Issues for known creators

I agree and 100% support the concerns voiced within this topic so far.

For brands with larger following like @quasarstore , @RTX_Dev , @jaksam1074 , and myself; the removal of the ability to revoke assets has restricted our ability to quickly resolve technical issues with delivery, stop resellers from continuing to profit off our work, and leakers to distribute it for free(or attempt to).

In the last month alone I have discovered 4 active stores reselling my scripts. One of the users accumulating 2000+ customers on a server pack with 2 of my resources and countless others. This is more than $140k~ in stolen revenue from my products alone(from both Cfx, Tebex, myself, and the rest of the creators they stole from to build their store).

As other’s have suggested above, it is understandable that revoking assets should not be available to all Tebex creators for it’s risk of abuse BUT the ability to revoke could save the livelihood of us Tebex creators with more than 3000-4000 customers following us.

All in all, I think it would be extremely beneficial for everyone(Cfx, Tebex, and creators alike) to consider re-opening the consideration of implementing a verification system for creators to earn the ability to revoke assets within reason.

5 Likes

Good afternoon everyone, I completely agree with everything mentioned, both the comments and the original post.

At the moment there are some points that should be reviewed:

  • Problems in the FilleZilla program, when a client uses fillezilla and uploads the files with escrow it gives an error in all the files inside the script folder. ( This generates unnecessary tickets for us to tell them to use another program )

  • When they removed the revoke scripts button it was the worst thing they did, at the moment, in case we have to ban someone from our store & discord, we cannot revoke their scripts.

  • Touched on the same subject as the button, there are people who buy scripts with the wrong framework and open a ticket asking to revoke the old script and send the new one with the updated framework. ( We can’t do that because we couldn’t remove the old script )

  • Verification system at tebex in stores with more than 1 year of existence or with a high sales volume. ( Being able to use the revoke button, I understand that stores with less time or less sales do not make much sense and can also generate problems for tebex / cfx )

  • Verification in the cfx forum depending on the store, we can connect our account here with our store and it will know if the store is verified, we also have access to immediate posts without approval here.

Best regards,
marcinhu - m-Scripts

2 Likes

Good evening, Sam.

I want to express my complete agreement with your concerns and lend my support to your call for change in Tebex’s policies. As a fellow creator in the FiveM scene, I have also encountered the challenges you’ve outlined, and I believe it’s crucial for Tebex to address these issues for the benefit of the entire community.

The removal of the revoke button without proper cause has indeed created a problematic situation. While I understand the importance of preventing unwarranted revocations, it is equally important to have a mechanism in place to deal with cases where reselling and inappropriate behaviour are evident. Tebex’s current stance, which requires concrete evidence of transactions, often fails to address such situations effectively. This not only undermines the hard work and dedication of creators but also hinders the overall integrity of the platform.

Your example of an individual openly admitting to purchasing an asset from another person, yet Tebex refusing to take action due to lack of payment proof, is a clear indication that the current approach is flawed. It is disheartening to see creators being affected by reselling practices that go unchecked, especially when there is substantial evidence available.

I fully support your suggestion to reinstate the revoke button for verified creators, accompanied by mandatory proof of inappropriate behaviour. This would provide a fair and accountable process that allows creators to protect their work from unauthorized distribution while still ensuring transparency and appropriate actions against those engaging in unethical practices.

Furthermore, I echo your call for other creators to bring forth their concerns and contribute to the discussion. By joining forces and presenting a united front, we can effectively advocate for change and improvements within the FiveM community. It is essential to maintain a respectful and organized conversation, recognizing the valuable time and effort that FiveM admins dedicate to addressing these matters.

Sam, I commend your efforts in initiating this conversation and shedding light on the need for Tebex to reconsider their policies. Let us stand together as creators and continue pushing for a platform that supports and protects our hard work while fostering a fair and thriving FiveM ecosystem.

2 Likes

I want to express my support for Sam’s statements regarding the current issues in the FiveM community. As someone who has been actively engaged in the FiveM scene, I have also encountered the same problems that Sam mentioned.

Firstly, while the escrow system is a valuable feature for protecting creators from leaks and resellers, it is not without its flaws. Many creators have experienced frequent errors, such as “Error parsing script” and “Failed to verify protected resource,” which often occur when using file uploading software like Filezilla. These errors can corrupt binary files and lead to support requests that wrongly blame the creators themselves. It would be helpful to address these issues and find solutions that minimize such errors and support creators effectively.

Another concern raised by Sam is the removal of the revoke button from Tebex. While it is important not to revoke assets without cause, the current Tebex policies make it difficult to take appropriate action against resellers. Compelling evidence of reselling, such as individuals openly admitting to purchasing assets from third-party resellers, is often disregarded due to the lack of proof of payment. Reinstating the revoke button for verified creators, while requiring proof of inappropriate behavior, could help combat reselling and protect creators’ intellectual property rights.

In addition to the specific points raised by Sam, it is crucial to foster open and respectful discussions among creators, admins, and developers. By providing constructive feedback, we can collectively work towards improving the FiveM platform and addressing other important matters that may arise.

