Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=193686

heyas; i don't think you need a message that links to another message on this board. if you want a big discussion, why not ask to have it moved to the 'complaint and debate' forum?

I wouldn't call it a "controversial" thread, it's more a question of legality and ethics. The way I see it, (and you can call me on it if I'm wrong) is that you want to develop something commercial from which you or your company will profit financially, and you want to do it with "free" stuff, to cust costs... What you want to know is, can anyone stop you, and if you go ahead anyway, will they be able to claim damages, right? I think the answer you're looking for is, "try it and find out." Like I said, I might be completely out of line, here, but that's my take on it. later jb

That wasn't meant as a threat by the way, simply an honest answer... later jb

I think it boils down to this...ask the individual if you aren't sure. If it says not for commercial use I take it to mean if I make money with whatever I do with it then that is commercial use, be it a render or an object. Ask the person who created it. And why bring this thread to another area anyway? Marque

OK, playing "devil's advocate" here... Why bring it up again? Because they're serious about making money, but equally afraid of getting sued, so they're hoping for "consensus" to go in thier direction... later jb "Somebody stop me!" :)

To answer your questions, read replies 56 and 58, Yes the creator does have post render rights. If they include a read me/license agreement stating their stipulations on using a object they created-Those are the guidlines that you can legally use the object. If they state not for commercial use-then you cannot use it for any works that generate a profit without the creators prior approval and permission.

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!! :)

Ok, for one those quotes I was "spewing" are very relevent, becuase it underlines the rights of copyright for a persons creations. and those quotes(as far as the U.S. are concerned) are the law, and are punishable by the courts in this country when violated. The legitimate answer to your question is the same as I have repeated over and over, If a creator states a item is not for commercial use-they have every right to make their own terms concerning the object. I have been in this field for several years, and done plenty of work and research concerning copyrights. and for your info the Graphics field isnt too new to have laws pertaining to copyright protection. There are hundreds of laws pertaining to Graphic Design and digital media. As for entering contests and winning prize money from said contest, I find that that wouldnt be considered as commercial use and you would be exempt from that part of the user's agreement, becuase your not selling the item. Lastly you should retract your last statement about us idiots who distribute free models going to screw you over.

Hi, "on the internet, nobody knows your a dog..." :) I'm 35, (somedays I feel even older :) but age is no guarantee of wisdom, it's also irrelevant to making money on the 'net, (or outside it for that matter.) and doubtless if you had explained yourself better at the start this would have reached a speedier consensus, if not resolution :) If you hadn't told me your age I would have assumed you were 20 something, since that the largest demographic group of 'net users... Having said that, "I appologise" for maligning your good name. I think you'll find that "the law" lags behind "the technology" by at least 3 - 5 years, and "public opinion" takes even longer to catch-up in most cases. Which is why case law & precedent are such big deals in the legal world. You don't need a new law for porn or "hate crime" on the 'net, since there are laws for those things already. Similarly, you don't need new laws to deal with .obj files as copyright exists already. You're only problem in that respect is to "prove title" to prove you created it in the first place, after that you'll find the law pretty cut & dried. This is just a kink on normal laws based around print publishing, the specifics change, but the underlying themes, the "spirit" of the law, remains. I can top 70 replies easily, check out the "Florida democrats' desperate rationalizations" thread in the complaint & debate forum, it's at 132 and counting :) I only got into this debate because I enjoy debating, extemporising at the keyboard, I have no life, sue me ;> If you want a real answer consult an intellectual property lawyer, everything else is just speculation and conjecture. I think though that you're going to have to get used to people saying anything they feel like in a debate, it's just the way it is, (cue Bruce Hornsby :) some will do it to throw you off, some will do it because they see life from a differernt angle, other are just crazier than a loon! all of which adds flavour to a debate and contributes to life's rich pattern, "deal with it!" :) Opinions are like assholes, everyone's got one :) Think of how dull life would be if everyone agreed on everything. forming an opinion, expressing it, and defending it if necessary, is one of life's great joys, (at least to may way of thinking.) Your milage may vary :) later jb

Well, like myself nobodies opinion is budging. So i figure we should end with a poll. 1. Without a copyright, can a modeler hold any legal rights over an object? 2. Without a copyright, can a modeler honld any legal rights over a render of their object? 3. With a copyright, can a modeler hold any legal rights over a render of their object? 4. Does a modeler who distributes models (free or otherwise)have the right to control the way the model is used? please answer the preceding questions. About my last statment, you must have misunderstood. The itiot isn't the one who distributes a free model. The itiot is the one who would freely distribute a model and get bent out of shape when they found that it was being used.

You spell idiot like that, and I think your just digging yourself a deeper hole, not to mention "polarising" opinion on the subject, (think Bush/Gore supporters :) Besides which a poll will tell you nothing usefull, the only opinion that counts is that of a judge/lawyer at the end of the day. later jb

If you create a work of art, in whatever shape, you own all rights, and may release them at will. You are in better shape, if you wind up in court, if you actually take the trouble, and expense, of formally copyrighting your work. Yes, you have the righ to specify how it may be used. There are exceptions, for example, for editorial purposes. That's how I understand the issue.-FK.

