update their license system in a way to reflect the new possible uses the content could have.
That’s the point where we don’t agree: I don’t think it’s a “new” use. Printing the result of your fiddling with some software and the bought content is something people did since Poser 1.
3D printing is, for me, just an evolution of printing. Like going from black & white to color printing.
So what would you say if the license stated “you can freely print B/W pictures of your renders, but you need a special license to make color prints”?...
One could argue that a 3d unlike the 2d print gives any other party the possibility to to recreate the geometry by rescanning the 3d printed model again. The original model is not protected anymore.
Of course one could argue that the polygons would not be the same.
I think the possibility to extract the original topology from a printed figurine is more theoretical, as the original mesh will most likely be posed, clothed, morphed, not to mention the resulting print is small (which means low spatial resolution). You could probably do as much with a couple 2D views of the figure from different angles.
If I print a life-sized naked Vicky in her default T pose, one could indeed 3D scan her and create something very near to the original mesh. But the associated cost would be so high it would certainly come cheaper to hire someone to redo the mesh from scratch.
My point is that given the cost and the benefit for fraudsters it’s a risk but not a real danger, at least not until making big prints and 3D scanning become really commonplace. If someone wants to get his hands on a DAZ mesh for free he’d rather search the torrents for free than spend thousands of dollars in equipment.
Are 3d licenses really about protecting the geometry and the textures or about a license for a certain use?
It is what they decide it should be, actually. If you build a mesh for an TV ad or show, you usually yield all rights to the production. When you buy stock meshes you only get an non-exclusive license for use.
Poserdom came to be because lots of people (including what was to become DAZ) contributed meshes, making what was initially just a pretty dull and limited app of no real use grow and flourish, spawning a whole ecosystem (which gave birth to DAZ, initially just a department at Zygote). In this context, everybody used the “licensed for use” paradigm, which was the best suited and visibly worked pretty well.
But back to licenses.
The common expectation for that kind of electronic immaterial stuff is that they sell you a license to a non-exclusive use as you see fit, like it happens for instance in the stock photo market. This means you can’t resell or distribute the product, you can only use it to do something else with it.
Let’s stay at stock photography: Imagine I buy some nice pictures to illustrate some brochure/book. Unlike 3D scanners, 2D scanners are commonplace and cheap; How can the stock photo agency which sold me (use of) those pictures protect its intellectual property?
They will have a hard time, won’t they.
Food for thought.
As long as the original shape stays the same one could say that this model is a copy from the other.
But the very second one starts to add morphs and change the shape it will be absolutely impossible to prove the source of the model.
Obviously, but that’s an old problem. Take a (copyrighted) song for instance, change enough notes to satisfy the “reasonably different” requirement and here you go. Blatant copies, look-alikes and “strongly inspired” stuff is all around us. But that’s life, there is a limit to how much you can protect an idea/design. Imagine some author writes a love story, and then prevents anyone else to write any story in which two persons meet and eventually fall in love…!
Ask yourself: How different has a story in a movie or book to be in order to be considered different?
There are very well-paid IP lawyers who do this for a living…
I guess in ten years some people may consider to hire lawyers to figure out if they can use the 3d content they purchased today in different stores with technology noone would have thought of to use now.
Well, that’s rather theoretical, since in 10 years most of the stuff we use today will be considered so low-res and limited very few would bother using it. Just look 10 years back, it was IIRC when V3 was released. How many still use her, or worse, V2?
Besides, there isn’t that much which changed in technology since 2003.