Loading...
> >

NFT and the Future of Digital Content

1…2324262829…53

Comments

  • Mark_e593e0a5Mark_e593e0a5 Posts: 1,601

    What I would suggest for DAZ is 

    • have a management meeting asap
    • invite the forum moderators to that meeting (because they are the current front line)
    • put in all the concerns and potental risks on the table
    • put all potential benefits of this NFT stunt on the table
    • and then decide if it is really worth it.

    In the very end, it is us, the customers, who pay their wages. We are not forced to spend our money at the Daz store. I appreciate if Daz wants to explore new ways in helping artists to monetarize their creations. But I am pretty confident that they are currently heading in the wrong direction.

  • droidy001droidy001 Posts: 282
    Richard Haseltine said:

    droidy001 said:

    katfeete said:

    droidy001 said:

    I think the system is far more stupid than many of you are giving it credit for. As far as theft is concerned, as far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's not about tagging something as original. If someone has a copy of your art legitimately they can put an nft on it. The nft only covers that one individual copy not the work of art. If that person then sells the nft the new owner can do nothing with it unless they have access to the physical media it is stored on, either a link or be in possession of the media.

    It's honestly even stupider than that. An NFT is a token. It has nothing to do with the possession of the art itself. Wikipedia has one of the clearer explanations I've seen: 

    An NFT is created by uploading a file, such as an artwork, to an NFT auction market, such as KnownOrigin, Rarible, or OpenSea. This creates a hash of the file recorded on the digital ledger as an NFT, which can be bought with cryptocurrency and resold. Very little data is stored directly inside an NFT. NFTs include links pointing to where the art and any details about it are stored, but the links can die.

    (emphasis mine)

    In other words, the only thing you are buying is the "hash" that was created when the file was uploaded. The article later compares it to buying autographed copies of a book or piece of art; IMO it's more like buying only the autograph. The work itself isn't in any practical fashion included. At best you're getting a URL pointing to the work, which can of course be moved, deleted, lost, etc. 

    "Art theft" is used in this context simply in the sense that people who do not create the artwork are uploading images and creating these hashes from them, then selling the hashes. They haven't "stolen" anyone's work, or copyright, but they are making money off something they had no hand in creating, which many artists quite rightly object to.

    It's very dumb, very fragile, and very, very wasteful. 

    It just gets drafter the more I learn. Taking a copy of a work you have no rights to is the theft. The nft is a way of monetising that theft. So when it comes down to it (in a weird sort of way) then nft is just another crypto currency except each one has a different value, but still not backed by anything.

    And that upload of the image would be subject to DMCA, unless the artist had given the purchaser the right to upload for viewing by others.

    The courts are going to to be full of claims and counter claims over rights. Looking forward to the first few that have to set precedent and expert witnesses trying to explain it all to a 70 year old judge.
  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 4,358

    DMCA is not globally effective. If it were, some pirate sites would be out of business.

  • Mark_e593e0a5Mark_e593e0a5 Posts: 1,601

    Given that Daz seems to have gone totally bananas with NFT's, today's bonus item fits https://www.daz3d.com/banana-suit-for-genesis-8 ;laughlaugh

    Btw. before complaining, put it in your cart....

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 108,534

    Torquinox said:

    DMCA is not globally effective. If it were, some pirate sites would be out of business.

    Depends on the site - I would have hoped that the big NFT sites would be responsive.

  • AnotherUserNameAnotherUserName Posts: 2,727

    JB007 said:

    Kaylakaze said:

    I'm hoping it's an April Fool's joke, and, if not, I'll be unsubscribing to all Daz3D emails and not buying anything again.

     

    Don't punish PAs .. if you're going to protest with your wallet - just stop buying Daz Originals .. 

    I disagree. Daz3d taks a cut of everything that is sold here, 50% I believe. If you are intending to preasure daz by hurting their income, then you have to stop purchasing here completely. No Daz originals, No PA products, nothing.

  • SevrinSevrin Posts: 6,313

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Torquinox said:

    DMCA is not globally effective. If it were, some pirate sites would be out of business.

    Depends on the site - I would have hoped that the big NFT sites would be responsive.

