Which is why I won't be using them. And we aren't talking about Viewpoint here, we are talking about an artist who did not state you could not the item he was selling until AFTER it was paid for, and that is false advertising. And the impression I got from Viewpoint was that you know from the beginning where they stand. And as far as using a model in a game I believe that as long as no one can take the actual model out and use it for themselves then that is also acceptable. If it is not, then those artists that I have purchased from need to contact me and we need to get my refunds started, because there is something REALLY wrong here. It is very clear what has happened here. He is saying pretty much that he is giving you the right to play with these models, but if you do the legwork to find a client, and you do the stoyrboarding and put together the presentation to sell your idea to said client, and you put the work together in the animation or rendered picture, then he wants a cut. I have no problem with that if it is stated up front and I have a chance to make the decision before I buy. But for him to put it out there and after you buy to say you have to get his permission, that's like buying a car, and then having the dealer tell you, "oh no, you have to leave it in your driveway, you can't take it anywhere or use it in any way out of your driveway, read your owner's manual". And when you say, "but you didn't say that before I bought the car!". And he will say, "no, but I didn't have to I am the one who created this car, and even though you paid for it I still want more money if you decide to drive it anywhere else". I think it would be a good thing if the store has a policy which insists that the artists here be honest, although until now there was no need was there? Marque