Copyright Issues Surrounding 3D Shapes and Meshes?

soulhuntre asks: "A well known and respected company creates aftermarket 3D human figures for a popular rendering/posing system. Part of the value of these figures is that a large add on marketplace is thriving for clothing and props that will work with these characters. So far so good. Recently though there has been a controversy around the claims this company is making on what kind of work is derivative under US copyright law, and what they have to be asked for permission for. Can anyone cite any cases that might be of use in figuring this mess out?" It all boils down to how much deviation is allowed for a work to still be called "derivative". Even though a company may still own the models, does that mean they own the clothes, which were made by someone else for that model, used to "dress" it?

"It is a given that if I use their mesh to create a product I am violating their copyright.

It is a grey area in my mind if I use an automated process to make a product that will fit around their mesh; if for instance I take their human into a program like Rhino and let Rhino build a curve network over the surface to use in making my clothing mesh.

It seems completely clean to me to take their figure into Rhino or 3DS Max and hand fit a mesh that will conform to their figure, say in order to make a pair of pants that will fit their character. The mesh is mine, the shape is mine as well - it approximates their shape but their shape is also the shape of a human... not something they can copyright in broad terms.

Then there is the issue of fair use in my mind. The purpose of these figures is to be used with conforming accessories. it is the selling point and the primary goal. The value of the Daz figures is derived in the marketplace from the fact that they are the most popular figure to add aftermarket items to. it seems to me they have no claim that a work that fits on their figure is diminishing their value or revenue."

Comments

Re:Repeat from K5

[soulhuntre]

Actually, the problem is that point #3 is true - these accessories have been prohibited.

The question is - is that a good thing? Is that a legal thing?

As for why ask on Slashdot - because a fairly large number of peopel here follow copyright issues and it seemed someone might have a link to a relevant case.

Maybe your right, maybe I should have known better. I mean, there isn;t a chance to bash MS for anything so how can it be a good topic for /.