Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
MMD Galaco - No Edit by Trackdancer



Someone (Ryukrieger) sent me a note about the ongoing controversy within the MMD community about the 'DO NOT EDIT' topic. The correspondent wanted to know what my views were and I thought about it and since it's been awhile since I've written an editorial article for MMD, I felt this was a subject matter worth discussing in more detail.

First off, I need to make it perfectly clear that I am usually a proponent of the 'DO NOT EDIT' rule. Most of my own work prohibits editing except for where special exceptions are made. My reasoning here is mainly because most of my work is original, are stages and in the final analysis, my thinking is that stages work like costume. Just find one that's suitable for your project and get on with it, don't be changing what I have put on offer. Still, I've seen bits and pieces of my stage components used in conjunction with other peoples' bits and pieces and in principle, I'm fine with this practice.

But the main 'hot area' with regards to the 'DO NOT EDIT' rule evolves around edits of existing character models. The main contention here falls into primarily two points of view:

1/. There are those that argue that model editors should not impose 'DO NOT EDIT' rules on work/models that are permissible to edit per the outlines of the original modeler.

2/. The other side of the argument is that an edit is a 'unique' work or interpretation and should be left alone 'as is'. If you don't like it or prefer some other change, then go do your own version.

My personal inclination is solidly inline with argument '2' above. The reason for this is that if I am going to download and use a model in the first place, the number one consideration is how the model (original or edit) looks in the first place. In other words, it is the ascetics of the work which is the prime consideration.

However, like probably everyone involved with MMD, I do have a certain number of models that I've purely collected because of the way they look, but I will never use for a variety of reasons. Some of these models are design-wise way out in left field or are too complex for ease of use, but they do make excellent collector's items and are just wonderful additions to a MMD model collection.

I'll like to add also that as regards the 'DO NOT EDIT' rule, if I am going to use a model on a regular basis, I will most likely edit the model's function but will respect the restriction in terms of not changing the way the model looks. And this makes sense. People do want to see their models used and no two (serious) users of models will do things the same way.

My contention is that the 'DO NOT EDIT' rule primarily governs the ascetics of the model rather than its functionality. People apply the rule, as I understand it, for three primary reasons:

1/. They really do not want people to modify the edit's ascetics.

2/. They really do not want people to make some minor modifications to the edit and then turn around and offer that version up as a model download.

3/. They really don't want people cribbing parts off the model. Most of these parts can usually be found in one of the library of parts that floats around the MMD group galleries or elsewhere in some repository somewhere on the Internet. Therefore, if you want the parts, go get it from the source. Also, some parts are original works which the editor wants to retain for exclusive use with the edited version. Even with original models, there are restrictions on parts similar to this. A good example is the hi-tech belt gear on Tda Append Miku which he does not allow to be used as a part on other models.

I feel that these are all valid reasons for imposing a 'DO NOT EDIT' restriction and legally they are within their right to do so where this does not conflict with the rights of the original modeler. And this is a tricky one which some people may have a hard time wrapping their heads around so let me explain it in a little more detail.

Let us start with an original model which permits editing. The default Animasa Miku model is a clear cut example as it has no restrictions on editing. So someone uses that model as the basis to create another model. In MMD terms that is an 'Edit'. So this person then offers their edit as a download to share with the community and then slaps a 'DO NOT EDIT' rule on the model.

Can they do this even though the original model was free to edit? The short answer is 'YES'. What the editor is saying is that you cannot edit the edit and this is perfectly legal.

The counter argument which is made by some is that since the original model was editable then the edit, at least in the spirit of sharing, should be editable too.

Nope, sorry I don't subscribe to this view at all. Just because the original is editable it doesn't automatically follow that a derivative should also be editable. The derivative work is an 'original interpretation' and if the editor wishes that the edit not be edited, they have every right morally and legally to impose the restriction. And if you follow the logic through it actually makes sense. Apart from anything else, why edit an edit, (except for functionality which doesn't change the ascetics at all)?

Most edits are made from existing parts. If someone wants a different version they can go through the same steps to recreate something similar. And this is perfectly permissible. Take my version of Chibi Gumi for example (fav.me/d5qqazt). It is based off Mamama's original model of Gumi Megpoid. YamiSweet  made a version based off the same original as has at least two other people including Mamama himself if my memory serves me correctly. Each chibi model used as its basis, the same base model, but each one is slightly different from the other edits.

But you know what? On my version there is essentially a 'DO NOT EDIT' restriction (although I didn't actually use that term). The reason is simple enough. If you don't like my version, go ahead and make your own 'dang' version as seriously, it is not hard with a conversion of this type.

But I don't really do much in terms of editing models. Like I've said many times, it's not really my thing and besides which there are many excellent edits made by others who do superb work with this type of modeling. A prime example of one of these models that I've essentially adopted into my stable of regular characters is the Tda-style edit of Galaco by nomiiie. But guess what? That model (shown in the illustration heading this article) is covered by a 'DO NOT EDIT' rule which essentially I have fully respected. The only alterations I've made to my copy are purely functional but the edit's design and ascetics have remained unchanged. After all, I use the model because I like the way it looks, so why would I want to change its appearance?

In actual fact, there are three versions of that Galaco edit on my hard drive. The original release version that I have preserved for my records. The version I regularly use which has customized functionality (minor changes to the bone system) and a version which has had all of the skirt physics removed as in some applications the dress physics puts too much of a drain on my system resources. But all three versions look identical. Like I stated above, why would I change the way the model looks? After all, I use it because I like the way the model looks. If nomiiie  has had issue with me changing the edit's functional aspects, she has yet to make her thoughts known to me. But herein, it is a fairly standard practice for modelers and editors to permit functional edits by users for private use.

