Loading...
> >

A Thread for Items with the "Editorial License"

24567…26

Comments

  • LeanaLeana Posts: 11,714

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

    Thanks for the heads up, I missed that. * note to self: remember to check license on new products *
  • mdingmding Posts: 1,243

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

    @Torquinox: Thankyou very much for staying alert and informing us! 

  • mdingmding Posts: 1,243

    Leana said:

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

    Thanks for the heads up, I missed that. * note to self: remember to check license on new products *question

    @Leana: You can always return it and ask for a refund. 

  • Charlie JudgeCharlie Judge Posts: 12,735

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

     This has been corrected and she now has a standard license.

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,328

    Charlie Judge said:

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

     This has been corrected and she now has a standard license.

    That's good news. Thanks!

  • frank0314frank0314 Posts: 14,054

    Charlie Judge said:

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

     This has been corrected and she now has a standard license.

    We had sent in an inquiry about it so it must've been a mistake being put on it.

  • N-RArtsN-RArts Posts: 1,496

    Sounds about as popular as the implementation of DRM. 

    Is the editorial license the one where you can't use certain items in commercial renders? (Sorry for asking, but my brain is fried, and nothing is making sense).

  • Silent WinterSilent Winter Posts: 3,721
    edited January 2023

    N-RArts said:

    Sounds about as popular as the implementation of DRM. 

    Is the editorial license the one where you can't use certain items in commercial renders? (Sorry for asking, but my brain is fried, and nothing is making sense).

    More or less - for most users, from a practical standpoint, it means no commercial renders.

    Technically an 'editorial license' means you can use it in editorial comment such as a magazine article about the topic.

    (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer so take that as my understanding)

    Post edited by Silent Winter on
  • kqbjnp66vk@snkmail.comkqbjnp66vk@snkmail.com Posts: 24

    Just finding this now and kind of bummed it's too late to return.  Just have to uninstall them both as I may use them in a render and not realize what kind of license it has.  Talk about a timebomb waiting to go off.

  • murgatroyd314murgatroyd314 Posts: 1,520

    Maboroshi Daikon said:

    Just finding this now and kind of bummed it's too late to return.  Just have to uninstall them both as I may use them in a render and not realize what kind of license it has.  Talk about a timebomb waiting to go off.

    I recommend filing a refund request anyway, telling them that you just discovered the unacceptable licensing terms. The worst they can do is say no. 

  • nemesis10nemesis10 Posts: 3,421

    Maboroshi Daikon said:

    Just finding this now and kind of bummed it's too late to return.  Just have to uninstall them both as I may use them in a render and not realize what kind of license it has.  Talk about a timebomb waiting to go off.

     

    https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/617021/cb-anhe-hd-use-restrictions-removed-lol#latest

  • KeryaKerya Posts: 10,943

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

     

    Thank you for remembering this thread!

    Even if she has reverted to standard license, it was worth the kick to the top of the forum ... because  Maboroshi Daikon  found out about the older items.

  • xyer0xyer0 Posts: 5,934

    I'm not taking any chances. Removed and hidden.

  • Matt_CastleMatt_Castle Posts: 2,567
    edited January 2023

    Silent Winter said:

    N-RArts said:

    Sounds about as popular as the implementation of DRM. 

    Is the editorial license the one where you can't use certain items in commercial renders? (Sorry for asking, but my brain is fried, and nothing is making sense).

    More or less - for most users, from a practical standpoint, it means no commercial renders.

    Technically an 'editorial license' means you can use it in editorial comment such as a magazine article about the topic.

    (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer so take that as my understanding)

    The wording of Daz's licence is currently that these assets can ONLY be used in an editorial context (and, depending on interpretation, only a non-commercial editorial context); this is massively more restrictive than simply saying that these assets cannot be used in a commercial render.

    ... well, that's how I assume they meant to word it anyway (although that may not actually be how they want the licence to work) but, on closer inspection, currently the editorial clauses of the licence are currently only mentioned in the Three-Dimensional works portion of the licence, and therefore arguably don't apply to their clause on two-dimensional renderings - but that would be a very odd restriction.

    Post edited by Matt_Castle on
  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,328

    Kerya said:

    Torquinox said:

    Let's add an item: https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9

    Unfortunately, this item has the Editorial restriction.

     

    Thank you for remembering this thread!

    Even if she has reverted to standard license, it was worth the kick to the top of the forum ... because  Maboroshi Daikon  found out about the older items.

