Renderosity Forums / Poser - OFFICIAL
Welcome to the Poser - OFFICIAL Forum
Forum Coordinators: RedPhantom
Poser - OFFICIAL F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2025 Jan 20 11:41 am)
Subject: A request to the Renderosity admins.
Hello Helgard, Two points to address: Firstly, there has been no rule change. This has always been the policy at Renderosity. There have recently been items picked up which have been in freestuff for some time without being noticed. These are now being removed or edited by the creators. I do realise that because these items have been in freestuff for some time, it may have led to an impression that items like this are acceptable. So regarding warnings, if any member feels they would like a review of a warning, they may contact Spike directly by IM or email (Spike @ Renderosity.com) for a review. All cases will be looked at individually. Thanks, Karen Poser Coordinator
"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan
Shire
exactly what items? the copyrighted stuff* maybe they finally realised that the copyright owners could come after them for having links to this stuff on the site. maybe they have been contacted and given the option, clean it out or go to court. ( for freebies? ) it's going to take time for the staff to get organised to catch newly uploaded items that are in violation. * Star Wars, X-Men, Star Trek....
Funny this topic comes up now... A couple weeks ago we had an issue come up in my company that forced me to make a little change to a long standing policy (nothing to do with cg). Without going into detail, it wasn't an 'ethic or legal thing', just a potential dollar liability issue. Anyway, I got a lot of resistance along the lines of, 'but, we've been doing it this way for twenty years'. People actually wanted to argue about it. I simply told them, "Well, guys. We were lucky for twenty years, and we're done pressing our luck." I'd be inclined to give Renderosity the benefit of the doubt.
1- um, I sorta agree that the warning should be removed. Yes, it has always been the policy, but that policy has not always been adequately enforced. 2- Karen's doing a great job, and it is NOT an easy one. I took a look at the task she walked into and ran away screaming. Don't give her crap. Or I'll come back and get involved meself, I will. 3- It is unrealstic and impractical to assume that unmoderated uploads within a few days are going to be caught when a backlog of five years is being gone through. 4- It might seem hypocritical, but note that knoweldge is not gained over time, and when ya learn new things, ya sometimes find out ya sorta whupped the puppy without knowing it. 5- Tunesy, that's exactly what's going on. Renderosity is shifting from a "little guy" type of place into one where the potential for a wider audience is needed. In short, they are growing. These are growing pains. 6- Ya'll might want to check the links in your tOS, copyright, uploading FAQ, and similar -- there's a few dead ones ;)
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
Let's not confuse the act of approving an upload for display and review of an item for intellectual property issues. However, yes, you are correct. The wolverine claws make prominent use of the term adamantium in reference to claws and feature an image that is startlingly familiar. The two "storm" items are also of questionable means, but those in particular are going to be a judgement call on an individual basis. The conan one gives me the same willies the wolverine one does -- they even came close to duplicating the titling of the film, which is a very serious trademark infraction. That's all on the first and third pages. Again, however, let's compare those three within two days to the over 5,000 currently being reviewed by someone who does this part time and for no pay. T'aint a kindness, sir -- and kindness is a form of gentle courtesy -- a little grease that lets us all get along.
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
lol -- well, can't say much for the wrestling shirts as I don't recognize them (but if they feature known images, then there's a big time booboo there, too). As for the tardis control room, it's actually rather safe under transformative use, excepting the possible use of the acronym TARDIS in the marketing materials -- there's no US registration for it that I can find so far, but there could be a UK one -- if I ever get conned into doing it, I may see what I can find there. And yes, I did agree that the warning is somewhat improper. However, there is a mechanism in place to address it -- all the folks have to do is bomb Spike. and, to my knowldege, spike does get paid to deal with this -- so go give him crap ;)
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
That works. It's tied to the acronym and an exterior of a police call box with some interesting descriptions of details, and is requisite of who-vian elements. Works for the phraseology. They need to change the marketing there, as well, then, to remove the potential infringement.
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
Which is awesome for use as a trademark, which denotes a specific good or services source (in this case, Dr. Who stuff). However, I'm willing to guage that the creation of a police call box in that rough style is an acceptable transformative use -- so they can make it. But, again -- and to the poitn with which we both have issue with the item -- it is the marketing of it that is violating that trademark.
