Sorry to add to the controversy, but I fear that clarification is even more important to DAZ than to me in my case. And sorry about being long-winded, but I think clarity and precision are essential now. I have not created an automatic app like Codetwister's ground-breaking Tailor, but I did develop and publicize a manual method for shrink-wrapping meshes around DAZ figures, and my own results from using the method have been sold or freestuff'ed since 2000 (the so-called "QuickSuits", -free base OBJ meshes for clothes creation). I was planning to put a new QS for Stephanie up as freestuff on PoserStyle (see image above) - but before I inadvertently break law, I'd like to know if your stance on this kind of thing has changed. More generally, I'd like to know if my method for creating Poser clothes make the products illegal, since this is rather important to me (and anyone else fitting their meshes to DAZ figures). DAZ (Zygote at the time) were given the original P4 and Mil QS meshes for inspection back then. When they were satisfied that the meshes were original, they gave their blessing. An attitude I admire, both for being generous, and for being wise, as any increased interest in Poser will supposedly directly or indirectly increase DAZ sales. Your FAQ about 2nd stage derivates (http://www.daz3d.com/pages/faq/answers/license/2nd-derivative.html) lists unacceptable methods of deriving new meshes from DAZ models. The list includes "shrink-wrapping/fitting" on the list. More than a year ago, I developed an app-independent manual slice/scan/fit method, which I offered to anyone interested on R'osity (http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=328879). Used in conjunction with smoothing and mesh cleanup, also part of any good 3D app, it can produce quite acceptable results (again, see above image). Without modifications the mesh itself is not very interesting, but it is 100% original, and it will provide a good base for developing new clothing. It is obviously more vertex-pushing than using automatic tools such as ClothReyes (Max) or Magnetic Vertex (TrueSpace), but the results are cleaner and more "intelligent", as they are based on choice rather than computing-only. However, as I think this kind of intial basic fitting "donkey work" is essentially re-inventing the wheel, instead of inventing new stuff for Poser, and thus increase the app's appeal to everyone, I have put zero restrictions on the use of the QS meshes. That means that an unknown number of Poserites may have created new Poser items in good faith with the QS's, or with the suggested method. More generally, ANY creation of Poser clothing will have to include some way or method for mesh creation around, or adjusted for, the intended target figure ("fitting" in your legalese, above). If your attitude now deems any such method, and the resulting meshes (such as QS's) illegal, I for one shall have to pull my freestuff items, and issue a very public warning and apology, and emphasize that my method and meshes are for personal use only. More generall y, all clothing creators who take the intended target figure into their 3D app for reference (instead of modeling by pure guesswork), might have to do likewise. I find it very hard to believe that you intend all this to happen, as I don't think it would be in DAZ's own best interests, for the above-mentioned reasons. Making Poser as attractive as possible will always increase DAZ sales, since DAZ is the first stop for every Poser item buyer. I certainly hope I have hugely overestimated my own importance, and hence my transgressions, in this matter, but I'd like to know. I'm a reasonably law-abiding citizen, and there'll be no hard feelings if you give me the thumbs-down (just a few sad ones, as that will most likely be the end of my Poser clothesmaking). I'm a hobbyist, as are most Poser users, and you have to make a living at this, so I'll respect your say-so. I hope you can find the time to give the say-so quite soon, as I (and a probably quite a few clothesmakers) are involuntarily retired until then. Respectfully, thip

Well put, thip. Q

Lo mate Well i cant see the problem as we all need to use the figures to get the modle we make to look a little like the figures that were them. And we as modelers are the ones making the meshes not daz, ok so we use there models to base our clothes and props on but as long as they dont contain there figure`s original mesh then there is not a prob cheersw dolly

very well put..

This is what it says on the DaZ FAQ. "DAZ models may not be used to create derivative, second-stage, or further stage derivative 3D models which can then be distributed in competition with the original DAZ product." Now, I understand where transferring morphs or shrinkwrapping, say, Vicki's shape to another 3D character would be non-kosher, but I don't understand how doing that for clothing would be. A dress for Vicki does not compete with Vicki. I would appreciate an explanation on how, or if, it is. After all, to take an example from the physical world, there are lots of clothes for Barbie (TM) dolls that are not made by Mattel.

Keep in mind, just because they "can" enforce this doesn't mean they "will." Most contracts I've seen in the past have had some non-enforcable BS in them. Read the microsoft licensing if you don't believe it. A policeman can give you a ticket for 56 mph in a 55 mph zone, but they probably won't.

