New release: v2.2.0 FINAL

[freezy]

I know you guys are proud of having learned the word FUD, but just randomly throwing it around kinda makes it lose its meaning.

 

21 minutes ago, slippifishi said:

Your defence of exposing PAC as "someone would have done it eventually"

 

That's not my defense at all. That's just my response to a side effect you guys are claiming will destroy your world. My defense is that it removes the idiotic plugin lock, or at least mitigates it, so the community doesn't get screwed over on every dmdext release.

 

 

1 hour ago, lucky1 said:

usul27 was pissed about this and teamed up with freezy

 

Not, under any definition, did I team up with usul. In fact, I don't think at porting VNI to real pins is in any way reasonable. VNI should be a vpin-only format.

 

Your frustration is turning into a rage of random accusations, which is understandable, but not very productive.

Edited August 15, 2023 by freezy

[Wylte]

On 8/15/2023 at 10:45 AM, slippifishi said:

I want to be a DMD colour artist whose hard work, which is already given away freely, isn't repurposed for someone else's profit

We all have to deal with that.  The reality is that this hobby is a grey area of recreation, preservation, and entertainment and we do it out of passion with no expectation of profit except for the joy of creation and experiencing the creations of others.  The measures (PAC) to prevent a shitty few (people who sell other people's work) from making money off that passion are not worth the harm it does to the hobby as a whole.

On 8/15/2023 at 9:40 AM, lucky1 said:

and protect YOU from legal threats from PPS or ColorDMD

If @Dazz thinks it's safer to host a virtual-focused format (that may eventually run on real pins) than a monetized real-world-focused format that definitely competes with the legally licensed format, then I defer to his judgement.  He is, after all, the one who dealt with the legal threats and who would be the first target of future legal action.

On 8/15/2023 at 9:40 AM, lucky1 said:

The only thing that hurts me is that the vpin community most likely looses some good colorization artists ... Now the real pin artists will most likely not export for vpin at all and definitely not convert to serum, because they simply don´t care.

They're already here (and thus may choose to stay despite what you think), and with the growing virtual-focused colorizing community there will be plenty more colorizations to come.

On 8/15/2023 at 9:40 AM, lucky1 said:

No problem for me as my vpin hasn´t been turned on for more than 2 years now and most likely will never be again

So... "bye" isn't even relevant since you (Lucky1) are already not really part of this community.

Edited August 17, 2023 by Wylte
Clarity

[NetzZwerg]

I am overwhelmed by the arrogance and lack of even the slightest respect for the authors. First the files were allowed to be converted into another format (against the will of the authors) and when enough files have been collected to mess with in any way, the authors are no longer needed and their files are banned from the forum. Wow,.... I won´t lose any more words here about that subject, enough time wasted already.

[slippifishi]

40 minutes ago, freezy said:

That's just my response to a side effect you guys are claiming will destroy your world. My defense is that it removes the idiotic plugin lock, or at least mitigates it, so the community doesn't get screwed over on every dmdext release.

 

It doesn't destroy our world, but do you remember how hurt and upset you were when lucky created the first hostile fork and you thought it was an abuse of your hard efforts and work and would come at the expense of the community? That's exactly how we feel, you have abused our hard efforts and work and it will come at the expense of the community. Unlike luckys hostile fork, however, you cannot close the door on the barn you opened. You claim to protect the community in some way, yet you damaged it irrevocably it in the same sentence.

 

I presented two choices to you when you were debating what should happen with respect to PAC and lucky's requirements; support the plugin, or don't support the plugin. Both of these would have protected the community as a whole, albeit with the plugin problems you were concerned about if included, or without them. But instead you chose an option three, which protects only the consuming half of the community, not the creator part - without whom you have nothing new to consume. You could have protected all of the community, but instead you consciously chose to screw those of us who have invested the most time in creating, for the the interests of the people who are (ironically) the least interested.

 

I guess a hostile fork of DMDExt is fair game again @lucky1 - let's wait for Freezy to do Scorbit integration first and then we can rebase from that and integrate the new features for a PAC2.

[freezy]

@slippifishi Can I ask you a question? Who, in your eyes, is the community? You keep using that word, but I don't think we mean the same thing.

 

My next question would be what exactly the expense is of that community is. Like, concretely, what's wrong today that was okay yesterday? Without FUDding (there you go, I made it a verb!) about potential misuse that is now all my fault. Concretely, how is the community "unprotected" today compared to yesterday?

[LynnInDenver]

I think there's a lot of people not listening to why part of this is happening - @lucky1 stonewalling on the plugin and insisting on a level of version checking that would let him kill @freezy's DMDExt support at any upgrade if things weren't kept to his one true way, which is why PACs are no longer being accepted as a file format.

 

Whether or not PAC is no longer being accepted, or if VNI/PAL comes back, is somewhat immaterial to me, personally. I disabled colorizations when @lucky1 forked DMDExt to roll out the PAC format, so I never installed his version of the extension to use PAC files, and I still intend on using neither. I have installed SERUM colorizations and use them. If I get a physical pinball with an original DMD, my current option would be to just buy a ColorDMD for it, and not bother with any hobbyist level options.

 

Also, if PPS/ColorDMD would have had complaints about VNI being distributed at all when they came to check things out, rolling out PAC would NOT have dissuaded them from demanding a complete and permanent colorization file takedown on VPU, the effort would have been considered to be just noise to ignore, or to just add another two words to the C&D notice. Right now, if they have any issues, it's most likely that they'd go after people selling unlicensed panel hardware with the ability to run colorization files right out of the box first.

Edited August 15, 2023 by LynnInDenver
Adding physical pinball option.

