Since Spike specifically asked me to start a rant of my own, rather than pre-empting someone elses as I'm wont to do... snicker here it is, as requested. Actually, it's not a rant - it's a legetimate question that was brought up by me and a few others in the previous thread. "Artists grant permission to Renderosity for the use of submitted images for an undetermined period of time. The Artist will remain the intellectual property holder of his/her work. " That's been on most contests here at the site for quite some time. I first noticed it in the contest fpor the first magazine issue cover. "Artists grant permission to Renderosity for the use of submitted images for an undetermined period of time... " Er... No. I. Don't. That's a main reason why I don't submit images or much else to contests here. When work is submitted, the permissions section needs to state specifics: What rights are being given away, What useage is Renderosity going to make of the artwork, What and how many times can they use it, How long will they retain usage rights, and for what purposes? Spell it out. If it differs from contest to contest, spell it out each time: just like a contract, because that's what it is. When I submit freelance work to a client, my contract states specifically what I'm selling, what uses it can be put to, where and when it can be reprinted and for what purposes, and wether they're retaining single printing, multiple use, or single use with royalties rights. Or... I don't sign it. No freelancer worth the name would either. Effectively, by the wording of that clause, renderosity can archive the image - legally - repost it a year from now, print it in the magazine, use it in ads and promotions, and do so for as long as the site stays in business. Possibly longer, as in: "for the use of submitted images for an undetermined period of time." Think it through. If you wonder why contest and other submisions are low at times, and why few or none of the members here that work professionally in the graphics field enter them that's why. Because no pro would sign a contract with that provision in it. And few amateurs who think it through would. By theway Spike - I'm NOT real certain what the point is of making a new thread on this. The point was raised, asked, and brought to your attention. You're easily capable of bringing it to Tammy. Yim's and Audre's attention... all a thread like this does is throw it out to the membership and start a potential forum brawl. It just flat doesn't take a forum thread, 14 moderators forum arguments, a consensus vote by Parliment, and 2writ from God to make a simple policy decision, or to make a contract interpretation. All it takes is looking at something, realising it might be a valid concern, and making a decision, sometimes... This is a contract and copyright issue dealing with how Renderosity views the content rights of it's members on submitted artwork. Shouldn't take a major forum discussion to decide to write a workable contract for contest submissions.

Er... that's "Tim's", not "Yim's". Damned typos. ;] Have no idea who Yim is...

Not that it matters to me as I don't enter competitions here at all, in any shape nor form. But. Well said. It's a shame that this site attempts to con people who are eager to enter competitions and may not be paying close attention to this sort of thing. Well said 'bear. Hopefully a few eyes will be opened and things will get changed to a more satisfactory system.

With all due respect to you friend...for I happen to respect you...but "con" is a very "harsh" word...no? I really somehow find it hard to believe this site wishes to "con" people...misunderstandings/miscommunications can happen everywhere, not only in real life but especially in "online" life... If this place really were into conning...I really believe a LOT would be much different here than it is now. No one is perfect...maybe no site will ever be perfect...but I am willing to stake my heart on this...I really do NOT think anyone here actually wants to "con" anyone deliberatly...I just do not see that at all. Cheers and well wishes to you, Peter

"... all a thread like this does is throw it out to the membership and start a potential forum brawl. " Bingo! Riiiiiiigggghhhhhhhtttttt on schedule. grin, waves hiya Peter. ;]

waving back at ya Sherman ;-)

Ah'll betya next time Spike asks me to email Tammy... snicker

Not that I consider myself a pro but that is one reason I don't enter contests here. The incedent with the 2d contest kind of left a sour taste also. Although it work out for the best it should have never happened.

Don't get me wrong... I don't consider myself a pro either. I do sell the occassional print to clients, but that's an offtimes thing. My main business is computer hardware, my graphics I do for enjoyment. Still... I did work in the field as an ilustrator for a number of years prior to 1994. I remember what doing contract freelancing was like.

I think the reason for a new thread is to keep the discussion centered on your point about better defining the contest specifics. Some people may not keep checking the 2D contest thread below, but will want to participate on the issue you brought up. And I agree, the wording needs to be better. We don't want to steal anyone's art, but we don't want to be sued for normal contest usage (such as displaying winning entries), either. Sorry to disillusion people, but we really do try to do things for the members, not to the members. :-)

You're on staff here now Crescent? Kewl. ;] Condolences, er... congrats I mean. ;]

