"But, it doesn't improve my idea. It does the same thing. It's the same idea."

And I think it was an original idea for you - but it is not a unique idea in graphic arts. This sort of prop didn;t start with poser... it is a fairly straight forward application of the way 3D works. It is a idea that would be independantly derived by many people - for patent purposes then it is "obvious".

I'm sorry - but I don't see a problem.

Hypothetical situation: I see am image of a cute Asian texture in the store, I decide I want one but don't have the money. I build one in Photoshop and post it for free. There is no ethical problem in my mind at all. I didn't use any of their work and the idea of an Asian texture is not so unique that it is protected... even if I got the idea from that texture.

Example: How many of the vendors here now include MAT files in their products? How many of them considered NOT using MAT files because it wasn't their idea originally? How many of them learned how to make MAT files because they or someone "reverse engineered" the MAT files the originator put out? Before we toss ethical stones here...

Example: As far as I know Anton pioneered the swapped geometry concept with the CFS (or the hair?). I am sure other vendors have or will use it - why isn;t anyone upset that they are copying this idea? Where is the call to not use it or release anything with it?

No offense, but a mapped plane is simply not something I consider unique enough to warrant this level of protection. You did it 'first' and you made some $$$. Seems fair to me.

Example: How many hair items in the store have pony tails? braids? How many people thing the community should have only had one pony tail hair? Not me. But someone (Daz?) made the first Poser pony tail... why aren't we protecting that?

Example: Jim Burton's amazing French Maid outfit. Surely someone else should be free to release a free stuff version of a French Maid outfit if they are inspired to create one?

This is why you can patent/protect an implementation of an idea, not the idea itself. Your specific pop is all yours, the idea of such a prop is not yours and never can be. This is a common thing in the world around us... and rightly so. I am not saying Nerd didn't do a lot of work - and I am happy some $$ were made... but I am concerned by the whole idea that this community thinks basic modeling principals are protect able.

Maybe this is fairly clear to me because I have been a programmer for so long selling products I developed. Clearly I know when I release a new program that does "Y" that soon someone else will have a program to do "Y" and that's fine. If they stole my code to do "Y" then I have a case... if they independently derived the solution or it is "obvious" then ah well, I am just glad I made my money for a while as the "first".

If this wasn't so there wouldn't be multiple Operating Systems, or Browsers, or Word Processors. Basic ideas are free.

BTW - the Daz prop can be used in this manner was my point - the shape is very basic.