Well,

I'm not going to mention names because I'm not like that.

I asked in an email to somoene who made a free model that was "For Private Non-Commercial Use Only....." in a commercial render for a product I'm setting up at the momment.

Note, its just for the render, nothing else, not to be resold, or anything like that.  You know what they told me?  They said "Glad you like the model, but if its used for commercial purposes I usually ask for the sum of $25.00."  Note, on that site, there is no price tag next to that model. 

WTF?  Why do people have to let the all mighty dollar get in the way of everything?  Some of us can't afford diddly right now, so I guess I'll be using another classic car that came with Poser instead of that one. 

Shame, I really like the artists work. But if snobbery is going to get in the way, I'll go else where. 

Like I said, not mentioning names, but am I being overly sensitive or you think I have the right to bitch about it?  I find it kind of disgusting, personally.  It's sort of like the persona of stars asking for 25.00 for autograph expenses.

Actually, it is kind of funny... 

You do want to use a free product for commercial purposes, but you are not willing to pay a small license fee?

Even, if there is no price tag next to the free - for non-commercial use only - product, the creator can ask
for any amount depending on the kind of use.
He may ask $ 25.00 of you and $ 2,500.00 from someone who wants to use it in a huge advertising campaign.

So, yes, I do think you are somewhat overreacting.
 

Quote - It's sort of like the persona of stars asking for 25.00 for autograph expenses.

If it took the star a couple of weeks of grinding work to make that autograph, maybe the comparison would hold.

I think you might be taking things a little too personally.

If I spent hours and hours creating a product that I'm kind enough to give away for free, I might well want some compensation should someone use my product to make money.

I think the problem is that dividing the usage rights into two broad categories (personal v commercial use) leaves people like you in the cold.

If the marketing department of a multinational corporation decides to save itself some money and uses a "free" model in one of their ad campaigns, I don't think any of us would fault the creator for wanting to be paid.

But when a very small business, or an artist who might conceivably at some point be asked if they want to sell (or license) a render or a print of a render -- even though it's actually unlikely that they will make much, if any, money from their usage of a model, has to limit themselves to commercial license, it can be annoying. I get that.

But, really, someone took a whole lot of hours out of their life to make a model. It's never arrogant to ask for money.  Some vendors do seem to have an overly optimistic idea of the current market value of their products, but I don't think it's arrogant for them to ask for a fair price. Given the time it takes to make models, IMO, fair price would be more like what is typical on Turbosquid. That you can even get a decent model of a car for commercial use for $25 is, when you really think about it, quite astounding.

However, I did offer a free set of what I made in return, I guess that still wasn't justifiable enough.  Mine took hours to create as well too.

You want to use something someone else made and don't want to pay what they are asking, right?

well gee yes that's all about you

What is the irreplaceable bang this freebie adds to a promo?

Background setting, prop, clothing, hair?

Please promos are supposed to be subject centric, the product is the subject anything else is a distraction

If you're trying to sell an add-on for a freebie good luck none of your "custumers" are likely to pay to add to a free item of less then V3-V4 figure status/calibre

You ARE overly sensitive.

Why is it okay for YOU to make money off the original artist's work and NOT okay for him/her to get a cut?

I'm just saying.

Quote - You ARE overly sensitive.

Why is it okay for YOU to make money off the original artist's work and NOT okay for him/her to get a cut?

I'm just saying.

+1

In fact it's attitudes like yours which are the reason I haven't released any freebies in a while

Well, ask and learn I guess.  Sorry not so many other people see it the same way.  That's why people get away with that sort of behavior.

And FrankT, maybe its not attitudes like mine, but laziness getting in the way that you haven't released any freebies in a while?

And also Frank, implying that you made freebies -- that would say you're "Selling" something, which I see no marketplace site for you either or items listed for sale. 

not lazyness at all - I use them in my renders a lot, I just don't release them - the render "Blast Doors" is all modelled by me for example. There's no "implication" about me releasing freebies.  The link is in my signature or if you are too lazy to read that then they are here:

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/freestuff/index.php?username=FrankT I don't have to sell things to give away freebies

ok this worth a flamewar?

if so, who's the best one to bet on here? will it be fists or just pissing up walls?

inquiring minds would like to know... since it's not that important. the answers been given, the rest now is just flames.