Actually, I didn't quite bring it up, I don't believe. Someone else did prior in that thread. I just thought that it bore further examination, so I highlighted it with a quote and comment. I agree with you that that's probably the intent of the wording. I do think it needs to be stated differently, and that what useage and dsiply rights you want need to be specific. Simply put, the example interpretation I gave could easily be used, and that passage in the rules quoted to justify it. Wether Renderosity would or not... shrug Probably not. If Renderosity were to change hands, as farfetched as that might be, would the new owners hold to that intent? Quien sabe? Who knows? If the intent is simply rights to display the winning entires, state that. If the intent is to be able to display the winning entries, or all entries and print a list of entries in the Mag along with the images, state that. If the intent is to only keep useage of the images for specific purposes and for a reasonable length of time in reference to the contests - then state those uses and the length of time. But state it, not a blanket "undetermined" - that's way too ambiguous. No offense crescent, I don't care who a blanket undefined permissions like that comes from, I distrust blanket useage contracts, and I do so for good reasons. State specifics on useage and for how long, that's all I ask. You might even find that a lot more people enter contests, or are willing to submit items for various things. Heh. You won't disillusion me, nor do you need to explain to me that we don't try to do things "to" the membership. I was on the other side of that fence for a long time. All in all, it's been my observation that generally the hearts are in the right place, but the execution is lacking. It's a shame that it seems too often it takes prodding from the membership for the execution to change.

I DO enter contests here. But I don't delude myself into thinking the images I submit are anything other than utter crap. ;) If Renderosity wants to use my images to advertise, well, Gawd Blesh Dere Pointie Leetle Haids. As far as I'm concerned, the only thing you could use my artwork to advertise is a "Stop Legume From Making Art" campaign.

This is all good stuff here. We do want to hear what the members want and we do want to make them happy. Our intent was/is never to "con" the members, we want to help promote them, and by doing this, it helps promote Renderosity. It's a big loop. If we put a image in the mag to promote a contest, It's that image that will catch the eye of the reader. This does many things. 1. The member that made that image gets their image printed. (most people dream of this) 2. It promotes the contest. (More members might join in) 3. The Reader might look at that image and realy like it and want to get in contact with the artist for some contract work. (This has happened) 4. Stronger contests attract more sponsers. (more and better prizes) The list goes on... Anyway, you are right, we should and will reword that part of the contests. I never realy did like that statement and feel it should be worded better. Thanks for bringing it up, We will take this to the table and hammer it out some. As for the 2D contest issue, It was simply a matter of getting all the facts in.

Legume, you bust me up man...

He might just make you a pink color ;-)

"a "Stop Legume From Making Art" campaign. " I'll donate images for that... snicker Yeah, hear it Spike. That always kind of bugged me also, even before... but back when it first started, there always seemed to be bigger things to argue about in mods forum. Like Legume making Art. ;]

Ironbear - thanks for the congrats. I pleaded and whined until they made me mod for the Writers' Forum. Now I get to work with people as verbose as I am. (They're a great bunch, and we're always looking for more people. Hint! Hint!) It keeps the rest of the forums safe. ;-)

No probs. For all the left handed wisecracks I make, there are worse places to work. I always loved H&T and modding the Tavern. "pleaded an whined"??? I ran like hell, repeatedly, when they first tried to make me a mod. ;] My big problem was I quit running once... Yeah... I may drop in. At least to browse and say hello. There's just way too many places on the net I'd like to spend time in, and way, way too few hours. Tell you what, get me the 36hr days I keep bitching for, and we'll see. ;]

A "Stop Legume From Making Art" campaign? Didn't we already have one of those earlier this year? It can't be time for another one YET!

No... that was the "Stop Legume from Violating the Sacred Poser HOT20!" campaign. That's DIFFERENT, dammit. ;]

Personally...I would really appreciate MORE art by Legume right now...I really miss Fluffer bunny and all his happy adventures...;-)

Speaking of which, I'm surprised my amputee pinup didn't make the Hot 20. Artist of the Year'll be here soon, I'd better stoke up the fires.