    The problem is that an NFT can be sold before the creator is aware of the fact.  As far as I can tell, NFT marketplaces perform no due diligence with regard to rights before approving listings.  This can result in the object of the NFT being removed from view via NFT marketplaces, and the NFT purchaser with nothing but egg on their face and a string of numbers. 

  • AllenArtAllenArt Posts: 7,175

    Panzer Emerald said:

    I really hope there are some big PAs against this garbage. :/

    You and me both! The whole thing stinks from the head down. 

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 4,358

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Torquinox said:

    DMCA is not globally effective. If it were, some pirate sites would be out of business.

    Depends on the site - I would have hoped that the big NFT sites would be responsive.

    Depends where that site is based, doesn't it? The point is, there is a ton of unknown about this NFT garbage; and most of the known is pretty bad. I can sum up by saying, I will not participate. It's a scam that makes it harder for me to get hardware I need to make 3D renders. You can quibble about the degree of impact, but there is a negative impact. I liked it better before I heard of NFTs or the Diigitals. To have Daz shoving both in my face like this makes me want to vomit.

  • JB007JB007 Posts: 135

    If the sister company (Tafi) wants to get involved in NFTs then they're free to go and do it - but trying to force feed Daz users with a diet of child like emojis it in the hope that there's a few suckers over here that will buy into the scam is bang out of order.

    I notice all the Daz Studio representatives aren't around today after they were trying to defend it yesterday .. so hopefully the message has got through to the higher uppers that we don't want it here .. but, it's more likely more propaganda training is being dished out so they all shout the same message .. 

    We'll here's the message we'd like to send back ... 

    WE DON'T WANT YOUR NFT RUBBISH 

  • droidy001droidy001 Posts: 282
    edited April 2021
    JB007 said:

    If the sister company (Tafi) wants to get involved in NFTs then they're free to go and do it - but trying to force feed Daz users with a diet of child like emojis it in the hope that there's a few suckers over here that will buy into the scam is bang out of order.

    I notice all the Daz Studio representatives aren't around today after they were trying to defend it yesterday .. so hopefully the message has got through to the higher uppers that we don't want it here .. but, it's more likely more propaganda training is being dished out so they all shout the same message .. 

    We'll here's the message we'd like to send back ... 

    WE DON'T WANT YOUR NFT RUBBISH 

    I had noticed that Richard seems to have been thrown under the bus to deal with this. I understand that representatives rarely get involved on forums, but this is a biggy. They have pushed it as a way for artists to get their work out and to maybe even make some money. How are they doing this? By trying to sell those artists other people's nft's. A majority of artists here have told them in no uncertain terms that they're not interested, and have concerns. If the people at Daz believe in this then they should be here telling us why. Even hobbyists who have no intention of selling works are getting worried about how it affects them.
    Post edited by droidy001 on
  • AbyssalErosAbyssalEros Posts: 289

    Somehow the page count does not manage to jump to 27. devil

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 40,254

    there are always Fungible Tokens

    Otherwise known as links wink

    here is a free one

    qrcode_ft.cc0textures.com.png
    450 x 450 - 8K
  • Mark_e593e0a5Mark_e593e0a5 Posts: 1,601
    edited April 2021

    The poor forum mods have quite a lot to do today and yesterday. I think it is a bit unfair to push the forum mods to the frontline as the whipping boys while Daz is hiding until this wave of outrage (potentially) dies down (granted, this is a very civilized rebellion).

    Post edited by Mark_e593e0a5 on
  • ChoholeChohole Posts: 33,604

    AbyssalEros said:

    Somehow the page count does not manage to jump to 27. devil

    It won't jump till it gets to 30 posts on the page.

  • AnotherUserNameAnotherUserName Posts: 2,727
    edited April 2021

    Mark_e593e0a5 said:

    Poor Richard has quite a lot to do today and yesterday. I think it is a bit unfair to push the forum mods to the frontline as the whipping boys while Daz is hiding until this wave of outrage (potentially) dies down (granted, this is a very civilized rebellion).

    I might be wrong, but arent the mods volunteers and not paid employees?

    Post edited by AnotherUserName on
  • JB007JB007 Posts: 135

     

    I had noticed that Richard seems to have been thrown under the bus to deal with this. I understand that representatives rarely get involved on forums, but this is a biggy. They have pushed it as a way for artists to get their work out and to maybe even make some money. How are they doing this? By trying to sell those artists other people's nft's. A majority of artists here have told them in no uncertain terms that they're not interested, and have c oncerns. If the people at Daz believe in this then they should be here telling us why. Even hobbyists who have no intention of selling works are getting worried about how it affects them.

