Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12395&Form.ShowMessage=1324384

SteffyZZ posted a message about evodes selling pirated textures (see link). I purchased one of these (AKA for Mike) on July 5th. evondes' store has been deleted from the MP. First, are the textures pirated? Second, what recourse do I have, since if they are pirated and purchased here, to get a refund? Does the 'sity have a policy for this? Do they notify purchasers when something like this happens? Do I have to contact evodes for a refund, or will the 'sity give it since the funds haven't had time to go to evondes' account? Thanks for any information.

Yes , the Aka texture was a pirated texture. It contained the ZS3D Breath Generation Iago entire body texture with minor modifications (a photoshop paper pattern added and hue changes ) and the ears head texture. I'm very sorry but those who have purchased this product have no right to use it. As for the Renderosity refund piolicy , this have to be answered from the Renderosity Admins. I've only suggested that beeing Aka a fresh product it shouldn't be a problem for Renderosity to refund it to the customers have purchased , but it was only a suggestion. Thank you, Stefania.

well- allways beware when others clam to know your rights. Seems to me that there are 2 things to consider. The products were bought in "good faith and credit" and, until a refund is recieved you may have the "fair use" clause on your side. In other words- someone may have to take the bite on lost profit- and it won't be the comsumer!!!

We receive and broker products in "Good faith". All merchants agree that they own copyright to the product being uploaded for sale and brokered through us. As a copyright holder you have to be prepared to defend your copyright in a court of law. Only a court can make 100% determination if a copyright violation has taken place. The court also would determine what course of action has to be taken if they determine that a violation did take place. Clint

As a customer, if I buy something which turns out to be stolen, I will not stop using it. The vendor who has been robbed is not being robbed by me. I see no reason why I should pay for something and not be able to use it. The ripped-off vendor must take a bit of a loss. If I have to assume this loss, then I will stop buying anything except from the most established vendors. These are not solid, concrete items like a dvd player. This is a copy, a copyright issue. I doubt any of the vendors could afford the legalities to stop it. The loss is a part of the cost of doing business. It is less of a loss than if I and all other customers begin to avoid new vendors. If I see a vendor harassing the customers who bought the "pirated" item, I will avoid buying anything from that vendor.

Usually, if you are caught with stolen goods, whether you know they were stolen or not, you can be charged with possession of stolen property and a few minor offenses. The problem is... you paid money for something someone didn't own. In essence, you bought the proverbial Brooklyn Bridge. I don't care how authentic the deed to your Brooklyn Bridge is... you don't own it. If you wanted to try and shut it down... you'd be laughed at and probably charged with disorderly conduct and obstructing traffic, along with some misc. charges... fraud, etc. Don't assume that because you bought something, you can use it. You can argue until you're blue in the face... but it's your butt if the REAL owner of the copyright wants to sue you for infringement and damages. And with the Digital Mil. Act... you just don't want that happening. Also... fair usage doesn't apply to stolen goods. For instance, if I steal a confidential handbook and take it home... I'm not entitled to make photocopies of it under "free usage". Just my comments... take them for what they're worth and consider yourself forewarned. And to SteffyZZ... I'm sorry this happened to you. I hope it gets resolved to your satisfaction.

Well then, ookami, if you are a vendor, then I shall NEVER buy anything from you. Anyone else want to get on my "Never Buy" list?? The stores get shut down. The pirates are stopped. The loss is on the vendor. Anyone who disagrees, you are on my list. Now you lose any potential sale. Your complaints are more damaging than the piracy. If too many vendors are going to place the loss on the buyer, I will stop shopping here altogether. There are other sites where I can trust the legality of the products.

Case study- ok- i know I'll probably get the names wrong- and someone will correct me. Remember the 'toppsy tail' thingamajig that was being sold a few years back all over TV. Well, if I remember the story right from college. Someone else invented it- marketed it- and was selling it. Ronco (I think it was) swiped the design from this individual. The next thing you know, there is a nationwide marketing campaign. Made them 20-30 million. The original creator did take them to court- eventually won- a tiny fraction of what was made. But the point is, no one in there right mind would even try to put ads in newspapers all over the country saying "you can't use it" You don't go after the end user, you go after the primary offender.

