TSR: In Ur Accounts, Deletin Ur Stuffs!

[calalily]

I did a bit of looking around about this.  That does seem to mean that's what's going on - your password isn't encrypted - which means that surely TSR can go into the database and find anything - all of the people with access to the database can do this. So how likely is it that they were hacked, then?  Someone hacked them rather than someone just went and had a look - likelihood -

Thank you.  Luckily, its not a password I use anymore, but it is important to get the word out to community about this possible security breach.  Too bad there is no reliable way to inform the TSR sheeple.

That should give members the shivers - TSR can see every single thing in their profiles - nothing is encrypted in their database.  TSR wouldn't have that discussed anywhere at all - after all, don't they pride themselves on their protection of personal information - when they couldn't really give a shit.

[dstar]

I did a bit of looking around about this.  That does seem to mean that's what's going on - your password isn't encrypted - which means that surely TSR can go into the database and find anything - all of the people with access to the database can do this. So how likely is it that they were hacked, then?  Someone hacked them rather than someone just went and had a look - likelihood -

Thank you.  Luckily, its not a password I use anymore, but it is important to get the word out to community about this possible security breach.  Too bad there is no reliable way to inform the TSR sheeple.

Those  with MTS2 accounts have been informed- as for the rest they won't believe anyone who is not from TSR because Thomass has essentially characterized all freesite supporters as being associated with PMBD (and much worse which doesn't bear repeating - see the screenie earlier -re: his April Fools Day statement, Myths Lies etc)

[Moune]

Not what I mean at all. Let's say I make a vase, and you made a vase. Let's say they are exact in the way they look, and based off of looks I yell out "thief!" If you come forward with uv maps, and anything else to prove how yours differ, it would prove it was not stolen.

I'd say it was be you who had to come up with uv maps or anything else to prove it WAS stolen.

With the whole innocence before proven guilty, yes someone proves your guilty, but you have to prove your innocent. In a court, the opposition doesn't try to prove you innocent, they prove you guilty. Your lawyers are the ones trying to prove your innocent.

Wrong! VERY wrong! Your lawyers don't have to prove anything. That's the whole idea of innocent until proven guilty. It's the core principle of the rule of law that you find in all modern democratic countries today.

Spaik may not be a thief, but she hasn't come forward to handle the accusations either.

I don't think I would either, if I were Spaik. As long as it's just baseless accusations, I don't see why I should waste time and energy doing anything but ignoring them. Somebody would have to provide proof that I stole something to get me to react.

Even if they differ by a tiny bit, if it can be proven she built her meshes off of Numenor's/Maylou's and did not give credit, even if they are only modified maxis meshes, then to me it is stealing.

Agreed completely. But as long as that hasn't been proved I think it would be wise to lay off the accusations.

[uknortherner]

Really?  Where can this metadata be found, I'm curious.   Unfortunately, my limited knowledge of computers has made it hard for me to explain to anyone what's going on, without saying, "Well, you just have to understand..."  So, any hard information I can find out and understand is really helpful to me. 

"Metadata" is probably the wrong word to use, but some image formats allow you to save additional information with the image - typically PC name, comments etc, which can then be viewed in any graphics program under "image properties".

In the early days of Coconut's blog, some of those images (not all) carried such information (usually a computer ID name or something like "Created with..." because most people don't bother filling in the rest of the data), and this information varied from one image to the next. Nothing incriminating, but enough to show that the images at the time came from two sources - the original source (i.e. whoever had passed on the images to Coconut), and the other, (presumably) Coconut him/herself where they had blurred out private data and re-saved the image. At the time it got me thinking that if anyone accused Coconut of faking these images, then this data would disprove such claims right away because there's more than one source.

Annoyingly, I've just gone back to have a look, but there's a lot more screenshots there now, and the ones I've just looked at lack this information.

[Moune]

Just because I got curious here's a screenshot for you.



And - no, this is in no way doctored. Even though DOT might try to tell you so.

