I'm not assuming anything. If he has, then he should provide proof of it to Renderosity to verify that he has, or Joat Mon should post that he has given permission. It's hard to imagine that if he had gotten permission, he wouldn't have offered proof by now, either through pdxjims here or via PoserPros or 3D Arena.

Are you gong to stop trolling any time soon?

I hate to say this, but I don't understand the continued pursuit of this. The object itself was NEVER redistributed, it was never sold, it was never included with anything. The only thing Dodger was redistributing was the diff file, NOT the original object. Theoretical copyright issues and questions aside, he wasn't in violation of the terms. Secondly, I think that so few people even have the original (which is no longer available) that the morph is useless to most people, anyway. Grey_Tower, I don't have any issues with you, but really, this is starting to look like a crusade. :( Can you please let it rest now? We all agree that Dodger is evil incarnate and stuff, but everyone's point has already been made by this point. bonni

Attached Link: http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

I don't have a problem with Dodger. I don't know if he's an angel or evil incarnate. I don't even know Dodger. From what I have read, it seems that Dodger is an innovator and I admire his desire to provide a wardrobe for his character that his customers don't have to constantly reach for a credit card to have. I know that DAZ could take a lesson about that from Dodger.

Look, this is a bigger issue than Dodger. The issue is anyone that would take a mesh that doesn't belong to them, modify it and distribute it without the copyright holders permission, even if their reason for doing so is purely altruistic.

You have to understand the diff file is made up of modifications of the original mesh. That makes the diff file a derivative of the original. Derivative rights belong to the copyright holder as do the right to distribute those derivations. Copyright law makes that very clear. Modifying a mesh and distributing those modifications without getting the permission of the copyright holder means you are depriving him of the opportunity to make and distribute the modifications himself either in the form of freestuff, or in the form of a commercial product.

We don't know if Joat Mon would have wanted to modify his corset to fit Dodger's characters and sell it or give it away himself. We don't know because he wasn't asked.

Content makers have to have a certain assurance that their copyright is going to be respected, that's why there are copyright laws. The only person that can modify an object and distribute a the modifications is the person that made the object or that has been given the right to do so by the copyright holder.

Put the shoe on the other foot. Suppose you made a "garment" for Posette and distributed it through freestuff. You decide you are going to modify the "garment" to fit Vicky and put the modified "garment" for sale in the Marketplace. The day your "garment" is to appear in the Marketplace, you find somebody already made those modifications and without a "do you mind", gave them away.

Move away from the thought of defending Dodger for a moment and look at the bigger picture. It's only about Dodger to the extent that he happens to be the one that modified and distributed the modifications of this particular item without permission. It's really about every mesh that's out there and protecting the rights of the content creator.

Elizabyte, the copyright issue is not theoretical. It's real. The fact that Joat Mon didn't mention modifying and distributing deriviatives in his trerms doesn't mean those terms can be ignored. Someone not telling you that you can't do something doesn't automatically mean you have permission to do it. The law is very clear IMHO, derivative rights belong to the copyright holder and only the copyright holder can authorize distribution of the derivations. Encoded derivations are still derivations.

Encoded difference files are derivations of the original mesh. Even if encoding is an accepted means of distributing derivations, it still cannot be used to distribute derivations without the permission of the copyright holder of the original object.

"U.S. Copyright law is quite explicit that the making of what are called "derivative works" -- works based or derived from another copyrighted work -- is the exclusive province of the owner of the original work." Excerpt from 10 Big Myths about copyright explained by Brad Templeton

Those interested in another discussion of this same issue concerning a differnt mesh can go here

That's all that can be said about it. If people can't see beyond their own noses and understand that this isn't meant to be an attack on Dodger by now, I sure as hell can't do anything more to make them understand.

For those that feel I was attacking Dodger, I apologize, that was not my intent. My intent was to discuss this particular facet of copyright, and Dodger was only brought into the discussion because it was stated that the mesh was modified and the modifications were distributed without obtaining permission.

Edited only to add above apology.

Message edited on: 06/29/2004 19:45

As I said, "EVERYONE'S POINT HAS BEEN MADE" including the copyright issues. There was a full discussion in the copyright forum, there was a full discussion here. MY issue was that this keeps going on and on and on and it's not particularly productive any more. bonni

I'm locking this thread. Enough has been said by everyone and now it's time to move on. I will find out if it's okay to post this link to these modified items here. If it isn't then I'll remove it. Shoshanna.