[Ashram56]

4 hours ago, Wylte said:

We all have to deal with that.  The reality is that this hobby is a grey area of recreation, preservation, and entertainment and we do it out of passion with no expectation of profit except for the joy of creation and experiencing the creations of others.  The measures to prevent a shitty few from making money off that

 

Shitty few ? Did I read this right ?

 

Let's see who exactly are these shitty few that vigourously expressed their displeasure at this whole situation: @NetzZwerg (14 colorizations), @Redrum (6 colorizations), @slippifishi (9 colorizations). Pretty much the main contributors on the colorization scene, each colorization a few hundred hours of work. Only major colorization authors who did not comment are @vbobrusev (13 colorizations) and @malenko (10 colorizations) (if you read this guys, please comment or react to any of these posts). So a few certainly, shitty definitly not. But at the end of the day, it does not really matter how many they are and what are their contributions: it's their work, they have the right to decide how it is to be used.

 

Speaking of contributions: yours on the other end ? 5 tables, some of them mods of existing tables from what I can see on your profile.

 

4 hours ago, Wylte said:

Their work is already here, and with the growing virtual community there will be plenty more colorizations to come.

 

So you're essentially stating "it's ok to steal their work".

 

12 hours ago, Dazz said:

@lucky1  This wasn't done to hurt you, but to hopefully open your eyes to the world around you. 

 

@Dazz You do realize that with that statement, you are essentially saying "colorization authors have no right to enforce what is done with their work if it goes against what the community requests" ? Would you say the same to VPW team ? Or TerryRed ? As an administrator to VPU, I would have thought you would have shown more caution.

 

Also, since when is PAC an "hostile" format ? How do you define hostile ? There's a working solution out there, anyone can use it. Yes it's complicated, but it protected the rights of the authors, something which PAL/VNI did not either. So do you consider "protecting the work of the author" as hostile ? There was a debate that Lucky1 fork was considered as hostile (and even then it was not clear cut), but that was something to be resolved between Lucky1 and Freezy. I don't think that as a VPU admin you are entitled to define what is hostile vs what is not, especially with regards to legal definition of open source content. But the PAC format itself cannot be considered as hostile, it's just a protection mechanism.

 

1 hour ago, freezy said:

@slippifishi Can I ask you a question? Who, in your eyes, is the community? You keep using that word, but I don't think we mean the same thing.

 

My next question would be what exactly the expense is of that community is. Like, concretely, what's wrong today that was okay yesterday? Without FUDding (there you go, I made it a verb!) about potential misuse that is now all my fault. Concretely, how is the community "unprotected" today compared to yesterday?

 

Depending on your definition of community. My definition includes creators and consumers. Creators earn the right to do what they want with their work. Consumers have absolutely no right to define that, unless the creator has transferred that right. That applies for tables, colorization, Pup Pack, you name it.

 

So to answer your question, without any FUD:

 

1/ You managed to piss off most major colorization authors, the creator part of the community (see first part of my comment above). I can't help to notice that all of the drama made a lot of claim on the colorization author intent, but never once actually asked them. Well, see the response on your post, here's your answer: they did NOT want to expose the PAC format publicly, allowing potentially malicious individuals to steal their work.

 

To note: yes, PAL/VNI was already there. And guess what, @zedrummer already made a tool to convert part of PAL/VNI to Serum. And @usul27 already has running HW that can run Serum colorization on a real pinball. Now fortunately, from what I can tell on the post, @zedrummer limited this to author only, but we all know the internet. And even more, absolutely nothing prevents someone doing the same for PAC now, with no restraint.

 

2/ These colorization authors have been working on improving their colorization, adding 64 colors and potentially HD content. When they provide these upgrades to real pin, the consumer part of the Vpin community will not get these upgrades. 

 

3/ You have set the bar. By unilaterally deciding to publish the PAC format in your github, you essentially loudly states it's open bar.

 

So here are a few consequences for you to ponder on:

 

1/ What's to prevent anyone to take a Serum colorization, convert it to PIN2DMD and potentially add specifities linked to PIN2DMD (such as entitlement) ? Technically nothing  changed, it has alway been the case. But before, you could have argued that you were respectful of the work of others, but now .. that argument is no longer valid.

 

And here's the link to Serum legal notice:

https://www.pincabpassion.net/t15414-comprehensive-tuto-about-colorizingdmd

 

and specifically:

" Thus, if you create a colorized ROM Serum with ColorizingDMD, you must accept the fact that you will share it for free.
As of now, the Serum format is only available for virtual pinball emulation, but I accepted that Markus Kalkbrenner integrates the ZeDMD and, perhaps later on, the Serum to its open-source and DIY PPUC which may bring the Serum format to the real pinball machines!
So, as a colorization author using Serum, you must accept to share it for free for real pinball machines too. "

 

A legal constraint is only valid as far as you can take it legally. And we all know no one in the community has the mean to enforce a legal action.

 

So by releasing publicly PAC format, you have essentially stated that you don't give a damn about the author rights. 

Which means that the same can be applied in reverse. And you can't apply your moral argument anymore. And someone could decide that "after all, if Freezy did it, then why can't I just repackage a sell a ZeDMD or PIN2DMD, the authors don't have a say in this matter"

 

2/ Let's expand the rationale, if it's OK to discard colorization authors rights, what about table authors ? What makes them different to colorization authors ? Nothing.

 

So Table packs ? Of course you can, the authors don't have a say in this matter

Cloning disk ? Of course you can, the authors don't have a say in this matter

Selling a cloned disk ? Of course you can, the authors don't have a say in this matter

 

I seem to recall a big fat warning on VPU welcome page warning against these "packs", that packs discussion were not allowed.