"Winning a flame war is like winning gold at the special olympics.." 

Personally, I see nothing wrong with someone asking for $$ if their product is going to be used by someone else in a commercial venture. Its only fair. After all, if you're going to be using it in a commecial venture, you should be able to afford it? It would be akin to you creating some renders, putting up for others to see, then someone adds those images to their pay site.. You created it, put it up for free but somoene else makes money from it.. ?

If someone is able to create something I am not able to myself, and it benifits me in the long run, why should they not be rewarded for their time and effort.. and skills that I do not possess? 

its like everything else.. if you don't want to pay licensesing fees then don't use it.. 

but that's just me..

I'm really big on the open-source movement and the philosophy surrounding this movement. We've just released V4-WM and Outfitter for FREE, something that will revolutionise Poser 9 / Poser Pro 2012 figures and how they work. All of this is done to give back to the community.

Can one attach a dollar value to what this team has created? No. Because it's not about money, it's about community.

Artists are artists: we're getting a "world-renouned" artist to paint the facade of the hospital I work at for some sum (won't go into that, but it's a fair amount). Should this artist be doing this for free? I can't say. The organisation have been able to agree on a dollar value on his work. And this is where the real pivotal point is:

Look at this as a transaction, Johnny. You have the right to render this item under the terms of the artist's conditions of use. You wish to abide by those terms, so in order to to get his consent to use this in a setting outside of those conditions, you ask his permission. He asks for a certain amount of money. You find it too much to pay. Transaction is completed. You won't use his item for your commercial render. Everyone is happy. Sort-of.

We all use items that we either paid money for (like windows) and thus feel we can expect to have certain rights, or ones we received for free but with conditions. If the price this artist is asking is one you feel is too high, you have two options: the route you took or negotiate on the price. I wouldn't let feelings get into it: the artist feels the price is fair... you don't. MD developers feel the price for their software is fair; i don't. Transaction ends with you not using the item and me not buying MD.

This is exactly the reason why I decline to download ANYTHING to which I do not receive the complete usage rights. You are either selling it, or you're not. You're either giving it away, or you're not.

I'm with Johnny on this one to this extent: If I can pay $15 for a commercial product and get unlimited usage rights, it does seem a little bit like a bait and switch for someone to ask $25 for a "freebee."

However, as Robyn has so accuartely pointed out, if the asking price is too high, then the deal ends right there. No reason to get mad about it... you just can't do business.

End of line.

Johnny's attitude is commendable IMVHO. some users may not even bother to ask permission, if it's true that dishonest users have tried to package and sell freestuff items in collections at warez sites.  however, $25 is a bargain, if all sales are attributable to the promo renders.  those cars are so finely detailed that the creator could sell them here along with the Ford, chevy, pontiac, audi, benz and other trade-mark/trade-dress autos, which means he could have asked for a percentage of sales rather than just a one-time $25 fee.

Quote - Johnny's attitude is commendable IMVHO. some users may not even bother to ask permission, if it's true that dishonest users have tried to package and sell freestuff items in collections at warez sites.  however, $25 is a bargain, if all sales are attributable to the promo renders.  those cars are so finely detailed that the creator could sell them here along with the Ford, chevy, pontiac, audi, benz and other trade-mark/trade-dress autos, which means he could have asked for a percentage of sales rather than just a one-time $25 fee.

I agree. You did the right thing negotiating with the artist, Johnny, instead of just using the item in terms that went against the conditions of use. However, nothing obligates the artist to reward you for being honest. Indeed, as Miss Nancy pointed out, $25 as a one-time fee for a commerical render is pretty reasonable.

A commercial render should generate some income for you. See that $25 as an expense.

I beg to differ. If Johnny had asked and then just abided by the creators terms, THAT would have been commendable. But instead he comes to post about it to get support for his hurt feelings and then get's offended when people suggest that he was indeed being too sensitive and goes on to be offensive and call someone lazy.

In my eyes, he lost all commendation the second he made the issue public fodder. Then he lost my respect for stooping to name calling.

Splitting hairs here but is the free item going to be used in the final item at all?  Is it just for a promo and not included in the commercial for sale item?

The discussion is interesting, useful, informative.... the personal attacks however, are not.

Please knock it off.

Just a promo render.  That's all.  Wanted it to be shown what the prop could be used as.  I didn't want to sell the model what so ever.  Just use it in an image with my prop.