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
I think it's a huge mistake to use reasoning along the lines of "Yep. And if they were approved by a mod then they have no leg to stand on with the warnings." Sure they do. That doesn't mean we can 'post whatever we want and see how close we can come to the copyright line without crossing it because Renderositys volunteer will catch it.' Reasonably good faith has to be expected of the uploader. If the uploader wants to play footsie with copyright laws then he better be prepared for the consequences, regardless how long it may take for the consequences to catch up to him. Renderosity volunteers owe us nothing; nor do paid staff for that matter. It's not reasonable to expect them to have to clear everything through a copyright attorney, unless you want 'free stuff' and 'free galleries' to become very expensive. Best policy is to simply not upload stuff that you know might be crossing the line. Chances are the uploader knows whether or not he is crossing the line, but the mod may very well not know if he is not familiar with your theme. The good faith of the uploader is very important here.
One last point and Ill stop rambling :) As far as warnings go, its unfortunate, but probably necessary from a business standpoint. If I were running Renderosity and I had to respond to a possible copyright infringement complaint I do NOT want to respond by saying only that we have removed the questionable material from our site. I want to respond to the complaint in such a fashion as to demonstrate to the complaining party that I do indeed take their complaint seriously by saying words to the effect that we have removed the questionable material from our site AND given a warning to the offending party. Omitting the warning could be a huge mistake from a business standpoint. That kind of omission could really haunt you later if a complaint were to escalate to a legal fracas. On a more positive note for the uploader Id guess that once the complaint faded off into the sunset your warning would probably be removed.
Message edited on: 11/29/2004 13:57
No comments in this thread were deleted by staff so I've no idea why they are gone.
Our freestuff coordinator karen is working very hard to wade through years of freestuff.
She is also checking & removing all the dead links so that freestuff finally ought to work.
We are still going to make mistakes & let items through which shouldn't be there - we don't recognise everything so if you see an item with copyright or trademark issues please contact karen so she can check it out.
We are working to get freestuff to fall into line with our terms of service here as it always should have.
This is not a new thing, we just didn't have enough people onboard before to tackle such a massive task.
This process has been going on for over a month & is expected to take up to a year to complete.
If anyone feels they received a warning for multiple copyright/trademark violations which they shouldn't have then I would suggest they contact Spike and request a review.
Getting one warning is not exactly the end of the world however unless you have already received multiple warnings for other issues.
A warning can be reviewed & removed at the members request if no further violations take place within a year.
Shoshanna
edited to add: Copyright & trademark violations which are being removed from freestuff were violations before they were removed. Just because we made mistakes in approving items that does not make a copyright infringement okay to upload.
Message edited on: 11/29/2004 15:46
Khai as I said above if a member feels they received a warning unfairly, they are free to appeal to Spike and request the matter is reviewed. Warnings do get issued in error & later removed. Members agree not to infringe copyright/trademark as part of the terms of service here - our failure to catch a violation before it went into freestuff does not negate the members personal responsibility to follow the rules.
I'm not talking about blatent violations or "pushing the limits". I'm talking about honest, up in the air situations that could be seen one way or the other. It's not mesh theft that's been discussed here, that's a no-brainer.
Look at who's items have been pulled. People who know the law and items that were original in mesh but based on fan art. People who would have likely been happy to delete if asked respectfully.
...... Kendra
Sarte, Truthfully, that's the sort of thing you should always do in any case. However, that doesn't, in and of itself, meet the criteria for legality, which appears to me to be the basis of the decisions on the part of Renderosity. Note: the overwhelming majority of license holders don't really have a problem with fan art, insofar as it is. In most cases, the only reason they really go after people is what they consider inappropriate use, or when someone challenges the mark that protects that property and they need to demonstrate good faith protection.
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
hey I'm glad to see all this happen, now everybody can get the Donald Duck textured swimsuits quicker woohoo. Don't believe me, do a search in freestuff for "duck" those textures have been there for months. maybe just maybe if all the sites got rid of all the stuff that is questionable we'd start seeing more original stuff show up.