Thip, Thank you. That is at least a reasonable setting of the problem, spoken in a calm voice. There is a tinge of sadness and concern there, and a willingness to work towards a solution, instead of this sudden flurry of hate and fear found in too many other messages. I hope it's contagious, but reasonableness isn't as much fun as name-calling, judging from the posts. ::shake head sadly:: What surprises me is that Steve Kondris posted the concerns in the FAQ at PoserPros last Tuesday... and folks waited until the weekend, when nobody would be around, to get all upset and petulant and demanding instant responses. A problem of this essential nature is too important to pressure into settlement, and if more people would spend time thinking about it, as you have done, instead of reacting like tinder in a wildfire, we'd find a safe route through this morass. DAZ must protect their intellectual property. We must have a way to contribute our own creative output in some confidence that what we are doing is not only legal but welcomed. There are so many ramifications to this, so many shifting layers, that I wouldn't want an off-the-cuff solution. I'd prefer that the points be argued and examined... they'll be less subject to change later if they are solidly reasoned now. Carolly

Posting to get an email back.

I hope this proves to be a misunderstanding...I hope DAZS' position is NOT that competetive products are illegal (which is the way I'm reading this). ANYTHING made by anyone other than DAZ is competetive with something or other that they've made (or will be when they get through defining terms). Or, maybe that's the point. "Unacceptable" does not mean "Illegal". And to me it's revealing that they used the term "unacceptable" rather than "illegal" (talked to the lawyers have you?); well yeah, because it's not illegal because nobody's sued and brought the issue to the attention of the courts yet. DAZ can protect their intellectual property all they want, but it's the definition of "intellectual property" that is the underlying issue. How can you deem a "method" to be "unacceptable"?. This is nuts and until somebody takes them to court they'll get away with it. I suspect it's the beginning of the end. Without creativity and innovation (which has come from the "outside" modelers/hobbyists/artists) Poser wouldn't be where it is. No Poser, no DAZ. What keeps Poser floating is the incessant influx of new ideas/methods/products which come from "outside". Dam up the source of new innovations, superior products, etc., and... If they had half a brain they'd encourage expansion in all areas. It is the nature of creativity to expand, not lie stagnant in a ditch. After Mike 1 we had a third-party (Massive Mike or whatever the first one was called). When Mike 2 was released well, gosh, golly, gee, there were all those morps to make Mike 2 into a "Massive Mike" clone. Howcome that was "acceptable"?

Anything that DAZ did not create DAZ cannot control.

A "shrink-wrapped" mesh is an original work and is the property of the modeler who created it.

-Jeff

That was indeed DAZ' enlightened attitude to fitted, but original meshes when I created the P4 and Mil QS's, Jeff. I still think this is something we can clear up easily with a few well-chosen statements, so please, everyone, stay calm and sensible. Cheers, thip

I am with you thip. Lets give them a chance to respond. I think some things have been takin out of context. Ron

{{{{"DAZ models may not be used to create derivative, second-stage, or further stage derivative 3D models which can then be distributed in competition with the original DAZ product."}}}}

The key to this misunderstanding is actually in the above quote. It is the words "distributed in competition with the original". What this ruling means is that if I used a shrink wrap method to copy Vicki's body shape onto a new original mesh, built a face and head, made it into a posable character, and then sold it, I have actually created a product in direct competition with Vicki. She would likely be a huge success for me, because she could of course wear Vicki's clothing, and if I were creative in mapping the UV maps, maybe even use Vicki's textures. We have seen this done VERY recently in a 3rd party model.

But what does this do to DAZ? Is it fair to them? Do they have the right to say they own their own body shape, and you may not reproduce it through any means to compete with them? Of course they do. Just as I have that right in what I create that is my own original work.

However, what you all fear, that they are trying to stop folks from making clothing in support of their work is not happening. DAZ has always welcomed people creating products that enhance and support their original creations. I do not believe this stance has changed, since upon reading this it is clear they are only disallowing models that are made in competition, not as enhancement add ons.

I hope some things have been taken out of context, but I doubt that is the case. The fact is that the DAZ faq is now claiming that DAZ has a right to control things that they do not own. It's frankly bullshit. They cannot claim morphs created by someone else, by any method are copyright violations, unless those morphs are distrubuted in such a way as someone without the original geometry can make use of them. Distrubution in .cr2 format has always been acceptable. DAZ cannot close their eyes, wish real hard and make it so. They are making claims they are not entitled to make.

DAZ has always welcomed people creating products that enhance and support their original creations. I do not believe this stance has changed, since upon reading this it is clear they are only disallowing models that are made in competition, not as enhancement add ons.<<< That's why they specifically told people who broker with them that clothing containing Tailor morphs must be sold on the DAZ site only? Yeah, that's welcoming.

"What this [ruling] means is that if I used a shrink wrap
method to copy Vicki's body shape onto a new original mesh, built a face and head, made it into a posable character.."

