Warning About Using Daz Studio Assets In Game Development (Sibling Company to Morph3d)

TLDR, unless you're considering ever doing business with Daz Studio or Morph3D. You've been warned.

Okay, first of all, I expect I'll get some flak for this post, but try to remember I'm here to warn the Unity community about something that I think is a problem for anyone considering using Daz Studio content in a game. I came at this from the angle of doing art using Daz Studio assets first. Along the way, I acquired a Daz Originals game indie dev license that was supposed to allow me to use their "Daz Originals" store content in the development and distribution of games. I thought I'd like to try to use some of the many things I owned already in the experimental development of a game for sale at some future point. After getting said game license, I invested more in Daz Originals with the idea that I might use these assets in a future game in addition to using it in my art. Now, at this point in the story, I've got many thousands of dollars invested in their assets.

BTW, I know this is the internet and some people can't help themselves, but I'm not asking for a commentary on the wisdom of doing this. It's done. I'm here to warn others so they can make a more informed choice. You can laugh at me, but I'm here to help the community learn through my mistakes.

Then they started retroactively changing rights to use of said content. In order to access the licensing language of that page on their store, they required one to agree to changes in the language. So, essentially, if you wish to continue using their store or access some pages, you are leveraged into agreeing to retroactive changes. As it stood last year, they had issued a change in licensing terms that meant that while one could use their 3D models, for which one had a license for game development, in 3D games, one could not ask users of such an application to purchase even 2D representations of such content. In other words, goodbye to microtransactions of a purely cosmetic nature in 2d games. I might be wrong, but this could be a huge deal for some devs. I complained because I felt that retroactive licensing changes were BS and also because I had thought at some point to try going the microtransaction route. I wasn't sure, but I didn't like that suddenly that option seemed to be taken from me, at least if I wanted to continue using their software and assets as I had done before.

Then today I'm greeted by this page on their store: https://www.daz3d.com/huntress. This is a Daz Original item for which I've supposedly already got a license to use if I purchase it because I have the Daz Originals game dev license. But a little down the page there's a new feature called an "Interactive License" option. So I click the "What is this?" link and I'm taken to this page: https://www.daz3d.com/interactive-license-info. This page basically says now if I want to use this in a video game, I've got to also purchase an additional license for this individual item because otherwise such use is prohibited under their EULA, which by the way, when I click the link that takes me to their current EULA language, I'm asked to agree to the following changes to their licensing, of course retroactively for all content I've already acquired the rights to use legally, without modification:

3.0 Interactive License Addendum

The terms of this addendum 3.0 are in force only when User has purchased a “Game Develoer License” or an “Interactive License Add-On” from the online DAZ store.

For any User who has purchased one or more Game Developer Licenses the terms of this Addendum 3.0 apply to all Content that the User has purchased a license to via the DAZ store where the “Artist” field of the Content contains a list of one or more Artist Names, and that the User has also purchased Game Developer Licenses such that the User has purchased a Game Developer License for each of the Artist Names represented in the Artist Name field of the Content.

For any User who has purchased one or more Interactive Add-On Licenses via the DAZ store, the terms of this Addendum 3.0 apply to all Content that the User has purchased such an Interactive Add-On License for.

In the case of Game Developer Licenses where the Artist Name for that license is “Daz Originals”. The terms of this section 3.0 apply to all content which also contains “Daz Originals” in the Artist Name, regardless of the presence of additional artist names also in that field.

All Content that can be identified according to the above criteria shall hereinafter be referred to as “CRT Content”. The terms of this addendum 3.0 do not apply to any other Content.
​

• • Modified Terms of Use. This section replaces Section 1.0 Bullet 5: “TERMS OF USE” for CRT Content ONLY.
    
