I posted this a little bit back, and am still wondering. If we take a preset tree convert it to mesh and alter it can we put it out in the free stuff as a wavefront obj, or is this breaking a license issue somewhere. I'm no lawyer and the fine print is an alien language to me. But I in no way want to do any thing that might be illegal or improper. Its just that most of the trees in 3d scenes are not very weathered...As a mesh they can become hurricane blown, or big fatted knotty trees and this would just enrich the heck out of 3d scenes out there.

I'm wondering too. Seemingly, if one can freely transport a mesh made in the Metaball generator, or a mesh created via grey-scale to height conversion, the output of a proceedural generator (formula object, generated and frozen particle cloud, or tree generator) should also be freely transportable. But what is Eovia's opinion? Has anyone emailed them the question?

I have no idea but sending them an email is the best idea I can think of. -Kix

If you create a tree or any other piece of art then you automaticly own the copyright to that work, even if you do not register it. Makes no differece if you sculpt one out of clay or draw it with a brush & paint. The tools you use to create your work are immaterial. Would Stanly Tool own the rights to a wood sculpture you made because you used a chisle made by them? Does Grummbacher claim any right to any painting created with their oil paints? There are some plug-ins that create trees and lightning that will not allow you to sell (or distribute) their output. It makes sense in that the "plug in" really creates the object. All the user does is push a couple buttons to call out some presets.

It MIGHT be a function of how much you customized the tree as created by C3. For instance, if you smoothed all the joins of the branches to the trunk, mades some custom leaf outlines and did some fancy texturing you might be able to claim the tree was more yours than theirs. But it all sounds like a real grey area to me. Our present copyright law does not really work very well in our internet/computer age. IMHO

As a general rule in law, if you can show significant change/improvement such that the original design is obviously different in form and content, then it is considered a new product. Lots of products that receive patents are just minor imporvements to products that produce significant different results.

as freestuff i dont think anyone would object, but if you were selling them for a profit i think it could raise some issues...