Unauthorized selling of instructions for MOCs

[Brother From Another Brick]

I'll take down the interview video and redo it with questions and concerns yall have.What do you guys want me to ask?

[Hod Carrier]

@Brother From Another Brick Honestly...? I'd rather you didn't. I felt a little uncomfortable listening to the interview because I was concerned that it might just have descended into a public shaming and I'm not entirely sure that redoing it will add anything. @Jimbricked has had the opportunity to put his points across and I think we can all see just how naïve he has been, which is something that I hope he can now see for himself.

Apart from failing to adequately raise the actual concerns we had, the only thing that concerned me was that Eurobricks comes out of your interview badly. Anyone watching it who doesn't know this community might get an inaccurate impression of what we are like. We are not hateful, vindictive or overly possessive, and neither are our rules draconian or restrictive. I do not believe that our reaction to this situation has been in any way disproportionate nor unrepresentative of how other parts of the wider AFOL community would have reacted. Jimbricked has not been banned and I would expect that he could still be a part of Eurobricks if he wished to.

[JEB314 (James)]

Just now, Brother From Another Brick said:

I'll take down the interview video and redo it with questions and concerns yall have.What do you guys want me to ask?

Hi @Brother From Another Brick,

Thank you for considering doing this. 

I think, on balance, it is for the best that this is done right, but in a limited way, as it is only fair to everyone concerned that this is put to bed, questions and thoughts given and then people move on.

I'm sorry to say this, but as you are a friend of Jim, I'm not sure you will be able to come at this from quite the right angle. It needs a partisan, neutral individual (who has also been fully informed on the situation as it stands), to do this, or else it won't come across right, in my opinion.

I think it would be best that @Jimbricked himself, makes a video saying he is stopping certain aspects of the way he was doing things, changing a few, and starting with a fresh approach and new energy to feature his own content.

That way, he has a future on Youtube, and things can move on.

[Toastie]

35 minutes ago, Hod Carrier said:

@Brother From Another Brick Honestly...? I'd rather you didn't. […]

@JimbrickedI think we can all see just how naïve he has been, which is something that I hope he can now see for himself. […]

We are not hateful, vindictive or overly possessive, and neither are our rules draconian or restrictive. I do not believe that our reaction to this situation has been in any way disproportionate nor unrepresentative of how other parts of the wider AFOL community would have reacted. […]

Jimbricked has not been banned and I would expect that he could still be a part of Eurobricks if he wished to. […]

I did not get much sleep last night - due to this development. Too fast for me, too much energy. And in some posts too far away from adult fans of LEGO behavior (for me that is!).

If there had been more "hate" and related things caused by this event, I would have quit being a member of EB. Now in contrast, we come to grips. Not endorsing what happened, but discussing in a way that is appropriate for AFOLs in this community.  

@Hod Carrier you have summed it up in such a nice way, there isn't anything I would like to add. And it makes me feel so much better. There is your clear statement (that I take as a community statement I fully support), there is a picture of how this community "works".

Most importantly, I do want to praise the moderators of EB to not just jump on a "Hot Topic" and kick @Jimbricked out, but give him space and time to rethink.

This is what makes this community so different from others that I know as well.

I could not agree more with what you said.

Thank you very much for that.

All the best
Thorsten     

[JEB314 (James)]

5 minutes ago, Toastie said:

Most importantly, I do want to praise the moderators of EB to not just jump on a "Hot Topic" and kick @Jimbricked out, but give him space and time to rethink.

This is what makes this community so different from others that I know as well.

Absolutely, I think the moderators have handled this very well!

If this was a great number of other communities, like you say, it would've been different.

This is why I love Eurobricks, its measured approach to things in general means we can ride any storm.

[MAB]

1 hour ago, JEB314 (James) said:

I think it would be best that @Jimbricked himself, makes a video saying he is stopping certain aspects of the way he was doing things, changing a few, and starting with a fresh approach and new energy to feature his own content.

 

And maybe to actually admit that what he was doing was wrong, and he now understands that he should not take other people's work and sell it. And apologise.

The big thing in that interview (at least from the stealing point of view) was that (1) he is not sorry for doing it and (2) it was hateful EB that has made him stop doing it and not the realisation that what he was doing is wrong.

 

[koalayummies]

5 hours ago, Brother From Another Brick said:

In my opinion, if you dont want people to use your creations probably dont put them on the LDD Gallery, but I do understand why your upset.

Ah yes, the victim blaming argument.

There's a difference between: enjoy this for your personal private use to build something you like versus use this for commercial purposes to profit. The latter is not fair use.