Yes sometimes you will see this version of Galaco as used by me with a shiny dress material. That's done using MME effects and not through any editing. But the basic principle here is I have adhered in good faith to nomiiie's restriction on not editing the model's ascetics. Regardless of the effects that I may apply to the model, it is recognizable instantly as her interpretation of Galaco which I kept faithfully to. But what if I wanted her to have a pink dress for example? Well, first off, I would not edit the model in this manner without asking nomiiie first. And if she was agreeable fine, but if she is not, I would fully respect that too.

Does that make sense?

But revisiting the last point again, if she did state 'NO', I would have absolutely no issues with that because I respect the amount of work that she put into make her interpretation and if for some reason she was against the idea of creating a variation of this edit in a pink dress, I would fully respect that. But note especially that in the instance where I would want to edit a "DO NOT EDIT' model in a manner that changes the edit's appearance, I would at least have taken the step to ask for permission first and to accept and abide by whatever decision the modeler or editor decides.

Now the other side of the argument is that the original base for the Galaco model is by Tda and he permits editing of his original work within the guidelines as outlined in his readme.txt. Doesn't he need to be consulted in this equation? After all, if he permits editing, should this not pass on to subsequent edits of his original?

This is worth looking into to clarify the discussion going on here but to fully understand the process here let's look at Tda's original stipulations which I am replicating verbatim below:

Reminder: This summary English translation is for reference. Should any conflicts arise, the original Japanese Terms of Service shall take precedence over English Terms of Service.

For more details, refer to the original Japanese text.

Terms of Service and Disclaimer
The overall design of this 3DCG model is based on the character Hatsune Miku Append of Crypton Future Media Inc. This model is created under Piapro Character License.

Here is Piapro Character License. piapro.jp/license/pcl/summary
  • Use this model within the limit of Piapro Character License and this Terms of Service.
  • You may not use this model if you don't agree to Piapro Character License and this Terms of Service.
  • Tda shall not be responsible for any damage and loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with using this model.
  • The latest version shall take precedence if this Terms of Service is revised.
  • When using this model for commercial purposes, you shall obtain prior permission from Crypton Future Media Inc., the copyright holder of Hatsune Miku, and then contact Tda.
  • Editing this model for your videos and pictures is allowed within the limit of the conditions below. You don't have to obtain prior permission from Tda.

1. Do not ruin the feature and image of Tda style. The edited model(s) shall be clearly recognized as Tda-styled model(s).
2. Remove the logo CRYPTON on the anklet, or replace it with the body00_MikuAp.tga file in the (Japanese Text) folder.
3. When distributing edited model(s), attach both the original Japanese Terms of Service and this English Terms of Service, credit the original name of this model Type Tda Hatsune Miku Append, the original creator Tda and editor(s).

Prohibitions
1. Redistributing the unprocessed original model. Trading the original model is also forbidden.
2. Editing this model into naked or base model(s).
3. Removing any part(s) of this model, regardless of in the original form or edited form, and attaching it/them to other model(s) to create and/or edit the model(s) that is/are not Tda-styled. (e.g. attaching Tda Mikufs pigtail(s) and/or waist gear to other model(s).)
The only exception is the minimum edit for a video or a picture in which Tda Append Miku plays the main role, but distributing the edited model(s) under this exception is forbidden.
4. Removing any part(s) from non-editable model(s) and attaching it/them to this model.

Revised on May 30, 2013. 

 

 

Please note especially the term below and keep this in mind:

  • Editing this model for your videos and pictures is allowed within the limit of the conditions below. You don't have to obtain prior permission from Tda.

Also note that nomiiie's Tda style edit of Galaco is inline with the conditions outlined above (as I understand how it is written).


Now here are nomiiie's rules from her readme.txt also reproduced verbatim:

Galaco Ver. 1.2 by xNomChu (6/8/13)

Rules:
Do not edit
Do not redistribute
Credit xNomChu
Do not claim as your own

Credits:
TDA, ChieTheBekon,
Sowlow, MMDFakewings18,
Artemis129, Jin, Amiamy111,
xNomChu, Creinie

All parts are fully legal

Galaco belongs to Internet Co.
Model belongs to me


Note the 'DO NOT EDIT' rule especially. Note also that because she is not the original modeler, her rules cannot supersede some of the rules of the original copyright owner. In other words, wherein she can enforce her will with regards to changing her edit's appearance/ascetics, she cannot stop someone (like me) from editing the model's functionality as this was permissible under the original modeler's rules. Does this make sense? If not, please allow me to clarify:

1/. I cannot alter Galaco's appearance because this is nomiiie's work over which as applicable to this particular model she has full jurisdiction.
2/. I can alter Galaco's functionality as the basic foundation for those are inherently a characteristic of the base of the model which is still firmly within Tda's jurisdiction. Unless nomiiie completely re-rigged or re-did the model's core foundation (ie. weighting and bone system), Tda's original permissions still apply.

When you think about this whole 'DO NOT EDIT' argument, my opinion is that a lot of people have the view that the work of model editors are of less worth that the work of original modelers. This kind of thinking leads to the silly argument that since the original modeler permits editing, 'who the heck are you to restrict the editing of an edit'?

