Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - To daidalos mod team

Page 3 of 3

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)

- - To daidalos mod team (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=18025)

Wutz	01-10-2011 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by csThor (Post 210913)

NG accquired various shipyards post-war and has therefor claimed "intellectual ownership" of the ships produced by said shipyards. In the current situation it's irrelevant if their claim is logical (which I think is a word which should not be used in one sentence with NG) or even legal (which I doubt as well) but the fact stands: Ubisoft struck a deal with NG and now we're stuck with said deal. Which means any aircraft and ship produced by companies under the NG umbrella (which aren't in the game ATM) will not be added by Team Daidalos. Same goes to any aircraft of NG not flyable will not be made flyable, either.

Hmm if there was a list of ships posted which are no goes it would be more understandable. Or does NG have rights on ALL the ships which where stationed at Pearl during the Japanese attack?

Fenrir

01-10-2011 07:04 PM

Come on guys, think ahead a bit here:

IT DOES NOT MATTER WHICH U.S. COMPANY MADE YOUR FAVOURITE PLANE/SHIP/VEHICLE AS THERE IS NOW LEGAL PRECEDENT.

This means any US firm that swallowed up any of the manufacturers of ships/aircraft/vehicles could now sue for the unauthorised modelling of "their" intellectual property, not just NG.

By folding on this issue, Ubi opened the door to all US companies that either built - or bought up a manufacturer - of any of these things to be a potential source of litigation.

As for the IJN/IJA side of the equation, I understood that the lack of flyable Kate and others, is more to do with a lack of verifiable data with regards to cockpits and instrumentation, tho there is a chance that the same legal issue might be a factor with the Japanese (ex)aero-industry companies.

dFrog

01-10-2011 07:18 PM

Well, I have a question about ''intellectual property''.
What about F4U-4,-5,-7... It was made before Grumman acquired Vough, do they own any rights or can this plane be made ?
I'm no lawyer, just asking.

Fenrir

01-10-2011 07:37 PM

As far as understand, you buy a company you automatically *buy* the intellectual property of that concern be it new inventions or the design of stock that was bought by the governmant on behalf of the people 70 years ago.

Just grand ain't it?

dFrog

01-10-2011 08:05 PM

Well yes. I forgot to add that Grumman sold Vough. It was bought by Carlyle and renamed Vought Aircraft Industries.
Who's the owner of rights now ?

TheGrunch

01-10-2011 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fenrir (Post 210939)

As for the IJN/IJA side of the equation, I understood that the lack of flyable Kate and others, is more to do with a lack of verifiable data with regards to cockpits and instrumentation, tho there is a chance that the same legal issue might be a factor with the Japanese (ex)aero-industry companies.

There's plenty of references available, it's just a lack of interest from third-party modellers, it seems.

EJGr.Ost_Caspar

01-10-2011 10:20 PM

Yep, I have enough references about the Kate's cockpit(s).

Fafnir_6

01-10-2011 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar (Post 210978)

Yep, I have enough references about the Kate's cockpit(s).

Cool! You ARE encouraging speculation, you know.

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:17 PM.

Page 3 of 3

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page