Please also note, FrankT's attitude statement is what made me defend myself.  Nothing more nothing less.

I think you are entitled to your feelings whatever they may be.  It's good that you asked first though.  So many don't.  For me, I would't use something in the beginning if I knew it could not be used commercially no matter how cute or great it is.  But that's me.  I also won't buy a vendor's products if the readme tells me I can't use it commercially.  Most vendor's don't care if you turn their applications into pngs to sell.  However, there are a handful who forbid anyone to make pngs out of their props to sell or give away.  I think it's silly because the people who buy my pngs don't use a 3D program, don't want to, and never will.  They simply want the png to make whatever with it.  They will never buy that vendor's application anyway.  I read and understand the terms and it's my choice if I buy (or download the freebie) or not.  That's why it is so important for me to read what the conditions are before I buy or use something.  I purchased something once without reading the info and found out after the fact, I couldn't use it to sell or give away as a png or psd file.  Now it is sitting in my computer and I doubt I will ever use it.  I learned the expensive way. 

@SingAndPrayIsMe: I think we've all done that (learned the expensive way).

I think the key transaction to make is this: there is no such thing as a "Must-Have" - that tends to fade all those bad feelings away when other transactions don't go to expectation.

Here is a thought, make your own prop.

End of problem.

If the person wants $25 bucks to use it based on thier license, either pay it or go another route.

Complaining about it has done nothing for your cause other than to give you a flaming front.

Feel free to bash me over it as well.

Actually, it's make YOUR own prop -- not YOU own prop.....

It's not bashing either --- it's expressing my own opinion --- so before you try to correct me, make sure you do use the right terminology.

Good call. I edited it for you. :)

I'm thinking a little less attitude is needed in this thread.

TO all.. lets keep answers to "answers" not bashing for asking questions and/or replying back to answers. If you have a problem with someone, the forum is not the place to discuss it.

Thanks guys

In the interest of simplicity...

Question: Am I just being overly sensitive?

Answer: 'fraid so.

While you aren't re-selling the item, this is clearly a commercial context, as ultimately you'll be making money from this venture. It's only fair that the creator of the item share in your success.

Think of it as a collaboration, rather than purchasing a product, if it makes the pill a little easier to swallow.

I see nothing wrong with asking money for use of a product that someone has made, and I too don't think 25 dollars is unreasonable at all.  

But, I've said this before and been attacked, but here I go anyway.

I don't like the term free stuff being used for products that aren't for commercial render.  I would prefer the word demo product or free (but not for commercial render) or something. 

My guess would be that the OP thought it was free when he first spotted it, then read the fine print and that is what started all this.

In fact I would love to see a separate free stuff department where the free stuff is able to be used for commercial renders.   This would be particularly nice for new poser users because i feel there is a real risk for them of dumping a ton of free stuff into their runtimes without realizing that if in 10yrs time they want to sell their render then they can't, and it will take them forever to pull all the bits out of their runtime again if it is all mixed in, once they understand what the word free stuff means to some people.

And if someone wants to make free stuff but not for commercial renders, it would be great if there was a separate department for that stuff.  If I saw something in that section that I really needed for a render, I too would enquire about the cost, and if I could afford it I would buy it.

Love esther

Most of the freebies I make are for non commercial use only and no amount of money will change that, simply because it's to protect myself and you.  They're by and large based on works that are copyright to the BBC, who generally don't mind "fan art" but they'd start to get stroppy once money changes hands.  Actually, you could use them in commercial renders but I expect you to pay my legal bills and no doubt your own when the shit hits the fan.

The others are entirely free to use in commercial stuff, as you see fit.  That's my perogative and is by no means definitive.

The stuff I make as freebies, I could just as easily keep for myself, or - in the case of the non infringing potentials - sell them.  

I can perfectly understand someone wanting to charge a license for commercial use of a free item; after all, if you stand to make some money off it, why not the creator?  If it's good enough to use for a commercial purpose, it's good enough to pay for.

IIRC, BATLAB and several other Japanese freestuff makers do a similar thing.  IMO, almost all Japanese freebies are of commercial quality, yet there are numerous creators who give their stuff away.  It's reasonable to ask for some recompense under certain circumstances.

