Let me state that I agree with Ikyoto, this would have to be done diligently and responsibly. It could not be used as a club for grudges or such. It should be reserved for instances, such as this, where the evidence is so overwhelming that even a politician would have to admit that it was factual and where the alleged thief has had the opportunity and time, as in this case, to make amends or defend his/her case. And in those instances where there is doubt, the benefit of the doubt would have to go on the side of the alleged thief. Not a perfect solution, but, there are a lot of instances where the case is, in fact, overwhelming and at least those blatant, lower than whale$&!+ bottomfeeders would be revealed for what they are. As requested by Renderosity, I sent the little bugger an email. It calmly (at least for me) pointed out that, at best, his "converted" models were "derivative works." And derivative works are specifically mentioned in the copyright law as falling under protection for the owner of the original copyrighted work. In other words, your model can only be used in derivative works with your permission regardless of whatever format it is converted to. But, I am sure he already knew that. By the way, his works are exhibited by some online galleries. I have begun emailing them, telling them what he has done and requesting that they remove his work. If you see his renderings anywhere, tell the gallery owner what he has done and request that they show support for honest artists by removing his material. With that, I think I've probably spouted off enough about the matter. Take care.