    Two Dimensional Works. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, User may (i) incorporate, copy and modify the CRT Content in the creation and presentation of two-dimensional animations and renderings which may require access to the CRT Content by the User’s customer during electronic execution of the User’s application, and (ii) incorporate two dimensional images (including two dimensional images that simulate motion of three dimensional objects) derived by User from the CRT Content in User’s other two-dimensional works, and (iii) publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense such two-dimensional animations, renderings and other works; provided that User may not in any case: publish, market, distribute, transfer, sell or sublicense any renderings, animations, software applications, data or any other product from which any CRT Content, or any part thereof, or any substantially similar version of the CRT Content can be separately exported, extracted, or de-compiled into any re-distributable form or format. All other rights with respect to the CRT Content and its use are reserved by DAZ and its licensors. User warrants and is responsible to ensure that the CRT Content used in User’s applications are not available to end users in their native formats and that every effort is made to protect the CRT Content from theft or copyright infringement by employing technology, asset protection, encryption or any other resources at User’s disposal.
    
    Three Dimensional Works. DAZ wishes to encourage the expansion of the catalog of Content available to its users. Accordingly, User may access, use, copy, and modify the Content to create one or more derived or additional three-dimensional works provided that:
    
    • any such derived or additional three-dimensional works are designed to require or encourage the use of CRT Content available through the online DAZ store either by (i) requiring the use of such CRT Content to function, or (ii) allowing only limited function when not used in conjunction with CRT Content from the online DAZ store; and
      
    • upon receipt of a written request from DAZ, User immediately ceases any and all distribution of the art that User has created from the CRT Content, if DAZ has determined, in its sole discretion, that (i) such art is substantially similar to or is a clone of existing Content; or (ii) such derived or additional work fails to require the use of Content available through the online DAZ store.
    
    The creation of three-dimensional physical representations (3D-print, molded copy, CNC-routed copy, and the like) of Content or any three-dimensional art derived from the Content is permitted only for personal, non-commercial use by the User. Additionally, the user may not grant other entities or individuals the right to produce such physical representations of the Content except for the sole purpose of providing the print to the User for their personal use.
    All other rights with respect to the Content and its use are reserved by DAZ and its licensors.
• While incorporation of the CRT Content into User’s applications is authorized as set forth above, User expressly agrees and acknowledges that any discrete sale of CRT Content separate from a purchase of the User’s application is allowable ONLY with express written consent of DAZ. Thus, for example, within the context of a game, the sale or purchase of the CRT Content, portions thereof, or either two-dimensional or three-dimensional derivatives thereof as a separately-purchased commodity or upgrade using items of actual or virtual worth is prohibited without prior written consent of DAZ. Written consent of DAZ may be sought at the address set forth herein.

What concerns me more than anything is the addition of the two points I bolded above--that making a 3d work using their content requires some vague "encouragement" of the end user's use of DAZ store content--meaning a purchase of some type from their store for use and that if I use any of their ready to use content without significant alteration, they can make me cease and desist its use in all 3D works. Now, it seems that although I purchased all that ready-to-use content for my art and acquired the rights to use that same content in video game development, they're saying that I cannot use those models without: a.) requiring the users of my application to also purchase rights to use that content, unless I, as application dev, significantly limit their use in some undefined way, and b.) substantially altering the content before it can be used in my application.

Seriously? WTFFFFS? You may not see the point, but there is a huge difference here in terms of what is required from me now in order to use that which I've already purchased the legal rights to use. I cannot even access my online purchased content page to retrieve a link to my license without agreeing to this addendum. And after finding the link to the original license agreement by scrolling through all of my purchase receipts, I am once again taken to a page that asks me to agree to this binding retroactive addendum. Shifty business and shady practices. I asked someone else who doesn't have such a license to attempt to access the indie game developer's daz originals license page using the link I was able to find, and they can't even access the page to view the original language. They also were forced to agree to the retroactive changes without then even being able to see the original license.

Oh, and for those who don't know, these guys are a sibling company to morph3d.com, which some people have boycotted and protested against for their licensing choices. Now, if you're even thinking of considering going there after I've shared my story to my shame and regret, having spent more than $10,000 at their store over the past several years, you've been warned. You cannot say nobody told you how they treat their customers. I've paid a price, and I'm paying another by doing this, but you don't have to. Stay clear! Warn others!

