Saw that this was added to the Terragen License Agreement:
QuoteRESTRICTIONS ON VOLUMETRIC ASSETS. You agree not to copy, transfer, assign, rent, resell or distribute Volumetric Assets to any third party, except where necessary as a reasonably minor part of deliverables to your clients for Licensed Volumetric Derivatives. Without exception you agree not to distribute Volumetric Assets as a stand-alone product or part of a product bundle to any third party. Without exception you agree to bind all recipients of Volumetric Assets to restrictions that are as strong as or stronger than those in this section of this Agreement, including relevant definitions or broader versions thereof.
I'm not sure if this just applies to volumetric assets that ship with Terragen, or assets the user creates. For example, if I use Terragen to export a vdb cloud, can I not sell that vdb file?
I can sell renders, heightmaps, textures and such created in Terragen so not sure why I wouldn't be able to sell a vdb. I'm guessing this is just to cover future assets that perhaps are going to be included with Terragen?
Clarification please...
-Derek
Hi Derek,
The complete definition of "Volumetric Assets" includes assets that the user creates.
Clouds are driving a major portion of our sales. But I'm increasingly seeing clouds that were exported from Terragen and rendered in other apps without the need for Terragen licenses, and if this trend continues it will cut deep into sales of Terragen. We need that income to keep making Terragen better.
Here's a less-legalese version of the terms related to volumetric assets.
Restrictions:
- You agree not to share VDBs derived from Terragen clouds, apart from a few exceptions in the agreement.
- This restriction also applies to other volumetric formats which are converted from clouds or cloud renders, such as other voxel formats, deep images, and more.
- This restriction also applies "turntable" renders of clouds derived from Terragen clouds (anything that's 180 degrees or more of rotation). Why? Because AI or other technology is going to be (probably already is) sophisticated enough to extract high-res volumetric data from this information.
Things you CAN do:
- I encourage you to create clouds in Terragen, and share and sell Terragen projects and clip files. The important thing here is that if someone besides yourself (outside of your organization/production where applicable) wants to work with clouds generated in Terragen, they should be using Terragen or at least buying a license, regardless of what renderer they use afterwards.
- I encourage you to create VDBs from these clouds to use them with other software for any reason (e.g. render, previs, compositing etc.), provided that they stay only with you or within your organization/production (except in limited circumstances stated in the agreement) and your organization/production keeps them confidential.
This non-legalese version is not a substitute for the proper license agreement. I have to point this out because all the wording is there for a reason.
I hope you will appreciate why I need to take these steps. I don't have any plans to restrict other kinds of assets. Clouds are a bit different because they're the kind of thing that can be instantiated from a relatively small number of VDBs and re-used over and over again, so they are particularly vulnerable.
I want to add more presets and cloud types to Terragen, but I need these protections in place first.
If you'd like to generate some VDBs to sell, let's discuss it offline. I am very open to working out a custom license agreement.
In other words, if you sell a ready product featuring volumetric assets (a picture to hang on the wall or a part of the movie), you can sell said ready product freely. You can't dismantle it and sell volumetric assets as stand-alone parts though.
Matt, I think this is an overly restricting way of handling this. I respect you decision but given the current state of cloud creation in TG I think TG's good reputation is due to other specific features - an outstanding landscape and planet-scale renderer with one of the best atmospheric models.
I think I've seen one person selling assets of clouds generated in TG but there also people selling panoramic HDRs from TG - is this something you would restrict, too?
In 1-2 years, most 3d apps will be able to generate and manipulate volumetric data, and I bet some of them will even include some sort of fluid simulation to help with the billowy look and a more realistic approach. There's already the very affordable EmberGen for smoke/fire sims which can be used for clouds to some degree, and it does it in seconds since it runs on the GPU, and it's *designed* specifically to export and re-use the VDB data. Houdini can do a lot already, although it's quite pricey. Maya/Max will have Bifrost at some point with probably a similar feature set.
I would say that an overly restrictive asset licensing model will keep people away and make them look for alternatives instead. I totally respect your decision but it definitely could have the opposite effect on potential users.
Hmm... Are you sure Houdini and Maya don't have simmilar restrictions in place?
