CovertJaguar Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 You do not have permission to include Railcraft in this pack since you have not met the restriction I placed on future inclusion of Railcraft in Technic packs. That restriction being a publicly posted list of permission and license links. I made this fact clear to at least one member of the Technic team. If there is a public list of permissions/license links available and I'm just not seeing it, please post the link. Otherwise, failure to comply will in result more drastic actions that generally will just waste time for both parties. PS. Before anyone asks, the Voltz pack did meet the requirements, their list of permissions is easily found. This takedown notice does not apply to them, only to the Technic Lite pack.
Niavmai Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Are you seriously threatening to put malware in your mods?
Portablejim Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Screenshot in case something happens: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B5klE_D9KbB-cGhid1hwSmRPRzQ
bocaj1234567 Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Well what you are threatening doesn't really matter because most people don't use your mod.
EricFate Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Does anyone even care enough about anything Railcraft brings to the table to bother? Aside from storage tanks, all it really seems to do is to reinvent itself every couple months in ways that break itself. It's the main reason why it is on the short list of mods I've never bothered to send a donation to. The only new feature I like are the storage tanks, but I can replicate that using redpower pipes and storage blocks on a smaller scale. Anything I ever tried to do with carts, I wound up doing better with ender chests and turtles.
Killer-of-Lawyers Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Covert, if you're ready to take more drastic actions, then please do! My personal information is easy to find, and I'd love for you to put some legal weight behind your batshit insane restrictions! Serve me papers or shut up.
Lothos Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 No single mod author has the right to demand to see permissions for someone elses mod being used in the same pack. This is nothing more than a petty power play by an ego driven mod author.
danidas Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Ah this is what I've been waiting to see as railcraft has always been one of the mods that the technic devs had questionable permissions for. Personally this is exactly what Sengir should of done instead of firing first before asking and in doing so you have earned a lot of respect Covert no matter what direction this goes. As for the direction, last I checked the technic devs have permission for each mod in the pack due to most being open sourced or having very open usage licenses. So they can either pull rail craft out of the pack or compile a list of proof including said licenses and other private info they have on their permissions to make public. Hopefully the the second option as that info would go a long way to a peaceful resolution to this and help technics image. Either way It does not really matter as I will play which ever pack I find the most fun and enjoyable with what ever mods I want to add.
Retriever Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 You do not have permission to include Railcraft in this pack since you have not met the restriction I placed on future inclusion of Railcraft in Technic packs. That restriction being a publicly posted list of permission and license links. I made this fact clear to at least one member of the Technic team. If there is a public list of permissions/license links available and I'm just not seeing it, please post the link. Otherwise, failure to comply will in result more drastic actions that generally will just waste time for both parties. PS. Before anyone asks, the Voltz pack did meet the requirements, their list of permissions is easily found. This takedown notice does not apply to them, only to the Technic Lite pack. BTW Learn some english and learn that it's the "Tekkit Lite" Not "Technic Lite" ass hole!!!!
sirlucius Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Otherwise, failure to comply will in result more drastic actions that generally will just waste time for both parties. Please continue doing things like this. I'm a huge fan of how mentally unstable to minecraft modding community is, and this is just a treat.
SemiPr0 Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 I was really looking forward to replacing my usual tank storage systems with the new iron tanks from Rail Craft but looks like I'd best not even bother if this is the way things are going to go.
bocaj1234567 Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 The only thing that players on my server have made from railcraft was the Tank Cart before we banned it.
turtleboy3737 Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 this was the wrong way to handle this. Instead of coming in demanding the mod be removed how about asking first if this was just an oversight, or something malicious.
EarthApocalypto Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Whoa watch out guys, he's threatening us for using a free mod that's from the internet. Edit: I looked at the Railcraft wiki, and apparently Covert is secretly Anonymous. If you fail to get permission, CovertJaguar will use all means available to get your mod pack removed from the Internet.
theprolo Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 It's better than just putting malware in without warning. I've not used Railcraft much, but I still think it should definitely be in the pack if possible - it can be used to make some pretty awesome builds.
StealthArcher Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 I think I'll leave the discussion as such. We are going to use your mod. Weither you like it or not. Oh also, Serve me papers or shut up.
danidas Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 this was the wrong way to handle this. Instead of coming in demanding the mod be removed how about asking first if this was just an oversight, or something malicious. I would suggest that you look at Coverts past posts as he warned the technic devs about this a few times along with a few others. So it is no surprise really and if the technic devs fail to handle this correctly it may very well end even more poorly then the whole forestry issue did. Here is railcraft's official license for those that are wondering. Either way at the end of the day it is just a game so it is best to let them sort this out while we enjoy modded minecraft.
andrewdonshik Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 I would suggest that you look at Coverts past posts as he warned the technic devs about this a few times along with a few others. So it is no surprise really and if the technic devs fail to handle this correctly it may very well end even more poorly then the whole forestry issue did. Here is railcraft's official license for those that are wondering. Either way at the end of the day it is just a game so it is best to let them sort this out while we enjoy modded minecraft. Most of that license is absolute bs. To sue, or to prove any ownership, you'd need a derivative work. RailCraft is by no means one, as it mostly (and barely) modifies something already in the game.
turtleboy3737 Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 technic/tekkit is the only way I even know railcraft exists. On top of that if I felt so inclined I know exactly where to go to donate to railcraft because of technic's donate page. I would think mod authors would just be happy to get the exposure and not get so upset about being incorporated into a pack like this.
EarthApocalypto Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 technic/tekkit is the only way I even know railcraft exists. On top of that if I felt so inclined I know exactly where to go to donate to railcraft because of technic's donate page. I would think mod authors would just be happy to get the exposure and not get so upset about being incorporated into a pack like this. Exactly; the mod makers are getting donations, and even publicity from mod packs. Then they're being manchildren and demanding their mods be removed.
andrewdonshik Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 technic/tekkit is the only way I even know railcraft exists. On top of that if I felt so inclined I know exactly where to go to donate to railcraft because of technic's donate page. I would think mod authors would just be happy to get the exposure and not get so upset about being incorporated into a pack like this. My thoughts exactly.
danidas Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 Most of that license is absolute bs. To sue, or to prove any ownership, you'd need a derivative work. RailCraft is by no means one, as it mostly (and barely) modifies something already in the game. As stated by Covert in his past posts the whole permission issue has never really been about copy rights and has everything to do with respect. Here is the exact quote: It actually has very little to do with legality and everything to do with respect. We all know that none of this will hold up in court and the only way Covert can act on his threat is via malicious code and further harming technics already poor reputation. Their is also the issue of this leading to other mod devs coming forward in this manor forcing the technic devs to remove even more mods from the pack. As dealing with malicious code is not a option no matter how easy it may be to disable.
Killer-of-Lawyers Posted January 6, 2013 Posted January 6, 2013 The problem is Covert is right. No one has any respect for him. He's a wailing manchild. He'll never get respect, no matter how many take down notices he serves, now matter how man DRM tricks he tries, no matter how many times he goes forestry on packs using his mod. No one respects a child.
Recommended Posts