Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 32

Thread: 3D model resell Question??

  1. #16
    Michael Nicholson zapper1998's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    spokane washington usa
    Posts
    4,663
    Blog Entries
    1
    ok thanks

    hmmmmmm

    I can add my name in a few places that would be hard to find...
    And I don't think the would look for my name in the model... Kewl idea yup

    price is going to $1200.00 usd..

    mike
    Intel Core i7-980, OC 4.7ghz water cooled.
    Gigabyte x58-UD3R with an Intell SSD 180GIG
    RamCorsair-DDR3-1600-32GIG
    Nvidia Titan Z, x 2 And 1 GTX-1080 by Gigabyte.
    4xEnterprise/WDVelociRaptorŪ300gig

  2. #17
    Super Member vncnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    1,570
    Quote Originally Posted by jwiede View Post
    Until the user converts it to OBJ or FBX or whatever and that metadata, which isn't supported by the other formats, is lost. Therein lies the problem, it's very difficult to ensure the metadata stays associated with the model in all cases, which is why having some kind of "in-band" signature is so important.
    Converting to a different file type is the same as "Save As" or "Export". Both actions can be disabled via meta data.
    Without internal key it's barely possible to decrypt the LWO file in another application.

  3. #18
    www.Digitawn.co.uk rustythe1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    england
    Posts
    1,216
    Quote Originally Posted by erikals View Post

    possibly. BMW hunts down their 3D models (yes, true story)
    yes boeing too, if you try to upload a model with the name boeing in it to Shapeways or turbosquid it rejects it and then asks you to contact them as you have to register for an official licence to sell their products.
    Intel i9 7980xe, Asus Rampage Vi extreme, 2x NVIDIA GTX1070ti, 64GB DDR4 3200 corsair vengeance,
    http://digitawn.co.uk https://www.shapeways.com/shops/digi...ction=Cars&s=0

  4. #19
    Man of many cells. shrox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Eureka, CA
    Posts
    6,962
    Quote Originally Posted by zapper1998 View Post
    ok thanks

    hmmmmmm

    I can add my name in a few places that would be hard to find...
    And I don't think the would look for my name in the model... Kewl idea yup

    price is going to $1200.00 usd..

    mike
    Don't assign a separate material to the hidden letters, or they'll be easy to find and remove.
    shrox www.shrox.com
    -----------------------
    Heavy Metal Landing


    -----------------------
    I build the best spaceships, the biggest spaceships, they're great, you'll love them.

  5. #20
    Axes grinder- Dongle #99
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    14,729
    Quote Originally Posted by vncnt View Post
    Converting to a different file type is the same as "Save As" or "Export". Both actions can be disabled via meta data.
    Without internal key it's barely possible to decrypt the LWO file in another application.
    ?? Are you saying metadata can PREVENT copying, or that meta data gets erased by copying?

    Anyway, saving in GEOMETRY seems more secure anyway, and as shrox points out (though it seems obvious) don't give it "Signature.surf". I think jweide's "unique mesh config" is the most secure, as it can ONLY be read by the originator.
    They only call it 'class warfare' when we fight back.
    Praise to Buddha! #resist
    Chard's Credo-"Documentation is PART of the Interface"
    Film the cops. Always FILM THE COPS. Use this app.

  6. #21
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    426
    Perhaps not metadata, but a blockchain registration?

    Take a look at these and see what you think.

    https://www.licens3d.com/

    https://www.ipchaindatabase.com/

    With blockchain, you can create a historic record of your model, even down to the code, that is immutable. In that way, its provenance can be proven to code.

    It's still early in the development of advanced protections for 3d IP, but this may be a worthy consideration.

    I actually just sent an email to Turbosquid legal to see what their stance on this would be. I will update with their response (if any).

    The other consideration is to include your contract with the purchaser stipulating the exact use of the model and providing you with indeminification in the event that the model is modified, released, or resold.

    Also, make sure that no one else has any potential right to your work. That may mean getting a legal release from Manitowoc. That can be something as simple as an email stating that you created a 3d model of their crane and do they have any issues with you selling the model. If they reply in the affirmative, include that in the blockchain database as well.

    If you include all of that pertinent information in the blockchain, you are about as secure as you can get.

  7. #22
    Michael Nicholson zapper1998's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    spokane washington usa
    Posts
    4,663
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by RPSchmidt View Post
    Perhaps not metadata, but a blockchain registration?

