(is that sarcasm?? :~) What's wrong with a homemade texture? Isn't Angie in the free stuff area a hand made texture? I haven't downloaded it yet (file was huge) but the renders of it look great.... ) Hummmm... Everything I make is my own. I have been living off of it for a couple years. I guess I must be delusional. The homemade textures that I have sold, privately, and, the other originals have not kept this roof over my head, or food in my stomach? Or, the occasional few hundreds of dollars that my girls...the fledgling Poppis...have needed? Let me rethink this...Homemade does not sell. That is not what I grew up to know as true.

why not find a way to distribute a difference file like we do for morphs? That would settle a whole lot of cross-texture problems. Can this be done? -WTB

Layers, WTB, layers. Kate

one more year, and the stress, worry and fear will make it seem as if it isn't even worth it to try.....

The whole reason DAZ started this thread was to educate the artists with honest intentions, such as Snow Sultan. (Though his name was not brought up publicly by us; we prefer to correspond with individuals privately.) We feel that the vast majority of the Poser community have integrity, and therefore a public general education is effective and we don't have to be heavy-handed. The honest will be glad to have the DAZ end-user license agreement clarified and will need no coersion to comply with it. At the same time, we realize that the dishonest will not be affected by a general clarification of the terms they agreed to upon installation of our products, whether concerning derivative maps or warez archives. (We're not labeling anyone as dishonest here either.) That being said, we have faith in this community and in the honest people that deal here every day. There are many artists out there that do not realize they are creating or using pirated maps. We would hope that no artist would intentionally copy or pirate anyone else's work. But when this does happen we hope that both parties may cooperate to resolve the situation. Snow Sultan is an example of an honest person who made an honest mistake, and this issue has been resolved between DAZ and Snow. DAZ does not feel that it is betraying any community trust for someone to warn any individual artist or DAZ of potentially pirated work. Rather, we feel that this only builds the community strength of integrity. DAZ Productions, like any artist here, is trying to protect its work. DAZ respects the artists that are part of this community; in return DAZ expects that same respect as part of this community as well. We would hope that no other professional artist's work would be intentionally pirated and then distributed whether free or for sale. At the same time DAZ is a professional company that would like to keep its artwork free from piracy. The DAZ License Agreement clearly states it that way. A profit loss is evident for the original artist in most piracy cases, whether the pirated item was given away for free or for sale; because that is one less product that the original artist did not sale. In fact, when a derivative work is given away for free it is probably even more damaging to the sales of the original product. As we previously posted, DAZ encourages artists to make textures, clothes, props, morphs, etc. for our models. However, we do not feel that it is too much to follow the guidelines set up in our License Agreement, which all users must agree to before the use of any of our models. If this License Agreement is not abided by then DAZ, like any other artist, has the right to see to it that its product is protected. If we may echo what Jenifer Keeling, Copyright Agent for Renderosity wrote, "Most of our members are honest and just are not aware of the copyright laws and our policies that enforce them. No one should be hung because they didnt know, but I hope that we can all work together to educate them on the laws and policies." And to clarify a question that has been raised a few times in this thread, yes, the blank texture templates that we provide free for all our models are usable for any artist to create a map, whether or not that artist even owns the model. For clarification on this or any other issue, please contact us directly: sales@daz3d.com. Thanks for all the posts and comments made on this issue. We feel that we've been able to raise public awareness concerning this issue and wish to discontinue this topic on this public level. AnneMarie White DAZ Productions www.daz3d.com

You're doing a fine job AnneMarie, but effecting a policy change this significant in the way your products are sold and used requires more than a couple of forum posts which have been move to the backwaters. This is not really the time to discontiue this topic on a public level. Sorry, I do respect DAZ's right and responsibility to protect their products, but I would suggest that DAZ will have a hard time changing the rules after the fact. Their established policies and practices are in contradiction to the license agreement. Allow me to explain. For several years now, the default texture maps that came with the Poser products have been publicly posted as a means of transferring revisions among users. This has been done with the full knowledge and tacit encouragement of the product suppliers - Meta, Zygote,Curious & DAZ. This exchange of revisions and enhancements amongst users was the basis of the evolution of the Poser online community. The online community itself increased the value of the products to the end user and has been touted by the product suppliers as one of the significant advantages of their products. In essence, this free public exchange of copyrighted materials was one of the major selling points of the products, i.e. I bought their product based largely on the fact that I would be able to increase its value to me by exchanging enhancements with other users as was suggested in its marketing and by its historic public usage. I am not challenging DAZ's right to restrict the exchange and distribution of future products, but most of us bought these products with the clear understanding that this practice was both permitted and encouraged. ------------------------------------ Now, taking off the Perry Mason suit for a moment, in a practical sense, DAZ must supply at least one map with the initial purchase that CAN be exchanged between licensed users. Most of the enhancements in texture maps by users deal with only a few features on the map and not the whole figure. For a user to share a new face, tattoo, scar, or any other partial addition to a figure, it must be included in a full texture map for most licensees to be able to use it directly. Strict adherence to the new policy suggests that for me to share a new tattoo with the community I would have to create my own teeth, eyelashes, eyes, lips, etc. as well. If I'm not interested in making new teeth and fingernails then, according to their revised policy, I cannot share my work with other licensed users. As this exchange of enhancements is what has brought the greatest value to these products (how many of you would have originally bought, or still be using and upgrading these products if you could only use them the way they came out of the box?) then it would clearly not be in the interest of either the publishers or the end users to now change this policy and historic public practice. DAZ has now put us on notice that this will not be allowed with their new products. OK, no beef with that as long as I know it before the purchase. However, I must agree with the suggestion made above that at least one map that comes with the purchase of a product must be available to users as a means of exchanging partial user revisions.

From what I have gathered, DAZ has every right to protect themselves. People complaining that they changed 90% of a DAZ image is moot. My brother is a intellectual property lawyer, and I mentioned to him this case. He said that this is a clear case of copyright infringement, on the basis of these violations being obvious derivative work. It doesn't matter if it is 1% derivative or 99%. Depending on whether DAZ has registered the copyright, they have every right to go after violators on a per incident basis or loss profits. And since Renderosity ticks off each download, it would be hard to establish a per incident basis. DAZ is being very diplomatic in these issues. The least people can do that don't understand these issues can not complain when a ripoff texture is being taken down.

Daz has never allowed their texture maps to be redistributed in any form. There are plenty of free texture maps that are entirely original--Mitch of www.mitch3dseite.de does 'em for the fish, robin wood of www.robinwood.com has some for vicky, I've got one for michael in the freestuff here. And Catharina's photographic textures are awesome...if you buy the top-end license agreement from her site, by the way, you can use her maps in your own maps. It's not super easy to paint a texture map from scratch or to photograph your own model, but it's not super easy to write a book from scratch either. Doesn't make it ok to lift passages or even a sentence from someone else's book, and it's not ok to lift pieces from proprietary maps, either; even small ones like fingernails and tongues. If those parts are so unimportant, why would you need to take them from a proprietary map? Just paint 'em. We're all bound not by what's commonly done but by the contracts that we've agreed to, and anyone using any daz product does so having agreed to their license agreement. This is not a change in policy. MaryCanary

I meant wouldn't be hard to establish...

I have no problem with DAZ protecting their copyright.. it's their work, and they are well withing their rights to do that. What I DID find offensive was the following... "After viewing the Victoria 1 vs. Odyssey it was obvious to DAZ that they are the same map". Hi-rez or not, the images posted show a significant difference - the hands may match, but to paint it all with so broad a brush is simply incorrect and, to me, offensive.

Nance, you hit the nail on the head! These people who are touting the "letter-of-the-law" have all failed to recognize a fundamental legal principle called "reasonable expectation". As a newcomer to Poser I came with several "expectations" based on experience in other areas. One of those areas of experience was with a product called The Sims by Maxis (a company about the same size as DAZ maybe smaller). If you know their product, and compare the model-building features, you will see similarities with Poser - except Poser is designed for adults and has a different scale factor. In any event there are parallels is the communities that have developed around them both. In the Sims community, Maxis (owner of all the primary copyrights) encourages building your own object mesh files and texture files by starting with one of their originals and modifying it. Furthermore they grant you the right to freely share your work, and provide a website for that purpose. They never accuse anybody of "stealing" their work, even though it is all in some part based on their originals. That's because this is a community of HOBBYISTS, not professional mesh builders and Hollywood rendering studios, and there is no harm in any of it to anybody - its called "sharing". Furthermore, Maxis recognizes that the more 3rd party accessories for their product, the more they will sell. And before you poo-poo the Sims as a child's game, just go look at some of the wonderful floor and wall tiles that have been created (all available for free download without copyright limitations except commercial use). Some of them would be entirely suitable for Poser or 3DS MAX. Now, as far as I can see, the Poser community is primarily HOBBYISTS too, although we are occasionally graced with the presence of some 3D world celebrity. So I don't understand the REAL motive behind DAZ's policy regarding TEXTURES for THEIR figures. It is NOT to protect their product, I can assure you - that claim just doesn't make any sense. The longer this thread goes on, the more I suspect that they are just trying to monoploize the texture market now that the mesh market has hit a plateau. And speaking of textures, it leads me to another reasonable assumption that I made as a newcomer. When I got my first DAZ CD of Michael, I eagerly installed it and launched Poser. I loaded the figure and pushed the "render button". Needless to say, I was appalled by the lack of detail on the texture. "Oh, well", I thought, "this must be a BASE texture that they kindly supplied so I can paint on my own details. Surely they cannot claim this washed-out generic texture to represent anything resembling a 'finished' product, and its sole reason for being must be as a starting point for further development." That is what I really thought at the time. And it was a "reasonable" assumption. Of course I had not read their TOS - as most people don't - I just assumed I was dealing with "reasonable" people and they had a "reasonable" TOS. OK I was wrong. Now that I have read it, I am even more suspect of their motives. Why do they bother including a texture with their meshes anyway? No mesh I have purchased from them ever came with texture that was usable for anything except as a base for modifications. And I don't recall ever seeing a prize-winning image which featured one of their un-modified basic textures, so I guess a lot of others feel the same. In fact, I seriously doubt that they could copyright such a generic representation of the human form (or dragon form either). They certainly cannot claim that it is either unique or artistic. There is nothing truly "distinguishing" about their texture when compared to other generic "human textures" which float around the 3D community. The only thing special about it is that it conforms well to their mesh, and therefore provides a more detailed guideline for positioning graphic elements than is available in the mesh templates. So why do they conplain about people "infringing on their artistic rights and intellectual property" especially under the cirucmstances outlined above? I can come to only one conclusion, and that is that they hope to control or dominate the texture market for their meshes.

I also don't believe this is a "change of policy" for Daz. I just wish they would include just one texture with their Vicky. Seriously though, while the ahnds show copyright infringement, I don't see how the rest does (granted we are looking at a small pic). There are only so many skin tones, and someone could use the colour off the daz map. Eyes, naval, breasts, butt and tongue can only go in certain places. With all the tutorials out there, is it any wonder that most maps look the same?

The argument for reasonable expectation isn't even close to being applicable here. And it just isn't possible to dominate 3D texturing...a power of 3D software the ability to swap and alter textures. And if you want, for yourself, of course you can alter a DAZ texture after purchasing it. I have some textures here at Renderosity. They are made from photographs I've taken and painted by me. They are from scratch (albeit designed with the DAZ template). I have the right to sell this. People that rip off a texture do not. Now that is reasonable.

Intercept - that is NOT what we are talking about at all. Your textures are clearly distinguishable in their own right. My point is that the DAZ work is so generic that they can claim almost anything resembling a human form as violating their copyright - including yours if they wish to apply the same criteria as above.

The way I spot a texture that uses part of the daz texture is to look at the "inner mouth" section. That weird red thing with the ridges in it. Doesn't look like a real body part at all, but soooo many maps use it. It first appeared on the original DAZ vicky texture and if you see it on a map you've gotta at least wonder. Maybe someone decided they'd paint the exact same inner mouth thingy but it's unlikely because it's not a very good inner mouth, ya know? But it's distinctive and proprietary anyway. The other thing I look at is the fingernails and toenails...they seem to migrate around a bit too. Basically the parts that carry the least "personality" are the ones that are going to migrate from copyrighted textures into other works. But they shouldn't.

OK lets put all the hypothetical banter aside for a moment. Here is my real world fear. I am currently working on my first figure texture for Michael. To date I have only published clothing textures which take a few hours for each piece to make. But so far, I have probably spent between 30 and 40 hours on my body texture alone. Starting with original photographs, experimenting with wrapping, discovering the limitations of the mesh and the strange seam structure, and unpredictable alterations by the poses, painstaking blending, then re-texturing then re-blending. Trying to get leg hair to resolve realistically on a 1500x1500 template (it ain't easy I can tell you). On and on it goes - I'm sure you know. In any event, as a last resort, to aid me in positioning such things as the navel and nipples, I imported a layer with the DAZ basic texture on it. As I made my original work transparent to see the DAZ layer beneath I was shocked at how similar my work appeared... yes everything was in the same place and resembled a human male, even though I had not even looked at their texture in its flat form (unrendered) before that time. I deleted the DAZ layer after using it to make a few minor repositionings. Although I know my work to be 100% unique, I know that It probably would not pass the tests described above because it is indeed "similar" to the DAZ texture although it has lot more detail and renders entirely differently (as does the Odyssey texture). My fear is not that DAZ is being hurt by people "borrowing" parts from their base, it is that they are setting themselves in a position for claiming rights to MY work. Think about who has something to gain by all this. Welcome to the REAL world. If you think this cannot happen, just ask any freelance artist who has worked for Hallmark Cards.

I said it before and I'll say it again. LAYERS. You can make all sorts of changes to maps with layers. You never even have to touch the original map. Kate

Kate, according to what has been said here, even TRACING is forbidden. So much for layers.

I just reread all of the above, copywrite rules. I think this not only applies to Vicki, and, Michael...but, to the Daz clothing for them, as well. Does this, in fact, put many in our marketplace at risk of having their things being pulled...or, worse yet, having Daz claim the rights to their profits? I know, from making my own clothing textures, that when you run the obj through the uvmapper, if you need a uvmap for making a texture. But, you must save the new uvmapped .obj. I don't see many clothing textures advertising a new uvmapped .obj file for the garments. So, I am gonna assume, that they are made from Daz texture bases. Correct me if I am wrong. Poppi

::So, I am gonna assume, that they are made from Daz texture bases. Correct me if I am wrong. Poppi :: Hi Poppi, I just made a lot of new clothing textures using DAZ templates as bases, as I think most people do -- NOT the textures as bases. The templates are freely available to use as a guide to make textures. Of course there are a few clothing items that do need remapping in order to make certain kinds of Trans Maps and textures. I think in that case you would need to make a new .obj. :) Lisa

Soulhuntre wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi-rez or not, the images posted show a significant difference - the hands may match, but to paint it all with so broad a brush is simply incorrect and, to me, offensive. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Wow, that's outrageous, isn't it? The victim of a theft has the fucking audacity to be a bit clumsy about reporting the crime. What offensive bastards. What really IS offensive is to take parts of someone else's work (be it freebie or commercial, individual or corporate) without permission and/or in direct violation of a user agreement, and redistribute them. It's the same principle whether it's parts of a DAZ texture ripped for insertion into free stuff, or parts of a free Staale texture ripped for insertion into a commercial effort. It's called theft, and this should be the focus of attention here, not all this other shite. I really don't understand where some people on this thread are coming from. Well, I do actually. They're displaying the usual degrees of stupidity and hypocrisy, leading them to talk the usual complete and utter bollocks.

I was wondering when someone was going to notice the similarities and point them out. ;] Theenk yew, PJ. grin I had bets going it'd be you. ;] I'll buy the booze with my winnings. Oh... I get it. Since it was hands for a freebie, it was ok and Daz is the bad guy. Makes sense now.

PJF: By reducing this thread to the simple definition of a "theft and a victim" you have insulted every sincere post here regardless of the position it represents. You could also use some help with your definition of the term "offensive" before you throw it around too much more. Please take this personally.

I'll lay money he has the definition memorised. And was using it in the intended context.

Thanks, LisaB. Grrrrr...lately I sing praises, if my internet connection stays connected for 15 minutes. And, sigh...taking PJ's side, yet again. Have any of y'all done that "difference" test on the stuff you have on your hd? I am not just talking freestuff, either. Shoot....only one outside texture passed, here. And, that didn't do as well as my own. Kinda made me wonder about the people I have been respecting. Sigh...no popping, here.

Soulhuntre wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi-rez or not, the images posted show a significant difference - the hands may match, but to paint it all with so broad a brush is simply incorrect and, to me, offensive. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< [PJF:] Wow, that's outrageous, isn't it? The victim of a theft has the fucking audacity to be a bit clumsy about reporting the crime. What offensive bastards. I wouldn't use "offensive" in soulhuntre's post but I agree that it was "clumsy" to say they were "THE SAME MAP" That's only significant because DAZ is supposed to be professional and not some "hobbyist" flogging day old work from a tute at the store. People just have certain expectations when you're a company. Still, this has been resolved by SnowSultan by pulling his relevant freestuff from other sites as well, and others (like Eowyn) who may have been using derivatives have started too. It's as good a resolution as I've ever seen around here so it's great. :) But darnit, my one chance to get a daz texture warez and I didn't get it cos I don't download vicky stuff! heh heh [/my joke tags don't come up here so i'll use square brackets]

