Im primarily a 2D artist.
I use Poser 4 for its original purpose has an aid to 2D composition.
When I looked into the poser forum I discovered the EULA of P5 and it saved me a load of money.
I WILL NOT be buying P5 so long as it has this Draconian EULA associated with it. (Or any other program with a similar EULA)

Thanks to a few good individuals I was alerted to the BIG BROTHER attitude, and the money I had saved for Poser 5 was spent on software by other companies.

Like most of the people here I will only support software by buying it:
Warez kids are scum and , more to the point, they will not comment in this forum.
So, thanks to the vocal efforts of a few good people I was able to make an informed decision whether or not to buy this software.

When CL gets in touch with reality they will have another customer.
Bugs be damned All new software has these and theres no denying that fact.
If CL survives this farce they will fix the program. Of that Im sure
But will they survive it?
Possibly, and good luck to all those people who are working so HARD to make this a realistic, working tool for us artists.

But the important fact is this: Am I willing to give them money for a program that I do not own?
Answer: No F*cking way!
Has it cost me anything no.
Has it cost the company anything just one sale, thats all.
(And for those people that say; Dont like the protection Scheme Dont buy it)
Thanks! Ill take your advice:-)

I guess that all folks!

"Am I willing to give them money for a program that I do not own? Answer: No F*cking way! " If this is what's causing you the problem, you should take a look at all Eula's. You don't actually "own" any software. you license it.

If i pay for something i own it

That's not always true (ie. if you pay to see a rock concert, you don't own it) and likewise with software. Read the Eula's for any of the Windows OS's, or Mac OS(I'm assuming you have one since you have poser), or any other software. You're licensing it. All software companies do this, otherwise people can say "I paid for this software, I own it, therefore I can copy and resell it!"

Actually Logo, you aren't the only one. I'm willing to put up with the bugs and such - but I can't chance the EULA. Nope - no way. I doubt CL will ever clear up the vague areas, and I do know that legally if any area of a license/conract is vague the court leans to the end user in regards to that portion. But some of the restrictions are far too strict (i.e. declaring the license void if used to depict an illegal act - that removes the benefit of Poser for those who do crime scenes, no matter what CL says now - unless they get a written approval from CL they could be in trouble later). So yes it's another lost sale for now - actually it's 2 - 3 lost sales since I would have bought it for my son as well and possibly as a gift for a friend. But somehow I don't think CL is worried about us not buying it ;-)

....I think in this way, if you travel by plane, you don't pay to buy a plane, but what you pay is to travel. you don't not own the softwear, that means you cannot sell it, but you can use it just like you own it. I think nearly all softwear that need $ to buy is like this. Just think of win... did you own your 98or me or XP?

I believe the intent of that particular part of the EULA is to say it is against the EULA if the picture itself is illegal, such as child-porn in some communities. Curious Labs is trying to safeguard themselves from a future lawsuit. It is poorly worded, in my opinion, and I can easily see how it could be interpreted in different ways.

Yup. Your constitutional rights have primacy over any EULAs. Consider that if they take you to court and lose (or loose, depending on the EULA :) the EULA no longer applies and is no longer legal. This brings up a question: we learned that DAZ lost a court case possibly involving their EULA. Is that what was caused their (so called) clarification a few months ago? Does the DAZ EULA still have any legal standing? Q

There's a was there that wasn't supposed to was. Sorry. Please read: Is that what caused their (so called) clarification a few months ago? Must put an end to such wasesing.

The CL Eula is no more draconian than just about any other. Does this sound right... Anything you produce out of poser, that does not include original content from their product is yours. So images are yours, but a character (.cr2 file) made with a set of Don's bones is not. A character made with a set of bones you design based on an object you either designed yourself or have the legal rights to is your property. I think. Does this sound right? Any legal eagles out there with an opinion?

"But the important fact is this: Am I willing to give them money for a program that I do not own? " Err, which version of Windows do you use? /P

Actually, DAZ has never been in a lawsuit over our EULA or for any other reason. You're most likely confusing a post that was made by Curious Labs regarding a lawsuit they pursued in the past. Steve Kondris Public Relations DAZ Productions, Inc.

What I regard to be the main point in LOGOs intial post, is the fact that Poser 5 has not much to offer for those who want to use it as a tool. What good is it to someone who uses it like a manekin to get poses right when you draw? What good is it to someone who just uses it for character animation who uses it only for character animation/posing for projects done in other application? Nothing more than Poser 4! Let's take me for example. I do most work in Cinema 4D, one of the high end applications. It offers (better) modelling, better rendering, lighting and everything else than Poser. Why do I use Poser? Because it is rather inexpensive, easy to handle, and if you know how to work with the models, how to tweak them in other apps, and what models to use at all, you can get good results. But Poser is not a tool, it is still a toy - just ask some professionals. Why is it just a tool? Because it is limited in features, in same ways, its perfomance is rather weak, and it is problematic to combine it with other applications. CL did a good step to turn Poser in to a tool, as they started to plan improved cooperation with pother apps, like MAX, Lightwave and Cinema, adding a little more value to thier product as well to products they made plugins for. But they screwed it up in some points (discussable, I admit). Thean they came up with plans for increasing this more with Poser 5 - dynamics, collision detection and so on. It may have turned more into a tool with this. But CL designed Poser 5 in a way, that theese features wouldn't be usable in other apps. They even went so far to make the previous plugins not able to be used with new releases of the other products, thus forcing users to upgrade to the new version, which will cost them them money (the upgrade), nerves (the actvation), and may be legal problems (the EULA) just to be able to use what they already have. Is it so hard to understand that Poser and CL have lost that little respect they have gained in the past with theese users? Okay, there are new models in the package, but there are better ones out there, that many already have. They are called Vicky, Mike, Dina and whatever. So, Poser is going back into its ghetto, be laughed at by professionals, instead of opening up more, and gaining reputation. "Owning" software, for most people mean they know they have a license, but are beeing able to use it like they want, make hardware changes like they want, reinstalling it twice a day if they want. It does not mean having to pay for it, and, on top of it, having to ask for permission to use what they have paid for. In an extreme example, imagine having to ask you bakery for permission to eat thier bread with honey instead of jam! Anyone here who would accept this?

