It's a really important point. But the NP's fanboys/employees/trolls will say:

- Proof it!

We can just speculate why Oleg and team are so afraid to write a letter about the subject... NP is just a small company that helps people with disabilities... NP is like Mother Teresa of Calcutta!


Gimme a break...

back to page (about) 5....

that would depend on how the interface was constructed, also your lawyer would ask; what proof have you?
Now what do you think the reaction would be?






what, in the application receives the data??

Whatever the software dev want. You can do anything with the provided data.

What's your stupid point now? You want that I describes how any game implement HT?

just ArmAII if you like

You talk like you know a lot. Talk about or go to hell. ASAP.

If it really was unfair competition, you would have to sue the devs, not NP.
Unless np forced them to remove the interface - and here we go, no one can prove.

Just out of curiosity, if CoD only supports TIR, what are you going to do, lobi?

Ask Oleg if they can include freetrack dll in the future patch, and if not, why not?

I have no personal interest in this topic, but as i read all the topics whilst drinking my morning coffee I have followed its progress (or lack thereof). In this pic from another topic Luthier seems to have all sorts of HOTAS stuff in the background and it looks to me that he has 2 devices attached to the top of his monitor one being TR, also in another pic you can see a webcam attached but im not sure if its inbuilt to monitor as i have sweet f#%k all knowledge about em. Im sure as developers they would try as many devices as possible for compatability, and being a niche there are not that many ( Im jealous, he has a warthog)
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c93/spritzen/4.jpg

original article with more pics
http://spread-wings.ru/index.php?opt...d=371&Itemid=1


PS, What a way to make a living, couldnt think of a better job if i tried, only down side is you would have to read these forums, but they probarly get the tech who stuffed up to do that as punishment :)

I'll bother 1C a lot, with new topics, polls, etc. Will try - as we made with BIS - that they support FreeTrackClient.dll interface.

And if someone in the world find a workaround to make Freetrack works in IL-2:CoD, I'll use it without regreat and any trace of "moral concern', until 1C give native support.

But I really know what I'm not gonna do: buy some NP crap to fly in IL-2:CoD, because is EXACTLY what NP wants.

why not just remove the NP access by FT and present a clean package?

Thats "Realpolitik" W-R,

"... legality, morality i am very fond of them, as long as they go along with my interests."

:-D

;)

it is real even for you... if you don't see it is because you live it.

For what? To you talk about the "way" FreeTrackClient.dll works in ArmAII?

Thank's God Freetrack devs aren't that innocent. If Freetrack removes TIR unnencryped interface support "magically" all titles that don't support Freetrack Interface will do that?

Gimme a break, please! Your sick NP employee view, masked with "moral", is all about keep the monopoly. NP don't want that FT are an option, NP don't want that FT removes TIR emulation, NP wants that FT goes to hell, vanish, became dust!

Is you play stupid, we don't! You and Robtek can pose as "moral guys", but we FT users know that we "hack" nothing, that we aren't "stealing" others work! We have a free software to use with our hardware, but our games don't let us communicate with it, so we have to emmulate a route.

It's not like "piracy", "hack", whatever. We don't have an fair option to use our software/hardware with our prefered titles, one supported by the game, just the crap NP interface. Who reduces this discussion to this point - hack - is a moron, don't know a thing about the subject, and like to pose as "the right guy against piracy and hack", but is only stupid.

But this will be funny: any programmer here can remove TIR Interface support from Freetrack and upload this version, please? Let´s see whats happens...

FT only came along a short while ago, whereas NP have been around for a while... perhaps if FT had of gone down the path of doing its thing legitimately, instead of going straight for the hack (the easy option), things might be different and FT may have been considered truly an alternative, as it stands now.. it is just a hack.

As usual, even with Freetrack using your own interface, NP employees will ALWAYS keep saying the "hack" crap.

So, even with the removal of TIR route, we'll see this kind of crap talking. FT don't go "straight for the hack", FT uses TIR unnencrypted interface to "talk" with games that only uses TIR route and communicate with NP hardware, and FT removed the NP hardware support when requested by NP. FT has own interface, and even today NP can't talk a xxxx about FT use of TIR unnencrypted inteface. You can still talk lies, they don't become true for that. FT is out there, LEGALLY!!! IT'S A LEGAL SOFTWARE!!!

Pathetic. FT is so truly an alternative that ArmAII uses it. And NP have shivers with that!