Actually this method of model building is legal as well as long as the new model does not contain a DAZ owned dataset.

I want to follow this, so here's my automated response post... along with 2cents worth. I love the Mike2 and Vickie2 models. I purchased them after seeing the tons of free facial morphs, clothing and skin textures available in the free stuff area of this site and others. I was so impressed with their features and flexibility, I posted encouragement to another member to purchase them as well, and that post was eventually used in one of DAZ's advertisements. Although I am not as satisfied with their Millennium clothing packages as I am with the models that utilize them, I do understand DAZ's wish to remain competitive. That does NOT mean I condone restricting artistic license, nor cornering the market. Attempts to do so would be illegal in the US free-market society. Trying to understand the issue, I went to their FAQ site and read through the licensing agreement. After reading the FAQ at their site, I can honestly say I do not see where an original clothing mesh that looks nothing like any of their clothing would break their copyright, nor their licensing agreement. Here are two relevant excerpts from the EULA: "4. GENERAL RESTRICTIONS AND TERMS OF USE. ... [paragraph 1: 3D models are to be used by one user or in one household] ... [from paragraph 2:] ..."You may... [use the 3D models in renders and animation for sale or distribution] ...provided that you may not in any case: (a) separately publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense any 3-D Model(s) or any part thereof; or (b) publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense renderings, animations, software applications, data or any other product from which any original 3-D Model(s), or any part thereof, or **any substantially similar version of the original 3-D Model(s) ** can be separately exported, extracted, or de-compiled into any re-distributable form or format... "6. OTHER RESTRICTIONS. ...[This is a licence to use the 3D models] ...User may not reverse engineer, de-compile, disassemble, or create derivative works from the 3-D Model(s). These restrictions do not pertain to rendered images or pre-rendered animations." While I am not a lawyer, as a customer, I take this to mean any new mesh that looks like the items in the clothing pack (shirt, slacks, dress, catsuit, etc...) would be breaking copyright because it looks "substantially similar" to the items created by DAZ. Obviously, any of DAZ's mesh that is altered to make it appear to be totally different would be breaking copyright because the "new" item would in essence be using pieces of the original. If my interpretation is correct, then folks who make clothes totally from scratch for distribution through free stuff have nothing to worry about. And artists who make original clothes (such as fetish gear) totally from scratch for sale should not be breaking the license because DAZ does not offer such items for sale and would therefore, not be in direct competition with DAZ's products. Either way, unless DAZ can prove the item for free stuff or for sale was created AFTER this license agreement was updated, all previous items would fall under a grandfather clause. If DAZ prosecuted artists making original mesh items before this change in the license agreement, it would be a breach of contract on DAZ's part by altering the license agreement under which the customer originally purchased the Millennium figures. That would be a form of non-disclosure or false advertisement. Until someone from the legal profession can say this interpretation is incorrect, I have no choice but to belive I am correct. I look forward to learning more directly from DAZ. If my interpretation of the above items is INCORRECT and they are, in fact, trying to prevent artist from selling original meshes of original ideas that fit the bodies of Mike and Vickie, they will loose the respect and business of the Poser community, as is demonstrated by most of the posts in previous threads. I sincerely hope that is not true. Either way, it seems DAZ will suffer some form of backlash from this new license agreement.

mehndi said: "The key to this misunderstanding is actually in the above quote. It is the words "distributed in competition with the original". What this ruling means is that if I used a shrink wrap method to copy Vicki's body shape onto a new original mesh, built a face and head, made it into a posable character, and then sold it, I have actually created a product in direct competition with Vicki. She would likely be a huge success for me, because she could of course wear Vicki's clothing" Isn't that Vina D.?

I just don't understand why the answers cannot be "clearly" stated by DAZ. All of this is very interpretive. It seems to me that you cannot derive a new model (human figure) from the vicky mesh, for example. And you cannot derive a new jacket from a jacket model. That seems like an quasi-unfair thing for a designer to do. Ok, granted. But this can also be interpreted to mean that you cannot derive a new jacket from a vicky mesh (even by creating splines among the curves of the body and so forth). I was looking at Bloodsong's website last night concerning the Dragon Factory (which looks awesome, btw). I like that on one page there is legal-speak and on the other is what that actually means. I thought that was cool and witty. Perhaps we could tone down the legal speak and get some honest answers.

