I think he means Posette, Dork, etc. Right?

Well said, casamerica. As a side note: There are so many misconceptions about copyright law today ( mostly because of the way copyright law is written ) that if you're involved in any dispute over a copyright you should probably ask an attorney who specializes in it. I'm certain that Jenifer Keeling ( Rosity's Copyright Agent ) would agree when I say that telling people the facts about copyrights is one of the most difficult things to accomplish... You're working against common sense and intuition, two things that do not now, nor have ever, factored into the realm of copyright law. ( At least not since 1790, when the first U.S. Copyright Law was signed into action ) Paul

Side Note: I;m not saying by the way that the law is right or wrong in this case, simply stating what the law says. There are currently a lot of misconceptions about copyright law that the generl public can't get past simply because they don't make a lot of sense. In fact, the only people who can generally make sense out of copyright law are copyright lawyers. The DMCA alone was a 50 - page 30,000 word draft. Most of it makes reference to earlier referendums and laws, such as the White Paper ( published by the Lehrman Group ) and the 1976 revisions of the 1909 Berne Convention redevelopment and reinstatement of the 1909 CopyrightAct. In other words, please don't take offense at my rebuttal, it's not personal. I stand by my statement because it's backed up by over 15 resources, two law professors, and congressional mandate. Paul

KattMan: Sorry to disagree. Here are some references to the actual statements, revisions, and rulings on the matter: Digital Copyright ( Jessica Litman; George Washington University Law Professor; Published 2001, Prometheus Books ) Digital Millenium Copyright Act ( codified at 17 U.S.C. ss 512 ) Copyright's Highway, The Law and Lore Regarding Copyright from Gutenberg to the Celestial Jukebox ( Paul Goldstein; Published 2001, Hill and Wang Press ) The actual law seems somewhat strange, particularly if you consider what it does to considerations of reasonable doubt and burden of proof, but if you're familiar with the raging battles over content owner's rights versus ISP responsibilities, you should be able to make sense out of it. Paul

"This can actually lead to a lawsuit as cash is being made by this company." Actually, this can lead to a lawsuit regardless of cash being made. In fact, if the item(s) in question have valid copyrights, this can lead to immediate removal of the questionable material and termination of TurboSquid's services by their Service Provider. Paul

LMAO. This is way too wierd. I've never met you, Anton, but I have to say that it's good to know you're out there... On a side note to Steve Cooper, and anyone else whose had things stolen, if you're watching: The Digital Millenium Copyright Act, enabled by the 105th Congress, under Federal and International Law, makes some pretty broad rights available to content owners ( a.k.a. Copyright Owners ). Among these rights is the right to hold responsible for damages any service provider that hosts or assists in the transfer or infringement of any copyrighted material, knowingly or otherwise, unless: 1. The Service Provider immediately upon notification of the infringement claim removes all infringed materials, and revokes the account of the infringer. ( There is no stipulation that the content owner must provide evidence of the infringement accusation ) 2. The Service Provider must provide freely to the content owner, upon request, all identifying information available about the accused infringer. In return for these requirements, the service provider is exempt from claim or suit brought against them by customers claiming improper removal of data or improper termination of the account. In other words, anyone who finds their copyrighted work hosted illegally, can notify the Service Provider to have that work removed, and the violator's account cancelled. If the Service Provider refuses, they are in violation of the DMCA and can be held liable for each transmission of the copyrighted material in civil court. Not legal advice, just a bit of information I thought the merchants could use. Before acting on this information, I would highly recommend discussing with an attorney the validity of your case, the status of your copyright, and the proper procedures necessary in order to assure your case is handled properly. To Steve Cooper, specifically, if you've got a copyright on Posette, you have the legal right to ask TurboSquid's Service Provider to remove all questionable content, stop providing service to them, and immediately give you all information that you require to identify them. While I don't personally advocate the extreme measures that you're legally entitled to take, I'm sure you'll discuss the matter with your attorneys to determine the suitability of your action. Regards, Paul Jenkins

Side Note: Do people really feel that the Renderosity staff is out to get THEM? I think psychologists might find some interesting things to say about that theory. ( delusions of persecution come to mind )

Heh. I think, Richabri, that once a person has made up their mind
on something being bad and evil, they usually refuse to actually
consider it as anything else. I'm here every day, several hours a
day, and I've noticed an unfortunate contingent who feel some need
to rebel against everything that this place does. Frankly, I think
that once a person compares an online site to Nazi Germany or
Stalinistic Russia, their argument loses all merit... but that's
just me. Paul >Have you been consumed by your stupid conspiracy
lately?

