Attached Link: http://www.somavision.com/centerfolds/index.htmlhttp://

http://www.somavision.com/centerfolds/index.html correct link

I would say there's nothing anyone can do. Those are renders, not the actual textures. -JH.

If they're distributing the textures, there would be a problem, but I would think that anyone who thinks an artist's texture is good enough to use on their site is flattering to that artist. As long as they aren't making a profit off of it without the artist's permission, it shouldn't be a problem.

There is a memebership fee which I dont believe the artists are getting a kick back for.

actually yamato and nerd were not asked if their textures and/or models could be used and on a thread at PFO they went into it in more detail, I realized that there are a lot of people here who might not read the forums over there and felt that this should be brought to peoples attention here.

I have sent a personal e-mail to them asking them to please contact Nerd and Yamoto and both of their e-mails and expressed some concerns that both of them had. See, this is where I am a little concerned. If I create an image, say using an .OBJ by say PhilC (sorry Phil you were the first to come to mind :o) ) I would personally ask him if I could use the .obj prior to the sale of the image using that. Sometimes it gets a little difficult to do if you have 5 gigs worth of stuff and 40 people to contact for one image. I am not justifying it, just pointing out both views (what I would do and most likely why some the people weren't contacted). Rather than starting a huge agenda and massive flame war, I give them the benefit of the doubt till I hear back from them. If I don't..well... Fact of the matter is this, this is in a way an upsetting thing, but unlike the Trimax incident, they are only pushing images using people's products rather than the products themselves and until we hear from the owners of the products that were used in the images it would seem a little rash to fill their e-mail box with flames without any knowledge if others were contacted or not. My 2 pennies Jack

It was suggested a couple of times before, and it is VERY important: Everyone posting any work of his own should include a copyright note, explaining what's allowed to be done with it, and where it ends. If a texture is posted to the public domain - fine, but you can't do anything afterwards. If you don't want this, include a note like "to be used for private/non-commercial purposes". It might me still difficult to actually get your right if anything happens, but at least you have a chance for legal actions if anything really nasty occurs. Otherwise, no way at all, I'm afraid. (I'm not reffering to the actual case - I have no idea at the moment what the read-me's in question said)

This is such a difficult thing to deal with because when you post things like textures or models for free download, you really can't enforce against someone using them without your knowledge. When I was designing the cover of a book, I used a pillar that I had downloaded from one of the 3D sites, then I realized that I couldn't remember who I got it from, so I decided just to make one of my own and use that. It's not right by any means to use other people's things without permission, but there's really no way to make a texture or model self-destruct if it's used commercially without the artist's premission. These people are obviously telling folks that the things they use are theirs, which, of course, is a lie, but it's very difficult to prove it. I think we all have to be aware that when we offer something up for grabs that there's every possibility it will get used in some way we don't approve of. Unfortunately, it's all a part of it, whether it's wrong or not. I don't think there's really any way to prevent it. Melanie

Granted, if the textures have been used against the authors copyright terms thats not a good thing. But I don't understand how you can look at a final render and know for certain a particular texture was used? Making a photo-realistic naked girl is a popular goal around here, and other places. Naturally when people are striving for the same look, they are going to make similar texture maps.

melanie, you are completely right that it is a very difficult thing to proof a misuse, and even more to successfully claim your right. But it still makes a difference if you (at least) try to protect your work. If stuff is posted (nearly) anonymiously or without a legal notice, you have no chance at all. If you do include a copyright notice, you have at least a small chance - which is better than nothing. Also, there are some ways to protect yourself - if you release textures, just burn or copy them to a disk, put it in an envelope and snail-mail it to yourself. When you recieve it, put it to a safe place. If you ever have to sue someone, this sealed letter (together with 2-3 witnesses that saw your work in creation) is MUCH better than nothing as evidence!

Even with a copyright notice you really can't control a final render. What you are protecting is the data file itself form being resold or redistributed. -JH.

Better than nothing, once again. Also, it depends on the value of the claim. If Jack Michaelson uses your texture on the sleeve of a CD which sells 50 million copies, it might be worth the try...

I just typed a great reply and my Internet disconnected on me before I could post it (aaaaahhhhhhh!!!!). Let me see if I can recreate it. My point was that if you don't want your texture maps used by other people, don't post them for the public to use. Martin, I also post my textures on my site for free use by anyone, commercial, noncommercial, or personal use. If someone redistributes the texture maps without my knowledge or permission, I would be upset about that. But mine are also public domain. I've mailed story manuscripts to myself as you mentioned to do with a CD above. I brought that up in a thread a while back, myself. Ashlocke, I'm a notary where I work. I suppose it could be done. Notary is generally used on legal documents, though. I figure that anything that is rendered with a texture I created is not the theft of my texture. Since I put it there for people to use in their art, where's the problem? If I don't want people to use my textures in their art, I won't post them. But to say that they stole your texture when all you see is their finished render is like a company that manufactures artist paint claiming an artist stole their colors when they used the paint on a painting that is sold in a museum. Or like Corel claiming I stole WordPerfect because I used that program to write a story that I publish. I think the important thing is that you don't want the textures themselves redistributed. The renders made from them really can't be considered theft, if the creater of the texture offered it for use by artists. I guess you could say then that MetaCreations could claim we all steal the figures from Poser when we render images from it. Same difference. If you don't want your textures used by others, don't share it. Melanie

melanie, I don't want to play the "legal specialist" here (because I'm certainly not... :-), but one note: "public domain" is an established term, and it really means that everyone may do whatever he/she/it wants - if you declare it PD, you shouldn't be upset about anything, because that's what you allowed. What you more likely want to use is "Freeware" - this term includes legal restrictions (declared by you) which enables you (theoretically) to claim your rights (on a court when necessery). For that reason my tools all include a clear note that they are "Freeware, but not in the Public Domain".

Martin, it was Ashlocke who used the term "public domain" first and I merely repeated it. My point is that if you post anything to the Internet, no matter how much you try to protect it with copyrights or notary, you still run the risk of people using it. If you don't want it used, don't post it, simple as that. Yamato did write to this place some time ago, I remember reading that a while back, and the place argued with him that they supposedly had created the textures, that they were not his. Now whether that's true or not is subjective; textures can often appear similar after rendering. Again, I can't stress enough, if you create a texture map or a mesh and you don't want anyone to use it, or that it may be used in the wrong way, simply don't give it to people. We start the ball rolling ourselves by offering it. There is no way to control who takes it and how they are going to use it. We need to use common sense about what we post in the first place. As for the notary, if you plan to publish something professionally, a notary could ruin your chances. For instance, if you wrote a novel and had the manuscript notarized, every publishing company in the world will send it back with a rejection slip because the notary stamp tells them that you don't trust them. Professional publishers honor copyright and will not take your story or parts of it and release it under another author's name. The minute you place a copyright symbol or a notary stamp on the manuscript, you can forget about a publisher accepting it. When they see that stamp or symbol, they won't even read the manuscript, they send it back unread. So, you have to be careful about how you use notary services. It can be good on the approrpiate things, but it can hurt you in other ways. continued-- Melanie

...If you are afraid of your work being stolen enough to have it notarized, then you shouldn't be sharing it. Use it in your own renders and just let people wonder how you got your image so realistic. It's sort of like that secret ingredient in Grandma's cake recipe. If someone steals our work, it all comes down to our own responsibility for having put it out for grabs in the first place. Nuff said. Melanie

Question- How do you get something notorized digitally, ie on your textures in this case, or anything on the internent? I'm just curious how that'd be done.

Ok. Thanks, Ashlocke :o) Appreciate the reply.