 

But given what happened here, I'm asking, quite seriously: why shouldn't it be allowed ? After all... Authors rights don't matter

 

Let's expand the rationale even further. What's different between a protected colorization format and preventing Spike1 emulation ? The first is done by an author protecting his work, the second is done by a corporation protecting his work. Oh, but Stern has obviously way more resource than a small colorization author, so we will not poke the bear and comply and remove the files. Hopefully VPU will do the same when colorization authors will ask to remove their files ?

 

Assume that @NetzZwerg, @slippifishi @Redrum and all other main contributors ask their files to be removed because you pissed them off, and VPU complies, where will the "consumer" part of the community get them ? Poking the Internet around ? private message ? No central repository anymore.

If VPU does not comply and keep the files nonetheless... Wow, what an uncomfortable situation for @Dazz, what an example that would make

 

 

5 hours ago, okerra said:

Should what you say apply, or don't you think it was unfair to deny support for zedmd as a device before serum existed and then include serum in your dll solutions to make them work on pin2dmd? Seems a bit hypocritical to me

 

That's probably the ONLY valid comment I have seen from Freezy supporters in this thread. Yes, Lucky1 was probably wrong into denying support of ZeDMD, or at least publicly state if there was a technical rationale for not supporting it. And that whole situation actually started the entire drama.

 

I should although point out that in the french facebook group where ZeDMD was advertised by BenFactory, one of the main advertising point was "no activation fee required". And the response was mostly "oh cool, so I don't have to pay anymore for PIN2DMD activation". We were talking about a 20 euros activation for vpin that cost more than a few hundred of dollars. And knowing that this money was used for charity, no wonder Lucky1 took offense.

 

But just because ZeDMD was not supported by PIN2DMD colorization code does not mean it gives anyone the right to sit on the colorization authors rights

 

@freezy I really hope you do realize now that your actions have consequences. You are well known in the vpin community, and making decision such as this one, against the interest of the main contributors, sets a very very bad precedence. No one will be able to complain now if somebody does not comply by the rule, because "hey, if freezy did it, why can't I".

 

 

[Wylte]

4 minutes ago, Ashram56 said:

Shitty few ? Did I read this right ?

No, you ready that wrong: it's directed at the people who take free tables and colorizations and sell them in packs or in pre-made vpin cabs.

6 minutes ago, Ashram56 said:

Speaking of contributions: yours on the other end ? 5 tables, some of them mods of existing tables from what I can see on your profile.

You don't spend much time in the community and your Google-Fu is weak if that's all you've seen me do 😉

7 minutes ago, Ashram56 said:

So you're essentially stating "it's ok to steal their work".

I edited it while you were writing, apparently - my intention was more "they have already been introduced to the community, so they're not 'just' real pin authors who will all stop making colorizations if Lucky leaves"

[Dazz]

What makes DMD Colorizations special and immune to community rules that have been in place for 20+ years? 
It can't be only because its time consuming to produce... Of course it's time consuming.... Just like everything else in this hobby.  However, it's not on par with VP/VPMame development.  They don't get paid for their contributions to the hobby yet they use their own personal time for everyones enjoyment.  DMD colorizations are definitely not on par with building a complete VPX table release... Some table releases have taken teams of many people hundreds of hours each to recreate everything from artwork, to coding, to 3d modeling, sounds, etc.  Again, they don't get compensated for their time other than their enjoyment to share their creations.  Every aspect of this hobby is there because the people behind them enjoy doing their parts of it.

 

Why was this (.pac) done? 

Word on the street is that this was to help protect VPU... I'm sure it was to some extent, but it was never discussed for the real reasoning behind it.  This was to keep or hinder people from selling or including colorizations for other hardware, or selling hardware DMD's with some ones colorization on it.  

 

So, seriously what REALLY makes DMD Colorizations any different than any other aspect of this hobby?

Unfortunately, everyone that has EVER contributed to this hobby in the past 20+ years have had their creations sold or included on devices, either with or without their knowing. People have been selling community content for as long as the hobby has been around. Back when we were on dialup creating and sharing ROMs and re-creations, there were people burning the software including ROM's and tables to dozens of CD's and selling them. Today we have people ripping off full sites of content and software, bundling it, selling it as a package, on a hard drive or even completely loaded machines. It has always been totally wrong for these people to do so.... yet it is still done today and unfortunately it will always continue to be. 

 

For those that don't know... LONG before setting up this site.  I am/was one of the original HyperSpin-Fe team members. HyperSpin is/was a heavily graphical arcade front-end made for MAMEcabs. We spent hours upon hours tracing artwork from arcade machines, consoles, flyers, etc. only so we could create animated themes for each game.  Ever since the early days of our project people we had to deal with people ripping the site and selling the community created content. To this day... Christopher Shat(w), aka HyperSpin Team (in which he has absolutely NOTHING to do with the team or HyperSpin), is STILL selling HyperSpin loaded drives that include the executable(s) that our original team created. BTW - he's joined in on the digital / virtual pinball and is selling it as well. 

Sometime ago, perhaps many have forgotten.... VPUniverse was ripped and cloned by someone that was selling packs, drives, and loaded machines. This user went as far as personally attacking myself and bringing a virtual argument into the real world enough to try and get me fired from my lively hood.  I know first hand what it's like to have content that you have poured tens and hundreds of possible hours working on only for it to show up somewhere that you have had absolutely no say so in.  This problem isn't going to go away... It needs to go away and as a community we should fight it, but it's not going to go anywhere. One seller dies and 2 new ones start up....

 

I'm sorry, but colorizing DMD's is a very very small aspect of this hobby. We have gone 20 years without them... It's a wonderful advancement to the hobby and greatly livens up boring single color displays. 

 

It's unfortunate that we all have to take time away from doing something to try and better the community.  Instead here we are... arguing over stupid shit like closed file formats that the hobby has never had previously... 

