I just have a question What I want to know is it legal for me to make a character in poser by adding some morphs and props and then turn around and sell this character (the cr2 and rsr file not the .obj) in the renerosity on-line store? If so how is it legal? Viper also can morph targets be sold?

If I'm not mistaken it depends on how much you change it. It has to end up being something different enough from the original (am I right?). I'm sure there are people who know a lot more about this than me. If you're not sure, it's probably better not to. But you'll get a lot clearer idea of bounds from some others, I'm sure :)

I'm no expert but here is my ethical opinion. If your work is substatialy different in nature from the elements it was composed of such that those elements are unrecognizable, and those elements were published free of usage restriction than go ahead, though courtesy/moral obligation would be to credit the authors of those elements and provide links to them. If the authors of the elements did not give a complete release from all use restrictions than you must contact them, show them the work, negotiate credit and compensation or remove those elements from your work no ifs,ands,or buts about it.

I wonder about Morph Targets? Zygote or Metacreations or whoever owns the mesh, what hapens when you make a target object based on the mesh?

The exact legal stand on this matter is the same as for artwork...if you change it 30% it's yours. PERIOD. (it may actually be only 20% but 30% is safer...) That is the official copyright law. (I used to do some copyright stuff for a game publishing company...)

oh, yeah, one more thing. The ethical considerations in this matter are another thing entirely. Legally you can take someone's stuff, futz with it and sell it. Ethically you may not be able to sleep at night...I would but you may not.

This from Chad at Zygote in an earlier thread... (begin quote) "If I can, I'd like to add a little, too. Feel free to quote me anywhere else this subject is being discussed. Like Scott said, copyright infringment of software code (including 3D models) is not measured in percentage of change, as it is for traditional media or binary images (not to mention music, stories, etc.) Even a small amount of usage of someone else's programing code is illegal. For example, if I wanted to write a program that had the exact same features as Adobe Photoshop I could, of course, do that. However, if I took even a few lines of code directly from Photoshop and put them into my new code it would be illegal. (Much less starting from Photoshop's actual program code and then going through it to make modifications here and there until I felt I had hit the 51% different mark.) That having been said, you will probably see why it is still perfectly legal to make, sell, and/or give away a "plug-in" program for Photoshop (authorized by Adobe or not). Users will still need to buy Photoshop itself for any add-ons to be useful. As I said, copyright infringment of 3D computer model data is determined the same way as software code Someone can change models to the point that they think they will be unrecognizable the makers, but they are still stealing from whomever created the model. As far as the "plug-in" analogy goes, if someone modifies one of the models included in Poser, for example, (ie: creates a morph target for that model) then they are working within the Poser license agreement. It is also OK if they want to sell or give away their work (morph targets) to others who have purchased Poser (since they also own a license to the same models). This is, in fact, benefical to all parties involved and makes Poser a more desireable product. They are essentially paying the person for their changes to the model and not for the original model. Problems arise when people modify models (to create morph targets, new models, or whatever) and then pass those changed models along to users who have not purchased the original models. (For example, as a free downloadable model rather than in a format which requires posession of the original model, such as .cr2, .pcf, etc.) Obviously, there is no way that any company or individual can make sure that everyone is following the terms of their license agreement. Zygote appreciates all the efforts you people in the Poser community have made to prevent violations of model license agreements (Zygote's and otherwise). Thanks. -- Chad Smith Zygote Media Group " (end quote)

Sorry, forgot to include the thread this was pulled from. You can find the entire thing at... http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?Form.ShowMessage=118417&Form.sess_id=109465&Form.sess_key=960234741

Is that the true "legal" as in a "laws on the books" standpoint or someone's opinion of it? In my own interpretation of copyright law, a 3D model is nothing more than a piece of art like a painting or a song. If you change it...you get the idea. It's not programming code. Not at all. It is the same as a binary image becase the data in the file is actually just a description of points like the description of pixels in an image. It is not instructions like in a piece of software code. If you've ever decoded a 3D object it simply says "point 1 is at x:+25 y:-2 z:0" That isn't code anymore than "pixel1 is color r255 g128 b33" (which is how images are encoded). So, by using this example you could say that a 3d Model is fundamentally the same as an image file. They both describe the attributes of a single point / pixel. They both use 3 attributes to describe them and they both follow the same format. So, I ask you this: "How is a 3d model different from an image?" Answer:"Not at all". One other thing...You can't believe a software company about anything. Of course they would say that you can't do that because they don't want to lose the revenue. But wether it is actually "LEGAL" is a question only documented copyright law can decide...not a software rep. My advice is "Look it up" in the library of congress or a local law library. Never take anyone's "word on it" when it comes to legal questions...if you do you'll always get screwed.

Thanks everyone for your input on this subject. I now have the answers that I needed befor filling someone request.

Kyrin <_ you're right it's 30%.

Here's the part that still gets me. Do we not exchange MT's in the form of individual body part .OBJ files? Seems that the line is somewhere between an .obj file of a single body part and, (as that jerk was doing a couple of months ago) an .obj of a full body.

Myth #1 - "If you change it 30% it's yours." Have you ever heard of derivative works? The owner of the original copyrighted work and only the owner of the original work owns the exclusive rights, the exclusive copyrighted rights, to ANY derivative work. The following is based on legal opinions from Rebeca Delgado-Martinez Valette, an attorney, and is based on the legal principles of the Berne Convention which the United States is now a signatory. QUESTION: What if I take someone else's writings, text, HTML or graphic image and change it around to suit my needs? I own the "new" version, right? ANSWER: If you did any of that with the original owner's permission, and according to his/her terms and conditions then you own the "new" version. If not you are committing copyright infringement and/or plagiarism." QUESTION: What is copyright and what can be copyrighted? ANSWER: Copyright is a protection that covers published and unpublished works of literary, dramatic, musical, artistic, pictorial and certain other intellectual creations, provided such works are fixed in a tangible medium. This means that if you can see it, hear it and/or touch it - it may be protected. If it is an essay, if it is a play, if it is a song, if it is a funky original dance move, if it is a photograph, HTML coding or a computer graphic that can be set on paper, recorded on tape or saved to a hard drive, it may be protected. Copyright laws grant the creator the exclusive right to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute, perform and display the work publicly. Exclusive means only the creator of such work, not anybody who has access to it and decides to grab it. Myth #2 - "In my own interpretation of copyright law, a 3D model is nothing more than a piece of art like a painting or a song. If you change it...you get the idea." Okay, let us assume your interpretation that a 3D model is "... nothing more than a piece of art like a painting or a song." It is still protected under copyright law since artistic expressions such as paintings, sculptures, songs, etc are protected. And, as such, by merely "changing it" you do not gain ownership of what the courts have already determined would be a derivative work. And there is no 30% rule or law. That is an urban legend. Even for the sake of "fair use," the courts have already stated that they must also consider the QUALITY of what was used, not just the quantity. A case involving 2LiveCrew is a case in point. And if the use in any way harmed the commercial propects of the work then even "fair use" has been ruled as a violation of copyright protection. I base the above on the opinions of attorneys offering their legal opinions on the web and on the opinions of my own attorneys who did win a victory for me a few years back when someone tried to claim an "altered" work of mine as theirs. There are other cases of "altered" or "changed" works that ended up costing the alleged "new owners" some cash - "The Devil's Advocate" and "Batman" cases are examples. The producers tried to innocuously use other artists works woven in discretely with their new art. They lost. And their new work comprised far more than just 30% of the new work. So, the courts have already shown the 30% rule to be non-existent. I do not think ayone truly appreciates the degree to which Zygote has allowed their work to be freely used. And I do not think anyone should try to take advantage of their generosity. They have allowed great latitude. It is ethically and legally best to play within those latitudes. Take care and Godspeed.

pretty much off the topic, but html can't be copyrighted, only the design of the page. So renderosity could copyright the yellow-linked message board, with the green "hotlinks" stripe down the right, but they couldn't copy right the html code saying how to do this. Kinda like an author can copyright a story, but they can't copyright the words used in the story, only the way that the words all fit together to make something else. Any chunk of HTML is fair-game to be used elsewhere, just as long as your page looks different in the end. in the store you're selling your changes to the models, not the models themselves. Kinda like a texture map, it's an addition to the model, not a replacement. SewerRat

Just my 2 cents- I think If someone is going to sell something than it should be made from scratch. I think the user should have had an empty scene to start with. Not just click a button that saves the creater hour, no days of work, maybe months. Considering the models zygote has made for poser. I don't think I could modify them enough to call them my own work. Anyone can modify something- but actually doing 100% of it-well it's real work which is worth money.

I don't know if I agree with that lynnJonathan, that way you end up needing to reinvent the wheel every time I think it's ok to piggyback on other peoples work, as long as they say you can (you contacting them, or they specifically said so in the readme) and as long as you are only passing off your CHANGES as your work, not the whole thing but I think it's totally acceptable to start with someone elses model as your base well, that's just my counter-2-cents =) take it for what it's worth (which is probably much less than 2 cents. unless you mean australian currency, which isn't worth much at all right now) SewerRat