RSC/USPITS: Time for FILSCA to step up to the plate?

It's inevitable that sites started/maintained by 1 or 2 individuals which are useful enough to become hugely popular like rsc, theuspits, GPL track database, GPLrank etc. will close. It's not a matter of "if" they close it's "when". People get burned out, tired of the abuse, discover a life away from their computer screen, get married/divorced/remarried, run out of funding (see previous item), get hit by buses, etc... It's also almost a given that the really innovative and/or useful sites, like those mentioned above, are going to be set up by 1 or 2 individuals and not a corporation or committee. Along with a lot of crap or copy sites of course, but Darwin's laws will take care of those... However once they're established a vital service the sim community and burnout is looming on the horizon it would nice if these guys had the option of turning their baby over to a committee-like structure such as FILSCA. Then we'd have the best of worlds, innovative websites developed independently and a more stable "share the workload" organization to take it over when it looks like they could be lost. If even half of the exampled above were handed over to FILSCA to be maintained, secured, and continue to evolve then I'd be willing to pay them $5-10 a year for access.. Of course the developers would have to be willing to live with the loss of control that handing it over truly means (I'm sure some would rather close). And FILSCA would have to get over the "we didn't build it ourselves" thing. I know, I know FILSCA is for leagues, but you can't have leagues without drivers first..

mcewena wrote: > It's inevitable that sites started/maintained by 1 or 2 individuals > which are useful enough to become hugely popular like rsc, theuspits, > GPL track database, GPLrank etc. will close. It's not a matter of > "if" they close it's "when". > Sorry to dash your hopes but there is no chance of us handing RSC over to anyone. The admin team are working hard to get the site back up and running as we speak. In the last day we have overcome a huge hurdle that has been preventing this and now finally feel we are making progress towards getting the forum back online. Cheers Phil Lee RSC Administrator

God no, please dont hand it over to FILSCA couldnt imagine anything worse quite frankly, they already seem to to think they control simracing so please dont give them anything more to inflate that opinion. "Phil Lee" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:crjk7i$6jt$1$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (17 lines)

> mcewena wrote: >> It's inevitable that sites started/maintained by 1 or 2 individuals >> which are useful enough to become hugely popular like rsc, theuspits, >> GPL track database, GPLrank etc. will close. It's not a matter of >> "if" they close it's "when". >> > > Sorry to dash your hopes but there is no chance of us handing RSC over to > anyone. The admin team are working hard to get the site back up and > running as we speak. In the last day we have overcome a huge hurdle that > has been preventing this and now finally feel we are making progress > towards getting the forum back online. > > Cheers > > Phil Lee > RSC Administrator

I'm not a big fan of the current form of FILSCA and it's not so much a "hope" as a suggestion-of-last-resort for sites that are going/gone. The one advantage of the committee format though is that they can change their tune, either by the world ignoring them or by the world joining them and staging a coup. Unless of course they're commitee elections are held in the Ukraine... ;) Great to hear you'll be back soon Phil but I still think burnout/closure is inevitable unless your support base is large enough to be self sustaning, if it is, then you've already become a committee ;)

In article <crjs7p$t00$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says... > God no, please dont hand it over to FILSCA couldnt imagine anything worse > quite frankly, they already seem to to think they control simracing so > please dont give them anything more to inflate that opinion. > Hmmm, I'd never even heard of them until yesterday. I went to their website yesterday and didn't see any compelling reason for them to take over anything.

"John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > In article <crjs7p$t00$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] > says... > > God no, please dont hand it over to FILSCA couldnt imagine anythingworse

Quoted text (7 lines)

> > quite frankly, they already seem to to think they control simracing so > > please dont give them anything more to inflate that opinion. > > > > Hmmm, I'd never even heard of them until yesterday. I went to their > website yesterday and didn't see any compelling reason for them to take > over anything.

I think FILSCA has great potential to centralize sim racing leagues - a good place to find a league and see who's who and what's what. That will be more than enough for them however - making it anything like The Pits/RSC would be huge overload!