    Take a look at these and see what you think.

    https://www.licens3d.com/

    https://www.ipchaindatabase.com/
    Thanks for the info

    All the models are LWO and LWS format do those support that format
    I read the info just could not see what software programs other than Cad stuff supported
    interesting.

    Mike
    Intel Core i7-980, OC 4.7ghz water cooled.
    Gigabyte x58-UD3R with an Intell SSD 180GIG
    RamCorsair-DDR3-1600-32GIG
    Nvidia Titan Z, x 2 And 1 GTX-1080 by Gigabyte.
    4xEnterprise/WDVelociRaptorŪ300gig

  8. #23
    A.K.A "The Silver Fox" Gungho3D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Oztralia
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by zapper1998 View Post
    What do i need to do so they will not resell or redistribute the model?
    Yeah valid question.

    To my mind, creating a model for someone else is similar to writing source code and handing it over to a client - that's the basic framework. The one extra layer you have with writing code is that you may only be contracted to develop an application, which you then pass on to the client as a compiled set of files which they install on their machines ... if that's what you've agreed to contractually (yep, been there, done that).

    However, having the option to "lock" your model or 3D assets away from being copied / modded / resold etc is not, to my mind, available to us in any meaningful sense ...
    ... and hence, from the get-go, you should be thinking this through clearly and quoting an end price accordingly.

    E.g. some clients may want you to create a series of 3D assets, for which they wish to retain full IP control (meaning that you are barred from re-selling/re-using the supplied assets in any way). If that is the case, my suggestion is don't just charge for your "time" only - factor in the ongoing value (to the client) of what you are being asked to create and supply. Bottom line is: in such a case you are being asked to "renounce" any further profitable use of what you have just invested heaps of effort in, so charge accordingly.

    However, however ... you may be able to work out an agreement with future clients regarding what they allow you to do with the 3D assets you are creating after final delivery. In this case, also before you slap down the very first polygon (ok, maybe I should say "your first sub-d surface"), have it clear in your mind in real world terms as to the potential extended value (i.e further sales / re-use) of what you are being asked to create and supply - meaning, the job may be so niche that, realistically, you may never be able to re-sell / re-use your creation. Or, the job is so sweet that you are going to make a million bucks as every man and his dog flocks to your site begging to throw money at you and your product. The point is: quote an end price with the wisdom of foresight.

    Ok, so there is one final thing: you may simply enjoy the focus of a project, some real world application of skill and craftsmanship, and the $$ aspect may be secondary. In that case have a blast, don't get too stressed, and rack it up as a means for increasing your portfolio ...

  9. #24
    Super Member vncnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    1,570
    Quote Originally Posted by jeric_synergy View Post
    ?? Are you saying metadata can PREVENT copying, or that meta data gets erased by copying?

    Anyway, saving in GEOMETRY seems more secure anyway, and as shrox points out (though it seems obvious) don't give it "Signature.surf". I think jweide's "unique mesh config" is the most secure, as it can ONLY be read by the originator.
    No. The metadata itself cannot prevent copying.
    Only Lightwave can prevent copying an encrypted LWO file to a different file format and/or copy it to the clipboard, based on an list of trusted dongle idīs (or s/w equivalent) and their permissions inside the encrypted LWO file.
    The permissions can be granted or refused in Modeler, Layout, and ScreamerNet.

    "New users" who are unable to open the object can register their dongle id for the object by e-mail. After payment you could send them their personal key that works only with their dongle id, and enables them to update the permissions list in the LWO file.

    I consider the permissions list as (encrypted) metadata but you could also add contact info, an owner signature, an image, a low-resolution preview 3D model, historical usage, etc.

    The metadata is simply a datablock, somewhere in the LWO file, that has no other functional meaning to the 3D object.

    Modifying the LWO file with a text editor is useless.
    A simple file copy (by the OS) is still possible but you would need a listed dongle id to use the LWO file in Lightwave.

    The only disadvantage is that you canīt use the encrypted LWO file in other applications unless the system is open to other vendors.

    Newtek could set an interesting new standard here.

  10. #25
    Man of many cells. shrox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Eureka, CA
    Posts
    6,962
    Could simply copy and paste from one LW modeler window to another defeat any copy protections?
    shrox www.shrox.com
    -----------------------
    Heavy Metal Landing


    -----------------------
    I build the best spaceships, the biggest spaceships, they're great, you'll love them.

