I recently got around to organizing some POV graphics into a new
math-themed "gallery."

It presents miscellaneous pictures and animations I've needed to
throw together during various projects.

enjoy,

http://www.ipfw.edu/math/Coffman/pov/gallery.html

Adam C.

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 16:44:01 -0500, Adam Coffman wrote:
>http://www.ipfw.edu/math/Coffman/pov/gallery.html

Careful what you do with that chesspiece.  This is from povlegal:

The user is also granted the right to use the scene files,
fonts, bitmaps, and include files distributed in the
INCLUDE and SCENES\INCDEMO sub-directories in their own
scenes. Such permission does not extend to files in the
SCENES directory or its sub-directories. The SCENES files
are for your enjoyment and education but may not be the
basis of any derivative works.


-- 
#local R=<7084844682857967,0787982,826975826580>;#macro L(P)concat(#while(P)chr(
mod(P,100)),#local P=P/100;#end"")#end background{rgb 1}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.y)0,0
translate<-.8,0,-1>}text{ttf L(R.x)L(R.z)0,0translate<-1.6,-.75,-1>}sphere{z/9e3
4/26/2001finish{reflection 1}}//ron.parker@povray.org My opinions, nobody else's

Post a reply to this message

Ron Parker wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 16:44:01 -0500, Adam Coffman wrote:
> >http://www.ipfw.edu/math/Coffman/pov/gallery.html
> 
> Careful what you do with that chesspiece.  This is from povlegal:
> 
> The user is also granted the right to use the scene files,
> fonts, bitmaps, and include files distributed in the
> INCLUDE and SCENES\INCDEMO sub-directories in their own
> scenes. Such permission does not extend to files in the
> SCENES directory or its sub-directories. The SCENES files
> are for your enjoyment and education but may not be the
> basis of any derivative works.

This whole derivative works thing is ugly. If I copy an object statement
out of one of the scene files such as -

box { <-1-1-1>,<1,1,1> pigment { color rgb <1,1,1> } }

and use it in one of my scenes then technically I am creating
a derivitive work. Where do you draw the line ?

What about all the people who use the standard include files in their
scenes ? Are those not then derivitive works ? Again where do you draw
the line ?

If I "create" the above example myself, and then copyright the
scene file, is everyone who ever uses the exact same syntax in
violation of copyright law ?

I just now decided I am not going to worry about it. If someone ever
accuses me of plagarism the proof is theirs to provide and they will
have to bear the costs of prosecution.

-- 
Ken Tyler

Post a reply to this message

Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
:> The user is also granted the right to use the scene files,
:> fonts, bitmaps, and include files distributed in the
:> INCLUDE and SCENES\INCDEMO sub-directories in their own
:> scenes.

: What about all the people who use the standard include files in their
: scenes ?

  The povlegal specifically says (as seen above) that's ok.

-- 
#macro N(D,I)#if(I<6)cylinder{M()#local D[I]=div(D[I],104);M().5,2pigment{
rgb M()}}N(D,(D[I]>99?I:I+1))#end#end#macro M()<mod(D[I],13)-6,mod(div(D[I
],13),8)-3,10>#end blob{N(array[6]{11117333955,
7382340,3358,3900569407,970,4254934330},0)}//                     - Warp -

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> 
> Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
> :> The user is also granted the right to use the scene files,
> :> fonts, bitmaps, and include files distributed in the
> :> INCLUDE and SCENES\INCDEMO sub-directories in their own
> :> scenes.
> 
> : What about all the people who use the standard include files in their
> : scenes ?
> 
>   The povlegal specifically says (as seen above) that's ok.

Ok, that is covered in POv-Legal but what happens if I copy a box
object out of one of the scenes in the SCENES directory and use it
in one of my works ? A box is a box is a box...

And what if I rip a string of code out of one of Colefax's incs
and use it to create something different. Technically it is
still a derivitive work but yeilds entirely different results ?
Am I stealing from Chris ?

-- 
Ken Tyler

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:
> 
> Ron Parker wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 16:44:01 -0500, Adam Coffman wrote:
> > >http://www.ipfw.edu/math/Coffman/pov/gallery.html
> >
> > Careful what you do with that chesspiece.  This is from povlegal:
> >
> > The user is also granted the right to use the scene files,
> > fonts, bitmaps, and include files distributed in the
> > INCLUDE and SCENES\INCDEMO sub-directories in their own
> > scenes. Such permission does not extend to files in the
> > SCENES directory or its sub-directories. The SCENES files
> > are for your enjoyment and education but may not be the
> > basis of any derivative works.
> 
> This whole derivative works thing is ugly. If I copy an object statement
> out of one of the scene files such as -
> 
> box { <-1-1-1>,<1,1,1> pigment { color rgb <1,1,1> } }
> 
> and use it in one of my scenes then technically I am creating
> a derivitive work. Where do you draw the line ?
> 
> What about all the people who use the standard include files in their
> scenes ? Are those not then derivitive works ? Again where do you draw
> the line ?
> 
> If I "create" the above example myself, and then copyright the
> scene file, is everyone who ever uses the exact same syntax in
> violation of copyright law ?
> 
> I just now decided I am not going to worry about it. If someone ever
> accuses me of plagarism the proof is theirs to provide and they will
> have to bear the costs of prosecution.
> 
> --
> Ken Tyler


Thanks for your comments, Ron and Ken.
I was careless with regard to that paragraph in the terms of use.

