One of my friends just went through a break up with a long time boyfriend and when he left,he left all his poser stuff behind on their computer.It is a common practice that people in relationships share and in fact by law purchases made while you're in such relationships are considered to be owned by both people...the only time the law requires you to go to court to resolve the matter of ownership is if there is a dispute between the two parties as to ownership of properties.This also extends into the realm of software and it becomes a real problem here due to online piracy and the fact that its not so simple to determine if the circumstances of a broken relationship are indeed factual...but in fact,by law you are required to do so before you may accuse or harass someone for "stealing" copyrighted software products or components.

Making the matter even more difficult is that the merchant involved also produces their products in partnership with someone else...should we require that if their relationship breaks up that their products be seperated because two people in a relationship together may not claim mutual ownership of said software when they break up??Sounds foolish doesn't it:)Even more foolish would be if the two "seperated" merchants decide that since they are seperated they no longer want anyone to use any of the products they created with their former partner...would they have the right to demand that everyone stop using their products and only use the products they produce using only their own name?Answer simply put is yes and if not,then the matter basically becomes an issue of "accomodation" as merchant rights will supercede consumer rights regardless of similar circumstance!

However,the terms of a Read Me may not contradict existing laws once the matter of a financial transaction is established because from that moment on,all existing laws created to protect consumers come into play.In fact,if the terms are "hidden" rather than openly displayed it can actually be a violation of law as burying conditions in a link that might be overlooked or burying terms in a read me you can't read until after a purchase is not open and full disclosure as required by law prior to purchase in most states.When you buy an item here or somewhere else...it is not an understanding just of federal U.S. law,but the laws of every state and nation.But even with this,these rules are only a general guide...it has already been proven in court that such documents often contradict their own terms,are confusing for consumers to understand and generally will not be enforced in a court unless there is a "proven intent" by the alleged perpetrator to violate the terms of usage.

This brings me back to the point of this post as one of my friends was offline for a while due to the breakup of a relationship,she came back and posted an image using a product that was legally purchased by her partner who left the items he purchased with her.However,one of the merchants here saw the item listed in credits and recognised that the user was not listed as a purchaser of this product...thus,the merchant went after my friend probably with the thought that the item was stolen or pirated software.My friend got so angry she deleted her entire gallery and believes rosity will go so far as to delete her account because once again its a top seller who is at the center of this.

I myself was accused of stealing the Hatchling Dragon when in fact I recieved it and many other items given away free with Platinum Club membership back around Christmas and on another site I included an image made by another artist "with permission" in a portrait hanging on a wall...the merchant of the product used in that image tried to say that I had violated the terms of his read me and the site actually threatened to ban me before I found an attourney online who informed them that unless the usuary terms of the read me "explicitely" forbid such usage it would open them up to a lawsuit.He further pointed out that usuary terms and terms for commercial distribution are different...you may,for instance,create an item for your own private use and lease it to someone else for their own usage under terms you agree to accept~however,if the intent was to create the item for mass commercial distribution then it is no longer a matter of personal usage and terms may not be dictated that contradict the "implied" understanding of the purchase by consumers.To consumers,the 3d products you create are being sold for their use in creating art and if you are charging them a purchase fee,then laws from state to state and nation to nation come into play to protect consumer rights.If you charge $20.00 for a 3d shirt that the consumer only uses in one or two images...they will feel they have the right to use that item any way they damn well see fit!In court,the merchant would be hard pressed to prove that the item was not created for mass market distribution but for their own private usage...they must further argue that sale was not intended for mass market but restrictive distribution for which they could ensure that the terms of usage were clearly understood.And thats key here as the consumer is not entering into a personal agreement with you...you do not know this person nor did you at any point make sure that the consumer had a working understanding of the terms you dictated for usage.The point of sale is with the site acting as middleman and it thusly is the site itself which must clearly establish the terms of sale on every item...if not,it is not an issue between the merchant and consumer because neither party had any contact directly between them.

The implied terms of usage that most consumers are aware of is that they buy your product to create art in the same way other artists would purchase inks or paint...your products are merely tools which they purchase for creating art.

What you need to concentrate on is piracy and how your products are being circulated as a commercial ware.Its time for merchants to get together and decide that if you create something for open market distribution that usage should be "unconditional"...then clearly seperate any items with conditions into a seperate catagory that states that all these items are "restricted" usage.If you do this then there are no mistakes and there is no confusion...but I doubt many merchants would as placing any item under a "restricted usage" banner guarantees diminished sales!

