Blu-fx vs MAXXP

[Tom Knudsen]

Made a new topic on the matter as this case interest me

Ref. Curtisy of Aerosoft Sim News

http://youtu.be/HicOCYi0iOI

Kinda makes me wonder, is this pure code stealing or is it just someone with a similar idea

that offers it away to the community for free.

So whats up John, is this wrong or competition?

[arb65912]

Just out of curiosity, is there any way of proving that the code was stolen if that is the case?

 

I am sure that if it is, the legal actions might be complicated.

 

Cheers, AJ

 

P.S. I was thinking about that before and personally, I would have SkyMaxx Pro and Maxx-FX combined into one plug-in for slightly higher price.

I was asked for the numbers, I would say SkyMaxx pro is used about 90% and Maxx-FX only 10% ( in my case of course)

Of course all is a personal preference.

[HarryCYUL]

going 2 make coffee, this thread will be interesting       I was going to start a Blu-FX thread last night but chickened out

Edited April 22, 2014 by HarryCYUL

[Tom Knudsen]

An healthy discussion is nothing to fear Harry, however these my be

 

 

Anyway, back to topic.. I for one did not go the distance and bought the MAXXP as I did not see the value of it.

Now I can try it for free and see what the fuzz is all about (yet anyway). But is it fare to say this is a piracy

without any judgement in the case or just a freeware to be tried out, and if it is a true copy or something similar
is it then cudos or hell no to the author, and why should one buy MAXXP when this is free?

 

See my curiosity sirs? Where is the line of conduct here?

Edited April 22, 2014 by Tom Knudsen

[sqrt(-1)]

Let's just say for the sake of conversation that ethics have been stretched pretty thin...

 

Case in point, it wasn't until the freeware developer was called on the fact that he even used identical names for the themes for his initial release that forced the change for v0.3.  He even admitted to having been "greatly inspired" (his words) by John's work.

 

IMO, it's a little too similar to be considered anything but a shameless copy.

 

That said, I'm not a copyright or patent attorney.

 

EDIT:  I have MaxxFX and took a look at BLU-fx (at least he changed the case of "FX") and still find MaxxFX very much worth the money.

Edited April 22, 2014 by SqrtOfNegOne

[HarryCYUL]

Let's just say for the sake of conversation that ethics have been stretched pretty thin...

 

Case in point, it wasn't until the freeware developer was called on the fact that he even used identical names for the themes for his initial release that forced the change for v0.3.  He even admitted to having been "greatly inspired" (his words) by John's work.

 

IMO, it's a little too similar to be considered anything but a shameless copy.

 

That said, I'm not a copyright or patent attorney.

 

EDIT:  I have MaxxFX and took a look at BLU-fx (at least he changed the case of "FX") and still find MaxxFX very much worth the money.

0.4 update released today

[Tom Knudsen]

As a former EULA investigator at AVSIM.com I have seen my share of attempt to copy and reshare freeware products.

That said I am not an attorney of law and will not try to argue this case in any way other than my personal opinion.

 

From a technical point of view, is the manipulation of the shaders/datarefs within X-Plane protected or free for third party vendors to exploit?

If this is just a library for others to manipulate, is it then copyright besides the similar themes? I have not seen the MAXXP interface and cannot therefor

make a qualified quess based on similarity judgement, but far as I can read it is similar?

 

Guess this is the new Facebook vs Harvard Connection

[Cameron]

I'm not one for censoring, but giving this individual any kind of platform for discussion after a borderline copyright infringement is not a discussion we will have.

Sorry guys!