Digital Art Zone

 
   
2 of 4
2
How do you deal with 3rd parties who want to see proof that you payed the fee for licensed 3d models?
Posted: 16 June 2013 03:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  420
Joined  2009-07-24

One word. Lawyers. They are the only ones who can understand the mess they have made of this country (USA).

 Signature 

Someone please tell me what is so great about this century.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 03:38 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2009-08-07

It’s totally understandable that they asked for these confirmations. They are exposing themselves legally by purchasing work from you that contains the creative labour of third parties.

To be honest, I was surprised when my publisher (bless them) did not ask for a similar list from me. I had one ready to go when I submitted my graphic novel to them, but they just took my word for it.

 Signature 

Check out The Lesser Evil, a graphic novel made using DAZ models, and published by Zetabella Publishing!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 04:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  275
Joined  2003-10-09

Yes it is customary to ask for proof of copyright clearance, but linvanchene seems to have done that by submitting copies of receipts, EULAs and invoices.  I have never had a legit client require for more than that except for the one case with Kodak mentioned above.  I think any professional knows to not only keep their receipts but to frequently create backups.  I also keep all original installers whether .zip or .exe and make sure that the file name corresponds to the product name in the invoice.  That way I have the EULA embedded with the product.

As for using free stuff in commercial work, I highly discourage it.  I would not do it and I don’t think any experienced professional would except under extreme conditions where the original author can clearly establish ownership and transfer rights of the product content.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 04:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4680
Joined  2011-11-25
RonS - 16 June 2013 04:13 PM

As for using free stuff in commercial work, I highly discourage it.  I would not do it and I don’t think any experienced professional would except under extreme conditions where the original author can clearly establish ownership and transfer rights of the product content.

This is very good advice. I wish I had known this when I started. =-)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 05:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  447
Joined  0

Sounds to me like you’re being stalled.

I would in a business-like, professional manner tell them you have provided all relevant materials required to prove your ownership of the proper licenses, direct them to DAZ directly for further inquiries, and set a date that you expect remittance of your payment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 06:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  654
Joined  2011-03-26

edited and removed by user

 Signature 

DAZ User Gallery / Facebook / Deviant Art

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 07:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4680
Joined  2011-11-25

I think it would be helpful to standardize licensing as well in clear understandable terms. I recently went to a 3d-artists site who was vending genesis models, and her usage and licensing agreement was so confusing I just didn’t buy from her.

I am not a lawyer, and legaleze and I need usage terms spelled out plainly for the products I buy.

This is one thing daz does quite well. Even on competitors sites the usage terms are ‘whatever the artist includes in the readme file.’ This is quite confusing if it is not standardized usage across the store. I prefer if I buy from a specific store the usage terms be standardized..

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 07:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3142
Joined  2004-04-25
SereneNight - 16 June 2013 07:08 PM

I think it would be helpful to standardize licensing as well in clear understandable terms. I recently went to a 3d-artists site who was vending genesis models, and her usage and licensing agreement was so confusing I just didn’t buy from her.

I am not a lawyer, and legaleze and I need usage terms spelled out plainly for the products I buy.

This is one thing daz does quite well. Even on competitors sites the usage terms are ‘whatever the artist includes in the readme file.’ This is quite confusing if it is not standardized usage across the store. I prefer if I buy from a specific store the usage terms be standardized..

The actual Genesis mesh or morphs for Genesis?  Is the vendor actually including the mesh in obj, dsf or duf format?  If she is, that’s redistribution and a direct violation of the EULA.  If she is simply selling morph sets, then it’s not.

There is standardization in the form of the Genesis EULA.  A vendor cannot change their EULA to less or negate any part of the Genesis EULA but they can add restrictions that apply to their particular product. 

Usage terms, even if they are more restrictive than the DAZ EULA should be spelled out clearly so their is no misunderstanding.

The difference between DAZ and other brokerages is the fact that DAZ owns the base products and it’s their EULA at the root of things.  While it is not stated, if a product is sold at Rendo for V4, first and foremost, the V4 EULA is in effect when you use the product.  If the vendor has other restrictions, they are placed in the read me because that is generally where you find such information.  Brokerages cannot have a blanket policy.  Even DAZ doesn’t.  IIRC, there was at least one outfit for ChibiBel for A3 that had a no commercial use clause attached to it.

 Signature 

“...not world enough nor time…” 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 07:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4680
Joined  2011-11-25
icprncss - 16 June 2013 07:36 PM
SereneNight - 16 June 2013 07:08 PM

I think it would be helpful to standardize licensing as well in clear understandable terms. I recently went to a 3d-artists site who was vending genesis models, and her usage and licensing agreement was so confusing I just didn’t buy from her.

I am not a lawyer, and legaleze and I need usage terms spelled out plainly for the products I buy.

This is one thing daz does quite well. Even on competitors sites the usage terms are ‘whatever the artist includes in the readme file.’ This is quite confusing if it is not standardized usage across the store. I prefer if I buy from a specific store the usage terms be standardized..

The actual Genesis mesh or morphs for Genesis?  Is the vendor actually including the mesh in obj, dsf or duf format?  If she is, that’s redistribution and a direct violation of the EULA.  If she is simply selling morph sets, then it’s not.