UKnortherner, that's really interesting information about the metadata (or whatever is the right word). That and what you also mentioned about browsers should be enough to refute any claims that Coconut has faked the screenshots. I hope she'll put this information up on her blog - in case there are any doubters.

[Scurvy Cat]

Missed that one.  Missbonbon, you haven't taken a basic civics class or flunked it.  Or you're in a country with a different justice system than the US or UK.

Innocent until proven guilty-- is just that.  The accuser bears the burden of proof.  If I am accused of robbing a bank I am innocent until the guilty verdict comes in.  The state has to prove I did it.  It can't just decide that she looks guilty therefore she's guilty.  They have to offer some proof.  Fingerprints, an eyewitness, the fact that I had all the proceeds from the bank in the trunk of my car five minutes after the crime.  (Though the last might not be considered enough evidence depending on the jury.*)  But this has to be determined by a jury.  That's why you're entirled to an attorney if you can't pay for one, why you can usually get out on bail, why you aren't just tossed in a hole and left until the court system gets around to you.  You are innocent until the judge and jury pronounce it.  This keeps me safe from people declaring "ScurvyCat is a thief" just because they don't like me, and I have to spend the rest of my life denying it.

Now, the Sims community doesn't have a judge or jury. Not officially anyway.  But it still takes more than, that sort of looks like that other thing to convince me.  For instance, not only did shakeshaft's meshes match buggyboos point for point, but buggyboos name was on one of the internal files, and one of the textures was a custom texture done by her.  That is proof.  A coincidence of timing, like they came out two days apart, might be grounds for further investigation, but it doesn't make the accused party guilty.  Nor does, "Oh, cool, a Persian living room set.  I think I'll do one too and charge for it."  

I'm designing a cul de sac apartment complex because someone else mentioned they'd done one.  That doesn't mean I'm stealing their apartment complex, just picking up on a good idea.

*However if somebody chimes in that "Circumstantial Evidence" isn't proof at this moment I'll lower them into a vat of enraged boiling sharks  an inch at a time.

[Guybrush]

I don't know if this can be of any use at all, but if somebody wants to try to find more information about TSR or Ibibi AB it might be an idea to take a look at this page:

http://www.bolagsverket.se/

It's the Swedish registry of companies, and if it works the way it does in Denmark (and I think it does) all companies have to file complete financial records that are then made public. Ibibi is an 'aktiebolag' (AB), so all their financial information should be publicly available somewhere at this site.

There is an English version, but I don't know if it contains the same information as the Swedish one.

Sorry that I don't dig into it myself, but I don't really have the time or energy at the moment.


Edit:
Forgot to add:
SHAKESHAFT IS A THIEF.

You have to have the registration number for every company you want to check, I haven't found that for Ibibi AB yet.
But in the mails Thomas had sent for recruting on MTS2 he directed them to send mails to the domain oddjobb.se, if I remeber correctly.
I checked that out a while ago and it's a website creating company with TSR as a reference.
http://www.oddjob.se/referenser.php
You can find all their names on their index page to.
After some time I found the registration number for oddjobb.se but you had to be registred with whatever it was to be able to check, I aint so I can't.
But I found this:
http://www.121.nu/onetoone/foretag/oddjob-aktiebolag
"Omsättning" on the right is their income, no exact numbers.
1 000 - 499 000 (2007)
1 000 - 499 000 (2006)
1 000 - 499 000 (2005)
1 000 - 499 000 (2004)
(Swedish krona, 500 000 sek is around 46-50 000 dollars.)

I also found this.
http://www.robtex.com/dns/oddjob.se.html

I found nothing at searching for ibibi AB, would problably be more interesting.

Edit:
Found this now on Ibibi (with org. number):
http://www.allabolag.se/9697215540
"F-Skatt: Aldrig registrerats"

wich means; no registred taxes?? Not sure how company stuff works but it wouldn't surprise me if they hadn't payed them.

[neriana]

Technical evidence isn't necessary to prove Coconut didn't fake the screenshots.

