New User Agreement

shadowhawk1

Chohole said:

Have you ever sat back and thought how much easier it all was back when there was no periodic EULA update that you had to tick a box on once every 12 months or so.    You know, back in them good old days when all products came in .exe files with bitrock installers. 

 

At least back then it was only about the item you were installing. I don't understand why they are making this so flippin difficult to opt out of section 4! I have already submitted a ticket to the help desk but that can take 48 hours for a resopnse and I am trying to work on a commission that is due by then,

BlumBlumShub

shadowhawk1 said:

OK I want to know how to opt out of this, I am trying to log into my account and I can't do anything without agreeing to this new EULA. I don't want daz using my work without compensation and they are holding my content hostage until I sign the EULA. If I have to sign this first and then notify daz I wish to opt out there is somethign seriously wrong! This is pretty much extortion!

But you said you would never upload anything, so these clauses will be irrelevant to you anyway.

BeeMKay

shadowhawk1 said:

BeeMKay said:

shadowhawk1 said:

BeeMKay said:

Well, honestly... since you already agreed on this option anyway in prior EULAs, you could just agree again, and start the opt-out process in parrallel. As far as I understood, uploading your images to the galleries&forum is only allowed if you agree on the EULA (see segment below), so if you don't want them to use your things, just kill your gallery and remove all images you uploaded to the forum. You will have to do that anyway if you opt out of that addendum of the EULA.

That would probably be the easiest solution in any case, as you can't post your images to the gallery or forum anyway without giving them permission to use the content.

"By pressing the “Accept” button below or by uploading User Creative to any of the Sites, User hereby indicates User’s complete and unconditional acceptance of all the terms and conditions of the Agreement and this Addendum. The Agreement and this Addendum together constitute the entire agreement between User and DAZ with respect to the User Creative.

If User does not agree to the terms of the Agreement and this Addendum, User must not select the “Accept” button below or upload any User Creative to the Sites. "

BeeMKay, that is what started all of this, you cannot jsut select the submit button WITHOUT checking the box. It sends you into a look where it tells you that you cannot sign the EULA without being logged in and if you hot the login it takes you back to the EULA or if you try to access your account it takes you to the EULA. Why give us an option if we cannot utilize it?

Because that is why I said - I do not know if you legally still can use your content, because the old contract between you and DAZ broke down (as they changed it, per EULA), and the new, you don't wish to sign. Basically your right of usage crumbles and breaks down entirely without that mutually signed EULA.

It says so in the preamble (and any of the older preambles:

"Except for any signed agreement between DAZ and user, this agreement supersedes and replaces any other agreement that was or will be presented at the time of content installation.

If User does not agree to the terms of this Agreement, User must not select the “Accept” button below."

To me, this reads that it's either in, or out, "can use it, or no longer can use it", so them not allowing you to download content would be within what the EULA said for quite a few years, and what you agreed upon as legally binding to you the last time you agreed on the EULA.

But again, I am not a lawyer. Please consult with someone who does have professional experience in this. What I say can equally be totally wrong, or be valid for my country of residence, but not the USA.

No not only are they using strong arm tactics they are refusing me access to purchased content which now becomes theft. Does this not bother anyone else?

 

As I stated several times, I am no lawyer. It's how I, as a layman, interpret the EULA's words. PLEASE consult with a lawyer or legal advisor about this.

You might find this read interesting, it has more links about legalese at the bottom: https://www.eff.org/de/wp/dangerous-terms-users-guide-eulas

and good old WIKI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-user_license_agreement

 

shadowhawk1

BlumBlumShub said:

shadowhawk1 said:

OK I want to know how to opt out of this, I am trying to log into my account and I can't do anything without agreeing to this new EULA. I don't want daz using my work without compensation and they are holding my content hostage until I sign the EULA. If I have to sign this first and then notify daz I wish to opt out there is somethign seriously wrong! This is pretty much extortion!

But you said you would never upload anything, so these clauses will be irrelevant to you anyway.