:cool:

FT is a hack tool, pure and simple

So the developers of ArmAII are officially supporting a hack tool?

was there something you didn't understand?

although BIS did institute an interface for FT (and trusted that FT would only use that interface), yet LoBi refuses still, to answer how that all works.

My point is that if FT could be classified as a hack tool then the ArmAII developers would hardly have built support for it into their game.

That seems to be the problem LoBi is having

You will get a raise in salary from NP for your simple blunt point of view. I hope they put that pathetic phrase of yours in their TIR 5 boxes as an ad slogan.



"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

hacking is easy, developing your own is hard

Wolf_Rider, just out of curiosity, why do you care so much?

My interest in this topic is clear enough, I don't want to spend £150 on a TIR 5 when my FT set-up cost £20 and about an hour of my time (and I'm a long way from my time being worth £130/h), but I really don't see your interest.

And no, I'm not implying that you must work for NP.

simply - I care



Do you use the TIR interfacing?



That makes for a change :s

Well, okay, but that didn't answer my question

Il2 (the only game I use FT in) lacks native support for FT, so yes.

[QUOTE=David603;228643]

Well, okay, but that didn't answer my question

[/QUOTE


accept that is the answer you will receive


so you're running a hacked game

LOL!

Oleg, this guy said that IL2 1946 is a hacked game!

I use FT in IL2 1946 too. I don't alter anything in IL2 1946, just run FT and tick the "evil hacked" interface to emulate the TIR interface and it's work.

Now we are running a "hacked game"?

W-R, you are a really sick person... :-)

Fair enough.
Does it hurt anybody? I paid for my copy of Il2 1946, infact I have boxed versions of most of the Il2 series sitting on my shelf. Nor would I have brought TIR even if there was no way to get 6DOF in Il2 with FT, I would have ended up using FT with mouselook and 2DOF.

So, my conscience is clear on this matter.

that just goes back to the; you don't own the software, you have a license to run the software. Does it hurt anyone? well, yes it does... using FT with NP software/ interface is theft. same as stealing from next door because it has an item your house doesn't.



we'd only have to trust and take you at word on that one...



you'd be surprised of the amount of people, who, have a clear conscience on what they've done

I don't bought anything from NP.

I run IL-2 1946 - that I bought - and Freetrack - free.

Freetrack don't use NP software to do the HT. Freetrack uses the data format of TIR to stream data to IL-2 1946.

You, W-R, as NP, have SEVERE problems to keep this "hack" talking! Is really fun to see!

:cool:

you know full well FT uses NP software

Besides the old unnencrypted interface? No, FT don't use NP software! And even that don't qualify use of "NP software"...

And YOU know full well, loser. Pathetic NP employee...

Yes, I understand the court of law version of software use, but this isn't a court of law, so take my statement at face value or dismiss it as you wish, its my opinion, nothing else.
Why would I lie? Again, this isn't a court of law.
Sure, and as an atheist I don't even believe in a conscience in biblical terms(a fixed sense of right and wrong "built into" every person), but I know if I hurt someone who doesn't deserve it or steal etc I will feel bad about it (and yes, I will use the court of law interpretations of this as a rough guide in this case).

However, given all that I don't feel bad about using software I paid for as I wish for my personal use (and I don't believe that FT using the open version of the NP interface falls outside that).

you "understanding" seems to differ from your 'opinion" though



hmmm... a touch of selectivity there



too much inconsistency for anything to taken seriously at face value or otherwise

(Pol Pot, and similar, had clear consciences too)

Running again, liar? :grin:

Understanding the law and opinion of what is right and wrong may differ. Can you honestly say your opinion of right and wrong and your understanding of the law are 100% compatible? If yes, you would find it impossible to live in the US, where each state has its own laws, or where I do in Scotland which has its own legal system separate from the rest of the UK.

Well, yes, part of my understanding of atheism is that there is no intrinsic right and wrong, so I would not hold up the conscience as being anything other than an indicator of contextually suitable behaviour. As such, if the conscience if not infallible, your conscience probably differs from mine, and if conscience is nothing more than a result of your culture and upbringing then there is no reason why it cannot be selectively examined.

And yes, I'm aware this could be used to justify to your conscience more or less anything, but for all practical extents and purposes my conscience is probably very close in values to for example a Christian's, barring of course that I don't believe in the Bible as the infallible word of God.