Not everything that they were using was taken from the LDD Gallery, I know for a fact that some was taken from here on Eurobricks or from Bricksafe.

5 hours ago, Brother From Another Brick said:

Personally, I would have reached out to him for some money and asked for a 50/50 split, so you still get some recognition. Hopefully, I didnt offend anyone, because im trying to be neutral in this situation.

They should do that sharing thing now and should have before, at the very least given credit but clearly they didn't care about any of these builders and those builders shouldn't have to be asked to strike a deal like that, the burden is the other way around. Distribute all funds made from the selling of instructions and youtube revenue generated from their channel to all those that they took from, or as per @Blk69's suggestion, donate it to a charity. Considering the lucrative potential that their channel had (thanks @JEB314 (James) for the image from the other thread):

The overwhelming majority of that would be profits generated from the unauthorized and uncredited usage of other people's work.

Edited May 25, 2018 by koalayummies

[JEB314 (James)]

I've been thinking, should we just have a defacto rule? (Maybe on Eurobricks, maybe more widely.)

 

Something like:

"If you sell or profit from digital material related to LEGO® in any form, that doesn't belong to you, and are found out or reported, you will be dealt with according to the extent/severity of the case."

 

As then there is some standpoint to aid controlling this type of thing, as at the moment it feels more of an 'unwritten rule'.

I know there are rules on selling and promoting selling on Eurobricks, but I feel this could be beneficial to the site.

Just a thought...

[MAB]

His youtube channel is now back up.

[Carefree_Dude]

He included this line. 

"Anyone who continues to talk about the Situation or Hate via my YouTube channel will be blocked instantly. This is the only Warning. "

[Phoxtane]

36 minutes ago, Goldenmasamune said:

He included this line. 

"Anyone who continues to talk about the Situation or Hate via my YouTube channel will be blocked instantly. This is the only Warning. "

Oh dear, I see we've reached the nuclear option in any debate: banning the dissenters. 

See, this tactic is used when either there's legitimate trolling causing derailment and distraction - or when a certain somebody gets tired of having to deal with a "messy" situation of their own doing...

If anyone's interests here overlap with video games, look up the time when Jim Stirling was sued by the developer Digital Homicide!

[JEB314 (James)]

I've just been described as "The definition of a true human being!"

Don't know quite what to say! :)

[koalayummies]

1 hour ago, MAB said:

His youtube channel is now back up.

Todays Brickguardian News: The thought of losing the entire revenue stream proved too much to bear for the miscreant and he promptly reestablished all of the content he could still salvage in hopes of maintaining some semblance of the lifestyle that thanks largely to appropriation he had become accustomed.

1 hour ago, Goldenmasamune said:

He included this line. 

"Anyone who continues to talk about the Situation or Hate via my YouTube channel will be blocked instantly. This is the only Warning. "

36 minutes ago, Phoxtane said:

Oh dear, I see we've reached the nuclear option in any debate: banning the dissenters. 

See, this tactic is used when either there's legitimate trolling causing derailment and distraction - or when a certain somebody gets tired of having to deal with a "messy" situation of their own doing...

If anyone's interests here overlap with video games, look up the time when Jim Stirling was sued by the developer Digital Homicide!

Thanks for sharing and well said.

Many here nobly offered him the benefit of the doubt, they held out hope that he inexplicably didn't know that what he was doing was morally and ethically perverted, offered him a second chance (even though it was really at least a third chance based on past discussions), patiently heard him out and sacrificed their time to explain to him the significance in hopes that he would correct the flagrant wrongs. While he has taken steps to correct most of the wrongs that led to this (however short of restitution) unfortunately all the rest of this appears to have been in vain as the true character is slowly revealed. That same olive branch of diplomacy through discussion is not offered but instead outright revoked and banned and an inflated sense of superiority and entitlement takes over as a dictatorship over the truth is rolled out. 'You shall not inform anyone looking at his channel of his past' as he attempts to sweep this under a decrepit urine and feces stained rug.

[Toastie]

1 hour ago, JEB314 (James) said:

I've just been described as "The definition of a true human being!"

Don't know quite what to say! :)

I'd take that as a "thank you". Regardless of what other honorable (this is >not< a joke!) EB fellows do think. I personally very much appreciate your approach, James.

All the best,
Thorsten

[JEB314 (James)]

Dear All, 

These last few days have certainly been eventful, but I would just like to say 'thank you' to everyone that has got in touch through multiple different channels of communication like messaging, email and social media, etc. Whether by helping me, advising me, supporting me, telling me how they really feel, or just showing appreciation for what I have been trying to achieve. 

