I see this add in the marketplace http://www.renderosity.com/softgood.ez?ViewSoftgood=9516 So I think "Great! Some cool space ships. I can do a space comic for sale and redistribution." Then I see a clause on the page stating the models are ONLy for non-commercial use. Now did I miss something or is the marketplace "selling" models for commercial use? I thought the idea was if I buy the model I am paying for its use. The free stuff area I can kind of understand since the stuff is free and one should not look a gift horse in the mouth but the market place is a commercial site. This would be like me buying Vicky from Daz and Daz saying "even though you bought this model you cannot use it commercially". I thought anything I buy in the market place is fair game for commercial use because I paid for the model.

Qoute from readme file:
The Starbase C3 Mojoworld Libraries are sold "as is" and consist of models and images that become yours for personal usage only. No commercial resale can be made using any 3d or 2d element of the C3 Mojoworld Libraries. They, along with their names, likeness, and titles remain the commercial property of Cube Productions Inc. You may import, alter textures, render ,animate, and play with the Libraries and their derivative designs (That's what it's all about;) for personal usage only. (ex. Personal web sites, online sim game play, personal art creation etc.) Cube provides commercial usage agreements for its properties. Please contact us at webmaster@cube3.com for further information.

Well... what I was thinking they ment was no use of the models themselves in comercial work where they could be extracted, cause i made a miswording once and had someone think they couldn't use it in comercial work. However after looking at there readme file, it states no use for comercial in 2d and 3d work which right there cuts out the possibility of using them in a picture your going to resell.

guess this guy doesn't wanna make many sales, I don't know why he did that, might be a miswording but it seems pretty clear int the readme. :?

Please don't extrapolate this non-commercial restriction to the whole of the Marketplace! This vendor added this on his/her own to the standard Renderosity license, which is, as you have been saying, far less restrictive. Why this person did this... you'll have to ask them!

Yep, it is his right to say that and it is stated up front so there is nothing to really complain about. At the same time, I doubt anyone that reads this will actually buy it due to the no commercial use clause. If I pay for something I expect to use it in commercial works. Nuff said.

Excerpts:

According to the licensing agreement the Renderosity requires sellers (Artist/Author) to put on the items - 'Buyer acquires the copyright to any derivative works created using this work, provided none of the original materials can be extracted from the derivative work by any means.'
And the Buyer's portion states - 'Buyer may use the materials in any personal projects or commercial projects, as long as the Artist 's work is protected from extraction'

yeah but keep in mind it is a guidline. The seller can change it but if they do should ahve that change clearly stated on the sale page. In this case it was clearly stated before purchase. You now have the choice to still buy or not. In this case I would make the choice of not buying.

That's silly! What are you really buying? The right to play with the software at home? That's really lame. If you buy a piece of software you should get the rights to use it for whatever you like. Why buy it otherwise?

That is the seller's right and the sellers choice. But I agree it is lame. I might have missed that non-commercial use clause and would have been REALLY pissed if I had bought but could not use it.

It's more than lame, it's incredibly stupid. As far as I'm concerned, anything sold in the Marketplace here should adhere to the Marketplace license and this site should enforce that. No way in hell would I pay $30 for something to "play with".

Merchants like this need to get a clue.

What about cars"? If I buy a car or truck and use it for a messenger service or to delever Pizza do I have to pay Chevrolet extra? I never did understand that.

When a person pays money for an item (model, texture, whatever), same as software manufacturers do, this should mean that you don't actually buy and own the item, but the license to use it commercially. This person obviously misses the point. You can't charge people money for something they don't receive the license to use. It's one thing with free giveaways, but with purchased items, it's quite another. He's charging almost $30 for this package. No one is going to pay that kind of money for this. There are very similar things floating out there on the 3D sites that are free (and I'm willing to bet some of those will even allow commercial use). He's probably sitting there wondering why no one's bought it yet. I think it's unbelievably selfish and greedy of a seller to do this. I don't really agree that an artist "has the right" to deny commercial use when money is exchanged for it. Freebies, yes, but not when he's making a profit, but the buyer can't use it for that purpose. What exactly is the buyer paying for, anyway? When I read about this sort of thing, it really gets my dander up! Melanie *** it's not just a hot flash this time, it's her fuse getting short ***

