I saw it.  Thank you very much, I appreciate that you let me know :)

Okay, thank you for the update.

Don't know what version you're using, but have you checked their website?

http://www.rtencoder.com/downloads/ 

Quote - Well if you post such a question on a publicy accessible forum do you expect only lawyers to answer? Of course not. Good point, agreed.  It's just reading through all the responses gave me the impression that everyone was an authority without pointing the OP to the rules. 

You're also going to get different answers from a global persceptive based on different experiences and people will freely debate it. Which is whats happening here and theres nothing wrong with good fair debate. As for the advice that's gonna be given.

I completely agree with you. 

If it's obviously wrong - like the tat guys - then other artists will want to warn the OP. Purely because they don't want the OP to get into any trouble. So yes you're right anyone doing this should get permission from the IP or copyright holder.

I'm not sure the tat guy is completely wrong, but unless I knew for sure, I would definitely get it in writing, for my own peace of mind. 

Well I'd just like to know how many of the members who have responded here are copyrite attorneys?  On what authority or fact are the answers based upon?  I'd love to see some text or links directing the OP to these rules.  Far as I can tell, the only person making any "reasonable" sense is Gate.  Granted his spelling sux (yes I spelled "sux" wrong... I did it on purpose), but you can OBVIOUSLY tell that English is not his primary langauge.  So rather than make his spelling an issue, just stay focussed on the question at hand.  If a person isn't able to use their brain to debate or, at the very least, display a small measure of tolerance, then they ought to just keep their mouth shut.    

The advice that Ragtopjohnny got from the Art Room Tattoo Galary appears to be sound.  However, to be safe, he could contact the copyrite holder and request permission to use their designs for commercial digital models, get it in writing and provide that to Renderosity for them to "keep on file," just as ShanaC does.

Seems some of the answers to this simple question were made much more complicated than was necessary.

Oops... just noticed the sharecg models are DS or Bryce only.

There's a pocket watch included with the Hatter pack for Gosha

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/bcs/marchhare/76174#

Also there are a couple at sharecg

http://www.sharecg.com/v/16965/View/5/3D-Model/pocketwatch01

http://www.sharecg.com/v/16966/View/5/3D-Model/pocketwatch02 

Ya know cedarwolf that really bites!  Too bad it's that way in OK.  I think Oregon has it best.  No sales tax whatsoever, whether you buy products in a store or online.

Maybe it's time to get OK and the rest of the states to follow whatever it is that Oregon is doing right.  I'm not exactly sure how their government runs, but I imagine their roads are maintained and their school system has what it needs, etc.  They must be doing something right. 

You're welcome quietrob :)

Looks like DAZ fixed the problem too.  I just added some poses to my cart and proceded to check out and their cart did not add tax.

Have a great weekend! 

DAZ was collecting tax for California just after the Cararra purchase.  After many California customers complained that there is no tax on digital products in California I'm sure they looked into this and discovered that their customers are correct.  So, DAZ removed the collection of tax from their cart script.  With the update to a new eCommerce store and with all of the scripting issues, I figure it's a glitch or just needs some code replacement to update the script.

What's important to keep in mind is the fact that California has not passed any laws that require companies to collect taxes for digital content.  Until that happens DAZ is not required to do so and they should not do so unless required by California law.  Simple as that. 

DAZ bought Cararra and Cararra corporate offices are located in Palo Alto, California. So, if the law changed in California and DAZ is required to collect tax on digital products because they have a business presence in California then they would have to do it. But, it doesn't appear the law has changed.  

DAZ had this issue when they bought Cararra, several years ago, but realized that even though they have a presence in California that does not mean they are required to collect tax on digital products.  As far as I know California has not passed any laws regarding taxation of digital products.  However, if you live in California and purchase a tangible product in California then you will have to pay taxes, but not on digital products even if the company has a presence there.

More likely than not, the addition of taxes for California customers in the checkout process is just a glitch or technical issue that DAZ needs to fix and I'm sure they're doing their best to fix all of the issues, one at a time. 

There's nothing wrong with the naked body and if your brother wants to see porn, I highly doubt his first thought will be to use Poser.  If he has access to the internet, he'll find a way to get his fix.