 

Yet, this seems to be much more important than anything else that we have to do or look forward to...  

 

 

[Ashram56]

2 minutes ago, Wylte said:

No, you ready that wrong: it's directed at the people who take free tables and colorizations and sell them in packs or in pre-made vpin cabs.

You don't spend much time in the community and your Google-Fu is weak if that's all you've seen me do 😉

I edited it while you were writing, apparently - my intention was more "they have already been introduced to the community, so they're not 'just' real pin authors who will all stop making colorizations if Lucky leaves"

 

Well, english is not my primary language, but here's your quote:

 

" The measures to prevent a shitty few from making money off that passion are not worth the harm it does to the hobby as a whole."

 

And in the context of this thread, this implies PAC. Which in this context is about protecting colorization authors from using their work on real pinball without their authorization. I fail to see how PAC can prevent table pack sellers (it can't). You might want to reword your statement in this case.

 

[Ashram56]

3 minutes ago, Dazz said:

What makes DMD Colorizations special and immune to community rules that have been in place for 20+ years? 
It can't be only because its time consuming to produce... Of course it's time consuming.... Just like everything else in this hobby.  However, it's not on par with VP/VPMame development.  They don't get paid for their contributions to the hobby yet they use their own personal time for everyones enjoyment.  DMD colorizations are definitely not on par with building a complete VPX table release... Some table releases have taken teams of many people hundreds of hours each to recreate everything from artwork, to coding, to 3d modeling, sounds, etc.  Again, they don't get compensated for their time other than their enjoyment to share their creations.  Every aspect of this hobby is there because the people behind them enjoy doing their parts of it.

 

Why was this (.pac) done? 

Word on the street is that this was to help protect VPU... I'm sure it was to some extent, but it was never discussed for the real reasoning behind it.  This was to keep or hinder people from selling or including colorizations for other hardware, or selling hardware DMD's with some ones colorization on it.  

 

So, seriously what REALLY makes DMD Colorizations any different than any other aspect of this hobby?

Unfortunately, everyone that has EVER contributed to this hobby in the past 20+ years have had their creations sold or included on devices, either with or without their knowing. People have been selling community content for as long as the hobby has been around. Back when we were on dialup creating and sharing ROMs and re-creations, there were people burning the software including ROM's and tables to dozens of CD's and selling them. Today we have people ripping off full sites of content and software, bundling it, selling it as a package, on a hard drive or even completely loaded machines. It has always been totally wrong for these people to do so.... yet it is still done today and unfortunately it will always continue to be. 

 

For those that don't know... LONG before setting up this site.  I am/was one of the original HyperSpin-Fe team members. HyperSpin is/was a heavily graphical arcade front-end made for MAMEcabs. We spent hours upon hours tracing artwork from arcade machines, consoles, flyers, etc. only so we could create animated themes for each game.  Ever since the early days of our project people we had to deal with people ripping the site and selling the community created content. To this day... Christopher Shat(w), aka HyperSpin Team (in which he has absolutely NOTHING to do with the team or HyperSpin), is STILL selling HyperSpin loaded drives that include the executable(s) that our original team created. 

Sometime ago, perhaps many have forgotten.... VPUniverse was ripped and cloned by someone that was selling packs, drives, and loaded machines. This user went as far as personally attacking myself and bringing a virtual argument into the real world enough to try and get me fired from my lively hood.  I know first hand what it's like to have content that you have poured tens and hundreds of possible hours working on for show up somewhere that you have had absolutely no say so in.  This problem isn't going to go away... It needs to go away and as a community we should fight it, but it's not going to go anywhere. One seller dies and 2 new ones start up....

 

I'm sorry, but colorizing DMD's is a very very small aspect of this hobby. We have gone 20 years without them... It's a wonderful advancement to the hobby and greatly livens up boring single color displays. 

 

It's unfortunate that we all have to take time away from doing something to try and better the community.  Instead here we are... arguing over stupid shit like closed file formats that the hobby has never had previously... 

 

Yet, this seems to be much more important than anything else that we have to do or look forward to...  

 

 

 

That does not change a single point in my argument: NO ONE has any right to define what is being done by someone else work. Period. You compare VPinMame and others, fine, but it's the developer decision to make it open source (just like it's freezy for DMDext). Just because it's several thousand hours of work, freely given by others, does not mean that any lesser "component" has to follow the same route.

 

BAM is not open source

Popper is not open source

PuP Player is not open source

 

If at any point in time, any of the author of any of the component above decide to enfore a fee to get access to their SW, it is THEIR prerogative. Their's, not your's, not mine, not anyone else, their's and their's only.

Likewise, if a colorization authors decides he is willing to provide his file for free or to charge for them, again it's their prerogative.

 

By opening the format, you deprive them of this prerogative.

 

It does NOT matter if it's script file, a simple modification to a table, a PuP pack, whatever. It does not matter if it's important to the community or not. Most importantly, it's certainly not defined by what you or others define as being important.

 

As I wrote to Freezy in my post, if someone such as yourself or Freezy make a statement like "we don't care about your rights', then you are in no position to give lessons to others. And yes that include those "pack sellers" you refer to.  And you actually have been the target of someone abusing of somebody else work (and yes I know of all the history), yet you condone such a position ? It's mind blowing, I just don't get it.

 

 

[ARMYAVIATION]

Wow what fucking drama. Hurt my head to read all this.  And the worst was when @Wyltewas accused of only contributing to the community with5 table mods.  That’s funny…

[LynnInDenver]

Here's my immediate recommendation: If colorization authors do not like what @freezy has done with this, they're free to pull their files completely and deprive the virtual pinball community of colorizations going forward, and to post here that they're doing so and exactly why.

