Selling a 3d models with substance textures

[John254615189zh8]

Hello,

I'm a 3d artist and selling my models on 3d stocks. So is it legal to sell a 3d models with textures from: https://substance3d.adobe.com/assets

I found this EULA

https://wwwimages2.adobe.com/content/dam/cc/en/legal/servicetou/Adobe-Substance-3D-Assets-Addl-Terms...

and it looks like it is legal. Right?

Thank you

[Marion3D · Accepted solution]

Hi John,
It is legal indeed as it would be a "modified work" or a "bigger work" as witten in the EULA.
However are you are the one with the license to the asset and not the person purchasing for you, the sbsar or square texture of the material can not be found in what you will be distributing, you would have to distribute the texure on the assets UVs for example.

[John254615189zh8]

Hi Marion3D,

Thank you very much for a quick and clear answer!

[AJ_Graphix]

Thanks @Marion3D for that info. 
Regarding the following from the Adobe Substance 3D Assets Additional Terms:

1.1. “Larger Work” means a new work of authorship created that incorporates an unmodified Substance 3D Asset.
1.2. “Modified Work” means a new work of authorship created, at least in part, by modifying a Substance 3D Asset.

3.1. The following license restrictions apply to your use of Substance 3D Asset(s). You must not:
(B) use the Substance 3D Asset(s) in any way that allows a third party to use, download, extract, or access the Substance 3D Asset(s) on a stand-alone basis;

3.2. You may distribute the Substance 3D Asset(s) only as incorporated into a Modified Work or a Larger Work if (A) the
Modified Work or Larger Work, without inclusion of the Substance 3D Asset(s), would qualify as an original work of
authorship; and (B) the primary value of the Modified Work or Larger Work does not lie with the Substance 3D Asset(s) itself.

Based on the wording of those articles in the terms, it would seem that selling a 3D modular asset pack (ie. Castle, Medieval Town, etc) with material shaders that contained the tiling output textures of a Substance Material (ie. Base Color, AO, Roughness, Metallic, Normal Map) would qualify as a "Larger Work" (ie. unmodified Substance 3D Asset) and be permissable according to the license terms, since the original .sbsar files are NOT included and the primary value of the asset pack is the 3D models and NOT the textures or material shaders.

It is common practice in game development to utilize tiling textures in shaders to increase texture resolution (permissable by Article 1.1, "unmodifed" in a "Larger Work"), and at other times, it is preferable or more efficient to bake the textures into an object's unique UVs (permissable by Article 1.2 as a "Modified Work").

Obviously, incorporating tiling textures into shaders and then selling a standalone Shader Pack would NOT be permissable, since the primary value of the pack would be the textures themselves and would violate Article 3.2.

Am I correct in all of my above assessments? Thanks very much for your time.

Sincerely,
Adam Janz

[Cedric Marchessoux]

Hi

>Based on the wording of those articles in the terms, it would seem that selling a 3D modular asset pack (ie. >Castle, Medieval Town, etc) with material shaders that contained the tiling output textures of a Substance >Material (ie. Base Color, AO, Roughness, Metallic, Normal Map) would qualify as a “Larger Work” (ie. unmodified >Substance 3D Asset) and be permissable according to the license terms, since the original .sbsar files are NOT >included and the primary value of the asset pack is the 3D models and NOT the textures or material shaders.
>Unfortunately that is not exactly true.

The value of the substance material is not only in the sbsar, but also in the tiling textures. The license you get when you license a Substance material on your side allows you to use if for as many projects as you like, but does not allow you to transfer that license to a third party. When you share the tiling textures to a third party, you allow them to use them for other projects while they do not have the license to do so. This is why the “applied on UVs” rule applies when re-selling 3D assets with the maps open.

Best regards
Cédric

[AJ_Graphix]

Thanks so much, Cédric, for clarifying! Wow... okay, perhaps that info should be added in detail to the Adobe Substance 3D Assets Additional Terms, because the current wording of the Terms do not imply that level of restriction. I will be certain to only use Public Domain or custom-generated textures for any asset packs I create. Admittedly, that is disappointing, but I do appreciate you taking the time to let me know. Have a good week ahead. 🙂

[John254615189zh8]

I have a new question about 3D models and Substance. Can I include certain elements from Substance 3D in my 3D models for sale on stock platforms? For example, I want to create a 3D model of a fruit crate. I need a 3D crate model, which is available in Substance in FBX format. If I import it into my 3D software, apply materials, and fill it with fruit, can I sell the resulting model on a 3D stock platform? Thank you.

[Tiffany3D · Accepted solution]

Hi @John254615189zh8 - We can’t give you an opinion on whether any particular use is compliant. In order to be helpful, we can say that the requirements of Section 3.2 in the Adobe Substance 3D Assets Additional Terms are not meant to be particularly onerous. We want to avoid your simply redistributing Substance 3D Assets without some meaningful modification. We don’t want unmodified assets redistributed.