I have to agree with Kosmokrat here.. I use P4 as a tool for making figures for my trueSpace pics.. 5 just ain't worth the money for me.. if the hair, (the excuse that it's too many polys to export? BAH! I've used DXF landscapes from my copy of Vistapro 4 that ran into 10 or 20 megabytes b4 now.. the poly count is easy to reduce), cannot be exported? useless to me. if the new conforming clothes cannot be frozen and exported? useless to me. the new firefly render? won't be using it anyway, since I'll be using tS with Volumetrics, Radiosity, etc etc etc... Kai

The only thing I can say is that anybody here who doesnt like the P5 EULA has not read the P4 one or ProPack one. They dont give you the ability to do anything. The P5 EULA gives you far more rights. LOGO you must not use any legitimate software. All software I use only gives me a license to use it. I also am a legal expert who spends most of his time writing legal briefs. Ron

"Is it so hard to understand that Poser and CL have lost that little respect they have gained in the past with theese users? Okay, there are new models in the package, but there are better ones out there, that many already have. They are called Vicky, Mike, Dina and whatever. So, Poser is going back into its ghetto, be laughed at by professionals, instead of opening up more,and gaining reputation." Well the propack version 4 is still very useful Character animation plugin For Cinema4DXL and Lightwave as a MAC user who owns Cinema and Lightwave i already have my own CLOTH and HAIR solutions and of cours a real lighting system particles,modeling tools, stability and a world class render engine. So In my opinion their is still much money to be made by CL onthe propack if they bundle it with poser4 and drop the price to $200 and market it heavily as a character animation plugin for Lightwave C4DXl and MAX -wolf359 founding member of "the 12 animators"-

"if the new conforming clothes cannot be frozen and exported? useless to me. the new firefly render? won't be using it anyway, since I'll be using tS with Volumetrics, Radiosity, etc etc etc..." From what my experiments have shown me the dynamic cloth stuff does export. Once the simulationis calculated the mesh is deformed for that frame as if it was a morph... export that frame and it should be just right. Can anyone confirm? I don;t have time to do it right now.

Soulhunter you are correct. Ron

I also think that people have it bass-ackward about the hair as well. It's not that P5 can't export it, it's that none of the other software has the capability to import it yet. If software companies only created features that everyone else's software could use there would be very little innovation in the software industry. it's now up to other comapanies to catch up. I know that some of the tools in Poser are rudimentry compaired to some of the other programs and those features can be found stock, and as plugins for the "high end" software but most of posers features cant be used as easily or as cheeply in those "high end" programs. the Hammer is a simple carpenters tool used in some form or other for thousands of years. sure there are pnumatic nail guns that shoot nails out like bullets from a machine gun, but I have yet to see a carpenter without a hammer in his toolbelt. as far as I'm concerned CG artists that don't use Poser becouse they don't need it are within their rights but if they don't use it becouse other cg artists will make fun of them well that says something about the person not the tool. a tool is a tool if all you need is a hammer why drag out a 15 pound nailgun along with it's 80 pound compressor?

Well said wdupre! Ron

How the hell can they prove that it was P5 that was used to depict an illegal act? I can't tell the difference between P4 and P5 renders...just my uninvited .02 And if you used the exported dynamic cloth...so? Oh my, another cause...right after IB's freestuff rally, now we get this...lmao 5000 renders of various felonies being committed: "nope, can't smoke that joint in Poser 5!"

The only thing I can say is that anybody here who doesnt like the P5 EULA has not read the P4 one or ProPack one. They dont give you the ability to do anything. The P5 EULA gives you far more rights. Ron, you keep saying it, but I have the EULA in front of me here, and I can't find what you're talking about. Please explain it to me. Is it section E, which says "Any portion of the Program merged into or used in conjuction with another program will continue to be the property of the Company and sugject to the terms and conditions of this agreement"? However, above the Program is defined as "the computer software contained on the medium in this package". That's only the software, not the files used in it or the files produced by it. It makes no special claims to those files, and without that, to assume it includes them would be like assuming TXT files are part of Notepad's software. Please explain what you're talking about.

That's the Poser 4 EULA, BTW. I don't have ProPack.