Preamble

By pressing the “Accept” button below, User hereby indicates User’s complete and unconditional acceptance of all the terms and conditions of this Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between User and DAZ with regard to User’s access, download, and/or use of Content except in the case where User has a version of the Agreement signed by both parties, in which case the signed agreement will supersede this Agreement. Except for any signed agreement between DAZ and user, this agreement supersedes and replaces any other agreement that was or will be presented at the time of content installation.

Because I DON'T agree with section 4 of the EULA. I am not going to blindly sign something or check a box to soemthing that I don't agree withit. Its the princeable of being forced to sign something that I don't agree with to access something that I have already paid for and am being refused access to it until I do.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Totte

Basically, section 4 is much like what you see in facebook, Google+ and any other sites EULA where users can post images, because of they do not ask you to allw this, they can be sued for copyright issues by showing an image you posted in the gallery or the forums, or when they backup the gallery or forum, or when they make banners of the best images etc etc. 

 

shadowhawk1

BeeMKay said:

shadowhawk1 said:

BeeMKay said:

shadowhawk1 said:

BeeMKay said:

Well, honestly... since you already agreed on this option anyway in prior EULAs, you could just agree again, and start the opt-out process in parrallel. As far as I understood, uploading your images to the galleries&forum is only allowed if you agree on the EULA (see segment below), so if you don't want them to use your things, just kill your gallery and remove all images you uploaded to the forum. You will have to do that anyway if you opt out of that addendum of the EULA.

That would probably be the easiest solution in any case, as you can't post your images to the gallery or forum anyway without giving them permission to use the content.

"By pressing the “Accept” button below or by uploading User Creative to any of the Sites, User hereby indicates User’s complete and unconditional acceptance of all the terms and conditions of the Agreement and this Addendum. The Agreement and this Addendum together constitute the entire agreement between User and DAZ with respect to the User Creative.

If User does not agree to the terms of the Agreement and this Addendum, User must not select the “Accept” button below or upload any User Creative to the Sites. "

BeeMKay, that is what started all of this, you cannot jsut select the submit button WITHOUT checking the box. It sends you into a look where it tells you that you cannot sign the EULA without being logged in and if you hot the login it takes you back to the EULA or if you try to access your account it takes you to the EULA. Why give us an option if we cannot utilize it?

Because that is why I said - I do not know if you legally still can use your content, because the old contract between you and DAZ broke down (as they changed it, per EULA), and the new, you don't wish to sign. Basically your right of usage crumbles and breaks down entirely without that mutually signed EULA.

It says so in the preamble (and any of the older preambles:

"Except for any signed agreement between DAZ and user, this agreement supersedes and replaces any other agreement that was or will be presented at the time of content installation.

If User does not agree to the terms of this Agreement, User must not select the “Accept” button below."

To me, this reads that it's either in, or out, "can use it, or no longer can use it", so them not allowing you to download content would be within what the EULA said for quite a few years, and what you agreed upon as legally binding to you the last time you agreed on the EULA.

But again, I am not a lawyer. Please consult with someone who does have professional experience in this. What I say can equally be totally wrong, or be valid for my country of residence, but not the USA.

No not only are they using strong arm tactics they are refusing me access to purchased content which now becomes theft. Does this not bother anyone else?

 

As I stated several times, I am no lawyer. It's how I, as a layman, interpret the EULA's words. PLEASE consult with a lawyer or legal advisor about this.

You might find this read interesting, it has more links about legalese at the bottom: https://www.eff.org/de/wp/dangerous-terms-users-guide-eulas

and good old WIKI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End-user_license_agreement

 

I read the links and they are more software related, not what is going on here. Like most people I do not have the money nor the time to consult a lawyer over this and that is something I believe daz is counting on with their EULA. I either capitulate and check the box or I kiss all of my purchased content goodbye because I won't be able to access it until I do sign. my biggest beef with this is that we are all forced to sign whether we agree or not because daz is holding all the cards.

shadowhawk1

Totte said:

Basically, section 4 is much like what you see in facebook, Google+ and any other sites EULA where users can post images, because of they do not ask you to allw this, they can be sued for copyright issues by showing an image you posted in the gallery or the forums, or when they backup the gallery or forum, or when they make banners of the best images etc etc. 