However, we are going way off topic here, so lets drop the discussion of conscience and stick to discussing whether it is legal for FT to use the open version of the NP interface. ;)

@ LoBi...
you're getting pretty hard up, when you have to quote yourself, LoBi... is this what you're going to do the next while? just quote yourself??







furphy



sorry, I don't do "god" conversations and as such, they have no place in this thread



nooo... you were going off topic


that would be nice, except, your "legal understandings" and your "conscience" would seem to preclude that... besides which, all the arguments are contained between posts 1 ~ current.

Take cover! Handbags flying around!

*sigh* It's pretty obvious that this guy has some kind of connection to NP, even if it's just via a relative or something, this degree of devotion to any piece of software is just ludicrous.
I still haven't seen a convincing argument that the use of an NP data format to provide data to the Il-2 program is illegal. Strikes me that it doesn't say anywhere in the Il-2 user license that providing data to the NP interface provided within Il-2 via an alternative method is illegal, nor is there any requirement to agree to any NP license in order to use the software which might include this provision. I wonder if he also thinks that programs like Foxit PDF reader or OpenOffice are illegal.
Basically, don't even bother, guys. Last time I had any conversation with this guy about TIR he went so low as to edit his previous posts after I had made my reply to them to make my posts seem less valid. It was very effective until you realised that every time he replied with "OMG WHAT'R E YOU TALKGING OBOUT GRUNCH!?!!!11", his previous post had a last edit time later than my reply did. :rolleyes:

LoBi, I don't think you're exactly helping the discussion at this point...

Since you are sticking to a (attempted) legalistic interpretation of right and wrong in an argument that has not proved of sufficient merit to reach a courtroom, its a valid question. Which, once again, you won't answer.
Yeah, beats me why I brought that up either. My fault for introducing conscience to a discussion when I myself don't believe it has an intrinsic value.
Yup^^ That was me.
And yet no agreement has been reached. Discussion/argument ongoing.

However, since the only reason why I joined this conversation was that I was interested to see if you might have motives for defending a situation with no apparent profit to yourelf, other than you having a personal connection to NP, and you seem to have no intention of explaining what these other motives might be, Adiós :)

WR I'm curious, perhaps all along you have been agreeing with those that are requesting native Freetrack support?

You clearly have a problem with FT making use of ("hacking") NP's interface.

OK, fine, but the reason the present situation exists is that there is currently no alternative for those that can't or won't buy NP hardware but still wish to "head track" in-game.

Would you still have a problem with people using FT if game developers supported FT's own .dll without FT having to resort to using TrackiR's interface?

eg. in 1L2FB1946 we could have something like the following in config.ini

Would you still object to this?


BTW my TIR is in the post on it's way to me so I am not as biased against NP as you might have originally suspected.

In the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, as part of the anticircumvention provisions added as Section 1201 of the Copyright Act, Congress specifically recognized reverse engineering needed for interoperability as an exception to the anticircumvention rules:
A person who has lawfully obtained the right to use a copy of a computer program (i.e., purchased a copy of IL-2 computer game) may circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve interoperability of an independently created computer program (i.e., interoperability of the Freetrack program) with other programs, and that have not previously been readily available to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement under this title. {FN98: 17 U.S.C. §1201(f)}
In its Committee Report explaining the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary specifically cited Sega v. Accolade and indicated: “The purpose of this section is to foster competition and innovation in the computer and software industry.” {FN99: Sen. Rep. No. 105-190 at 12}


Source: http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1...5.html#secV.B.

But it's a hack.:rolleyes:

I have to mention it again - if you want sue someone it's the devs of COD, they are the ones blocking alternatives, not NP.

We agreed to this several dozen posts ago.
If there was a FT 2.3 without TIR support everything would be fine.
Problem is, this FT 2.3 wouldn't support IL2 anymore, as FT relies on TIR interface in IL2 - which is unacceptable for guys like lobi.

