Flightsim.to new business model and terms of service leaves content creators without rights to their own work

[KL791]

Flightsim.to today introduced their new Premium model. Combined with their Terms of Service content providers are effectively bared from removing uploads for eternity while Flightsim.to can set pricing for download as they want and even go in and modify your creations.

I strongly suggest all content providers boykot flightsim.to until the make changes to their terms of service.

I have no problem as such with Premium subscriptions but combined with their Terms of Service and in particular the section quoted below is just too much.

(4.3) Licenses you are granting us: By submitting or posting User Content to the Service (either directly or through a Third Party Service) you grant this Site a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, sublicensable, assignable, unrestricted, worldwide license to use the User Content, together with all consents or waivers (if any) necessary to distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, transmit, communicate to the public and modify the User Content, by any means and in all media formats and channels now known or hereafter devised in perpetuity, and to advertise and promote such use, without further notice to, or permission from, you or any other person, and without compensation or reference to you or any other person.

 

[rhumbaflappy]

Essentially, they want to steal your content. I advise all developers to take this seriously, and not upload anything to Flightsim.to

 

[KL791]

...and Flightsim.to declined my request to delete the file.

Luckily we soon have a new version ready and it will not be on Flightsim.to.

 

[=rk=]

Anyone remember an event called "Woodstock" and that new invention called a "tape recorder?" Boy did that device cause a fuss, am I right? Nowadays they have software that can auto tune anyone into a Carlos Santana set and if there is any video, other software can synch you right into the performance.

You cannot honestly believe Flightsim.to intends to enact maliciously, or in any way detrimental to the community, can you? Just look at the ripples that have already started, simply from this TOS. Flightsim.to needs content, fresh content, more and faster and new stuff everyday, please. They desperately crave happy, eager, productive developers. The last thing they want to do, is lose credibility, become a Surclaro, or whatever. Good luck regurgitating FS2004 repaints with no lag for premium, as a business model.
I Know why they do this and it already happened to me and I had your exact same reaction Henrik and I regretted it. Originally I only uploaded to Avsim and I knew Tom. Rikoo, of his own accord, mirrored my KHIO Hillsboro scenery and not only that, he edited it. I was livid when I discovered it, briefly flattered and I should have stopped right there, but no, pride. When he got back to me, he was apologetic and truly perplexed, but he complied in a huff which clearly communicated my content would no longer be welcome at Rikoo. Hmm, that's a mixed blessing, isn't it. Later, I saw that he had actually fixed my scenery, I had botched the upload and it had been in a complex disarray of parts, he put it all into a seamless installer. Then I felt like a real doof, because it had gotten a lot of hits at the French site. People will not seek my downloads out, as they do GAIST and Avsim will not host my ponderous uploads, Flightsim.to is about my only option.

Everything else aside, I myself use a lot of stuff freely available online, Sketchup and Sketchfab models mostly. Recently I discovered Seafront Simulations also uses Sketchfab models, he can get away with this, because his core library is also free. In almost every duplicate of a recent scenery I did, I discarded his, for my own interpretation of the Sketchfab models. Talk about newer, fresher.

It took a long time for the music industry to restructure, all that DMCA stuff and the ISP's threatening to report you for Limewiring, glad that's all died down. $200 a seat, seems like live performances do indeed pay off for musicians and I suspect, with the coming AI revolution, when my computer can finally cough out a perfect replica of Otto Kittel's FW-190 after I type "Otto Kittel's FW-190," my 3d modelling will have to become more performative as well, to survive.

 

[WarpD]

I will point out that changing their policy does NOT legally apply to anything that happened prior to the policy change. Thus they would be required to operate all uploads that happened before the new policy went into effect based on the prior policy. Otherwise, I'm fairly certain they'd have to allow you to remove the files. No, I'm not a lawyer... but... I'm used to dealing with contracts/agreements/etc... and none can be enforced on prior business. It just isn't allowed.

 

[ronh]

Good luck with that, it has already happened , a dev uploaded work, way before these changes, He asked to delete his work, they told him no. It's our to use as we please. Take him to court, ya a freeware dev has those resources.