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=748153

Spike and Ironbear, I was the guilty party and trouble-maker who complained about this, and not for the first time. The quote is from the thread where it was brought to your attention, and the link is to the earlier thread, where I walked away from a losing argument... knowing that it would come up again and again until fixed. My first commissioned pieces were in 1969. I have been making a living from art *alone* for the last 20 years (1982). I won't claim to be a "Pro" with capital P, but I do know something about contracts and copyright law. I know what my time is worth. I know what my royalties and resale rights are worth. I may choose to give someone my time or my rights, but that is MY choice... not to be taken from me. As an employee at Epyx, it was easy to divide the copyrights: anything done on the computer belonged to them, anything done in traditional media (inks and oils, etc.) belonged to me, and I was very careful to keep design work separate. When Electronic Arts broached the subject of employment, this was a sticking point: they wanted all rights to everything I thought of, or dreamed of, even if it had nothing to do with the computer. During the intervening years game companies had started publishing stuffed animals, books, stickers, lunch boxes, TV shows... there've even been a couple of movies. All rights. Yeah. Not even for dragons. During some "undetermined period of time", Renderosity might branch well beyond a magazine and website. An employee often gives up all their rights, we contractors don't... not if we have a spark traveling between the last 2 grey cells. I should have left for WorldCon yesterday, but I was too migrained to drive, and the snarling beast is still clamped to my temple. This message might not be as complete and coherently reasoned as it ought to be, and it will be next Tuesday at the earliest before I can return to it. But this is important. Spike, I don't know how many others feel this way about risking yet another copyright conflict. It is possible that only those of us who sell our work have been ripped off, and want to avoid being that angry again... and thus avoid Renderosity contests. But it shouldn't take a Forum concensus, but discussion among the decision-makers. I agree with Ironbear that it isn't something for 100,000 people to gum to death. But maybe this is also a way to sample how other professionals feel. Thank you for considering this, it may be something that we revisit, but I sincerely hope that we can get wording in place which will preserve the rights which need preserving and allocate the rights which need allocation. If a clean sentence can avoid a lawsuit, please let us get that sentence written. Carolly ******************************************************** "Ah, yes, THIS contest. The one where 2 or 3 mods came down hard on me for complaining about the rule granting them full and complete permission to use all the art entered (not just winning art, anything entered), in any way they wished, for as long as they wanted. I've fought too many copyright battles to willingly enter anything as vague and troublesome as an official Renderosity contest. I've been in and out of several professional organizations over the years and we've learned that it is just cheaper to avoid trouble. Here is the line that I object to: "Artists grant permission to Renderosity for the use of submitted images for an undetermined period of time." ****************************************************

I better IM Mosca...someone page the forum fire brigade...hail the pink ponies...bring on fluffer rabbit...we're on a grande mission here... ...oooh...I better shine up my helmet and clean out my temple too....and maybe get a tan for those nudy shots... ....top twenty here you come...er...maybe this time you make better than top twenty...maybe your very OWN gallery in honor of Doctorate of poser...?? evil grin... (you all know I'm pleasantly kidding...I hope...)...warm happy nuts to everyone...really....;-)

Yup. I didn't figure on bring anyone else into it, although I did mention I wasn't the only one who found it questionable. Hrmmm... thanks. I hadn't seen the thread you just linked before... I'm going to have to say I find the remarks of PunkClown and the other mod in that thread even more questionable. If I raised what I believed was a reasonable concern over a copyright issue/statement, and was given a number of those responses.... never mind. I think Spike can probably conjure vivid images of ground zero. grin Kidding in some of the posts here aside, the concerns you brought up in that thread are precisely the type of concerns that made me echo the question on that in the other thread in this forum. And, they can't be scoffed aside, nor shrugged off with a "of course we know Renderosity wouldn't take that kind of lisence on that clause... " I might believe that, but if I was 100% in belief of it, I'd enter contests here. I'm not, I don't, and I won't until the clause changes to specific listings, and I determine that those specific listings are something I'm comfortable with signing off to. And if anyone asks my opinion, I'll direct them to the GAG section on contracts and copyrights, and suggest they don't either... until this changes. I may joke while discussing it, but Spike, Tim and Tammy know me well enough to never mistake the humour for my not being serious about certain things. I can joke and be deadly serious on something at the same time... I may not consider myself a workig professional in the field at the moment, but I retain my professionalism, and I earned those attitudes in the field. Contracts are specific for a reason, and that reason is to protect BOTH parties from costly misunderstandings. In the case of a site like this where a large majority of the members are not professionals, specifics are doubly important to protect those who don't know the laws from signing away rights they don't need to or can't afford to. If that clause as it stands does come to be an issue, the resulting legal hassle is going to be too expensive for both Renderosity and for the artist concerned: better to forestall it now. And on a issue involving contracts and potential legal issues that can affect the site, it probably shouldn't be something that forum moderators should scoff off when a member has concerns. They just might annoy someone obstinate enough to take it to a contract lawyer, and/or to the GAG nd other professional organizations. And you've never seen contest sponsors bail on prize donations faster than when they think their companies may get sucked into a legal brawl over conets rules. They tend to vaporise with "Sorry, we've reconsidered our involvement... " letters.

a yim is merely a chalk shaving. Next time you see a chalk shaving, impress your friends and say "Thats a yim!"

Is that any relation to a "yam"??

umm I have made my living as an artist for the last few years .. however as I am back Nursing part time, I guess my story has kind of an ambiguous ending ;-).. regardless I have always felt that allowing certain images to be freely used has actually helped get my name out there.. I am perfectly aware of what I am doing when I enter a contest here .. one thing is I support the community that supports me .. second, yes I may have given some of my time away ,. but I give it in exchange for promotion .. it is not free as far as I can see. Third I do it because I love the challenge .. and sometimes I get lucky .. am I less professional because of this? I don't know .. but I think that there is a level of balance between hard line and a bit of a laid back approach one has to take to get their name out there... so far to a certain extent at any rate it has worked.. my name is fairly familiar on the web and I do get at least semi regular commissions...

