Radart wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> But are we putting this WHOLE sight, and possibly all the sights in the same picture, are we all dumb clucks before we even lay any eggs?? <<<<<<<<<<<<< I don't know who you are responding to with your idealistic meanderings Rad, but if it's to my post, then I think you need to remove the rose tinted specs. Get this: Renderosity (Bondware Inc) is brokering store items, and so is as involved in selling them as much as the individual contributors. If Renderosity sells items which are protected by copyright and/or trademark (or uses copyright material to advertise items) without permission and/or a license, then the whole site is in danger from any subsequent legal action. The store does refer to this issue in its uploading guidelines: "By uploading a product using the form below, you are representing that you are the owner of the intellectual property being uploaded or that you have the legal right to sell the intellectual property on behalf of the owner. You agree to indemnify Bondware Inc. in any dispute which may arise regarding products that you sell through this site." My reading of various court actions around the world doesn't lead me to believe that this 'indemnity clause' will protect Renderosity particularly well. The only distinction a court is likely to make between Renderosity and any individual amateur contributor is to treat the individual more leniently. It will most likely regard Renderosity as the responsible professional partner, and any action will be much more severe. Depending on the degree of complaint from any potentially offended party, court action could involve closure of the whole site. Are copyright and trademark owners likely to learn of any potential transgressions of their creative rights? How many enemies does this place have?... Of course, if Renderosity is informed about potentially 'dangerous' items in the store, and chooses to ignore the warning and go on selling; then it rather deserves any action that might follow - both pragmatically and morally.