I felt it just needed to be said, as it really has made it all feel worth the effort and many hours behind the scenes that relatively few people know about.

Regards,

James

[Toastie]

15 minutes ago, JEB314 (James) said:

Dear All, 

These last few days have certainly been eventful, but I would just like to say 'thank you' to everyone that has got in touch through multiple different channels of communication like messaging, email and social media, etc. Whether by helping me, advising me, supporting me, telling me how they really feel, or just showing appreciation for what I have been trying to achieve. 

I felt it just needed to be said, as it really has made it all feel worth the effort and many hours behind the scenes that relatively few people know about.

Regards,

James

Dear James,

very well said.

And handled by you in an absolutely professional manner. Professional in a sense of "wise" and caring about many things but not just "the issue". Thank you very much for all your efforts. I really do appreciate that.

With very best regards,

Thorsten.

P.S.: Just an idea: Maybe one of the moderators can close this topic here on TrainTech and keep it open, maybe even "tacked" to the top, in the "General LEGO Topics Forum?".

   

[Trekkie99]

5 hours ago, Goldenmasamune said:

He included this line. 

"Anyone who continues to talk about the Situation or Hate via my YouTube channel will be blocked instantly. This is the only Warning. "

Umm...?

 

5 hours ago, Phoxtane said:

Oh dear, I see we've reached the nuclear option in any debate: banning the dissenters. 

See, this tactic is used when either there's legitimate trolling causing derailment and distraction - or when a certain somebody gets tired of having to deal with a "messy" situation of their own doing...

This. Understandably trolling exists in the world of YouTube comments, but such a statement sounds more like he just wants to sweep this all under the rug. 

[LEGO Train 12 Volts]

8 hours ago, Toastie said:

Dear James,

very well said.

And handled by you in an absolutely professional manner. Professional in a sense of "wise" and caring about many things but not just "the issue". Thank you very much for all your efforts. I really do appreciate that.

With very best regards,

Thorsten.

P.S.: Just an idea: Maybe one of the moderators can close this topic here on TrainTech and keep it open, maybe even "tacked" to the top, in the "General LEGO Topics Forum?".

   

Not being a native English speaker I didn't want to participate in this forum not to express concepts in a trivial way when you and other members have already spent the best words and best efforts.
I was impressed by the particular wisdom and discernment shown and I am happy to be part of this community.
A special thanks for your speeches.

LT12V

[Nemo57]

On 24.05.2018 at 3:08 PM, Tenderlok said:

And several Russian train MOCs by Pavlo, which were presented here (with designer's permission) by @Nemo57. Nemo57, can you contact Pavlo with this issue?

I represent Paul's opinion on this difficult issue, with which I completely agree.

"I'm always glad when someone collects my model, but it's a shame when it's done for enrichment, and even more so it's unacceptable to do it without information about the source and authorship ...

On the other hand, if the author of the channel published a link to the resource from where the model was taken, indicated in the video that the model was not his, explained how and where to download it and what program to use for viewing,
thanked finally the author of the model for the work done and the file provided for free, then this video I would consider a good advertisement for the resource (site, forum) from which the model was taken and, of course, to its author.
Well, if advertising will bring a small income, then advertising is not free and the author of the video also did the work ...
But, and if the income is significant, then it's worth to contact the author of the model and negotiate a fee with him."

From myself I want to add that this problem is not a problem of the forum, authors and lovers of the Lego. Most likely, this is a problem for a person who considers necessary and permissible the use of someone else's labor, love of lego for their own mercenary purposes. That's all. I apologize for the difficulties of translation (this is all Google translator).

Edited May 26, 2018 by Nemo57

[Stash2Sixx]

On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 8:18 AM, Toastie said:

Most importantly, I do want to praise the moderators of EB to not just jump on a "Hot Topic" and kick @Jimbricked out, but give him space and time to rethink.

This is what makes this community so different from others that I know as well.

 

You guys all handled this very well.  Yes, I was in the loop and watched it to see where it went.

 

[JopieK]

@Stash2Sixx most train engineers don't mind getting their hands dirty, a little rough around the edges but after all they are not that unreasonable and mean well ;)

[Sven J]

Dear trainheads,

I’m bumping this thread because another person (again a not-so-active EB member) has surfaced who unauthorizedly offers instructions for two of my models. This time, he does not sell them, but instead asks for a "donation“ by those who download the instructions, "as it takes a lot of time […] to make“ them.