Yay!!....well said ;-)

It's a choice Laurie... hopefully, when you or I do that, it's an informed choice. When I give away work, or do work on spec, I do it on an informed choice because I fell [or hope] the benefits will outweigh the potential loss - even if in the case of most work, the loss is only in rendering and concept time. The line in the contest guidelines that is a concern has the potential to take advantage of those without the basis for making the informed choice. If Renderosity wants/needs indefinate rights for an undetermined period, such as in the case of the winning site logo design, they should negotiate that with the individual winners.

Artists grant permission to Renderosity for the use of submitted images for an undetermined period of time. The Artist will remain the intellectual property holder of his/her work. "That's been on most contests here at the site for quite some time. I first noticed it in the contest for the first magazine issue cover." ________________________________________________________ Hey Sherman, I first noticed that verbiage in the Vue 4 contest I managed, which was before the magazine contest. It was probably around before that as well, and was submitted to me to include in the rules that I was in the process of writing up at the time. I distinctly remember reading it and thinking, Hmmmmmm...., and wanting to change it to something more specific and straightforward. Ambiguous, yes. Seems like it could allow for alot of leeway, worded like that.

Yeah, Mike. I did not iclude that line, as I recall, on the Virtual Tavern contest. [I'd have to check, but I don't believe so... ] So technically, Sandcastie and the other entrants never gave indefinate permission for the use of their logos and banners. And I emailed winners after the contest and reasked for permission anyway... just to be clear on it. I'm not sure it's a requirement to have that agreement here... it's just become custom and few people think about it when they put a contest up.

The statement covers Renderosity - to give us the right to archive the images within the contest archives for as long as we have contests archive. Since we do not know how long this archive will be listed on Renderosity we included the statement that would cover this. That is all the statement is meant for. We always communicate with artists and get their permissions before we do any additional promotions for artists. Always have and that will never change. : ) We do not take members works and use them without their consent on any project. thanks tammy

"to give us the right to archive the images within the contest archives for as long as we have contests archive. " Ah. That was the point of the question: what does the "useage" and the "undetermined period" cover. It was er... extremely non-specific, and potentially covers a lot of useage possibilities. Simply what you stated here, restructured slightly, would cover that and have eliminated any questions: "By entering/submitting work to this contest, the artist granst Renderosity the rights to archive and display the images within the contest archives for as long as we display archived contests. All rights still belong to the creator, and Renderosity will negotiate seperately for additional useage as needed/desired for other promotional purposes with the creators." Do you see how what you'd said, and what I just jotted off based upon it reads much differently than: "Artists grant permission to Renderosity for the use of submitted images for an undetermined period of time. The Artist will remain the intellectual property holder of his/her work." One is specific, one isn't.

i do see. : ) we have discussed and looks like spike is on it. i just wanted to post to communicate how we are using this. thanks tammy

Very cool thread. Informative too :) As a new mod here and having not only worked with the others for a wee while... I've also had the pleasure of meeting and working with a number of Renderosity folks during DragonCon. These people do not harbour any intentions of doing "things" to the membership in any way, shape or form. They're intentions are to promote and help the community members as much as they possibly can within a community framework. I'm very glad Spike asked for this to be in a separate thread Ironbear. I think a thread such as this "collective knowledge & idea base" being created for the edification of us all is one of the most valued tools a community has to offer and give to/of itself. Not being a professional artist or artist (yet) or a copyright pro or even someone who has won any contests, the particular line that had come into question didn't even raise red flags for me. I'm glad you all did! Everything the renderosity volunteer and non-volunteer staff is doing is done because they believe in this community. Not for any other reason. One of the reasons you do hear us say "we are taking this to the table" is that again, we are looking for the input and advice from a variety of sources to ensure there is no bias and that all sides of the coin are looked at as it were... Congrats to the community on getting a very valid item tabled, thought about and looked after :) PS: "By entering/submitting work to this contest, the artist granst Renderosity the rights to archive and display the images within the contest archives for as long as we display archived contests. All rights still belong to the creator, and Renderosity will negotiate seperately for additional useage as needed/desired for other promotional purposes with the creators." Damned good phrasing Ironbear!

grin I do words, reasonably well. Occassionally, I do words for eating money... Thank me AFTER you get my consulting bill, Firefly. Once the "Oh MY GOD!" wears off. ;] Np Tammy. See ya next crisis grin

hehe, I'll keep that in mind Ironbear!! Guess I better go back to practicing my faint (grin)