Patent violation and copyright violation are two different things. Plus... that was BEFORE the Digital Milennium Act which the the Music/Movie industry...er... I mean Congress... signed into law. It gives copyright holders (especially of digital material) MUCH broader rights. Heck... copyright holders can get information about a SUSPECTED copyright violator without even seeing a courtroom for a court order. So much to a right for privacy. The government is leaving private industry to decide guilt and innocence. Gotta love it. It just goes to show that the congress is not interested in their constuients... but in how much they money they can get from private interest groups.

I also got tired of all the copyright BS here. I have not bought from the store here since 8/19/01 because of this same type of thread. It seems as though it may have involved the same merchant, but I'm not sure. The funny thing is that I have not missed buying things here. I thought it would kill me, but with all the free stuff and things from DAZ, I am doing fine. The only thing that almost killed me was passing on several of Thorne/Sarsa faeries!

As far as im concerned stefy z and rtenderosity gang banged the person who was accused without giving him his rights under the law to be properly represented, and he probably has a case now for a lawsuit for violating his due process rights beforetaking action against him that caused him financial damages.

ookami that pertains to industy not private sector hun. And your a lier, If uyou think it's leagal to give out personal information based on request because you suspect piracy.

"As far as im concerned stefy z and rtenderosity gang banged the person who was accused without giving him his rights under the law to be properly represented, and he probably has a case now for a lawsuit for violating his due process rights beforetaking action against him that caused him financial damages." Not at all. We were asked by the merchant(s) to remove their products. Clint

Attached Link: http://news.com.com/2100-1025_3-1013154.html?tag=cd_mh

Darkmatter... I'm a little confused by what you say applies to industry and not private persons.... if it's concerning who can enforce they're rights as a copyright holder... it's best you actually READ the body of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It allows ANY copyright holder to get a "subpoena" to obtain information about "suspected" violators. I'm not really confused over how you insulted me, displaying your own obvious ignorance of the DMCA. See the attached link for an article on the lastest ruling against an ISP (Verizon), who didn't want to hand out user information without a court order. Here's a exerpt... "Unlike ordinary "John Doe" subpoenas, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) allows copyright holders to subpoena information without first seeking a judge's blessing, making it an easier and cheaper method for tracking down alleged copyright infringers..." Probably best to get your facts straight and do a little research before insulting someone. Enough said.

I'm just copying and pasting important copyright laws information from COOLER extracted from the original thread:

My apologies for the length of this but there is a lot of misinformation here that simply must be corrected.

a special aside to Dark Matter... I don't know where you are getting your information from but rarely have I seen a series of posts where every piece of information is totally wrong. If you want to discuss copyright issues I suggest very strongly that you take a look at the information at... http://www.copyright.gov/laws/,http://www.copyright.gov/faq.html, and http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html before making statements that are not only erroneous but dangerous if some innocent were to read & act on them accordingly.

Post #29 "First off you got to take the person to court before you publicly accuse them of stealing from you and present your case before a judge before taking action against them."

FALSE... Current copyright law (especially the Digital Millenium Copyright Act & the No Electronic Theft Act) is written in such a way as to make it easier for an individual to protect themselves without having to involve the legal system. Taking a situation to court is usually a last resort, after all other courses of action have been exhausted.

Post #30 "And furthermore you have not proven to anyone here that your textures were not ripped off from someplace else possibly an offline magizine so nor have you proven that you can leagally copieright your stuff I see no copyright office number here."

FALSE... SteffyZZ has filed a proper DMCA certificate of infringement. This document, sworn to under penalty of perjury, places the burden of proof on the other merchant to prove that no violation exists.

Post #32 "Also note it is not legal for renderosity to bann or drop a merchant without a court outcome that person can sue renderosity for damagages even if he is guilty because he was denied due process by law over an accusation."

FALSE... Renderosity is enforcing its TOS & merchants' agreement NOT acting as a law enforcement agency.

Post #33 "if you do not take your stuff to a copieright office and get it properly copyrighted anyone can copyright your stuff and steal it right out from uder you, publishing on the web does not give you any protections."

Post #34... "What really pisses me off is that alot of people don't copyuright there stuff even tho they lie and say they have because they are too lazy or to stupid to go do it."

FALSE... A Copyright does NOT have to be formally filed in order for a creation to be protected. "Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device"
(http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html).

---

Post #35 "if you accuse someone you do not have the right to take action against them without a court outcome., Why? because it is against the law to deny a person due process of law, no person can be deemed guilty outside the athority of the law."