    The other threads about the anhe figure reminded me  smiley

    Happy to help. I am not a fan of editorial license. I don't even want freebies with that license.

  • TorquinoxTorquinox Posts: 3,328

    Matt_Castle said:

    Silent Winter said:

    N-RArts said:

    Sounds about as popular as the implementation of DRM. 

    Is the editorial license the one where you can't use certain items in commercial renders? (Sorry for asking, but my brain is fried, and nothing is making sense).

    More or less - for most users, from a practical standpoint, it means no commercial renders.

    Technically an 'editorial license' means you can use it in editorial comment such as a magazine article about the topic.

    (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer so take that as my understanding)

    The wording of Daz's licence is currently that these assets can ONLY be used in an editorial context (and, depending on interpretation, only a non-commercial editorial context); this is massively more restrictive than simply saying that these assets cannot be used in a commercial render.

    ... well, that's how I assume they meant to word it anyway (although that may not actually be how they want the licence to work) but, on closer inspection, currently the editorial clauses of the licence are currently only mentioned in the Three-Dimensional works portion of the licence, and therefore arguably don't apply to their clause on two-dimensional renderings - but that would be a very odd restriction.

    I think we'd need a lawyer to read it before one could say yay or nay on that.

  • frank0314frank0314 Posts: 14,054

    Matt_Castle said:

    Silent Winter said:

    N-RArts said:

    Sounds about as popular as the implementation of DRM. 

    Is the editorial license the one where you can't use certain items in commercial renders? (Sorry for asking, but my brain is fried, and nothing is making sense).

    More or less - for most users, from a practical standpoint, it means no commercial renders.

    Technically an 'editorial license' means you can use it in editorial comment such as a magazine article about the topic.

    (Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer so take that as my understanding)

    The wording of Daz's licence is currently that these assets can ONLY be used in an editorial context (and, depending on interpretation, only a non-commercial editorial context); this is massively more restrictive than simply saying that these assets cannot be used in a commercial render.

    ... well, that's how I assume they meant to word it anyway (although that may not actually be how they want the licence to work) but, on closer inspection, currently the editorial clauses of the licence are currently only mentioned in the Three-Dimensional works portion of the licence, and therefore arguably don't apply to their clause on two-dimensional renderings - but that would be a very odd restriction.

    We have pointed this out to Daz for clarification

  • lou_harperlou_harper Posts: 1,163

    barbult said:

    Daz_Travis announced editorial licensing in July. As far as I can see, Daz implemented none of what we customers asked for in that forum thread, with regard to making the Editorial License very visible and filterable. There is only a little note on the product page that isn't displayed at all on a mobile device in portrait orientation. I don't see any "filter by license" option of any kind in the shop, my product library, or DIM. Am I overlooking all this capability, or is it just not there?

    I just submitted a help request to return the Retro Apartment (Standard License), because Daz+ released the next part of the series with Editorial License. 

     I have no idea why the Retro Apartment Props 2 should be under editorial license. Maybe the appliances but those are too generic. And there is no actual "Lemb" brand as far as I can tell. If you go to Shutterstock you find plenty of vintage appliance photos for commercial use.

    I use stock photos all the time for book covers, so this whole commercial vs editoral thing is very familiar, but this one doesn't make any sense to me.

  • lou_harperlou_harper Posts: 1,163

    kenmo said:

    Sounds like DAZ is going the same route as Shutterstock and Getty Images have already for stock photos. I sell stock photos on both as well as Adobe. When I upload an image I must distiguish between whether I am uploading a photo to sell as an EDITORIAL or CREATIVE photo. Since I mostly upload photos of cars and identiffiable landscapes, most of my photos are sold as EDITORIAL.

    Adobe has only recently started to accept EDITORIAL.

     

    Cars yes. Landscapes why? Unless they are cityscapes with recognizable landmarks they should be fine for commercial use.

  • NathNath Posts: 2,804

    lou_harper said:

    barbult said:

    Daz_Travis announced editorial licensing in July. As far as I can see, Daz implemented none of what we customers asked for in that forum thread, with regard to making the Editorial License very visible and filterable. There is only a little note on the product page that isn't displayed at all on a mobile device in portrait orientation. I don't see any "filter by license" option of any kind in the shop, my product library, or DIM. Am I overlooking all this capability, or is it just not there?

    I just submitted a help request to return the Retro Apartment (Standard License), because Daz+ released the next part of the series with Editorial License. 

     I have no idea why the Retro Apartment Props 2 should be under editorial license. Maybe the appliances but those are too generic. And there is no actual "Lemb" brand as far as I can tell. If you go to Shutterstock you find plenty of vintage appliance photos for commercial use.