Ok, I won't point out the fact that there was never any need to use an interface other than DirectInput for head-tracking anyway...;) I saw in one of Oleg's posts that CoD will allow the use of joystick axes to change head position, though. Which is awesome. :D

I have said many times that games should be available for any and all aternative forms of headtracking.. this is the consensus reached and was reached very early in the piece, here is however a sticking point



that is the sticking point



Alternative forms of headtracking is a relative newcomer but hacking is hacking



That is almost word for word what I have said all along. Sadly though other sims/ games have that option (as LoBi will advise us) but quite often that option gets passed over in favour of the NP software.


well, good for you

§117. Limitation on exclusive rights: computer programs (a)
Making of additional copy or adaptation by owner of copy. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 [17 USC 106], it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1)
that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or (2)
that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
(b)
Lease, sale, or other transfer of additional copy or adaptation. Any exact copies prepared in accordance with the provisions of this section may be leased, sold, or otherwise transferred, along with the copy from which such copies were prepared, only as part of the lease, sale, or other transfer of all rights in the program. Adaptations so prepared may be transferred only with the authorization of the copyright owner. (c)
Machine maintenance or repair. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 [17 USC 106], it is not an infringement for the owner or lessee of a machine to make or authorize the making of a copy of a computer program if such copy is made solely by virtue of the activation of a machine that lawfully contains an authorized copy of the computer program, for purposes only of maintenance or repair of that machine, if--
(1)
such new copy is used in no other manner and is destroyed immediately after the maintenance or repair is completed; and (2)
with respect to any computer program or part thereof that is not necessary for that machine to be activated, such program or part thereof is not accessed or used other than to make such new copy by virtue of the activation of the machine.
(d)
Definitions. For purposes of this section--
(1)
the "maintenance" of a machine is the servicing of the machine in order to make it work in accordance with its original specifications and any changes to those specifications authorized for that machine; and (2)
the "repair" of a machine is the restoring of the machine to the state of working in accordance with its original specifications and any changes to those specifications authorized for that machine.






§107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A [17 USC § §106 and 106A], the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--

(1)
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2)
the nature of the copyrighted work; (3)
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4)
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

Spamming now? Btw, the judge ruled against Sega based on section 107. Maybe that is why you posted it. You must of had an epiphany.:-P

Disclaimer
The material is intended to provide my view of the current state of the law protecting digital information. It is not being offered as legal advice, and if you have a specific legal question, you should contact an attorney qualified by both experience and bar membership to provide legal advice.

http://digital-law-online.info/notice.htm




no where does it say, you can use what you have identified and achieving interoperability would apply to the sim/ game itself...

* Edit

but in light of the fact that interoperability can be achieved without reverse engineering, you're running down a the wrong road....

Sega was a hardware platform manufacturer similar to XBox

Obviously, there's no point in discussing anymore if you are just going to make stuff up. Have fun spamming away the truth in your quest for the moral highground.

Before I leave, remember 20 or so pages back you seemed to know that copy rights applies to software, not hardware. So it is obvious to me you are now being disengenious putting hardware in the arguement to spam the truth away. People can read the Sega case for themselves. It dealt with the reverse engineering of sega's software by a commercial enterprise. Spin it all you want. You can't change history or the law.

MadBlaster,

quoting legal text and decisions of courts here prove absolutely NOTHING!!
The same procedure with different attorneys might, and will, lead to a different outcome.

Well if lawyers and attorneys cant agree, HONESTLY what friggin hope do you think you blokes have???? page 66 ffs.

I personally hope it has both. But lets wait and see, going against each other in roundabout arguments is just losing support for both views imo.

Sega was a console manufacturer much the same as X-Box, Wii, etc

That DMCA exception design to allow program-program communication, using what you have identified from reverse engineer already allowed under copyright, repeated here for third time.

US Copyright Law Section 102

'In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.'

TRIPS version for NWO

'Article 9
Relation to the Berne Convention
2. Copyright protection shall extend to expressions and not to ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such.'

Also

'Federal regulators lifted a cloud of uncertainty when they announced it was lawful to hack or “jailbreak” an iPhone, declaring Monday there was “no basis for copyright law to assist Apple in protecting its restrictive business model.”'

Article 10
Computer Programs and Compilations of Data

1. Computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971).

2. Compilations of data or other material, whether in machine readable or other form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations shall be protected as such. Such protection, which shall not extend to the data or material itself, shall be without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material itself.

and "jailbreaking", which your article link refers to is in relation to cirmcumventing protections on mobile smart phones and not the iPad. So, in this sense, you would have to go the developer... but wait, you don't have to as methods already exist which can be hooked into ;)

Tell that to Sega.