     

    Yeah, you've to feel for Richard .. trying to do his job without much support while the natives are restless .. 

  • Jason GalterioJason Galterio Posts: 2,562

    Sevrin said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Torquinox said:

    DMCA is not globally effective. If it were, some pirate sites would be out of business.

    Depends on the site - I would have hoped that the big NFT sites would be responsive.

    The problem is that an NFT can be sold before the creator is aware of the fact.  As far as I can tell, NFT marketplaces perform no due diligence with regard to rights before approving listings.  This can result in the object of the NFT being removed from view via NFT marketplaces, and the NFT purchaser with nothing but egg on their face and a string of numbers. 

    That's like someone selling a picture of a wraith on horseback and calling it a Nazgul. When the term Nazgul is copyrighted by the Tolkien estates.

  • AbyssalErosAbyssalEros Posts: 289

    Jason Galterio said:

    Sevrin said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Torquinox said:

    DMCA is not globally effective. If it were, some pirate sites would be out of business.

    Depends on the site - I would have hoped that the big NFT sites would be responsive.

    The problem is that an NFT can be sold before the creator is aware of the fact.  As far as I can tell, NFT marketplaces perform no due diligence with regard to rights before approving listings.  This can result in the object of the NFT being removed from view via NFT marketplaces, and the NFT purchaser with nothing but egg on their face and a string of numbers. 

    That's like someone selling a picture of a wraith on horseback and calling it a Nazgul. When the term Nazgul is copyrighted by the Tolkien estates.

    But the NFT is so much more worth whit that tag!!!
    Or do you think someone will pay for a fungus link called: "Starved and rotting corpse on a dead horse"?

  • Jason GalterioJason Galterio Posts: 2,562

    AbyssalEros said:

    Jason Galterio said:

    Sevrin said:

    Richard Haseltine said:

    Torquinox said:

    DMCA is not globally effective. If it were, some pirate sites would be out of business.

    Depends on the site - I would have hoped that the big NFT sites would be responsive.

    The problem is that an NFT can be sold before the creator is aware of the fact.  As far as I can tell, NFT marketplaces perform no due diligence with regard to rights before approving listings.  This can result in the object of the NFT being removed from view via NFT marketplaces, and the NFT purchaser with nothing but egg on their face and a string of numbers. 

    That's like someone selling a picture of a wraith on horseback and calling it a Nazgul. When the term Nazgul is copyrighted by the Tolkien estates.

    But the NFT is so much more worth whit that tag!!!
    Or do you think someone will pay for a fungus link called: "Starved and rotting corpse on a dead horse"?

    <laughing>

    True.

    And I am not doubting DAZ's respect for our gallery images. Just pointing out that they have their own ignorance on display regarding Intellectual Property. Since they had no issue stealing the copyrighted Nazgul term to sell their NFT.

  • tsaristtsarist Posts: 1,638
    JB007 said:

     

    I had noticed that Richard seems to have been thrown under the bus to deal with this. I understand that representatives rarely get involved on forums, but this is a biggy. They have pushed it as a way for artists to get their work out and to maybe even make some money. How are they doing this? By trying to sell those artists other people's nft's. A majority of artists here have told them in no uncertain terms that they're not interested, and have c oncerns. If the people at Daz believe in this then they should be here telling us why. Even hobbyists who have no intention of selling works are getting worried about how it affects them.

     

    Yeah, you've to feel for Richard .. trying to do his job without much support while the natives are restless .. 

    I'm not going to cry about that.
  • DAZ_RawbDAZ_Rawb Posts: 817

    Here I am again, posting I believe for the fifth time about the exact same thing, because Daz employees have been posting in this thread but people are not reading the other posts.

     

    Daz will not create NFT's of your gallery images without you performing a number of actions to say you want NFT's created of them. Currently we are not accepting requests to make NFT tokens for any gallery images but if that changes and we have a way for you to request we will let you know.

  • Jason GalterioJason Galterio Posts: 2,562

    DAZ_Rawb said:

    Here I am again, posting I believe for the fifth time about the exact same thing, because Daz employees have been posting in this thread but people are not reading the other posts.

