New disclaimer or am I just blind?

Hey gents,

I just noticed this disclaimer in DCS world when I updated it last "Depiction of any weapon or vehicle in these products or game does not indicate affiliation, sponsorship or endorsement by any weapon or vehicle manufacturer." I also noticed it on VEAO's website tonight before I purchased the Kitty. Is this new or have I just not been paying attention. And if it is indeed new, does this mean ED and third party devs are finding ways around getting the license agreements to accurately recreated declassified aircraft? Just curious. May be a dumb question but that disclaimer stood out this last time I played and when I noticed it on the Kitty's site, I thought things might have changed.

Regards

Robert

It's new, but as I understand it, it just means that ED does not work for the vehicle manufactures (i.e. gets money for advertising their products or even could be held responsible for whatever those manufacturers do with their products). So, no, I don't think that it is meant to open a way around licensing issues.

The manufacturer didn't pay ED or 3rd parties to make the models.

What Joey says ^^^^^ It's nothing sinister, typical terms and conditions m8.

What about the relationship between Belsimtek and Bell/Textron during the Huey development?

Huey has the "Official Product" sticker, so it had to be approved, or should we say "endorsed"?

I believe its purpose is to mean that there isn't bias toward the weapons/vehicles.

As far I know, ED has been allowed to enter to different military compounds to record sounds and document the behaviors. And AFAIK they have even allowed to see the classified data but under NDA so they can't even talk what has been left out from consumer versions, while the military versions includes those (or not). And clearly military has paid ED something about making the models, even if it would just have been that money doesn't exchange anything but they are allowed to make a consumer version of the vehicle then for business means (so it is we help you, you help us deal).

And then there are of course those official support/development happen between different DCS modules.

But I don't care, more important for me really is that the data they use and modeling is done as accurately as possible without bias. As we know there already are dozens of threads about AIM-120 vs R-27/R-77 and how specific kind data should be used and how they should behave etc. And then the discussion turns easily that ED is "promoting" or "enforcing" specific manufacturer/believe/consortium/whatever etc.

So I see it as such. Otherwise I would say it would be illogical to write such disclaimer when ED promotes that they use real data in PFM level modeling from the manufacturers etc.

And yes, I noticed it at first hand after the update and thought first "Have I been blind" so "Me too!" about the thread topic!

What about the relationship between Belsimtek and Bell/Textron during the Huey development?

 

Huey has the "Official Product" sticker, so it had to be approved, or should we say "endorsed"?

*add firm here* didn't go to 3rd party/ED and say "here make this for us, here's some money.... oh and make it look good while your at it"

3rd party/ED went to *add firm here* and said [in laymans tearm] "We would like to make *add aircraft here* can we have to required info please?"

What Bell/Textron probably done is "Not bad, here have a sticker"

What Bell/Textron probably done is "Not bad, here have a sticker"

Belsimtek might feel that it means a wee bit more than that! ;)

I'm glad someone else asked about this........it's sudden appearance seems surprising.