"taking action based on an accusation is against the law and can be prosecuted by the damaged person in form of a lawsuit when income or funds are lost meaning the store that was taken down."

"It is up to the damaged person claiming losses to take the thief to court before any action can be taken in thier behalf under the law, because No one can be deemed guilty outside the athority of the law."

ALL FALSE... as stated above copyright law is specifically written in order to make it possible to resolve a situation WITHOUT involving the courts. Additionally copyright law is primarily civil, not criminal, law. "Innocent until proven guilty" & as well as "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" do not necessarily apply in a civil trial.

Post #36 "Also note renderosity by acting as judge jury and excecutioner is outside the athhority of the law. assuming the role of a copyright court."

FALSE... Renderosity is not only enforcing its TOS & merchants agreement but is complying with the law by removing an infringing product. Under the terms of the DMCA once a proper claim of infringement is received Renderosity must "expeditiously disable access" to the material in
question or they may be held liable for damages.

---

Post #44 "This really can't go on any longer and it's time to take a proactive rather than reactive stance. It's not fair to the people that are being stolen from, to your customers, and it's giving Renderosity a bad name."

Post #45 "I have been amazed by the humdrum way in which renderosity admins handle (or more correctly, do not) some members actively using and displaying images using products they clearly haven't bought or recieved as (legitimate) gifts, and through my own experience I have been inclined to let most of these go, but renderosity must act proactively in a case such as this or else the whole system is farsical."

Renderosity cannot act proactively to enforce a 3rd party copyright. In fact they cannot act at all unless they are properly notified by the original copyright holder or a designated agent, that a potential infringement exists.

ookami,

the procedure for obtaining a subpoena under the DMCA is hardly as easy as your link makes it out to be. You have to provide a federal district Clerk of Courts with a valid DMCA claim of infringement (sworn to under penalty of perjury) for a specific incident of claimed infringement. This must be identical to the claim originally filed with the online provider. Additionally you must provide the clerk with a properly filled out subpoena request & a sworn statement that the information requested will only be used for the purpose of correcting the infringing situation. The clerk then must review the request & accompanying information &, if everything is in order, can issue the subpoena.

This from the text of the DMCA....

"`(1) REQUEST- A copyright owner or a person authorized to act on the owner's behalf may request the clerk of any United States district court to issue a subpoena to a service provider for identification of an alleged infringer in accordance with this subsection.

`(2) CONTENTS OF REQUEST- The request may be made by filing with the clerk--

`(A) a copy of a notification described in subsection (c)(3)(A);

`(B) a proposed subpoena; and

`(C) a sworn declaration to the effect that the purpose for which the subpoena is sought is to obtain the identity of an alleged infringer and that such information will only be used for the purpose of protecting rights under this title.

`(3) CONTENTS OF SUBPOENA- The subpoena shall authorize and order the service provider receiving the notification and the subpoena to expeditiously disclose to the copyright owner or person authorized by the copyright owner information sufficient to identify the alleged infringer of the material described in the notification to the extent such information is available to the service provider.

`(4) BASIS FOR GRANTING SUBPOENA- If the notification filed satisfies the provisions of subsection (c)(3)(A), the proposed subpoena is in proper form, and the accompanying declaration is properly executed, the clerk shall expeditiously issue and sign the proposed subpoena and return it to the requester for delivery to the service provider.

All this has pretty much caused me to reconsider buying anything here ever again. I have bought dozens of great items, and rarely have been disappointed. But, if I have to worry about some whining crybaby vendor worried about missing potential profits and alleging theft, then trying to sue me for buying something they believe to be stolen - too much BS for me. SteffyZZ - I hope they thank you, Renderosity and ALL the merchants, for dealing with this in such a poor manner, and causing a major consumer to stop buying here. I am going to suggest to all the vendors I have bought things from to sell someplace that will protect my rights as a customer. I will not have some cry-baby voiding my purchases under threat of lawsuit with that facistic DMCA crap. Welcome to the new Corporate States of America.