Entropic: "They" sent you, didn't "they"? Nope. No one sends me anywhere. You forget, I control everything. Your entire life is in my hands. I should say at this time, however, that I am not the sole member of my organisation, but I speak for them if they need spoken for. For some reason it seems that eloquence is not a prerequisite for world domination, contrary to popular belief. Most of the members ( there are 5, called the Pentaverat ) lack a gift for words, so they ask for me to assume such responsibilities... I'm sure you understand. On a side note, and more to the point of the thread, I like the choices for AOM, and think that so long as the nomination committee stays on track, it's a good change. As a 3ds user primarily, I'm impressed with all the work of the nominees, and am glad that I have to spend time in consideration of my vote, and actually evaluate the talent of each, than to simply vote for someone who I've heard of. Paul P.S.: Sorry about the sarcasm, TwoBeans, but it's my best way of getting people to notice that they're taking things too personally. ;) Gotta keep perspective to survive here, right?

TwoBeans: The employees of rosity aren't the 'Illuminatus', I am. I arranged World War 1 in order to promote my own political and economic strength, and have continued to work on ruling the world, since. Renderosity's really not that important a player in the move to suppress your civil liberties or to acquire your servitude of my ultimate plan. I can assure you, as well, that though you believe nothing of what I have written here, that's the entire point. In other words, stop giving rosity so much credit. While, I'm pretty sure that the "Renderosity Final Solution" is big news to the world, and am surprised that nobody from CNN or MSNBC has sent investigative journalists to investigate the horribly opressive regime we are VOLUNTARILY supporting with our membership, I don't see any reason for name calling or meanness to good people. Paul P.S.: Next week I'll be using the current division in Middle East politics to raise gas prices in the U.S. Please don't complain, this trick is old hat by now. fnord

Be sure to listne to bonbon, tonymouse... She's in the spotlight. :) Paul

Looks like a perfect compromise of the views, Pablo... Well done! Paul *8^>

My vote is for DarkSkills ( 1st ) because the coffee cup is the closest thing to a Teapot. In fact, I'm surprised none of the modellers actually included one. Paul P.S.: The image looks pretty damn cool, too. *8^>

Whatn I'm saying, Pablo, that I may not be getting across well, is that such a form being the first the person sees is going to make them think it's a necessity. Also, it would add clutter if every time I wanted to critique an image, or respond to another post, I'd have to deal with a long form like that. That's why I say that the idea should be accessible, while not being integral to the comments. Consider this thread, and what it would be like to carry on this conversation if a "form" popped up every time you wanted to respond. Also consider: The bigger threads take time to load for people with slower connections. Adding more information unecessarily would make it even slower, and a lot of people would just not bother. Guess maybe I'm a minimalist. I don't want to shoot your idea down, it just seems counter to the forum I have in my mind. Hence, the compromise of, why not put it there, but make it an extra that people can use if they want to? Regards, Paul

Thanks for posting folks... it's worked out now. @Wadus: It's not so much annoyance at the ebots as the sheer volume of ebot spam I get. Some days, when I've been really active in the forums, I can get as many as 150 ebot messages that I can usually sum up by just checking on the threads upon which I've been very active. Also, it IS a bit of annoyance when I go on a net vacation ( meaning, the times when I get away from the net for a week or so ) and come back to find 700 - 800 messages waiting. It would be nice if there was a way to disable all ebot messages and re-enable later, but as I understand it, the coder's overworked as it is. Regards, Paul