It's been near 20 years since that decision. The DMCA provision that stems from that went into effect maybe 6 years later. You have a big hurdle to overcome.

no kidding.

yes Blaster, Sega and Apple iPhone cases were similar and Apple should have known better... even Android incorporates a switch to allow untested(unapproved) 3rd party apps to be installed or not, *and at least with "approved" apps, the consumer knows the app has been tested and won't cause system instability, will get support and won't trash their warranty.

but this is the other end of the stick to getting alternative headtracking inclusion in games but (additional to my previous) may be constructive to seeking HT inclusion into DirectX. Then again, what with Kinect for PC, MS may already be onto that.


* late edit

wow just saw this thread,67 pages and counting,i dont thik i have the stamina to read it all but ia year ago i bought TIR 5 with the clip and pro clip, the pro clip was a pos and flimsy and a waste of money but the clip on the hat version i love, and if people can get the same thing for less money i say well done to them but i wouldnt be without it now.

How to enable Trackir on Cliffs of Dover?
 

TRACKIR

I saw Ilya using trackir with COD on this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgy88KGDX-o

However, I've just installed the game and haven't found an "enable trackir" option anywhere. So I went to the Natural Point website for their supported game list but IL2 COD is not listed.

Just in case, I checked my trackir software and it says the game list is up to date. So... how can I enable trackir?

I'm running on an Intel i920, 15GB RAM, ATI 4870X2 (2 chips 1 card) with 2GB of video memory, and the game runs at very low FPS (on single player with all options on MEDIUM). I've read in some other threads that the laggyness is not caused by computer specs but by some bug that was apparently already fixed already with an automatic steam update. I got the update but I see no change.

I've disabled that epilepsy option and the game got a bit better, but it's still unplayable as it is. In a combat flight sim, a half-second lag makes a huge difference. I'm hoping trackir can help me enjoy the game but have no idea how to activate it. Any tips?

PS: The graphis are a huge improvement over the previous version. The landscapes are beautiful, but not much different from those of Rise of Flight. The water is amazing though.

I didn't read the whole tread, so I may be off here.... but to answer your specific question about how to enable TrackIR, you don't have to enable it in a game. The TrackIR emulates mouse movement so any game that has mouse look will work with TrackIR. There are probably more complex games that have multiple view axes that would require a game-specific setting, but IL2 wasn't that way, so I assume CoD also looks around using the mouse. If that is the case, your TrackIR should work by default.

bummer


@Triple...

TIR is self enabling in game, just have the software running before starting the sim (update the software first by using the Check for game Updates switch). In the, in sim, Control page (for assigning butttons to functions), there is an entry to toggle TrackIR on or off.

There is an option to enable TIR in one of the controls menus, but I haven't got it to work yet.

Basically, like RoF, you can't enable it once the game is running, it seems - you have to enable TIR before running CloD.

Also I've noticed that the vital re-centring for TIR (F12) is mapped in Steam to taking a screenshot!

So, now every time I try to re-centre my TIR, I get a screenie.

Moreover I can't find out via Steam how to disable this feature to enable me to use F12 for TIR.

Agree on performance - not good at present even in training with 1 plane in the air. Landscapes look very bright, but I suppose there will be lots of playing around with settings...

R

Thanks Wolf for the Trackir tip. It works now. :)

@Russkly
You can disable (or change) the screenshot key by right clicking on the steam icon on the taskbar and selecting SETTINGS. Once there, click the IN-GAME tab and there you'll have the option to either delete or replace the screenshot setting.

In the near future, however, once trackir updates their game list to include CoD, you'll be able to make a better profile (as opposed to the default one, which is a bit too slow for my taste), and make your own shortcut keys. I normally use /*- on the keypad, since they're usually not mapped to anything in games.

Dear pilots

I got now my TrackIR5 PRO Clip and a profile I downloaded from the web. It is CHARVEL's who can find on Natural's page.

I assume that Cliffs of Dover is recognized 'automatically' `?? by the TrackIR software as IL2 since there is no extra CloD profile or game entry.

If that is the case what does the software/driver use -
My loaded Charvel profile or the IL2 profile?


Ingame I set up the Headtracker on/off to F11 and independent mode to F10 in the camera settings.
In TrackIR's driver settings I have F12 for re-center and F9 for Pause?....

Should I change the settings ingame to F12 and F9 or leave them empty??

I am asking since I do not get these settings with my X52 Saitek Profile working. Of course I do want to allocate re-center and pause into my joystick!


Can you please tell me how to do so?


thanks allot


PS:
If someone gots a better profile than CHARVEL's please make it public or send it to me and tell me why you prefer it.