People really need to stop thinking like this.

Sure there are a lot of crappy edits to be found in the DA galleries, but by the same token, there are many REALLY GOOD ones. A small handful of these have found a niche in my own staple of characters and others are key components in my own collection or have been put on my 'to do something meaningful with at some point' list. Regardless of the quality of these works, they do represent considerable effort and creative energy expenditure by the editors responsible for their creation.

How is that the activities of dedicated model editors less than the efforts of the original modeler?

Good quality edits are as hard to come by as good quality original models, perhaps more so as there are some real technical hurdles involved in the process of adapting one model design into something else successfully. Model editors should not be regarded as merely the 'poorer cousin' in the overall equation. Without their active contributions, we would not have the wide range of models available and God only knows that we need more model choices for MMD, not less.

So if a model editor puts a simple 'DO NOT EDIT' rule on their work, why is it so difficult for some people to respect this? By what measure is their contribution less than that of the original modeler? Just look at the wide range of Tda-style or Lat-style models available. Tda made one model - Miku Append. Others, specifically model editors, have taken that single model as a basis to create a virtual universe of Miku variants and other character models based on the style. No matter how talented Tda is, he has got a life outside of MMD. If it was not for the contributions of model editors, both from Japan and elsewhere, there would not be the wide range of excellent Tda-style character and model choices that we all enjoy today.

My nomiiie Tda-style version of Galaco would not have been made possible except for the fact that a 'model editor' took the time out of her life to create her. Does this make her work any less important than the contribution made by Tda? I think not.

This is the whole key to this argument. People really need to think more about what model editors really bring to the MMD table. Honestly, I am sick to my teeth of arguments that models shouldn't be edited because they are 'frankensteining' something else or that edits are "second rate efforts by modeler wannabes". It takes a certain level of training, knowledge and skill (as well as, in general, some rather expensive software) to create original character models. At the same time it also takes a certain level of skill, knowledge and dedication to transform an original character model into something else.

The whole thing about MMD is that it is made possible by the contribution in terms of time, talent and effort by many different people. No one, not even the likes of Tda, is an island within this community. Yes, it can be argued that Tda (purely by way of example) is an 'important' contributor to the community. After all if it was not for his original work and the permissions that he has given to others to adapt his work that we have an entire range of Tda-style models to choose from and most are of excellent quality.

Now look at the other side of the argument. What happened to those original modelers who do not allow their work to be edited? I will not name any names here, but suffice to say, the modelers with the most restrictions on their work (or who have thrown the most 'sissy' fits when their work is edited) have essentially fallen off the mainstream of the MMD current.

By no means am I arguing for a free-for-all attitude when it comes to editing models. Original modelers and editors do have their rules. There isn't necessarily a common consensus either nor does there need to be. We just have to understand what each individual modeler's or editor's restrictions are with regards to their work, and if we value their work at all, the least we can do is to respect their restrictions. After all, they really are not asking for a lot are they?

On the other side of the coin, there are model editors who do allow their edits to be edited. Some like Xoriu  openly encourages the practice with her works which is fine because she's coming from this argument from another angle. So by no means is the 'DO NOT EDIT' rule universal even amongst model editors themselves.

Personally, I am a little leary of this policy from a legal standpoint as this open ended editing policy can lead to legal mischief and misunderstanding of permissions. We do need to bear in mind that editing of original models is done by consent of the original modelers but also that there may be restrictions stated openly or merely implied that could lead to nasty situations between various parts of the MMD community. All you have to do is to look at Tda's readme.txt as shown above and the more astute reader would have noticed the addition of this line under prohibitions:

    2. Editing this model into naked or base model(s).

Some people did take it upon themselves to create Tda-style bases which was against the original modeler's intent and expressed permissions. All you have to do is read point 3 more carefully to see that this is already implicit in his restrictions, but unfortunately some people do not seem to be able to understand the English version of the restrictions, nevermind about the Japanese. So Tda ended up having to amend his readme.txt and clarify his intent specifically for the less astute.

In any case, please let me spell it out in case anyone still doesn't understand the nature of Tda's permissions:

Specifically, he permits variations/edits of Tda Miku Append, including altering the model to represent other characters so long as the editor adheres to his conditions. He does not allow, and never did allow for the model to be used for parts. Creating a base model using the Tda Miku Append model as the foundation of the base model is in direct contravention of his permissions. So subsequently the base and any model edit using these bases are against his permissions and can be regarded legally as a breach of his copyrights.

Does that make sense?

This fundamental misunderstanding of his permission has lead to a series of conflicts between some segments of the Japanese MMDC and their Overseas compatriots. A rather unfortunate state of affairs which could have been avoided if people did fully understand how far they could go when editing his model. Clearly (or perhaps not so clearly) his original intent was to allow for variants to be made from the original, not for the model to be converted into what essentially was a general purpose part for other builds.

Now some people have actually used the original Tda Miku Append and re-edited it in a manner to make it possible to create other characters in a manner that would seem to be in direct contravention of what I just stated above. Classic examples being the Tda-styled Teto and Neru models. So how did they get away with it? Simple - they contacted Tda and got his special permission and active support for their projects. This goes back to something I keep harping on with regards to permissions. If in doubt, contact the original modeler and seek their expressed permissions. Honestly, MMD modelers are in general nice people. The worse that could happen is that they say "NO". More often, you may find that they will at the very least, listen to your reasonable requests or proposals.

It does sadden me to see the conflict between segments of the Japanese MMDC and the DA MMDC over the editing of the Tda Miku Append model. It is something that has hit negatively at least two well known members of the DA MMDC both of whom are amongst those few people who are on my DA friends list. However, I am not going to take sides in that controversy. Suffice to say, a lot of the misunderstanding could have been avoided if people took the time to fully understand the implicit intent and permissions as outlined in Tda's readme.txt. Granted, that it is not the easiest document to read and fully understand but one doesn't need to be a lawyer or even need to have a "full understanding of the Japanese language" to comprehend the exact nature of what is and is not permitted with the Tda Miku Append model.

There's nothing unusual here. Those of you who have been reading the detailed journals by Digitrevx on the process of creating his latest BRS model should have a clear understanding about the amount of real work that goes into the creation of an entirely original character model for MMD. I build stages and honestly, I can knock one out in about a day or two without breaking a sweat. But the effort he puts into creating his work requires real effort. This is no different for him or Tda or any of the other modelers who create original character models from scratch. So they have every right to impose restrictions on what they allow to be done in terms of editing of their work and we have the responsibility to understand and respect those restrictions.

By the same token, responsible model editors, both within the Japanese MMDC as well as here on DA, expend a lot of effort on their work. I've followed several of them through the progress of their projects and know how much real effort they actually needed to put into their work. Yes, in a sense their projects were easier but that does not diminish the amount of time, effort and dedication that they put in to creating something wonderful at the end of their efforts. Honestly, I don't have the time, patience or know-how to create character models from scratch. I also don't have the patience to mess with the PMD editor for hours creating edits, but I fully understand the amount of time and effort which both original modelers and model editors need to put in to their work. Yes, there are difference, but they do bring different but equally important skills to the MMD table and both parties, in my book, have their role in the MMD community as a whole.

So if an original modeler or model editor states in their documentation 'DO NOT EDIT', before you shoot off your mouth at them, just think for one moment about the amount of work and effort that they put into their work, original or variant, in order to add yet another resource into the common MMD pool. Honestly, they really are not asking for a lot. All they really want is just a little bit of respect for their efforts, and if you cannot respect that, well then may be you have a problem and not them?

Anyway, thanks for reading and as always the opinions expressed herein are purely mine and are worth exactly 2 cents.


Cheers.



Afterwords: Please do not post comments asking me to interpret the permissions as outlined by other modelers and editors. I am a spokesman for nobody. If you need clarifications on permissions, please contact directly the parties concerned. In this day and age, with easy access to applications like Google Translate, even the language barrier should be no hurdle. And if in doubt, don't guess - seek clarification.


Add a Comment:
 
:icon2234083174:
2234083174 Featured By Owner Apr 24, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
i truely respect what you say :)
you have made some really good points
whats your veiws on mmd models that cost money(like the windows 100% models) and people doing commissions(ones that do it using parts from other models and not made from scratch)
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 25, 2015
Windows100% and most payware models are editable for private use so there's no issue on editing those models if you paid for one.

Commissions for models using other people's parts is actually illegal (copyright infringement at the very least) as most if not all parts/models made for MMD are issued with non-commercial use restrictions. So people who make edited models for others who want selfie models of themselves for commission are actually breaking the Law. Likewise, even making pictures for commission using non-commercial restricted models (and these include background models like stages and skydomes) is also illegal.
Reply
:icon2234083174:
2234083174 Featured By Owner Apr 25, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
ok thanks
i agree with what you say
Reply
:icongumicandy:
GumiCandy Featured By Owner Sep 14, 2014
Alright, but would it be a valid rule if say, I put together a model edit, allowed editing but then do not allow people to put the 'do not edit' rule on my edit if they happen to edit?
Just asking because you seem to know what you're talking about. ^^;
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2014
Yes you can. The concept under the Creative Commons language is "SHARE ALIKE". ie. Share your version (edit) under the same conditions as the original version (or edit).
Reply
:iconepicjonny155:
epicjonny155 Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2014
SSSOOOO the "do not edit" rule must exist?
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2014
Yes. If that's what the content creator wishes.
Reply
:iconblakejx:
BlakeJX Featured By Owner May 22, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Okay, so I've opened this page for a month now and haven't read it, finally got through to reading it.
Anyways, I find the lack of reading practice is also a hindrance. Much like discussed before, many people DO NOT read rules or even descriptions currently, which contributes to people editing models labelled DO NOT EDIT. Which came to me that, if they don't even read a description in the download section, they most probably wouldn't bother to open the readme.txt file.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner May 23, 2014
It took you a month to read this ... you have my sympathies. :D

I know for a fact that many people don't read the readme.txt which is why I package my stages with comic book style instruction sheets and even then there is a percentage who don't read those.
Reply
:iconepicjonny155:
epicjonny155 Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2014
"However, I am not going to take sides in that controversy." 

whats that suppose to mean?
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2014
It means that: "I am not going to take sides in that controversy". :)
Reply
:iconepicjonny155:
epicjonny155 Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2014
so it means your not against the do not edit rule.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2014
I'm not against it at all. In point of fact, most of my models are of the 'edit only for private use' variety.
Reply
:iconepicjonny155:
epicjonny155 Featured By Owner Jul 19, 2014
ok thanks.
Reply
:iconmmdanimatio357:
MMDAnimatio357 Featured By Owner May 17, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I agree with you!
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner May 19, 2014
Agreeing with me, according to some, may not be a desirable trait. ;)
Reply
:icondamesukekun:
damesukekun Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
Okay, let me clear some points.