We make stuff for the fun of it and for the pleasure it brings to others in use.  Free stuff is in the original spirit of the early Poser community; it's nice to be a part of that.  I also owe my early days in Poser to many of the kind and skillful creators who donated tons of stuff I wouldn't have been able to afford or make for myself.  Now I can, I do my bit to pay it back. 

I am considering putting a new restriction on all my freestuff that it's not to be used for  political purposes of any kind.  I'm absolutely serious about that, btw.  I hate all politicians with a passion and I don't want to see my stuff used to further their grubby agendas.

Keep in mind the comment I made earlier in this post, "I could just as easily keep them for myself or sell them".  That applies to every freestuff creator. 

So yes, I do believe you're being overly sensitive.  Or cheap.  ;) 

Creators have the right to make claims on their intellectual property, unless they expressedly waive that right.  Pay to use, or use another model, but please, avoid becoming a thief.

The free/fee model is pretty common. I have a lot of quality software that I can use for free as long as it isn't used for business. If you're going to make money, why is it wrong for the creator to want a taste? Your reference to autographs almost sounds like you think this person is some kind of diva for placing a value on their work for commercial use, but are you not expecting to be paid for your work?

Adding price tags to free items would probably only potentially confuse what is probably the vast majority of people who have no intention of commercial use. People working at that (commercial) level should be familiar with useage fees and assume they would apply if it is clearly marked for non-commercial use only - assuming the creator allows commercial use at all.

I'm wondering if they had said $2.00 you'd be upset. Is it the principal or the price? You were willing to offer your item in exchange so it doesn't sound like you are against the idea that some payment is appropriate.

I think of it in terms of fairness over and above commercial or legal stuff. If I lend you my lawnmower for free cuz you're broke or I'm just a nice guy, it's one thing if you cut your yard. If you make $200 cutting other folks yards, then we have no contract but it would be fair for you to give me a taste, no?

I'm not familiar with the commercial art world, but I bet they don't think such arrangements are odd or out of place at all. Are you overly sensitive - I don't know. maybe not sensitive so much as unrealistic.

I see this analogy: My neighbor tells me I'm welcome to use his lawnmower whenever I want, for MY lawn. But then if I start taking his mower to other people's houses and charging them to mow their lawns.... Yeah, he has a right to some of the $$.

Shame, I really like the artists work. But if snobbery is going to get in the way, I'll go else where.

*It isn't snobbery to ask to be paid. It really is amazing that I have to point this out. $25 dollars isn't out of line for something that probably took well over 4 hours to create. In this deflated Poser market, some people acquire an unrealistic sense of entitlement. Your feelings shouldn’t be hurt when the creators of valuable stuff don’t give you free rein to profit from their efforts. 

I like Esther's idea of having multiple sections in our Freestuff area based on usage rights. That's something that would really differentiate Rendo's Freestuff section from any other site and it would stop a whole lot of these types of confusions in the process. Of course, rearranging current freebies into new catagories would be a massive project but it could be made doable with keywords I should think.

Another possibility would be to have the creators post their license terms in the "details".

I think different sections is overkill. Listing it in the details - definitely a good idea; and maybe a simple overlay on the thumbnail. IIRC, it's been suggested before.

The thing is, we're dealing with IP here, not a loaf of bread, it seems to me but IANAL People retain rights and can impose conditions. I know that it goes against the instinct that says if I "bought" it or it was "free," I can do with it as I want. You can quibble about the use of the word "free," but I don't think "demo" is necessarily more accurate or less confusing.

Personally, I'm a lot more peeved at not being able to sell software that I "bought" than I am about paying for commercial rights, but that's the way the law works. For that matter, I'm more irritated by morals clauses dictating what kind of image I can produce. I always honor requests in that regard, but bypass items that demand it. By the same token some people request donations for commercial use. I certainly don't have a problem with them requiring payment though. If you're really concerned that "free" shouldn't be contaminated with money then pass it on and don't make money on your use of free material. At least offer to donate the profits to some children's charity; then everyone wins.

why wouldseparate sections be overkill? If it's not free for certain types of renders eg commercial, political, whatever, then it isn't quite free really and could definitely confuse a newbie.

I vote for separate sections.