This kind of thing has come up before and I think Renderosity needs to do something to straighten this stuff out. I think this vendor is shooting themselves in the foot for another reason...their terms are probably unenforcable. They may also be exposing Renderosity to liability for deceptive advertising. IMHO: 1. If a product is sold with a document titled "license" and another one titled "read me", the one titled "license" will be presumed to be the legally binding one in any court of law. 2. When that license states "the Artist may only revoke this license, if it is shown that a Buyer has previously violated the terms and conditions above," any unilateral amendments to that license would be null and void as an attempt to revoke the license without the prerequisite license violation by the buyer. This would be true even if the amendment comes in a "read me" file bundled with the product and license when it is first obtained (essentially, revoking the license in advance of sale). Indeed, it may be seen as intentionally deceptive to provide a license at the time of purchase but "slip in" another document that alters it. The license could have, and should have, contained all pertainent and prevailing terms of use in effect at the time of sale. 3. The marketplace makes numerous and clear promises that that all products sold include the standard license and allow commercial usage. People rely on those statements when making purchases, and it may be considered deceptive or fraudulent if offered products do not comply with those advertised promises. But that's just my opinion.

Sorry to play devil's advocate here, but I guess the guy didnt want to see some of his hard work show up in somebody else's model package and be passed off as their own. That's been seen too many times in just the freestuff area alone.

Nah this is lame. If its in the market place then it should be usable to make commercial art period. That's what the market place is for. Now I have to go and read every license and make sure, even though I plunked down $$$ to buy it, I can only use it in a pic I do privately for no profit. That's like buying a t-shirt but you can only wear it in your bedroom. The marketplace is fair game. I'm paying for the item for crying out loud. How much more recognition and reward does the author want?

I agree with Dave on that. I read the restrictions as a new merchant who doesn't want their (2D) textures or (3D) meshes being used in someone else's products. Pretty much a standard restriction, just phrased differently. I expect Cube3 to post some clarification soon, to address member's concerns. Just my opinion:-)

Just a thought here, but wouldn't have been easier (not to mention more polite)to simply email the merchant and ask for clarification? Perhaps the liscense was misworded.

I exchanged brief Emails with him a bit ago, He said he'd post a statement this evening. I expect that will clarify things to some extent.

I think the biggest problem with the set, may be the fact that some of the ships look way too much like 'commercially published' ships (ie: star trek) So you would be tking copyright chances. I think the seller may be taking this chance as well, by selling then...dunno. ~EA

Well now it says: "(Note: These models are sold for non-commercial personal usage only.They remain the copyrighted properties of cube productions inc.)"

He's clarified it alright. Clarified himself out of sales.

Renderosity needs to do something about these types of restrictions because anything I buy here I will use commercially.

Perhaps he doesn't have the right to re-distribute them? What else could possibly be the explaination?

Yes I agree Kendra. I thought the market place was fair game. I can understand leather-guy's position that I wouldn't want my model or texture added to someone else's model or setup and resold. But you restrict all usage to personal use only in a store that sells the material makes little sense. is there anyway we can have a bold symbol on products that indicate that this product can be used commercially. Makes browsing much easier. I almost bought that ship pack and am glad I actually went in and read the fine print or I'd be out a few buck.

Stating the restriction only in a file bundled with the product, is like wanting to park your car in England, relying on the UK law that paid car park managers must compensate for theft etc unless stated otherwise, and then, after you have paid, finding a "We are not responsible for ..." message printed on the ticket or on a notice that can't be seen from outside the car park. Surely among so many Renderosity members, one is a lawyer and can give a ruling here?

I may be too much out of touch here, but I don't believe Mojoworld character files like these can be used anywhere but in Mojoworld. Is that how all you guys were wanting to use them? I don't think they'll work im Poser. I've never tried Mojoworld, myself - are the files compatible? Anyone here clarify this?

Anthony, the restrictions are posted on the product page and incorporated into the main graphic there as well as in the readme. I had seen the product page before I came across this thread, and I knew about them without having seen the readme. Hard to miss, actually, as there's only 3 short paragraphs, and the restrictions take up the whole third paragraph. I don't think anyone was trying to sneak it thru or put one over on prospective customers. I'm not a Mojoworld user, or affiliated with Cube, I just Emailed them about this thread so they'd have a chance to reply. When I ran a search for Cube3 in the forums, I only found a couple of posts, and I figured he/they likely didn't read the Poser forum as a matter of routine. (Not sure why it's here, anyway, as it's not a Poser product?)

"I may be too much out of touch here, but I don't believe Mojoworld character files like these can be used anywhere but in Mojoworld. Is that how all you guys were wanting to use them? I don't think they'll work im Poser. I've never tried Mojoworld, myself - are the files compatible? Anyone here clarify this?"

