Editorial License - what is it, restrictions of the usage
Artini
Posts: 9,467
I have noticed a new item in the Daz 3D shop:
https://www.daz3d.com/cb-anhe-hd-for-genesis-9
More such items are listed in:
https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/608786/a-thread-for-items-with-the-editorial-license#latest
Sorry, I have not spotted this thread before, and has bought these 2 items:
https://www.daz3d.com/retro-apartment-props-2
https://www.daz3d.com/cyber-racer
What worse, I have not spotted this another thread:
https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/578896/eula-update-editorial-licenses-coming-to-daz/p1
Its license is Editorial:
https://www.daz3d.com/eula#editorial
If the online DAZ store identifies the Content as being for editorial use only, Users may use the content only in a manner that is allowable under the fair use doctrine which, in certain circumstances may permit the use of copyrighted or trademarked material for an editorial, non-commercial purpose to illustrate Content that is newsworthy, or of public interest, provided, however, that (i) DAZ makes no representation, warranty, or guaranty about the applicability of the fair use doctrine to any particular use of the Content, which the User should determine in consultation with its own legal advisors, (ii) the User may not, in any event and regardless of the fair use doctrine, publish or distribute the Content through another stock media clearinghouse, and (iii) the User must take all possible and reasonable efforts to credit the copyright and/or trademark owner of the Content;
How one can use such items?
Is it allowed to publish renders of such items?
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
7533 S Center View Ct #4664
West Jordan, UT 84084
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
"
Key EULA Changes:
Introduces a new licensing level called Editorial Licensing. This allows for a new type of content to be restricted to non-commercial purposes.
Allows new Daz store content to include additional license restrictions beyond the standard agreement on the product page. For example, a trademarked product may include additional information.
Removes the unit restriction for 3D Print Licenses and updates to establish a 3D Print License for potential purchase.
What is an Editorial License?
Editorial Licensing is a licensing agreement that defines the usage of a product as editorial only. Purchasing a product with an Editorial License gives you no rights to any IP within, meaning you cannot use it commercially unless you secure the rights with the original IP holder(s).
Editorial License Restriction Examples:
Products may not be used in games or NFTs, either transformative or derivative works (2D or 3D)
Products may not be used to create any merchandise (book covers, clothing, logos, etc.)
Products may not be used in any advertising or promotional material (online, TV, etc.)
Products may not be used in any unlawful manner (derogatory, etc.)"
Okay, they've completely changed the wording on that since its original version.
Previously, the description made no mention of Fair Use, and instead specified that it must only be used non-commercially and not in any derogatory fashion. (However, I strongly believe they meant "defamatory").
Now it specifically says that the use case must meet Fair Use criteria (although I believe gets it wrong - editorial use does *not* have to be non-commercial).
Technically, this probably means that these assets are now probably pretty useless to many Daz users.
17 U.S. Code § 107 specifies Fair Use as:
While being non-commercial is mentioned as something that the courts should consider a factor in judging whether a use is fair use, being non-commercial or commercial neither guarantees or forbids a case from being fair use.
And I don't think most standard use cases for Daz content really meet the definition of being "transformative" enough to reach that exemption.
So I'm not actually sure Daz expects these assets to be used with those licence terms.
It's great to see the visibility was improved... oh, wait. Nevermind.
Does it mean, that I cannot share/publish 2D renders of such items at all?
Do they want us to use our own legal advisors, to determine fair use, with each render?
Can I post 2D render of such items on Daz Forum, without consulting legal advisor?
As it now specifically mentions Fair Use in the terms, it's arguable you can't use the assets in the first place unless your use case meets an exemption.
Now, for the disclaimer I should have put before: 1) I am not a lawyer, and 2) I don't suspect that's what Daz actually intends - but proper Fair Use is a lot more restrictive than the typical internet user's understanding that "Well, I can put scenes from Marvel films on Youtube as long as I claim I'm not making any money!"
Doesn't matter. Editorial license means don't buy it, don't even accept it for free. Not worth the trouble! That's my view of it.
Ok, thanks for the comments.
I think, I will avoid such items, at least, for now.
Yes - until these items have a clear way of being flagged in Daz Studio itself, then they make licence management so much harder; it's just easier to keep your library clear of any licencing pitfalls.
Is anyone keeping a thread of all items with the Editorial License restrictions? Is there a pinned comment somewhere that is just "here's a list of EL items"?
Thanks.
So I don't get it. Why would they even put something in the store like this?
There is this thread that has tried to be that - doesn't look like it got pinned tho.
I bought her straight from the sales page cause of her price didn't look at her product page just like those other products didn't expect her to be restrictive and get me into trouble for using her If it wasn't for the other thread warning I wouldn't have known luckily saw the warning before installing and using put in for refund as a certain character would say "IT"S A TRAP"
It seems that in case of Anhe it was set in error and since corrected.
Otherwise, I imagine it would apply to things like cars that are exact replicas of existing models. Even very old ones of those are trademark protected, so you couldn't use them for them anything commercial, like a book cover.
