My position on the use of Open3DLab, within this and any other community.

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
⚠️  A Word on Open3DLab, SmutBase & 3D Asset Licensing
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

*for anyone wanting to use assets or get started in 3D*


───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
🧰  How I Handle Assets
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

I do use assets from online sources, but the legwork is frontloaded. I make sure
everything I grab is either Royalty Free or CC0, and any Blender addons I use are
GPL, MIT, or Royalty Free.

That way I don't need to maintain spreadsheets full of attribution tables,
especially given the size of my Blender Asset Browser.

Simply put: I avoid any CC licenses (CC-BY, CC-BY-NC, CC-BY-ND, etc.) entirely,
as they're too restrictive to use without constant worry.


───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
🚩  The Problem with Open3DLab & SmutBase
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

These communities take ZERO CARE when it comes to proper attribution or licensing.
That's exactly why I avoid them like the plague.

To make matters worse, even though each asset page has a "License" section, there's
no way to filter or search by license on the site. So if you wanted to only browse
CC0 or GPL assets, tough luck. You'd have to check every single page manually.

The time spent double-checking just isn't worth it, and here's the kicker: they
often entirely misattribute their assets. They treat porting someone else's model
as equivalent to having made the original, then slap on a CC-BY (or worse, ND/NC)
license demanding *they* be credited... while not even linking to the original source.

  Example:
  I once went down a rabbit hole trying to track down a DAZ3D model in the
  official shop, only to confirm that some guy on Open3DLab had ported it
  without ever linking the original. And technically, you need to *own* the
  original to be allowed to use a port.


───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
🔍  Case Study: The Fluid Painter NSFW Extension
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Link: https://smutba.se/project/91fca296-c230-459e-b745-00ae0fed1684/

Fluid Painter is a GPL-licensed addon sold on Superhive (formerly Blender Market).
Under the GPL, any derivative that contains even a few lines of the original code
is automatically subject to the same license.

Here's the irony: the NSFW extension was made by the same creator, yet they
licensed it under CC-BY instead of GPL. Whether this was an oversight or
intentional, it doesn't matter. Since the extension is a derivative of their own
GPL-licensed code, the GPL still applies. You do NOT need to adhere to the CC-BY
license. It's legally invalid.


───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
🔍  Case Study: DAZ3D "Barn Garage" Takedown
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Original DAZ3D Shop listing:
https://www.daz3d.com/barn-garage

Open3DLab posting (now taken down):
https://open3dlab.com/project/4f059471-4851-4c64-b314-7aa49ae98c53/

I reported this conversion to DAZ3D directly. A sales representative confirmed
that none of the DAZ licenses allow redistribution of converted models. They
reported the listing I flagged along with a selection of others.

The result: the Open3DLab page now shows a takedown notice, stating the content
was deleted through the Notice and Take Down (NTD) procedure in compliance with
the DMCA.

This is proof that reporting works. These aren't untouchable uploads. If the
original rights holder is made aware, they can and will act.


───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
📌  Where I Stand Going Forward
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

I have come to a decision. Henceforth, I will NOT collaborate with artists or
interact with people that knowingly use Scenes and Rips obtained via Open3DLab.

Keep in mind, O3DL does contain actual fully featured and truly publicly accessible
stuff. As in actual free 3D models, without legal concern.

I am drawing this line in the sand to preemptively distance myself from people that
misattribute using video game rips not for the sake of homage, but easy work and
easy money. In that same vein, I am distancing myself from people that just use it
to skip any form of effort.

If you have even the slightest amount of skill or passion, you can make great
scenes from just free assets, no payment even necessary.

I have reported and at least gotten one DAZ3D Conversion taken down from the site.
I encourage you to do the same. We are not talking about cracking the newest gaming
release of a multibillion dollar corporation here. These people take away the small
amount of money that freelancers in the 3D space would have ever made. And
sometimes, they profit from it themselves.


───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
📝  TL;DR
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

Take licenses seriously. Actually vet your stuff BEFORE you download it, so you
don't have to worry about it later.

People assume that sharing and being generous somehow absolves them of licensing
responsibilities. It doesn't. It's always on YOU to make sure you're not
downloading something that was made available illegally.

(And yes, sharing GPL-licensed products with friends or even republishing them is
legally fine. You're just morally questionable if you go beyond sending it to a
friend and essentially re-release someone's paid work for free.)

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
-Kilghardt k.h.