Unity 3D Models from Daz into Unity Question

[jeyemill]

So I've been playing around with Daz recently and started to make my own characters to use in my small project using the Unity game engine. It’s a simple point and click adventure game with the 3d models being from Daz and the dialogue portraits are renders from Daz.

Here’s an image of what it looks like so far (Just playing around with the dialogue and Renders)


With that said, I’ve seen a couple of people saying something about “licensing” when it comes to using Daz models in a game engine or something along those lines?

I would appreciate it if someone could elaborate further about this Daz licensing thing and if I should just find a different alternative for my 3d models. Thanks.

 

[Saki_Sliz]

Yes, you should be aware of Licensing.

In the legal system, you can copyright "Things" but you can not copyright "ideas."
In order to copyright something, it needs to be in a format, such as a patent. In the case of current digital stuff, it would be audio, or in this case, A 3D MESH.

You pay to have "access" to the 3D mesh, or pirate the 3D mesh from this site, but once you make art (the rendered) image, the image is a different format (.png or jpg) so you now own the art even if the assets is stolen.

but in a 3D game If you use a 3D mesh, well the maker still owns rights to that 3D mesh that you are using, so you have to pay to use said characters. For example, this character has a $10 licence

You must be registered to see the links

where as others have $35 $50 or even $100

basically, all anyone can guess is you buy the 'licence' so that if someone recognizes the character and for some reason get in contact with the artist who made the asset, they could contact you to either remove the character, or get the licence, or you could show you have the license to show you are safe (but that also requires buying the asset if you haven't already), but as far as I know it is just a way for them to get more money out of you.

 

[lancelotdulak]

If youre writing a game that is basically just going to be linked on sites like this and never make a lot i wouldnt worry about it. Most likely the worst case for you is sites that offer it recieve a dmca notice and/or you recieve one and you have to take current copies down and/or buy a license for the particular content etc. (This isnt worth sueing over unless its a game with profits at least in the 5 figure range as thats what it would cost to sue for). Basically dont worry about it unless yorue going to create a mainstream game and sell it on steam etc

 

[polywog]

Yes, you should be aware of Licensing.

In the legal system, you can copyright "Things" but you can not copyright "ideas."
In order to copyright something, it needs to be in a format, such as a patent. In the case of current digital stuff, it would be audio, or in this case, A 3D MESH.

You pay to have "access" to the 3D mesh, or pirate the 3D mesh from this site, but once you make art (the rendered) image, the image is a different format (.png or jpg) so you now own the art even if the assets is stolen.

but in a 3D game If you use a 3D mesh, well the maker still owns rights to that 3D mesh that you are using, so you have to pay to use said characters. For example, this character has a $10 licence

You must be registered to see the links

where as others have $35 $50 or even $100

basically, all anyone can guess is you buy the 'licence' so that if someone recognizes the character and for some reason get in contact with the artist who made the asset, they could contact you to either remove the character, or get the licence, or you could show you have the license to show you are safe (but that also requires buying the asset if you haven't already), but as far as I know it is just a way for them to get more money out of you.

A 3D model is just a bunch of ones and zeroes it's not a physical object, so your application for a patent is hereby denied. You can copyright your "code" but if a dev applies 20 morphs, and converts the model to an alternate format..
the resulting code will not be recognizable. When you change a model, even just a little, it is a new and different model.

Look at the Daz store. Literally half the items for sale are where one artist takes someone else's work, changes it a little, and re-uploads it, selling it with their name on it.

You must be registered to see the links

 

[jeyemill]

A 3D model is just a bunch of ones and zeroes it's not a physical object, so your application for a patent is hereby denied. You can copyright your "code" but if a dev applies 20 morphs, and converts the model to an alternate format..
the resulting code will not be recognizable. When you change a model, even just a little, it is a new and different model.

Look at the Daz store. Literally half the items for sale are where one artist takes someone else's work, changes it a little, and re-uploads it, selling it with their name on it.

You must be registered to see the links

I kinda had that same thought. The characters I made for this are all from the Genesis 8 base with a couple of different morphs, clothes and hair styles from other characters (that I admittedly did not buy). Plus it aint like Im planning on releasing this on steam, I’m kinda doing this as a hobby and was planning on making something that I could upload here in the future and maybe if it gets some followers i’d make a patreon at most (but that's just me getting ahead of myself).

