"All your filter are belong to someone else!"

Quote
Before Dilla came down with that nasty "Cheekola Virus" and suffered memory loss.....he promised to make a filter for me each time I re-posted this Devil. Steve

Hang on Steve, he may be working on it as we type.

If they did adopt duel library system they would win too by increased revenue from the commercial filters - Author who previous had no incentive would submit and the ones who have made 3 HU's and disappeared would be retained by then submitting commercial filters - the competition of commercial reality would make better filters that were saleable instead of churning out half bakes - those who wanted to give away there filter could and would still be happy - Texture packs or on individal textures could be compiled for people not running FF [ obviously the ones running it as well] which would increase awarenss of FF - it could increase FF sales by people seeing it as a way to directly make income. The list of benifits goes on but I can't think of any negatives

I'm a bit weary of a dual commercial/restricted library system because.....

Quote
Rawn (RawArt) wrote: The biggest obsticle would be that it would need more overseeing by FF staff than a regular library would

+2 I think a simplified "these-are-the-terms-of-use-for-all-filters" system would be the easiest, most straightforward way for both FF and users to deal with....

I think the only real issue here is to clearly prohibit users from copying and reselling straight texture presets without any creative input. I have a hard time believing that this would have any negetive impact other than to thwart users looking for a loophole to make a quck buck off of the program without having to do anything at all. In fact, I think that protection would help promote the submission of quality texture filters, benefit FF sales by having a better quality filter library, and ultimately benefit customers by having an ever-growing library of quality filters to use.....

Eh ehhhrrrrrmmmmmm.....

Quote
Filter Forge should start creating straight texture packages and sell them seperately from the program.....create incentives through some kind of reward/compensation for authors of the textures used in the packages.....and completely diffuse the users that are copying texture presets and reselling them online......

Dilla, that's three posts.....you owe me!!! LOL....

Sorry to be a pest again just wondering how many products [Removed by moderator] used that is filters? Is it just chainmail?

And it seems a bit strange that Filter Forge would give Renderosity permission of usage for filters unchanged when in their eula it states that this is not allowed? Can someone please clarify for me? Thank you

Decided to remove what I posted here and will gladly send it to anyone who is thinking of selling their products at a certain place.

He had quite a few there, that's for sure. I feel sorry for all the people who paid him for presets they could have gotten free.

And Renderosity was quite nasty with me for posting the link to the filter. I told you about their email. Nasty people over there...they always were.

Perhaps that is what needs to be done till Filter Forge steps up to protect their filter authors a removal of filters this will only get more difficult for filter forge's reputation, if they don't protect their authors I know other sites will do such if their vendors or users were abused that is called good customer service and protection of an artists rights and work. Where is the programs developers on this? I have started on many freebie products already that are only going to cause some $ trouble for those selling non derivative work from filters If you wish to promote me and my freebies so that more people know that what you pay for on vendor sites you can get free through me with credit to those involved and filter forge! Some of the upcoming freebies will be derivative work and non-derivative.

They will be posted at:My Webpage

please spread the word and perhaps this will put a hindrance on some of this abuse

Let's see if what they get on [Removed by moderator] and others vendor shops they can get free now. Let's keep the ball moving on this.

And if I have offended anyone I apologize but it's truly not difficult to be creative.

Quote
Omega3 wrote: Connie, could you tell us who they are?

Well, I don't feel comfortable giving out the names, but I don't mind letting you know how I figured it out. They have same nickname here and on renderosity. If you used their filters, and have them in your library, when you open Filter Forge, it will tell you that the filter is no longer in FF library, and is automatically moved to "My Filters".

Perhaps it's a coincidence that at least two of them are the same people whom have either in forums or via PM expressed the dislike for what's been hapenning. Perhaps I jumped on a conclusion here, so I don't feel comfortable giving out specific names. Sorry. If they're following this thread perhaps they'll decide to chime in, in person.

Quote

Vladimir Golovin wrote: I like the term "parasite" -- I'll adopt it for further discussions Literally a minute ago I finished the new additions to the Filter Forge EULA I was working on with our attorneys for some time. I am not a lawyer, so you shouldn't consider anything I post here as a legal advice (consult a lawyer in your jurisdiction for that). Here's what we added: Quote You may not distribute, unless otherwise provided herein or expressly permitted by the Licensor, images derived Using the Product or Filters (“Results”), unless such Results constitute a derivative work as provided above and are not a mere non-substantial modification of an image based on existing or slightly modified existing Filter in the Licensor’s Filter Library that you obtained by Using the Product. You hereby agree that the Licensor may, solely and at its own discretion, request that you cease any distribution of images that it may deem not in compliance with this section and such unauthorized distribution constitutes a copyright infringement. For avoidance of doubt, you may distribute, in the manner described above, the Results, provided that (i) such Results are not mere images that are derived based on minor modification of already existing Filters Using the Product (i.e. the Results shall not be solely based on existing Filters, which are included with the Product or obtained from the Filter Library) and your Results constitute substantially new images; or (ii) you are the author and copyright owner of the Filter(s) based on which you developed the Results Using the Product. If we translate this from Legalese to Human, it goes roughly like this: 1. You can't take someone else's filter, use it to generate some images and sell them as your own work. 2. You can't take someone else's filter, add a couple of controls, claim the filter as your own, use it to generate some images and sell them as your own work. 3. If you're a filter author, you can sell images you made using your filters. Which means we're officially encouraging filter authors to make money off their work. Any feedback is welcome -- we still have some time before this goes live.

that's off the first page of this thread. you can rest assured that vlad is working on this. the FF crew and vlad in particular, has a lot of integrity and i fully expect he's sweating this thing out with the lawyers right now. i've been in these forums since about the second day of the beta test and i'm come to respect vladimir and how he does business. he'll get it ironed out. he may not like the double library idea, but he proposed the EULA changes as stated above and i'm sure he's working to make this as fair as possible.