Here is the actual quote. No where in it did Daz say you cant use the Tailor except under limited circumstances which to me are very fair nor did they say you can not make original clothing for their figures. "There is little to no creative abilities within the bounds/code of the Tailor, simply tools to manipulate/transfer/organize, etc. And though Codetwister's application does allow some pretty unique results, this is not considered original creation or design. HOWEVER, and this is the big crucial "however", because the new cr2's generated by The Tailor still require that people possess both AIko and the Victoria Clothing Pak in order to make use of the new CR2's. Whenever a new character or product requires that both the figure that the morphs were transferred from and the figure that the morphs were transferred to be owned already by the users, then this process is legal. When this guideline is adhered to, neither DAZ, nor any of the artists that work cooperatively as Brokered Artists with DAZ, or any other creator for that matter, is damaged by such new creations. This does not mean that derivative characters cannot be made or sold if they work off of limited use CR2 files. In fact, there are many ways in which this can be done, whether it be via MOR Pose files (perhaps the most preferred method by us), OBJaction mover, etc. By "Limited Use CR2" I mean those that are non-distributable. In the case of DAZ's property, any Millennium Figure CR2 (other than say Michael 1.0, Victoria 1.0, or the Millennium Baby to name a few) is considered to be "non-distributable". What I want to address here though is the concept of "circumvention". This is the simplest and most accurate way to state DAZ's position on any such characters. The only thing DAZ considers unfair, and therefore illegal, is when someone creates a character that then makes it possible for people to truly benefit from the Millennium Figures CR2 contents without having to purchase the Millennium Figure itself. For example, if someone creates a CR2 file for Michael's Bodysuit that contains the Muscular3 morph from Michael 2.0 and then begins to distribute that new CR2 publicly or commercially, suddenly people who have never purchased Michael 2.0 will benefit from items included only within Michael 2.0. We feel that this is unfair, particularly when it creates a disincentive to purchase that original product. Basically, anything that circumvents the need to purchase an original product is most likely not allowed. There is another issue that needs to be addressed: Under normal licensing standpoints, it would be damaging to the sales of The Tailor, since people could get the morphs without purchasing The Tailor. But, "Codetwister" has relinquished all such rights openly and publicly, stating specifically that such practices are allowable. I have personally communicated with CodeTwister specifically on this issue and he has reaffirmed his desire not to restrict the use of his application with such copyright rules." Ron

"For example, if someone creates a CR2 file for Michael's Bodysuit that contains the Muscular3 morph from Michael 2.0 and then begins to distribute that new CR2 publicly or commercially, suddenly people who have never purchased Michael 2.0 will benefit from items included only within Michael 2.0" BUT! the body suit cannot contain a Mike 2 morph, it has to have a morph that is made from it's own mesh, that resembles/comes close to/mimics the mike 2 mesh. If then, someone takes the morph from the clothing and uses The Tailor to make another morph that resembles/comes close to/mimics the morph that resembles/comes close to/mimics from mike 2, and puts it in a mike 1, you get a clunky knock off. It will not look as nice as the daz morph, it is a 3rd generation approximation. The folks making original clothing meshes are getting a raw deal here, when they are doing nothing wrong at all. It is the person who would take a morphed piece of clothing and reverse engineer a resembles/comes close to/mimics mike2 or vick2 morph that would be the problem. Not the clothing modelers! The wrong people are being punished here.

Pam your wrong. The catsuit was made from the Mike geoms and is almost exactly the same. Further no where has Daz said you can not make your own clothing meshes that is what others are saying. Please show me a quote where Daz said that. Ron

I hope you are right Ron. I do not have the bodysuit, so I do not know. If it uses the same mesh, then you would not need The Tailor at all, you could just use poser or morph manager. What the fuss is over is Tailor made approximations, no?

TygerCub: The issue raised by DAZ (originally on the PoserPros forum) was not about the models themselves, but about the MORPHS contained in V2 and M2. According to what I have gleaned from reading all the posts, DAZ feels that anything which conforms to any of the new morphs on V2 or M2 is a violation REGARDLESS of the mesh or the method of creation (even if BOTH the mesh and method are your original work, the result may NOT be distributed). The example they used specifically mentioned using The Tailor to apply corresponding morphs to an original article of clothing (such as a 3rd party generic bodysuit) even though The Tailor does not "copy" the morphs, but creates new morphs that are approximations. They went on to say that The Tailor was only an example, and that ANY method of replicating the morph SHAPE (not the morph code) was an infringement. IE: anything that allows an otherwise original mesh to "fit" one of their new morphed figures is a violation. This is the kernel of the issue after you remove the "smoke screen" of hyperbole thrown at us by DAZ before they retired for the weekend. They were very clear if you read the statement carefully. They simply do NOT want any competition to their own morphed clothing for M2 and V2, and they don't care how "original" the article of clothing is. wdupre: If you read DAZ's statement you will see that they went far beyond making a copy of Yucky2 - they just used that as an example which served their needs because most would agree that a direct copy of V2 IS a violation, and none of us would do it. But they expanded that analogy to include almost any article of clothing (now or in the future) which might compete in GENERAL. For example: DAZ makes a shirt with M2 morphs in it (and a crummy one to boot), then you can NOT make a shirt - ANY SHIRT of any kind or shape (made by any method - current or future) which will fit a M2 or V2 morphed figure. PERIOD Mehndi: Much as I respect you, I must disagree that a "similar shape" cannot be considered a copyright infringement, no matter what the EULA says. DAZ can copyright the mesh, and they can copyright the CODE for a morph - they can even copyright the "likeness" of the body/head textures. But they cannot prohibit approximations or similarities that are independently derived. Of course they can INTIMIDATE us into complying with their selfish whims, but that doesn't make them right.

