6 minutes ago, GoranM said:

And to top all this off, I just came across this:

https://austinmeyer.com/ok-this-is-just-plain-funny/

I had to laugh

omfg, it took me like a full minute to understand what the email was saying.

4 minutes later and now my face really hurts, thats getting memed for sure

At the risk of coming across as egotistical, I'm now curious (after reading that email) as to why they added a TBM as a default aircraft?  But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and just say they liked the aircraft.  Even if they got most of it wrong.

I guess youtube views matter, right?  Even if some or most of the platform has been plagiarized.

How sweet.

Edited June 9, 20215 yr by GoranM

...

Edited June 9, 20215 yr by mSparks

I didn't mean to.  Please, by all means, continue the laughter.  I know I will.  I don't think I've laughed this hard since watching a whole season of Seinfeld.

probably not egotistical at all, it was always suspicious, if you are US based I'd be tempted to call on some discovery of where they derived their designs, US law on that sort of stuff is brutal (see Oracle v Google) 

just need one common not true to life element to nail them to the wall aiui.

Edited June 9, 20215 yr by mSparks

7 minutes ago, mSparks said:

probably not egotistical at all, it was always suspicious, if you are US based I'd be tempted to call on some discovery of where they derived their designs, US law on that sort of stuff is brutal.

There's no point.  I'm not one to chase that kind of thing up.  Besides, if all of this is plagiarism, and is proven...it won't be long before Asobo is shut down.

Edited June 9, 20215 yr by GoranM

3 minutes ago, GoranM said:

There's no point.  I'm not one to chase that kind of thing up.  Besides, if all of this is plagiarism, and is proven...it won't be long before Asobo is shut down.

i think the limit is like $750 per derivative work distributed, or something to that effect.

Edited June 9, 20215 yr by mSparks

Actually, @tonywob I think that link to Austins site should be its own thread.  But as it's a sensitive matter, I may need confirmation first.

1 minute ago, GoranM said:

Actually, @tonywob I think that link to Austins site should be its own thread.  But as it's a sensitive matter, I may need confirmation first.

the tbm posts probably need deleting and you should check with your team and a lawyer.

Edited June 9, 20215 yr by mSparks

6 hours ago, mSparks said:

i think the limit is like $750 per derivative work sold, or something to that effect.

If there's proof beyond a shadow of a doubt, I'll look into it further.  For now, it's just a "source".  But to be honest, this isn't the kind of thing someone just emails Austin about for a goof.  Which is why I'm actually believing it.  Particularly as Asobo have said themselves, they are using BET.  A few red flags were waving when that was said, but most of us shrugged it off.

Edited June 10, 20215 yr by GoranM

18 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Which is why I'm actually believing it.

There are many potential reasons someone could make stuff up like that, but the "proof", at least on your side is fairly easy, there is stuff you know you faked, and they wouldn't, see how they compare.

apologies, $750 looks like the minimum, 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/504

(1)

Except as provided by clause (2) of this subsection, the copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just. For the purposes of this subsection, all the parts of a compilation or derivative work constitute one work.

 

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/216973787.pdf

 

Quote

Non-willful infringers are liable for $750–$30,000 per work infringed.48 The maximum penalty increases to $150,000 per work infringed for willful infringers, and even “innocent” infringers are liable for at least $200 per work infringed.49

 

Edited June 9, 20215 yr by mSparks

You're tempting me.

1 hour ago, scotchegg said:

Who was the first person to mention MSFS in this thread?

User @Sims Smith made a (IMO) legit comment in relation to XP visual upgrades, hoping it wouldn't look too similar to MSFS which he doesn't like. Doesn't seem to me a comment made to provoke or troll.

Infact the thread was prosecuting well after that comment, with no further mention of the competing product. Then came the comments about XP being too late (compared to the competing product) and the preview not having enough views (compared to the competing product). Especially this last one, seems to me a type of comment clearly provocative if made in an XP forum. And then it went downhill.

I think some MSFS fans must have some issues of their own. P3D, Aerofly, DCS users don't usually come here trolling and suggesting that Austin is a buffoon because he's actively further improving XP flight model.

It's interesting from a psychological point of view.

Edited June 10, 20215 yr by Murmur

6 minutes ago, GoranM said:

You're tempting me.

i remembered the $750, because the first time i saw it in a court result the fine was $750 for every $7.50 item that had been sold and it bankrupted them - their only defence was they didnt know it wasn't allowed, I've watched such outcomes fairly closely ever since - i forget what it was about, something stupid like selling cover cds.

oracle was awarded $8.8Billion for google green rooming the java api, per item is how it got so high.

If its true that msfs has been deriving their works from xp rather than the real things, it could easily get very very messy very quickly.

 

 

20 minutes ago, Murmur said:

It's interesting from a psychological point of view.

Oh, I’m in total agreement with that, socially and psychologically.