The confusion comes from the mind gap between Japanese and overseas MMD users.

Tda didn't anticipate at all that overseas MMDers would distribute base edits or parts taken off from his model, so he missed to clearly forbid these kinds of edits.

In Japan, we rarely have base edits or parts-taking-off edits. People who distribute such edits get many thumbs-down as thieves. Model creators or editors are expected to make their own models or edits from scratch. Redistributing other people's models with slight edits is a big no-no in Japanese MMD communities.

As you mentioned, lots of efforts and time are behind each model. Model creators spend some months - sometimes a year or more - to make their models. Some of them are unhappy to see people being negligent to the efforts they spent. They feel frankensteining, base editing or taking off parts are open disrespect to them.

Not a few Japanese MMDers are computer programmers, illustrators or video game designers. As professionals they show respects one another. Most overseas MMDers, on the other hand, are teenagers who think they are free online and that online contents are free. Maybe I should say the conflict between Japanese and overseas MMD communities comes from cultural AND generation gap.
Reply
:icondigitrevx:
Digitrevx Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2014
The last part of damesukekun's response pretty much sums up my observations as well. Western MMD users seem to be a very young generation. Its impressive such young people can even mess with 3d but at the same time they haven't the same understanding or respect for the amount of work it takes. I get asked all the time to do random models because of the simple fact they just don't understand the time investment. So like you I believe its part cultural and big part maturity.

However I've noticed a few cases where R-miku's head has been replaced on nico. For me since they are tasteful edits I can accept it. But it does go to show no country is perfect but in general Japan seems to be more respectful. ^^
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
Okay, let me clear some points.
Actually, I was hoping to hear from you as you seem to be a spokesperson for at least one part of the Japanese MMDC and that's great as we really do need better lines of communications.

The confusion comes from the mind gap between Japanese and overseas MMD users.
I can appreciate that, never mind about Japan and the Overseas community - even in this country (USA), people's thought process can be hugely different from coast-to-coast.

Tda didn't anticipate at all that overseas MMDers would distribute base edits or parts taken off from his model, so he missed to clearly forbid these kinds of edits.
I gathered from the amended version of his readme.txt that this was probably the case, but as I stated above, this was already implicit in his original text. It is just that people failed to fully understand the intent and scope of his original readme.txt. (This is not a criticism. Just a comment).

In Japan, we rarely have base edits or parts-taking-off edits. People who distribute such edits get many thumbs-down as thieves. Model creators or editors are expected to make their own models or edits from scratch. Redistributing other people's models with slight edits is a big no-no in Japanese MMD communities.
Personally, I am not a big fan of taking parts off existing models. If you look on Bowlroll.net, there is a huge repository of parts that were specially made for adding to models. Re-distributing other people's models with only slight edits is a big no-no even outside of Japan. But the issue here is that 'Overseas' we do have a much younger audience involved in MMD than in Japan and for some, the ability to be a able to re-color (for example) a model is a huge first accomplishment.

This is a question of education. We need to consider the legitimate need for 'children' to learn what are possibly valuable technical skills and at the same time to bear in mind that 'children' outside of Japan do not in general have the same type of training in etiquette that is in-grained into Japanese (or many other Asian) children from an early age. As adults, whether we are from Japan or elsewhere we need to encourage one whilst at the same time educating about the other. And discussions like this one is an important part of this process.

Speaking as an American parent, I want my children and the 'children' here on DA to have the freedom to explore new technologies, especially here on the Internet. This is 'their' world or will be a fundamental part in their future, but by the same token, they do need to understand what is 'good behavior' and to factor in the considerations of cultures outside of their own.

As you mentioned, lots of efforts and time are behind each model. Model creators spend some months - sometimes a year or more - to make their models. Some of them are unhappy to see people being negligent to the efforts they spent. They feel frankensteining, base editing or taking off parts are open disrespect to them.

No one is arguing against any of these points - these are all understood BUT I do not like the use of the term 'frankensteining'. It is not conducive to a good discussion on the subject of editing models. Please factor the following into your consideration.

Probably the majority of MMDers or at least a huge segment of the Overseas MMDC are teenage girls. Their interest and focus in MMD may not conform to the 'norm' in Japan which unless I am corrected otherwise is older, more male dominated and probably includes a large number of people with professional credentials. "Teenage girls" will be more interested in things like fashion and will be inclined to dress their favorite MMD character into different costumes - which means that they will be more interested in altering what the models are wearing (including hair styles) and less so perhaps than the modeling of the base. In other words for a large segment of this population MMD models are like dolls that can be dressed up in different clothes.

Now the problem with this process is that they will be involved in a process that you term 'frankensteining'.

I hope you are able to understand what I am trying to say here and perhaps you might want to take what I'm saying and have a 'productive' discussion with your own community about the implication of what I am saying here. Do note that I am not arguing that fragrant breaches of copyright should not be firmly dealt with -- this should remain foremost in any discussion, but by the same token, those of you in Japan do need to recognize that MMD has become 'International' and to fully comprehend the implications behind this fact.

Japan may be an island but not on the Internet ... just as you people have been arguing for changes in our behavior overseas, that does not preclude your responsibility to reciprocate in kind.

It is not about you being right and we're being wrong. Trying to mandate rules purely from the Japanese perspective is going to be a losing fight on your end as the Overseas MMDC is too dynamic in composition for you to be able to adjust to. Rather let's keep discussions like these going and educate the entire community as to what is and what is not acceptable behavior in terms of MMD models.

