#Copyrights & Ethics
Hi everybody, John E., John F., Rachel, Gus, Paul et al.
After reading all the message fire about ethics and copyrights issues,
i have decided to jump in with my opinion (which based in facts, no
emotional response). I don't want to torch again the gun powder, but
I think that all you ladies and gentlemen are quite wrong with this
issue, and certainly there has to be MORE than the eyes can see if
you all act in this wild way.
Let's make some assumptions:
1.We are in a FREE market. That's clear for all of us.
2.In this hard and wild world, EVERYONE can make products, market
them,
3.Here, in the capitalist world, we have a thing called COMPETITION,
which is based in many things, i.e. the scarcity (base of the
Neoclassic economics). So many people with the same class of product
or with products based in the same idea, can market them, get a
market share and compite with each other.
Ok, sorry for the basic economic discurse 🙂 Now, if we look to this
case, the point is clear: there is no point to discuss about. Are you
all crazy or what!? I don't care if Rachel had first the idea of
mesh people, if John had it first or who is first, the egg or the
chicken <g> The fact is that anybody can make and market mesh people,
because, and sorry if someone think that this is too hard, 3d mesh
people is not a very original idea and for sure, any special discover
by anybody. There has been people in architectural renders, worse or
better, a lot before 3ds ever existed in the mind of the Yost Group.
And you are talking about attorneys and court… it's like saying that
IBM will sue all clone makers to make machines based in the PC
concept. Or if Xerox sue Apple for the concept of the MacOS GUI and
the mouse. If Apple had not win over Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard in
the Windows-NewWave-MacOS case, do you think that the simple *PUBLIC*
idea of 3d people for architectural renders are subject of court
treatment. No matter John had seen Rachel people before make his
people. I don't need, and anybody need, and help to realize what a 3d
people has to look in our computers. In fact, I don't understand the
idea of buying 3ds mesh people when I have the tools to make the
people myself! (yes, I know that for me it can look ridiculous, but
others don't have the time to build the meshes theirselves).
I have a question:
Does anybody thinks that there has to be only one product class from
one manufacturer/developer in the 3ds third party market? No, my
dears. Nobody have the rights over the idea of a sun path program or
a 3d threes program. Nobody. But all of us, as the client, have the
right to choose the program or product I want, from the Yost Group,
from Schreiber, from Pyros, from Rachel, from John or from ACME.
Could be for the quality, the final results, the price… but I want
to have there the choices, like when I go to buy a computer, a car or
an stereo.
This question doesn't "stink", there is simple no question. If there
are other "reasons" for this rage, please tell me. If not, I think
that you all are a little lost in copyright land.
HOWEVER, someone has raised another question here: the ethical side.
Again, I think that some of you had been a little impulsive.
Specially, when all of you assume their own "known" parts as
universal truths, and don't know, like me, the case from both sides.
I think that this is more an emotional issue than a ethical question.
My personal opinion is that here here are no UNETHICAL behaviour
(seeing what has happen in the forum). Moreover, since this 3dpeople
is not a Rachel idea, I can't see how John can act in an improper
way.
What I see as improper behaviour in a public forum are all this
personalized public attacks and crossfire. Too many strong words that
I think don't do anything good to the 3ds community. Nobody need
unbased accusations all over the place. In other words, be less
emotional and expose the facts.
That's all. Thanks for read this message.