Quote from: N-drju on April 30, 2020, 09:33:25 AMHmm... Are you sure Houdini and Maya don't have simmilar restrictions in place?
Definitely... unless you are using the educational license, there are no restrictions in place in regards to the content you produce. You've paid for the license so...
I'd say that VDB creation could be a good selling point for TG if the tools allowed for a bit more creative freedom... generate clouds based on imported meshes, better control over shapes and density/noises based on height within the cloud, presets for billowy or feathered properties etc. If the VDB exporter worked on all platforms AND we had a way to import, manipulate and render them, that would certainly improve TG's position.
Or finish the VDB exporter, add support for import and render, and make this an additional reasonably priced plugin so it generates income and mitigates the potential loss.
Or introduce a new additional licensing model for content creators planning to sell VDBs created in TG.
Also, I'm fairly sure the turntable restriction is bad for the user base. If I were an environment artist looking for a job and wanted to include 10 turntable vids of clouds in my reel I would have to keep them 180° only in order to not violate the EULA? I don't know how others feel but this is just wrong.
The gray area I see here is that most organizations contract the work out to someone who can do it. At which point they usually do not, or are even willing to learn some proprietary software, let alone install it, for the final product for their creation. It's like when I applied for a visual effects company recently, I am explicitly suppose to have the commercial licenses, and software, to do my job, and deliver the appropriate final products... They aren't going to buy a Terragen license just to hang it on a wall because they contracted a dude for some clouds and space fly-bys shots.
Additionally, this infringes on a large portion of not only Terragen's initial Commercial goal, but most any products goals in exporting with few exceptions like Speedtree, which is no friend to content creators, but hobbyists and conglomerates.
Creating limitations based on popularity of use I'd say isn't going to help your sales, you may stall the hurt though...
And aside from beautiful final renders by people that have been here for a long while learning, Terragen isn't really worth it's price on it's current roadmap. Imagine if I was a company that invested in this software to see bugfixes throughout it's maintenance period with no real substantial traction towards users needs? And adding further limitations to content creators outside hollywood is a bad move.
The TG target audience gets more and more niche...
Firstly I am really looking forward to using Terragens VDB support. There is a massive free cloud data set released by DISNEY from the MOMA film that will be lots of fun to use, check it out here.
http://www.cgchannel.com/2018/07/download-disneys-data-set-for-motunui-island-from-moana/
There are already a lot of VDB assets available on line that will be fun to experiment with.
Ultimately no software can stand on its one as a single solution to ones rendering needs. Being able to easily send assets back and forth between programs is essential to all studio pipelines. Terragens "Render Elements" is a vital part of this process which allows final output to be compped and tweaked in third party programs (NUKE, AFTERFX, HOUDINI, PHOTOSHOP etc). The same is true of our ability to export and import terrains, essential for positioning and shadow catching.
There are some kinds of shot that can only be done by having matched renders across multiple applications. Think of a shot of a reflective space ship emerging from a billowing volumetric cloud casting shadows across a landscape.
I don't think the new Licensing Agreement is overly restrictive. Matt is explicitly allowing VDB's to be shared by artists and studios working on the same project. I would expect larger studios would want to build up libraries of volumetric clouds that they can reach out for at any time and have ready made cloud assets that work across all their software with little or no compatibility wrangling. I know both DNEG and MPC would send juniors off in their first weeks to make tree libraries (SpeedTree) or convert rock assets (MegaScan) just to build up the in-house asset library.
Unrelated suggestions:
Restrict the export of VDB's to the professional version only whilst having import available across all versions.
Create a custom VDB version (VDBt) that can only be read by applicable versions of Terragen.
Sell a separate VDB (VDBt) reader plugin for Houdini, Maya, Max etc
Meanwhile Houdini doesn't even have export limitations on the OPEN vdb format, even in indie. Many don't.
Good heads up to get an explanation I should keep my skies completely bare and use another software.
Taking your troubles out on consumers is a bad move. Your only winning favor with friends.