And a share-the-workload sort of thing. Assuming from what they originally intended they'd have some sort of regular elections for duties. If you're the guy (un)lucky enough to be maintaining a certain section of their content you just decline the job the next time it comes up. Unfortunatly they don't seem to want to share how they work until after you've joined.

control simracing? That's a little rich - FILSCA's nothing mroe than teh work of a few guys over the course of a few years to facilitate leagues and keep drivers' stats for life - and all of it for free. The idea that anyone wants to control sim racing is a bit much; though i imagine there are those (no names mentioned) who would, given the opportunity, seek to control our beloved sim-sport for profit. Filsca cannot make a profit since it's a not-for-profit club and cannot, legally, show an income. What's more, filsca is not owned by anyone except the member leagues - which are, in turn, 'owned' by their drivers - as such, filsca cannot 'take over' anything since filsca is the sim racers and is owned, 100%, by its members. As such, the idea that it can take over sim racing is, as said, fanciful at best. What filsca does do, however, is empower its own members to protect simracing from the vultures that always circle around any 'sport' for profit. "Byron Forbes" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:41de8d01$0$31709$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (22 lines)

> > "John Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:[email hidden]... >> In article <crjs7p$t00$[email hidden]>, [email hidden] >> says... >> > God no, please dont hand it over to FILSCA couldnt imagine anything > worse >> > quite frankly, they already seem to to think they control simracing so >> > please dont give them anything more to inflate that opinion. >> > >> >> Hmmm, I'd never even heard of them until yesterday. I went to their >> website yesterday and didn't see any compelling reason for them to take >> over anything. > > I think FILSCA has great potential to centralize sim racing leagues - a > good place to find a league and see who's who and what's what. That will > be > more than enough for them however - making it anything like The Pits/RSC > would be huge overload! > >

"alex martini" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Mq_Dd.55874$[email hidden]... <snip> What filsca does do, however, is empower its own members to protect simracing from the vultures that always circle around any 'sport' for profit. That's a bit rich too; a bit to much self-importance being attributed to sim racing.

"alex martini" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:Mq_Dd.55874$[email hidden]... > control simracing? That's a little rich - FILSCA's nothing mroe than teh > work of a few guys over the course of a few years to facilitate leaguesand > keep drivers' stats for life - and all of it for free. The idea thatanyone > wants to control sim racing is a bit much; though i imagine there arethose > (no names mentioned) who would, given the opportunity, seek to control our > beloved sim-sport for profit. Filsca cannot make a profit since it's a > not-for-profit club and cannot, legally, show an income. What's more,filsca > is not owned by anyone except the member leagues - which are, in turn, > 'owned' by their drivers - as such, filsca cannot 'take over' anythingsince > filsca is the sim racers and is owned, 100%, by its members. As such, the > idea that it can take over sim racing is, as said, fanciful at best. What > filsca does do, however, is empower its own members to protect simracing > from the vultures that always circle around any 'sport' for profit. It seems there's as much competition off the track as there is on! :) When they make a show of jealously like that you know you're on the right track. I personally wish you a lot of luck with FILSCA. I don't see why anyone should be threatened by you - you are both unique and overdue. Drivers can go there and find a league taylor made for them. League admins can go there and see how other leagues do things and learn from each other. I really look forward to seeing you grow and develope into a valuable and exciting resourse for all - who knows, you might even take over all of sim racing! LOL.

Every time I hear of filsca, I can't help but hear the phrase "All your racing sims are belong to us" -- Richard "ZZ" Busch Member: Screamers Racing League oAo AoA MARA TransAm GT Rank +57.022 GT Rank Monster 1414.955 GPL Rank + 14.768 MoGPL Rank + 308.654 N2003 Rank -18.8060 ---------------- Remember racecar is racecar spelled backward ----------------- ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Just how do they empower? And who are the vultures, cant ever remember seeing anyone demand anything from me before I race online, Iam not against leauges/teams/drivers joining to together but its all the nonsense of commitees, sim approval and all that which just seems like kids pretending to be the Fia to me.