    I use stock photos all the time for book covers, so this whole commercial vs editoral thing is very familiar, but this one doesn't make any sense to me.

    The brand you should look for is SMEG :   https://www.smeg.com/us/small-appliances

  • SofaCitizenSofaCitizen Posts: 1,889

    lou_harper said:

     I have no idea why the Retro Apartment Props 2 should be under editorial license. Maybe the appliances but those are too generic. And there is no actual "Lemb" brand as far as I can tell. If you go to Shutterstock you find plenty of vintage appliance photos for commercial use.

    I use stock photos all the time for book covers, so this whole commercial vs editoral thing is very familiar, but this one doesn't make any sense to me.

    Search for the brand Smeg. Note the font and colour schemes used.

  • lou_harperlou_harper Posts: 1,163
    edited January 2023

    SofaCitizen said:

    lou_harper said:

     I have no idea why the Retro Apartment Props 2 should be under editorial license. Maybe the appliances but those are too generic. And there is no actual "Lemb" brand as far as I can tell. If you go to Shutterstock you find plenty of vintage appliance photos for commercial use.

    I use stock photos all the time for book covers, so this whole commercial vs editoral thing is very familiar, but this one doesn't make any sense to me.

    Search for the brand Smeg. Note the font and colour schemes used.

    Okay, I can see it, but the shapes and colors are generic vintage. The font similarity arguably might push it over the line, but you can remove that. There are car models in the store that are far more problematic that don't have editorial restrictions.

    PS. When I see "SMEG" I think of Red Dwarf.

    Post edited by lou_harper on
  • mwokeemwokee Posts: 1,275
    Retro Apartment Props 2 has to be an error for editorial. It's part of a series of products and the others are a standard license.
  • Charlie JudgeCharlie Judge Posts: 12,735

    mwokee said:

    Retro Apartment Props 2 has to be an error for editorial. It's part of a series of products and the others are a standard license.

    Yes, it part of series; but DAZ_Jack Tomalin  has indicated in the DAZ+ forums that it is not a mistake: https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/7893581/#Comment_7893581

  • SofaCitizenSofaCitizen Posts: 1,889

    lou_harper said:

    Okay, I can see it, but the shapes and colors are generic vintage. The font similarity arguably might push it over the line, but you can remove that. There are car models in the store that are far more problematic that don't have editorial restrictions.

    PS. When I see "SMEG" I think of Red Dwarf.

    Haha, yeah I agree with you there :) I didn't discover the appliance brand till many years after watching Red Dwarf so was pretty odd to first see.

    I imagine that changing that branding may possibly have been enough to allow it to be released under the normal licence as it could then be considered generic enough. From what I remember, someone said that the PA was not in a position to make amends at the time so it was either release it under that licence or not at all.  Obviously not releasing it at all would still have issues since it is a sister-product to the earlier kitchen and the other props product.

  • mwokeemwokee Posts: 1,275

    Then it's my mistake. Refund submitted for all three products.

     

    One more thing I need to watch out for.

  • WendyLuvsCatzWendyLuvsCatz Posts: 38,212

    Charlie Judge said:

    mwokee said:

    Retro Apartment Props 2 has to be an error for editorial. It's part of a series of products and the others are a standard license.

    Yes, it part of series; but DAZ_Jack Tomalin  has indicated in the DAZ+ forums that it is not a mistake: https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/7893581/#Comment_7893581

    pity this cannot be clarified for non DAZ+ users to be able to read too instead of being restricted to a closed forum

    we are still customers and would pay more for the props if we chose to buy them too

     

  • FrankTheTankFrankTheTank Posts: 1,131

    so if we bought the Retro Apartment Props and changed the textures & removed the fonts on the appliances, would it then be ok to use in commercial renders? (I am not a Daz+ member, so I am not able to see if there was any discussion on this in the other linked thread.)

  • Richard HaseltineRichard Haseltine Posts: 100,888

    TGSNT said:

    so if we bought the Retro Apartment Props and changed the textures & removed the fonts on the appliances, would it then be ok to use in commercial renders? (I am not a Daz+ member, so I am not able to see if there was any discussion on this in the other linked thread.)

    No, it is sold with an editorial license regardless of the reasons for that - the license isn't conditional on its being unmodified.

  • ioonrxoonioonrxoon Posts: 893

    Another one for the list - https://www.daz3d.com/r35-cyberpunk

Sign In or Register to comment.