I'm sure we all agree that taking credit for someone else's work, or worse, trying to re-sell it, is deeply unethical and wrong. However, I've never downloaded a freebie or purchased a product which included a EULA that required me to give credit to the maker, at least not in the case of noncommercial work, which is all I do. There is one Renderosity merchant whom I'm told tried to do that until, on advice of her lawyer, she removed the "always give me credit" clause from her EULAs.

In sincere appreciation for Renderosity's generous hosting of our images in the galleries, I credit products I bought here, on the assumption that it might help with sales. I frequently credit the makers of free stuff if the items are available here, or if someone I know (especially from the Poser newsgroup, where we receive weekly freebies) made the item.

When Guitta refers to the rules, I assume she's referencing the sorts of TOS violations that she specified. I took erka's topic to be on a different sort of theme, more about giving credit where it's due than on the subject of serious copyright violations.

Renderosity's TOS do not require members to credit the makers of items they use in their art. It's a courtesy to do so, naturally, but failure to do so is not necessarily a sign of disrespect or lack of appreciation. As rds suggested, many of us acquire lots of items over time, so that even if one keeps all of the ReadMe files and EULAs, it can become very confusing to try to remember or determine who made what. Failure to credit the makers of legally obtained models, meshes, textures, etc. is not a violation of copyright or Renderosity TOS. Claiming they're your own creations is, and I'm very sorry to hear that this has happened to you both. I can't imagine how such people think that they can get away with that without others noticing. (I assume you're referring to your contributions to the CDs that come with VUE, forgive me if I'm wrong.)

Still, imagine going into an art museum and seeing attributions on the wall like "oil paints, gesso, and linseed oil by Artcom, brushes by John Doe, canvas and stretching donated by Jane's Frame Shop. Studio space rented from my landlord" etc. etc. Nobody expects such minutae in the nondigital art world ... the art is the thing, not whose products helped the artist to make it. We seem to be held to a more exacting standard by some in the digital realm, which in lieu of actual violations makes little sense to me.

However, I'm very grateful to people who provide freebies. I have nothing but admiration for people who can model, something I still haven't taught myself to do, beyond simple boolean-modified primatives. However, if I download something from Free Stuff, don't use it for several months, and then do so as a small detail in one of my renders, any failure to name the provider shouldn't be taken as the result of a bad attitude or a lack of ethics.

erka wrote: "In a way, that someone is a co-artist in your own works." You are absolutely correct, and this is something that's been very much on my mind lately, since I lack the skills to make everything myself. Although my response might sound defensive, I do agree with erka and will try to do a better job in the future of crediting the co-artists who make free items. Again, though, when I purchase something, I've purchased license to use it without naming the creator, unless their EULA very specifically says that I must.

Giving credit is a courtesy, not a rule.