"ZZ" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:41e12ac2$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (21 lines)

> Every time I hear of filsca, I can't help but hear the phrase > > "All your racing sims are belong to us" > > > -- > Richard "ZZ" Busch > > Member: > Screamers Racing League > oAo > AoA > MARA TransAm > GT Rank +57.022 > GT Rank Monster 1414.955 > GPL Rank + 14.768 > MoGPL Rank + 308.654 > N2003 Rank -18.8060 > ---------------- > Remember racecar is racecar spelled backward > -----------------

lol

"alex martini" wrote: > control simracing? That's a little rich - FILSCA's nothing mroe than teh > work of a few guys over the course of a few years to facilitate leaguesand > keep drivers' stats for life - and all of it for free. I am sure that is the aim. However, the script writers got a bit carried away IMHO with talks of moving sim racing up to Quake match status with the associated prize money and the recognition of our sport. Sim racing is a relative niche market compared to online FPS. Also announcing FILSCA as the first world sanctioning body for sim racing suggests some authority and from where? The "Federation International des Ligues des Simulateurs de Courses Automobiles" will alienate more than a few for several reasons: Firstly it is French which tells the Americans this is European run, and tells the British that is er French... If it was in English it could be perceived as a global initiative. Secondly it sounds an awful like FIA or even FISA. Those more mature amongst us will remember the FISA vs FOCA political wars which had nothing to do with racing. Thirdly if it is a sanctioning body how is this body elected to sanction anything? I am not against the concept and I am sure the guys put a lot of thankless time in keeping this running, but I do think the mission statement is rather grandiose and stacking sim racing up against competitive FPS playing is way over optimistic. Also I remember when Jack Rambo put together his "Nail the Track" series with a view to developing a World series with the equivalent of motor racing competition licenses for members back in 1999 with the conclusion that sim racing was just too niche compared with Quake et al. I am sure FILSCA means well but the days of professional sim racing drivers seem way off to me... Cheers Tony

Tony, I think you hit it right on the head. Very well stated. A few years ago I had the opportunity to look at their statutes and charter shortly after they had their 'unveiling'. With such items as requiring drivers in member leagues to recognize FILSCA as the "sole authority over sim racing proper", and not allowing leagues to leave FILSCA without approval of the management, and numerous other similar gems, one can only guess what their intentions originally were. This along with some of the rudeness displayed by some of FILSCA's management never inspired much confidence in me. 'Poorly begun is hard to salvage'. It's always seemed to me that they are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. As a 'sanctioning body' they potentially could end up being the problem. Do I take it that non-FILSCA leagues are now outlaw leagues :-))))))? DW

"Darren Williamson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> Tony, I think you hit it right on the head. Very well stated. > > A few years ago I had the opportunity to look at their statutes and > charter shortly after they had their 'unveiling'. With such items as > requiring drivers in member leagues to recognize FILSCA as the "sole > authority over sim racing proper", and not allowing leagues to leave > FILSCA without approval of the management, and numerous other similar > gems, one can only guess what their intentions originally were. > > This along with some of the rudeness displayed by some of FILSCA's > management never inspired much confidence in me. 'Poorly begun is hard > to salvage'. It's always seemed to me that they are trying to fix a > problem that doesn't exist. As a 'sanctioning body' they potentially > could end up being the problem. > > Do I take it that non-FILSCA leagues are now outlaw leagues :-))))))? > DW >

Far Kurnell! What a load of complete bullshit! A bunch of people get together to create a centralized site for sim racing leauges, and nothing more, and some bunch of bozos somehow think they're trying to take over everything somehow. Just exactly how in the fuck are they going to do that fuckwit? Try to make it mean something to be human in future if it's not too much trouble!

"Byron Forbes" wrote: > Far Kurnell! What a load of complete bullshit! A bunch of people get > together to create a centralized site for sim racing leauges, and nothing > more, and some bunch of bozos somehow think they're trying to take over > everything somehow. Just exactly how in the fuck are they going to do that > fuckwit? Try to make it mean something to be human in future if it's not > too much trouble! What you describe is what has been delivered rather than the stated aims. I would suggest the intentions were genuine enough but that someone got a bit carried away with the prose. This has led to many being wary of an unelected sanctioning body claiming to be the "face" of sim racing. Whether this is misinterpretation or not the statements are there to be misinterpreted. Such bodies are a necessary evil in professional competitive circles with all the politics and power struggles to boot. As I personally don't see much future for professional sim racing I would question the need. I certainly shan't be giving up my day job but that could be simply due to lack of talent :) A group of dedicated people giving up their own time to help fellow sim racers and provide useful stats and league summaries is another matter and another positive aspect of the sim community. I just think there is some naivity in producing a white paper with comments such as: Official national or world championships It will present itself as the "face" of sim-racing it will create the base for sponsored leagues and paid drivers as well as securing sim-racing�s future Consolidation of sim-racing into one body Landmark in forming first organizing body for sim-sport Once achieved, prizes for drivers will become a reality�and the producers of simulations will have no choice but to consult with its core market �FILSCA and its members Which is significantly more than "A bunch of people get together to create a centralized site for sim racing leauges, and nothing more" whatever spin you put on it... Cheers Tony