Give the kid a chance to use his creativity with Poser without worrying about naked bodies.  If you stop and think about it a moment, naked bodies do not equal porn.  Da Vinci painted Leda & the Swan, Michelangelo painted numerous nudes... the nude body does not equate sex or porn.  It's great that you're thinking of the best for your brother, but maybe overthinking just a bit, lol.

Quote - > Quote - And businesses count on that kind of behavior. Being kind to a business never pays off.  All you are doing is reinforcing bad behavior.

Always remember - right & wrong & morality NEVER enter a business decision.  That is the FIRST lesson you learn in business 101.

You have to deal with business in a cuthroat manner, because they certainly will with you. 

Ask the Poser folks if their long-term loyalty to DAZ has paid off.

Completely agree!  

And no my long-term loyalty to DAZ did not pay off, so I shop elsewhere.

kylumi and chohole are you self appointed DAZ representatives? Because if you are then you're embarassing the company. Are we back in grade school where bullies got together to try to push other people around? Seriously? You wrote an amazing story kylumi, you should pass that by a publisher and see what they have to say. Who knows, you might get published. Is this the type of climate you maintain in the DAZ forums? Do you make fun of people for daring to question the almighty DAZ? Do you really get that frustrated with people because they continue to disagree with you? If you aren't communicating effeciently, it's best to let someone else handle it. And if you aren't capable of having a decent conversation without making fun or cutting people then you both should probably just keep your mouth shut.

With regard to the installers, I don't know what's up. What I do know is that people have complained about their AV giving them a warning with some DAZ installers. I've seen first-hand what happens when I've installed from the older installers, the one's that are red with a round DAZ logo and a Z. I already provided the URLs to the previous sites that were, potentially, collecting the info. Now, either the information was being gleaned in order to provide personal information so DAZ could track who is installing their products and/or for marketting purposes. Doesn't matter, what does matter is that if they were collecting personal information, they should have informed their customers first.

If DAZ was not collecting the information, and this just occurred to me, the other possiblity is that whomever made the installers left tracks in the installers before licensing, and it's very possible that DAZ was not aware. However, they should have been in the know about this before allowing customers to use them.

Skiriki, I have hundreds of DAZ installers and I don't have time to install each one in order to give you examples. Just go through your own data, pick some that come from 2008 and away you go... Look for the one's made in 2008 with the red DAZ logo. If you have the Win 7 developer installed on a machine, that might be worth doing your research on.

RHaseltine, thank you for the explanation. I still don't understand how the installer would bring up three web pages. One for download.com, one for data.country code/poser and the last one was supposed to load the readme, but couldn't find it on the localhost. And these are the same URLs no matter what product I've installed that come from 2008.

Khory_D, I am using common sense and learned a long time ago to never follow along like a lamb. Always question when something isn't right. You're right, this is speculation. It's how people get to the bottom of things. It's how questions are answered. I don't need to provide you or anyone else with proof. This isn't a court of law and you are not my judge. Believe whatever you want. I am simply pointing out issues with the installers in correlation with the warnings that manleystanley spoke about. Besides the fact that many, if not all, businesses hire other companies to do their marketting research. How do you think commercials targe specific audiences? It's how businesses operate and how they stay in business. Ever answer a questionaire for a company? It was a result of marketting research. We are a society of net freaks, so marektting has adapted. It isn't beyond the realm of possibilities have personal data released or to be tracked through an installer.

You think this is a bunch of BS? Good for you, I'm glad you have an opinion that you felt you could express freely without other people making fun of you. Other people are expressing their thoughts and concerns and they are just as valid as anyone else. I don't know if DAZ was collecting the info for piracy purposes or for marketting or both or if they even knew about it. I have no clue. What I do know is what I've seen and I'm combining that with what other people are saying with regard to the installers.

I didn't say that the DAZ site change was the reason for a change to zips. I said that many customers have requested zips over installers. But that never happened and the ONLY reason it's happening now is because the new "eCommerce site cannot deliver installers," so DAZ must convert to zips. At least that's what I read in their forum a few days before it went down.

Those of you who are joking around having a good time making fun of people, you can just laugh alone. Why not let a DAZ representative answer questions without your interferance, or is there something you feel you need to protect them from? DAZ is not a person nor are they a child who needs protecting and defending. They are a hierarchy of individuals who run a corporation. Those of you who feel that DAZ has been slighted or bashed. Stop it! Stop getting emotional about a company and start acting like adults. You know the one's who debate with respect.

