There have been several requests for the nocd patch recently. Some requests have been answered, some not, some removed and some shipped off to the admin board.
So we all know, what is Simviation policy on the nocd patch for fs9. Maybe this could be added to FAQ. When someone asks for it they can be directed to a standard answer and nobody gets their toes trodden on, fingers burnt, wrists slapped, band or shot down in flames 8)

Matt

This site supports Microsoft's Flight Simulator.
We do not support piracy, file sharing or illegal file swapping.

Even though the patch had been in the download section, it was removed by the administrator Pete as the "No CD Patch" is not a VALID file when used with Microsoft's flight Simulator.

After speaking with Microsoft recently, it was brought to our attention that the "No CD Patch" is a "work around" to not having the Flight Simulator Discs in a licensed machine when using their program,......
thus people could be using their software illegally!

Therefore it is file sharing.

Most of us never look at it that way as people use the NoCD patch so they don't "burn out their drives" or have to place a disc in every time they want to fire up the sim.


This site is a business
and if it is going to stay in business,
we will support the company that gives us our business!

As most of you already know, Simviation is one of the biggest Flight Sim Sites on the web. There are thousands of downloads from this site each day.
The forum members exceed 17,000 people!

For this site to remain one of the leading Flight Sim Site's on the web, we will stand behind Microsoft when it comes to this sort of thing.


Thanks,

Simviation......

So is it considered piracy to use the NO CD patch, which I do, and I did purchase a legal copy of Microsoft FlightSim 2004, and it is even registered with Microsoft  ???

Not the way I read it. If this is the case I'm a pirate several times over.

While I obviously agree with the site policy I don't see how it's possible to tell whether anyone asking for the No-CD patch has a legal copy of the CDs. It would also help if Microsoft made sure its products run properly without using illegal patches before accusing people of piracy. I had this problem with both CFS3 & FS2004 & couldn't run them at all without the appropriate patch installed. This seemed odd to me as Microsoft sent them for me to review & although the guys in the support department (including the CFS3 development team) did their best to help I had to figure it out myself.

So it is a banned topic and wrong in Microsoft's eyes, but we are all against piracy and take active steps to reduce it as a rule.

The new rule is:  All requests to be made in PM to members!

Ben

Hope you don't mind my entering here; admittedly I've rarely visited.
However, I've been using a patch (OK, actually I used a hex editor) after my "original" CFS1 disk cracked. I've bought a second (reissued) disk via Atari but I'd rather keep it safely in its case. I've given a warning to patch seekers that a valid source disk should be owned but I've never given out a copy of my edited .exe and the only way it may be acceptible is if a valid disk serial number could be provided (no, you aren't using mine).
Unfortunately, and now applying this to the later FSims, this could be seen as too much a hassle if numbers couldn't be readily vouched for; if a registered disk was transferred, relinquishment would have to be recorded if the measures are so truly strict (a previously unregistered disk would automatically be registered to the patch requester). Truly dedicated hackers will do their thing, anyway .

I agree, I figure that when my disc is not workable than
it will be time to get 2006 or 2008. This sim is the greatest thing. The big guys at micro. come up with it. I see we only make it better TEAM WORK!!! can't wait to see the next one and what you guys can do with it. I also think that the work done here helps Microwsoft to produce a better base sim out of the box.

MS might view the no cd patch as file sharing or piracy but that view is only validated if the no cd patch is being used by somebody with an illegal fs9 installation.  MS has no legal grounds to charge piracy against somebody using the no cd patch in connection with a legally purchased fs9 installation.    They already have made their profit on the sale and there is no way they couold make a case against a legal fs9 owner in connection with how he operates the software on his own machine, specifically if it's a machine also running a legal copy of windows.  I understand it is good and necessary to support MS policies concerning their software but in the case of a file that may be either legal or illegal depending on how it is used wouldn't you all think that the final repsonsibility would rest on the end user and not the site that is hosting the file?  If that is the case, then why host anything at all in a file library? For ALL freely downloaded files and payware software are at risk of piracy or other un-ethical means of distribution or modification.  How far do a software publishers rights go in regard to the personal, private use of their products on a personal, privatly used PC?  Why, that is akin to a carmaker dictating how a person should drive their products or how they may customize or otherwise personalize them.  And it goes the same for any other kind of product.  About the only right any manufacturer can claim in dictating terms of PERSONAL use is in making warrenty or product support policy.  If I use a nocd patch or even create a virtual disk 4 drive and MS wanted to take me to court about it, they would loose because I am doing so privatley with legally purchased products.  Under those conditions, MS no longer has the right to dictate the manner in which I use their product for my own enjoyment.  And also, they wouldn't be able to make a case against anyone hosting such a patch as long as their is an included eula specifying acceptable use of said patch.