  11. #26
    Michael Nicholson zapper1998's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    spokane washington usa
    Posts
    4,663
    Blog Entries
    1
    wow
    hmmmmmm
    thanks
    Intel Core i7-980, OC 4.7ghz water cooled.
    Gigabyte x58-UD3R with an Intell SSD 180GIG
    RamCorsair-DDR3-1600-32GIG
    Nvidia Titan Z, x 2 And 1 GTX-1080 by Gigabyte.
    4xEnterprise/WDVelociRaptorŪ300gig

  12. #27
    Super Member vncnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    1,570
    It depends on the implementation.

    Newtek could disable the Copy command in Modeler, based on permissions.
    If permissions allow Copy/Paste but the target application does not support the new LWO format (incl. Encryption and protection management) then Paste could not continue because of incompatible formats.

    Older versions of Lightwave will never recognize newer versions of LWO files.

  13. #28
    Founding member raymondtrace's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    838
    The discussion of DRM 3D object files seems pretty futile in a world where we don't even have reasonable DRM for 2D image files. I haven't touched either in years: do Maya & Max have this ability? The protection of 3D object file data seems contrary to the greater need of interoperability. In the proposed scenario, users may be prone to copy/export the data to another format that is not restricted.

    The idea of including traces within the geometry requires the expense of vigilance on 3D marketplaces that might pirate your work. Do you make more money by creating more models or by monitoring the few models you've already published? And how do you prove ownership with the identifying "bug" in the geometry if your stolen model is only presented as a render?

    There is already a "Commentary Text" portion of the LWO format (LWO3, LWO2), which could allow the inclusion of metadata like author and license info. A mildly-clever developer could create a plugin that reads/writes author information to this area. While it wouldn't offer any secured usage, it would be a good step toward communicating usage rights. Most copyright abuse is likely due to ignorance. I'm sure I'm not alone in struggling to distinguish the acquired models in my library that I can use for royalty-free commercial work and those that I can only use for personal experimentation.

    Quote Originally Posted by zapper1998 View Post
    Is there anything i can do?
    Not really, beyond specifying the license and consequences for violation.
    LW7.5D, 2015, 2018, 2019 running portably on a USB drive on an Amiga 2500 running Wine.

  14. #29
    Super Member vncnt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    1,570
    Quote Originally Posted by raymondtrace View Post
    The discussion of DRM 3D object files seems pretty futile in a world where we don't even have reasonable DRM for 2D image files.
    2D image files are totaly different from 3D formats. You canīt simply PrintScreen your 3D model to Copy/Paste the model. Even if users would be able to directly access GPU memory, there are many ways to mark or criple the 3D objects in GPU memory.

    Newtek owns the format of LWO and owns the native application that produces/uses it. That could make some issues slightly easier to solve. Other applications will not be able to bypass the encryption easily if the decryption key is private and requires a dongle id.

    Quote Originally Posted by raymondtrace View Post
    I haven't touched either in years: do Maya & Max have this ability? The protection of 3D object file data seems contrary to the greater need of interoperability.
    Thatīs why itīs better to have a widely accepted method.

    Being the first to offer DRM may sound like suicide but Iīm sure many companies would be interested to protect their assets in a similar way.

    Quote Originally Posted by raymondtrace View Post
    In the proposed scenario, users may be prone to copy/export the data to another format that is not restricted.
    Any appliciation is able to disable their support for Copy/Paste so copy/export/render/re-rig can be safely restricted by the application that is able to decrypt the LWO file.
    Even when export is allowed, Lightwave could still add hidden markers to the exported file in a similar way phase shifting is sometimes added to music on YouTube.

    If export is absolutely needed, the 3D industry should recognize the need to cooperate and protect 3D content to a certain degree and make DRM available for many more formats.

    The 3D software that supports DRM could improve interest.

  15. #30
    Electron wrangler jwiede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    6,493
    I'll just say I think you're underestimating the internal Lightwave changes needed, both in implementing such a system, and in comprehensively modifying all relevant code to ensure the permissions are followed (which is a huge undertaking, there's not really existing abstraction of access control in the manner needed).

    What you're suggesting would require modification of a significant percentage of existing Lightwave app code (read as: serious risk of introducing bugs), as well as serious changes to many SDK APIs. Such PKI-based schemes also implicitly require notable attestation and revocation infrastructure, requiring more development/testing/etc. (difficult to do properly without security development expertise) as well as ongoing support and maintenance efforts.

    Could it be done? Absolutely. Is any RoI likely to offset the risk and effort required? I suspect not.
    Last edited by jwiede; 07-03-2018 at 03:36 PM.
    John W.
    LW2015.3UB/2018.0.7 on MacPro(12C/24T/10.13.6),32GB RAM, NV 980ti

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •