Bad news on the front friends, Daz3D marketplace is once again targeting product using any Daz3D UV’s or topology despite having an interactive license. Apparently the interactive license can only be honored for “finished” games.
1 Like
My product [Materials Conversion and Layer System for Daz3D Imports in Materials - UE Marketplace] has been removed from the Unreal Marketplace following a copywrite notice claiming only finished games are protected by the interactive license agreement.
(Materials Conversion and Layer System for Daz3D Imports in Materials - UE Marketplace)
1 Like
This happened to others like this: https://forum.unity.com/threads/warning-about-using-daz-studio-assets-in-game-development-sibling-company-to-morph3d.502755/
1 Like
My product can not be used by itself, it requires one to import their skeletal mesh as I only provide a static mesh mannequin. It also requires texture maps not available anywhere by Daz to function. It is also transformative in nature by allowing the addition of real-time video and game implementation which Daz does not allow. It also takes the level of quality to a much higher level than any native product can. All satisfying the requirements for a transformative product makes it FAIR USE. This however also doesn’t matter.
1 Like
"Dear Daz3D representative,
I am writing in response to the recent copyright infringement notice I received concerning my Materials Conversion and Layer System for Daz3D imports that was on the Unreal Engine Marketplace.
I would like to assure you that the content in question is entirely original, created by me, and does not violate any existing copyrights held by DAZ3D or any other party.
Each component of my product was created through a meticulous process:
The base models were sculpted by me in ZBrush, with subsequent wrapping to match the Daz Genesis UVs and topology using Wrap3.
The skin materials were personally created by me using Substance Painter. Other maps such as normals, cavity, and roughness were extrapolated using Knald.
The tattoos, another feature of the product, were also designed by me. I can affirm that I possess complete rights to these.
The groom assets were created in Blender.
The masks were designed using Photoshop, leveraging online makeup tutorial diagrams and using tools like the pen tool and Gaussian blur for refinement.
I have substantial documentation and video proof of the creation process, which can be provided as evidence of the originality of my work and my dedicated adherence to copyright laws.
Is it possible you have mistaken my hard work for that of someone else? I believe under closer inspection you will come to that conclusion.
I do not exactly know what was flagged for this notice as I have not seen the notice and just received an email notifying the takedown of my product that I worked hard and long to develop. Frankly, it is a moot point because I can prove the creation of every asset.
I respect and value the importance of intellectual property rights, and I have no intention of violating such rights. I believe there may have been a misunderstanding or error in this case.
Therefore, I kindly request that you review the matter in light of the information I have provided. I am willing and ready to collaborate with you to clarify any doubts or confusion regarding the originality of my work.
Should you need any further information or evidence, or wish to discuss this matter in further detail, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Note, I will continue to contest these allegations as far as I need to. I worked hard on this product and I will not let false allegations that impede my character, my work ethic, or my artistry stand.
Thank you for your understanding and attention to this matter.
Best Regards,"
in return I got this…“I’m afraid that the UVs and shapes (if that is what you mean by
topology) and the actual polygon structure (the usual meaning of
topology) of the Daz figures are protected by copyright too”
When asked about the countless products available on Renderhub, Renderosity and the like I got this “Daz does, even here, reserve the right (which I do not believe has ever been exercised) to require such derivative products to be taken down.”
“An interactive license covers the use of the licensed product in a finished game” Is the last thing I got from Daz Legal
That’s ridiculous, especially regarding the uvs! So you can’t even include a completely custom texture if it was created to fit their uvs?
1 Like
And what’s worse is they try to completely ignore you, I have sent 40 plus emails over the past month trying to get this resolved only to be ignored, downplayed, and just not taken seriously. Such bad business. I am really seeing how ■■■■■■ of a company they are.
It is a pity that you are not rich because it is clear that you would win the trial.
It is incredible that the takedowns make it the innocent one who has to prove his innocence. How will a uvwarping be protected by copyright hahaha 
Daz is a piece of 
and I hope you move your abilities to metahumans
1 Like
The worst thing, and this is saying something, is that they will not answer the emails. I have sent 38 to their 3 responses an I think I got those due to social pressure from the community.
Strange thing is the bridge is open sourced leveraged with a Epic grant so excluding the G3-9 framework considering the Genesis 9 now uses the Epic base skeletal rig that also includes the correct leaf joints along with the corrected twist bones it’s a bit of a reach on Daz3d’s part to claim copyright infringement. In part Epic owns copyrights as to hierarchy construction, even though naming convention is different, and as to questions can one copyright skeletal hierarchy and as to joint naming convention.
As to historical context Daz3D’s EULA has always been confusing as they have in the past made attempts to move into the GRM (game ready models) market place and there past attempts have been less than successful and the only reason they are in their current position as a viable alternative to the base Epic rig is because Epic made it possible to import a DS asset with out limitation, as well as an open source bridge, that more or less forced the other engine developers to follow suit.
Like many we to have requested of Daz3D a clarification as to usage as to terms and conditions and the response has always been one of confusion as we not knowing if they understood the questions we asked as to contradictions in their own terms and conditions of use.
As to fair use it’s clear that part of their business is made up of merchants who are making DCC products for the Genesis base as part of their online catalogue as well as products that can be purchased at marketplaces such as Renderosity.com as to items built on the Genesis platform as for purchase or given away for free.
As to why such sites are allowed to do so is unclear but as far as I can figure is
- Such products can only be support currently in Daz Studio
- As being consider previous art they are protected by fair use doctrine.
- It’s unclear that Daz3D owns the rights to the open source bridge short of promoting it’s use as a fair use plugin on their platform.
The last I feel is a violation of Epics fair use license that applies to all products such as plugins, blueprint’s, animations, materials, and the fair use of Epics base rig to build suck products following the fair use rights as outlined in Epic’s terms and conditions.
The flip side I do feel that it would be fair to provided a merchant license as to sharing in profits made on their framework inline with the royalty paid as to the use of the Unreal Engine.
In the mean time expect to be communicating with some part timer working the support desk
OK so I took a look as to what is included as part of the package and I noticed this
Included Assets:
2 HD 3x subdivision G8.1 Static Mannequins w Basic Underwear
By including the G8.1 static mannequin you violate the terms and conditions as applied to CRT Content (CRT content includes all content as part of the content package that requires a end user interactive license) and as part of the asset package is not allowed as a stand alone product.
This leads to this
any such derived or additional three-dimensional works are designed to require or encourage the use of CRT Content available through the online DAZ store either by (i) requiring the use of such CRT Content in order for the works to function, or (ii) allowing only limited function when the works are used other than in conjunction with CRT Content from the online DAZ store; and
So since you did included Daz CRT content in the form of the Genesis 8.1 base Daz3D can order a take down of the entire package as it’s he responsibility of the end user to prevent reselling their copyrighted assets that at the very least require an interactive license.
With out dissecting the entire EULA I will assume the rest of the assets are yours as being original content which based on their EULA you own full rights as to copyright with the exclusion of the CRT assets as supplied from Daz3D.
To get around the limitations you would have to bootstrap your DCC product by requiring the end user to download and comply with any form of licensing extension be it the interactive license or per item purchase of a CRT product.
Disclaimer. I’m not a lawyer so if it matters hire one and is up to you to confirm terms and conditions. What you could do is go over to Renderosity and inquire there as to the requirements of making ready an asset package you are interested in selling on their market place 