Couldn't tell you, I don't use Mojoworld. But it doesn't matter. Monkey see, monkey do. If one vendor thinks he can do this others might too.

And it shouldn't be allowed because it really isn't enforcable.

"No way in hell would I pay $30 for something to "play with". "??? Well, I guess those of us who are just hobbyists "playing" and not kidding ourselves that we're commecial artists are just dumbbutts, huh?.....can't believe anyone'd be dumb enough to buy Poser, Vic, Mike, etc..just 'cause they enjoy it and wanna learn something new. Gosh, i must be even dingier than I thought...I think. Beav(tongue in cheek) BTW...I just thought the disclaimer meant that you couldn't redistribute the meshes and models commercially..not that you couldn't use 'em in commercial pics.(But see comments concerning intellect above...probably went right over my stupid hobbyist head)....:) heehee

there is only one reason to buy a model ... Tar and Feathers comes to mind.

i don't think it's a good move.

Considering what the picture shows, and what Kendra above touched on, those ships like "cut-up, and pasted together" part of both Paramount Star Trek and Lucasfilms Star Wars ships... Just an observation... -Lee

Attached Link: http://www.theforce.net/scifi3d/

FYI - I made Cube3 aware of the the situation last night. Clint MarketPlace Manager

Two comments: 1. It doesn't matter if it's for Mojoworld or anything else, the fact is, money is being exchange for something that the purchaser can't use in commercial projects. It doesn't specifically state redistribution of meshes, it just says non-commerical, which covers all commerical projects, including renders. 2. If the person selling these has used other copyrighted ships (i.e., from Star Trek or Star Wars, etc.), then he/she is breaking the law in the first place, and giving a no-commercial restriction is sort of laughible since he/she is breaking that rule right there. Melanie

Hehe, I gotta agree with Beav1. Everything I have purchased, to the tune of about $450, is for pleasure, fun, etc. Lots of people buy oil paints, canvas, brushes, etc. and just paint for fun. It's like that for me, except digital. (besides, I can't paint )

I DO understand the comments, though, and agree with the general theme: If you sell it for use with Poser, renders from Poser should not be restricted in any way, commercial or private.

Why does the image Frankenstein and the angry mob come to mind here. Just because one vendor did this, you guys are ready to pitch the whole lot of them into the same category.

Thanks, Dave. i already said something like that in post #3. Really, i buy a LOT from the Marketplace here, and in that i am also a consumer, i am in violent agreement with those who prefer the regular R'osity usage policy, which is very standard and reasonable. Folks, i think i may generalize and say that most of the merchants feel just the way you do, so not to worry about people jumping on the restrictive use bandwagon. We're mostly smarter than that. :^) :^) :^)

"Well, I guess those of us who are just hobbyists "playing" and not kidding ourselves that we're commecial artists are just dumbbutts, huh?.....can't believe anyone'd be dumb enough to buy Poser, Vic, Mike, etc..just 'cause they enjoy it and wanna learn something new. Gosh, i must be even dingier than I thought...I think"

You're reading quite a bit into what I said that isn't there. Most of what I do is "playing". My point is that I couldn't see spending so much on something so restricted. If I'm going to fork over $30 for anything I'd better be able to do what I want with my renders. Including selling posters or web designs.

Kendra, I agree with you (and the majority of the thread concerning selling and full commercial use). But to sort of, though I wasn't elected to the position , try to explain what beav1 and I were saying: I don't think beav1 nor I were "centering" on your remark. Although he DID pull a quote from your message, I think his remark and my remark really stemmed from a small underlying part of the discussion which seemed to be saying "why would anyone pay for something that really only allowed it to be played with?" I see at least one other remark like that and when I first read the message thread, it seemed to infer that kind of message (in addition to other things). I think, tho I certainly may be wrong, the majority of the people who frequent the Poser areas of R'City are doing it for fun. Some, perhaps, thinking that one day they can make some money from it. Others knowing it's just a hobby. And you certainly did say "I" when you mentioned your feelings.

Here's what it says in their readme file about the subject: "You may import, alter textures, render ,animate, and play with the Libraries and their derivative designs (That's what it's all about;) for personal usage only. " Seems pretty clear you'd end up paying for something can only admire personally on your own computer.

This is like buying MS Word and then not being allowed to publish the book you wrote with it. Like a restaurant being able to buy ingredients and make food, but not sell it. Amateurs. Sheesh.

A while ago someone asked me for permission to make commercial images using my scuba diver model, and I allowed him. This happened 3 times, and once with my Grey alien model.