I really hope your not trying to burn me for typographical errors, but if that the extent of your argument then so be it. A poll does does tell me something useful, the opinion of the public. If you don't feel your opinion is useful, then don't state it.

By the way, your conventions don't seem to be so hot either. "Besides which a poll will tell you nothing usefull"

I tend to express my opinion regardless, what others think of it is thier problem :) Though if I ever stoop to a "spelling flame" you have my permission to shoot me :) I'm used to speaking to people who don't speak English as a first language, and they usually like to be corrected. You spelled it wrong twice in succession and t isn't close enough to d for it to be a finger slip, so I assumed you'd like to know how to spell it. As for the "besides which..." it makes sense in context, a poll of peoples opinion will tell you nothing usefull when it comes to the rule of law, because if you want the definitive opinion you seek you'll only get it from a lawyer, (for a fee) or from a judge, (as he renders his verdict.) Out of context it probably does seem a little counter intuitive. If you'd like to engage me in an argument about semantics, semiotics and etymology I'd be only too happy to happy to oblige, I love a good language scrap! :) Though we may need to take that to email... later jb

etymologies have nothing to do with typo's, the word just sounds big. It doesn't matter anyway, it seems people are done discussing the actual topic. I made up my mind, and so has everyone else. The use of thread no longer exists unless someone brings something new to the board.

Etymology is the study of the derivation of words/language, (unlike entymology which is the study of insects :) and as such can be brought to bear in an argument about languge, again, context is important. As for "big words" well, the English languge is the richest most descriptive language there is, (unless you're talking about snow ;) I enjoy "argument" for it's own sake because it alows me to really use the languge to it's full extent. I use a "big" words, not to insult or confuse, (most of the time :) but because it conveys my precise meaning, I use language for it's own sake and derive pleasure from it. (Translation: "I'm an old fart with no life" :) But you can't give up now man, I was just beginning to enjoy myself! :) later jb

Unfortunately, taking a poll of people's opinions will not do you any good in this instance. FastTraxx is correct. Copyright laws are quite clear whether it is printed matter or someone working in a 3D modeling program. The creator of the works is the copyright holder and may distribute their work as they chose and distribute whatever rights to others that they chose. If an artist has specified that the model/obj is not for commercial use, but for personal/hobby use, then this is the right they are assigning by law. In case of commercial usage, the original author must be contacted for permission and/or a payment for use. Your age or inexperience will be not an excuse in a court of law. As an author (a vampire novel for sale on the web) and as an 3D Artist, I know about copyright. FastTraxx has been in the biz far longer and probably could quote you verbatim. Listening to his advice will probably save you a lot of headaches and possibly legal expenses if you are sued.

Well, anyway don't think to low of me, I've pretty much been able to hold my own in these verbal battles....and i'm only 16. Its been fun debating with everyone. I don't know if anyones visited my web site yet, but please do. Thanks for everyones help.

Attached Link: http://spiffyandstuff.homestead.com/main.html

This seems to be quite an emotional discussion. My impression basically is that nobody knows exactly about the legal issues (they might be different for different regions of the world). So lets play a small scenario. If you post something in "freestuff" and make an explicit exclusion of commercial use you might be on the loosers side - this is because your exclusion might simply not be legally sufficient. There has to be an active acceptance of your rights (click on an acceptance button), a simple text file with an e-mail address is not enough. The user has to make an active acceptance before installing and using the items. Youre chances are even worse if the user is in another part of the world than where you are - there are many countries who have not accepted international copyright laws. The other rule, if you are a user, is that if you create a "genuine piece of art", its yours, without any exception and whatever you used for its creation, see the emphasis on "genuine". If you are in doubt as a user, you have to create a deposit of money for possible copyright infringements, because it is on the creators site to proof it. So my advice is, sell your stuff through the store. This has its own legal problems, because your terms of use can not contradict those of the store. The store then has to make an explicit notion on the pictures etc. that there are copyright restrictions which can be read before buying it under the stores licence conditions. By the way if you want to keep control over props and characters you should register them, otherwise your chances are small. In most case it will not be possible to trace the rights or to proof that the rights are actually yours - what happens if you used a Zygote mesh as the base for a morph ? I know what I am speaking of because I have tried to insist on my copyrights (not for 3d stuff ) back in a law suit. Karl

If I got this right, this would basically mean that whatever you do to a Poser figure or a texture template, it still belongs to Zygote or Curious labs, so any statement connected to a mesh or texure based on the original owners work (who has copyrighted it) , is useless, and any user as long as he legally owns the original mesh he can use it, if you post it. The only thing then left is to hope that users are correct, and respect your work.