Here's a render of Michael 1 wearing Sci-fi Guys Morphable Bodysuit and the Michael 2 Morphing Clothing Pack bodysuit. Mike's body has not been changed at all. I did apply the muscular 3 morph to the suit. Even DAZ's "officially sanctioned" product circumvents the need to buy Michael 2 to get the Muscular morphs.

I don't see Daz sending out a deluge of cease and desist letters. and I can only believe that the only items that they could (or would)legaly question is items derived directly from their meshes or items wich could be used to reverse engineer exactly the shape of their meshes (thus the concern over the body suit)so please people, please, please, don't start pulling your great products prematurely! Especialy becouse I don't have enough money to buy them all this weekend ;)

However, the morphs contained in the distributable cr2s a.k.a the LE versions are ok to add to clothes? I'm refering to this quote: (By "Limited Use CR2" I mean those that are non-distributable. In the case of DAZ's property, any Millennium Figure CR2 (other than say Michael 1.0, Victoria 1.0, or the Millennium Baby to name a few) is considered to be "non-distributable".)

Then Daz has again shot itself in the foot, because they are selling, in their Michael 2 Morphing clothing pack 1 and 2, a catsuit that, and I quote, 'contains corresponding morphs for all of Michael 2.0's morphs.' If this is not acceptable for Daz and threatens their copyrights why are they selling it? To anyone, not just those who have bought MIke 2 The thing I worry about in the FAQ is the word "can" "DAZ models may not be used to create derivative, second-stage, or further stage derivative 3D models which can then be distributed in competition with the original DAZ product." As was proven last night in another thread-- breast sizes can be transferred from clothing for Vicki 2 to Vicki 1. The word 'can' is a literal can of worms. How about making it illegal-- I think then you could jump from unacceptable to illegal for this one-- to actually distributing a model in competition. We will all gladly jump on that with both feet stiletto shod. Here's the rewritten sentence. DAZ models may not be used to create derivative, second-stage, or further stage derivative 3D models which are then distributed in competition with the original DAZ product." That's illegal. And I support it. Possibility [indicated by the word 'can'] is infinite and unpredictable. And also unenforceable--except by whim. It's a universal bugbear in court. Emily

Ronstuff please show me where Daz has said that. I also read the post and quoted exactly what they said. Ron

Okay....I think legally, this is how it stands. If you had purchased any of the mil2 figures BEFORE this statement was made by Daz, you are not bound by the new rules, but, by the rules in the "readme" of your m2 character. you entered into a contract at the time of the purchase. this contract cannot be altered after the fact by either of the parties, independently. also, clothing that may "compete" with their clothing package can be modelled and SOLD. there is no law that i have heard of that would grant such a monopoly...as, under our legal system, free enterprise is encouraged.

Thanx to all for voicing their concerns, and for keeping them reasonably sotto voce ;o) Just to clear up exactly what my concern in this thread is, here's the key paragraph from the link I give above. I have re-written the key passages verbatim in uppercase for emphasis : "One of the simplest ways to create a derivative model is to convert a DAZ model (typically OBJ format) to another non-Poser format, and distribute that. Beyond this, a DAZ model may be altered by adding and/or removing geometry in order to create a derivative work. EVEN MORE DIFFICULT FOR MOST USERS TO RECOGNIZE, BUT STILL DETECTABLE TO TRAINED MODELERS, ARE METHODS INVOLVING TOOLS THAT CAN CREATE A DERIVATIVE MESH WITHOUT TRANSFERRING THE POLYGONAL LAYOUT OF THE ORIGINAL. (MANY OF THESE METHODS CAN RESULT IN A MESH WHICH SEEMS LEGITIMATE, OFTEN WITH NO VERTICES COINCIDENTAL WITH THE ORIGINAL. THESE TYPES OF TOOLS/METHODS MAY INCLUDE: NURBS/poly conversions, subdivision/smoothing or triangulation operations, de-resing, SHRINK-WRAPPING/FITTING and randomization operations.) The distribution of models created using any of the above examples is strictly prohibited, and none of these methods will result in a mesh that is not still subject to DAZ's copyright." The method I describe above, and on the link given (to the Amapi Forum), would constitute a "manual shrink-wrapping" method. Like all other methods of making a mesh that fits another, it relies on having the target mesh (i.e. the DAZ figure) in one's 3D app as a reference. It yields a new mesh "with no vertices coincidental with the original", as will naturally be the case with a totally new mesh. This kind of mesh would still be a copyright infringement, if the above text is read literally. I'm still sure that DAZ did not intend the wording of their EULA to be interpreted thus, but I'd prefer to know for sure. I'm sure a lot of other people would, too. So let's wait and hope for a sensible DAZ answer, and keep cool while we're waiting.

