Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cronopio dentiacutus.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Cronopio dentiacutus.jpg[edit]

File is based on a purchasable 3D file from Renderosity https://www.renderosity.com/marketplace/products/92847/cronopiodr . The author of the file has asserted that they have purchased a right to use the file. Renderosity's license agreement https://www.renderosity.com/wiki/policies/standard-license states in the "ALLOWED USES OF THE STANDARD LICENSE" section that The Buyer may use the Product personally or commercially in the form of rendered images and the Buyer has not violated any other terms of the License. Examples of some allowable Buyer uses are: advertising, rendered images, marketing materials, website image, icons, logos, e-publications, illustrations, animations, greeting cards, stickers, mousepads, coffee mugs, t-shirts, 2D rendered images for games or backgrounds., but also states that The new work does not compete with the original Product and The new work is uniquely different from the original Product. and The Buyer shall not recreate the Product or convert to any other media format and re-distribute the files, regardless of whether it is for sale or free. I do not think that the Renderosity license agreement for the work is compatible with a CC-BY license for the image. Hemiauchenia (talk) 19:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Keep The license appears to prevent you redistributing the software or the original 3d file, not any still images of the manipulated 3d render. --RAN (talk) 21:23, 17 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Where's the proof that the license was paid for? I'm not saying that I don't think it was paid for, I just think that there's a need for UTRS proof. Also I don't see how releasing the image under a CC-BY license qualifies as "commerical use". Is a render on a white background "uniquely different" from the original product? It would seem to me that releasing a render like this would compete with the original product and thus fail the non-compete clause of the Renderosity license. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We don't ask people to prove they paid for Photoshop, or paid to use any newspaper archive to upload public domain news articles. I am assuming the original product is either the original software, or the original wireframe and skin. The result would be the product's output. --RAN (talk) 11:32, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Question Putting the question of copyright aside for a moment, is this even an educationally useful image? What's visible of the dentition in the rendered image doesn't seem consistent with what's shown in DOI: 10.1038/nature10591, and the rest of the body is highly speculative. Omphalographer (talk) 19:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It also exists as an example of the software. --RAN (talk) 11:45, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    What software? Renderosity is a 3D artwork marketplace, not a piece of software. Omphalographer (talk) 19:38, 20 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Delete The issue with model conventions by Dinoraul is honestly confusing and is probably best removed. One reason is that his models are often sold as paid stock images as licensed. Therefore, we believe that problems may arise not just with the model itself, but with its similarity to stock images. For this image, it would be too close to these stock photos.[1][2] If this image is allowed, it would be possible to create and upload your own image that is a copy of a stock image. Unfortunately, since he is deceased, we cannot contact him regarding the terms and conditions. Aside from that, I also agree that this model is inaccurate considering things like dentition. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 05:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Cronopio_dentiacutus.jpg&oldid=803492944"