Why anyone would want to copy that awful inner mouth I have no idea. I agree with PJF and just want to say that stealing is wrong, please don't steal. About Layers: We can make and distribute a difference layer as a photoshop file, but not everyone has photoshop. therefore, would it be hard/impossible to write a program like Mover so that people could encode and decode difference files between any two bitmaps or jpgs? (being of the same size)? Difference layers are not about tracing, they are about adding or detracting features such as detail. -WTB

O.K. I have been reading these threads and following them, and here are a couple of questions for ya all that I think a lot of would either like to know or should know. 1. To the renderosity staff...There is a lot of talk about store textures using parts of the vicki maps, which places them in copyright violation. (I personally only have a few, and haven't had a chance to check them yet) So, if it is found that these textures are using teeth, mouths, hands, parts or whatever of Daz's texture, then from a legal standpoint, all of us who purchased those maps can't use them. Will you refund the consumers for the money they spent on these textures. (I would hope) 2. for Daz...so what is someone who has used one of the texxtures in their art to do. I have used Snowsultans because I love his texture (sorry, even if it inadvertantly used parts of yours, it was much preferred to the one I purchased from you). Now, I didn't use it for any of my commerical work, but what if I did? Are we as artists expected to destroy all of the art we created with these textures? And what if someone used one that had given commercial use for a commercial project and is now finding out there was a copyright violation. 3. for Daz...because I think it was asked and in this long thread I missed the ansswer. If one owns the Vicky map from you, must they still delete the modification, since they didn't do it themselves? and 4. for anyone...is someone going to give us a list of these textures so we know which ones to delete? We know of snowsultans, and Eowyn was nice enough to inform us of hers, but what about the others. I think we all need to know what is being deleted due to infringement so we do not inadvertantly use those textures and further purpetuate the copyright problem. Enough questions for now, I must sleep. Take care all. Angela

Aeon Flux in the character section. Copyright violation. Characters from Willow, in the character section. Copyright violation. Transformers, in the character section. Copyright violation. etc etc etc Just pointing out that Vicky textures are the least of this place's worries.....

WTB, Paint Shop Pro reads photoshop psd files just fine. In fact, when I'm working on a layered project in PSP7 I always save to .psd format. I don't know about other paint programs, but I would think the major ones are capable of using the .psd format. Of course, I could be gasp, horrors wrong. =) Kate

Thumbs Plus does, too, and from there the format can be converted.

DOH! You're right. And I should have known that since I have thumbs plus. I guess it's just that I haven't used it for conversion so I didn't pay attention to that. :) Thanks for the reminder.

"Wow, that's outrageous, isn't it? The victim of a theft has the fucking audacity to be a bit clumsy about reporting the crime. What offensive bastards." Why make a well reasoned comment when you can just resort to childish name calling huh? Just maybe if you read all the words (even the big ones you usually skip) you might have seent hat I did not condone any copying of any kind. What I >did< say and what I stand behind is this... to say that theya re the "same map" is so completely false on the face of it that there is simply no credible reason to make the comment that I can see. I mentioned rather specifically that Daz has every right to demand that the copied works be pulled, but I also expect them to be accurate in their claims. The difference is a crucial one. "It's the same principle whether it's parts of a DAZ texture ripped for insertion into free stuff, or parts of a free Staale texture ripped for insertion into a commercial effort. It's called theft, and this should be the focus of attention here, not all this other shite." Since no one is disputing that the texteures shoudl be pulled, and the textures WERE voluntarily pulled - I am not sure what "focus" you might want outside of a lynching. Or maybe you just wanted a reason to say "fucking"?

someone needs a reason to say "fucking?" any reason is good enough in my book. fucking fucking fucking. ahhhh, my day is better already. :)

I've been hearing alot of that "F" word, lately. Too much, to tell the truth. Seems as if I can't stay online for more than 15 minutes...And of course, I pop off with that word when I get signed off. Now, the bird is saying it, kinda replacing his pop. Grrrrr. f***....f***...f***???

Ah, Poppi... I just know you mean to say "Feep" like the birdies do, right???

Maybe its coming something good of this too, clearing definiations of Dazs copyright. I dont comment this treat public otherwise than this: I have beeing also in almost same situation as Eowyn and SnowSultan. And now, TO ALL who have download mine 3 free stuff Victoria textures: Margo, Irland and Claws, they ar now remaded and can be downloaded from my site/TM Combo Victoria Texturemaps, all 3 in one zip. They ar all replacement, updates for fit Victoria and now hopely Victoria 2 also, and Dmentias PosaVic for not forgot.:) Finally My apologies for not beeing aware of some things, but hopely we all learn of our misstakes, I have learn a lot.