|
jffe
|
I know I mentioned/suggested this in a thread somewhere several months back, but I guess I'd like to formally suggest it for an update feature. While not everyone will want to lock their filters, and not everyone will like that some filters are locked, having that choice, can only broaden the scope of what gets submitted. Example ? I have several filters that are alright, but contain new ideas that I haven't seen exploited yet, and while I don't mind sharing what I have been able to do with them so far, I don't want to post any of those kind yet, because they are not anywhere near fully developed, and I'd just as soon work on them myself until the techniques are more polished. Another example ? Maybe some game company wouldn't mind sharing some great textures, but they, like the late great persidio suggested, don't want their concepts ripped off and duplicated for sale, well, if the filter is locked and can read-only, then they can label the controls along the lines of what I did with my "Skeptic" filter, and none but the top of the top filter makers would even be able to begin to decipher the madness that lurks beneath the hood. Meanwhile, we all get to hit random all day, or tweak sliders, and get some cool results. I think it's a more than reasonable feature request, although I doubt it will be a popular idea. Truth is, there is NOTHING to lose from implementing it though, because if you don't, then ya simply don't get the filters I suspect are out there in addition to the ones I mentioned, and if you do, then we all gain something.
jffeFilter Forger |
| Posted: June 22, 2007 12:51 pm |
Details
E-Mail
|
|
Kraellin
Kraellin
|
due to the nature of the data files, the ffxml's, this would be particularly difficult to do. you'd almost have to encrypt them and i'd hate to see that.
i do understand what you're asking for and why. like jean said a while back, this would promote others releasing filters that they might otherwise not want to. but the cost for doing so would probably be prohibitive. the ffxml files are basically text. you can open them up and look at them or even edit them in notepad. heck, i even fixed one of mine by doing so.
so, even if you made these read only, they could still be easily copied, made read/write and then edited in FF. so, about the only other option would be to encrypt them and i think that's a bad idea.
so, it still boils down, to me anyway, that FF is a sharing program. the whole philosophy is based on this. it's a user sharing library and encrypting or locking filters in some manner just goes against the grain here.If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!
Craig |
| Posted: June 23, 2007 10:44 am |
Details
E-Mail
|
|
jffe
|
| Quote |
|---|
| Kraellin wrote:FF is a sharing program. the whole philosophy is based on this. |
----Great philosophy, however, not so useful in a world where the program costs $299 and the people using it tend to make more than that off of it. I really do like the philosphy of sharing what people want shared, however, after being trespassed against on emule, yootoob, and the like, I also appreciate the realities of the internet, and these modern digital times. Unfortunately, I alo realize, no copy protection is 100%, not yet anyways, but, to not offer the latest and greatest in theft prevention, is also a mistake in that some people will see that as an "I don't care about you" type of attitude. For instance, I, or any of us, could've never submitted any filters, or submitted 3, then just gotten FF cracked online by April of this year, and just shrugged it off, we shared, screw them for not sharing FF with us. However, I was here, and I saw FF give away free copies to people who did not even submit a filter, but who beta tested and posted on the forums, FF does care to some degree.
----I suggest they just add lockable filters as an option, if it is at all possible, then it is worth some extra coding work etc. If it is absolutely not possible, then they should explain that to us, and then people like myself and persidio and whomever, can choose to do whatever from there and stop inquiring about it. (And how can that be possible, when they sell a version that won't open/edit the filters, come on.) It's really nothing personal toward anyone, it's just personal to people who have been stolen from before, and who wish to limit what is stolen in the future given the choice.