IC your point Machineclaw...but most people want to emulate/recreate scenes from their favorite movies/games etc, so therefore all the movie/game etc related stuff. And when sites that have contests regarding each of these movies/themes people MUST have exact(or close to it) items in order to compete to win. That said, I have no problem with people creating such items, even though I'm not into fan art. I have no clue as to computer gaming and generally speaking wouldn't remember if I'd seen it in a movie either( I don't pay attention to such things), so anyone could put out anything & I wouldn't know the difference, I'd just be oh how cool, I like that item. ~shrug~
Message edited on: 11/29/2004 19:04
Message edited on: 11/29/2004 19:05
Regarding Tunesy's explanation for the need for a "warning": This is semantics. Being told not to do that constitutes a "warning" from an outsider's POV. This is not to be confused with the debits randomly assigned to the unworthy which can eventually force them to create a new account. The debits are punitive. In old threads we've seen cases of people getting banned for accumulating "warnings" on specious and arbitrary grounds, sometimes without being told that they were "warned." M
I think you misunderstood my point, mickmca. Rendo has a lot to lose if a copyright issue becomes a legal tangle. The uploader doesn't. It's unlikely that the uploader would be much of a target if the copyright holder decides to press on legally. Rendo, on the other hand, would be a much bigger target. That's what attorneys look for. I've been around that block a few times, unfortunately. Rendo has to demonstrate proactively that they take it seriously or an opposing attorney could shred em. I can't comment on "accumulating "warnings" on specious and arbitrary grounds" because I don't know anything about that. On the other hand, if someone has recieved multiple warnings because of possible copyright issues then that's really the uploaders fault. The uploader shouldn't put Rendo in a position where they have to try to untangle gray areas of copyright law. If we do that then we're really abusing a nice free (don't forget the free part :) service.
Something to note about all of this stuff, as well, is that we are looking at interpretations based on individual knowledge. The freestuff, galleries, and Marketplace are overseen by different individuals, who, it is my understanding, have pretty strong leeway. These different people will, generally, act on their own authority to determine what is and what is not considered risky for renderosity. They might consult with the legal department, but that is not always the case -- they have to have personal reason to do so, as they legal department is unimaginably busy, since she's also a lot of other departments ;) (and before anyone wonders, no, I don't work for rosity, nor have I ever. I don't even know these people except through the site. But there is a LOT of info available on this site.) Fan Art is not a grey area in IP law. There are a great many strong precendents and rulings which clearly show that most of what is considered fan art is simple infringement. But Copyright and trademark rely on reactive enforcement on the part of the rights owner. In many cases, the rights owner will not pursue cases of infringement until the value of those rights becomes too diluted. At which time the larger, wealthier owners of said rights (ie, corporations) will tend to swoop down in the most broad fashion imaginable. Shoot first, ask questions later sorta stuff. Based on that, it makes a hell of a lot of sense for Renderosity, which has grown very large and could be considered a fairly decent target monetarily, to avoid being caught in that initial barrage when they do the next round of stuff. So they are now enforcing that. As noted before, that they have not done so in the past does not excuse the persons who already violated the TOS from having uploaded it, nor does it excuse them for the manner in which they are doing so. It simply is. A rule doesn't necessarily need to be enforced all the time when personal responsibility is involved. If you ignore a stop light or stop sign and get hit and then get a ticket, do you complain about how only then do you get in trouble for it? oh, um, wait -- sorry, Forgot the answer is yes. or is it? Looking through the reactions of the last few days, I have to wonder...