 

That is why I don't use Facebook, Twitter and all those other apps. All I want is access to my content and for daz to keep thier sticky fingers off of my artwork.

Chohole

As has been proved to you several times in this thread,  there is a "Get out of jail free" card built in.   OK you say it will take some time back and forwards to get it sorted out for you, but as the relelvant clause doesn't even apply to your own particular way of using the site I simply cannot see why you are persisting with this argument.  Whne the clause was just on the Gallery sections of the site, as it was before DIM and the universal EULA, then I simply did not upload any images which I had sold to someone else with limited publication agreements on them,  and yes I did have some.  I even did one complete set of images and sold them complete with copyright to the client. They were used to manufacture tourist type souvenirs, which was why the client wanted to hold the copyright.

shadowhawk1

Chohole said:

As has been proved to you several times in this thread,  there is a "Get out of jail free" card built in.   OK you say it will take some time back and forwards to get it sorted out for you, but as the relelvant clause doesn't even apply to your own particular way of using the site I simply cannot see why you are persisting with this argument.  Whne the clause was just on the Gallery sections of the site, as it was before DIM and the universal EULA, then I simply did not upload any images which I had sold to someone else with limited publication agreements on them,  and yes I did have some.  I even did one complete set of images and sold them complete with copyright to the client. They were used to manufacture tourist type souvenirs, which was why the client wanted to hold the copyright.

Once again, why am I being FORCED to sign something I DON'T agree with just to opt out of it? Right in the preamble it states if I don't agree with it don''t sign it but they give no option to opt out until you sign it. Where is the common sense in that? Thats like telling someone that they have to wreck their car to get vehicle insurance!

Richard Haseltine

shadowhawk1 said:

Chohole said:

As has been proved to you several times in this thread,  there is a "Get out of jail free" card built in.   OK you say it will take some time back and forwards to get it sorted out for you, but as the relelvant clause doesn't even apply to your own particular way of using the site I simply cannot see why you are persisting with this argument.  Whne the clause was just on the Gallery sections of the site, as it was before DIM and the universal EULA, then I simply did not upload any images which I had sold to someone else with limited publication agreements on them,  and yes I did have some.  I even did one complete set of images and sold them complete with copyright to the client. They were used to manufacture tourist type souvenirs, which was why the client wanted to hold the copyright.

Once again, why am I being FORCED to sign something I DON'T agree with just to opt out of it? Right in the preamble it states if I don't agree with it don''t sign it but they give no option to opt out until you sign it. Where is the common sense in that? Thats like telling someone that they have to wreck their car to get vehicle insurance!

You have to agree to the current EULA to get access to new downloads of content - otherwise people could duck the changes that are not optional by simply refusing to agree. This doesn't affect your ability to use previously downloaded content (though of course the particualr term you object to is already in force from that previous EULA). I undrstand your frustration, but the process would be unworkable in any other way.

It is worth stressing that the clause you object to applies only to images uploaded to Daz - images that you do not place on a Daz site are not affected by it in any way (Daz is not claiming rights to your renders on creation).

Since you have already accepted the term in previous agreements the only material change from a fresh acceptance is in the rights to 3D printing and interactive use. Signing now, then sending the retraction of image usage rights will ensure that there is no ambiguity as theer might be if you sent the withdrawal before accepting the new agreement. It wouldgive you access to fresh downloads of existing content or downloads of new content while not conceding anything you have not already conceded.

