Curious. I'm pretty sure I've seen people told it is ilegal to:

1) Reproduce any geometry derived mathematically from the original geometry. For example, you can't make gloves using V4 hand vertices. You have to fit new geometry by hand. (Forgive the pun.) It is not a defense to show that the original geometry cannot be recovered from this derived geometry. It is a violation of the EULA to generate a mesh from the V4 mesh in any way using software, and distribute the derivative mesh. This is only allowed for personal use.

2) Reproduce any textures derived from the original textures, even if greatly reduced in resolution, altered in tone, etc.

Maybe the people who had these discussions simply tolerate inconsistency and contradiction. I can't stand it. And hearing that the DAZ forum members concluded it was OK doesn't convince me. These are the same people who argue that I do not supply any information, and also argue that gamma correction is an adjustment you make to calibrate your monitor, not an adjustment you make to produce images targeted for your monitor. In other words, anything beyond "ooh pretty"  or "ooh easy" seems to go over the heads of some people at DAZ forums. Not everybody, for sure, but there are quite a few with big mouths and small ability to parse complex concepts.

---

Renderosity forum reply notifications are wonky. If I read a follow-up in a thread, but I don't myself reply, then notifications no longer happen AT ALL on that thread. So if I seem to be ignoring a question, that's why. (Updated September 23, 2019)