Let’s continue the conversation like @jaksam1074 said in a positive and organized manner, ensuring that the valuable time and effort of the FiveM admins is well-utilized. Together, we can contribute to a better and more supportive community for all creators and users involved.

BeansFL

Peace and out :v:

2 Likes

Hi please take this into account, we are here improving everyone’s experience on your platform !

Many people are still using leaked assets even after the escrow system got introduced…

Lot of people are reselling assets and earning money for work they did not create.

I support all the creators that are working really hard to create the best experience for every users on the 5m platform (players, owners, developpers) but some people are just here to take advantage of the situation and here to scam or impersonate.

Thanks for reading !

4 Likes

Great idea!

4 Likes

I COMPLETELY agree with you Jaksam !

4 Likes

Hi, just acknowledging that we’ve seen the topic and read it up to this point.

It should be noted that there’s a lot of different concerns being raised here and it somewhat feels like a coordinated effort of people posting either the same requests with different phrasing, or ‘agreeing’, and I’d like to point out that this actually makes things a little more difficult to reply to: we already know a lot of people are having similar concerns, and even if only a single person had such a concern it would not be any less valid, so posting to ‘agree’ or ‘show that a lot of people run into this’ might make it a little more difficult to reply to.

There’s also a few sensitive topics being discussed here like the revocation button and the various use cases that people had for it, which might take a bit to untangle and respond to, and, ideally, we’d seen as separate requests right away rather than having people work up ad-hoc solutions using the revocation feature.

On the same note of the revocation button I’d like to point out that the design was indeed to not have any manual granting/revocation functionality at all, so when people were reporting some sellers abusing the button we first asked ourselves ‘wait, there’s a revocation button? oh no…’ and it turned out a miscommunication in the specification led to such a feature existing, we somewhat rushed to remove it given that any use case that such a button would be needed for should ideally have specific functionality or other workflows to accomplish these same goals in a more predictable way across sellers.

(similarly, it is highly unlikely there’ll be a ‘verified creator’ program with a revocation button, this would just add more complexity and feelings of ‘unfairness’ while still making for inconsistent treatment, if there’d be any program for ‘big creators’ it’d rather be a more direct line to report issues and request changes without having to work up the courage to make a forum post first)

I’ll make sure more gets replied to shortly, just getting this part out of the way first…

8 Likes

I completely agree with you Sam, the removal of the revoke button has me frustrated for a long time. Often customers come to me that their asset magically removed itself and that they did not transfer it or that they want it transferred back. The revoke system was useful in this case, because I could revoke the old asset and give them a new one. With the current system that’s limited. I hope to see some change in the future, with some kind of creator verification system as well. Hope your post gets some attention :slight_smile:

4 Likes

Thank you everyone for your support ! It’s extremely appreciated :heart:

6 Likes

I agree with what have been said below, sometimes customers or server owners can transfer their assets to their dev so he can test them etc… and once they stop using the Dev service or change the whole dev team they open tickets asking us to revoke the assets for that dev since they no longer work with him and Now that the revoke button is removed we will find ourselves either sending scripts for FREE or simply saying NO and the client will not be satisfied and that’s bad for the whole community.

4 Likes

I completely agree. A much smaller dev here, but hearing about people’s work getting leaked is why I’ve slowed down. I feel like if there’s a point in time where I (or put yourself in this example) start to grow too fast or get a lot of popularity, I’m going to fall into an endless loop of bad things because there’s no way to prevent leaks. Before I took the break I took, I had nearly 200 members and I was starting to see how things can backfire quick. Especially with the amount of trolls in this community. Thanks jaksam for putting this out there, someone needed to!

3 Likes

Hey Sam and everyone involved :slight_smile:

Just giving my opinion towards your concerns and potential solutions that can come from your side as well. Not just CFX or Tebex’s.

Escrow “errors”

These programs (Filezilla, WinSCP, etc) have always done these things though. I remember these problems from like 15 years ago. I doubt they will ever be fixed.
Files not transferring at all, refreshing file view not working as intended, line endings getting jambled, sometimes even file endings… and your mentioned problems with escrow files.

Streamline your support process. Have an FAQ set up with this as one of the first things (e.g. at the “installation steps” section).
Make sure your users read through it. (“a README is called like that for a reason” is what I tell my customers) (Check (*) below for more)

Revoke button

Tebex has gotten back to me with every single request I have filed regarding revoking or resending of assets and everything was always fulfilled to my satisfaction.
You just have to give proper evidence. A Discord message is not really proper evidence if you ask me.

Though I do have to say that I never had a problem with resellers. All my (paid) resources are protected via escrow (only ~10% is actually encrypted but it is enough to combat this behavior) and so far even people that only buy “non-escrow” or “unencrypted” resources have been satisfied with how I handle the code side of things. In the two years I have been selling stuff with escrow, I only ever opened a single encrypted function from my code (I simply missed something that should have been configurable from the get-go) as more simply wasn’t necessary. I only ever encrypt core functionality that should never be touched anyways.

