Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.Daz 3D is part of
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
That would be breach of contract if they changed Standard Licence to Editorial after one had already purchased the product.
Completely different sitiation, that doesn't take anything away from your original license nor does it replace it, just adds an extra license (besides, it's your choice). And there was no change either, since there already was the interactive licese that worked the same way.
At the moment it adds the extra license - but when they did the bulk "add 3dprinting license" for every DO you own that you bought before x/x/2022, it overwrote the "standard license". They changed that afterward.
I just wanted to point out that the product library is not a reliable source to proof you bought something with a standard license.
I was asking you about that in the case there was more of them.
I have already put those two in my blacklist and I will never buy anything related to them. I'll also totally stop purchasing stuff from here until there's a safe, secure and clear way to avoid Editorial Licenses with ZERO risk of getting one of those by mistake.
A strong store filter, a clear marking in the promo image, a clearly visible and non-missable banner in the product page and a reminding popup asking for confirmation in the checkout page are a must in the store, and not just one of those but all of them must be there together. Also a clear separation and marking in the DIM, in Central, in Connect, in Content and Smart Content panes after the purchase of those products is a must.
I'm sorry for those PAs who works hard on those products but, personally, I definitely can't have editorial licensed stuff in my library.
Is it shown in the cart (or better the side pane after adding to the cart)? It would probably be full-text-searchable. They should really implement a filter for such...
I'm genuinely curious if anyone from the company is reading these liscensing concerns and taking them to heart.
I mean I'm utterly doubtful that they are, but some small part of me wonders.
The general impression/explanation over the years has been DAZ does not listen to/have concern for/holds much stock in whatever is said in the forums because the forums only represent the opinions/concerns of a fairly small percentage of users and the higher percentage of users never join or participate in the forums (therefore, I presume that somehow means they agree with whatever is going on), so unless it's something really important like some huge software flaw or the site has been compromised or something really bad like that, we are mostly just talking to ourselves and our concerns are amusing, but not something that carries any real weight whatsoever.
Not strictly true - but often if the forums opinion is one way and Daz don't change anything - it's then seen as 'they don't listen or care'. We do.. but there are times when there is a difference of opinion.
The forums provide feedback and it's balancing that, ultimately, with the sales data. There are a lot of times where those are very very different, so it's about balancing all of the variables.
I imagine that is true for some cases, however part of this issue is that many did not realise that items they bought did not have the licence they expected - either because it was removed/hidden due to a plugin/view mode, because they added it from the catalog view or just because it was not as visible as it could be. Therefore, I think it would perhaps be difficult to tell from sales data between the people who do not care about the licence and those that do not currently realise that they now have a potential legal landmine in their library.
I am sure the licence is here to stay (as other stores also have something similar) but I would hope that, in this particular issue, the views of the people in this thread would carry a little more weight than usual versus the raw numbers in a spreadsheet for which context is not always fully apparent.
To be clear, I'm not talking specifically about the EL in this instance. I'm talking in general, that's how things go.. we obviously factor in time too, so we don't judge things on immediate sales numbers.
Regarding the EL and how it's displayed on the pages, yes, it's being looked at.
As a fairly new Daz-user - just started in March of 2022 - I'd also like to add my voice to the chorus saying that Editorial Licenses are fine; so long as they are very clearly displayed, easily noted when purchasing, and, if something were to have a license change, be clearly denoted in some way in the product/product library.
I specifically got into Daz to start working on some VN projects and thinking that products could suddenly be "out" after I've purchased them is a nightmare. But mainly, I just want to easily identify these products going forward.
Thank you.
I'm pretty certain that it's not possible for the licence to change after purchase. If there was a legal issue in this area the product in question is likely to be pulled from the store.
...right. the two pro sites I go to clearly indicate the licence status for a given product on the item's page.
So here's a question. The (very cool looking) Cyber Garage | Daz 3D product uses Cyber Racer | Daz 3D in its promos, a product which has an editorial license. Now, since both products are by Merlin, obviously they've got more room to use them, but it's made me wonder.
1) Do promo pictures count as "commercial use"? Could a pa use a product with an editorial license as part of a picture promoting/advertising their for-profit content?
2) Is the person who made the product and is selling it under an editorial license themselves free to use the product however? I know this seems like a dumb question, but as far as I can tell the point of the licene is so that real-life products/textures/IPs etc. can be used without worry of legal reprocussion. So if someone made an, idk, Twilight Sparkle character under an editorial licence, are they actually free to use that product themselves commercially? I'd assume not...? Same goes for products that use real-life-sourced textures.
This isn't a call to action or witch hunt by any means, just genuine questions I have that I can't find an answer to on the license page
In this case both products are being sold by Daz (Daz Originals) and I don't think the promo pictures were done by Merlin Studios ...
1. Commercial use? This would cover both direct sales (such as creating an image and selling it) and promotional use (like ads, or a portfolio an artist shows to prospective clients).
2. A creator/author/originator of content wouldn't be a licensee, unless they had sold or assigned their rights to another party. Therefore, they wouldn't be bound by the same terms as those of us purchasing licenses. You'd need to hear from a PA or Daz itself to know the precise terms of use for content by the PA when it is sold at Daz. There could be a number of special stipulations.
Dumb question from someone that has only just read about this and hasn't gone through all 15 pages.
Is this an accurate summary...
