I was afraid you would ask for more concrete advice
I propose the following short answer: SH3D is built on the use of liberal licensing that will give users a lot of freedom, also for commercial use including models. But as the user is ultimately responsible for license compliance, the user (especially a commercial one) should check the terms against the actual usage. The FAL and CC pages will supply instructions on appropriate attribution. For example, if the model is CC BY 3.0, see the attribution terms with links (appropriate credit and indicate if changes were made). If in doubt, consult creator. That, of course, is a pretty useless answer - if to be expected from a legal point of view. And for limited commercial use, well, as long as caution is exercised, using the models is unlikely to create problems.
But, as the world of intellectual property can be pretty unforgiving (and in my opinion, too unforgiving), you may want to ponder the following. These are not recommandations, just loose thoughts:
Commercial usage can be many things. Take a couple of extremes:
- Major, international manufacturer wants to build a new furniture range on one of the models.
- Models used in an animation sequence in The Force Awakens.
- Commercial 3D architecture software wants to include (all) models from SH3D free models page in their own € 10 000 software package.
- A multi-million design enterprise uses one specific model as a centrepiece in all international presentations with only hard-to-find information about the origin.
Far fetched, maybe, but these examples could put the most liberal of licenses to the test, and national and international law could even set the license aside. In short, common courtesy dictates that the user would be silly not to consult the creator in such cases. Expect a judge to say: "But why on earth didn't you just ask?"
A more normal example, an interior decorator wanting to show a paying client how his home should look, is more within the scope of commercial usage as I interpret the SH3D and models licensing regime. But, still, check the licenses: FAL and CC and decide how best to comply.
With license compliance ultimately being the responsibility of the (commercial) user, exact advice on how to comply is therefore almost impossible, not least because there may be (local) legal nuances.
But to mention a possibility: the name of the models used could be amended to include attribution requirements, e.g: Sofabed, eTeks, CC BY 3.0, unchanged (link may be required). Then the information would be available to everyone who opens the SH3D file, and a furniture list could be extracted to accompany print material, photo/video rendering and 3D webviewer presentations.
How to do this conveniently with many models, is an interesting question, and I have no idea whether the "shortcuts" proposed have been tested legally. But I should add, that because of the caution displayed on the models submission page, the model creator has already accepted liberal use of models. And the creator can add attribution information in the file name. This is even more true where a model is submitted as a library, where the creator relatively easily can supply customised information in the properties (see thread 1550 for using information property in 4.5). By doing this, the creator contributes to how attribution should be available.
A couple of more points to complicate things further:
- There may be models on the SH3D free models page that bear a resemblance to designs subject to some sort of intellectual property protection. So if you are really unlucky, you may get some designer coming after you (and the poor model creator).
- Some models could well be so generic and simplistic, that they may not be subject to any sort of copyright protection.
I could go on, but this just to explain why I generally prefer making my own models and textures for online use. And when I share models, I make sure they are sufficiently generic so no third party can claim any rights. But then - I am being very careful.
ok