Gary

Quote:


I think we all appreciate SimV here. I was lost for 2 or 3 days once when the site went down earlier this year (group hug)...

IMHO:
considering a "no CD patch" illegal software is the same as considering a CD-R disk an illegal item. Because it *could* be used for illegal purposes (making an illegally downloaded install of FS2004 work without the presence of the original media), but it is designed to do a totally legal "hack" (not having to insert the original disk every time); and I believe most if not all people here use it this way.
In the same way, why not ban CD-Rs from shops too, because they *could* be used to burn illegal copies?
It could never stand up in court. 
btw, I understand the site policy and I haven't any problem with it.

Yeargh, y'all pirates. Now walk the plank of bad flight sims!



A.

I would like to add that a lot of work goes into creating a game when all of us have money to spend on booze and fag and what not I think parting a bucks for orignal version should not hurt us all.So No Cd patch is out at least for me.

This thread has become valid again though.

Now Microsoft has stopped backing this site again for the most petty of reasons. Do we still have to bend down to their will?

I've looked at the FSinsider links page and to be fair we are down under the addons section. But not in the community section. Seems like MS like what we have to offer but not what we have to say.

I suppose it can only do our reputation for impartiality good. Who needs Microsoft anyway?

A thought on the NoCD patch (that I think hasn't BPB here):
The key issue that program creators and vendors have with things like that patch is that it is part and parcel of the whole piracy industry.
Many crackers and hackers are just trying to be helpful, but probably not most of them. Among the many freebies are many stolen wares, available for purchase. It's real competition, just as it is in the entertainment industry.

A movie distributor doesn't care if you buy 100  of their DVDs - that bootleg in your collection was stolen from them, regardless of whether or not you paid for it or it was given to you for free.


The bottom line is that although most people use the patch with legitimate versions of the software, and the patch is freely distributed, in their eyes by using it you are "doing business" with pirates.


Another thought:
A piracy-prevention method that would be more appealing to FS users (and thus more effective) would be effective coding or something; a registered password, maybe... the problem most folks seem to have is that the damned play disc gets damaged, and many CD-burner programs have difficulty copying it in full, even for legitimate backup.

And requiring Disc 4 for play has led to a different sort of crime:
I recently bought another retail copy of FS9, and discovered when I got it home that someone had carefully tampered with the seal and stolen the disc itself; probably a store employee...
  I wonder if it would even work with another copy of the sim?

Mike Gilbert from The Aces Team signed up here at Simv to see and hear what people were saying about the FSX Demo.
His SimV name was tdragger.
Here is his blog
http://blogs.msdn.com/tdragger/


During this past Summer, Simviation contacted The Aces Team to be asked to be put on their Community Sites page as they were redoing the entire MS FS sight for the up and coming release of FSX.
After more than a 1/2 dozen emails to them, Simviation was finally "put back on the list".
We were pretty happy about it as we knew that SimV was getting the new server, the new forum and the new look!

Then, 2 months later the FSX Demo came out.
Obviously there was allot of talk about FSX, good and bad.

Mike Gilbert from the Aces Team signed up at Simv under the name "tdragger" to get some feedback and try to help out a bit. Mike got slammed by a few members, some have left and and some are "ex-members". But it does not take much to see why he left. I had sent him an email and he had responded with basically,
"Why should I waste my time with a site that only wants to put down what we have tried so hard to create for this community".