Connatic- Believe me, we merchants do understand- I too bought the Devine character pack. Will I use it if the spirt moves me- until I recieve a refund it is mine, period. I would never knownly buy anything from her myself- seems like about 3 times a year she comes in to terrorize this site. Other wise we never hear a word from her, never a freindly post or comment. Makeing everyone afraid to use any of her crap. MOST of the merchants I know just ignore her, don't blaim all of us for one bad apple. Personally- I'd consider her behavior if not a TOS violation, just bad business and boot her out the door. Clint has allready said that 'osity won't pull peoples pics, it's not ositys problem. So, no worries mate :)

Thanks, geoegress - I am learning that we customers have some rights in this affair, buying in Good Faith. I will be cautious, and I am making a list of vendors that blame the Customer. SteffyZZ will never get a sale from me. Anyone supporting her anti-customer views will never make a cent from me. I hope all the Customers do this. We can unite and stop vicious vendors from making us the victims of their problems. Also, I will avoid all the pirates.

its not the vendor Connatic, you're blaming the victim. Its the DMCA that will bite you in the end. That is the law of the land in the USA. The copyright laws in the EU are not any better (only a little), and on a side note: the trademark laws here are many times worse in Europe than in the US. Ganging up on StefyZZ and other vendors that are simply defending their individual property rights is not the answer. We want a good policy for the consumers of the Marketplace here, and the copyright policy just doesn't cut it for the consumers here - its only to protect vendors. I just completed a full review of the policies here, and NOTHING is written here about fraud. Nothing at all. I do not want to buy fraudulent products. I do not want to use fraudulent products. I want a return policy in writing that allows me to return fraudulent products back to the marketplace. There is not one, not one anywhere on this site, and I looked. Please direct me to a fraud policy, if there is one... please. I really do believe a fraud policy is very important to the customers here, and also to the majority of honest, hard-working vendors as well. I do believe a fair return policy in such cases would go to inspire good will in Renderosity. We've heard the copyright side of the argument long enough. Lets talk about the rights of the consumer, here.

oh, and I will happily buy from StefyZZ again. I have bought Asia from the Marketplace here.... and her lovely Kelma and Suelma from her site... Kelma and Suelma are the best African textures, anywhere! your loss if you don't buy from her. They are higher priced than most peoples but they are worth every cent of their money. Probably why they get pirated, unfortunately. I will buy from any well known, well respected vendor that's been at it a while, that cares deeply about providing a good solid product with good support. As I am a strong supporter of private property and rights for individuals vs. corporations... I will probably always tend to come down on the side of the hard working diligent artist. just the way I am... and I make no excuses for it. I shouldn't have to compromise my integrity... if it makes people dislike me because ethics are important to me... so be it. I can do without those kinds of people.

Attached Link: http://www.bbbonline.org/reliability/code/principle4.asp

Principle IV: Customer Satisfaction Online merchants should seek to ensure their customers are satisfied by honoring their representations, answering questions, and resolving customer complaints and disputes in a timely and responsive manner. -- bijou's comment this is the case with Renderosity, no problems here) -- Honor Representations: Online merchants should comply with all commitments, representations, and other promises made to a customer. -- bijou's comment this is the case here too -- Answer Questions: Online merchants should provide an easy-to-find and understand notice of how customers can successfully and meaningfully contact the business to get answers to their questions. Online merchants should promptly and substantively respond to the customers commercially reasonable questions. -- bijou's comment this is the case, when its not a difficult situation. When these warez problems crop up... then I see a pattern of 'cover yer backside' ... that doesn't inspire confidence in customers, and its showing in these threads. Stop doing that. Be up front and accomodating to the customers, even if it means you have to bite the bullet and issue them a store credit. They've been ripped off too... and nobody wants to see them lose confidence in the marketplace here. I've watched big companies ruin themselves with a bad attitude in these situations... don't do it! -- Resolve Customer Complaints and Disputes: Online merchants should seek to resolve customer complaints and disputes in a fair, timely, and effective manner. -- bijou's comment read above... as I said. Be up front, be accomodating, issue the credits when you know these people have been cheated. They will come back and buy from you again... their good will is worth the investment. -- Online merchants should provide an easy-to-find and understandable notice of how a customer can successfully and meaningfully contact the business to expeditiously resolve complaints and disputes related to a transaction. Online merchants shall have an effective and easy to use internal mechanism for addressing complaints and correcting errors. Examples include fair exchange policies, return policies, etc. In the event the customers complaint cannot be resolved, online merchants shall also offer a fair method for resolving differences with regard to a transaction by offering either an unconditional money-back guarantee or third-party dispute resolution. -- bijou's comment read what I said before ... we need an official fair exchange policy in CERTAIN situations. The warez situation is where a fair exchange policy is called for. People will buy without fear then. Be prompt, be accomodating... your customers are what pays the bills here, its not worth getting them all upset. You could withhold a percentage of profits from new vendors for insurance, that can be repaid after a period of time... say six months or a year. That can help insure you in such a situation like what's happened here. -- If an online merchant offers third party dispute resolution, it should use a trusted third party that offers impartial, accessible, and timely arbitration that is free to consumers or at a charge to consumers that is not disproportionate to the value of goods or services involved in the dispute. Online merchants should provide customers with easy-to-find and understandable contact information for such third parties, including a link (or similar technology) to any third party sites used for such means. -- bijou's comment I can imagine this is a case for the copyright problems with certain vendors... but for us, I think a fair official return policy in these warez situations would be the right answer. that way you don't have your customers worrying about it, a worried customer buys less, and that's not a good thing. my two cents observation, as a former retail manager. I think I might have learned something in my years of grunt labour... anyway.