 

Be a professional contact the company with your concerns first, then if you feel you've paid tens of thousands for a license that has been revoked in a contractual change that isn't just, contact a lawyer.

 

Sorry to hear that, and thanks for sharing. I recommend you ping their legal department and point them to this thread, asking them to chime in and clarify. I think there's a chance that at least to a degree this is a misunderstanding based on unclear wording, and that the intent of the EULA changes is to prevent creation of "competing products". E.g. the 2D thing probably aims at preventing people from buying a game license for the 3D content and making a "game" that really is a spritesheet generation tool that exports animated 2D spritesheets of 3D content licensed from DAZ. You can always rely on big companies trying to maximize revenue and trying to protect their revenue. Making their EULAs more draconian than they reasonably should be, is in conflict with maximizing revenue, so there must be another reason they thought they need to do this.
And the other part... maybe that's just for content that is to be offered back into the DAZ eco-system, trying to prevent people from making DAZ compatible assets that essentially are "free alternatives"? I'm not sure this even applies to you. Their whole business model relys on people needing to buy that stuff, so of course they'll keep a clause in there allowing them to keep authority over what lives in their content eco-system.
Good luck with all of this!

 

I got that email a few hours ago. There's nothing to worry about - did you miss this part in the email?

 

I had a quick read and I am no expert in law jargon, but to me these new terms seem to only enforce the terms of usage as a final product, not as an asset in a game.
They just want to make sure you don't sell spritesheets with their 3d models in other stores, or modify the 3d models and resell them. It doesn't affect usage as an asset in a game.
Just like when you buy a sound library, you are allowed to use it to create your music but you can't alter it and sell another sound library based on that.

 

That's not actually correct. Essentially, you can use DAZ models in 2D apps without a licence (e.g. visual novels, or as backgrounds etc), but you can't use them for 3D characters in games without a licence. It's explained in detail elsewhere in their EULA.

@CaptainStardog The new licencing arrangement is actually much better for us, as we can buy all future DAZ Original content without needing to buy interactive licences - our existing Game Dev licence covers it all.

 

I believe the sentiment is that a licensor that retroactively voids previous licensing and requires new payment and terms on existing deals is not worth dealing with. On that point, if the OP is at all correct then temporaily more favorable terms in the immediate term may not be "better" for them as a licensee as they forsee further changes and voiding of the current terms in the future.

 

It seems like everything's fine, it's just confusing.

Which is why I didn't buy into that license back when I was considering it. It seems like they're doing the right thing, but in a confusing way.

 

That I did not get until after I made this post. Glad they clarified. Still doesn't make me feel better about additional confusing language.

 

Sorry, but I fail to see how this is better. I was already able to purchase and use all Daz Original content with my existing license.

 

Are they doing the right thing? The language was already pretty clear in the existing license. This significantly muddies the waters.

 

This is a ripoff. Both options should have been there.No need in using daz intill old license is back

 

Apologies, I didn't phrase it correctly. I just mean that we're better off than everyone else. The new interactive licences are really expensive (most I've seen are $50, and just one at $10). We don't have to pay that new fee.

Bottom line: I really wouldn't stress about this. I've been using DAZ for 6 years and I've dealt with the company reps several times - they're always really helpful, as is the community. The new licensing is being discussed over on the DAZ forums, you should take a look if you haven't already done that.

 

Are you certain you meant to say "are"? Because $50 seems really cheap to me.

 

Such is life is 1st world country.

 

DAZ assets are not required to make good quality games and the assets themselves are definitely more than $50. If you can't afford the license then you couldn't have afforded the assets either.

 

"can't afford" and "are really expensive" are not the same thing. He may just be on a tight budget.

 

Originally the license that allowed you to use DAZ models in games was $500. That's considerably more depending on how many assets you need which is why I asked if he actually meant "are" or not.