 

At this point, there's no reason to continue to argue the point. No side is completely in the right here. I agree @freezy probably should not have provided the PAC decode (and I'd counsel he go ahead and remove it again), but maintained the plugin architecture (albeit without providing engine version, just API version). However, @lucky1 should not have appropriated open source code from DMDExt to include in his closed source project's compiled engine for the rollout of PAC, either, nor should he have taken verbal potshots at the SERUM project referencing legal jeopardy it might invite, since that's @Dazz's problem and not his.

[Dazz]

1 hour ago, Ashram56 said:

 

That does not change a single point in my argument: NO ONE has any right to define what is being done by someone else work. Period. You compare VPinMame and others, fine, but it's the developer decision to make it open source (just like it's freezy for DMDext). Just because it's several thousand hours of work, freely given by others, does not mean that any lesser "component" has to follow the same route.

 

BAM is not open source

Popper is not open source

PuP Player is not open source

 

If at any point in time, any of the author of any of the component above decide to enfore a fee to get access to their SW, it is THEIR prerogative. Their's, not your's, not mine, not anyone else, their's and their's only.

Likewise, if a colorization authors decides he is willing to provide his file for free or to charge for them, again it's their prerogative.

 

By opening the format, you deprive them of this prerogative.

 

It does NOT matter if it's script file, a simple modification to a table, a PuP pack, whatever. It does not matter if it's important to the community or not. Most importantly, it's certainly not defined by what you or others define as being important.

 

As I wrote to Freezy in my post, if someone such as yourself or Freezy make a statement like "we don't care about your rights', then you are in no position to give lessons to others. And yes that include those "pack sellers" you refer to.  And you actually have been the target of someone abusing of somebody else work (and yes I know of all the history), yet you condone such a position ? It's mind blowing, I just don't get it.

 

 

 

I totally understand that some aspects are not "open source"... 

I'm not familiar with BAM, but I don't think its made for individual community creations.  If I recall BAM is an addon for Future Pinball.... in which FP was not open source either and the developer gave up on it.  The community found ways to work around it, thus BAM was created. With that said, the file out-put from Future Pinball did not result in a locked / encrypted file format and could be modified by anyone using the editor.  I'm guessing that the BAM core is closed as it could be using commercial plugins that were required for development, pre-compile, that can't be distributed legally. Popper and Pup are not open source at their core, but people are free to build upon create themes, etc. and the resulting files are NOT encrypted either.  The resulting files can easily be modified via the editor by anyone without having to decode it.

 

If @NailBuster wanted to sell his product, Pinup Popper/PuP... Legally there is absolutely nothing stopping him from doing so.  Popper/PuP contains NO commercial / IP content at it's core, unlike DMDs.  He could easily remove any of the software packages from the baller installer and charge for the front-end.  The same can be said for Future Pinball and Visual Pinball as "pinball construction kits" and not for emulation/recreations. At their cores, neither contain commercial or IP content, again.. unlike DMDs.

 

26 minutes ago, Ashram56 said:

free or to charge for them, again it's their prerogative.

 

This is where you are 100% incorrect.  It is NOT their "prerogative" to charge... It is flat out illegal for them to do so.

Could lucky charge for his Pin2DMD editor? Sure he could. Could he charge for the out-put, either encrypted or even decrypted, colorizations?  Can anyone doing a colorization using any of the editors charge for their encrypted or decrypted file? NOT without proper licensing.  So... yes, there is a difference.

If you are more interested in creating colorizations for real machines... do it for yourself, or contact the ColorDMD guys.  I know that they may have incentives for people that help with their colorizations.

[zedrummer]

6 hours ago, Ashram56 said:

To note: yes, PAL/VNI was already there. And guess what, @zedrummer already made a tool to convert part of PAL/VNI to Serum. And @usul27 already has running HW that can run Serum colorization on a real pinball. Now fortunately, from what I can tell on the post, @zedrummer limited this to author only, but we all know the internet. And even more, absolutely nothing prevents someone doing the same for PAC now, with no restraint.

That's right. I made this tool and proposed it only to authors to convert their own colorizations. 2 people wanted to get access to the tool without being the owners of the colorizations they wanted to convert. As they were not able to show a proof that the owner agreed with that (I would have asked him, anyway), I refused to provide the tool. This converter willingly partially capture a colorization, all the masks and dynamic content must be done again. A lot of authoring is still needed.

The aim is not to convert PAC colorizations, only PAL/VNI as they were said to be abandoned, and that's fair game to try to make author move their previous colorizations towards Serum rather than towards PAC.

You are right, too, that creating the convertion tool as I made it (with no mask nor dynamic colorization) is quite straightforward for whoever has really minimum coding skills using open source and even closed source code. So, if the "now" in "... absolutely nothing prevents someone doing the same for PAC now..." means "... now that PAC go through dmdext", I think that you are wrong.

I think that if Lucky1 had principles against this conversion tool, he wouldn't have proposed a similar conversion afterwards https://vpuniverse.com/forums/topic/4609-pin2dmd-colorprism-v40-firmware/page/14/#comment-70005

 

[elicend]

14 hours ago, Wylte said:

 

They're already here, and with the growing virtual community there will be plenty more colorizations to come.

So... "bye" isn't even relevant since you're already not really part of this community.

I’m sorry I’m “just” a colorisation beginner (only one still under debug and just a demo shared) and my first language is not English but this sentence hurt me…

 

[slippifishi]

11 hours ago, freezy said:

@slippifishi Can I ask you a question? Who, in your eyes, is the community? You keep using that word, but I don't think we mean the same thing.

