Mods discussion, links, etc

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

If the patriotic method doesn't work with the NG chiefs, you still can talk to Mr. President! When are next elections?

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

You guys need a website or something like it, with tutorials, restrictions, a "wishlist" of add-ons, and ideas on how folks can help.

That would surely be helpfull. Unfortunately we do not have the ressources to set up such a place.

[BadAim]

I think it's a shame that our nature is not to forget who "fired the first shot" and get about the business of cooperating for the greater good. Much pain could be avoided. Much good could be done. Oh, well....Such is the human condition.

[BadAim]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

If the patriotic method doesn't work with the NG chiefs, you still can talk to Mr. President! When are next elections?

Two Looooooong years.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

A shame!

[Asheshouse]

The Northrop Grumman position on intellectual property rights.

From http://www.northropgrumman.com/ipm/tmpolicy.html

In summary NG claims trademark rights on the names of its "products" but does not claim any rights to images, drawings etc, provided the name is not used.

Trademark Licensing Policy

TRADEMARK LICENSE
FOR USE WITH PHOTOGRAPHS, ILLUSTRATIONS AND PAINTINGS
NOT OWNED BY NORTHROP GRUMMAN

Background: Northrop Grumman Corporation recognizes that the copyright in a photograph, illustration or painting of a vehicle is owned by the photographer, illustrator or artist, respectively (absent a contractual arrangement otherwise). At the same time, Northrop Grumman, as the manufacturer, owns the trademarks (e.g. "F-14", "Corsair") in the vehicles it makes. Under the trademark laws of the United States and other countries, a trademark owner risks losing trademark rights if others use those trademarks without permission.

Purpose: Northrop Grumman respects and appreciates the creative talents of the photographic and artistic communities. Northrop Grumman desires to promote the use of its trademarks with photographs, illustrations and paintings by granting a free license to photographers and artists so that Northrop Grumman can maintain its trademark rights while at the same time being minimally intrusive.

License Terms:

Northrop Grumman hereby grants a free license to photographers and artists to use Northrop Grumman’s trademarks with his/her photographs, illustrations or paintings, including with any that are sold.
The photographer or artist agrees that the quality of his/her photographs, illustrations or paintings that use Northrop Grumman trademarks will: (a) be at least equal to the standards commonly used by the professional artistic and photographic community for illustrations, paintings, and photographs, (b) display the correct name of the Northrop Grumman vehicle(s), and (c) not disparage the name or reputation of Northrop Grumman or violate any laws.
The free license does not apply to the use of Northrop Grumman’s trademarks in books, posters or calendars in runs that exceed 5,000. Likewise, the free license does not apply to use of Northrop Grumman’s trademarks for any form of merchandise such as toys, models, clothing, coffee cups, notebooks, electronic or video games, etc. Licenses for such uses are available from

Director, Intellectual Asset Management
Northrop Grumman Corporation
1840 Century Park East
Los Angeles, CA 90067

But from previous comments made here it seems 1C may have made specific agreements which extends these terms in order to avoid legal conflict over Pacific Fighters.

I am surprised that they claim specific rights to the trademark "F-14". I thought that was a USAAF designation. However the term "Corsair" is understandable as a trademark. Perhaps you would be ok using "F14"

When it comes to ships it seems unlikely that NG would claim any rights to "CV5" but they might claim trademark rights to "Yorktown". --- Even though I expect it is the USN which decides on names of ships, not NG.

PS: I have e-mailed NG to clarify the last point. --- Don't hold your breath waiting for a reply.

[Oktoberfest]

You just need to email or write to this guy :

http://www.northropgrumman.com/leade.../wes_bush.html

Better agree on a common text first. As I'm not a native english speaker, I'm no sure I have the skill or the subtility to write a good letter.

Who's wanting to try ? Then everybody downloads the text, sign and send it to NG CEO Wes Bush.

Do you think it's a good idea ?

[Asheshouse]

Since SaQSoN said he has a Yorktown Class model gathering dust I thought it would be worth trying to get a specific answer to this first. This is what I've sent.

Could you confirm to me that you do not claim trademark rights for the the following names:

"CV5"
"USS Yorktown"

Regards

If there is a negative response, or no response, then this can be used in any letter drafted to the CEO.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by _1SMV_Gitano

There is no doubt that a more varied cargo/steamer fleet would be welcomed by most players, provided the models are made according to specs and do not violate any copyright.

That's excellent news, since most of the U.S., U.K., German, Italian and Japanese civilian shipbuilders are out of business and have been for some time. Anyhow, there can't be any copyright issues with Axis equipment, since those would have fallen by the wayside as "spoils of war." As for the Soviet stuff, that's all in the public domain because it was government designed and planned.

I did a tiny bit of research on this, and there are a whole bunch of U.S. auxiliary ships, such as the Liberty Ship and C2 "Victory Ship" variants, which were specifically designed by the U.S. Maritime Commission for war use. They look to be copyright free, since they were government designed and produced by shipyards which went out of business after the war. That opens up a lot of minor U.S. types.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by SaQSoN

There is no such thing, as "good enough". It is either fits technical requirements and "political" restrictions (like NG issue), or not.

My point about mods being "good enough" wasn't meant to imply that they're up to DT standards. Rather, they're good enough that people will overlook their obvious flaws because of what they bring to the game. Right now, mods fill niches which DT hasn't yet filled. That points out obvious directions in which DT should work.

For example, if "frankenplane" German nightfighters and British heavy bombers seem to be popular, then DT should beat the modders at their own game by doing the RAF night bombing campaign properly. Basically, beat the modders at their own game.

Originally Posted by SaQSoN

But, unfortunately, some authors of this high quality mods either do not want their creations in official add-on, or do not want to make the said modifications to their work. In this case, such mods are left out as well.

Based on what you, and other DT members have said, it seems that you are proactively contacting the better modders and trying to recruit them. That's extremely encouraging. I'm just sorry that more modders can't, or won't cooperate.