 

I paid $170 for the licence on sale about 3 years ago (and we have ~ 25 models/items in the game; i.e. ~ $1250 if you're using the new interactive licences).

 

$50 is extremely expensive for a DAZ model. If you use Platinum Club and just wait for sales, most models are < $10.

 

Ah. Okay. They have ridiculous sales akin to Udemy. That explains a lot.

 

Thanks, guys, for the input. I'm just frustrated because I feel that the new language is confusing and when I reached out to a rep, they didn't explain how the new language would impact my usage, only that I needed to comply with the new EULA. The rep repeated the explanation that there is no need to purchase licensing for content if I already have an agreement for that artist. Again, I'm glad of that. The new licensing fees are extremely high. But this does not make me feel better about their changing the EULA without giving an explanation of the impact of the new language. It still makes it sound as if I have to somehow encourage users of 3d video games I create with their products to make purchases from Daz directly and am now forced to modify the models so they are not exact duplicates of the product as I received it from their asset store. I get that we don't want the characters to all look the same, but a wrench or sprocket?

 

no one is going to buy new interactive licences just to use a hand full of things from their catalog. There just going to lose customers.

Edit: Now they are actually censoring post on the forums. Your post has to be approved now.

 

So, is it currently possible to purchase 3D models from daz3d.com and use them in games?

Basically, I only need to purchase each asset with it's interactive license and that's all? I could use it in commercial games, no royalties?

Sorry if it sounds obvious, but I've checked their EULA and it's so confusing :3

 

What is Daz producing that people want? I've never checked out the website, but I keep seeing people complaining about legal problems like this and complex liccensing issues.

I thought they just made soft-core porn models? Is there a dearth of sexy models without complex legalities surrounding their usage on the Unity Asset store, Unreal marketplace, or turbosquid?

 

It's pretty much similar to UMA, although higher quality.. Well in terms of models not actually game ready models, it's actually an extremely cool tool for filling out scenes with background characters etc. and storyboards / load screen renders etc. etc.

Contains an absolute shed load of morphs and comes with face rigs etc. etc. it is probably one of the best character development solutions about. Well it would be not for the licenses, odd choices and lack of game ready content.. Still it can be far quicker than making your own stuff.

Character creation has to be one of the worst parts of development that you sink a hell of a lot of time, in one of the Unity keynotes they said it took them a month per character and think of how long it would take you to create 40+.. Yes of course you will share skeletons and use morph targets etc. etc. but one cannot deny again the massive time sink and to hire artists to fill a game world you'd be talking tens of thousands in some cases.

Personally, I don't think there's an ideal solution out there.. They all have too many drawbacks over going custom and DIY, we all learn the hard way though.

 

A month spent on a single character is like a cinematic quality, hero AAA character.

I'm a beginner and can finish a basic character that looks decent enough for throw-away NPC purposes in ten to fifteen hours. I'm sure an experienced professional, especially with a large kitbash library, could whip up unique NPC's in no time.

But for somebody who just needs a bunch of generic bodies quickly, I could see the value of a system like this. But I wouldn't make it out like the time spent designing custom characters for a game isn't worth the value. I mean, it depends on the game, but I doubt a game made mostly or entirely from auto-generated stuff like this would have much character to it.

 

I'm sure I said the best way to go is DIY, did I not? Well you still have to re-work them anyway to get them game ready, personally I strive for quality and less than a week would for a base char would never happen when we include hair meshes / clothes / textures / morphs (sizes) etc.

It does have a Z-brush bridge AFAIK so you can mould and shape the char to make it interesting.. At that point though you might as well just DIY .

Plus you got to remember, a lot of game makers aren't artists.

Also they need to be well designed for animations, never seen a kitbashing setup for humanoid characters work well.. What you'd generally do is have two skeletons and then design all the clothes and morphs around that single character for variation then when in the game engine all you do is change morphs / enable / disable meshes for variation. For decent quality it still takes months, but ultimatley at that point you have a starting point that will last forever.