 

Ashram provided an excellent description which is fitting with my own interpretation - the community is everyone, creators and consumers alike. I am a member of the community, you are a member of the community, LynnInDenver is a member of the community - we all are. Pinball players near and far, real and virtual, past present and future. In fact he did an excellent job of answering your next question too, so I won't bother repeating his post - it's really good, you should read it.

 

9 hours ago, Ashram56 said:

If VPU does not comply and keep the files nonetheless... Wow, what an uncomfortable situation for @Dazz, what an example that would make

 

@Dazz does seem to be stalling in this regard - I submitted a request well over 12 hours ago, and he has made several long posts in that time, yet my files still remain available. When will you take them down Dazz?

 

8 hours ago, LynnInDenver said:

I'd counsel he go ahead and remove it again

 

The penny finally dropped eh Lynn? Unfortunately Freezy's selfish actions mean it is too late - the horse has bolted and the code is published. Unless he starts breaking principles of git to destroy history (his ethics as a software developer probably preclude him from doing that), but even then and as with all good data leeks, no one will ever really be sure if the code has been kept by a third party - he has destoryed the PAC format, as was his intention. I suspect it has been copied, this thread and Freezy's actions have hardly gone under the radar.

 

Quote

Here's my immediate recommendation: If colorization authors do not like what @freezy has done with this, they're free to pull their files completely and deprive the virtual pinball community of colorizations going forward, and to post here that they're doing so and exactly why.

 

But in this regard, you can get fucked my friend, we owe you nothing, ESPECIALLY you - you dropped all our projects months ago as you are constantly reminding us. You can go to Freezy for an explanation, that's where I plan to send anyone requesting my files now. As long as Dazz removes the files, which I am starting to suspect he won't.

 

7 hours ago, Dazz said:

This is where you are 100% incorrect.  It is NOT their "prerogative" to charge... It is flat out illegal for them to do so.

 

My colour DMD projects represented a collection of bits (0s and 1s) that were generated by a project I created. The collection of 0s and 1s is unique to me, only I have the project files to generate that collection of bits in exactly that order, no one else. Those bits are my bits, created solely by me, and they are mine to do with as I see fit; not even lucky has any say in the matter, even though they were made with his editor. That they are to be used on a pinball machine - real or virtual - makes no difference, it is always my work wherever you use it. This false idea that somehow because I apply colour to an image that I don't own, means I don't own the rights to the colour I applied is outright wrong. If I buy a blank canvas and write my name on it, then I give it to an artist and he paints a picture over the top, does he lose the rights to that picture? By your argument, yes he does, it's my canvas, he could never have owned any painting he drew on it. Does a photographer own the rights to a photo he takes? By your argument, no, he doesnt own the copyright of the things IN the photo.

 

And if this was somehow true, then it further demonstrates the hypocrisy of your hosting - IP infringing files are perfectly acceptable to upload, as long as they are in the DMD colorizations category (and as long as you don't charge for them offsite) - PuP pack creators take note, anything goes in that category! EDIT: And in an ironic twist, the Serum TRON project probably contains IP infringing content in terms of ripped movie frames. That's a Buena Vista/Disney film as well, and those guys are brutal with their lawyers!

 

Freezy will lock this thread soon because that's what he does to stifle conversations he doesn't like, as can be seen in his original end of an era thread. So before he does, thanks to the few vpin players who have reached out in the past and present to offer your support, your comments were always a great driving factor in my deciding to start new projects, and even when I was fed up of colouring and thought I was no good at it, it was the unexpected praise for my projects that resulted in me coming back to give more. I will continue to colour going forward, and I look forward to speaking to some of you when I release my next project. I doubt I will be around VPU much after this is all over, but you will find me on another popular pinball site I am sure.

Edited August 16, 2023 by slippifishi
Adding a taste of irony

[Ashram56]

6 hours ago, ARMYAVIATION said:

Wow what fucking drama. Hurt my head to read all this.  And the worst was when @Wyltewas accused of only contributing to the community with5 table mods.  That’s funny…

 

I'm not one to not admit my mistakes. I uncorrectly read @Wylte statement as a direct attack to colorization authors, calling them "shitty few". Hence my unwarranted reaction and comparison, apologies to @Wylte for that.

 

1 hour ago, zedrummer said:

I refused to provide the tool

 

And you are to be applauded for that.

 

1 hour ago, zedrummer said:

"... now that PAC go through dmdext", I think that you are wrong.

 

That's not what I meant. No need to go through DMDExt (and you actually don't need it in real pinball world). It's the fact that the format has been reverse engineered and put out in the open in the source code which is my main concern.

 

1 hour ago, zedrummer said:

I think that if Lucky1 had principles against this conversion tool, he wouldn't have proposed a similar conversion afterwards

 

That's not what I think he proposed. He proposed to include in PIN2DMD editor an export function, which would put the decision in the hand of the authors. Not a conversion tool that could operate on the generated virtual pin file.

 

5 hours ago, Dazz said:

This is where you are 100% incorrect

 

Well no, I'm pretty sure I'm not.

PPS IP protection only apply on asset and gamecode

ColorDMD IP protection only apply if some of their content and/or tools are being reused on an alternate HW, or alternate HW violates their patent.

 

My understanding of PAC format (and @lucky1 can elaborate) was that it could both protect colorization author, but also anyone hosting the files by removing any copyrighted assets.

If no copyrighted asset is included in the distributed content, then PPS cannot do anything about it. That's exactly how Pinsound operates by the way, in the context of sound: their SW/HW does not ship with any copyrighted content. The website hosting the original files is separate from their main website, and is a community based website (ie they did not provide the original sound packs), not managed by them.

 

So yes, colorization authors can do whatever they see fit: PPS can't come back to them because it does not have any copyrighted asset, and ColorDMD can't come back to them because their patent applies to an imaging device, not the colorization file itself.