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
...that is bothering people. Most everyone does understand that. It's the warning and the tone of the message. True, the 'sity has every right to give a warning. The owners have a right to ban everyone except little purple people who paint with thier privy parts if they want too. It's the whole tone of how it's being done. If you decide to activly enforce something that you haven't enforced before, a public notice and reminder would have been nice. Then while you're going through on a first time basis, delete, send a message, and say that the warning has been waved, but please don't upload copyrighted material again. Yes, I know you can always do the personal touch with Spike to get the warning removed, but all you're doing is increasing his workload and p*ssing people off who helped build the site up in the first place. Warnings should be for uploads after a published warning date, or after a reasonable period of time after the date for older items so the freestuff provider can either change his freebie to comply, or remove it. Everyone appreciates the hard work Karen is doing. But come on, you catch more flys with honey than with vinigar. Obviously the 'sity is clamping down in a number of areas. Paypal censorship issues, copyright issues, etc. The 'sity has every right to do this. But if you announce, set a timeline, and issue a few reminders as deadlines approach, there will be a much lower roar and more acceptance. Are things like this in the newsletter at all? They should be. Question though. Usually when a company does a major tightening of the rules, it's for specific economic reasons. Either someone has made threats and you're responding, or you're getting ready to sell the business and want to clean it up to remove dispute areas before the sale. Is the 'sity on the block?
uh oh. ya had to go and do it. sigh asking the important questions like "why" are dangerous, pdxjims. They get you into trouble. Well, that or they call ya paranoid, delusional, or, eep -- a victim of personality displacement!!! Then they lock ya up in nice soft rooms, and you and I can play all day! oh my! That means I could have company. I had best tidy up a bit. Maybe rig a new intern for access, too. I hate sharing my biological computer systems...
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
ynsaen! I'm GOOD with interns! I've had LOTS of experience with interns and nurses! They can be fun! One morning at 3:00 AM when I was in the hospital for something or other, a nurse came in to give me a sleeping pill. Of course, I was already deep asleep, but rules are rules. She looked at me and thought I wasn't breathing, tried to find my pulse and couldn't (she was new), and pulled a code on me. I woke up as the emergency crew arrived. After the usual la-ti-da, they left grumbling. The nurse accused me of doing it on purpose. Ah, such fun! To play with the nurses, even when you're asleep!
"asking the important questions like "why" are dangerous, pdxjims." - ynsaen
Life's too short to stay away from the dangerous stuff, ynsaen. And that's no damn' fun. ;) I'll bite. Shoshanna, Spike, anyone in Adminville feeling particularly forthcoming: ****************************************** Why now? What's happening behind the Green Doors that makes a freestuff purge on fanboy items suddenly a priority? Why now, immediately following the PayPal Purges when the members are already riled up? Why is it that since you put in place a "Freestuff Approval Proccess" over a year(?) ago, staff members have been approving this stuff merrily along? Doesn't The Staff read the ToS? Do the approval staff not check for ToS violations before approving freebies? Or is it done on an "Unzips to the right folders - PASS!" basis like RMP testing? Are pointy little heads rolling in Freestuff Approval right now? And if not, why not? (oO) WHY was there no announcement to the General Populace that this was going to begin? Do you not consider the membership worthy of that courtesy? Speaking of the PayPal Purges, why fanart freebies, rather than Bondage or sextoy related? Wouldn't that make more sense... in light of the stated rationales for the recent marketplace upheavals? Won't those also cause problems if a PayPal re decides to go through freebies? Are you also going to be going through the RMP and removing all of the "Movie Inspired", "Game Inspired", "Celebrity Likeness Inspired" and related for-sale items that are like, profiting you off of unlisenced properties? Lara Croft outfit lookalike ring any suddden bells? ;) And if not, why not? Freebie makers possibly, like, easier targets because they don't like, make money for the site - they cost it in bandwidth? A "ToS violation" is still a ToSV even if ya'll get a cut of sales. Are the RMP lookalike items next perhaps? If not, why not? Why the "Black Mark on the permanent Record"? Wouldn't the courtesy of making an announcement, giving people a week to remove their own stuff, and sending a polite IM saying that "We've decided to actually enforce a policy for a change, so we're removing your 'Wolverine Bondage Faerie' from freebies, Thank you, The Manglement" be more........ ...... Professional? Why punish the members for the laxness and incompetency of the Staff over the course of several years in policing? Someone from The Big Two deliver a C&D Bomb by email to the home office and now Tim's crapping green and sending all the little moderator-bots on a Freebies Search and Destroy? ****************************************** Why you're absolutely right, ynsaen. Asking "Why" is lots of fun. grin kicks back to watch what happens next I hope my nice soft room is comfy, and the I-love-me-jacket doesn't chafe. I do so hate that. ;)
"I am a good person now and it feels... well, pretty much the same as I felt before (except that the headaches have gone away now that I'm not wearing control top pantyhose on my head anymore)"
- Monkeysmell
scootch in here, hon -- I've ordered popcorn and shouldn't be too hard. I scared the guy pushing the shiny cart around so bad she's shaking just enough....