That's what Daz was supposed to originally do and it used to be a cost effective solution when you could pick up the game license for like $130.00. Now with these interactive licenses it's not worth it, I'd rather pay someone X hundred a day..

I can make chars to a reasonable level, so it's not a massive issue although I've looked into many solutions to try and save time.

 

The license makes no sense for indie developers - way too confusing and, as others have posted, more expensive than hiring your own contractors. Which is why we dont see Daz content in games.

 

Well... not the kind you play...

 

As I read it and the following posts here, it does not stop use in games, only reselling derivatives of the original models, which most game developers are not doing (at least the ones I know). They sell games not models. Now if you charge a game user for a new character to use in the game, that could be an issue, but it doesn't seem like it to me.

I do not like how they individualize all the models, you can spend a lot of money on them like you did.

 

Good artists are expensive. It may look like a lot of money, and it may even be a lot of money to you, but it's a fraction of the cost of having a custom model made by an artist. Fortunately there is a solid open source solution available if you're unable to afford an artist or the cost of their art.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MakeHuman

 

The problem with Daz license isn't the bar that stops you to sell models, the problem that is bar you from selling/giving away for example physical copies of your final characters.
No kickstarter gift statues, no "premium" bundle, etc. Obviously if you aren't planning to do any of these, not even if your game (maybe series) becomes popular, then everything is fine, otherwise you will bleed money to Daz if you decide to do it anyways.

Oh man, I hate viral licenses... (I know, if you don't use the library part you're safe, but still)

 

So wait... This forum got confusing. Can you use the 3d models in 3d games without the interactive license? Or no you must have interactive license if it is a 3d game?

 

If you want an interactive product, you need an interactive license.

 

IMHO, the best part of open source software (and creative commons assets) isn't the price, but the licensing terms. I don't entirely mind the money, but when your company depends on a bunch of licenses that are subject to arbitrary change, with vague definitions and implied threats... it makes me feel gross and unsafe.

What are the alternatives to makehuman and daz3d? CharacterCreator? Morph3D? Any of them have attractive, understandable licensing terms?

 

Manuel Bastioni Lab with Blender 2.79. It is CC-BY.

Makehuman is not very usable, because developer are on crusade against perspective camera and insist that you're exporting data in certain way, it becomes GPL.( https://forum.unity.com/threads/makehuman-license.430943/ )

 

if you already have the models in hand, pay them what you think is fair and use the models however the hell you want. as long as you are making derivative work and not redistributing them verbatim, your product has value of its own that supersedes the value of it as a "daz model", you are protected under the fair use clause of the DMCA. they have no legal leg to stand on trying to charge YOU to use YOUR derivative work in YOUR game. think about the shoulders they are standing on, all the collective ideas and technological progress that were necessary for their derivative engine and content to exist... think they go around trying to hunt everyone up the chain and making sure catmull and clark both got a hefty cut from their softcore porn 3d models?

 

"How to get sued in a few simple steps."

 

This is complete and utter nonsense. Copyright of the basis of any derivative work belongs to the person who created the original, not the derivative; you dont get to own someone else's work just by changing it slightly.

That means you do not have the right to redistribute your derived work unless you have permission from the copyright holder of the original work.

US Law states : "The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material."

Clearly you've not even done basic research of your claims. The Fair Use clause of DMCA specifically states "Items considered Fair Use would be commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship."

 

Okay, as has been explained to me by Daz reps themselves, if you have the old license you're fine. The "interactive license" is for those of us that came onto the scene after they quit offering the old license. Under the old license you're grandfathered in. The addendum in the EULA isn't a retroactive "revocation/cancelation" of your old license. It's akin to me buying an asset while it's on sale and I have PC+, then if I cancel my PC+ they can't come back and say that I have to pay non-member price to continue using the asset as I have always used it under the terms of the license I purchased.