I don't have a problem with Free Stuff having restrictions on renders, but commercially purchased items should be unrestricted. Not allowing items to be redistributed, commercially or not, is a valid concern - it directly takes away the merchant's ability to make money. How I use the item, so long as it doesn't affect the vendor, is up to me. If the Starbase merchant gets away with this, then other merchants may try the same. We already had a problem with one merchant slipping in a "non-commercial use only" clause in the Read Me of purchased items. The Admins stepped in and said that was not allowed. The contract in the Marketplace clearly states that commercial renders are permissible. Yes, Starbase prominently states non-commercial renders only, but all of my stuff is seperated between purchased and free downloads. If I ever start selling my artwork, I'll be able to separate out my non-commercial items and make sure that I'm legal (and ethical) with my renders. Having merchants free to add restrictions on top of the Rendie license means all commercial artists here are going to go through Hell separating all the restrictions that will start popping up. Yes, I'm voting with my feet by staying the Hell away from this purchase (and the other ones available at their site) but keeping this in the Marketplace sets a dangerous precedent - merchants freely deviating from the standard Marketplace contract with the excuse, "But I did put a warning up." We'll end up with rules about how obvious the warning has to be, etc., before long.

Yes, in the vein of the thread, I can only ask...Does Renderosity permit people to post items for sale that don't comply with their copyright standards? Meaning more stringent.

If the standard license agreement for the Marketplace says commercial renders are allowed on purchased items, then any artist wishing to post a sale item in the Marketplace (in order to make money, mind you), then he/she had better seriously consider this. If he/she doesn't want commercial renders created from the purchased item, then don't put it up for sale. Simple as that. What do they have against artists using it for commercial renders anyway; the seller has already made their share from the sale of the item, anyway. That's the whole point of charging a price for it. Melanie

If Mr.X makes a model, and Qwerty Inc. uses it in a commercial render, then sometimes Mr.X will want a rakeoff from the profit that Qwerty Inc. makes using renders including that model. That is a common feature of business. Similar to that in the past I have known book authors to want extra royalties for copies of their books that end up in public libraries, and videotapes are often marked as "not for public showing or rediffusion".

Mr.X ... didn't he write morphman?

"If Mr.X makes a model, and Qwerty Inc. uses it in a commercial render, then sometimes Mr.X will want a rakeoff from the profit that Qwerty Inc. makes using renders including that model."

Then Mr. X needs to sell on his own website where he can establish this for his items. Not in a marketplace with what should be one standard. Mr. X can market his item to the type of group that will give him what he wants and not a group so diverse.

Just my opinion anyway. The way Renderosity is set up, it needs to enforce one license across the board.

Hey...I SAID tongue-in-cheek...LOL

I'm a little late here, but I wanted to jump in with a clarification on the offense taken by the "why would anyone buy something they couldn't use in commericial work" stuff. The difference here is that if you buy Poser, Mike, Vic, etc. just to play with (and I don't want to think how much I've spent doing just that) and then somehow get a chance to sell one of your pieces that uses them, you can do that. You have the right to use them commericially, whether you do so or not. In this case, you wouldn't have that right. I sincerely doubt I'll ever be able to sell anything I make, but I also won't buy something that has a personal use only clause in the license because, frankly, it's just selfish. Freebies are all right (I have that clause in my freebies as well, though I need to rewrite and clarify that I mean work intended specifically for profit) because the provider is doing a favor and getting nothing in return. A vendor is not doing a favor, they're doing a job, and one of my job requirements is freedom to do whatever I want with the images I make with the model. On the other hand, if that's not one of your job requirements, that's cool too.

Mr. X has received his compensation when he first sold the item for $30 (or whatever). If he sells his virtual widiget to 1000 people, he's made $30,000. Why should he ask for more just so the buyer can use it in a commercial project? His orilginal selling price is his cut in the profit. If he asks for extra to use the item in a for-profit project, then he's double dipping. Melanie

I AM Mr. X And I agree with Melanie. If I sold Morph Manager for $30 lets say and someone out there uses it to make the best video game on earth that sells 50 million copies then I can't come back and demand a cut of that money. I sold it under my license agreement. Plus there's the arguement of taking the bad with the good ie someone wants a cut of profits when their product is used to make something profitable but the same people won't take a portion of the loss if their same product creates a loss.

What I want to know is if this is going to be allowed to take place here in the Marketplace. Do you stand by your license or not? This is the type of confusion you should be trying to avoid.