Perhaps they have a right…but is it the right thing to do especially when it clearly hurts the community? Shouldn’t the community have rights against the arbitrary deletion of files…especially files that other mods are reliant upon? I say this as a past content creator. I think there’s a good middle ground here where we can respect creator and community rights.
2 Likes
I think maybe that you are ignoring the fact that without the generosity of freeware developers there would be no free products or even one site to visit. And given the days, weeks and months some of these creators spend on their addons for us I personally wouldn’t begrudge 5 minutes of my time visiting any website of their choosing. An updated list of the websites to go to on a thread in this forum would be sufficient for me to be honest.
I also feel that creators should retain rights to their product too (as much as is possible anyway in this internet age) and have the right to delete their addon should they so wish. If we users value any addon highly enough then we can surely always take a backup anyway. Storage is pretty cheap nowadays.
As to your belief that it hurts us more than flightsim.to I wouldn’t be too sure of that either. It takes a long time to build up trust (from sponsors, advertisers and users alike) but that trust can evaporate almost overnight leaving a download site bereft of high traffic addons, of users and of high spending advertisers. Occasionally, the lack of trust runs so deep that the company or website will never fully recover.
Basically, creators are the life blood of any free download site. Without their addons there are no downloads, no downloaders and (probably) no advertising revenue. Maybe this should be borne in mind when discussing the rights of creators 
8 Likes
I’m surprised no one has created the replacement site for freeware. oportunity is ripe for the picking.
I also suggest adding a downloads section to the oficial MSFS forums where only approved developers can post.
In the end, FS.TO will do what they determine is best for their company. I am surprised this thread has not been moved or closed. Just not sure this discussion is in a correct forum location or forum.
The decision to move it here was made by the forum moderators.
Thanks for the thoughtful response, but as a past content creator myself I fully understand the blood, sweat, and tears involved in the process. I also understand that as a creator of content for a community I have some responsibilities to that community as well. My biggest issue with this whole thing is creators pushing for the absolute right to arbitrarily delete stuff they release at anytime they want.
While it may not be a big issue for single airports or skins but if you release a library that 100 mods depend on then all those mods are affected if the author of that library decides to delete it. Particularly for new users looking for the content. I remember back in the day for early versions of FS when you had to track down libraries across the internet, often finding that the site is down or the files missing.
Flightsim.to, whatever you may think their motives are, seems to want to bring some order out the potential chaos that freeware could turn into. Given the fact that MSFS patches often break mods, it’s important to have a central place that keeps track of which mods work and which do not, forcing people to 50 different sites to check for updates after a patch is a disservice to the community. Flightsim.to’s updated terms of service, to me at least, addressed creator rights concerns while keeping the community rights in sight as well.
10 Likes
Thanks for your lengthy reply and I understand (obviously) the arguments you are putting forward.
I think maybe what we fundamentally disagree on is the creators’ rights to their addon once it has been uploaded and once it has become relied upon by users. You seem to believe that the creator has some sort of duty of care or responsibility to the user. Whilst your argument here does have some merit I still feel that the addon is entirely the result of the creators’ time and effort and it should therefore be their decision on whether or not it should be deleted from the website.
This difference of opinion is something which could probably be debated for hours on end with different people taking maybe different views and a vote taken at the end to pick the winner.
I don’t think that the two of us are ever going to agree on this though
5 Likes
In the end, when FS.to started, they made sure they set it up so developers felt at least a bit protected.
Then they changed their terms of service with no warning and no discussion. No matter how powerful you are, any autocratic action will create an opposite and likely greater reaction.
It doesn’t matter how right they feel in their actions, they needed to be a bit more thoughtful and interactive in their implementation of the changes they were thinking of. Hopefully lesson learned.
There’s enough history in the Flightsim community over things like this that they should have known better.
3 Likes
Where would you have put it?
Seems like a General Discussion topic to me if there ever was one. I appreciate that it’s here as now I’m knowledgeable about what happened.
Many companies have made decisions “in their best interest” and failed almost immediately. While perhaps their intentions were in the right place, as soon as you think you’re right and smarter than everyone else, chances are it’s going to blow up in your face.
2 Likes
Agreed, they probably should have known better and they should have reacted sooner once it blew up. However I see no evidence that convinces me to not chalk it up to ignorance or inexperience than to anything nefarious.
I don’t know any of them but I’d rather give them a little grace over this than join the pitchfork mob wishing to burn it all down.