I don't think Coconut is a literary genius, or that she's a manic who never sleeps. She'd have to be both to create all that writing, in different voices that precisely match the voices of the people who posted in those threads.

[SnarkyShark]

That should give members the shivers - TSR can see every single thing in their profiles - nothing is encrypted in their database.  TSR wouldn't have that discussed anywhere at all - after all, don't they pride themselves on their protection of personal information - when they couldn't really give a shit.

See, that's the thing, Calalily.  It's quite possible that he's always wanted the option of being able to peruse member's personal account settings because it gives him a sense of being that much more in control. The guy has gone to considerable lengths to control information concerning TSR that has appeared outside of his own website, so wouldn't it stand to reason that it would just seem natural to him to be able to study and possibly utilize information stored on his own site?

[CatOfWar]

Guybrush, you may want to PM sidhe to coordinate your efforts.  I think there were one or two other folks in this thread who were looking into the Swedish business end of things and/or knew someone who could read Swedish.  If I recall, you all were looking at 1) Swedish anti-piracy law, with respect to TSR violating the EULA, and 2) Swedish business fiscal stuff, such as reported income and maybe tax evasion?  Don't know if a few folks here can figure all that out, but if Sweden has some version of the BBB or some such, maybe you could get them to look into it?

[Quorneater]

I don't see anything dodgy about those wireframes.  Anyone wanting to do a version of the maxis window without the bottom squares would have done it exactly the same way.  I hope the waters are not going to be muddied so that the *valid* complaints against TSR get discredited along with these rather more desperate ones

[Darqstar]

Innocent until proven guilty-- is just that.  The accuser bears the burden of proof.  If I am accused of robbing a bank I am innocent until the guilty verdict comes in.  The state has to prove I did it.  It can't just decide that she looks guilty therefore she's guilty.  They have to offer some proof.  Fingerprints, an eyewitness, the fact that I had all the proceeds from the bank in the trunk of my car five minutes after the crime.  (Though the last might not be considered enough evidence depending on the jury.*)  But this has to be determined by a jury.  That's why you're entirled to an attorney if you can't pay for one, why you can usually get out on bail, why you aren't just tossed in a hole and left until the court system gets around to you.  You are innocent until the judge and jury pronounce it.  This keeps me safe from people declaring "ScurvyCat is a thief" just because they don't like me, and I have to spend the rest of my life denying it.

Yes and no.  You can't arrest someone unless you have a certain amount of evidence.   For example, if Mrs. X kills her husband, the police are first going to look at her.  Let's say everyone in the community knows Mr. and Mrs. X had a lousy relationship, that Mr. X was cheating on her, Mrs. X threatened to kill him several times, that's not enough evidence to really arrest her and make it stick.  But, let's say they find out Mr. X was beaten to death with a rare, antique golf club, and it just so happens that Mrs. X has a set of those golf clubs with that precise one missing and her favorite golf outfit has been thrown in the trash, covered in Mr. X's blood.  Now they have enough evidence to arrest Mrs. X.

And, while she's still innocent until proven guilty, her lawyer has to now prove she didn't do it, by refuting evidence given by the prosecution.  Yes, of course the defense will refute all the evidence, but that won't be enough.  "I know my client didn't do it, her golf outfit covered in blood is because someone broke into the house and put on her golf outfit and then killed Mr. X." Who will believe that?

But if the defense brings up Father Flynn, the most respected priest in the state, who testifies that Mrs. X was at a private catholic retreat and he was giving her council at the time, now the defense has brought in new evidence.  If while Mrs. X is in jail, someone breaks into the house next door to her, puts on a golf outfit, grabs a golf club and kills her neighbor, then it will cast more doubt on her guilt.

Techically, yes, all the defense has to do is put doubt into the mind of the jury, but that's only in a criminal case, which is why OJ didn't go to jail, but got sued and screwed.  In a civil case, there can be a grey area.  And, while we'd all like to say that we fully believe someone is innocent until proven guilty, we rarely actually think that way.  Ever watch the show Cops?  At the beginning they always say, "All suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law!"  But really, when you see that guy beating the crap out of his girlfriend, do you really say to yourself, "Now wait a second, I don't know if he's guilty or not.  Let's sit down and look at all the evidence!"  