----One last example, then I'm letting this go assuming an FF person replies with a definite answer one way or another. I have made 20-30 videos, and some show up on yootoob and sites like it here and there. The problem ? Well, since I wasn't selling those particular digital products, there is not a legally pursue-able one at this time. However, flash videos, look & sound, like *ss in a blender (excuse my edited cussword), and I have ZERO interest, in making yootoob another $1.6 billion while I get nothing and some 15 year old takes credit. The people that post my videos there, are stealing my very rights as the creator, as to how, when, and where, I wish to share my material. And it's not right, no matter how many millions of ignorant 15 year olds do it every single day.
jffeFilter Forger |
| Posted: June 23, 2007 6:13 pm |
Details
E-Mail
|
|
Kraellin
Kraellin
|
your complaint about the youtube stuff is quite legitimate and i do understand. but i'm curious about what it is you want to protect here in FF....
ok, i just re-read your first post. so, what you want to protect is your ideas that are part of a submitted filter but that are potentially also many other filters down the road. so, basically, you want a sort of copyright protection on those ideas so that you can get the rest of that potential used. hmm, interesting. i have run across that very notion myself when making filters. my solution to that has always been either dont submit the filter, as is the case with some of my multi-filters, or dont worry about it and just submit it. and, as far as i can tell, no one has ever developed any of my ideas in submitted filters.
but, if they did, i still wouldnt worry about it because i'll gain something from what they do. frankly, i've seen things in other's filters that have inspired me to create something else. that's just a natural process. the free exchange of ideas and knowledge always benefits me more than if i simply hoard too much. and yes, i do hold back a little bit, especially if i think there's really something there for an immediate development, but for the most part i think the sharing of filter data is beneficial to more than just FF's pockets. what i give out i tend to get back ten-fold in new ideas. so, to me, the numbers justify losing one or two ideas to someone else.
see, to me, if the filters were locked, i'd never get to see how uber made all the things he made or how steve did all his glass stuff, or how ben made his feather or northern shadow made some of the incredible things she made and that would hurt me, FF and all the rest more than not guarding a few state secrets. so, we'd all end up having to learn everything from scratch, never being able to build on all that's really here.If wishes were horses... there'd be a whole lot of horse crap to clean up!
Craig |
| Posted: June 24, 2007 2:23 am |
Details
E-Mail
|
|
StevieJ
Designer/Artist
Posts: 11224
Filters: 163
|
I would just hold onto the concept until you have it fully developed.....then submit everything after you have exhausted the concept. I'm holding onto my 3D glass for the same reason.....because if I submit them now, there would soon after be a wave of clones and variants of it that might preempt areas of it that I want to develope...... Steve
"Buzzards gotta eat...same as worms..." - Clint :) |
| Posted: June 24, 2007 12:34 pm |
Details
E-Mail
|
|
jffe
|
| Quote |
|---|
Kraellin wrote:
so, what you want to protect is your ideas that are part of a submitted filter but that are potentially also many other filters down the road. so, basically, you want a sort of copyright protection on those ideas so that you can get the rest of that potential used. |
----Well, not just me, I'm not holding that much ha-ha, but assuming FF keeps growing, there will be many people who might not mind sharing cut-down or range limited filters that did some great stuff. But if someone can just open their filter, remove the range limits, and add more to it, then their filter (and any results from it), has no protection against being copied in that way. Doubley so for unique concepts that have not been exploited/realized by others yet. There are not many of even the hardKore filter makers here I don't think, that can just look at a filter someone else made, and go and copy it without looking inside of it. So in that way, it is a large step against copies, and in that way might even slow down the pointless repetitive growth of the filter library, by removing that easily abused possibility.
----Since there is a much cheaper (1/3 the cost) version of FF available that does that for us, (makes filters uneditable/viewable internally), why can't it be an option for the full version ? Again, not to belabor the point, but there's really nothing to lose from allowing filters to be locked. Those who don't care or want, specifically to share the internals of their filters, can choose to. And those who don't want their filters opened, can still share something with the rest of us all. It simply is a win-win in the end. And yeah, people can just choose to not sumbit their filter to the library now as things are, but how does anyone win there ? They don't.
jffeFilter Forger |
| Posted: June 24, 2007 2:52 pm |
Details
E-Mail
|