Thus far, and I've read several of your journals on MMD, you seem to be only looking at the argument from primarily a Japanese POV. That's not going to work when you're dealing with an International community. Our cultural values have validity too and also need to be factored into the overall equation.

Not a few Japanese MMDers are computer programmers, illustrators or video game designers. As professionals they show respects one another. Most overseas MMDers, on the other hand, are teenagers who think they are free online and that online contents are free. Maybe I should say the conflict between Japanese and overseas MMD communities comes from cultural AND generation gap.

My response to this comment has already been addressed in the preceding paragraphs.


I do appreciate your comment and as I have stated at the beginning, I do very much want to thank you for this opportunity to having this discussion with you.
Reply
:icondamesukekun:
damesukekun Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
I'm not pessimistic about the conflict between both sides. Japanese creators started trying communicating with overseas MMDers in English, and overseas creators started making their own models from scratch. With their original models overseas MMDers will win trust and respect from Japanese MMDers.

We have gone through the matters discussed above. Many Japanese model creators who are active now were in their teens in the early stages of 3DCG anime designing. They "illegally" stole, edited and redistributed other people's models, and ironically they learned 3DCG designing by illegal edits, but Japan is a small country and copyright holders can easily catch online thefts. So those teenagers soon stopped illegal activities.

Many people condemn Japanese model creators as racists, and that may be partly true.
Shutting out "nasty barbarians" is, unfortunately, a negative cultural heritage of Tokugawa seclusive diplomacy. But in most cases Japanese are just afraid of uncontrolled redistributing or editing of their models on a worldwide scale. They can find and kill illegal reproductions in Nicovideo or Bowlroll, but can't in countless websites where English, Spanish or Chinese are the main languages.

Of course we should accept the fact that we can't control our works once we upload them to the Internet - this is the main reason Animasa distributes his models without rules except for Piapro Character License. Still I'd like to point out that Japanese MMDC has flourished by respect and trust among MMDers. Japanese MMDers expect overseas MMDers to show the same attitudes, and as I said, I'm not pessimistic about this. I think overseas MMDC and MMDers will voluntary behave respectfully as they release more their original models and win trust.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2014
I don't think its really a 'conflict'. Just opposing values trying to find a balance and in the natural order of things. Things should smooth out in the long term. My own perception is that MMD in one form or another will be around for quite awhile yet. People do want to get along and a lot of the more uncooperative people seem to have left the community so the rest of us just need to learn how to get along more smoothly.

Personally, I've been involved in MMD for almost 3 years and it has been a thoroughly enjoyable hobby. I've only really had one single negative experience and that was 50% my own damn fault.

I have nothing but admiration for Japan, its people, history and culture. I love to food too, but by the same token, you're all human too and there will be some I suppose who might be more difficult to deal with. Some may be a little more defensive about their work and that is understandable, but racist no. We need to drop that word out of these discussions completely.

I actually fully support the policy of 'killing' illegal edits. Copyright infringements are unlawful, period and removing illegal downloads is something that should be done.
Reply
:iconxx-turquoise-xx:
xX-Turquoise-Xx Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
I agree with this for the most part, but the do not edit my edit thing dose not sit right with me. As much work and time I put into my edits to make them as flawless and glitch-less as possible. I cannot upload it to the internet and tell some one not to edit my edit. I have nothing against people who do this, I personally wouldn't edit someone else's edit to take parts of it because lets face it, most of these edits have some serious rigging/physical/bone problems and I wouldn't edit someone else's model to be better, thats kind of rude. If I didn't like someones edited model, I would find another one or make my own.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
Sorry, but I am not going to strain my eyes trying to read print this small.
Reply
:iconxx-turquoise-xx:
xX-Turquoise-Xx Featured By Owner Apr 20, 2014
oh I'm sorry XP
Reply
:iconjoey1058:
Joey1058 Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Good article, trackdancer.  One of the concepts that is alluded to is intellectual property.  I didn't see it mentioned, but that is my take away on this one.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
I covered the intellectual property aspects of this argument at length in previous articles and didn't really want to drag that back in in the interest of brevity. But you're absolutely correct, the copyrights of modelers and editors is a large component in this discussion.
Reply
:iconbrsa:
brsa Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014  Student Interface Designer
I think it's selfish. To say that others can't edit what you yourself didn't make either.
I think if the model has free to edit parts others could edit it.
This is just another reason to whine in this community. "Whee someone edited my model I hate them now"

and also the reason why I don't enjoy making edits anymore.
If you support the original owner of the part this is like disgrace on them...
This is why win100% is a thing. Since free to download models feed this "Do not edit my stuff" hunger.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
How is it selfish 'to say that others can't edit what you yourself didn't make either'? In point of fact, provided that the edit is legal, the Law itself says that the work is a legally protected work and you cannot alter it, period. As such, the 'Do Not Edit' statement is purely an etiquette.

People need to get the concept that a model or an edit, just because it is free-to-download is automatically editable out of their way of thinking. The reality is that by Law, the work is protected from alteration which means simply if you edit/alter/modify it you're breaking the Law. This is the whole point of behind copyright laws.
Reply
:icondigitrevx:
Digitrevx Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
I break "MY" models down to simply, if you want to edit go ahead but please make it a good edit. If you want to edit and put it up for download it has to be a substantial change and come see me so I may Judge if its enough. This is to avoid the 10 min texture swap crowd from taking credit for nearly a month of hard work.