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
salt? Heck, hon, here at the sonoran home for the criminally insane we just wipe it from the bodies of interns we pile up in the dark corners. Terrible turnover rate. But oooo weeeee doggie it taste good!!
thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)
Dear all, I am posting this in all the threads concerning freestuff which are ongoing because I am concerned that people are missing information which has been given. First of all, the policy here has not changed in any way. We have always had a strict policy on copyright and trademarked items. However, up until very recently there has not been a person dedicated to freestuff. There now is (me) and I have been working through freestuff in order to clean up all the old dead links and apply the policy where necessary. This does mean that some items which have been in freestuff for a long time are now being questioned. Understandably this is a surprise to the creator in some cases. Where possible, I would like to work with the creators in order to re-release the item into freestuff in an acceptable fashion if possible. In order to achieve this I am taking advice from JenyK (Renderosity's Copyright agent) where necessary. In some cases we have been able to advice the creator to re-package or re-name the item and we have been able to rerelease it. However in other cases the item has been an exact replica of something which is trademarked, or had other problems which have made this impossible, or sometimes the creator has just not wanted to do this, and those items have been removed. Secondly, please remember that Renderosity doesnt host these files and so to say "the item was deleted" is not strictly true - we've deleted a link to the item. You might feel that's playing with words, but it's important to note that the item still exists whether we link to it or not. We are not saying that the creator should not offer the item, just that we don't wish to link to it due to our concerns. The decision to keep or remove or amend an item can only be the creator's, not ours. We are not making any moral judgements here, we are simply applying our TOS. Regarding warnings. I will say again that any member who feels that they received a warning which is unfair, is encouraged to contact Spike directly for a review. If Spike feels the warning is unfair, he will remove it. If any member is concerned or unsure if their articles may be "removed" (ie the link deleted) due to trademark/copyright issues, please contact me or any other member of staff by IM and we will review the item. We can't promise an instant response but we will take a look and let you know, and if there is a way of repackaging the item or amending it then we will work with you. And lastly, I would like to let everyone know that we have listened to the feedback you're giving us in these threads. Believe it or not, none of us want to feel like the bad guys or go around upsetting members, and we definitely don't want to discourage members from creating freestuff, as long as it is within the TOS. If any member feels that my communication with them has been rude then I apologise that you feel that way as it was certainly not the intention. If you do IM me regarding these issues then please remember I work full time and have a family so you may not get an instant reply :-) Karen
"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan
Shire
"Regarding warnings. I will say again that any member who feels that they received a warning which is unfair, is encouraged to contact Spike directly for a review. If Spike feels the warning is unfair, he will remove it." and Spike has stated the fact that warnings are being given out is news to him. "hey left hand whatcha doing? this is the right hand"
I don't get to live in Adminsville, but speaking as a Poser mod... Why now? The whole 'cleaning up freestuff' has actually been going on for a couple of months. Very few members who have been contacted about questionable items have actually received a warning out of over 1000 items which have been reviewed during this time. This was going on before the PayPal thing. It's nothing to do with it. Why then (a couple of months ago that is)? Because that's when we finally got a coordinator in who 1) Was willing to take this specific job on (it's a mammoth task) 2) Is pretty good at recognising a lot of this stuff 3) I think does a difficult, thankless & time consuming job very well. If you've watched the header you'll see we've had a fair few people try out as a coordinator/moderator - it's not for everyone. Before then freestuff was approved by anyone with a bit of spare time to do it - which doesn't necessarily mean they are going to recognise a copyright infringement. We've all got full time jobs IRL and I don't think any of the mods or coords here are copyright specialists. So, we make mistakes - we may even let a few other things through by accident in the future. That doesn't make it okay for people to submit copyright violations to freestuff. Yes, the staff here do read the tos - I think I could recite it in my sleep. Members have been asking for freestuff to work properly for some time - having working links to existing downloads along with not having items which contain copyright infringements and/or trademark issues is a step towards freestuff working properly. Why not tell everyone? Well, you can put that down to me being an idiot - I thought everyone already knew they were supposed to follow tos here and members asked for freestuff to be fixed. We were just doing what we've always been trying to do - our job. It was not intended to be discourteous. If anyone feels