How do you deal with 3rd parties who want to see proof that you payed the fee for licensed 3d models

linvanchenelinvanchene Posts: 617
edited November 2013 in The Commons

edited and removed by user

Post edited by linvanchene on
«1

Comments

  • Herald of FireHerald of Fire Posts: 3,384
    edited December 1969

    To be honest, it sounds like the company was trolling you. I'm not sure I'd want to deal with a corporation like that, given a choice.

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 19,933
    edited December 1969

    if they are simply not understanding the terms of the EULA, which it appears may be the case given their querying license fees when they've already seen that you have purchased, it may be that you need to tell them to open a Copyright Abuse ticket to get the terms explained from the DAZ end.

  • SimonJMSimonJM Posts: 2,954
    edited December 1969

    Just to play devil's advocate a moment (as I really think they were wholly draconian and over the top in their demands ...) what would have potentailly happened to them if they had used one of your images in a 'public airing' and you had, by mistake, used a background or other product that had a restricted or 'not for commercial use' usage associated with it?
    Personally I think a simple "please confirm that all components used do not break and terms and conditions" style request would have sufficed.

  • icprncssicprncss Posts: 3,481
    edited December 1969

    What did the contract you signed with client state regarding 3D assets?

    Our clients receive a full and comprehensive list of all assets used and all costs incurred. All files, including project runtimes, scene files and renders are archived should future questions arise or the client wishes to reuse assets or take the project further.

    All software used in a project is also given (along with a full set of time sheets) and if proof the a legally licensed copy was used is provided. If you have a legally registered copy, any software company will be more than happy to give you a statement verifying this.

    As for the use of free models, perhaps the client has had issues with others who have used "free" models that were not free but illegally obtained.

    Did you ask the client why they were in need of all this documentation? If they have been burned in the past, they may be erring on the side of caution.

    Without knowing the other side, I can't make a determination.

  • Serene NightSerene Night Posts: 5,573
    edited June 2013

    I recently had someone want to use my art commercially which is the first time this has ever happened to me. Problem was the pictures I used were some of my first hobby work, and the renders in question had free models. I only downloaded freebies which allowed for commercial use, however, sometimes usage terms are not spelled out in readme files or are simply not there or require complicated attribution scheme.. Some content I couldn't even trace, such as a few 3d apples which could be from anywhere and which all looked alike to me. Since I no longer had the original files, it was impossible to redo with newer content I had bought and paid for, so I was SOL.

    I had to decline the use of pictures for which I couldn't confirm an exact commercial use license or for whom the licensing was too complex or unclear.. This was only right thing to do. but it brought home the fact that licensing and keeping track of it, is very important.

    Fortunately, the person was understanding, however, this taught me a lesson. I no longer use freebie content.

    My policy for disclosure is if I pay for an item, I do not feel obligated to disclose what I use in a composition during hobby use, unless I feel like it. Most 3d artists can see if I use v5 ponytail anyway or if I use someone else's commercial-use background. This is much the same if I pay to use a piece of clipart or a photo on a brochure. I don't attribute these items because I pay for them.

    If someone buys a render, then people are entitled to know the licensing is in order and a detailed licensing should be available on request.

    Post edited by Serene Night on
  • CypherFOXCypherFOX Posts: 2,360
    edited June 2013

    Greetings,
    So...this is interesting; I was thinking deeply about this recently, and how to create a database of content fingerprints that would allow you to generate a list of used content automatically. It wouldn't handle things like poses which are transient in that they just modify the numbers in your scene, but anything that persists in your scene file like textures or models would work. It's possible to make it handle any source, R'osity, RDNA, DAZ3D, and ShareCG, or any others that provide their content in a ZIP format.

    It would need to be partially crowd-sourced (although it could be seeded significantly up-front) and it's not something that can be available 'tomorrow', or even 's**n', but it's definitely doable.

    -- Morgan

    Post edited by CypherFOX on
  • Serene NightSerene Night Posts: 5,573
    edited December 1969

    Cypherfox said:
    Greetings,
    So...this is interesting; I was thinking deeply about this recently, and how to create a database of content fingerprints that would allow you to generate a list of used content automatically. It wouldn't handle things like poses which are transient in that they just modify the numbers in your scene, but anything that persists in your scene file like textures or models would work. It's possible to make it handle any source, R'osity, RDNA, DAZ3D, and ShareCG, or any others that provide their content in a ZIP format.

    It would need to be partially crowd-sourced (although it could be seeded significantly up-front) and it's not something that can be available 'tomorrow', or even 's**n', but it's definitely doable.

    -- Morgan

    I think this would be quite useful.

    I admit, this is something I did not think about when I first started using daz.

  • TotteTotte Posts: 7,048
    edited December 1969

    I've seen a similar situation many years back when a school was using Macs (with Mac OS 7) and the community IT manager wanted to see the licenses for the OS:es, which there wen't any as it came with the machines and was not even sold separately, upgrades was free back then.
    Ended up getting a written letter from Apple that stated those facts (which saved the school from being assimilated into the Windows borg.

    The similarity is, the license was also in the EULA, which neither the IT manager nor the lawyers could read and fully understand.

    So I think Richards advise is the best, make them get the info from the source itself.