All the kids out there making their little edits on existing models slapping unofficial legal nonsense pretty much means nothing when you don't have a lawyer. And thats my 2 cents.

In the end its about follow original modelers requests always because they can stop making them and handing them out and some of the models were made for people/organizations with legal power that can squash you. :)
/rollsbacktocorner ^^
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
This is to avoid the 10 min texture swap crowd from taking credit for nearly a month of hard work. ... eh, I've done a few of these too ^^

All the kids out there making their little edits on existing models slapping unofficial legal nonsense pretty much means nothing when you don't have a lawyer ... the "Do Not Edit" statement is not legalese and is probably unenforceable/meaningless in a Court of Law.

and some of the models were made for people/organizations with legal power that can squash you ... this has happened quite too often to people on DA which is one of the reasons why I've been writing articles like this.
Reply
:iconryukrieger:
Ryukrieger Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014  Hobbyist Filmographer
I have a few concerns I want to address. Well, first and foremost before diving in, I do respect people who put hard works in edits and originals alike without discrimination or one less than another.
So second, however, when edits are of high-quality and with lots of works and minds put in it, I do understand on the "Do not edit" part, and some models can confuse the editor and/or be broken through editing, I don't have problems, but I'd suggest to expand on the "Do not edit" onto which extent the models shouldn't be edited.
(and if possible, putting editable on the correct parts of the models as a nod of gratitude to the original modelers, I'm not saying they're the better, but it means you're on equal footings, by taking something, it's not negative to not give, but it's a positive plus to do so).

But the main problem I have is with the simplest edits, such as recolors of models or textures, simple editing or replacing of textures, the models that have much less works put on them.

Because like using MMD to make pictures and videos, getting parts is easy, making it looks good is the hard part, so for each model I see "Do not edit" on, I usually look at the amount of works put into the model, was the editor/modeler actually do good or was it a lazy effort (I'm not grouping all), it's easy to appreciate good editors' rules, but it's also hard to appreciate a bad editor's ego.

Although I simply don't edit as a main part of my MMD usage (that doesn't mean I don't know the hard work of editing, because I've watched and tried learning my friends working on good edits and quick-edits), so I'm talking rather on a neutral standpoint than as an editor who wants to edit the uneditable models.

In short, considering the "Do not edit" rules, it comes down to the effort, a good amount of efforts, yes, it's fine, and I appreciate if they are editable and no problem if they're not, but if it was not (as I've seen, some even have too much ego in themselves that they see themselves above others or the models were just too simple or give little to no credits, by making models editable, that means the credits really go back to the parts, if it wasn't, then credits really are a must on every single part to help the community), then I really have problems with such people, because it really goes against the "community" spirit, where everyone is on equal footings with none above the others,

--- I'm derailing from here
I may need to make my view point less harsh, because it ticked me off how a lot of people with great amount of efforts put in models and edits allow editable, while a minority (yes, minority, so I don't group and have problem as a whole) doesn't and do little efforts while still taking parts from the editables. 
For the misunderstandings, I really want it to be solved, so I don't see anyone who violates rules due to mere misunderstandings in any bad lights, because it's misunderstandings, and they happen like everyday's meals!
So when taking things into considerations, it really comes down to community spirits and of course, "communication", and would "doing this" be a good communication to others or not.

I will take in more elements when considering a model to see if the user was at all, appropriate, to apply "Do not Edit" or not, after all, when someone does something lazy and applies restriction like they're above others, it's hard to overlook those, meanwhile, the actually good edits are appreciated quietly, because there's nothing much to be said beside compliments.

But of course, in after all, you provided a well-thought opinion and very good points, I'm only inquiring other "elements" to take into consideration.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
I think most people miss a vital point - the 'DO NOT EDIT' rule is actually only an etiquette. A work, original or 'legal' edit is automatically protected from editing by copyright laws the moment the work is created. The argument is really that simple.
Reply
:iconryukrieger:
Ryukrieger Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014  Hobbyist Filmographer
You're right on the technical and lawful aspect, but looking specifically into MMD community, what does it mean on the aspect of community spirit and mutual respect? While some do their best to contribute to the creative community, because MMD is a fan-based community from the beginning, it's not illegal for some to do the otherwise, but using something free for all in their works and then restrict it, it doesn't follow the community spirit well. (Of course not talking about complete original pieces).
So in short, I'm not looking exactly on the technical aspect, but rather the other side, the more vague side that is the community spirit, is it as long as it benefits them, or is it benefiting the community as a whole. But for the technical aspect, you're right, it's nothing wrong.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2014
What you are alluding to is the moral aspect, but even here, I still maintain the stance that people do have the right to impose "DO NOT EDIT" rules if that is what they wish to do. You cannot force people to share in a manner that makes them uncomfortable. When you're talking about sharing and "community spirit" a part of that equation is that you have to factor other people's feelings into the equation. That's just how the world works.

