To clarify, I checked their development tools to figure out how many pending reviews they have and based on the recent ones, I didn’t get the impression that they couldn’t handle it.
I don’t know how it is for them overall. Most developers don’t like code reviews, but it has been established as a common practise that just makes sense.
That’s not necessarily true. It depends on how they can be integrated into the team. It is not unusual in my experience that a developer who recently joined the team can help a new person a lot without an overhead for the leads. That simply depends on the situation within the team and that’s why only they can judge what makes sense and what not.
They are not allowed to publicly talk/post about other software because of legal reasons. For the same reason, screenshots and naming other software is not allowed on official Blender platforms. They are actually looking at other software and from time to time, things have to be deleted here and there because of it.
I certainly carefully read everything you have posted. I agree with the specific issues of the Blender features you have raised. On the other hand, I don’t agree with what you think is happening and what should be happening.
I hope it doesn’t come across as too arrogant, but I literally don’t want to spend the time to go into detail as it would take me forever. I may clarify it in the coming days though.
I didn’t know that. Very interesting. What is the legal reason for that? What are the consequences of this?
It’s not. Thank you for the conversation. I like to see others point of view. It helps me to judge what is happening in Blender world and in general on a broader scale.
You may not post anything digital that belongs to someone else without permission. You may not post descriptions of, links to, or methods for stealing someone’s intellectual property (software, video, audio, images), or for breaking any other law.
You may not post descriptions of, links to, or methods for stealing someone’s intellectual property (software, video, audio, images), or for breaking any other law.
This I understand.
You may not post anything digital that belongs to someone else without permission.
This is somewhat vague and broad. I don’t see how discussing other software and how it’s good, bad or is compared to Blender shouldn’t fall under fair use and be forbidden here. And how this should prevent Blender Foundation from looking at other software to get inspired for better solutions or workflows in Blender.
I think I said all I wanted in the couple last post. I’ll stop off topic talk… for now.
I am assuming you are not a lawyer. It seems like you don’t really understand why using other software’s features for inspiration could get Blender developers into trouble.
I am not and I am not advocating stealing to be clear. There is a lot of cross over between different software in features which are based on similar technologies and cater to similar audience from what I understand.
I think open standarts like USD, EXR etc. are here to improve overall expirience between different apps.
If you can explain to me how Blender can get in legal trouble trying to improve let’s say UV unwrapping expirience and bring it closer to Maya or RizomUV? I’d appreciate it.
BF just want to avoid patent and lawsuits trolls . They already had some kind of situation, so it is not imaginary issue.
While implementing tools like others is reasonable, or even talking about it in private, but posting screenshot of competition software and adding public comments “we should steal that idea” in nicer words is just reckless.
The functionality can be added, it’s just the design implementation can’t plagiarize other software.
Below are several UV design proposals. Most of this functionality Maya has already. But they are proposed here without using Maya screenshots as a reference.
This is what I thought. Everyone is “inspired” by others best practices and features but no one is talking about it openly because they can be subject to legal trouble based on their public statements. Got it.
Let me tell you the obvious.
Nature inspires itself and replicates itself continuously to evolve to shape and adapt the environment to achieve the best balance.
But man no, he can’t do it, he must go against nature.
It is the law of man.
Man can also steal and be inspired by the mechanisms of nature, he can study it and replicate them to evolve, but another man cannot do it.
It is the law of man.
I’m tell the obvious.
Things we all know, but they are so big and distorted that it’s obvious elephants in the rooms that no one sees. and let me say something equally obvious. the planet doesn’t seem so healthy lately, in many ways, And even the man does not seem so healthy to me, especially in the mental health, even before pandemics*.
That replicates itself all the time. and we rubbing it from brain to brain very quickly, and we don’t care whether it may be “a stolen idea or not” it spreads quickly and replicates itself. indeed, we are forced to feed on it and replicate it.
It is the law of man.
ALL Elephants in the room.
Nina Paley docet.
Though the core question is not that, but it is a legal one: How can a potential lawsuit be avoided. It is about “better safe than sorry”, rather than a philosophical debate why it should be done differently and why it is against nature.
Everyone can have an opinion on that matter and be assured, mine is likely quite close to yours. However, when it is about legal topics, opinions are worthless or potentially very expensive.
The reality is that 19th century laws have remained out of date and they have done everything possible not to update them, favoring large monopolies and have created a strong imbalance in society. Today it is very evident that we are at the end of the line … Well China has given a shit about this old laws … and it’s the only place that has grown.
It’s just to report the obvious, of course, they are just my opinions and I certainly don’t have the strength to argue over a world that is all broken
As far as I can see, there haven’t been huge changes on the platform.
Intuitively, I can see two simple reasons why the increase took place:
Sprite Fright: Being able to closely follow someone like Matthew Luhn is unique and definitely adds quite some value. If that is the reason for the increase, the risk is high, that the numbers drop when the project is done.
Due to the current circumstances, some people may want to invest time into learning Blender (be it newcomers or people from the industry)
Besides the things @DeepBlender mentioned I guess it is also because if you are a cloud member from now until release of Sprite Fright you will be in the credits.
I’m not sure. There might be some leaving but the clouds content in general is pretty good. So perhaps people will come for Matthew Luhn but a lot will stay for the content.
