage isn't 100% port--if it is retextured considerably--could I upload it in the future, if eezstreet's policy is approved?

[Link]

 

its not illegal, its not againsty the law, its just that the corporate empire doesnt want anything to be moddable, mot

 

Even if that were true, JKHub can still disallow files that are proven to have content not authorized from the original author based on our current rules.

[Ory'Hara]

it is true then we can go backout of jkhub

[Link]

Absolutely, if you dislike it then nobody is stopping any one from leaving it's a long standing rule of the site and will be upheld.

[eezstreet]

So @@SiLink, what stance do you take on a porting policy?

[Circa]

So @@SiLink, what stance do you take on a porting policy?

See previous page.

 

[CrimsonStrife]

I was entirely planning to sit by and watch how this plays out, as I am retired and don't rightly give a rat's ass what the policies do.  But @@Circa dragged me into this.

 

its not illegal, its not againsty the law, its just that the corporate empire doesnt want anything to be moddable, mot

 

As much as I hate to say it, Ory is kind of correct here.

 

Here is more or less what I told Circa:

 

 

Circa: Have you read the porting discussion yet?

CrimsonStrife: oh yes

CrimsonStrife: tis madness

CrimsonStrife: but I've been lurking

Circa: Yeah. It's a mess.

CrimsonStrife: they've got the legality angle wrong though.  LA (when it existed) would have licensed out the Star Wars IP to these various developers to produce a game. Specifically prior to LA really being a studio in and of it's self (I think unofficially LA still exists as does LF, and ILM but they've simply been absorbed into the Disney studio blob).  What this means is, while companies like Raven would have had the rights to their own code and assets, the overall rights went to LA.  Just as the StarWars IP was owned by Lucas.  Now, Disney owns all of that, and while I would have to dig to find specific references, Disney tends to be very tight-fisted with their IP, even to a point of pulling a large selection of their holiday films and shows from Amazon and other streaming networks to try and drive viewers to their TV Networks.  What this means is, that really, untill Disney takes a stance, modding of the Star Wars games in general, is kind of a gray area.

Circa: Yeah. That's kinda why this is such a mess. I hate grey areas.

CrimsonStrife: but porting is kind of the same issue, you would have to check every title's EULA, but I am pretty sure moving content from one game to another would count as a redistribution of assets outside of general user use, and therefore while not "illegal" per se, WOULD be a violation of the EULA, which you are agreeing to simply by owning and playing said games

CrimsonStrife: I.E. You could be sued into oblivion by any license holder for any IP.  And the other big catch to that, is that it isn't up to the actual developers to say what is and isn't OK.

CrimsonStrife: that decision is made by each company or IP holders legal department or representatives, which may have little to no understanding about modding.

CrimsonStrife: so lawyers will jump all over that shit

CrimsonStrife: Raven approved of user content, so they provided the tools to do so, and they would have had approval from LA. BUT when content come from any other company, and is being put into a Raven made game, then would require approval from the studio behind that one.

CrimsonStrife: it is one thing to move between JKA and JK2, as both are owned and licensed between LA and Raven, and both are approved for modding. So the only legal gap there, is if Disney, who now own the rights, disapproved it.

CrimsonStrife: Which is entirely within their legal right to do so.

Circa: Yeah. You should copy and paste all that into the thread. 

CrimsonStrife: I don't plan to get directly involved with this nut house, I'm retired <.<

CrimsonStrife: you want to share that, by all means.

Circa: You're still part of the community though! Lurkers count as part of the community. lol

CrimsonStrife: Well, the only other thing to add to that, is that; one could argue that if you re-create, say a character, from another IP...like, Halo for instance, that as long as you were not actually moving any content from the Halo games into another game, and you created it all yourself then it COULD be covered under an artistic fair-use license provided it was not sold for profit.

CrimsonStrife: what this means is, that ALL assets, are covered under a blanket clause

CrimsonStrife: it ALL belongs to the IP holder, so if you ARE choosing a stance, it would need to be an ALL or NOTHING stance.  The first wouldn't be "illegal" per se, but would be at risk of violating EULAs and ToSs but it would be fair, while the latter would be really limiting on mods, but also fair.

CrimsonStrife: I got this...

Circa: DO IT

 

 

TL:DR

1. Now that Disney owns all of the Star Wars IP, and they have a history of being tight-fisted with their IPs, we can actually assume that all modding is officially a gray area until they take a stance, because it would be entirely within their legal right to change it.
2. Porting between JKA and JK2: perfectly fine, both are owned and licensed by the same groups and approved for modding,so there should be no conflicts.
3. It is important to define the "legality" here, officially, none of this is "illegal", you won't have cops banging down your door or hauling you off to jail, as this would not be a criminal case, but a civil or even corporate one.  I.E. porting to or from anything other than JKA and JK2 would likely be a violation of both the Raven and LA EULA and ToS, and would almost be guaranteed as a violation of the other groups EULA and ToS.  As such, you could be sued into oblivion.  I wouldn't be worried about LA, but rather whomever owns the IP to what you're porting.
4. ALL assets, are covered under a blanket clause,  it ALL belongs to the IP holder, so if you ARE choosing a stance, it would need to be an ALL or NOTHING stance.  The first wouldn't be "illegal" per se, but would be at risk of violating EULAs and ToSs but it would be fair, while the latter would be really limiting on mods, but also fair.
    
    

TL:DR (again): This whole thing is ridiculous.

 

it is true then we can go backout of jkhub

 

True, and I doubt the staff is going to bend over backwards to appease people who take that ultimatum.

 

[eezstreet]

See previous page.

well right, he wants to implement a flagging system. I have nothing against that, it's an alright idea. I'm just wondering if he considers ported models differently than ported sounds.

[eezstreet]

@@CrimsonStrife: your point #2 is wrong. Just because a game is "approved for modding" doesn't make it okay to distribute the game assets elsewhere/port them. See: the JK2/A EULAs, which still prohibit this but make a special case for making mods. Which is now actually invalid due to the source code being released.

[Circa]

@@CrimsonStrife: your point #2 is wrong. Just because a game is "approved for modding" doesn't make it okay to distribute the game assets elsewhere/port them. See: the JK2/A EULAs, which still prohibit this but make a special case for making mods. Which is now actually invalid due to the source code being released.

He means between those two games. Like porting from JK2 to JKA and vice versa.