Love esther

I havent read every post, but I think a lot of what needs to be said has.  I'll just add that I think characterizations like 'snobbery' and 'disgusting' are grossly unfair to the artist in question.  The comment about celebs and autographs leads me to think that you may not have a realistic perception of how much money most 3d artists for the poser community make off of their work.  Perhaps the artist in question 'cant afford diddly' right now either.

Good on you though for asking first, and for taking the time to read the liscence.  I know I'll have a mess on my hands when it comes time for me to sort out what I can and cant use in my tangled mess of runtimes.  

I am glad you are respecting the artists wishes on the matter though I do wish you had shown the artist more respect in bringing this to the forums.  Since you seem to be planning to sell your work it would do you well to remember that however you treat folks on the forums is how you treat your customers, the poser market is a pretty small and we are pretty much all each others customers.

Clear licensing conditions included with the prop would go a long way to help avoiding threads like this. Most I have found have been pretty good.

I have a simple attitude ... if I can abide the the terms I will use it. If not, I find something else or attempt to create my own facimile. It may even require me to rethink the project into something I can manage.

Definitely not worth stressing about.

Just my humble .02 :-)

Quote - why wouldseparate sections be overkill? If it's not free for certain types of renders eg commercial, political, whatever, then it isn't quite free really and could definitely confuse a newbie.

I vote for separate sections.

Love esther

Looking at the details page of current free stuff, it clearly states commercial and/or non-commercial use.
This shouldn't confuse a newbie.

One could even argue, it does not state clearly, that you cannot redistribute the item.

In the end, you would have to print the full license next to each download link.
 

Majority of people here are interested in rendering not in distributing.  People should just assume free stuff isn't for distribution.

Is there anyone here that would like to distribute free stuff?  My guess is no.

Well anyway, I do like it that the details state whether it is for commercial or not.  I still would like to see it in a separate section though.  To me they are totally distinct entities.

Love esther

Well, it depends on your POV I suppose. I may be wrong but I assume that the vast majority of people, especially new users aren't doing commercial work, so we're adding another layer of stuff for the new folks and casual users who are more likely to be confused by it in order to help the smaller number who - by definition, doing commercial work, should be aware to check the terms before downloading. I simply think that providing notice is sufficient without requiring splitting up the downloads.

As you say the majority probably aren't interested in redistribution. Should we have a separate section of redistributable items for the people who are interested? Taking it to the logical conclusion, the only things that should be called "free" are those that allow you to do anything with them, and that's never been the case. I see your point but I think the distinction probably isn't going to catch on and AFAIK, I've never seen a site with such a distinction.

I also take your point about discovering years later you can't do commercial with an item. How many typical non-commercial users are going to not download something they like because the "might" someday want to use it commercially though? In reality, I really don't want to have to go through two freestuff sections (or free and faux-free) every time to save people who are interested the trouble of reading the terms (which I agree should be in Details) - maybe that's selfish on my part.

N.B. Though I diasgree with the idea, you are still one of the nicest people here :-)

hehe thanks "

Should we have a separate section of redistributable items for the people who are interested?"

there wouldn't be enough people interested in doing this.

I think a lot of people wouldn't even look in the not for commercial render section if there were two sections.

And that's right about new users "

new users aren't doing commercial work"  

so when suddenly their best mate says, hey that's a nice picture you did last year - lets make some greeting cards, they suddenly find their runtime is full of all sorts of stuff that shouldn't be there, all mixed together with stuff that should be.

Love esther

How about filters? That would be easy enough to implement with tags. Those that find it important: use the filter. The rest: you have access to the whole shootin' match.

Quote - How about filters? That would be easy enough to implement with tags. Those that find it important: use the filter. The rest: you have access to the whole shootin' match.

Best idea yet!

If I was on your shoes, I will make a counter offer.

"I really love your work, unfortunately, I dont have the funds to pay for a license right now, how about in exchange for the rights to use your product, I will put your name and website on bold in the credits? Or, if my campaign made money, I give you the amount you require?"

Flexibility not sensitivity wins business negotiations.

Quote -

Looking at the details page of current free stuff, it clearly states commercial and/or non-commercial use.
This shouldn't confuse a newbie.

One could even argue, it does not state clearly, that you cannot redistribute the item.

In the end, you would have to print the full license next to each download link.
 