 

Now there's a different situation with regards to PIN2DMD itself, and ColorDMD patents. But that's a different subject than what's being discussed here: we're not discussing PIN2DMD, we're discussing colorization author work (and a subject that applies to ZeDMD as well as a matter of fact)

 

 

[freezy]

So, if I understand you guys correctly, works created by an author should belong 100% to the author and the author should have 100% of the saying how that works is being used.

 

I pretty much agree with you on that. BUT, it's not just black and white. There are many questions, like

• What does "being used" mean? Can they show it to friends? Can they give it to friends? Can they publicly redistribute it? Sell it? Use it in other ways than intended? In the professional world, this is handled by a license. Here, when licenses lack, we count on the common sense of the community, and what the authors articulate. For example, when a table author indicates that they wouldn't like their table to be modded, that's a bit like a license. Another example is you saying you don't want VNI files on real pins.
• What if the author has used tools made by others? Do these tools have the same rights? If a tool creator says "I wish you didn't do that", does the author have to respect that? Has the tool creator any word to say about how their tool is used, at all? How does it apply on works created by the tool?
• When a certain popularity is reached, is there an obligation towards the community to act in its interest and not in the individual's? In the open source community, there are regularly cases like this, where a developer of a popular library goes rogue and either sells, adds malicious code, or even removes his works, causing endless pain to the consumers. Is this justifiable, or is there, at some point, a moral obligation to act in the interest of the public?
• How far should enumeration of a works impact its usage? There is a famous case from a library called corejs, which is used by major frameworks and thus millions of websites, and where the author decided to print a donation link in the console when installing. If every library does that, the console becomes useless. So, is this justifiable? What are the rules?

I don't have generic answers to all those questions, and some are of course subjective, usually depending on which side of the authorship / consumership you are. But maybe sit back a little and reflect how you think you fit into this community.

 

I can give you my point of view, of course.

• The "being used" part is easy. Dmdext uses a license called GPL. Lucky1 violates it by bundling his fork's binary with the plugin. For some reason, y'all seem to be fine with that.
• The tools should have the same rights as the works created by them. One doesn't exist without the other, so there needs to be a balance. For dmdext, I feel that balance was biased towards the creators.
• I actually DO think there is a moral obligation to act in the interest of the public sometimes. It's hard to define when exactly, but in this case, the benefits of opening PAC are so overwhelmingly dominating over the drawbacks (so far, all I got: potential  VNI usage on real pins), that it was really a no-brainer.
• Concerning enumeration, I'm with Dazz. This is a hobby, and while enumeration can be tolerated, it shouldn't have an impact on others, specially if no one except a certain group is being enumerated.

So, take a deep breath. It's not like I've released a FSQ->VNI converter or something like that. Your real-pin colorizations are still protected. Focus on what you love to do. It's not the end of the world to disagree with others.

[zedrummer]

1 hour ago, Ashram56 said:

4 hours ago, zedrummer said:

I think that if Lucky1 had principles against this conversion tool, he wouldn't have proposed a similar conversion afterwards

 

That's not what I think he proposed. He proposed to include in PIN2DMD editor an export function, which would put the decision in the hand of the authors. Not a conversion tool that could operate on the generated virtual pin file.

 

You are wrong, Lucky proposed to one author (perhaps others) an "import routine for the editor" for Serum that could be then exported as PAC/FSQ.

 

1 hour ago, slippifishi said:

Ashram provided an excellent description which is fitting with my own interpretation - the community is everyone, creators and consumers alike. I am a member of the community, you are a member of the community, LynnInDenver is a member of the community - we all are. Pinball players near and far, real and virtual, past present and future.

I totally agree with that, the fact is that when there is a choice to make between different opinions, what we call "the interest of the community" should be, for me, the choice that represents the interest of the larger part of the community. In this case, for me, open source is always the right choice, there is always someone who can improve your code/format/whatever... Just look at emulation like Yuzu, MAME and even VP. This is what happened to ZeDMD when @mk47 put his hands on the project, and I can clearly say that I am no match for Markus. I am even no match for Freezy or Lucky, they are way more clever than me and they are pioneers, so wherever the discussion go, I respect these guys. But once again, BEFORE starting to code Serum, I pm-ed Lucky and tried to find a solution for my ZeDMD to be PAC-compatible, I didn't mean to be... "hostile".

[slippifishi]

1 hour ago, freezy said:

So, take a deep breath. It's not like I've released a FSQ->VNI converter or something like that. Your real-pin colorizations are still protected. Focus on what you love to do. It's not the end of the world to disagree with others.

 

<breath in>.........<breath out>

 

You are absolutely right Freezy, you didn't release a FSQ->VNI converter, in fact I don't think any of us would have had that big a problem with that because the vpin files were already free, and to get the FSQ file you had to go through the author paywall anyway; frustrating yes, as it would still lead to the release of an uncontrolled VNI, but not as bad as what you ended up doing.

 

Because what you've essentially done is release the reverse - a PAC->FSQ converter, allowing people to bypass the real pin paywall. A paywall you all don't agree with, I concede, but a paywall none the less, one that none of you were impacted by, and one none of you had any right to dictate should be bypassed. Your argument that we are talking about a hypothetical exploitation is also void - there is at least one case of alphaDMD running a VNI project that I know of, and as I stated previously, usul is open about offering to instruct others on how to achieve this - he doesn't want the grief that would come with doing what you have effectively done, but he is quite willing to let someone else take the flak; maybe you should reach out to him as your morals probably align.

[NetzZwerg]

56 minutes ago, freezy said:

When a certain popularity is reached, is there an obligation towards the community to act in its interest and not in the individual's?

