Francisco Penaloza Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I know there is several thread in this forum and other CG related websites, talking about rights of 3D artist or Visualization artist, regarding the 3D assets created for a hired project, cars, trees, buildings and so on. I received an invitation time ago to participate in this "sharing website" and after checking around I wonder, if this is legal! http://www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/architectural-exterior/arena-stadium I know you are free to sell model you have created but this really seems hired projects outsourced and now they are being sold? I don't know what terms or contract are involved here but I have been working with several architects for years and this is a big NO NO. what you guys think? I am just being puritan and paranoid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numerobis Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 I think you're right... and it looks like the person who runs this shop knows that there are problems: 1.2. Upon uploading the Product to the Site, the Seller shall indicate the terms of license, upon which a respective Product is licensed to the Buyer. If the Seller does not indicate any licensing conditions in his posting, terms of General license (see section 2 “General License”) shall be applicable. General license shall be applicable to Products that are made available for free download but the Seller’s, unless it is expressly indicated otherwise. 1.3. Certain Products with third party copyrighted or trademarked images, logos, brand names, etc., may require additional licensing, rights, permissions, releases, or clearance for non-editorial use. It is the sole responsibility of the Buyer and their legal advisor to determine, before purchasing, downloading or using any Product, whether additional licensing, rights, permissions, releases, or clearance are necessary for the intended use of Product. It is the Buyer’s sole responsibility to obtain any licensing, rights, permissions, or clearance. But i think this is not really surprising... I can't even find an address or imprint on their page... It seems that they are based in Lithuania http://rekvizitai.vz.lt/en/company/cgtrader/ I think you should show this site to any client who plans to outsource his work to china... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francisco Penaloza Posted September 3, 2013 Author Share Posted September 3, 2013 I think you should show this site to any client who plans to outsource his work to china... ha ha that's a great point now all that mambojambo licensing that they post in the website, still blurry and give the buyer all responsibility, any way there is the link for you all investigate your self. My only concern is I feel that this type business kind of hurt our industry, creating some non trust for possible clients, a few times when I tried to approach a new client he ask me if I have a sweat shop some place in a third world country doing the work, that's pretty bad if some people think this is the way this business operate :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marius e Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 In our profession you are hired to create an illustration. In order to do that, you need to create 3d objects. The client pays for a 3d illustration unless stated otherwise by the client and they buy all the 3d models wich mean that not even you can use the models again. So that is the end of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notamondayfan Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 I know there is several thread in this forum and other CG related websites, talking about rights of 3D artist or Visualization artist, regarding the 3D assets created for a hired project, cars, trees, buildings and so on. I received an invitation time ago to participate in this "sharing website" and after checking around I wonder, if this is legal! http://www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/architectural-exterior/arena-stadium I know you are free to sell model you have created but this really seems hired projects outsourced and now they are being sold? I don't know what terms or contract are involved here but I have been working with several architects for years and this is a big NO NO. what you guys think? I am just being puritan and paranoid I think the problem really lies with the artists / studio and their relationship with their clients. I personally wouldn't charge a client for a job, then upload the job to a reselling website. If my clients found out, then I wouldn't blame them for not using me again. Regarding the clause in the terms, I think they are just covering their arses to be fair. Some resellers such as 3D Ocean won't let you sell "real life" items in case of copyright infringement. Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marius e Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 As far as the actual model of the architecture or building I think it would be wrong to do, but furniture etc I cant see any problem... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notamondayfan Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 In our profession you are hired to create an illustration. In order to do that, you need to create 3d objects. The client pays for a 3d illustration unless stated otherwise by the client and they buy all the 3d models wich mean that not even you can use the models again. So that is the end of the story. I can't say I agree with you here, if that were the case then the client is also paying for hardware, software, even if it means you buying something specifically for a job, then the client can't claim ownership. At the end of the day the client owns / has rights to, what ever is set out in your contract. If the job is to create 1 illusration, then how you get to that end goal is ultimately up to you as a provider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notamondayfan Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 As far as the actual model of the architecture or building I think it would be wrong to do, but furniture etc I cant see any problem... Yes I agree with you here, I would never share / re-use something that the client has designed, but in terms of props, street furniture, etc, then these would be re-used. Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marius e Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 Look all im saying is that what ever I do is mine unless the client pays for something that I can never use again, which has never happened. And I agree that how I. we, us get to a final illustration is ouer concern. If everything was created in corel draw and only looks like a 3d, then what will the client do if he wants a 3d model......ive never been concerned about these thing, its obvious one cant share the model on web created for a client its just not good practice......also depends what it was..............if its a living room of a house then im sure one can upload, but not a commercial project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numerobis Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 In our profession you are hired to create an illustration. In order to do that, you need to create 3d objects. The client pays for a 3d illustration unless stated otherwise by the client and they buy all the 3d models wich mean that not even you can use the models again. So that is the end of the story. We are speaking about complete projects/scenes in this shop. There is no question that you can sell objects or textures you created yourself for a project - but this is not the problem here! If you get the plans from a client for an architectural or furniture design for illustration this is a completely different story... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Schroeder Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 It is perfectly legal and the only explanation you need is that they are not selling the stadium as the "Bob Smith Memorial Stadium", rather they are just selling it as the night stadium or some general term. Architecture has no rights to the image of the building because it is considered to be reasonably in public domain, which is why you are perfectly okay to take a picture of some famous building and sell the picture. It is no different that if I modeled some well known structure and sold it as "Scott's Big Ass Building." They are not selling the floor plans, which is where the copyrights and legalities come into play. It is no different than the Kitchen Aide mixer example. Someone, i think evermotion, got in trouble for it. So they just removed the Kitchen Aide tag and nothing could be done about it. It's also similar to weapons in video games. So yes, it is legal. Perhaps shady, but that is subjective. Maybe it is architects loading their models onto this website? Not everyone doing this is hired by a client, some are in house and creating the designs themselves so they can do what they want with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beestee Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I think you should show this site to any client who plans to outsource his work to china... This is an interesting point to consider. If you pay somebody $100 for a rendering, then I think it would be safe to assume that you probably do not own the time nor assets that led to the creation of that rendering and those assets will be used to generate more income from that project. In fact, you should also assume that much of the content used to generate that rendering is likely used in many other renderings for many other clients and is most definitely going to contain very little original work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJLynn Posted September 8, 2013 Share Posted September 8, 2013 This is an interesting question. The simple answer is, the creator owns the model, unless there's a good reason why he doesn't. If there's a work-for-hire contract, or an assignment of rights in a contract, those would be good reasons in most jurisdictions. However, the contract might contain limitations on the creator's rights to reuse the model for other purposes. The more complicated answer would touch on the copyrightability of architectural designs themselves in many jurisdictions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now