Forum: Poser - OFFICIAL


Subject: objects and the "not for commercial use" statement

spiffyandstuff opened this issue on Nov 21, 2000 ยท 23 posts


spiffyandstuff posted Tue, 21 November 2000 at 3:40 PM

First> I'm a sixteen (neerly seventeen) year old kid! I have no buisness and i'm not even enrolled in a graphic design class until next semester. I just have money to blow on my computer and love art. I only started this because i figured someone would know the actual law if there was one. As you all can see there is a lot of controversy. Everyone has a different opinion and FastTraxx keeps spewing these quotes that don't have anything to do with the subject/situation. Quit it, the graphic design field is new enough that there haven't been any laws passed regarding .obs's! And i think everyone would agree that the situation doesn't relate to anything else in law. When a person does get a copyright on something they can't control its use only its distribution. The question is whether or not a render is a distribution (the general consensus is veering towards no). Second>this is obviously an important, hot subject or there wouldn't be almost 70 reply's to the subject. If anyone else out there knows of a message generating so many replys, then please refer me. It verymuch should be put on a debate forum, but i wasn't aware there was one. Third> I'm not looking to make money, i want a legitimate answer to an important question. I just enter my work to artshows, and submission sites and don't wan't to do anything unethical. I don't want to screw anyone over, But if i've lost a readme, i don't want to have to worry about wether or not some itiot who goes around distributing free models is gonna try and screw ME over. It is worth discussing, even if it weren't debates are fun, especially when the subject isn't cut and dry. Anyhow, don't underestimate me based on my age. Thats the most important thing!! :)