Updates from Space Station No.5 - November 7th 2019

[Ceeg_LOTB]

Hello Troopers!

Welcome to November! This weeks Update from Space Station No. 5 is going to be a short one.

We are all focused on projects like server stability updates and working through our Customer Support requests. Changing our focus to server stability doesn’t affect the timeline for events and those will still be announced in the Game Feed.

Changes

If you haven’t heard yet, we adjusted the Crimson Blades Dungeon to stop Enemies from having multiple sets of Brave Talismans. We updated the enemies Talismans to 1 Brave set and 1 Tower/Serenity. This should allow for the floor to be more accessible to more players. The difficulty of this floor was not originally designed to limit as many players as it did. There was a counter to it, it just wasn’t as effective as we wanted it to be.

Bugs and such

Thank you for your patience while we worked on server stability. We implemented the first of the updates to the server at the beginning of the month, but we are working on more updates as a priority for 2019.

We are aware that the Missions tab is still bugged for a lot of our players. This is manifesting in a couple of ways including not tracking Missions completing and showing notification bubbles like there are rewards to claim. We are looking at some solutions to this and will resolve this as soon as possible, as we know it is affecting how you play.

Clans

We do not have any content updates for Clans in November. It will be business as usual while we stabilize everything that we have currently available. Things like Check-In tracking are targeted bugs that will be addressed as soon as possible.

Weekend Warrior will return next week…

Last but not least, I would like to invite the Community to share their Fan art. I have seen it all over the forum, in different places on Facebook and Twitter. I would love to see what you have done! Post it here in this thread and we will feature our favourites in next week's Space Station No.5 Update.

That’s it!

Space Station No.5, shutting down until next week.

[scott-5496]

Requesting art may not be a great move given the amount of 'artists' we have on the forum!

Well don't for getting this out even in a limited form.

[Muzzleloader]

Changing our focus to server stability doesn’t affect the timeline for events and those will still be announced in the Game Feed.*

That may have been poorly worded. We are working on a problem, but will still release material without fixing previous bugs. Many would welcome a break if some of the bugs were fixed. Grinding events are frustrating when you need to babysit to catch the connectivity lose, especially in timed dungeons.

[Galactic Cosmos]

Here’s two of my favorites that I made:

https://twitter.com/ryan_norman2/sta...558367233?s=21

https://twitter.com/ryan_norman2/sta...022544388?s=21

[Blazpheme]

So you wanna see some art? This was inspired by the current trend of re-skinned characters in the game...

[Discordian]

Photo is of my copyright; fonts used were public domain.

[Yup]

Photo is of my copyright;

Sorry.. uhm.. you were alive to take a photo in 1917?? You're more than 102 years old???

You might want to sue the folks on pinterest for using your copyrighted work: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/528750812500105042/

[Discordian]

Sorry.. uhm.. you were alive to take a photo in 1917?? You're more than 102 years old???

You might want to sue the folks on pinterest for using your copyrighted work: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/528750812500105042/

I own that original glass-plate diapositive for the stereoscopic version of that slide. Therefore, copyright of my work (as well as scanning and cleaning the scratches) does indeed reside with me. My copyright attorney agrees.

[Yup]

I own that original glass-plate diapositive for the stereoscopic version of that slide. Therefore, copyright of my work (as well as scanning and cleaning the scratches) does indeed reside with me. My copyright attorney agrees.

not at all how copyrights work.. nice try though.

That particular instance of the image is of my copyright. I took an extremely scratched up instance of a fairly common - but more-than-usually tonally rich slide, and I did a lot of work on it.

It is important to realize the reformatting or reconstituting copyrighted materials into a new form does NOT mean you can claim new copyright. -- You have created a derivative work.. that does NOT make you the copyright holder.

Think of it like a DVD.. you buy a DVD of some movie.. you then rip that DVD to a .mkv file.. you can't claim copyright over the .mkv file because you don't have copyright over the original content. All you've done is change the format of the content. Nothing new was created and without the original content your alterations to the format would not exist. Therefore scanning a glass plate dispositive may reconstitute the original image into a new form.. however it does not create new copyright.

The photo is 100 years old.. copyrights last (in the US) for 75 years after the creators death. So, unless that photographer died in 1943, which is entirely possible... there may still be a valid copyright in place which you clearly can not claim is yours. If the photographer did die prior to 1943, that would mean the photo is in Public Domain which, again, you can not claim ownership over.

------------------

I only point all this out because I make my living via intellectual property and specifically illustration and artwork. While the general public seems to often feel they have "copyright" because they have replicated, reproduced, or altered, some image they found.. this is an entirely incorrect assumption. You can not claim copyright over a derivative work. It does not matter how much you altered an image or what you altered. There is no such thing as "change it by X amount, and it's okay."

-----------------


Sorry, I honestly didn't mean to divert the thread so much.. but this is my profession.. my living..... for more than 30 years.. please do not claim copyright when you've merely stolen the work of someone else. You FOUND a photo and placed some type over it... that's all. It's derivative work entirely and not one single part of it is original in any way.

We can just leave it there. While I stand behind all I've typed. I do feel kind of like the ass in teh room for pointing it out. I know I'm absolutely 100% correct in every statement I've made.. but I don't want to ruin anyone's fun.

[Discordian]

not at all how copyrights work.. nice try though.

Blah blah blah a bunch of bullshit

-----------------


Sorry, I honestly didn't mean to divert the thread so much.. but this is my profession.. my living..... for more than 30 years.. please do not claim copyright when you've merely stolen the work of someone else.

Alrighty Yup, go take "[your] profession... [your] living..." and [redacted]

You're quite incorrect on copyright age for works created before 1 January 1978; they blanket expire a certain number of years after their creation date. This is why, for example, books, photographs, and movies published in 1923 and before are universally in the public domain, including the BASE IMAGE that was used here. My work on fixing it up - that's not in the public domain! When professionals like Marina Amaral colorize an original photograph, they own the rights to the colorization; when professional retouchers retouch a photo, likewise, although there is usually a contract between retoucher and photographer reassigning copyright.

I don't give a toss one way or another if people USE this image, I was making clear the fact that I was not violating anybody else's copyright in posting it. I tend to do this specifically because I respect copyrights myself; every three months I submit my most recent body of work to the US Copyright Office to make it official.

I can't claim ownership over the original work. Neither can anybody else. I can claim copyright over the changes, inasmuch as they're not part of the original. At some point in time, someone colorized a version of this scene (which was actually left there for hours) shot with a regular camera. If they colorized it after 1923 and didn't expire before 1978, their copyright to that colorization still holds.

See, I'm a professional as well, and I take offense when [redacted] accuses me of not understanding copyright law. Since I've made a living for the past 20 years creating intellectual property, have entered into complex negotiations for the transfer of that property, and have numerous times sought legal recourse when people have violated my copyright, I think I know what I'm talking about here.

TL;DR: STFU.