Myth #1 - "If you change it 30% it's yours." Have you ever heard of derivative works? The owner of the original copyrighted work and only the owner of the original work owns the exclusive rights, the exclusive copyrighted rights, to ANY derivative work. The following is based on legal opinions from Rebeca Delgado-Martinez Valette, an attorney, and is based on the legal principles of the Berne Convention which the United States is now a signatory. QUESTION: What if I take someone else's writings, text, HTML or graphic image and change it around to suit my needs? I own the "new" version, right? ANSWER: If you did any of that with the original owner's permission, and according to his/her terms and conditions then you own the "new" version. If not you are committing copyright infringement and/or plagiarism." QUESTION: What is copyright and what can be copyrighted? ANSWER: Copyright is a protection that covers published and unpublished works of literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, pictorial and certain other intellectual creations, provided such works are fixed in a tangible medium. This means that if you can see it, hear it and/or touch it - it may be protected. If it is an essay, if it is a play, if it is a song, if it is a funky original dance move, if it is a photograph, HTML coding or a computer graphic that can be set on paper, recorded on tape or saved to a hard drive, it may be protected. Copyright laws grant the creator the exclusive right to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute, perform and display the work publicly. Exclusive means only the creator of such work, not anybody who has access to it and decides to grab it. Myth #2 - "In my own interpretation of copyright law, a 3D model is nothing more than a piece of art like a painting or a song. If you change it...you get the idea." Okay, let us assume your interpretation that a 3D model is "... nothing more than a piece of art like a painting or a song." It is still protected under copyright law since artistic expressions such as paintings, sculptures, songs, etc are protected. And, as such, by merely "changing it" you do not gain ownership of what the courts have already determined would be a derivative work. And there is no 30% rule or law. That is an urban legend. Even for the sake of "fair use," the courts have already stated that they must also consider the QUALITY of what was used, not just the quantity. A case involving 2LiveCrew is a case in point. And if the use in any way harmed the commercial propects of the work then even "fair use" has been ruled as a violation of copyright protection. I base the above on the opinions of attorneys offering their legal opinions on the web and on the opinions of my own attorneys who did win a victory for me a few years back when someone tried to claim an "altered" work of mine as theirs. There are other cases of "altered" or "changed" works that ended up costing the alleged "new owners" some cash - "The Devil's Advocate" and "Batman" cases are examples. The producers tried to innocuously use other artists works woven in discretely with their new art. They lost. And their new work comprised far more than just 30% of the new work. So, the courts have already shown the 30% rule to be non-existent. I do not think ayone truly appreciates the degree to which Zygote has allowed their work to be freely used. And I do not think anyone should try to take advantage of their generosity. They have allowed great latitude. It is ethically and legally best to play within those latitudes. Take care and Godspeed.