Edit: After reading through some articles of the matter, I'v decided to go against it and not take the risk. I appriciate the answers, guess ima stick to modeling in blender.

 

[Saki_Sliz]

To be honest, It doesn't make much sense either to me.

A 3D model is just a bunch of ones and zeroes it's not a physical object, so your application for a patent is hereby denied. You can copyright your "code"

Following your logic, code is just a bunch of zerose and one, not a physical object, so application for a patent is also denied. But that is not the case (assuming you are not literally thinking I mean to use the term patent). Code is copyrighted, music is copyrighted, FILES such as a .png image or .wav sound clip are protected works of art, because a file is considered a type of medium, a format, that can be protected.

if a dev applies 20 morphs, and converts the model to an alternate format

So, as far as I can tell, only daz3D owns the 3D mesh OF THE BODY. In order for all the morphs to work, every character ever made for G8F (for example) Must use the same base mesh, just resculpted into different shapes. to be honest this would be the gray zone of law since law people haven't done a good job at distinguishing what core aspect of digital arts is considered protectable or important. Is the mesh just another file format and the sculpt is protectable, or must both the sculpt and the mesh be entirely created by a new artist to be protectable? I don't know of any court cases that goes this deep.

However, Often, characters can come with other assets, such as textures and other meshes, now that is 100% protectable... But I mean, if you use a skin texture, and modify the material, and mix it with other things and morphs, is it really recognizable as the same thing?

Fun fact: if someone tries to attack you, but you say that your work is transformative, in law the only way to actually get away with using a work in a transformative way is for the new work to be FOR ART ONLY. Meaning if you take someone else's art, mix it in a bunch other art or even your own stuff (for example, cutting up news papers to make a poster), if you do this just to make a cool advertisement banner or a monetized youtube video, turns out that does not hold up in court. The only time I see people win a case is when the work in question is a piece of art being sold as a piece of art. video games art really recognized as being a new piece of art in law, but everything else about games (code, assets, IP) can be protected individually. It is for this reason they are able to get away with having an interactive license you have to buy. But I am not a copyright lawyer. I tried to find the video from one of the lawyer youtube channels, but I couldn't find the case I was thinking of.

 

[polywog]

To be honest, It doesn't make much sense either to me.


Following your logic, code is just a bunch of zerose and one, not a physical object, so application for a patent is also denied. But that is not the case (assuming you are not literally thinking I mean to use the term patent). Code is copyrighted, music is copyrighted, FILES such as a .png image or .wav sound clip are protected works of art, because a file is considered a type of medium, a format, that can be protected.


So, as far as I can tell, only daz3D owns the 3D mesh OF THE BODY. In order for all the morphs to work, every character ever made for G8F (for example) Must use the same base mesh, just resculpted into different shapes. to be honest this would be the gray zone of law since law people haven't done a good job at distinguishing what core aspect of digital arts is considered protectable or important. Is the mesh just another file format and the sculpt is protectable, or must both the sculpt and the mesh be entirely created by a new artist to be protectable? I don't know of any court cases that goes this deep.

However, Often, characters can come with other assets, such as textures and other meshes, now that is 100% protectable... But I mean, if you use a skin texture, and modify the material, and mix it with other things and morphs, is it really recognizable as the same thing?

Fun fact: if someone tries to attack you, but you say that your work is transformative, in law the only way to actually get away with using a work in a transformative way is for the new work to be FOR ART ONLY. Meaning if you take someone else's art, mix it in a bunch other art or even your own stuff (for example, cutting up news papers to make a poster), if you do this just to make a cool advertisement banner or a monetized youtube video, turns out that does not hold up in court. The only time I see people win a case is when the work in question is a piece of art being sold as a piece of art. video games art really recognized as being a new piece of art in law, but everything else about games (code, assets, IP) can be protected individually. It is for this reason they are able to get away with having an interactive license you have to buy. But I am not a copyright lawyer. I tried to find the video from one of the lawyer youtube channels, but I couldn't find the case I was thinking of.

copyrights, patents, and trademarks are intended to protect the owner of intellectual property, not to prevent innovation.

Ask yourself "does my use of this, harm someone" if your answer is yes, then you shouldn't use it.

Take DUI for example. The hardest thing ever, to prove in court, yet a lot of people are afraid to drink and drive, for fear that they will be arrested. You shouldn't drink and drive, because it could potentially injure someone, not because there's a stupid unenforceable law against it. Laws don't prevent bad things from happening, the simply turn it into a game. Stupid people will admit that they had a few drinks, and give up their right to remain silent... some really dumb fools will consent to testing that may incriminate themselves, idiots. No professional drunk is going to do that, so the law doesn't stop them. Some arbitrary number assigned to blood alcohol content, doesn't prove that you were impaired, maybe you drink a lot and have a tolerance that allows you to consume 3 times the legal limit without it affecting your judgment and or abilities.

Should you drink and drive? Hell no! But not because of the law.

Anything that you could possibly conceive and get a patent on, I can improve upon, and get a new patent of my own. You're entitled to sell your inferior product, and I'm entitled to sell my superior product, neither infringing the other's rights.

 

[lancelotdulak]

Pollywog is right . I know this due to my need to listen to youtube blab while i drive. (a copyright lawyer on youtube). EVEN IF you openly admit copying model x. If you substantially alter it.. the copyright doesnt apply. Copyright law isnt absolutist like a lot of other law. It is intended to promote creativity and innovation and those arent just words they have legal meaning. There are a lot of legal examples of this im too tired to coherently repeat. But as an example if you take a picture of the "banana on wall" "art" that only includes it with no commentary etc. Youre violating copyright. If you draw a big laughy face or dick on it to disrespect it.. its commentary. If you take that Exact picture and ass grapes apples oranges etc it's either commentary or derivative. Not protected. If you take a daz model and change it substantially, not protected.
And.. more than a few daz sellers literally steal a model, change it a bit, likely export it to obj then reimport and name it something new (just to hide its origins from daz they probably dont have to do this legally.. maybe.. substantial similarity is also a legal term).. and sell it on the daz store. Just make sure you make substantial changes. The eyebrows and nose are major keys to how most characters look just changing those radically change how a model looks

Edit : he's wrong about dui.. you lose your license on the spot for refusing to test. And if you piss the cop off he'll just arrest you for suspicion and take you for a blood test so youre fucked anyway

 

[lancelotdulak]

Yes, you should be aware of Licensing.

In the legal system, you can copyright "Things" but you can not copyright "ideas."
In order to copyright something, it needs to be in a format, such as a patent. In the case of current digital stuff, it would be audio, or in this case, A 3D MESH.

Just so you know this is RADICALLY wrong. Copyright, patent and trademark are all very different things and different law applies. You dont "copyright a patent".

 

[polywog]

Pollywog is right

Edit : he's wrong about dui.. you lose your license on the spot for refusing to test. And if you piss the cop off he'll just arrest you for suspicion and take you for a blood test so youre fucked anyway

I'm seldom wrong. Laws may be different where you live, maybe your police are allowed to bend you over and sodomize you whenever they feel like it, but not in America. Less than 5% of DUI cases result in conviction.
It's extremely hard to convince 12 people beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone was impaired.
Arrest does not mean conviction. Pissing a cop off almost always works in your favor.

You must be registered to see the links

 

[Saki_Sliz]

Just so you know this is RADICALLY wrong. Copyright, patent and trademark are all very different things and different law applies. You dont "copyright a patent".

Copyright is a legal term, a concept
patent however was an example of format. is a lawful document, where an idea tries to take form so that it can be in a format which can then be protectable. (but not protected by copyright, that is a separate legal situation).
That is what I meant to communicate. I didn't mean to make it sound like I said 'copyright a patent'.