What you get if you try to remove your work. This is with a file uploaded when the site first started. I don't understand how this license can be enforced as it is over reaching, There has to be some government law against sure over reaching policies.

 

[OzWookiee]

Good luck with that, it has already happened , a dev uploaded work, way before these changes, He asked to delete his work, they told him no. It's our to use as we please. Take him to court, ya a freeware dev has those resources.

What you get if you try to remove your work. This is with a file uploaded when the site first started. I don't understand how this license can be enforced as it is over reaching, There has to be some government law against sure over reaching policies.

View attachment 86542


View attachment 86543

View attachment 86541

I've just asked for a copy of the original TOS when I uploaded the files and what has changed since.

Because they didn't inform us of these changes, that could be taken as acting in bad faith which would then AFAIK make their TOS void and we could ask for our content to be deleted. However that relys on them actually deleting the content and not tell us to stuff off.

I guess then we could maybe do DMCA takedowns, but... yea.

 

[FoxtrotScenery]

This might help those who want the previous legal terms, retrieved from webarchive: https://web.archive.org/web/20220819150640/https://flightsim.to/legal/terms

Specifically section 4.6:

(4.6) The licences granted by you continue until the User Content is removed as described below. Once removed, the licences will terminate, except where you permitted the further use of User Content after your removal, or the law requires otherwise. For example, removal of User Content by you does not require the Platform to: (a) recall User Content that is being used by other users within any limited offline viewing functionality of the Service; or (b) delete copies we reasonably need to keep for legal purposes.

 

[=rk=]

At this moment, anyone with an internet connection already has a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, sublicensable, assignable, unrestricted, worldwide license to use online User Content, together with all consents or waivers (if any) necessary to distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, transmit, communicate to the public and modify the online User Content, by any means and in all media formats and channels now known or hereafter devised in perpetuity, and to advertise and promote such use, without further notice to, or permission from, you or any other person, and without compensation or reference to you or any other person.

The software synergizes shared content from the entire internet, people are using this software to write movie scripts and college thesis and none of the original work gets credited, whatsoever. Many ChatGPT users are surprised to learn their "creations" are not in any way, original. The AI's have already moved on from text content and are performing quite remarkably with sound and 2d art, in about a minute, maybe three, they will be churning out prefect ish derivatives of everything that ever existed. This, while money itself is becoming meaningless. I feel like Nero, dancing in the flames of the dying old ways.

 

[WildLynxPilot]

This might help those who want the previous legal terms, retrieved from webarchive: https://web.archive.org/web/20220819150640/https://flightsim.to/legal/terms

Specifically section 4.6:

Also

(2.1) You can terminate or close your account at Flightsim.to at any time and you can stop using the Site at any time. To close or delete your account permanently, you need to expressly inform us that you want to close or permanently delete your account. We will then remove and delete all data associated with your User account. The Privacy Policy applies.

 

[Steffsim]

Hopefully all developers will join in and do not upload anything anymore. You can't behave more repectless towards freeware developers. I just want to have the right to decide when my files should be deleted. Nothing more.

Edit The post was not deleted, had just slipped to another place, sorry

 

[Lagaffe]

Hi,

First, I have write my opinion on their forum: https://flightsim.to/news/our-approach-to-flightsim-to-premium-and-creators-program

Second, I have created a new ZIP with only a README.txt in which I said my disapproval of their new rules and the fact that our written consent was not sought. I ask to news users to go on my web site in order to download my news versions.
This ZIP has been uploaded in place of my old aircraft version and all these changes appear to have been accepted: the last version of 864Ko (README.txt) seems to be the last version of my Menestrel HN-4xx on flightsim.to.
Apparently due to the disk space and server problems this would cause, older uploaded versions do not seem to be backed up. (I hope I am not wrong).
So it's like deleting your own addons since they have already been refused by KL791

PS: No Steffsim, you answer is always on the forum: they are organized answers in reverse order: old to young. If you scroll down you can find it !

 

[Steffsim]

Hi,

First, I have write my opinion on their forum: https://flightsim.to/news/our-approach-to-flightsim-to-premium-and-creators-program

Second, I have created a new ZIP with only a README.txt in which I said my disapproval of their new rules and the fact that our written consent was not sought. I ask to news users to go on my web site in order to download my news versions.
This ZIP has been uploaded in place of my old aircraft version and all these changes appear to have been accepted: the last version of 864Ko (README.txt) seems to be the last version of my Menestrel HN-4xx on flightsim.to.
Apparently due to the disk space and server problems this would cause, older uploaded versions do not seem to be backed up. (I hope I am not wrong).
So it's like deleting your own addons since they have already been refused by KL791

PS: No Steffsim, you answer is always on the forum: they are organized answers in reverse order: old to young. If you scroll down you can find it !

Great idea! I have now also replaced my sceneries with readme files.

 

[Kaiii3]

Great idea! I have now also replaced my sceneries with readme files.

whats out, some other Devs reported FS.to has replaced the "new" files with the old working once.....

 

[superspud]

whats out, some other Devs reported FS.to has replaced the "new" files with the old working once.....

I expect they would be looking for file size if developers are trying to 'trick' them.

No way do they have the time to download and check each new file. It might also depend on downloaders reporting non functioning downloads.

And if they show blatant disrespect then there are other ways of tripping them up.

This is their justification for preventing deletions - https://flightsim.to/help/uploading-at-flightsimto/limited-ability-to-delete-your-file

I can see where they're coming from, but they depend on the good will of creators and that should be at the forefront at all times.

It might be a business for them, or trying to be, but there's no business at all if they alienate the people who made it happen.

 

[Lagaffe]

All these justifications are contrary to European property rights.
Of course, I don't think that anyone will go to court, but if many of us argue for our property rights and what we have given as restrictions (see right side of each publication), this should make them reconsider their position.

In this case, it's all about the balance of power: if too few people show up, they will win. If the ratio is in our favor, they will probably reconsider their position.

PS: My "upload" of this morning of 864ko is always on the site. They don't change my last "archive".

 

[WildLynxPilot]

I asked them today to delete one of my airport sceneries to test it out. They approved it and the add-on is no longer available, so at least small sceneries with very few downloads can probably be removed. Sad that you have to take these steps...

 

[Lagaffe]

Maybe also they got a lot of remarks and are changing their policy so as not to scare those who are still at home.
In any case, if we make them understand that we do not agree, they will probably do something.
If we do nothing ... we will suffer.

 

[=rk=]

we will suffer.

How? It is already free. I have not seen one allegation of injury, financial loss, or incurring financial obligation. "Rights" were not established, from which to reduce other freedoms, rights are established and upheld to protect essential freedoms. How, has this been abridged? You are essentially stating, "this is free to some, but not all." Flightsim.to seems to think you will suffer for harboring useless bits and pieces. People may not know this, but other people have been ripping 3d models from video, for quite some time already.

So you've got...what? An original version of the Wright Flyer? How original? Right down to the wires and twine? And nobody can make the exact same thing? No, you have your version, your interpretation and that is what sells, that is what Flightsim.to craves and cannot abscond, originality. Even original remakes, remakes of the remakes and interpretations of the remakes. The are creators on YouTube that thrive, simply by rehashing other creators videos. These guys got it down, sort of:

They cannot even afford a studio, or maybe it's just trendy, but it seems like they will starve, if they stop pumping out new content. This is the direction flightsim.to is going, before they abandon creators entirely, in favor of automation. There is still time to catch the wave, if we can adapt.

 

[Marc L]

Woaw, I just found out what going on (just saw the thread here and also went to read commentes on FS.TO too)...I Loved FS.TO since day one, but now.. I hate it.

Now I'm so happy I never been able to complete my scenery, because I would have uploaded it on fs.to ... (even payware), now even if I had a project ready.fs.to would never see the color of it!

I support you, developers, their new TOS is Unacceptable, illegal, disrespectful! They better change that or FS.TO will definitely sink... wich is sad as it used to be the Best! (Im everyday visiting it for new addons)

Stay strong my friends!