---
If I create a cloud set off my so-called "commercial license" (can no longer be called such if the main aspect of the program is not commercial, inherently), for the VFX firm I work for, they should now own it, and should be able to use it in any work they're contracted for. They should not need to just re-render the clouds in TG on their license just because you want extra $$$. So far there is no transparency on Terragen being restricted computer software, or its assets, especially with a "commercial" license.
---
I'm also curious if this will even make any difference. I've tried to warn you before that TG is all over torrent and warez sites, especially in Asia. I've seen key gens, vdb generators, etc. Obtaining TG without a license, and doing anything you want with it is pretty easy. I'm sure a lot of these obscure phone games from China with these amazing skydomes are just happening by them on a stock website...
Quote from: WAS on May 01, 2020, 01:59:10 PMIf I create a cloud set off my so-called "commercial license" (can no longer be called such if the main aspect of the program is not commercial, inherently), for the VFX firm I work for, they should now own it, and should be able to use it in any work they're contracted for. They should not need to just re-render the clouds in TG on their license just because you want extra $$$.
Yes, and the new license agreement doesn't change that, but I might need to adjust the wording to make it more clear on that subject.
I think the more powerful the software is, the more people will like it. I just bought tg out of my hobby, there is no commercial use, because I like its function. I am not a professional, but I think that restricting the use of software functions is not good for software development. For example, if tg can export vdb, Planetside can sell vdb library by itself. If TG is recognized by the industry, I think it will greatly increase TG sales. People use TG's vdb, and then they also want to control the shape and effect of vdb. Buying a library is definitely a very passive act, and people will want to make their own cloud and have complete control. Hope terragen becomes stronger and stronger.
Maybe indeed make a special version with VDB export/import, but (much) more expensive, to compensate? Mostly users who would use the feature are the richer businesses I presume.
We are not stopping anyone from exporting VDBs if they have a Professional license. You still can export VDBs and you will be able to import them when import is implemented.
But there are restrictions on who you can give them to. You can't sell VDBs on an open marketplace, for example. The main purpose of this is to avoid widespread distribution of Terragen-generated VDBs (and similar formats) in the market.
You CAN give them to your clients as long as the VDBs are not the major part of what you are delivering to them and the client is subject to the same conditions after receiving them. If your client keeps the VDBs etc. in-house then that is fine. But if your client wants sell packs of VDBs, for example, that is a problem.
I realize that the new terms - as they are right now - make some things more difficult than they used to be. I am trying to avoid that. I want to find the right terms so that most people won't be affected by them. I will make some changes if I can find a better way to do this. I still want Terragen users to be able to export VDBs for a wide range of purposes.
I can see a good point in what Matt is saying.
Imagine a company buys your picture to put it as a website's background. Few weeks later, you realize that they actually sell printouts of said picture to whomever asks...
Quote from: N-drju on May 02, 2020, 07:01:20 AMI can see a good point in what Matt is saying.
Imagine a company buys your picture to put it as a website's background. Few weeks later, you realize that they actually sell printouts of said picture to whomever asks...
But in this case the user has purchased a "commercial" license, which inherently implies selling assets for revenue.
VDB marketplace is big, already, and TG pulling out isn't going to help TG. When a AAA movie or game uses amazing clouds first thing I do is analyze is from where (TG clouds have giveaways just like Houdini's always looks like smoke some). Where others remain and strengthen their software base because of interest TG is scared of loss revenue? Oi.
And from what you explained, because I am contracted, and not an employee or part of the company, or any part of internal decisions it seems I cannot give them VDB clouds to use in their projects. I couldn't know what they will and will-not use them for. I also cannot extend user agreements (specifically with me) to them that they have not legally agreed too. Contracting too; is technically selling work to a third paty inherently as well.
Speaking of that cause Oshyan just tossed a key at me, I never even actually agreed to any agreements or were shown them before receiving a license. I don't even have a PlanetSide account to review things.
---
Also the vague terminology around not a "Major part" of your scene is just asking to trap people. What constitutes a major part of a scene? It's currently at your discretion. Cloudscapes are a major part of any landscape scene really, and you know many people are just creating skyscapes and exporting them because
terragens terrain generation has fallen behind and isn't a major part of much production pipelines anymore, if it ever was (don't see many terragen landscapes in movies, mostly skies).
