I can't help but wonder if I can do this without being sued by anyone... :P
Given the fact that we were so excited over xoio people models I was just thinking if I could share some human models that I recently started to create with DAZ 3D software. Not very complicated. Just some simple textured people walking, sitting and so on. DAZ software is free of charge but their bundles that do things (like clothing, modeling, texturing) are not. This is where I have a problem. If there is a 3d model which I created with the use of DAZ bundles but which is ultimately my inventive creation am I authorized to do what I please with it or not?
I would very much like to give something in return for all good pieces of advice that I was given here but I'm a bit lost within this godawful legal mumbo-jumbo. Probably just as any of you... :-\
This is always an interesting discussion. If I buy some paint and a canvas, manufactured by others, and make a painting, am I free to sell it or give it away?
I echo Ulco...
what is considered modification, or creativity?
I'd say share, but who wouldn't?
Yes, maybe, but get this - they also used "paint and canvas" to create morphs, design clothing patterns and raw models. Having said this - upon modeling am I still using "paint and canvas" or a "painting" already?
I can make it a bit more difficult; the paint and canvas have been manufactured by another firm, who have purchased their materials from farmers and miners, oil makers and weavers, and so on..... Who can claim proprietory rights to their 'product'?
On the other side, if I purchase an expensive painting from a well known artist, cut it up and use it to make a 'arty' lamp or chair, who can 'claim' that.
The world is complicated :P
This all probably comes down to the individual program's EULA. There are many examples (Onyx, Plant Factory, etc.) where you are specifically forbidden from selling *any* model created by the software, period (or in the case of Plant Factory, you must sell it through their online store). I find this rather ridiculous myself, and wonder if these contract terms would even hold up in court, but until they're challenged we don't know for sure and it's safest to err on the side of assuming the EULA is binding (and keep in mind that even bringing such a challenge would be quite expensive, even if you win, so no one is likely to do it). So what does the DAZ EULA have to say?
Fortunately most canvases don't seem to come with EULAs. ;)
So is that it? And here I was hoping that forum is to help people and not entangle them into philosophical disputes. :( ;)
I guess I'll just try to read through EULA, NDA or any other three to four lettered document. I just don't like to waste time for this. :P But if it turns out possible, I'll certainly share one my creations.
For the love of... Oh pff, sheesh! ??? Here's an EULA extract:
OTHER RESTRICTIONS. This Agreement is User's proof of license to exercise the rights granted herein and may be printed and retained by User. User shall not give, sell, rent, lease, sublicense, or otherwise transfer or distribute any Content on a temporary or permanent basis without the prior written consent of DAZ. User may not reverse engineer, de-compile, disassemble, or create derivative works from the Content except as set forth in Section E above.
THREE DIMENSIONAL WORKS. DAZ wishes to encourage the expansion of the catalog of Content available to its users. Accordingly, User may access, use, copy, and modify the Content to create one or more derived or additional three-dimensional works provided that:
any such derived or additional three-dimensional works are designed to require or encourage the use of Content available through the online DAZ store either by (i) requiring the use of such Content to function, or (ii) allowing only limited function when not used in conjunction with Content from the online DAZ store.
Message from their legal department to top it off:
Richard Haseltine, Mar 30 04:51:
Unfortunately since, if I understand your question correctly, the Terragen files are still 3D they are a derivative product and may not be distributed under either the standard EULA nor, from what I understand, under the Game Developer Licenses. I'm sorry not to be able to give you a more helpful response.
Looks like the end of what might have been a pretty and promising story. ???
I think a test case needs to be bought over things like this. In UK law, I believe that virtually everything is covered by a "reasonable expectations" clause (my terminology, and I THINK i'm right, though I may be talking out of my backside) i.e. If you went out and bought a car (the sole purpose of which is to transport you from one place to another) and it said in the very small print, buried on page 24 of the EULA that you were only allowed to sit in your car in your driveway, and NOT use it to go to the shops in, then in court this would be thrown out as "the sole purpose of a car is to transport you from one place to another" and the EULA is not in accordance with reasonable expectations of the product.
A good lawyer would argue that if you create 3D content in one piece of software, then it would be reasonable to be able to use that 3D object in another piece of 3D software, as it would have virtually no use on its own. (lets be honest, a large amount of "finished" 3d work has been through a number of pieces of different software to get to that finished state) I'm wondering if you take your stuff out of DAZ software through poseray etc, into TG as an OBJ and then out of TG as a TGO would the EULA still be valid, as a TGO file can't be edited by DAZ software, or uploaded to the DAZ store for use in DAZ software. It has essentially become a "Stand alone" product and therefore no longer a derivative work!
Also, why not ask where you can add your TGO files to the DAZ store and see what they say. I'm wondering if you can set a price of $0 for your work when you publish it to the DAZ store?
Just my demented ramblings on the subject ;D
Well, your rambling is not that demented. :D
You gotta point there and I think most of us would agree with your train of thoughts. However, a model that is inserted into image is no longer a 3d piece of work and this is in accordance with EULA. That's why people use human models there. When I wrote to this legal-guy it was also my argumentation that .tgo files and even stinkin' .jpg files used for textures are no longer usable with DAZ which in turn makes "stand alone" idea valid for me (not for them obviously).
I don't agree that your example with a car is a good one. :) Such things (or paints and canvas as Ulco suggested) do not have EULA's and never had so we can't make analogical judgments (or even comparisons) between those and 3d artwork.
Mr. Miley - I think I will ask DAZ store about it... Also I'm planning to have a chat with some lawyer about this issue to see how s/he understands that agreement and whether it will be in accordance with the law of my country to share suchlike creation with the wider public.
Unfortunately from what I see, there are not many people who actually do share their human models but there are plenty of renders where they do appear. This reluctance to share this sort of work is absolutely understandable all things considered. Needless to say, I don't want to be the first "test case" as far as this is concerned. :(
In fact, if you put such object in an environment, render it and sell it as a poster, are you not redistributing a derivative?
No Ulco, because this is no longer a 3D piece of art (that's their magical word.) As seen above.
What convinces me to hold my horses is that no one at all shared any human models before. Coincidence? Judging by your Parkwood project (a good piece of work by the way) you've got plenty of human models too but didn't post any.
Well? So you see. I don't wanna risk my job or mental serenity for a little, virtually irrelevant model. :)