It seems to me that one of the primary reasons why matters of this nature cause such strife is that the 3d sites themselves in principle are lazy...they provide you a place to sell your wares and basically thats it.Generally the exchange of moneys between members and merchants on an individual basis is too small to bring the courts in to resolve issues that result from this "open market" platform...thus,only when things explode do these sites even take notice.But if the courts were brought in from state to state,sites like renderosity would be run out of business from the sheer cost of fighting so many individual lawsuits...and lets face facts,merchants and consumers both have tremendous problems with rositys set up.

Personally I have had no problems with rosity as of yet that couldn't be resolved...but neither am I a merchant and I have not given merchants a reason to attack me.In the case that caused me to bring this matter to your attention,a member here felt they had been wronged by a merchant unjustly and the merchant in turn thought they had been the victim of piracy...legally,my friend was in the right and was a victim of harassment.

I would say that an apology was in order,but of course its too late for that now as my friend like so many others has left rosity.Piracy is an issue that needs a better platform for redress that I believe begins with merchants not making direct contact with people they suspect of piracy~they do not know the circumstances nor do they have access to the records of sale.In this case,the purchase was made legally and all records regarding the sale are in the possession of renderosity...it was a matter for the admin here to look into,to find the answers,to verify the facts and then to contact the merchant to explain their findings~of course the admin might say otherwise,but only rosity has access to the members personal information,purchase history,credit cards and other information that could confirm that the member was indeed entitled to claim legal ownership of said products.She did not use a product for which she did not possess legal ownership,her partner left their relationship and by law she has as much claim of ownership to his posessions as he does to hers...thus,it was the merchant here at fault for taking matters into his own hands but then,what other process does rosity leave for them to pursue~mistakes are made,feelings are hurt and someone trying to protect his products from piracy becomes a bad guy.

I realise this post could be volatile...these are my opinions but I assure you,I would not present them if there was not merit and not an issue that needs attention.Time and again I have presented such issues to be shouted down by the establishment...then that establishment is confronted with the fact that they are indeed wrong!People here tend to think along linear lines,you arrive here not knowing what to expect and become part of the pack until your foot gets smashed by a sledgehammer...even merchants pay a heavy price as there are better ways to protect yourselves from piracy or at least to find compensation for some of your losses that you haven't thought of.I hope to eventually become a merchant so I am not hostile to merchants on this matter...nor am I hostile towards rosity or consumers,the fact is that situations like what happened to my friend probably take place every other day and there has to be another way to deal with issues of this nature.

Not really a smart move on the part of any merchant to ask someone to prove they purchased something. Piracy is a problem, p2p networks are a problem but lets face it, people who use them know they're wrong and would be stupid to post credits here or any of the main 3d sites.

I've said it before and I'll say it here, if anyone in my family gets into poser they will use anything I have on my computer. I will not buy the same product twice. If they want to become a member of this site they have that right as well as the right to use the items on our computer. Any merchant who disagrees with that can just deal with it.

In the case of a divorce, unless someone makes a copy and takes that to a different computer (and as a merchant myself, I would not have a problem with that. hell, divorce is a life altering incident and my little poser pixals are nothing in the grand scheme of it all) all the merchant is doing is confronting the screen name with no facts. Not smart.

Hmmmmm ok, so what about this scenario? I am currently going through a divorce, i moved house leaving all my poser artwork and purchases on the computer at the matrimonial address. I now have a new computer and have re-downloaded all my previous purchases. Assume my soon-to-be-ex wife suddenly develops an iota of artistic talent and decides to use the items on the matriomnial computer to create images which she displays here at R'osity... where does this leave us? By the way... this isn't going to happen, i know for a fact that my eldest daughter has formatted that hard drive in order to remove a virus. Jack

True but remember this,I can send you an image link from rosity and lo and behold you're now logged in as me...you have access to all my downloads and can get everything I legally purchased or was given as a gift.Thats what I mean about not taking this out on the merchants...its not they who have created the problem when from what I know all of these art sites will allow you to have easy access to other peoples accounts.So,who is the greatest pirate here...the p2p networks,file sharers or the sites themselves~I wonder,how much have merchants on rosity lost because of link exchanges that aren't done with any malice or forethought. If the merchants on rosity and the owners of rosity themselves don't care about how much they are unknowingly giving away when an image link is shared,then why are we even worrying about piracy when this very site is probably giving away thousands of dollars in merchandise each week or month because of a severe lack of security? And back to the original topic...I actually asked about a dozen merchants before posting and each one said it was a dumb move to confront the artist without knowing the facts and then,from what she told me,to harass her saying she had done something wrong...yeah,I think that was going a little bit too far since only rosity itself was in a position to tell~or I should say the other sites as well since she didn't say it was purchased here just that the image was posted here.