>What's more, filsca is not owned by anyone except the member leagues - So what's the length of the term of FILSCA president? Are there an annual election for officers from the league reps or is it a president-for-life kind of thing? Who decides if a league is eligible to join? There are lots of items like this about the filsca structure that aren't out on the public side of the forum, the answers might be beyond reproach but my point is we don't know. 2-3 times I've sent email requesting info about joining for the leagues I run/help and I've got no response, it could be just a coincidence that I've also posted (constructive I think) criticisms in their forums (which disappeared), maybe they were just bad email weeks.

I don't know about your emails - I have little to do with the day to day activity of FILSCA but I assure you no-one is editing or censoring your mails or questions; FILSCA is as open as you want it to be and we have plenty of leagues and about 2000 member drivers ... I know Christoph may have something to say on this, so I've sent him the links to these mails - the short of it is simple; FILSCA is a club. The reason why we are a club is so that FILSCA can run itself. As for league entrance, yes we have certain rules to join the club. Like any club, we have minimum rules for entry; you have to run a sim, you have to have certain rules in place, etc. These are normal rules and not draconian in the slightest. "mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >What's more, filsca is not owned by anyone except the member leagues - > > > So what's the length of the term of FILSCA president? Are there an > annual election for officers from the league reps or is it a > president-for-life kind of thing? > > Who decides if a league is eligible to join? > > There are lots of items like this about the filsca structure that > aren't out on the public side of the forum, the answers might be beyond > reproach but my point is we don't know. > > 2-3 times I've sent email requesting info about joining for the leagues > I run/help and I've got no response, it could be just a coincidence > that I've also posted (constructive I think) criticisms in their forums > (which disappeared), maybe they were just bad email weeks. >

Re. to: "2-3 times I've sent email requesting info about joining for the leagues I run/help and I've got no response, it could be just a coincidence that I've also posted (constructive I think) criticisms in their forums (which disappeared), maybe they were just bad email weeks." by mcewana Lots of issues raised, so let's start with the most obvious one: Art, I don't know where you have sent leagues requests to - surely they did not end in my mailbox. And there is no connection whatsoever to your posts which did not disappear. The forum had been reopened in January 2004, and the public posts from the period 2001- 02 had been moved to read-only archive. Just go to "Old forums" at the bottom. However, posts of about 3 months were lost due to backup failure. Cheers Christoph Head of the FILSCA Board "mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (18 lines)

> >What's more, filsca is not owned by anyone except the member leagues - > > > So what's the length of the term of FILSCA president? Are there an > annual election for officers from the league reps or is it a > president-for-life kind of thing? > > Who decides if a league is eligible to join? > > There are lots of items like this about the filsca structure that > aren't out on the public side of the forum, the answers might be beyond > reproach but my point is we don't know. > > 2-3 times I've sent email requesting info about joining for the leagues > I run/help and I've got no response, it could be just a coincidence > that I've also posted (constructive I think) criticisms in their forums > (which disappeared), maybe they were just bad email weeks. >

mcewena wrote: > It's inevitable that sites started/maintained by 1 or 2 individuals > which are useful enough to become hugely popular like rsc, theuspits, > GPL track database, GPLrank etc. will close. It's not a matter of > "if" they close it's "when". Since storage and bandwidth cost money, why not ease the burden of some of these sites by releasing files on a peer-to-peer network? Everyone provides a bit a storage and bandwidth so it's not huge blow to the community if a site goes down. It would also prevent sites going down when there is a popular release because they are overloaded. It's quite likely that the entire contents of theuspits and the rsc hosted sites are collectively sitting on the hard drives of RAS users several times over, not to mention things that haven't been available on a website for quite some time. Ken