You are not liable for any “damage” to anyones CFX account. It is not your problem if their CFX account was stolen. Yes, it sucks for them. But they should have properly protected their credentials. Instead of contacting you, they should contact CFX to resolve the issue with their account. Once they get it back, they can contact CFX and Tebex and clarify the issue with potentially transferred assets etc. After that,

I should also mention that a user selling their assets and transferring them just means you still have only one license around (assumes using escrow).
In my support I make it clear that selling and transferring assets leads to no guarantees from my side. I still give support to the current license owner but if anything happens to that asset for whatever reason, I am out of the boat. That user can then complain to Tebex, Paypal or whatever else they think might work. But if they got scammed by another user that shall not be my problem.

The customer made a mistake by buying a product that does not have a refund period attached to it. It is at your sole discretion to refund their purchase. Your customer can then just purchase the correct one. And this is just out of fairness towards your customers. You don’t have to refund it. (**)
But revoking the asset and then creating a new $0 payment for the new asset? That makes no sense.

All of that being said, I like the fact that we can get a discussion on this going. Let’s wait for d-bubble’s answer for more information.

Some personal gripe with this topic:

  • Don’t sell two (or more) different versions of a script. Sell a single one that encompasses all frameworks that you actually want to support. The easy solution to “oops, I bought the wrong thing”.
  • Don’t sell two versions of a script, one encrypted, one open (and 3-10x more expensive…). This does not combat resellers/leakers, it just fuels their ambition to actually resell/leak it.
  • Sometimes it feels like people do not know how to read policies and/or laws that directly affect them. Know your rights and the rights of your customers. Point them towards the written text if necessary.

(*)
Ticket support can make these things really sluggish in my experience. I am currently using a system where a user can request access to channels that encompass a single script (with a purchase validation of course). Once they got access, they can freely post their problems, suggestions etc in there.
And everyone that also has access can just answer. It’s not a ticket solely for the customer and support staff. We managed to have a huge community that helps each other out with these simple problems and sometimes even complex ones without me having to interfere. Of course I still give unanswered questions their proper answer but this helps immensely with the amount of time you have to spend answering support by yourself.
I still manage to do this solo with a constantly growing community and keeping a <24h answering time.

(**)
Extract from the checkout “Tebex Terms & Conditions” that you can find on your own Tebex store page:

Purchases from Us are payments for licenses to use the digital virtual items contained in the purchase. This transaction is final and there are no refunds. […]

3 Likes

Using encrypted assets it is always tough and sometimes impossible to provide an actual solution to the customer.
A common theme that happens on FiveM is stolen assets. Due to the nature of being able to only do a one way transfer , many customers have lost their assets to their ”devs” or “friends” that they no longer work with.
Having a system where the original buyer could retrieve the assets to his account at any time would be a possible fix for this issue (this would obviously have to revoke the assets from the other account).

As for the file uploading errors it really is a shame but I guess it’s something we are doomed with due to the nature of the process.

Another thing I would like to point out is that we were “promised” or rather “told” that there would be future support for javascript resources encryption, and so far it seems that keymaster has only been stagnated and no new tools have been added for us .

I am grateful nonetheless for the amazing opportunity that this brought to us, creators.

I do think most of the issues mentioned in the whole thread should be worked on since it’s a common occurrence.

1 Like

I don’t see the problem with people releasing similar resources for free. Some people just want to game and have fun, not fork out a mortgage just to afford something that’s virtual :man_shrugging:

Sure, absolutely you should support creators and pay for their work, but just because something is free and made from nothing but passion for the community rather than personal gain, doesn’t necessarily mean it’s low quality, which is the most fucked up misconception that I have seen brewing amongst the community.

Some big named map makers seem to have an ego and God complex and their support is for lack of s better word - dog shit, so I genuinely don’t blame people for not bothering with them.

9 Likes

And how is that related to the topic?

Some people forget most people are here to play a game not pay the price of a mortgage for a building or script that costs more than the price of gta itself. If these developers value their time and effort that much, maybe get a day job as a developer.

3 Likes

I agree with Bostra. The passion for giving back to the community is dying.

4 Likes

To add to the topic, from a buyers perspective Escrow is a ballache in being anti consumer and creates an massive heache, There are plenty of scummy developers profiting of basically open source scripts, or you purchase a script and find it a buggy mess and the developer gives you the middle finger,

Also seen in many cases some of the developers not being able to take some criticism and unfairly revoking assets.

I understand it to prevent leaks, but this also is contradicted by sellers selling open sources copies that end up leaked anyway, and the whole purpose of open source was to never be to restricted in the first place,
And some developers misslead with the term open source, what they really mean is less restricted.

As for reselling I do think consumers should be able to rightly reseller there assets on if there no longer using it, at the end of the day peope are investing alot of money into this and should be able to make some back when closing down,

Escrow is very much like Denuvo it anti consumer and it very one sided for the most part

4 Likes

I find it laughable when people escrow scripts that just take advantage of GTA natives, and then when someone comes along and releases a free version, they get butthurt because you’re quote “Taking customers from me!” Also when you convert an existing Rockstar Games interior into an MLO and think it’s worthy of $100+.

Clown mentality tbh.

6 Likes