3D-Mobster posted at 8:46PM Thu, 30 August 2018 - #4335484

---

Here is the thing, the moment you create your unique item/clothing using anything like Shrink Wrap or Extract in a 3D modelling app, It is considered to be derivative. The moment you use auto- transfer tools to transfer rigging or morphs, it is considered to be derivative. The Daz 3D EULA provides conditions for distributing or selling derivative content as stated above. The licence owner can also at any time request the derivative content be removed from distribution as in the conditions stated above.

This kind of licensing isn't unusual for rigged figures lets take Project Evolution for example, these are the licence terms for Project E. Copyright (c) 2018 erogenesis. All rights reserved. Not intended for redistribution.

---

I can only go by what I believe to be true, ... Snipped for brevity

Okay this is muddying the water a little from this particular issue and copyright law is a very murky area at the best of time and should only be waded into legally if you have pretty deep pockets and solid understanding of the laws associated. What the Daz EULA states is that any derivative content created from Daz 3D IP is subject to the Daz 3D EULA and the conditions associated. A static model of a jacket made in Zbrush is in no way a derivative of Daz 3D content. If that Jacket was formed from any Daz 3D IP whether V4 or a Genesis figure as a base or guide, it is generally considered to be derivative. If that jacket is then imported to Daz Studio or any other app and rigging or morphs is transferred to it ifrom Daz 3D's IP it's definitely a derivative item. The law is pretty clear when it comes to copyright derivatives. And Daz 3D's EULA terms are also clear when sale or distribution of derivatives is or isn't allowed.

Despite what you think or believe Evo would be well within his legal right to challenge any vendors sale of derivative content built on his copyrighted Project Evolution base and the law would be on his side in the event of a lawsuit. (This is just an example and I am no way saying that this would happen or that Evo would want that to happen, in fact quite the opposite in my understanding.)

I know that you are thinking no one can copyright the human figure, but that isn't quite true, have a look at the Michelangelo's statue of David for example... What exactly does that copyright cover as David is just a naked male human figure, right. You need to ask yourself "Would anyone not recognise the uniqueness of the sculpture when shown a picture of it?" or would they just assume it is a generic human figure the same as any other? No one can copyright individual words (Trademarks aside) but you can copyright a novel made entirely from those very same words. You need to look at what exactly is being protected by the copyright and generalising is just going to make the concept more confusing in my own experience. No one is saying that any clothing item that fits on a Daz 3D figure is derivative, what is being said is that any item made using Daz 3D IP as a base or a in some cases as a guide, can be considered to be a derivative of the original according to the legal definition.

As I have said Daz 3D does allow the resale of derivative content in pretty much all cases, but changing the license to Open Source is probably a step to far.