offended that we didn't announce we might get better at doing what we've always been supposed to do then I apologise. This is not a new rule, just an old one being enforced more rigorously. This is not related to the Paypal thing. I'm a mod not a Market Place Manger so they don't tell me stuff like that & as I said, we've been trying to get someone to sort out freestuff for ages. As far as the MarketPlace & it's policies goes - that is a completely seperate issue to Poser Freestuff & completely outside my control. You'd have to ask ClintH or DebbieM. about that. Amongst other things RMP testers do check for copyright/trademark violations - just like all the other stores. Warnings. If a member violates the tos and receives an official warning then yes it gets noted down. If they don't get another one within a year it doesn't count anymore - they can have it removed. Very few members who do get a warning for anything ever get a second warning. Most members never receive one at all. Why punish the members for the laxness and incompetency of the Staff over the course of several years in policing? I haven't been doing this for several years so I don't know about before I got conned into doing this job, but I think that's highly unfair. We do our best - it's not always good enough but it's what we do. I don't see the problem with us trying to be more consistent. Members have repeatedly asked us to apply the tos in a more consistent way. Part of that means making sure that freestuff follows the rules too. Just because we didn't do a good enough job before doesn't seem like a good reason to keep on being "lax" or "incompetent". Members aren't being "punished." A couple of members for specific reasons I won't go into received warnings about thier freestuff. How many people do you actually see posting "I got a warning for my freestuff being in violation of copyright/trademark law" or "my friend got a warning" in all these recent posts? Shoshanna
"A couple of members for specific reasons I won't go into received warnings about thier freestuff." And would those members ever be told why they were singled out? I think I will just shut up now. I made a polite request, that seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
Your specialist military, sci-fi, historical and real world site.
Helgard, any member who received a warning should have been told the specific reason/s at the time. Your request has not fallen on 'deaf ears' each point you raised has been answered in the above thread. We cannot remove a warning from a members account. Both I & karen have done our best to listen to your request and tried to answer it... "If someone releases a product, which is legal at the time of release, and the site rules change, making that product illegal, then the product must obviously be removed" Yes that is true, however these copyright violations were not 'legal' in the first place. The rules have not changed. Being in Renderositys freestuff section is not now and never has been a valid method of checking or proving the legal status of anything as far as I am aware. "But for someone to get a warning noted on their member record seems unfair to me. At the time when they released that product or freebie they were breaking no rules, and the product was released in good faith. To receive a warning means that any merchant can be guilty of a "future crime", which is not valid under any legal system in the world." This is not about Merchants. This is about freestuff. The copyright violation had already happened. It was never 'legal'. We didn't pick it up fast but that doesn't mean it was okay at the time. If you find out that someone else is giving away an item of yours without your permission & against your wishes in 6 months time, do you think there should be no consequences for their actions just because they got away with it for 6 months? This is not about items which used to be okay. It is about items that never were okay but had been overlooked. Some of them for years. "So I request that Renderosity removes all warnings from merchant accounts that have resulted in this new change of policy. I think this is a fair request" As Karen & I have both said - to rescind a warning (whether or not you are a merchant) the person who received it needs to appeal to Spike by im or email as he is the admin in charge of this area and will not deal with individual membership reviews in a public forum. If you have not personally received such a warning he would not engage in such correspondence anyway. Coordinators & Moderators do not have the authority to make decisions on rescinding warnings. "A couple of members for specific reasons I won't go into received warnings about thier freestuff." Only the member involved can request & receive this information which does not get divulged in a public forum. This is part of our tos - we respect member confidentiality. And would those members ever be told why they were singled out? If a member received a warning and wasn't sure why, they can always email or im the mod/coord who issued the warning and ask them. If it was issued by a Mod or Coord they would prefer not to contact, they can always contact another member of staff who deals with their specific area and ask them to find out why. It should have been explained in the warning notificiation. mickmca - if you want to know how many official warnings you have all you have to do is ask by im or email. Shoshanna
We have always had a strict policy on copyright and trademarked items. Uh, right. snicker
docandraider.com -- the collected cartoons of Doc and Raider
"Coordinators & Moderators do not have the authority to make decisions on rescinding warnings."