You'd probably get better results (in sales and usage) allowing sales, but requiring a license shipped with VDBs governing third party usage, and also creating a incentive to go back to TG for fresh new VDBs.
To be honest, I find your posts puzzling at best. You seem to be extremely critical of this software... Yet, advertising lots of TG solutions and links relating to this 'ere program. I find it deeply conflicting. If like you say, there are major flaws in this program, why not save your health and move to a competition which does everything better?
As far as sales terms are concerned... This is Matt's call and the best you (we) can do is to respect his own decision.
This is exactly what copyright has to offer. While selling my art, I could as well put up terms that it can only be viewed by Yorkshire Terriers and has to be hung exactly 234cm above the floor. True - I wouldn't get to many sales. But it is still my right to name such terms if I want to (though I don't ;)).
Quote from: WAS on May 03, 2020, 01:58:51 PMSpeaking of that cause Oshyan just tossed a key at me, I never even actually agreed to any agreements or were shown them before receiving a license.
Every time you install TG you
explicitly agree with the EULA.
Matt, another case for a second thought would be the 180° turntable restriction - lift it, please.
Environment artists are totally in need to include these in their reels. If someone is about to be hired because of his TG experience you really shouldn't penalize him for the money and time he spent to learn TG. He absolutely should be able to render out 360° turntables of the stuff he created and to post it on the internet, restricting this is nonsense and hurts your loyal users.
Even outside of that I absolutely oppose the restriction. If there's anything that can help the sales of TG, it's not getting restrictive on the content it can produce, it should first and foremost be the competitive edge over other apps. The new restriction hurts more than it helps.
Quote from: pokoy on May 04, 2020, 06:49:33 AMMatt, another case for a second thought would be the 180° turntable restriction - lift it, please.
Environment artists are totally in need to include these in their reels. If someone is about to be hired because of his TG experience you really shouldn't penalize him for the money and time he spent to learn TG. He absolutely should be able to render out 360° turntables of the stuff he created and to post it on the internet, restricting this is nonsense and hurts your loyal users.
Even outside of that I absolutely oppose the restriction. If there's anything that can help the sales of TG, it's not getting restrictive on the content it can produce, it should first and foremost be the competitive edge over other apps. The new restriction hurts more than it helps.
... however I have never had a single environment turntable in any of my reels or job applications.
I actually think that a cloud turntable only really shows of ones ability to make a turntable rather than the cloud which in nearly every context would only ever be viewed from one side :)
Quote from: pokoy on May 04, 2020, 06:49:33 AMHe absolutely should be able to render out 360° turntables of the stuff he created and to post it on the internet, restricting this is nonsense and hurts your loyal users.
With that, I do agree.
Quote from: cyphyr on May 04, 2020, 07:08:04 AMQuote from: pokoy on May 04, 2020, 06:49:33 AMMatt, another case for a second thought would be the 180° turntable restriction - lift it, please.
Environment artists are totally in need to include these in their reels. If someone is about to be hired because of his TG experience you really shouldn't penalize him for the money and time he spent to learn TG. He absolutely should be able to render out 360° turntables of the stuff he created and to post it on the internet, restricting this is nonsense and hurts your loyal users.
Even outside of that I absolutely oppose the restriction. If there's anything that can help the sales of TG, it's not getting restrictive on the content it can produce, it should first and foremost be the competitive edge over other apps. The new restriction hurts more than it helps.
... however I have never had a single environment turntable in any of my reels or job applications.
I actually think that a cloud turntable only really shows of ones ability to make a turntable rather than the cloud which in nearly every context would only ever be viewed from one side :)
Hmm then why Matt introduced this restriction in the first place? You personally may not be affected but it doesn't mean others aren't or that the restriction makes sense that way.
I fear introducing restrictions like these will hurt the user <> developer relation more than anything else, much like the outcry when Plant Factory restricted the content created in PF to not be sold. The consequence was that people chose other apps over PF and, suddenly, not having any restriction in place was their competitive edge. The same will happen in this case, especially since other tools offer some more accessible options to create hero clouds. All it needs is another tool or plugin to emerge and TG may lose customers instead of growing the user base.