 

1 hour ago, freezy said:

I actually DO think there is a moral obligation to act in the interest of the public sometimes.

That´s a great point of view. Wouldn´t it be a big interest of t he community to have table packs, all in one installers and stuff like that? Wouldn´t it be a big interest of modders to change some colors and claim a table as their own. I don´t know what the difference should be.

 

 

59 minutes ago, freezy said:

For example, when a table author indicates that they wouldn't like their table to be modded, that's a bit like a license. Another example is you saying you don't want VNI files on real pins.

Yes, but many members of  this "community" don´t give a shit about these "licenses". vni and pal files got collected and uploaded somewhere else for zedmd users, although they are outdated and I mentioned that I don´t want them to be around anymore. But I guess this was also a "big interest" in the community.

The release of this software opened many doors for using my files for whatever, without having any control about it. It really feels like we got hijacked step by step.
And now it doesn´t even matter if the pac files get deleted or if I delete them on my own, they are already out there in the current state, so there is no way to turn back anymore.

I am sure that many people will rip off all my projects sooner or later, because nobody seems to care about that, especially when there will be no more updates from my side.

So congratulations for acting again in the "big interest of the community!"

 

[stumblor]

5 minutes ago, slippifishi said:

a paywall none the less, one that none of you were impacted by, and one none of you had any right to dictate should be bypassed. 

 

1 hour ago, freezy said:

• the benefits of opening PAC are so overwhelmingly dominating over the drawbacks

 

Just so we're 100% clear - what are the public benefits to hacking PAC ?

 

Because the drawback is clearly a schism of the community and at the very least, a vpin loss of all current colourisation authors, which isn't in the public interest at all.

 

[Ashram56]

19 minutes ago, zedrummer said:

You are wrong, Lucky proposed to one author (perhaps others) an "import routine for the editor" for Serum that could be then exported as PAC/FSQ.

And he stated "if coloring authors are ok". Details matter.

 

1 hour ago, freezy said:

• The "being used" part is easy. Dmdext uses a license called GPL. Lucky1 violates it by bundling his fork's binary with the plugin. For some reason, y'all seem to be fine with that.

 

No I'm not fine with that either. But there is a difference between publishing a hostile fork (and even at that, there's a disagreeing interpretation on whether Lucky1 fork is considered as violating GPL), and simply publishing out in the open how to reverse engineering a closed format

 

1 hour ago, freezy said:

• The tools should have the same rights as the works created by them. One doesn't exist without the other, so there needs to be a balance. For dmdext, I feel that balance was biased towards the creators.

 

And there would not be any content if the colorization authors did not find a return on investment, be it fame or money. But if DMDExt did not exist, somebody else would have done it, very likely Lucky1 for that matter.

 

1 hour ago, freezy said:

• I actually DO think there is a moral obligation to act in the interest of the public sometimes. It's hard to define when exactly, but in this case, the benefits of opening PAC are so overwhelmingly dominating over the drawbacks (so far, all I got: potential  VNI usage on real pins), that it was really a no-brainer.

 

There we go again, the moral high ground. You obviously fail to acknowledge the consequences of your actions, because who exactly are you to define what is the public interest ? So public interest goes against author's rights ? That should include your rights then, so... if someone forks your DMDExt for a more "public interest" compatible version, even if it means reinstating closed source library component, will you stand still ? Oh wait this has already been done and it was considered as hostile

 

And then , let's talk about something the community as a whole desperately need: table packs ! Because hell, installing tables and configuring all SW IS complicated (far more than dealing with this whole DMDExt schism). If I take your statement, then I can exactly state "the benefit of having table pack or even fully cloned image are so overhelmingly dominating over the drawback that it was really a no brainer". Ah no, that goes against the table author wishes that his work is respected and distribution is done through authorized channels. Err wait... what was the colorization author stance again ?

 

1 hour ago, freezy said:

• Concerning enumeration, I'm with Dazz. This is a hobby, and while enumeration can be tolerated, it shouldn't have an impact on others, specially if no one except a certain group is being enumerated.

 

Tolerated. What a nice word. I'm sure Zen Studio would agree to that wording.

Doesn't it strike you that the most vocal opponent to your actions among the colorization author is @slippifishi, who actually... does NOT charge for real pinball files ? Yes you read this right, he does not. Yet he's out there, defending the author views, which you completely dismissed

 

So yes congratulations, as @NetzZwerg pointed out, you single handlely managed to:

- Create a schism : several PIN2DMD authors, among the most active, are going to take their leave, very likely asking their files to be removed. Dazz already removed @slippifishi content, at his request. How long before the others follow suit ? Will you go against their wishes and host the files on your github, in the  "public interest" ?

- legitimate shady practices: table packs or cloned images, using Serum colorization on alternate HW without the author consent, or more generally using any author work without their consent, all fair game now

 

 

[zedrummer]

1 minute ago, Ashram56 said:

And he stated "if coloring authors are ok". Details matter.

Do you forget all the previous messages when you are answering? I started saying "I think that if Lucky1 had principles against this conversion tool, he wouldn't have proposed a similar conversion afterwards", to what you answered that this is not an import tool, and that's exactly that, the same type of software! So I guess he has no problem with my converter...

 

36 minutes ago, NetzZwerg said:

vni and pal files got collected and uploaded somewhere else for zedmd users, although they are outdated and I mentioned that I don´t want them to be around anymore. But I guess this was also a "big interest" in the community.

No this is not, this was a big mistake I made (due to a lack of information, but I try not to minimize, I should have looked for this information) and apologized at least 3 times, and will continue if needed, even if"the harm is done" (I'm quite sure that before that, like for the GB table, every body could easily get all the VNI/PAL files, but yes, it was a mistake). But Freezy can't be blamed for that.