Ownership of knitting patterns :)

[Seth]

or ya'll be hanged, goddamnit !

[matrix2003]

LOL 

[FrankB]

Richard, I'm not quite sure what your purpose of this debate is. You don't seriously think that we would say yeah fine share our stuff, do you?

Here's a more suitable anology for you: when you write a program in C++ and compile it with a C++ compiler, you would reckon that the resulting program is yours. You know people could reverse engineer the code, so as a software vendor, you explicitly write in your eula that reverse enginieering is not allowed.
Now, your code consists of standard programming commands, that you are combining in a certain way.
With your logic applied, anyone could reverse engineer the code and freely share it, *because* it's *just* made of standard commands that you don't own as such. If that would be the case there would be no IP protection for you as the programmer. Whatever business you were hoping to get and make your living would simply be gone.

Our preset packs are the same like a programming language that is using standard commands, combined to deliver a certain end result. The only difference (until to date) is that our little programs or *presets* don't need to be reverse engineered, because they are used as instructions at runtime. Bad luck for us, because it makes it easy for people to circumvent the IP. We chose to go ahead anyway because we trust that people have their common sense together and don't shoot us in the back. We don't own a methodology. We own the preset we have made using the "TG2 programming environment", if you will.

However, there's no law that needs to be changed. The presets are our intellectual property and are declared and protected as such.
In the early days of NWDA, there was a note at the buy now button that said by buying you agree to the EULA, which it linked to.
Nowadays, the eula is included in the packs PLUS you agree to these terms before you can even submit your order. The previous setup , though, is still valid and in effect. Today it's just more visible.

I totally disagree that our presets are too simple. Even if a preset has only a couple nodes (but sometimes over a hundred), ususally weeks and sometimes months of development and testing go into these.

Thanks,
Frank

[Seth]

erased by Seth (useless post)

[Dune]

By the way, Matrix2003, would you mind changing your avatar!!?? It's very disturbing, especially when reading something quite as interesting as these lines about © Thanks.

---Dune

ps. © is a difficult thing. I have something going on at the moment with a client who commissioned me to produce something (with a little of his knowledge) and now thinks he owns the ©.

[Zairyn Arsyn]

Y'all listen up here.  Stay away from my nodes, ya hear!  And don't goin anywheres near the barn with my daughter.
Round these parts a man can get shot just for peeking at somebody's nodes.  Sheriff Macro's not around.
We got weapons, strong whiskey, and ten acre's for rendering.  Move along and take the lawyer with ya.   

i guess matrix2003 has a "true" render farm.
10 acres of rendering plants... thats alot of processing power.....

[matrix2003]

Legal definition of a derivative work: " DERIVATIVE WORK - A work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a 'derivative work'. 17 U.S.C. "  http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d042.htm

So if you make a new image using NWDA purchases, the image is now your own correct?  Does the EULA address derivatives?  Face it that is all we do!  We tweak endlessly to reach a better image.  
If you modify the Louis Vitton bag, you obviously can not call it your creation.  But if I tweak a Hero Rock for several months and then hit render for a finished scene, isn't the code or image now a derivative piece which I DO clearly own. NO?

[cyphyr]

Hi Frank

You don't seriously think that we would say yeah fine share our stuff, do you?

err yes why not, his issue was with a lighting condition which had nothing to do with the NWDA pack in question, are you accusing me of trying to steal it (I don't think you are )

I would in no way claim that the NWDA presets were "too" simple. I don't think I said "too". But they are very much simpler than the C++ and C++ compiler analogy. And the amount of time you put in dose not change how complex or simple something is.

Still no one seems to want to tell me how the file I uploaded earlier is mine. Yes I made it, yes I uploaded it, but its not mine I didn't create it in some way that only I can re-create. If you make a CanyonNetwork similar to mine should I think you have stolen from me, I think not.

I'm sorry but I don't think your presets are your intellectual property; I don't see how they can be, there's nothing original (technical meaning not artistic) there. Maybe "intellectual property" is claimed by simply saying so?!

Maybe I'm just an old revolutionary lol
I just don't get this ownership idea, never have, especially over ideas, methodology


Happy rendering

Richard

[matrix2003]

By the way, Matrix2003, would you mind changing your avatar!!?? It's very disturbing, especially when reading something quite as interesting as these lines about © Thanks.

---Dune

ps. © is a difficult thing. I have something going on at the moment with a client who commissioned me to produce something (with a little of his knowledge) and now thinks he owns the ©.

My others are much worse ......  I will work on a new one!

[cyphyr]

If you modify the Louis Vitton bag, you obviously can not call it your creation.  

Err actually yes as long as you don't claim its a  Louis Vitton bag, if you learnt from the Louis Vitton bag and then created a matrix2003 bag there would be no problem, even if both bags looked similar


Richard

[Seth]

erased by Seth (useless post)

[cyphyr]

Original post erraised
Oh well I can do that too

[Seth]

erased by Seth (useless post)

[cyphyr]

Have it your way if you dont wish to see my point.

In the above example it would not be a facsimile, a "photocopy" but a different bag from a Louis Vitton, it would be a matrix2003 bag. A new bag made up from previously learnt information derived from the dissected Louis Vitton. The fashion world relies on making copies, the major fashion houses support it, what you see in Paris you will shortly (very shortly) see in Chelsea.

In your world view it would not be possible to learn anything with out breaking some copyright

Richard

[FrankB]

Hi Richard,

copyrights can seem like a strange thing, but actually once you think about this a little bit it becomes quite logical and clear.
I think I understand your thought process here, assuming there are a few things you just don't know. Let me try to explain this.

- Complexity and copyright: complexity is not a pre-requisite for a copyright, unless the subject is totally trivial, like an application that can only print "hello world". The complexity of a tgd might seem little to you, though, while c++ code may seem like a miracle to you (I'm making it up). Vice versa, a c++ developer might think that a certain application is easy to reproduce, while Terragen 2 is beyond him.

- The canyon stuff you have posted is yours, but you will have difficulties claiming a copyright when someone recreates this, because you deliberately and publicly shared it.

- Trying to explain this in simple terms: yes the presets contain intellectual property. The term describes the original intellectual effort that went into making them. It's not *just* the certain combination of nodes, it's also in the custom parameters that combined with the certain combination of nodes deliver a unique end result. With IP it doesn't matter to how much % your subject is artistic, graphic, or technical, it's still your IP. It also does not need to be declared, because you genuinely own the IP by the time you create your subject. IP and copyright is declared to make it clear to others who don't know about these things.

I hope I have been able to clarify these things here Richard. I'm also happy to continue to discuss with you through email if you want.

Regards,
Frank