Here is the thread that we assume got SimV removed from the Community pages and put on the "add ons" section instead.
http://www.simviation.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1157236943/0


This was Tdragger's last post at Simv and is taken from that thread. 2 days later we were removed from The Community Pages.
Quote:



Dave

Theis wrote on Dec 12^th, 2006 at 11:51am:



me too I was just wondering where he went....

As long as Google loves us MS can do as they please.

I support MS in their work, I rarely criticise them and I would like to thank them for all their work they put into making the sim what it is. I do feel that it is most childish to behave in such as silly way though as to leave forums just because you don't like certain members attitudes. MS may be the most powerful firm in the world, but sometimes they need to realise they there is such a thing as one's opinion and such as thing as freedom of speech, and they have no rights to be a dictator to individuals own tongues.

I support you Pete on this. Apart from the fact we don't need listings to get attention as any search on google for flight sim stuff proves we shouldn't be bullied and punished for not banning (or simply just having on the board!) members for speaking offhand.

My opinion on the no-CD patch issue is as follows.
- the no-CD patch can be regarded *in itself* as illegal (albeit not exactly "piracy") because it breaches the End User License. The user is not allowed to alter the original source code in any way. Therefore, the person(s) who actually made it theorically breached the EULA.
- making use of the no-CD patch is not illegal in itself
- making use of an unlicensed copy of FS, instead, is obviously illegal.
So, to sum it up, IMO MS is in its own right when it claims that the no-CD patch was created by breaching the EULA, but users with a legitimate copy of FS do not breach it if they make use of such patch. Software piracy is only concerned when we talk about unlicensed copies of FS; the no-cd patch is "just" a non-authorized "hack" than *can* be used (and matter of fact, often is) by unlicensed users.

I have no idea who designed the "No CD" patch... ...!

...but I will be forever grateful to him/her/them for not having to search through an ENORMOUS! pile of game Cd's for disk No. 4, just to run my legitimately purchased version of FS 2004... ...!

It makes my life so much easier, and increases my enjoyment of the "game"...
...and no annoyance with Microsoft for making "things" difficult for me!... ...!

Paul...A life devoid of complications is a life worth having... ... ...!

It's nice to see how my opinion about the patch developed during the last year. 

We don't host the No CD patch not because we dance to MS's tune - which we don't - but because of the close relationship between the patch & piracy.


Remember that FS is only popular because of the way it was originally designed (before MS bought the franchise) to be developed & added to by users. So it is M$, like any business, that needs to dance to the tune of the consumers.

MS may be a big & powerful organisation but it is nowhere as big & powerful as the consumers it serves - MS tappears to sometimes think it doesn't need to dance to consumers or it knows best (think CFS3 & to some extent FSX). Like any product - if/when the company doesn't dance well the consumers will want to go elsewhere. In a competitive world where there is choice , they can. We all love the Bruce Artwick creation that MS now owns & so are unlikely to desert it in a hurry. ........

Like I say - no-cd patch - not for this site. 

One re-hash comment and two questions:

Comment:
About the No-CD patch, I think FridayChild gave the most concise answer as to why it should not be offered: it violates the EULA.  I am not saying it isn't useful.  I am not saying that only pirates and not legitimate owners of Flight Simulator use it.  I am not saying that if you use it you are a pirate.  I am not saying that if you use the No-CD patch your co-pilot is a llama and you got your pilot's license from mailing in Bazooka Joe bubble gum wrappers.  The only point is, the patch does go against the EULA, and it goes against the EULA in a way that Microsoft feels strongly about because of the potential for abuse by pirates.

Heh.  Pirates.  Argh, matey!  Now I want a pirate-themed set of skins for my favorite aircraft.  Heh.

Questions:

I read several comments about the vitriolic posts made in the "FSX" forum.  Are you referring to Simviation's FSX forum or a different FSX forum?

Secondly, what is our current relationship with Microsoft?  Are we getting along?  Not to say we have to be lap dogs to Microsoft or that we have done anything wrong, but it could be nice if we have a positive relationship.