>Like any club, we have minimum rules for entry; you >have to run a sim, you have to have certain rules in place, etc. >These are normal rules and not draconian in the slightest. I guess the part that makes me wonder is that those rules aren't posted on the public side of the site. I can't see the harm myself. I think the idea of a sanctioning body isn't a bad thing. It would be nice to know that the next new track released met a minimum quality/graphic standard (ie no invisible walls, no frame sucking blimps)or a new mod needed a certain minimum spec. That's something that a sanctioning body could do in a more consistant manner then is happening now and it would provide a target for the developers. I don't think it's too much more of a leap from there then to hosting the "filsca certified" version of the track.

"mcewena" wrote: > I don't think it's too much more of a leap from there then to hosting > the "filsca certified" version of the track. Except it would be a shed load of work. Defining minimum standards and the debates around historical accuracy, quality and drivability and then testing and verifying tracks and mods. The hosting is built around a set of tools enabling the leagues to provide updates themselves (which seems poorly utilised even then). FILSCA aims of unifying the sim community and using it as a basis for competing for the FPS money stakes just hasn't been realised simply because it is a niche in comparison and despite a lot of effort by a few there just isn't the sustainable mass to drive it forward. The relative lack of content on the FILSCA site is testament to that. Therefore the end result is a very watered down but nonetheless useful set of tools for leagues. All IMHO of course :) Cheers Tony

>Except it would be a shed load of work. Yep, you know of any sanctioning body that's not? If it wasn't who would need one? As pretty as their results pages and webzeen is, for any of the leagues I'm in it's duplication of effort. However something that we always struggle with (and I suspect other leagues do too) is what tracks are suitible to use (track length, graphics requirements, style/era, availibility, etc). The ratings on the track database are of some help but they're very subjective and have been hacked. NR tracks are even worse as everybody seems to have their own track.ini...

"mcewena" wrote: > >Except it would be a shed load of work. > > Yep, you know of any sanctioning body that's not? If it wasn't who > would need one? In an admittedly obscure way that was my point. FILSCA provides the tools for league admins rather than fulfilling the role of a sanctioning body. For all the good intentions clubs run by its members never seem to achieve much because it lacks leadership, the motivation to perform for those reliant upon you and the direction is unclear. Electing an enigmatic leader with a mandate and enduring the pain until the next coup or election after he has gone clinically insane is the only way forward! Alternatively conclude that a real sanctioning body for sim racing is going to be a thankless task with no end gain and a political struggle to boot and settle for a nice cup of tea and an iced bun in front of the TV... Cheers Tony

"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:H6YEd.8657$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> "mcewena" wrote: > > > >Except it would be a shed load of work. > > > > Yep, you know of any sanctioning body that's not? If it wasn't who > > would need one? > > In an admittedly obscure way that was my point. FILSCA provides the tools > for league admins rather than fulfilling the role of a sanctioning body. > > For all the good intentions clubs run by its members never seem to achieve > much because it lacks leadership, the motivation to perform for those > reliant upon you and the direction is unclear. Electing an enigmatic

leader > with a mandate and enduring the pain until the next coup or election after > he has gone clinically insane is the only way forward! > > Alternatively conclude that a real sanctioning body for sim racing isgoing > to be a thankless task with no end gain and a political struggle to bootand > settle for a nice cup of tea and an iced bun in front of the TV... > > Cheers > Tony You're probably right when it comes to the vast majority of clubs/leagues, but RASCAR is running smooth as silk. :-) -- David G Fisher

Quoted text (11 lines)

>"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote > However, the script writers got a bit carried away IMHO with talks of > moving > sim racing up to Quake match status with the associated prize money and > the > recognition of our sport. Sim racing is a relative niche market compared > to > online FPS. > > Also announcing FILSCA as the first world sanctioning body for sim racing > suggests some authority and from where?

They probably are either 1) extremely naive or 2) never heard of the NROS and it's total failure. -- -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- This announcement is brought to you by the Shimago-Dominguez Corporation - helping America into the New World...