Well, a flat tire is no reason to redesign the entire car. Even if it might have made a slight difference in a couple of cases. A copyright issue has come up, and it is being overlooked as a right to the use of a product that was purchased. Yet -For give me for another allegory- the answer that Armorbeast came up with sounds a lot like "Why don't we keep people out of our bank? They rob them. Isn't death a problem that we cause?" DBL 2004 - All rights reserved. :)

Hmmm...yeah I see what you mean...err,wait a sec,was looking at the sun again and need to adjust my eyes...ok,I see the words now explain their meaning;P Seriously...I am known to use allegorys myself but not as the entire context of a comment cause allegorys aren't mean't to make sense~they're mean't as an emphasis to a point that you make.If you disagree fine cause anyone can make spaghetti,just don't forget the meatballs;P

Armorbeast wrote:I can send you an image link from rosity and lo and behold you're now logged in as me<<

Thanks so much for pointing this out Steve! I never realized this and am lucky to not have sent anyone a link from Rosity.

But if I wanted to show someone an image I did here from Rosity without breaching security, is there anyway this can be done or do I have to upload the image to another site such as photobucket, etc. so the person is not logged on as me?

Also, if someone does send a link, how long is the other person logged on as them? Is it just as long as they keep the browser open or is it "forever"?

Thanks again for the heads up.

Warm Regards,

Nancy

Apparently you can stay logged in as them for as long as you stay on site.On DAZ,Chrislenn had sent me a link months before and one day I logged in and took me a bit to notice but I was logged in as her...so its not just here on rosity,but there with their system you have to keep entering passwords to get into really sensitive areas.But once you leave the rosity site I have noticed you can't log back in...they do say that if the link is old it won't log you in as someone else,but it did for me one time that I know where the link was almost a month old. If you want to send a link just to show the image,right click on the image and go to properties...there will be a link just for the image itself and it won't log you into anyones account cept maybe your own~even if it does you have no buttons or access to anything other than the image.Beyond that...just send them to rosity with you username for a member search lol,safest way of all if you want a comment or for them to chaeck your body of works.

Thanks Steve...I appreciate it. I have a few friends who are not members here and sometimes I like to show them a work I did. What I usually do is just upload it to photobucket and then send them the link to that..then remove it after they see it. Thanks again for this heads up. Best, Nancy

Fine... LoL... I use the word analogy too much, and I didn't think about that... too much.... Sorry, I haven't slept well enough, because I'm leaving for Modesto again tomorrow. I thought that I would be back in here Sacramento for six months or so... but I'm not. It was either that or metaphor... heh. I guess what I'm trying to say is that in the heat of the whole thing, your approach was slightly off to me. You're talking about a law suite against merchants and Renderosity being at fault; it seems like an individual incident that was (apparently) handled correctly. I haven't run into any situation where I accidentally end up with someone's downloading privilege and access to illegal opportunity at the fault of the website. Of course, I'm not trying. Either way, you never asked any questions or offered any suggestions, and it seemed like you wanted the whole entire thing changed. "...only when things explode do these sites even take notice....sites like renderosity would be run out of business from the sheer cost of fighting so many individual lawsuits...and lets face facts,merchants and consumers both have tremendous problems with rositys set up."

Just as an FYI... Yes, it is possible to receive a Link and get logged in as someone else... although, Renderosity has taken some steps to help in this matter... First off, when you first visit, that very first page, is the only one where your information is kept in the Link. It's a couple pieces and .. both can be found by just reading the URL... Form.sess_id & Form.sess_key Just open a new, blank browser session, then follow your Fav-link back to here and watch the URL... now, once here, try to go anywhere, all this information is lost and kept in your cookies. This can also be cleared, so even if you send me a link which these numbers in it, it still will not allow me to access your account information... just hit the Logout option back up at the top. Do I personally think this is enough? Nope. Is there a better way? Sure is, but then we'd get everyone yelling about the fact that they have to have SSL IDs and are constantly prompted for their passwords. Now back to the real issue in the thread. :) Cheers, - James