On the plus side, there is only a tiny number of items affected by this. (?)
If they created a 3D model of a product that someone else has designed and is/was manufacturing in real life, they would need a license just like the rest of us.
And it also seems that the licence can change at any point. Has that happenened in practice? Would I be told if it happened for an item I've bought in a way I will notice, say an email? Or is this just a theoretical concern.
I'm just trying to work out what I need to do here. There may be are items I am selling on DA I shouldn't be. Should I be keeping an inventory of every item I've ever used in a picture that I'm selling and checking their licences status of each on a regular basis, then withdrawing the image from sale if the terms changed underneath me?
Surely that can't be right. I must be misunderstanding this???
I just sell some pics on DA and make a small amount of money that goes towards assets. I don't have a legal team to check with, as one of the comments above suggests! But I don't want to be doing anything I shouldn't be, and I might want refunds on things I can't use.
There is a note on the item's page that states the item is for editorial use only (e.i. not for commercial products)—it replaces the information about other licenses (interactive & 3d printing ones). The visibility of that note had been argued by users ad nasueam, but Daz doesn't care. There's an also forum thread where users report all the editorial license items as they're released, so you can check your runtime against it.
Example of a listing with an editorial license. The license note is in the bottom right of the screenshot.
It happened once (from what I can tell): a hair item was pulled from the store because of its copyrighted name. So, the users who got it, retained their commercial license (whether they should use it commercially, is another matter, though it's probably less risky, since the biggest concern was the product name), and new users simply can't purchase it anymore. License change would be impossible to keep track of (who bought it when and under which license) and prove ("it's editorial now, but when I got it, it wasn't!").
In some cases, I think, the item was pulled from the store and then reinstated with editorial license. In these cases, I'd keep an eye on the forum (and the editorial and sales reporting threads) as people will report concerns and ask whether something should be under the editorial license, and you'll have time to return the product if you already bought it.
The most reasonable thing in this case is what many users in similar situation do: do not buy anything with an editorial license, period. It's not worth keeping track. If you happen to already have one or two items, delete them from your runtime and make a note somewhere so that you won't install them again.
In general, people might argue that the risk is low if you make little money etc., but it's up to each person how they handle such risk and if it's worth to them. To me (and many other users, from what I've seen), it's not.
The license is displayed on the product page, so you can see it before you add it to the cart, same as with interactive and 3D printing licenses. As for a notification when you add something to a scene, you don't get that for other license types, either.
The product page tells you if it's an Editorial License product. If so then you may not use it in images you sell. All other products are covered under the standard EULA and can be used in the sale of 2D artwork. As far as the license change you would need to speak with CS about that. It has happened where it was mistakenly marked, but we are unaware of the outcome for those who already purchased the product.
1) Technically correct, although many renderings sold at DA appear to use copyrighted IP, I guess they're just willing to take the chance that the IP holder won't come after them.
2) There's an "Editorial License" note on the right side of an item's page in the Store but it's easy to miss, and from what I've read, it doesn't appear if you're shopping on your phone instead of a laptop or desktop computer.
3) Correct.
4) Correct.
5) Not quite, see point #2 above.
Generally speaking, people's complaints are that it's easy to miss the added license when shopping in the Store, and there's no way to filter out those items so you can avoid any issues entirely.
Thanks to all the people that replied. It's extremely helpful, I had no idea about any of this, and I suspect the same is true of most users.
I don't think my feedback matters much given other comments, but I think it needs to stand out more, and be clear that the restriction you might care about is non-commercial use. Call it "Non-commercial" rather than "Editorial"?
I make very little money, but I don't want to do anything wrong. I think...
You don't have to check 2500 items. You can go to the editorial thread I linked above and click on all the links there while you're logged in the store. If it shows the item as "purchased" for you, it means you have it. If not, then you're in the clear. The editorial thread lists all (or close to all) known editorial license items.
Thanks so much! I completely misunderstood, I'll check it now
Given that some parts of today's car bundle have the restricted licence and other parts don't, I feel I need to re-express my displeasure at the extremely poor way these products are marked on store.
It has long been possible to add an EL product to the basket without the store showing that it's EL. I know users have added some new Daz+ item to a cart to trigger a sales deal without ever properly inspecting the product page. One can add an item to the cart from the store's list page, check out with it, download it and use it without ever being shown a notification of the EL licence.
Now that bundles can apparently include a mix of EL and non-EL products, we now have an entirely new way for users to purchase these products without being informed.
Bundles SHOULD NOT include a mix of licences without being clear about the restrictions on the main bundle page; (Personally, I would argue that mixed bundle licences shouldn't be a thing at all, but if it is going to happen, it HAS to be clearly shown). The Star Trek Fan-Art bundle at least showed that the bundle was EL on its product page; this bundle does not have any warning on the bundle page about the mixed licencing.
I continue to maintain that if Daz actually care about users following licences, they need to make this clearer in the store - in the thumbnail listings and in the cart - and provide a clear way to make it possible to keep track the restricted usage in Daz Studio itself; I do not have the time or patience to have to double check the licences on any asset I've grabbed out of Smart Content.
Once you have bought a product with standard license, they cannot change the license to EL retroactively. That would be a breach of contract.
If such a need would arise, they can only withdraw the product from the store, but you would still have standard license and be able to download and install the product from your Product Library.
Thank you :)