     

    Daz will not create NFT's of your gallery images without you performing a number of actions to say you want NFT's created of them. Currently we are not accepting requests to make NFT tokens for any gallery images but if that changes and we have a way for you to request we will let you know.

    That's exactly what I said. But I was pointing out that DAZ doesn't even understand IP as they actively stole one to sell a current NFT.

    This confusion also stems from DAZ employees not having a consistent message, not able to explain what the NFT plan was, and interchangable using the words "image" and "NFT" which sowed further confiusion.

    The messages came across as lawyer speak with weasel words in place to allow for multiple interpretations of what was being said.

    I know I am skirting the line (or outright stepping over the line) for having this message deleted. But I am hoping that this is a learning experience for DAZ in how to plan to communicate to customers and avoid the level of distrust and vingear that is going on now.

  • wolf359wolf359 Posts: 3,936
    edited April 2021

    margrave said:

    Ippotamus said:

    Does TaFi own Daz?

    It's spectacularly unclear. Wikipedia says Tafi was spun off from Daz3D. However, as I did some research, I found Daz, Tafi, and some defunct company called Morph3D all share the same CEO, James Thornton. So I guess there was some kind of restructuring.
     
     

    There was morph3D/MCS system for unity
    succceded by Morph ID
    succeeded by "The Oasis"
    succeeded by "Make tafi" now active in the Unity store.
    The ratings are unanimousindecision

    https://assetstore.unity.com/publishers/51491

     

     
    Post edited by wolf359 on
  • SevrinSevrin Posts: 6,313

    I don't think [SPECULATION!!!1111] that Tafi will reverse itself so quickly.  They've partnered with The Diigitals, and now apparently also with Champion, which has an even higher profile.  We've no idea how Daz got involved with Champion, a brand not particularly associated with digital art or technology, but every company is a tech company now, I guess.  Backing out now because of Daz forum posts could cause Tafi to lose face, and complicate attempts at future collaborations.  Of course all this turning out to be a dud could do the same thing.

    As for Tafi, it's a bit confusing.  The press release about Tafi and Champion says Tafi was founded in 2019, but Tafi's fact sheet (scroll down) says 2016.  Also that Daz is one of Tafi's brands, and not the other way around.

  • Jason GalterioJason Galterio Posts: 2,562
    edited April 2021

    Every company that I have ever worked for has made at least one announcement like this.

    However, every one of those companies talked to their customer facing employees to make sure all of them had the same information. Almost all of them handed out "talking points" so that all employees would be providing the same, consistent message, to the most predictable questions that customers would have.

    Almost all of these companies also had rules that the customer facing employees were not to interpret the talking points and not to speculate about them. They weren't gagged, they were told to collect questions that didn't fall into the talking points. These questions would then be discussed at a follow up meeting so that new talking points, if needed, could be created. With the same consistent message.

    Instead whats gone on here is complete chaos and its no wonder that customers are baffled and distrustful for what the plan is.

    Post edited by Jason Galterio on
  • AnotherUserNameAnotherUserName Posts: 2,727
    edited April 2021

    DAZ_Rawb said:

    Here I am again, posting I believe for the fifth time about the exact same thing, because Daz employees have been posting in this thread but people are not reading the other posts.

     

    Daz will not create NFT's of your gallery images without you performing a number of actions to say you want NFT's created of them. Currently we are not accepting requests to make NFT tokens for any gallery images but if that changes and we have a way for you to request we will let you know.

    I believe that the counter point to your statement which has also been posted previously is that EULA's can and will change at anytime the company chooses. Just because daz wont do something today dosent mean they wont do it tomorrow.

    Post edited by AnotherUserName on
  • DiscipleDisciple Posts: 169

    I saw the headline and thought it was a question.

    Shud U NFT?  I dunno.  Shud U?  I think I shud not.

    Hallelujah!

    Disciple

  • SnowSultanSnowSultan Posts: 3,797

    And they will let us know if the EULA changes...oh my god I could never be a mod here. 

  • ChangelingChickChangelingChick Posts: 3,364

    SnowSultan said:

    And they will let us know if the EULA changes...oh my god I could never be a mod here. 

    Wanna pitch in and send them cookies with me? :D 

This discussion has been closed.