  • McGyverMcGyver Posts: 1,007
    edited December 1969

    Well... recently someone who used my work in a short film was required by the (can't come up with the right word at the moment)... the festival's "promotors" to prove they paid for every item used... they requested that I open up my donation box at ShareCG so they could make a donation and prove they paid for the work... they sent me $20 for the item... which was very cool.
    Personally I did not expect anything since that was a free item and it clearly stated it was "Free for commercial use", but it was what the promotor wanted and the person ended up having no choice if the wanted to enter.
    I suppose it varies from nation to nation and in some cases people may go over the top just to provide a buffer zone without creating personal liability.

  • RonSRonS Posts: 281
    edited June 2013

    Years ago I was caught in a similar situation. After jumping through all the hoops and challenges such as you describe above, and providing everything they asked, and clearly establishing my rights, I STILL did not get paid. The company was Eastman Kodak Company (I can say the name because they are now bankrupt) so why would I not have trusted them up front? This kind of thing happens more than people imagine.

    Eventually, I gave up hope of ever getting paid but about a year later, I learned from another vendor that they had been treated the same way, except for a much larger sum of money. It turns out that Kodak was having money problems and was robbing from Peter to pay Paul - stalling smaller vendors to keep the big ones happy. I believe they intended to pay, but just did not have the cash and were stalling until "things got better" - which they never did.

    Clearly, you are being stalled - most likely for financial reasons, but if your client is a middle-man for another company it could be more complicated. Bottom line... from my experience (40+ years in the production business) no ethical company would require the level of proof that is described above. There is something fishy here - I hope you get paid. Let us know if that happens.

    Post edited by RonS on
  • KickAir 8PKickAir 8P Posts: 1,843
    edited June 2013

    Anything that I'm making for commercial use I'll keep a source list on a spreadsheet that includes the product name, sku if it has one, order number, order date, and site's url on a spreadsheet -- that having been said I keep all my 3D order histories in a spreadsheet, so the info's already handy. I like spreadsheets. Most people don't, and that ratio's probably worse for artists. If some company put me through the ringer linvanchene went through I'd've probably bailed -- I wouldn't've thought of Richard's solution.

    But my commercial work runs more to tshirts and greeting cards -- I've never had to deal with corporate vetting, and although I understand their need to protect themselves this seems to have gone much farther than necessary for that, and if it's not in the original contract then I think linvanchene should charge them for the extra work.

    Liking the idea of a render-asset tracking app! Given the info in the DIM DAZ could probably come up with one for DAZStudio without to much trouble -- outside of that Cypherfox's idea sounds good.

    Post edited by KickAir 8P on
  • FirstBastionFirstBastion Posts: 2,408
    edited December 1969

    Having worked for legitimate film production companies in the past, the paper trail expectations noted above are well within normal business practices for commercial distribution and broadcast and publishing. Errors and omissions insurance requires them to have the documentation.

    DAZ provides invoices for every purchase so keeping track of these licensed assets is atleast doable, though time consuming.

  • EClark1849EClark1849 Posts: 128
    edited December 1969

    As for Freebies, some, like my self , include permission for commercial use statements in the Read mes. If that's not sufficient, well, we may have to come up with a standard EULA for Freebies, I guess.

  • MistyMistMistyMist Posts: 15,564
    edited December 1969

    maybe they don't understand they are only buying the right to your render?

    if they want to use the face of the character you used, for their own uses, i'd imagine they'd have to buy the content ?

  • icprncssicprncss Posts: 3,481
    edited December 1969

    maybe they don't understand they are only buying the right to your render?

    if they want to use the face of the character you used, for their own uses, i'd imagine they'd have to buy the content ?

    The OP has stated the work was done for a corporation. That means the work is most likely to be used commercially. The company is protecting itself since they will be the ones who are sued if their is some violation. Since they commissioned or otherwise obtained the work, it will then fall to them to pursue the artist. This means they will have to spend the time and money as defendants on the original suit and then as plaintiffs on a second suit.

    To a company, it costs much less in time and money to have all your ducks in a row before you sign the check.

  • Dino GrampsDino Gramps Posts: 0
    edited June 2013

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

    Post edited by Dino Gramps on
  • ShaneWSmithShaneWSmith Posts: 537
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • RonSRonS Posts: 281
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • Serene NightSerene Night Posts: 5,573
    edited December 1969

    RonS said:
    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. =-)

  • AdemnusAdemnus Posts: 611
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • linvanchenelinvanchene Posts: 617
    edited November 2013

    edited and removed by user

    Post edited by linvanchene on
  • Serene NightSerene Night Posts: 5,573
    edited June 2013

    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..

    Post edited by Serene Night on
  • icprncssicprncss Posts: 3,481
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • Serene NightSerene Night Posts: 5,573
    edited December 1969

    icprncss said:
    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.

  • zigraphixzigraphix Posts: 2,768
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • Serene NightSerene Night Posts: 5,573
    edited June 2013

    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.

    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. =-)

    Post edited by Serene Night on
  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 19,933
    edited December 1969

    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.

  • BWSmanBWSman Posts: 0
    edited June 2013

    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

    Post edited by BWSman on
  • GeddGedd Posts: 2,473
    edited December 1969

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

  • ruekakaruekaka Posts: 271
    edited December 1969

    RonS said:
    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.

Sign In or Register to comment.
Rocket Fuel