I don't know about separate sections, but people often have different ideas of what "no commercial use" means.  Some allow their free stuff to be used for commercial renders but not for any other commercial use, others don't allow it at all, some charge if you want to use it for any commercial use.  So to me (and I'm not a newbie) just saying "no commercial use" is still confusing.  Depends on the person of course.  I think it would be helpful if terms were stated more clearly in the readmes.

I think sometimes it's an idea to think about why a creator gives out items for free rather than sells them as not everyone is in to for the money.  I give under non commercial terms because I wanted to give to the hobbiest amongst the community who "plays" in daz or poser and not to make money.  Vendors can go buy their equipment as they probably would do in any other business set up.  There are plenty of other alternatives in this world.

Some have asked if they can buy a licence from me, I have said no as that's not why I made them.  Also, I don't see why someone should piggy back off my work and  make money from items that have taken me hours/days to make. I have seen other forums where someone slated me as the terms stated they couldn't do commercial texture packs for my free clothing, why? because I give to the hobbiest for free and don't want them to then pay for a quick flood fill texture pack? (which is what I have seen of her work)  plus I can just see that vendor  thinking to themselves that they could actually make more money as the free items will be in a lot more runtimes and therefore a bigger potential customer base. 

People tend to push terms to their limits, promotional renders are commercial usage, even though it is just a render, the usage is a means to make money/more money and you are using it as part of your business. 

The free/fee offer of this creator may be that he is actually being flexible, they could so easily have said no. 

Quote - People tend to push terms to their limits, promotional renders are commercial usage, even though it is just a render, the usage is a means to make money/more money and you are using it as part of your business.

To me, commercial renders ARE commercial use, but I see commercial renders as different, really.  Some examples using a free dress someone has created

1-You are advertising a house and you use a picture advertising it, which contains a person wearing the dress.

2-You are selling a hairstyle at Renderosity and use an image advertising it, where the woman is wearing the dress

3-You create a scene for a rendering contest, of a person in a ball room, and they are wearing the dress

In those circumstances, the free item is just one of many many parts of something else, and it is not going to be the thing that makes you money.  You could do the same scenes in 1, 2 and 3 with ANY dress.  But maybe you happen to like the particular free one a lot so want to use that.

Personally, I see this as VERY different than these commercial uses:

1-Creating textures for the dress and selling them

2-Making tubes of the dress or a brush from the dress and selling it.

These, to me, are DIRECTLY making money from the free item.

I certainly agree that it's up to the creator to set terms.  And they may not want either type of usage (which again is up to them) but it's nice if they specify exactly what they mean by commercial use.

Quote - Just a promo render.

Not a lawyer but since you aren't selling the item and you aren't selling the promo render, shouldn't you be allowed to use the thing freely?  If you used it for artwork and then sold the artwork, that'd be different. 

Quote - To me, commercial renders ARE commercial use, but I see commercial renders as different, really.  Some examples using a free dress someone has created

1-You are advertising a house and you use a picture advertising it, which contains a person wearing the dress.

2-You are selling a hairstyle at Renderosity and use an image advertising it, where the woman is wearing the dress

3-You create a scene for a rendering contest, of a person in a ball room, and they are wearing the dress

In those circumstances, the free item is just one of many many parts of something else, and it is not going to be the thing that makes you money.  You could do the same scenes in 1, 2 and 3 with ANY dress.  But maybe you happen to like the particular free one a lot so want to use that.

Personally, I see this as VERY different than these commercial uses:

1-Creating textures for the dress and selling them

2-Making tubes of the dress or a brush from the dress and selling it.

These, to me, are DIRECTLY making money from the free item.

I certainly agree that it's up to the creator to set terms.  And they may not want either type of usage (which again is up to them) but it's nice if they specify exactly what they mean by commercial use.

there is such a margin where people have different views and it's a case of where do you draw the line, personally I did allow the usage

you mentioned in the first list above in relation to promotional work and therefore gave 'limited commercial use',

however people saw that as anything goes and included the second list, even though it was stipulated in the readme :/

It's an age old problem and think it will continue to be discussed and debated as to what peoples views are on the subject and they will

all differ, doubt there will ever be a definate thumb of rule.

Quote - How about filters? That would be easy enough to implement with tags. Those that find it important: use the filter. The rest: you have access to the whole shootin' match.

This is how ShareCG does it. ANd I find all of their filters exceptionally useful.