8 Likes
I’m actually surprised that the MSFS mod scene on Nexus is so small. When the game came out I was expecting Nexus to be my go-to for modding. I thought it would be well on its way to Skyrim-level number of mods.
However as of today it shows just 509 mods. I wonder why this is considering its such a popular modding hub.
1 Like
It seems this was only quite recent with Nexus mods, so it’s likely that’s what spurred fs.to to pull the same trick. You’d think that going by the -ve reaction Nexus Mods had they would have thought more clearly about the execution and communication, instead of aiming to replicate exactly the same -ve reaction that NM got. It’s a little disingenuous of them to imply NM had always been like this, when it was only a relatively recent change, and one that wasn’t received well.
Nexus is more famous for Bethesda Elderscrolls titles…
I have a heavily modded Daggerfall build from Nexus mods.
Never even thought to type in MSFS.
Someone will. Then when they get popular enough, and they think the time is right, they would likely try something similar, and history will repeat itself. Companies will always push the market to see how much they can get away with, until the inevitable climb down to save face.
Someone has, back in 2003 and still going, even with lists for MSFS 2020 scenery: https://flightsim-scenery.com/fs2020.html
2 Likes
Looks more like 1993 design 
2 Likes
It still does the job - when something don’t need fixing, the flightsim community don’t fix it - unlike flightsim.to.
3 Likes
Here’s a pertinent section from flightsim.to’s latest version of their TOS, I don’t know who in their right mind would agree to this:
" (4.4) You grant to the Platform the right to monetize your User Content on the Service, which may include displaying ads on or within User Content. For the sake of clarity, this Agreement does not entitle you to any payments.
(4.5) You are granting each other user of the Service a worldwide, non-exclusive, perpetual, and royalty-free license to access, download and use your User Content through the Service. This license allows users to use the User Content for their own recreational purposes only and in accordance with the purpose of the Website, which is to enable users to download video game mods for their personal use and enjoyment, forever.
(4.6) Please note: We reserve the right to keep your User Content indefinitely and are not obligated to remove it or stop distributing it if you request so, in accordence with the licenses you have granted us described above. The rights you have given us remain in effect even after this Agreement ends or if we discontinue your access to the Website. We might have a legitimate interest in continuing to share or to keep available your User Content. We may permit the deletion of your User Content in our sole discretion. If we grant such deletion, the licences granted will termine once the User Content has been removed, except where you permitted the further use of User Content after your removal, or the law requires otherwise. For example, removal of User Content by you does not require the Platform to: (a) recall User Content that is being used by other users within any limited offline viewing functionality of the Service; (b) delete copies we reasonably need to keep for legal purposes; and we can only remove the User Content (c) unless your content has been shared with other users and they have not deleted the content, or, (d) unless otherwise stated in this Agreement. When we delete User Content upon request, it is removed in a manner similar to emptying the recycle bin on a computer. You should be aware that removed content will persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time, which are not accessible to others.
(4.7) If you decide to end this Agreement with us, to close or delete your User account, or if we discontinue your access to the Website, Flightsim.to will either archive your User Content, or, in Flightsim.to’s sole discretion and based on its legitimate interest, transfer your User Content to an account set up by Flightsim.to if you decided to close or delete your User account. If your account is deleted, deactivated or suspended, this will not affect or terminate the licenses you have granted."
2 Likes
In that case AVSIM, Flightsim, SimOuthouse, Simviation site traffic would be just as popping as Flightsim.to. or these new official MSFS forums. They got left behind because they failed to evolve in not only website design/tech, but with modern flight sim culture overall. Before these new official forums, quick access places of communication like Reddit and Discord were already eating away at the old dinosaur aged V Bulletin style flight sim message board formats.
Let’s be realistic and not kid ourselves here, Flightsim.to devs studied the game and ran with it. The layout, ease of access and interactive addon scenery map alone were genius. There biggest flaws are the shady TOS practice decisions. Hopefully they have enough common sense to get things sorted that keeps uploaders, downloaders and overall business happy.
7 Likes
It really looks absurd. If I had the skills to develop something I would never share it on a site with these kind of clauses. 4.7 is explicit theft. They remove the copyright of the creator and changes to their own name. This was what allegedly happened with ATR. I do not know whether that story was a fact, but 4.7 says that they can do it and the creator can do nothing. I understand why creators are angry.
2 Likes