Ronmolina- go to the PoserPros forum - I can't post the link here as it will just be removed as have other links - The context I am referring to is in a lengthy discussion which followed their original statement which you quoted. But I did make an error when I said "if you read their statement" - I should have said "If you read their statement and their discussion and clarification that follows it." As I said before, I have boiled the issue down to its essence, removed the hyperbole and I have not claimed to quote them directly. I don't even ask anyone to "believe" me. Their statements speak for themselves. If you disagree with my conclusions, quote me something said by DAZ that contradicts them. I have a completely open mind, and even hope that they reevaluate and re-state their position, but this is where it stands for now.

Thip....This post by Daz came out in the last week or so. You did your tutorial...which, i found very, very useful...long, long ago. they can't just come out...all this time later, and make a new rule governing a figure that you must have bought at least as long ago, as your tutorial. you entered into a contract when you purchased your michael. you are free to use your michael as you see fit under the TERMS that were in place at the time you entered into it. they can try scare tactics...and, try to make folks think that it is not legal to "shrinkwrap" their mike, all they want....but, where in your readme does it say that? can you point me to any spot on daz that says this is infringement....AT THE TIME OF YOUR PURCHASE? There are no "ex post facto" laws, nor are there "ex post facto" contracts.

Fascinating. And kind of ironic. Anyone ever open up Vicki and Eve side by side in a modeling prog and examine the mesh cuts for jointing carefully? ;]

The reason this didn't break out until the weekend when the Daz people aren't here to defend themselves is because they posted on Thursday on another forum and people didn't find out about this post until Friday afternoon from someone in Renderosity. No offense, but I don't go to PoserPros very often. Until the mention at Renderosity, there was little posting about it at PoserPros, either. Now that people here are aware of it, there's a lot of posts at PoserPros as well. There's a lot of clothing morphs that eliminate the need to own Vicki 2 or Michael 2 - at least in regards to body shaping. The version 2 facial morphs are worth the upgrade regardless of clothing that can simulate the body morphs- but only if there's clothing that fits them. And if we can not create and distribute clothing morphs that can fit Vicki 2 or Mike 2 because they could concievably be used with a Vicki 1 or Mike 1 figure, then we really can't create or distribute any clothing morphs at all.

Personally I am tired of being led (and mislead) down the garden path by DAZ. It seems that their policy changes the moment they detect that someone has made something better than them (a potential threat) I have never seen such selfish behavior in any consumer oriented 3D community. I have made and freely distributed 3D models, mods, and add-ons for Games like MS Flight Simulator, MS Train Sim, The Sims, Ultima Online, Quake and many others. ALL of them support the 70% rule which implies that if you use their original (mesh, texture, whatever) as a base for your creation, but essentially create 70% new, then you have a right to distribute the derivitive product and call it your own. And please dont yell at me saying that this is a PROFESSIONAL community with different standards. BS - that may have been the case once upon a time, but my guess wqould be that at least 70% or more of DAZ's business comes from hobbyists and amateurs. Nevertheless, I have always abided by and respected DAZ's 100% rule. But now DAZ has introduced the 110% rule! It was bad enough when they had the 100% rule and convinced us that they own every pixel of a texture, every single vertex in 3D space, which is bounded by or coincidental to one of their pixels or vertices, but NOW they tell us that even THAT is not enough for them. They not only want to own the original pixels, and vertices, but ANYTHING NEARBY OR SIMILAR. Personally, everything about V2 and M2 has been a disappointment to me. I naievely thought that when Michael 2 came out, there would be new geometry in the body which fixed some of the terrible warps and breaks when the figure is posed. I thought M2 was an UPDATE or UPGRADE for M1. Instead, it was nothing more than an ADD-ON (aside from the head which is great, but still does not have a forehead morph!) . The body mesh is virtually identical - especially in the hip area where it needed the most work. All I got for my money was a LOT of mostly useless morphs that bloat my .pz3 files by about 15 megs per figure. Who would EVER want to copy all those morphs to clothing anyway? And the new morphed Bodysuit is the same - still crappy mapping - and just bloats my files. Instead I would rather use The Tailor and copy only the few morphs that I find useful to the original body suit and be done with it. But this is what DAZ DOES NOT WANT me to do! Sorry about the rant, and admit that this is carrying their point to an extreme, but is IS what they are suggesting, and all I can say is selfish, Selfish, SELFISH!