"ymenard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:VH_Ed.32319$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (10 lines)

> >"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote > > However, the script writers got a bit carried away IMHO with talks of > > moving > > sim racing up to Quake match status with the associated prize money and > > the > > recognition of our sport. Sim racing is a relative niche market compared > > to > > online FPS. > > > > Also announcing FILSCA as the first world sanctioning body for sim

racing > > suggests some authority and from where? > > > > They probably are either 1) extremely naive or 2) never heard of the NROS > and it's total failure. Hehe, we found something to agree on.

"Tony Rickard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:YsXEd.8622$[email hidden]... > > FILSCA aims of unifying the sim community and using it as a basis for > competing for the FPS money stakes just hasn't been realised simplybecause > it is a niche in comparison and despite a lot of effort by a few therejust > isn't the sustainable mass to drive it forward. The relative lack ofcontent > on the FILSCA site is testament to that. Therefore the end result is avery > watered down but nonetheless useful set of tools for leagues. > Well, since GPL (old sim with old cars with little mass appeal to the naked eye) and Nascar (little world wide appeal and not even a great deal of appeal to many yanks) are the only real online sims to date, I'd put this down to most of the reason for what you say about a lack of widespread interest and participation in sim racing. Look at how pitiful the situation is - 2005 and no multi sim for F1, GTP or Champ Cars. If someone had told me this would be the case back in 1998 I'd have laughed at them. Now if anyone wants to know who's screwing the sim racing community, no doubt the answer is in the greedy arseholes representing these sports that want an arm and a leg for licencing that shouldn't even need to be paid at all. Anyone looking for a good conspiracy theory need look no further than this.

>Look at how pitiful the situation >is - 2005 and no multi sim for F1, GTP or Champ Cars. If someone hadtold me >this would be the case back in 1998 I'd have laughed at them. > Now if anyone wants to know who's screwing the sim racingcommunity, no >doubt the answer is in the greedy arseholes representing these sports But that's a catch-22, to market to new buyers the manufacturors feel they need a brand name (you more or less implied branding is important yourself), therefore the licence holders have something that is in demand... If you were new to sim racing and you were walking past a retail shop window would you honestly buy something called "Generic Racer"? LFS has avoided this by having generic looking cars and not selling thru retail channels but they're also never likely to sell as many copies as any of the shrinkwrap crowd (it's not like grand dad is going to download a copy for xmas). I suspect if LFS ever did get successful and they had a car called a Maclaren F1 (mac instead of mc) racing against the "Farrari" Enzo they'd be hearing from Ron Denis's & Fiat's lawyers fairly quickly.

"mcewena" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted text (25 lines)

> >Look at how pitiful the situation >>is - 2005 and no multi sim for F1, GTP or Champ Cars. If someone had > told me >>this would be the case back in 1998 I'd have laughed at them. > >> Now if anyone wants to know who's screwing the sim racing > community, no >>doubt the answer is in the greedy arseholes representing these sports > > But that's a catch-22, to market to new buyers the manufacturors feel > they need a brand name (you more or less implied branding is important > yourself), therefore the licence holders have something that is in > demand... > > If you were new to sim racing and you were walking past a retail shop > window would you honestly buy something called "Generic Racer"? > > LFS has avoided this by having generic looking cars and not selling > thru retail channels but they're also never likely to sell as many > copies as any of the shrinkwrap crowd (it's not like grand dad is going > to download a copy for xmas). I suspect if LFS ever did get > successful and they had a car called a Maclaren F1 (mac instead of mc) > racing against the "Farrari" Enzo they'd be hearing from Ron Denis's & > Fiat's lawyers fairly quickly. >

All true. But why should they have a say in who makes a computer sim/game based on their racing series? Why should they be able to charge for that? It's a mis use of law! They are supplying nothing - no work on their part. And these sims/games are good advertising for them also. The only result of this is that these arseholes, and the lawyers/judges, make a killing for doing sweet fuck all. Developers waste resorces on this and we pay more for less - that's completely fucked!

I often wonder if the licening stumbling block is actually money or just culture? How long do you suppose it takes the jeans & t-shirt wearing developors to convince the 3 peice suit corporate crowd speak the same language. Imagine if say the West Bros. walked into Ford HQ... ;)