Quote - > Quote - manleystanley is right.

I don't know about the new DAZ installers, but the older installers were reporting personal information on pre Win 7 machines. After Win 7 came out there was a mistake in the installer that revealed two web pages, showing the personal data that was being transmitted, including the IP address, while installing the product. In pre Win 7 machines there would be a quick flash on the screen, but the customer proabably wouldn't have noticed. It was more than likely a third party company that reported to DAZ the personal statistical information. Even if you didn't run the browser the info still went out. That might be why the antiV pops up for some people, such as manleystanley.

 

According to Richard Haseltine (Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:09 pm):

Quote - The installers do, or did, check for network access but they don't use it - there's no "call home" element. It is, however, possible that the security software on your system is taking pre-emptive action and so causing the installer to fail.

Usually it is the anti-malware part of the anti-virus package that would warn you. So I grant you that this can cause problems with anti-malware/anti-viruses. Still, a false positive can be ignored when considering where the installers are coming from, it's just commonsense.

I have read a lot on this over the years and I never did see proof that DAZ was receiving personal information from installers. If you have read a post with someone showing proof of this please post the link. Otherwise I treat these as rumors. Many installer packages, including the open source releases, have the ability to allow the developer of a software to receive personal info, many installers include the code regardless if you didn't check a box to setup the feature when creating the installers (this code in the installers could be the bases for all those rumors).

Many software publishers have in the past been hammered when their installers were caught sending personal information and they suffered greatly in the press and loss reputation. Normally, you should always ask the public if it is OK to gather and send this information. Something tells me that if DAZ 3D was doing this in the past it would quickly have been reported and proven and a huge brouhaha would have ensued. I mean, DAZ 3D is getting hammered, as usual, even when moving to a new store engine. LOL!

I was not talking about rumors. I was talking about fact because I have personally experienced it. It has to do with using the old installers (as of August 2008). At the end of the install if you left the check mark for the readme the screen flashed so quickly that you couldn't see the information (like a DOS command) that redirected to a previously existing statistics server. In Win 7 the browser opened and showed the previously hidden information that was being transmitted. In XP, for example, this did not happen, so people didn't notice, but it revealed itself in Win 7. The three pages that opened are:

1. file://localhost/path of your install (readme)

Hosts:

1. http://www.data.your country code/poser

2. http://www.downloads.your country/readme's/product name

The DAZ product readme does not open in Win 7 because it's actually redirected over the other hosts. In theory, the installer sends out install time, product and install location to two servers. These send back the info to your localhost to open the readme on your machine. But, as the hosts do not exist anymore and data is not collected, the info does not get back to your machine and the readme will not open. The readme can only be opened manually from the installed folder.

It might be a fluke that this happened, but using other installers from other companies created in 2008, for example Illusions Designs product installers or any simple installers, don't show this phenomenon of opening three browser pages, two of which collect personal data. So does this mean that DAZ had corrupt installers for years without their knowledge? I don't think so.

If this was an attempt to fight piracy then DAZ should have informed their customers, beforehand, that statistical information would be sent. The DAZ installers that were made between 2001 - 2005 also do not show this phenomenon. Since hidden info is attempting to be sent, I believe manleystanleys's antiV is picking up on this and that's why he gets a warning.

Perhaps there was a quiet brouhaha over this and that's why DAZ has their latest set of installers, which as far as I can tell do not send private information to anyone. For over ten years people have been asking for zip installers, but DAZ ignored these requests. The only reason they're going to zip installers now is simply due to their new eCommerce store. That's just one of the reasons DAZ may be getting hammered. They don't really listen to their customers, or plan well, they do as they please and this is what it gets them... a good hammering.

I know you can't please all of the people all of the time, but you can please most of the people most of the time. If they cared about their customers then, for one example, they would have listened to the majority of them who have requested zip installers years ago.

I would love to shop at DAZ, but they have chosen to lock me out. I will not be forced into using software I don't want to use. They are the one's who have limited their profits. I can't use Genesis or the Gen 5 dolls because it's not Poser applicable. Their choice to limit profits, not mine.