When I'm not being careless, I usually am concerned about issues of
fair use, but I'm also no expert on legal notions like "basis of
derivative work" or the rights of artists (either the creator or the
copier).  Having gone back and re-read the terms of use, and the
specific comments in the "chess2.pov" file, I think what I originally
did (giving credit only to the POV directory, and posting a notice on
this news group) is just not adequate, with respect to either
complying with the terms of use, or notifying the creators that I've
modified their artistic property for my own use (which, while not for
profit, was not entirely private either).

Even though Ken brings up interesting points, that particular scene
was clearly not entirely my own work.  As an example of another issue,
if I had a student who turned this in for a graphics assignment, even
giving as much credit as I did, I'd probably ask the student to do
something more original.

Mostly because this takes less effort than giving any further thought
to these issues, I've modified the image on my web site, to make it
more my own (a possibly flawed theory that the derivative of a
derivative is not a derivative?), thus implementing the solution of
Lewis Carroll:

OFF WITH HER HEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Adam C.

Post a reply to this message

"Ken" wrote:
> what happens if I copy a box object out of one of the
> scenes in the SCENES directory and use it in one of
> my works ? A box is a box is a box...

Would you describe it as intellectual property?

Something where the author in the process of creation put his mind into it
and made it into something unique?

That's where to draw the line IMO.

> And what if I rip a string of code out of one of Colefax's
> incs and use it to create something different. Technically
> it is still a derivitive work but yeilds entirely different
> results ?
> Am I stealing from Chris ?

Depends on whether we are talking about one line of code or ten lines. Ten
lines would most likely be stealing, yes. What you should do is to read his
code, understand it and then make your own version from scratch (and I don't
mean to memorize the exact code, but the principle).

Actually that works in the case of the box too. Understand the principle of
the box, then write it yourself from scratch in your own scene!

The line *is* a bit blurred, but a chess piece is clearly intellectual
property and using it in your own scene is not legal. Or so I think.

I also must say that I disagree with you when you say that the derivative
works thing is ugly. I highly regard intellectual property and I think most
people will know where to draw the line, so that it shouldn't be a problem.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

Copyright info.

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

Ken might want to see section
7) "They can't get me, defendants in court have powerful rights!" 

_____________
Kari Kivisalo

Post a reply to this message

Rune wrote:
> 
> Would you describe it as intellectual property?
> 
> Something where the author in the process of creation put his mind into it
> and made it into something unique?
> 
> That's where to draw the line IMO.
> 

I agree about that, although there may be some cases where it's difficult
to judge, it it is usually quite enough to leave this decision to the
author of the possible derivative work. He should usually feel if the
reused code represents an intellectual work or not.

Something else, i sometimes reuse others' code as a basis to create my own
one, for example start with a texture made by someone else but modify it
then.  In the end there usually is not much left from the original
texture, but anyway it's of course somehow based on his work.  I
personally feel this is not so problematic, because i myself would not be
concerned about others doing the same with my code, but i'm not sure if
this is really correct.

Any opinions?

Christoph

-- 
Christoph Hormann <chr### [at] gmxde>
IsoWood include, radiosity tutorial, TransSkin and other 
things on: http://www.schunter.etc.tu-bs.de/~chris/

Post a reply to this message

"Christoph Hormann" wrote:
> Something else, i sometimes reuse others' code as a
> basis to create my own one
...
> there usually is not much left from the original
...
> I personally feel this is not so problematic,
> because i myself would not be concerned about others
> doing the same with my code, but i'm not sure if
> this is really correct.

Just like you, I think it's not a big problem. Again, I think the question
is if there's anything left in your code that is the intellectual property
of the original author. I.e. does your texture contain any of the elements
that made the original texture unique?

However, that's just my opinion. I too would like to know if that's actually
correct or not.

Rune
--
3D images and anims, include files, tutorials and more:
Rune's World:    http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk (updated May 10)
POV-Ray Users:   http://rsj.mobilixnet.dk/povrayusers/
POV-Ray Webring: http://webring.povray.co.uk

Post a reply to this message