Maybe not but they do have the position to make a better judgement in giving warnings.
I deleted my scotch bottle because of the trademark concerns. (and for the record, Karen worked with me very nicely when I asked her if it was a concern for her)
At the time I uploaded it there were plenty of branded items in freestuff AND it had been approved by the freestuff Moderator. Based on the warnings that were handed out, I felt right to be concerned. I don't have a problem with deleting it. I don't have a problem with Renderosity being concerned with trademarked items. I do have a problem when something is approved by this site one month but the next month the uploader is being discussed as a "copyright violator" when no mesh theft has occured.
And yes, as a merchant, although a small one, this is a concern. I understand items that were uploaded before freestuff became moderated but it's been well known now for a long time that freestuff HAS A MODERATOR and must go through an APPROVAL PROCESS. To start blaming members now isn't completely fair.
I swear, no other site causes so much emotionally draining stress as they make something ten times more difficult than it has to be. I just hope when the gallery fan art starts being hacked at that people are asked nicely to remove it instead of being made to feel like criminals.
That said, if you are concerned that your item will be a concern I do recommend that you ask Karen. It will make the job easier and save you from having to dispute an unfair warning. While I'm angry at the misscommunication going on, she was a great help.
...... Kendra
I suppose in some ways the most tiresome thing about these flurries is that the R'osity position is "always" "we always had this rule..." followed by ignoring the specific questions about how, given this rule, the following evidence that it didn't exist was accumulated. I'd like to hear the answer to one of IB's questions: If this was always the rule, then how is it that the newly created "review board" has routinely approved stuff that broke it? Hold your breath waiting for an answer that doesn't rewrite some more history. I dare you. One reason I don't go back to read 1984 any more is it isn't necessary. And Tunesy (way back there; I try to ration myself to no more than one visit per Poser site per week--doctor's ordure): I didn't misunderstand you. I assumed, as your reply confirmed, that you did not know that a "warning" is not an email saying "Don't do that any more." It's a tick mark on your "record" as a member, as a PTB explained later. You get one, you get a message supposedly explaining why you got it (usually making little if any sense, and seldom the unwelcome truth), and you better not get another! I would argue that the IP owners would be even more impressed if R'osity would burn the occasional warnee at the stake. Public executions will be in next year, you know. "Warnings" do not appear on your profile. You have no way to see what warnings you have, what they were for, or when they expire. And they are pointless, because, as any number of people can attest (some of them have posted in this thread under new identities), you can get banished instantly, irrevocably, and utterly (the official anathema is "Off with his head!") for unforgiveable offenses like, say, calling someone of great importance a "dufflebag" or looking up his nose. Which I would never do. M
Privacy Notice
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
I am placing this request publicly, because I feel that it affects all merchants and freebie providers. The latest change of rules at Renderosity have been applied unfairly. Please listen to my reasoning, and this is not trying to start a flame war and is a serious request. If someone releases a product, which is legal at the time of release, and the site rules change, making that product illegal, then the product must obviously be removed. But for someone to get a warning noted on their member record seems unfair to me. At the time when they released that product or freebie they were breaking no rules, and the product was released in good faith. To receive a warning means that any merchant can be guilty of a "future crime", which is not valid under any legal system in the world. If it is legal to make a model of a bomb today, and you make a model today and release it, and the law changes tommorow to make it illegal, you cannot be prosecuted for commiting a crime, when it wasn't a crime when you commited the act. That is the way law works. So I request that Renderosity removes all warnings from merchant accounts that have resulted in this new change of policy. I think this is a fair request.
Your specialist military, sci-fi, historical and real world site.