We set in an inquiry and the product has been corrected and no longer has the Editorial license on it
I'm with you on this... If I am not able to do whatever I want with 2d art I create using the assets, they're of no value to me. I've almost purchased things I really wanted and then saw the little notice about "editorial License" just in time to remove the items from my cart before cashing out and I'm sad about missing some of the things. Today, there's a new product "Mercury Coupe" which looks nicely modelled and very cool, a car with rigged features (and enough polygons that I don't cringe looking at all the unsmooth curves and edges that some vehicle models have) and I was all excited about it, and even more so when I saw that it was today's holiday sacrifice priced at only $2.99... but I'm just not going to buy it because of the license. If the modeller/PA chose this, they simply could have made up a name to stick on the hood, and otherwise tweaked the item to avoid the issue and not limit the use of the product. (The car has been radically customized anyway, so beyond the nameplate on the hood, would it have been an issue otherwise?) If the licensing choice is Daz's work... I don't want to encourage bad behaviour by buying items with the editorial license.
There should be an option in the store to hide/show "editorial license" products
Yes... I am wondering also.
I second this. I will never buy or even take for free one of these items. I fact, I am pretty annoyed that I have to even pay attention this nonscense.
I gave a lecture to a college art class on Daz, what it is, how it works, and the store. I chose to specifically point out this dumb liecense in its own slide and the dangers it could hold.
A cool race car in today's holiday sacrifice spot that somehow reminds me of the sort of cars you might have seen a villain like Snake Oiler drive in the old Speed Racer cartoons. A cool car that has the @#*% EDITORIAL LICENSE, so another product I'm not willing to buy even at $2.99 sacrificial lamb price now, and certainly, never will buy it later at regular prices while the license restriction remains. I'm not super familiar with particular brands of race cars but this product really does not seem like a direct copy of anything real-world, and even the sponsorship decals on it seem to be either fictional or "fictionalized" e.g., "Champeen" instead of "Champion" so I really wonder why this is licensed this way. And, who makes that decision: the PA or DAZ? This smacks of when Daz started encrypting products a few years back, started slow and then grew, but also, the customers began complaining about it, on principle and also due to practical considerations, and for whatever reason, Daz appeared to have changed strategy at some point on that encryption business. I boycotted encrypted products when they appeared, but a year later when a product's encryption "expired out" or whatever, I did buy (at least) one of them. Being the product was by then old, I got it much much cheaper than if it hadn't been encrypted and I'd bought it at intro. (it was that sexy Llamaghini Amenazador Version 2 Roadster by MattyManx and I recall this episode so well because I generally have no interest in those kinds of exotic cars but that one, OMG I wanted it so hot that I was even willing to buy on intro -which is not generally the custom for me-- except that encryption stuff was a deal-breaker.) Also I seem to recall that when Daz started that encryption scheme stuff a few years back, one of the Platinum + Club freebies ( a toll or guard booth sort of thingy) was one of the early Encrypted items; before the holiday sale began this year with some items EDITORIAL LICENSEd, I recall one or more D+ products being so licensed (which I passed on) and I have to wonder if that is no accident-- that these sorts of user-unfriendly schemes get rolled out in the low-price-point D+ or holiday specials to start softening up the ground for wider adoption. It would be nice if shoppers who dislike the editorial license would complain about it, and also, refrain from buying items so licensed. Maybe it will make PA or Daz (whichever is responsible) be more judicious about slapping that restriction on products. Meanwhile, having to pass on holiday specials I'd like to buy because DAZ is pushing or picking items with restricted licenses takes away a little more of the joy of the season by reminding me that I really have a longstanding hate-love relationship with Daz, Inc.
According to the other thread:
MEANWHILE. ON DAZ... there's a new product today "Stinger GTR Coupe" which pretty clearly has a recognizably BMW or BMW-adjacent front end with their "kidney-grill" that BMW fought a legal duel over some years ago (among other aspects) and no one seems to be ducking for cover from legal attacks there - that product does not have an EDITORIAL LICENSE bolted to it.
Ahh, yes - PerttiA gets the gold star today for recognizing the race car. It dates to the 60s so I guess that's why I sensed a 60s vibe about it somehow. ; ) I looked at some Bing images of the T163 and that's surely the inspiration here. I didn't really study the product vs the pictures but did notice the model has headlights but did not see any pictures of an actual car with them, and there may or may not be other little tweaks to the model but I'll say that there's not much doubt this is a homage to that car. Still to me, begs the question, why didn't the modeler just make a few judicious tweaks to the model if they were worried about being hunted down over copyright over a 60s race car model. (I mean, if a modeler is a fanboy and wanted a pure replica, they could easily make that for themselves, then adulterate it easily to be less direct a copy to sell publicly at Daz if they fear litigation. Assuming this is something determined by the PA, and not by Daz.) I guess it's not an issue for people who just want to do renders to show to friends or something, but if you can't create artworks, bookcovers, posters or mouse pads or mugs or whatever else without lawyering up or risking trouble if you actually sell a 2d creation using an editorially licensed item then I just can't understand how it makes sense to start filling the store up with that stuff. There are other platforms that cater to professionals who are buying & selling restricted license products (and prepared & willing to deal with that aspect) which seem like a better fit than Daz.
PS: @butterflyfish - thanks for the info in your post! I didn't know that other thread til you mentioned...
You're welcome