Well, I strongly suspect it took considerably more time, money and mental capacity for me to design and build the models… Nevertheless, this person has neither asked me for permission nor offered any kind of share of his revenue. What especially upsets me is that he even asked me about later improvements I had incorporated in my models compared to the once-public LDD files, yet he never indicated that he intended to use this background information for more than just his private pleasure.

Yesterday I contacted the person in question and asked him to remove the instructions for my models from his website.
However, again this may only be the tip of the iceberg. So let me appeal to you:
Please do not pay for instructions of any of my models!
I have not authorized any monetary exploitation.
If you like my models and would like to build one of them, contact me by PM. You will receive an LDD or Stud.io file for free, including technical advice if needed.

Do not allow people to make money with other people’s ideas – basically, that’s the same shabby sort of thing that L***in has turned into its business model.

Sorry for this rant, but I feel better now.

With my best wishes to all honest AFOLs,
Sven

 

Edited April 2, 2019 by Tenderlok

[Hod Carrier]

Ah heck!! Not again. 

@Tenderlok Sorry to hear that you’ve been a victim of this yet again. I hope we can have a mature response again from the community with regards to this and get things straightened out in a fair way.

It’s fine when you can easily identify who the originator of a model might be, but it’s harder when a model cannot be identified. I can see how someone who isn’t necessarily part of this community could be duped into paying for work that doesn’t belong to the vendor. We do rely heavily on the community ethos and the goodwill that goes with it, but it does make us vulnerable to IP theft. It would be a great shame if we had to consider deploying digital security methods each time we publish.

[dtomsen]

3 hours ago, Tenderlok said:

Dear trainheads,

I’m bumping this thread because another person (again a not-so-active EB member) has surfaced who unauthorizedly offers instructions for two of my models. This time, he does not sell them, but instead asks for a "donation“ by those who download the instructions, "as it takes a lot of time […] to make“ them.

Well, I strongly suspect it took considerably more time, money and mental capacity for me to design and build the models… Nevertheless, this person has neither asked me for permission nor offered any kind of share of his revenue. What especially upsets me is that he even asked me about later improvements I had incorporated in my models compared to the once-public LDD files, yet he never indicated that he intended to use this background information for more than just his private pleasure.

Yesterday I contacted the person in question and asked him to remove the instructions for my models from his website.
However, again this may only be the tip of the iceberg. So let me appeal to you:
Please do not pay for instructions of any of my models!
I have not authorized any monetary exploitation.
If you like my models and would like to build one of them, contact me by PM. You will receive an LDD or Stud.io file for free, including technical advice if needed.

Do not allow people to make money with other people’s ideas – basically, that’s the same shabby sort of thing that L***in has turned into its business model.

Sorry for this rant, but I feel better now.

With my best wishes to all honest AFOLs,
Sven

 

If I’m right, I actually know the person you are writing about and then you couldn’t be more wrong.

That person have absolutely no interest in any monetary gain from any of the building instructions shared for free on his website and even makes them for people on request, almost always for free. He also makes sure to acknowledge the original designer. Just take a look at all the other stuff on this site and in the building instructions themselves. Yes many are mine but there are also quite a few from other trainbuilders, some even active on this board.

In my humle opinion he does great work for our community with his work and even though he should have asked explicitly for your permission, to throw him in with the rest of the sad examples in this thread is just as wrong,

If I’m wrong about the actual person, I sincerely apologize  

Edited April 2, 2019 by dtomsen

[Sven J]

@dtomsen I think we're talking about the same person.
Yes, he credits the original designers (albeit, in my case, misspelled). But that does not affect my main two points. First, that I feel hoodwinked when someone asks me questions about my models without claryfing his intentions, and then I accidentally find instructions for my models offered on his website; and second, that I simply do not like to see people taking (ever so little) money for something that is actually freely available.
And it's no excuse that this has happened with other builders' creations, too. Also, the community argument is not very valid in my opinion, for you can justify just any kind of plagiarism with it.

Another thought: Yes, he has turned the original LDD files into instructions, and yes, this is a certain amount of work. But all the little tweaks and tricks that are required to get such a model really working - I doubt he was able to completely identify and incorporate them. For example, one issue regarding smooth running characteristics, which he explicitely asked me about, is NOT addressed in the instructions. Now who will people blame if their model doesn't work properly? At least partly me. Had they received the files directly from me, we could have cleared up things from the beginning - for, as I wrote, technical advice is included.

To be honest, I'm tired of discussions like this. I'll be silent in this thread now, but will also draw my consequences regarding the future availability of detailed insight into upcoming models.

Edited April 2, 2019 by Tenderlok