bijouchat, I feel bad for any artist being ripped off. That is beside the point that SteffyZZ intended to shift the status of victim to the buyer. You advocate supporting the vendor's property rights, but what about the property rights of the buyer? The money paid for the pirated good is property. I have been theoretical, as far as I know nothing in my purchases has been a pirated good. I take offense that SteffyZZ ATTACKED the buyers without going thru proper channels. She attempted to dictate to innocent members what they can do with their own property. I have nothing but her words, no proof, no court decrees. What if she is mistaken? I do not know if her accusations are true. I am simply creating my own policy towards buying stuff here. Any vendor placing the blame and loss on the buyers is no longer an alternative in my choices. I may miss out on some good product, but there are many others. I am an artist, I sell my Poser output, and I do not condone piracy of any sort.

First of all thank you so much bijouchat for your truly kind words and support! This is truly very kind of you!
And I completely agree with you about the customer rights and Customers Satisfaction Policy.
Thank you again so much!

To Connactic:

I've absolutely NEVER attacked the customers, I've only defended my rights and my hard work.
I'm truly very sorry for all the honest customers have purchased my pirated products!

"The money paid for the pirated good is property"

FALSE: when you purchase a digital good you're not purchasing the good itself but the license to use the good. If the license purchased is illegal, ( as for pirated /warez products ) , also if purchased in good faith, the license is NOT VALID.

"I have nothing but her words, no proof, no court decrees."

A Copyright does NOT have to be formally filed in order for a creation to be protected. "Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device"
(http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html).
Current copyright law (especially the Digital Millenium Copyright Act & the No Electronic Theft Act) is written in such a way as to make it easier for an individual to protect themselves without having to involve the legal system. Taking a situation to court is usually a last resort, after all other courses of action have been exhausted.
... as stated above copyright law is specifically written in order to make it possible to resolve a situation WITHOUT involving the courts.

SteffyZZ has filed a proper DMCA certificate of infringement. This document, sworn to under penalty of perjury, places the burden of proof on the other merchant to prove that no violation exists.

http://www.uniquerenditions.com/Cheat4/Cheat4.htm

"I do not know if her accusations are true. "

Once again I didn't made any ACCUSATIONS, but simply explained the evidence of the facts and defended my rights.

Thank you again very much bijouchat and all the kind persons were very supportive in this bad issue.

Sincerely,
Stefania.

Stefania, How dare you say my money is not my property? Please read the quote - "The money paid for the pirated good is property." When you dictate what a customer can or cannot do with a purchase they made, that is an attack. Even if you are shown to have a right to do this action, it is bad business policy and you are going to lose way more sales from your harsh rhetoric than the pirate(s) have ever cost you. If I ran this site, I would cease doing business with you, because you are causing potential customers to doubt the legitimacy of this marketplace. BUYER BEWARE is a phrase I do not like to see. I will NEVER buy anything from you or anyone agreeing with you. I am sorry you are a victim. I am even sorrier for the buyers you are depriving of their hard-earned money. You offered no course for these people to get some sort of trade-in for your own product. You could have turned this into a positive marketing situation for yourself, instead you will lose sales due to your insensitivity.

"If I ran this site, I would cease doing business with you, because you are causing potential customers to doubt the legitimacy of this marketplace."