Very promising i think we'll all look forward to the alteration
Still like the dual library Steve

um, this is the internet folks. you should not be so surprised to find that you are being ripped off, that's the way thinks work in an open forum like this.

it's like hanging your original paintings in an alley downtown, with a sign saying 'art museum, $1. please place entrance fee in cup below'. then the next day you arrive to find - oh gosh, my paintings are gone! who would be so dishonest? well duh...

actually no that's a terrible analogy, because everyone who submits a filter here does it so that others can use the filter. you were generous, and someone took advantage. welcome to the world.

the only reason i would be put out by finding renders of my filters for sale is that i didn't think of it first! just send the guy an email telling him he's a goober and say that you're a big shot laywer and you're gonna get him good. then he'll stop.

if a filter author wants to profit from their own work, they shouldn't submit it to the library, plain and simple. keep it on your hard drive, then sell the rendered images yourself. of course someone will probably steal those, but such is life in this digital age. once something is made available to billions of internet users, it becomes free. not legally of course, but in all practicality, that is true. when it comes to digital information we really can't speak of what's legal, or even more abstract - what's ethical. there are millions of dollars worth of music, movies, and software out there for anyone with internet access to posess in a manner of minutes. if you download, then fine, you understand. if you don't download, and if you think it's 'wrong', then study more philosophy and think long and hard about the origin of your system of ethics, because it's all a social construct, none if it is really real. the end.

Quote
I definitely prescribe to the way you guys feel about it...... If you might have a problem with your filter being hijacked and abused, then don't submit it.....it's just that simple......

Just wondering if you don't mind people using your effects on a texture, i made a few abstracts and applied one of your metal effects modifying the values etc.

Quote
James wrote: Just wondering if you don't mind people using your effects on a texture

Not at all.....I consider it a compliment when people use my work.....especially when I see my name buried somewhere in the fine print.....

Quote
garbanzo wrote: of course the people making big bucks off of others' filters are not going to worry about trying to get the program illegally, they'll just buy it...

That's very true.....

Are you doing it as a promo to help FF......kinda like FF's new freepacks???

I thought your blog was a nice write-up on FF

You're welcome

Are you going sell texture packages sometime in the furure???

Carl, the link to James's blog is in this string.....

http://www.filterforge.com/forum/read...5&TID=4426

Quote
Sjeiti wrote: Just wondering, has anybody already tried to contact mr [Removed by moderator]? I just dropped him a note kindly asking to either remove the Quilts pack or put it up for free and change the readme (in which he claims to hold copyright). Let's see what happens...

Good for you, Sjeiti!

Sjeiti, if he replies back to you, would you let us know what he said?

wow...is this nonsense back again?
Filterforge stated clearly that the output of the program can be used any way the person who buys the program desires.
To limit how people can use FF will limit its appeal to people who would be interested in the software, and such would limit the marketability of FF as a whole.
Why would you guys be so insistant on attempting to limit FF's usefullness and try to give this company as a whole a bad reputation?

That makes no sense to me.
This is a great program, and I would like nothing more than to see the company grow. To give them a reputation (in a community where FF can make alot of sales) that will leave potential customers of FF unsure if they can or cannot use the software for their projects, will have them not bothering with the program....and FF loses sales. All this nonsense and harrasment of FF customers is doing a great diservice to FF.
The simple facts are that the "rendered output" from a particular program cannot be considered part of the programs copyright. The presets one includes are particular lines of code, and those lines can be copyrighted (if FF so decides...and that has NOT been made clear one way or another). Therefore that copyright can ONLY ensure that people dont take one of your presets and make a new filter (aka lines of code) out of. It holds no bearing over rendered output.
The only person who can copyright the rendered output of any program is the artist using the program. The programs creators have absolutly no say over that at all. Copyright laws may vary somewhat from country to country, but this tenant is always very similar. Rendered output is the product of the artist who does the rendering.

Again, if you are concerned how your filters are being used, dont submit them, but if you keep harassing paying customers of FF then you are doing nothing but harming the companies reputation...and that is really not cool.

Quote
James wrote: Sounds like your [Removed by moderator] imo from the way you keep posting dude you seem to get very annoyed if someone has something against someone straight stealing there work and profiting from it. If not why so defensive, plan on doing the same thing?

Wow...you really are looking to burn some witches arent you LOL

No I am not [Removed by moderator], I am just a member on this board as you all are. I have a ton of filters uploaded here, and am working on submitting even more of them.
I don't object to anyones views, my sole intent is to try to help people keep a clear perspective as to what the reality is regarding this situation, because people seem to be getting hung up over persieved copyright violations without clearly understanding how copyright works.
I have been in the graphic design industry for about three decades now and have a fair bit of experience in these matters which I try to share.

You use words like "stealing" "ripping off" etc. But the reality is that there is no theft going on. FF cleary stated that output from this software can be used in any way the artist cares too. Thats pretty simple...and also copyright law supports this as well. So unless you can find some clear point that shows how something is in fact being "stolen", then the whole point is mute.

I have nothing to be defensive about, because I sit on both sides of the fence. I create filters here and submit them regularly, and I also am a texture artist who uses filters here as well. I harbour no illusion that people can make texture resources out of the filters I submit...but so what? They might make a buck or two, but in the end, as filterforge grows in popularity, the people who buy those kits will feel foolish for buying them instead of FF itself.
If you really want to do something positive for the community, it would be better to inform the consuming public about the power of FF and its usefullness. That would do more for everyone. But right now the harrasment of FF customers and casting a cloud of ambiguity over the usefullness of FF is harming everyone.