Technically I have only been doing this stuff for the past 7 years, and haven't really gotten a start-up off the ground (but this year will be different!), but I consider myself pretty familiar with the terms since I have had to talk with lawyers about this and bought a patent or two and had to go through business competitions and training campus where we have to understand copyright and knowing what we can and can't say while trying to talk to investors. (How am I suppose to make a prototype when no one is giving me money yet! Everyone wants to see the prototype first, but I am still in college, its really frustrating).

about the DUI, yeah the laws do differ state to state. In my state of Washington (not dc) you get a fine and a separate ticket just for having an open alcoholic beverage in the car. However, we can refuse to blow (for health reasons), but are required to do a blood test at the station (it is a good way to buy time to have your blood levels go down enough to be legal). Getting sodomized is just a bonus

 

[polywog]

You must be registered to see the links

 

[Saki_Sliz]

alcohol-prohibition-was-failure

I don't even need to know what the article says to know what you mean, thanks American history class XD

 

[lancelotdulak]

You must be registered to see the links

lmfao its from cato... might as well have posted something by dr seuss

 

[lancelotdulak]

Copyright is a legal term, a concept
patent however was an example of format. is a lawful document, where an idea tries to take form so that it can be in a format which can then be protectable. (but not protected by copyright, that is a separate legal situation).
That is what I meant to communicate. I didn't mean to make it sound like I said 'copyright a patent'.

Technically I have only been doing this stuff for the past 7 years, and haven't really gotten a start-up off the ground (but this year will be different!), but I consider myself pretty familiar with the terms since I have had to talk with lawyers about this and bought a patent or two and had to go through business competitions and training campus where we have to understand copyright and knowing what we can and can't say while trying to talk to investors. (How am I suppose to make a prototype when no one is giving me money yet! Everyone wants to see the prototype first, but I am still in college, its really frustrating).

about the DUI, yeah the laws do differ state to state. In my state of Washington (not dc) you get a fine and a separate ticket just for having an open alcoholic beverage in the car. However, we can refuse to blow (for health reasons), but are required to do a blood test at the station (it is a good way to buy time to have your blood levels go down enough to be legal). Getting sodomized is just a bonus

Theres a guy named leonard french on youtube you should really watch. He's very interesting and.. a copyright lawyer. His fans are .. well very legally educated novices on copyright law. And i agree on the last part totally. I had a dui 30 years ago because i gave a guy annoying the staff a ride home and the cop smelled HIM.. and tested me. I blew a .07something and a .08 i think . Demanded ablood test but didnt follow through after it came through.. i was an idiot kid. Pretty sure my bac was probably about .01 by the time i got tested. I was a fool of course.
Dont give up on the business if you really want it. I started one and didnt despite hellacious setbacks and rough times. i eventually succeeded.. didnt get anything like rich but i made a living til i got sick of it and its one of the things im proudest of. Dont give up

 

[Saki_Sliz]

leonard french on youtube

Have you heard of Star Citizen, or Robert Space Industries? big game that is being crowed funded ($280 million? most fundraised thing on record) but it hit a bit of a rough spot with some law (cryteck vs cig lawsuit), and as a result of trying to learn more about the case, I found Leonard last year.

 

[lancelotdulak]

Have you heard of Star Citizen, or Robert Space Industries? big game that is being crowed funded ($280 million? most fundraised thing on record) but it hit a bit of a rough spot with some law (cryteck vs cig lawsuit), and as a result of trying to learn more about the case, I found Leonard last year.

I didnt know he did anything on star citizen. The execs there are the most brilliant fucking con artists in the history of man. They have idiots paying 10s of thousands for ships that dont exist in a game that literally doesnt work who have formed a cult to destroy anyone who doubts the game that has been in development 10 years , has a handfull of models useable in "game".. in a game engine that i could hire 4 coders off of f95 or rprogramming to produce in a couple weeks... Yet i know of BRILLIANT games out on steam put out by one guy living off ramen that are better than it will ever be.. and theyll likely end up being cobol programmers somewhere to make a living..

 

[Saki_Sliz]

I wanted to say Star citizen tends to be a polarizing topic, kinda how elon musk's cyber truck design is quit polarizing, either you love it or you hate it. I use to think it is just because things out side the norm equates to being polarizing, But I don't think that's the case anymore. I think people just like to be polar, even after the topic is considered trivial.

 

[polywog]

 

[polywog]

lmfao its from cato... might as well have posted something by dr seuss

“[Seuss] would like to say he felt it was a flop because he couldn’t draw sexy, naked ladies,”