Actually, Connatic, the root cause of that belongs to those who have sold items they had no right to sell. I didn't agree with Steffy either but spoke with her in an IM. I understand what is born out of frustration. We all act in a way we might not normally in these situations. (trust me, I cussed out a few Hewlett-Packard service tech's last night and that's not normal for me)

Renderosity needs to do something about situations like these and I do believe they are working on it. Give them time. Someone ripped off could simply grant the victims that license to use but if the number of purchasers is large, that could mean a huge blow to the original artist. To completely discount their situation is pretty hypocritical of you I must say as the customers are not the only victims in this situation.

Instead of 'me, me, me' we need to be more productive in suggesting ways to avoid this. Personally I don't agree with Steffy's idea of assuming all new merchants are potential thieves (I know, the comment was born out of frustration) or holding back payment for a period of time.
Perhaps a database of body textures with 2 specific people who test only these items and can compare specific areas during testing.
With so many reference photos and seemless skin textures in the marketplace now we're bound to soon have similar textures built from these tools. The last thing we need is someone crying wolf in the forums and ruining someone's very legitimate reputation because they used the same breast or lip photo that both had purchased and had a right to use. Should the artist specify the reference photo's? Maybe. I don't particularly care for that idea but I would have no problems letting R'osity testers know what was used.
Testers could do a 'Renderosity Background Check' on new merchants who suddenly upload a well done body texture with no real history to this site. I'd even suggest they do the same check on other sites as this isn't the only community there is.

There's many better ways to handle this, on all levels, than what's going on right now.

Kendra, I did not discount SteffyZZ's situation. I said I felt sorry for ripped off vendors. I will not purchase anything from the pirates. I also said I did not care for the way she handled this situation. There is absolutely nothing hypocritical in my statements. She had no sympathy or solutions to offer the buyers. She dictated to the buyers, other vendors, and Renderosity like she was some sort of authority. I feel this is a very important issue, and I have a right to be offended and to express my opinions.

I'm not saying you don't have the right. I expressed mine too. But in the end we should simply figure out a solution so this doesn't happen again.

If a person were to purchase merchandise from a local store, and later find out that the item was stolen, they would be required to return the item to the rightful owner, or face possible legal consequence. Why is this situation any different?

They would get a refund! I have never heard of anyone buying stolen goods at, say, WalMart.

People who traffic in stolen goods are not only ripping off the owners of said goods, but also the unwary purchasers. The blame for this belongs squarely on them, and as a business, Renderosity has a responsibility to protecttheir customers from this type of fraud. There is still no clause in a standard merchant contract that provides for this sort of situation. A good contract between merchant and marketplace would go a long way toward protecting the rights of everyone who does business here. Consequences for fraudulent trading and business practice could be written directly into the contract. Renderosity should never allow itself to profit from the fraudulent business practices of others.

All of these ideas are a no-win situation for the buyers. If Renderosity must make more binding contracts, then there is more work to do to enforce the new rules. So they will have to raise their share of the profits therefore raising the prices of all the goods. So then everything will cost more, and less will be sold. The only easy answer is for the vendors to adopt buyer-friendly policies. I am amazed that some vendors are advocating suing this site. They should be booted from here immediately. Anyone advocating taking legal action against this site is becoming a problem for me, since I shop here. These vendors are also added to my No Buy list. They are compounding the damages from the piracy. Many buyers are agreeing with my stance, so these un-professional vendors are digging their hole ever deeper. The one power I have in this situation is the ability to vote with my money! Come on all vendors, put it out in the open, so I know who is cool and who is a fool! If you want to punish buyers for being buyers, I want to know about it. So do all the other shoppers.

momcat said; "If a person were to purchase merchandise from a local store, and later find out that the item was stolen, they would be required to return the item to the rightful owner, or face possible legal consequence. " ummm- I work in a pawn shop- as long as it is know by the authorities when we buy it and hold it for 15 days - it is ours- even if it was later proven to be stolden.