At times like this, I really wish DAZ had someone on duty on the weekends to check into the message boards. The simple fact is, we can debate what they did or did not mean, but none of us know what was intentional and what was poor choice of words. We really need DAZ to clarify what they actually mean, and preferably a copyright lawyer to say what actually can and cannot be done. ::sighs:: It's going to suck to wait until Monday for this.

Exactly, FyreSpirit. Heck, go see my most recent posts on the thread below to see my opinion that we're just tossing probabilities until DAZ says something official.

FyreSpiryt, you will not need to wait till Monday. I have just gotten off the phone with the DAZ men who are in their office working on a post to further explain this matter to the satisfaction of all. Original clothing makers of most clothing are not affected by this ruling. People who want to modify existing clothing to fit new characters, or even the Version 2 Millenium figures such as Michael 2 and Vicki 2 are not affected by this ruling for the most part. This ruling was meant to cover only one or two areas that have begun to become a problem. I ask you all to remain calm and wait on Chad's post. As for someone on duty on the weekends, that is where PoserPros staff and I will begin to fill the bill partly. We are here and staffed round the clock for you to turn to, and know how to reach the DAZ men if need be, and in many cases will know answers for you to help you without even needing to reach them, once the transition is more fully completed.

Thanx loads for the advance answer, Mehndi. Sounds as if DAZ is sensible enough. I for one will wait more or less calmly, if slightly impatiently ;o)

Thanks Mehndi, A little breather is a good idea. While I wait... I was just wondering what "one or two areas" have become a problem? Is it things like SFGs bodysuit? If so, then I think it's a paranoid knee-jerk on the part of YouKnowWho. For example, I already owned the SFG bodysuit, as well as Doug Sturk's bodysuit, AND the Tailor when I went ahead and purchased the M2 Morphing CloPak. Why? because they are different items with different applications (although superficially similar). Owning any one of them does not make me personally more or less prone to buying another version if it comes along. Now, however, after such a stink, I really want a refund for the M2 CloPak, not because it is duplicated with something else I own, but because it is inferior, and I was misled into thinking that it was conforming and might be a time-saving item (NOT). Normally I would not ask for a refund even when I am dissatisfied with a product- I just write off the loss as a "foolish expense" don't use it. But their anti-consumer attitude (and this is not the first time it has come up) is beginning to make me feel less charitable to them. No matter what they say next, it is clear that they think we are all a bunch of criminals, and I just resent that entirely.

Mehndi: DAZ can fuck off. They have no right to make any controls on this issue, and if they really want to, I'd suggest they figure out the legal facts of life first. Paul

Glad to hear it Mehndi. Since my name is being bantered about here and there, complete with illustrations of my morphed body suit, let me be perfectly clear that I have never, and would never, distribute the M2/V2 cr2's. I distributed clothing cr2s that contained morphs that allowed the clothes to fit morphed figures and that is all I have ever done. I would appreciate it if people keep that in mind. I will also say this: 1. Just because I happen to have made an item directly named in Daz' announcement (I'm not the only one you know) doesn't mean I did something that anyone here thought could possibly be wrong. I morphed the body suit for Mike in good faith that it was not an issue to do so. 2. My Mike suit was released in April well before Daz ever had a body suit with even one Mike morph in it. At the time, there wasn't even a hint that one might be coming. No objection was made until now, and I had no way of knowing this would be a issue. 3. My suit does NOT contain every Mike2 morph (for that matter, none of my morph packs contain every morph). Daz' new suit contains ALL of the morphs. Therefore, if an argument is going to be made that a product circumvents the need for Mike2 mine is certainly not the best candidate to point fingers at. 4. My suit requires you to decode a pcf file with the original body suit as the key. Thus, my suit cannot be used if you do not own the Daz body suit. It has always been my understanding that such a requirement validated the item as legitimate. 5. I have never sold anything I have morphed. My motive has never been profit. The only items I have morphed that come with a commercial product instead of as a free add-on download is sold in Daz' own store. The only "benefit" I have ever gotten is a few thanks that I did it and the fact that people have to give me copies of their products (meaning third party stuff...I did buy the clothing packs you know) because I obviously couldn't morph them otherwise. I do the morphs because I think its nice to share--that is all. 6. As a customer, I very much want clothing that lets me take full advantage of the advanced figures available to me. My true hope is that Daz' response allows such product development to continue without clouds of "am I doing something wrong" hanging over good people's heads. 7. If the body suits are the only thing they absolutely don't want used--and I am feeling pretty certain their response will say that--that's fine. If I can't share them but can share other things I tailor without feeling like a criminal I'll regret that this is the case and be glad the matter was resolved without stifling the creativity of the whole community. I look forward to Daz' reply.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=765731