You mention "mutual respect", but your underlying argument is that in your opinion, people who don't want to share in the manner that you like are being 'selfish' or not contributing in a manner that is conducive to the community spirit as you perceive it. Let me throw that back at you from another POV. How is it 'mutual respect' if you're arguing that people must share in the way you personally feel is 'fair"? Isn't their POV equally valid?
Reply
:iconryukrieger:
Ryukrieger Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2014  Hobbyist Filmographer
It is true, which is why I said it is a very grey area, as well, since anyone can be right in their own way.
However I agree that people have the right to impose the rule, but I have to say how it is different in quite some cases.
For example, from the start it has been more freedom, this is the base of MMD, it's not something that came out of nowhere. Yes, freedom has its limit, but when factoring the feelings of the ones imposing the rule, what about the feelings of the ones who created the original parts, are they truly happy with it. But yes, another grey zone.
Another one is a very neutral, split one, there are people who reinforce their rules nicely, with proper manners when rules are broken, and ones that don't, talking and looking down on people despite they mayhaps broken some rules in the past, not ready to forgive others but quickly on themselves. But yes, another very split one.
In the end, it is a grey zone, and there's the part that the rule can be there and be fine, but there are parts that aren't at all.
Reply
:iconsilverunicornprinces:
silverunicornprinces Featured By Owner Apr 18, 2014
so if I lets say rigg something to a model  does it fallow under the do not edit becuase its been altered

I have rigged parts to fit on model bones rigged stuff to become hair ties

I have also had to rigg a mermaid tail to work in animation in mmd

so doing such edits beyond just adding parts could be considered altered models
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
CORRECTION: By rigging the implication here is that you were not the creator of the parts rigged in the first place.
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
By rigging the implication here is that you were the creator of the parts rigged in the first place. It's hard to be to answer as I don't have specifics, but as a general principle, as a rigger you will have very little say over the parts you rigged unless you created the part from scratch.
Reply
:iconsilverunicornprinces:
silverunicornprinces Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
so I just wanted to know

about how to defind stuff and so this aslo mean all those game ripped diva models also falls under
this sort of rule

so all that drama clameing that a ripped or edited diva game rip models is yours is a false clame

sort of what I thought all along
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
Game rips are illegal  - no discussion there. Which means that the 'no edit' rule cannot be applied to them but by the same token and editor of an illegal edit (ie. a game rip) is also breaking the Law.
Reply
:iconsilverunicornprinces:
silverunicornprinces Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
so its true after all

most of them do not get this at all
thats why I stay way from diva game rip ediiting there is to much drama
and when da gets around to it they will be all removed any way...
Reply
:iconsimplegamer517:
simplegamer517 Featured By Owner Apr 18, 2014
I have a question: I made a model out of Tda Miku's body but replaced the head with a different one. The head was legal and can be placed on a different model, but what concerns me is that does this violate any of Tda's rules?
Reply
:icontrackdancer:
Trackdancer Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
Yes it does violate Tda's rules - you CANNOT use Tda's work for parts. This is clearly (I hope) explained in the journal above. But to clarify, putting a different head on Tda Miku's body violates the following terms:


1. Do not ruin the feature and image of Tda style. The edited model(s) shall be clearly recognized as Tda-styled model(s).
2. Editing this model into naked or base model(s).
3. Removing any part(s) of this model, regardless of in the original form or edited form, and attaching it/them to other model(s) to create and/or edit the model(s) that is/are not Tda-styled.
Reply
:iconsimplegamer517:
simplegamer517 Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
Thank you for the clarification.
Reply
:iconchildishwar:
ChildishWar Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I think it's removing a TDA head and putting it on another model like Kio for example. Don't take my word for it though because TDA dislikes frankenstein edits.
Reply
:iconsimplegamer517:
simplegamer517 Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
The body I used was TDA, not Kio. The head was different and was legal... so is that still bad?
Reply
:iconchildishwar:
ChildishWar Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
I would think it's fine right now. You might wanna ask Damesukekun on dA because he has ties with TDA. Here: damesukekun
Reply
:iconsimplegamer517:
simplegamer517 Featured By Owner Apr 19, 2014
I checked his profile. But I'm afraid that he might get mad at me and probably go and rant again... but I'll go and ask anyway.
Reply
:iconmaddoktor2:
Maddoktor2 Featured By Owner Edited Aug 2, 2014
Although I'm probably too late, hopefully, I can spare you that rant with a very simple interpretation of the TDA editing rules. =)

The easiest way to explain this is to first look at the rules and then the model itself:

First, the rule in question:

3. Removing any part(s) of this model, regardless of in the original form or edited form, and attaching it/them to other model(s) to create and/or edit the model(s) that is/are not Tda-styled.

Basically, the rule says, and I paraphrase, "parting out is not allowed", which is another way of saying that using parts from one model on another is a no-no. Period. There is just no other way to interpret this rule - it's rock-solid.

Now, let's address specifically what you're asking about, which will demonstrate exactly how Rule #3 works:

The instant you separate the head from the body, you have "parted it out". You have removed a "part", and created another "part" out of the remainder of the body. What was once a complete model is now 2 separate "parts" comprised of a head and a body. In this case, Rule #3 clearly applies because:

Parting out is not allowed.

By doing a head swap, you break Rule #3 twice - you break it on the model you took the head from and on the model you used it on because you have parted both of them out to create a 3rd model. Because of this, that new 3rd model becomes by default and by definition an illegal edit.

I hope that helps. =)
Reply
:iconsimplegamer517:
simplegamer517 Featured By Owner Aug 2, 2014
I already had the issue resolved back then. The head I used was modeled as a head with no body. I didn't take it from a model. But anyway, thank you for the reply. It gives a much clearer explanation than the other replies I received.
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×

:icontrackdancer: More from Trackdancer


Featured in Collections

journals by wakuwalt7


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
April 18, 2014
Submitted with
Sta.sh Writer
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
15,328 (7 today)
Favourites
19 (who?)
Comments
54
×