ARRRRGH! I just had this long reply written up and the damned Rendermonstery ATE IT >_<;; Short story, I talked to my hubby (cop) who basically agrees that this is more of a moral issue than a legal one in regards to the customers who made the purchase in good faith. Regardless, REnderosity still has a responsibility to their merchants and customers to actively discourage this type of behavior. Plagiarized images get pulled from the galleries, and offenders banned for repeat offences. Any poor schmuck with the bad luck to use the wrong words (or is simply ignorant of the facts about piracy) when searching for commercial models is assumed to be a warezekitty, is probably banned if not driven away by the ridicule, rather than pointed toward the proper resources and educated. Merchants who plagiarise and sell the products of others seem to just be getting a slap on the wrist and allowed to do this repeatedly. Meanwhile, Renderosity still gets their 50% cut. This just seems very, very wrong to me.

ya- don't you hate it when the page times out- arg :) Believe me big time- I have strugaled(sp) with these kind of moral issues a long time- I work in a pawn shop- don't own it, lol and I allways avoid like the plague buying from ppl off the street. I hate buying a 200 dollar skill saw from someone for 5 dollars- grrrrrrrrr Feeding off the desperation of other - in the best of circumstances. Buying someones fathers tools in the worst(swiped out of the shed) :( or desperate to feed the kids. But jobs in the sticks are hard to find. It's not right but not much can be done about it either :( What I've been hearing is lets arrest the person who bought the skill saw for possion of stolden property. Not the person who sold it to us. My job is simular to renderosity. We are nothing but middle men. argggg- it timed out on me too- lol

Connatic, go ahead and toss me on that "No Buy" list too, huh? If the planets ever align and the moons of Jupiter cross just right, causing me to lose my mind and sell my work, I don't want you buying it anyway. I don't want to be blackmailed into kowtowing to your every wish for the slight possibility for a $5 sale, OK? All right, now that I've got that off my chest, let me try to douse the flame I just started. Conn, I understand your anger and frustration. And, I too have a personal "No Buy" list. However, running around slapping anyone who disagrees with your with it just isn't helping and it isn't getting you or your cause any sympathy, all right? OK, now, that aside, let me reiterate what I think people are saying they want. 1) We want Renderosity to improve their merchant contract so that if an item is permanently removed due to possible copyright infringement, the vendor does not get any pending payment for it. This punishs the potential pirate (they don't get paid) and removes some of the incentive. 2) We want some form of disincentive for piracy. 3) We want stronger penalties when these issues come up. 4) We want a better refund policy. Or perhaps just better PR towards the current one. It just seems that we want to know that we can get our money back from Renderosity if we can't get to a suitable arrangement from the vendor, rather than just hearing "sorry, not our problem". In this case, I'd argue that it's purely academic as to whether they're legally required or not. It's just good customer service.

The importance of this issue stems from this potential situation: I have a paid project to finish. I buy an item here to help get me to that goal. I am nearly finished with 2 weeks of work on the job, and lo-and-behold, I am commanded to stop using the item. This causes me a major problem. I must find a substitute for the item, and redo the entire project. That is a serious situation.

Funny, how Steffy always gets fried when she tries desperately to protect her work, and yet another well-known merchant with the same complaint gets fawned over and supported. We are a weird society when we protect the thief (one who knew exactly he was ripping Steffy off) and attack the victim...

You are looking for good deal on Photoshop on the internet. You come across a what loloks like a reputable site, with a a great price (but not so great as to raise any alarms) on the previous version of the software. You purchase the product and anxiously await its arrival in the mail. What comes in the mail is not a boxed version of the program you thought you were getting, but a CD ROM copy of of the program. You purchase the product in good faith, but now realize you were ripped off with a warez product. You have a full working version of the program (and a serial number) in your hands. You have already paid for the product, and there is no way to get your money back without costly legal action. Do you use it?

you buy a fake pair of jordash blue jeans- do you wear it? or do you become pragmatic? or would you even know? each and everyone of us would have to take whoever to court (smallclaims) to retrieve our money. then hire servers that could easily be on the other side of the planet to serve notice that money was owed- then just to have them say bugger off. thats just not going to happen. back in the 60's the soviet union swiped the design of the SST and made there own version- can you ride in the russian version now? you can drive yourself crazy if you don't become even a little pragmatic. man I wish the forums had a spell checker

Trying to bait me, eh Momcat? That is not the same situation! I would know immediately that the item was a pirated good. I only buy from legitimate sites. I would contact my credit-card company and stop payment. For software, I buy directly from the author, not resellers. I will not punish Renderosity or responsible vendors for the poor business sense of some vendors here. It seems a lot of members are trying their best to convince me not to shop here.

re: small claims...you're right. Not gonna happen. The question remains unanswered. Do you take the moral high ground and practice what you (in general, not you specifically geogress) preach (zero tolerance for warez), or do you act pragmatically as you (geogress) suggested, and use the program anyway because you paid good money on good faith? Now here's the thing (and this just as much a question for the mods as anyone else: The owner of the site that sold you the warez is a member here. If you talked about your situation here at Renderosity, would you risk being banned? Would the seller be banned? You have purchased a warez item (albeit unwittingly)from a fellow member (who knowingly distributed warez). Would zero tolerance apply?