I personally will probably never be affected by this. But with these restriction in place I will make sure that, should I ever need clouds as VDBs which may end up on someone else's HD without my control, TG won't be a part of the VDB pipeline. Then, looking at my long-time relationship as a customer of planetside, will I be happy? Take a guess...
Quote from: pokoy on May 04, 2020, 07:31:01 AMI personally will probably never be affected by this. But with these restriction in place I will make sure that, should I ever need clouds as VDBs which may end up on someone else's HD without my control, TG won't be a part of the VDB pipeline.
I really doubt that you could be charged of anything on these grounds - you'd have no control over what someone is doing with your TG-generated assets. Just like with my picture example. But yes, it could quickly become a problem to well-meaning artists who just provide final "products".
I do see a point as far as VDB export (and sales thereof) are concerned, but it's a pity that turntables are also included...
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on May 04, 2020, 06:24:54 AMQuote from: WAS on May 03, 2020, 01:58:51 PMSpeaking of that cause Oshyan just tossed a key at me, I never even actually agreed to any agreements or were shown them before receiving a license.
Every time you install TG you explicitly agree with the EULA.
Different Agreement, Martin. It doesn't even contain the VDB segment, and you can't legally have two contradicting agreements, to begin with. It creates a nullified agreement due to liabilities.
And again, all contracted work is technical presale of services/assets. It's not you working for a company, etc, and you can't extended agreements on them.
---
And honestly how is this going to help Terragen except inhibit sales? Also, how is it going to protect Terragen when exported VDBs are as such, an exported VDB. Any VDB can be extensively augmented until it doesn't resemble the original, and used for thousands of iterations, and you'll never know. And as far as VDBs out there that you can't cover with a new agreement, how does it help? They can all be used for almost limitless variations and tweaking.
---
Further more applying restrictions to an open format which doesn't have any, anywhere else, is really shady. Just cause TG exports it? What does TG do in the OpenVDB that warrants any uniqueness? Especially using basic perlin, which is available in other software? Heck if no one is using easy clouds, you could very well mistake perlin from other software as TG generated and opena can of worms. TG Easy Clouds are easy to spot, but basic perlin noises in VDB format?
---
Seems the damage has been done, and trying to attack consumers over it is wrong. The mistake was made to not restrict them, and it shouldn't be changed because you're hurting. That's just more fuel for the TG fire.
Hi everyone. I am taking all of this feedback into consideration.
The cloud turntable restriction was a step too far, and I've decided to remove it. Turntables will be allowed.
The cloud turntable restriction was added because it was considered a big loophole with current and next-generation AIs. But it would cause a lot of damage so I will remove that in the next update to the license agreement.
Other definitions/terms may change as I consider feedback and weigh it up with our plans for the future.
Quote from: WAS on May 04, 2020, 02:06:24 PMDifferent Agreement, Martin. It doesn't even contain the VDB segment
The EULA is the same as the agreement you see in the installer. They were updated on April 28th. The April 28th agreement is in the 4.4.65 installer.
Quote from: Matt on May 05, 2020, 01:39:03 AMQuote from: WAS on May 04, 2020, 02:06:24 PMDifferent Agreement, Martin. It doesn't even contain the VDB segment
The EULA is the same as the agreement you see in the installer. They were updated on April 28th. The April 28th agreement is in the 4.4.65 installer.
Oh, that would be why. I have 44620. Huh I didn't get a update notification again. Weird.
Quote from: pokoy on May 04, 2020, 06:49:33 AMMatt, another case for a second thought would be the 180° turntable restriction - lift it, please.
Environment artists are totally in need to include these in their reels. If someone is about to be hired because of his TG experience you really shouldn't penalize him for the money and time he spent to learn TG. He absolutely should be able to render out 360° turntables of the stuff he created and to post it on the internet, restricting this is nonsense and hurts your loyal users.
Even outside of that I absolutely oppose the restriction. If there's anything that can help the sales of TG, it's not getting restrictive on the content it can produce, it should first and foremost be the competitive edge over other apps. The new restriction hurts more than it helps.
************************************************************************************************
I totally agree with this post.