There is standardization in the form of the Genesis EULA.  A vendor cannot change their EULA to less or negate any part of the Genesis EULA but they can add restrictions that apply to their particular product. 

Usage terms, even if they are more restrictive than the DAZ EULA should be spelled out clearly so their is no misunderstanding.

The difference between DAZ and other brokerages is the fact that DAZ owns the base products and it’s their EULA at the root of things.  While it is not stated, if a product is sold at Rendo for V4, first and foremost, the V4 EULA is in effect when you use the product.  If the vendor has other restrictions, they are placed in the read me because that is generally where you find such information.  Brokerages cannot have a blanket policy.  Even DAZ doesn’t.  IIRC, there was at least one outfit for ChibiBel for A3 that had a no commercial use clause attached to it.

Interesting. This I did not know. I believe it was a morph for genesis. I did not buy the product or download it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 07:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2760
Joined  2007-12-25

Those of you who need to track 3D content used for commercial purposes might want to support this feature request:

https://bugs.daz3d.com/view.php?id=50357
0050357: Include product, creator and license details for all content in scenes and renders

If you haven’t yet made an account at the DAZ bugtracker, you’ll need to do that before you can read or comment on this feature request—it’s not the same as your forum or store account.

I personally think this kind of feature could be a real draw to use DAZ software for scene construction and renders.

 Signature 

Shop Zigraphix @ DAZ3D

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 June 2013 09:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Addict
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4680
Joined  2011-11-25

icprncss” date=“1371432983” The difference between DAZ and other brokerages is the fact that DAZ owns the base products and it’s their EULA at the root of things.  While it is not stated, if a product is sold at Rendo for V4, first and foremost, the V4 EULA is in effect when you use the product.  If the vendor has other restrictions, they are placed in the read me because that is generally where you find such information.  Brokerages cannot have a blanket policy.  Even DAZ doesn’t.  IIRC, there was at least one outfit for ChibiBel for A3 that had a no commercial use clause attached to it.

I am confused by this. Will content not available for commercial use be explicitly indicated? Because the EULA at daz doesn’t seem to cover that. and it was my assumption that content bought at daz could be used for commercial use in renders.

zigraphix - 16 June 2013 07:50 PM

Those of you who need to track 3D content used for commercial purposes might want to support this feature request:

https://bugs.daz3d.com/view.php?id=50357
0050357: Include product, creator and license details for all content in scenes and renders

If you haven’t yet made an account at the DAZ bugtracker, you’ll need to do that before you can read or comment on this feature request—it’s not the same as your forum or store account.

I personally think this kind of feature could be a real draw to use DAZ software for scene construction and renders.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I logged in and added a note to this. =-)

 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 June 2013 05:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15665
Joined  2003-10-09

The outfit that had a no commercial use restriction was in the old free Archive, not in the store. That area hosted several non-DAZ freebies (Questor’s weapon sets, for example) that had their own EULAs. The only store product that has a more restrictive EULA than the usual DAZ version, as far as I am aware, is the Ann Marie Goddard Digital Clone for V3 (if it’s still in the store); there are also a few merchant-resource sets that have less restrictive EULAs with respect to redistribution in modified form.

 Signature 

DAZ Studio Frequently Asked Questions

Index of free DAZ Studio scripts and plugins list

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 June 2013 05:47 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Active Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  811
Joined  2008-09-17
SereneNight - 16 June 2013 09:29 PM

icprncss” date=“1371432983” The difference between DAZ and other brokerages is the fact that DAZ owns the base products and it’s their EULA at the root of things.  While it is not stated, if a product is sold at Rendo for V4, first and foremost, the V4 EULA is in effect when you use the product.  If the vendor has other restrictions, they are placed in the read me because that is generally where you find such information.  Brokerages cannot have a blanket policy.  Even DAZ doesn’t.  IIRC, there was at least one outfit for ChibiBel for A3 that had a no commercial use clause attached to it.

I am confused by this. Will content not available for commercial use be explicitly indicated? Because the EULA at daz doesn’t seem to cover that. and it was my assumption that content bought at daz could be used for commercial use in renders.

Here’s one example of a product sold in the DAZ store that can’t be used for commercial purposes (see the Notes section)
www.daz3d.com/women/anna-marie-goddard-digital-clone

 Signature 

Resistance is futile.  You will be DAZzimilated


Old post count: 5719

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 June 2013 06:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Power Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  2196
Joined  2011-11-16

That was mentioned by Richard previously, and as he stated… the only known example of that sort (for clarification.)

 Signature 

Just because I may have a strong opinion doesn’t make it any more (or less) correct than any other, just that I feel passionately a particular way at that moment.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 17 June 2013 06:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Active Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  262
Joined  2012-02-21
RonS - 16 June 2013 04:13 PM

As for using free stuff in commercial work, I highly discourage it.  I would not do it and I don’t think any experienced professional would except under extreme conditions where the original author can clearly establish ownership and transfer rights of the product content.

It depends on how you define “Free stuff”. I could not see problems to use (e.g.) the monthly, weekly,... freebies here from DAZ or Freebies some other vendors offers along their payed items.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 4
2