The fact is that most copyright/trademark holders won't care too much if you make a model of thier product/billboard/image - until you either use it in a way that they find offensive or degrading to the product/billboard/image (ie using a CCC billboard in a Pepsi commercial) or you use it to make a lot of money at which point they either want a share or want it all (normally the latter)

In general american copyright law has become so redicules it is considered a joke by most sane people and has produced some really stupid (and profitable for the lawyers) cases.

As for a render being the same as a photograph - I think you will find that falls down on the arguement that to produce the render of any trademarked item you must first have modelled it (the same is not true of photography.

Message edited on: 12/02/2004 09:44

Well since nobody has mentioned it here - one of the most important things to remember is DON'T OPEN ATTACHMENTS

I think you have just made the point of the original post. If a long time user of the site has 'Hmmmmm...I never noticed that link before. :) That should make things easier.' And you don't have to go the route of fancy graphic buttons, just making it more noticable would be an improvement.

Okay I need to clarify what I said - I was not refering to goods sold on renderosity, which are extremely low priced. I was refering to software sold a high price (for example MS Office) which operates under the same terms. And no I do not agree with the sale or distribution of copies of software no matter what the price. I am merely refering to the resale of the original software AFTER I am finished with it. I agree the car analogy was misleading, however the comparison to the record industry was not. If you bought a CD and the record company told you that you could not sell on that CD should you wish to you would be upset. The selling on of a product once no longer used and the redistribution through copying are two seperate issues and should be dealt with as such. The second is already illegal. Calling the first illegal has not provented the second from happening.

An interesting point - how did the software industry manage to create such a situation. Could you imagine the motor industry getting away with that one. 'We are not selling you the car, just letting you use it - when you have finished with it we get it back' (and yes I know about leasing but you do have the option to buy at the end of the lease). If I pay over $100 for an item - then trust me I think I have the right to recover some of that outlay when I am finished with the item. And I know that it is difficult to prove that someone has finished with a piece of software, but that is an issue for the software industry to resolve rather than try and con the public into 'paying to use'. Even the RIAA hasn't tried that one YET.

Now that is what I want for Christmas a 200+ gig hard drive. but in the meantime and while I am not dreaming thank you Sharen for what I have recieved....

Not minding mud or annoying pigs - here goes. Thankfully the RIAA has put a damper on the activities of programs such as Kazaa. What you asked is not only illegal but on a parr with being close to a bushism. Why would you ask a question of people who make a modest living creating wonderful items for some great programs, how to circumvent their income? Nope thinking about it, it is way beyond bushism.....

Now I might be wrong here but wouldn't making the Genre selector a multiple choice (as suggested above) be a simple case of changing the html code from (and I am using spaces here for obvious reasons)
"< SELECT name="filter_genre_id" >"
to
"< SELECT name="filter_genre_id" size="5" multiple >"

Of course this would depend on how this change interacted with the gallery.ez form filter.

Just a sample of what can be done with unexpected props from unexpected places - Thank you again MAPPS

I know this may not be the most sensible suggestion but wouldn't it be far more sensible to combine the Galleries (for the reason stated by ArtyMotion) and allow multi selections of the Catagories? It would allow people to learn what others are doing in other digital art forms, it would remove the need to create extra galleries as new software emerges, and would allow people to post to multiple catagories, so you do not run into the is it Fantasy or is it SciFi.

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you, Thank you and in case I forgot to say it THANK YOU.

Okay it is 'mean' to complain about freestuff - but I am sure that those that actually provide 'stand alone' items would be happier if people could find it easier and not have to trawl throu 20 pages of textures. And it isn't restricted to the freestuff area - you can't even specify a stand alone item in the market place. More textures to plough throu before you find an item that actually fits the description of what you are looking for. Try this go to market place click on poser - Victoria 3 - clothing and see how many are 'texture' style items and this is when they have a specific texture section.... I appreciate the freestuff and use it a lot - but it does get tedious having to scan through pages of thumb nails before finding something that actually fits the description typed in a search

Nope I don't think so. The undo in Poser seems to be almost exclusively tied to direct manipulation in the pose window. I think, and I am certain that someone will correct me if I am wrong, that CL decided that in almost every other situation there is a way of returning to the previous state without using the undo.

This is only a guess but going by previous threads you may have to render a png to place in the appropriate folder for the hair pose.

Actaully I was refering to AOL's dialup - you might check to see that your dialup isn't set to 'High Speed' or that you are actually paying more for the AOL 'High Speed' dialup system. This consists mainly of reducing the size of images before downloading to your computer and thereby reducing the quality of said images. AOL is not the only company offering this system so beware lol