can I share assets with a family member on their own account?
StratDragon
Posts: 3,278
in The Commons
Over the years I've amassed a large collection of free and pay for daz3d assets, now a family member has expressed interest in this software (along with other 3D packages I plan to get them started with)
can I get them signed up with their own account that link back to my account to get them started with some of this content? Technically the computer they are using is mine, I still own it.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2026 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Well, as you probably know the EULA says
Linking two accounts is just not going to happen. putting the content on more than one computer that you own and control is permitted.
If all you're doing is letting them use your computer to create and render a scene there is no problem. What you can't legally do is transfer ownership of the assets to that family member.
I'm not a lawer but the wording "The Content is for User’s exclusive use and no other individual or entity. Each individual must obtain his or her own license to use the Content." makes me think that each user must have their own licence to use the content and you can't let anyone else use the content on your computer to create and render scenes.
Yes, individual and entity used that way are legal terms. One would have to look up whether a family or household as defined by a government jurisdiction were the purchase was made was considered a 'legal entity' in that legal jurisdiction. Maybe they need to clarify that more with individual or entity registered that made the purchase. I know there are credit card and bank accounts that are familial accounts and the parents pay the bill.
thanks everyone for the legal clarifications and interpretations. I think they are just going to have to use my account if they want to learn this.
the most annoying part is my kids laptop blows the doors of my workstation.
Well, I'm not a lawyer either, but I thought the key phrase was "computers owned or controlled by User."
Well as one of 7 children I can tell you most times my parents only bought 1 of an object and sharing was required. Worked out fine as once past the novelty often 0 of 7 children were interested in the product anyway.
When you're talking about physical objects no-one really bothers much about sharing. It's the easy copyability of data that makes suppliers come up with these convoluted rules and legal jargon to make sure they are covered. I think that back in the early days (I'm talking MS-DOS era here) Borland's conditions for their compilers were "use it like a book", i.e. as long as it's only being used by one person at a time it doesn't matter if more than one person uses it at different times on different computers. I thoought that was a good condition to have but it's probably too simplistic these days.
Maybe you should tell them the content can't be installed on their laptop so they'll have to use the workstation, and that means they'll have to lend you their laptop
"Books" on Kindles are taking us to the point where they are licensed like a piece of software anyway.
This was before ebooks were widely available, they might not have been available at all.
I have mixed feelings about ebooks. They are very convenient, easy to buy, don't take up any room, and I've got lots of them on my Kindle. But I started buying ebooks when you could only buy them from American sites. I lost a lot of them when they changed the rules and decided their books couldn't be downloaded outside the USA, one company was taken over and only some of my books were avaialable from the new owner, another company stopped supporting the secure format I was using so none of the books I bought are avaialable. And I've got a laptop that is set to American regional settings because that's the only way I can get it to authorise the player for the audiobooks I have bought from an American site. I suppose these are the penalties of being an early adopter.
I'm hoping that Amazon will be reliable in the long term, but if they go away or stop supporting the Kindle I'll lose a huge number of books and be very angry.
Digital licenses really needs to be challenged and slapped down more in higher courts. Sick of getting hosed over software. I should be able to sell my old PS licenses etc the same way I can sell my old hardware when I upgrade.
But I used my old PS license to get the upgrade price. My upgrade was a physical copy, ie a CD and when I install it on a new computer I actually need to use the older version CD to aid the install otherwise the upgrade will not work. Interestingly enough I do have poser versions that behave the same way. So selling your older version could mean that you won't be able to use the newer version if you used your older version to get the cheaper (upgrade) price.
Best thing to do would be to contact Customer Service (IE do a support ticket) and explain the situation and see what they say. The EULA says no but there is no harm is asking Customer Service.
Daz_Ann, may I ask which Contact Department should queries about the EULA be directed?
I'm not Ann, obviousl, but I am informed that I should tell you that Sales would be the relevant dept to use in this instance.
Thanks :)
Where did I mention physical objects? What are PCs but physical objects anyway? One of the practical commonsense considerations of the install on two PCs rule is that digital products must run on a physical product. So what if that family had 7 PCS for each child in the house? LOL, thank goodness I know that 7 children are unlikely to be messing with DAZ but that's the sort of thing a reasonable parent is going to question why they are being punished for the actions of these criminal syndicates and various peer to peer sharing law-breakers.It's also very sound reason why many people just throw up their hands and walk away from computers rather than be subjected to potential legal entanglement with each product EULA that they don't read and they don't understand and even more surely can't afford to defend themselves and their rights with regards to this multiplicity of EULAs anyway.
Obviously, someone claiming to be sharing a digital product with their family member but in actuality sharing with whomever and whenever they please ain't going to read the EULA and ain't going to come to the forums asking, so effectively once again it's fair use folk that are punished and insulted and others just keep on keeping on what they've been doing.
Oh, you'd be surprised. maybe not here, but i have seen numerous times in various gaming forums pirates asking for assets, software, etc. Here is the best case I have ever seen. A 3rd party commercial developer for a game I develop for released a very comprehensive addon package which of course hit the pirate sites hours after release (some user had to upload it). A couple of weeks later they released a patch with some fixes. One thing no one realized is that if you applied the patch to a non legal copy of the software it totally screwed up the addon. I saw at least 12 pirates post in the various community forums that their game was screwed up after installing the patch and were looking for fixes...priceless!
You can relinquish assets through a living trust. So when you are dead the assets could be passed on.
It's digital and unlike a paperback, digital ebooks cannot be passed on unless the author agrees and the EULA does not support digital sharing.