 

shadowhawk1

Richard Haseltine said:

shadowhawk1 said:

Chohole said:

As has been proved to you several times in this thread,  there is a "Get out of jail free" card built in.   OK you say it will take some time back and forwards to get it sorted out for you, but as the relelvant clause doesn't even apply to your own particular way of using the site I simply cannot see why you are persisting with this argument.  Whne the clause was just on the Gallery sections of the site, as it was before DIM and the universal EULA, then I simply did not upload any images which I had sold to someone else with limited publication agreements on them,  and yes I did have some.  I even did one complete set of images and sold them complete with copyright to the client. They were used to manufacture tourist type souvenirs, which was why the client wanted to hold the copyright.

Once again, why am I being FORCED to sign something I DON'T agree with just to opt out of it? Right in the preamble it states if I don't agree with it don''t sign it but they give no option to opt out until you sign it. Where is the common sense in that? Thats like telling someone that they have to wreck their car to get vehicle insurance!

You have to agree to the current EULA to get access to new downloads of content - otherwise people could duck the changes that are not optional by simply refusing to agree. This doesn't affect your ability to use previously downloaded content (though of course the particualr term you object to is already in force from that previous EULA). I undrstand your frustration, but the process would be unworkable in any other way.

It is worth stressing that the clause you object to applies only to images uploaded to Daz - images that you do not place on a Daz site are not affected by it in any way (Daz is not claiming rights to your renders on creation).

Since you have already accepted the term in previous agreements the only material change from a fresh acceptance is in the rights to 3D printing and interactive use. Signing now, then sending the retraction of image usage rights will ensure that there is no ambiguity as theer might be if you sent the withdrawal before accepting the new agreement. It wouldgive you access to fresh downloads of existing content or downloads of new content while not conceding anything you have not already conceded.

 

I understand all of that Richard, but why offer an opt out and then require someone to accept the EULA just so they can opt out? Wouldn't it have been easier to offer a box to check to opt out of Section 4 from the start?

frank0314

They wouldn't pick out specific things to opt out of. It would be all or nothing

Richard Haseltine

shadowhawk1 said:

Richard Haseltine said:

shadowhawk1 said:

Chohole said:

As has been proved to you several times in this thread,  there is a "Get out of jail free" card built in.   OK you say it will take some time back and forwards to get it sorted out for you, but as the relelvant clause doesn't even apply to your own particular way of using the site I simply cannot see why you are persisting with this argument.  Whne the clause was just on the Gallery sections of the site, as it was before DIM and the universal EULA, then I simply did not upload any images which I had sold to someone else with limited publication agreements on them,  and yes I did have some.  I even did one complete set of images and sold them complete with copyright to the client. They were used to manufacture tourist type souvenirs, which was why the client wanted to hold the copyright.

Once again, why am I being FORCED to sign something I DON'T agree with just to opt out of it? Right in the preamble it states if I don't agree with it don''t sign it but they give no option to opt out until you sign it. Where is the common sense in that? Thats like telling someone that they have to wreck their car to get vehicle insurance!

You have to agree to the current EULA to get access to new downloads of content - otherwise people could duck the changes that are not optional by simply refusing to agree. This doesn't affect your ability to use previously downloaded content (though of course the particualr term you object to is already in force from that previous EULA). I undrstand your frustration, but the process would be unworkable in any other way.

It is worth stressing that the clause you object to applies only to images uploaded to Daz - images that you do not place on a Daz site are not affected by it in any way (Daz is not claiming rights to your renders on creation).

Since you have already accepted the term in previous agreements the only material change from a fresh acceptance is in the rights to 3D printing and interactive use. Signing now, then sending the retraction of image usage rights will ensure that there is no ambiguity as theer might be if you sent the withdrawal before accepting the new agreement. It wouldgive you access to fresh downloads of existing content or downloads of new content while not conceding anything you have not already conceded.

 

I understand all of that Richard, but why offer an opt out and then require someone to accept the EULA just so they can opt out? Wouldn't it have been easier to offer a box to check to opt out of Section 4 from the start?

You would also be accepting that the contract gives you the right to opt out of that section, then you would exercise that right. It isn't unconditionally accepting the usage right in isolation.