Yeah, technically, TSR doesn't have to prove their innocence and neither does someone who is being accused of stealing someone elses mesh. However, if the accusing side starts bringing forth evidence, proving that yes, indeed, you stole it, do you really think people are going to say, "Well,  since the accuser doesn't have a signed statement from the guilty party, claiming that they stole the item, we can't believe it was stolen."  You're going to look at the evidence you're given and make your own choice on their guilt and innocence.  

In most cases, I think people are reasonable.  Honestly, I don't think Spaik "stole" Mary Lou's meshes etc. to make their version of the add ons for the Independent Expression windows.  I do think though, that Spaik was inspired by them.  "Hey, lookie what Mary Lou made!  Those are pretty  popular, I think I'll make a set of those too, and put 'em up at TSR!"    Seeing that all those windows were inspired by windows that come with the original game, I don't think it's even wrong that Spaik probably was inspired.  Now, if Mary Lou made "Easter Egg shaped windows for the holidays!"  and next week Spaik came out with similar windows?  Again, it might be inspiration only, but it still doesn't make Spaik look good.  At the least, it makes her look as if she's unable to come up with any original ideas.  Especially since I find that Spaik's stuff isn't nearly the same quality as Mary Lou's.   Were Spaik to say, "Hey, I like those Easter Egg windows, but they aren't lined up right, and I want to make them so you can have them one color on the inside and a different one on the outside, then yeah, she was inspired, but she also set out to improve over the other set.  

Edit to add:

Technical evidence isn't necessary to prove Coconut didn't fake the screenshots.

I don't think Coconut is a literary genius, or that she's a manic who never sleeps. She'd have to be both to create all that writing, in different voices that precisely match the voices of the people who posted in those threads.

Not to you and not to me and I'm sure not to most of the people here.  However, for someone who's leaning towards the side of TSR, that might not be enough proof.  And if you're explaining it to someone who hasn't seen the evidence, chances are they really aren't going to believe it's enough.

It's hard for us to believe sometimes, but there are a fair number of people in this fandom who barely know about what's going on and/or refuse to become involved.  If I get a chance to talk to someone like that, it's going to make our side look better if I can explain about the image information, then to say, "Well, we know they aren't screen shots, because the personality changes so much in each post."  That isn't as hard as people think it is, fiction writers do it all the time.   

The idea is to be able to say, "This is the evidence," and hopefully, interest that person enough into going and seeing for themselves, so they can make their own conclusions. 

[Pescado]

Just because I got curious here's a screenshot for you.

In all fairness, that screenshot IS an EAxis mesh to begin with, and not exactly a complex one from the looks of it. If I desired to make that sort of modification to it, I'd probably end up with something that looks exactly the same also.

[neriana]

If I get a chance to talk to someone like that, it's going to make our side look better if I can explain about the image information, then to say, "Well, we know they aren't screen shots, because the personality changes so much in each post."  That isn't as hard as people think it is, fiction writers do it all the time. 

Good fiction writers do it all the time. Most fiction writers are pretty crappity. Even then, the fiction writers are creating those personalities. It would take a very special sort of writer to be able to fake the voices of real people so well. We see DOT, Thomas, padre et al post elsewhere. One starts to learn what they "sound" like. And it would be very, very difficult to write so many posts that "sound" exactly like all those different people on those different subjects. Very nearly impossible, in fact.

Historians have always been able to catch forgeries without using a bunch of recently invented forensic tools for this reason. What people write and say tells us who they are, and mimicking any one person is difficult. Mimicking many, convincingly, in a sustained way? I've never seen it.

[Moune]

Just because I got curious here's a screenshot for you.

In all fairness, that screenshot IS an EAxis mesh to begin with, and not exactly a complex one from the looks of it. If I desired to make that sort of modification to it, I'd probably end up with something that looks exactly the same also.

Thank you. That's what I was trying to say.