Not everything is about you Connatic. I am not trying to bait you. The question was directed toward the community at large and the moderators of this site.

I guess my approach is to adopt an Every-Buyer viewpoint. I am not so ego-centric to think any comment not directly addressed to me is. As I see it, the moderators are staying out of this, and I can understand why. Anyone answering your baited question the wrong way could fall under tos banning for supporting warez. So, yes, that is a baited question. So tell me momcat, if I buy a character package that later turns out to be a pirated version of your Kaede character, are you going to ban me from using it, even if I have committed weeks of work on a project containing said file? Or will you try to find a way to get us both thru to a workable solution?

In direct answer to your question; no. I might make life miserable for the thief, but what's done is done. I have neither the resources, time, nor the inclination to be bothered with pursuit of my copyrights on the consumer level.

I might, however, feel a bit differently if I had made the initial investment of purchasing expensive tools, hiring models, paying for studio time, added to the hours of labor involved in creating a photorealistic character, and seeing other people making a profit from my hard work while I receive no compensation.
While I may not agree with Stefania's stance, I certainly understand her frustration. If I were to purchase a texture and find out that it was pirated (as has happened to me just last week in a trade), I would, and did, approach the original artists and offer to work something out.
I certainly do not agree with your attempt to blackmail the merchants of this site into agreeing with you by threatening them with your "No Buy" list.
Go ahead and put me on it if you want.

Realistically, I know that it would be a complete waste of energy to pursue the matter on the consumer end.

That's really not my point here. My point has to do with the seemingly double standards of many members of this community and the administration of this site.

They seem to have no trouble pouncing on, or banning anyone who they think might be talking about warez, without a thought given toward education and forgiveness of a first offence (zero tolerance). Yet merchants who sell pirated and unauthorized derivative works are allowed to continue indefinitely. The product in question might be pulled, but there is no other apparent consequence. It is completely up to the original artist to pursue costly legal action...usually futile as well. Adding insult to injury, known thieves are not only allowed to remain members of this community, but also to continue doing business here.

To top it all off, merchants who have the audacity to inform the public about someone stealing from them are made out to be the villians. If an honest mistake is made, and the parties involved can work something out (which they should be given the chance to do,IMO), that's good; but there still need to be consequences to discourage this type of fraudulent activity.

I can easily forgive a mistake. What I cannot tolerate is deliberate dishonesty or hypocracy.

I fail to see what I said that is blackmail. I have every right to not buy from those espousing practices I disagree with. SteffyZZ made no attempt to reach an amicable deal with the buyers she DICTATED to. That is the factor which offends me. She should pursue justice against the pirates, not the innocent Buyers. If any Vendor is unhappy with this site's policies you have the option to exert your freedom of choice and go elsewhere to peddle your wares. As for the pirates, please DO inform the Buyers of this transgression. I will certainly avoid them when it is clear that they are committing piracy. I have no sympathy for them.

Sometimes it is not what you say, but how you say it. You are right. You have every right to your opinion and how you choose to spend your money. It was the tone, and presentation of your post that I found offensive and felt was an attempt to threaten. It read very much like a calling out of anyone who disagreed with you so you could put not only them on your $hit list, but enlist other consumers to do the same. I apologize if I have misunderstood your intent. The problem still remains that Renderosity needs to do away with this double standard, and come up with a fair system for dealing with piracy in its marketplace.

"To top it all off, merchants who have the audacity to inform the public about someone stealing from them are made out to be the villians." "It was the tone, and presentation of your post that I found offensive and felt was an attempt to threaten. " Thats the whole thing in a nut shell- and this isn't by far the first time either- I would never have opened my mouth on this if it was the first time- telling ppl that they are to be re-victumized(sic) was just plain wrong!!! The emotional state of the vendor is irrivelant!!! The old saying does apply here "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen" bye bye- I am done with this thread. thanks momcat :)