Scifiguy, I don't believe anyone is accusing you of distributing the Vicky or Mike cr2's. DAZ has said that a bodysuit could disguise Mike 1's lack of morphs, or allow you to copy Mike 2's morphs to Mike 1. My crude render helped illustrate the possibility of the bodysuit disguising the body itself. Here's DAZ's current reply. I was the first to respond, and paraphrased what I'd read for clarification: 1.) Clothes like a pair of shorts won't cover the whole body, so they are acceptable. 2.) A bodysuit covers the body, so that is not acceptable. You'll see a good illustration to illustrate the point. I sent chadly an Instant Message to express my own personal concern about my Free Stuff items that I voluntarily removed when I saw a potential issue here. Ron

Just waiting to hear Daz's response to all of this...

Ron, Will you kindly stop paraphrasing for us? We are indeed quite capable of clicking on the next thread. (Anyone who is reading this on a computer monitor has got "point and click" down pat by now.) We are even capable of reading the original text. For ourselves. Carolly

Carolly, would you kindly get off my ass? If you don't like to read my words, then don't. Thank you very much.

Carolly, Then why haven't you done so before judging others for their reaction. I have been following every word in every thread on this forum and others all day, and can say that you clearly don't have a clue what half the people are saying. Or maybe English is not your first language, then I might understand.

DAZ is claiming that by adding a morph to a clothing item that makes it confrom with a V2 or M2 morphed figure, you are passing information that would subvert the need to buy Michael2 of Vicky2. This is just plain silly if we would stop bickering for just a minute and examine the possibility a bit closer. Do any of us really think that having a body suit (even one with all the M2 body morphs) would in any realistic way subvert the need to have Michael2? Could anyone realistically use a morphing bodysuit as a credible substitute for M2 or V2 including their functionality? Could you REALLY pass those morphs EFFECTIVELY back to M1 and DUPLICATE M2? - NONSENSE - you might get a few body parts to be similar, but the effort woudl be monumental and frustrating. What about other clothing? Would a pair of shorts which were (legally) designed to conform to Michael2's body also conform to a bodysuit that was morphed to look like M2? NO, of course not. All you have is spandex for superheroes, swimwear and underwear, and even those things don't work right on the Michael bodysuit because it is so crappy!. There is no real threat here, there is NO way you can reproduce Michael 2 via any of the techniques in question. Well, maybe if you devote a hundred hours in trying, you might come close, but if your time is worth ANYTHING it would not be a rational thing to do! It's just cheaper to buy Michael 2 and his crummy morphing CloPak than to go to all that trouble. And if anybody actually DID it I say Bravo! You proved it could be done! So what. For 20 bucks you could have saved yourself a LOT of time. So then will hundreds or thousands of people start doing it even if someone proves it can be done? DAZ is leading some of us to believe that there is some simple process whereby you load Michael 1, push a button, and VOILA!, you have Michael2, and that is just Hogwash! Even using the Tailor isn't as fast or simple as they suggest, and it doesn't always give the expected results, so there is NO way it can reproduce anything close to a threat to DAZ. I'm so sorry to see Scifiguy pull his body suit - even though it only had a few of the full body morphs, it was vastly superior to the piece of crap made by DAZ because of its better mapping. THAT is what I perceive to be the truth behind the issue. A superior product IS a threat to them even if it does not violate their copyright in the strict sense, so they make up some other pretense to get it off the market. That's how it looks to me.

"I'm so sorry to see Scifiguy pull his body suit - even though it only had a few of the full body morphs, it was vastly superior to the piece of crap made by DAZ because of its better mapping. THAT is what I perceive to be the truth behind the issue. A superior product IS a threat to them even if it does not violate their copyright in the strict sense, so they make up some other pretense to get it off the market. That's how it looks to me. " And that, they would say, is hitting the nail squarely upoon the head.

OH, but you see, it's ok to make a bodysuit that will disguise Mike 1's lack of morphs, as long as you have an exclusive selling arrangement with DAZ. That's why the Vicky and Mike Morphing clothing packs exist. And I do believe DAZ had offered to talk to SciFi guy about an arrangement as well.