This is all rather pointless without some input from both the Renderosity admins and/or Stefy herself, so this is the last post I'm going to make until that happens. Otherwise, we're all just talking to ourselves. Here is how things happened from my view. 1) Stefy posts her two new texture packages in the store for sale, along with a clearly worded addendum to the license about the same username which bought the texture being the poster of any images in the gallery. She also requires credit on any gallery image using it. 2) I post a thread asking her to reconsider the license changes. At no point did I say she had no right to do them; what I said was that I didn't see how requiring credit on all images would stop warezers, and that I and possibly others would be put off from buying Stefy's new textures with such conditions attached. 3) Stefy posted, saying that it was all a misunderstanding and that she would remove the conditions. She added that the new license restrictions were brought about by warezers. She didn't address the "credit in the gallery" issue at all. However, in the descriptions of "Yuma" and "Yazoo&Yoda" in the store, there was now a paragraph saying that those buyers who had already purchased the packs should delete the two extra license requirements, as they were "NO MORE VALID!!" 4) About twenty-four hours after posting this, Stefy sent her IMs to Blackhearted. She also posted a rude message under his image in the gallery. Both of the issues she was confronting him over were the same as the new license requirements that she had already publically agreed to withdraw from her new textures. Worse, both issues were about ASIA, a texture which never had any such requirements in the license. My conclusions from this were that Stefy publically agreed to remove the username and credit restrictions from her products after a thread was started saying the restrictions would hurt her sales, and then she proceeded to try to enforce them anyway. Worse, she appears intent on enforcing them not just for the two new texture packs, but also on her previous works. I was more than willing to believe the initial problem was a simple misunderstanding or a frustrated reaction to warezers (although, for the thousandth time, this doesn't explain the "giving credit" clause, which I personally find far more disturbing than the username clause.) However, Stefy's actions flatly contradict both what she wrote about removing the license restrictions and the change she made in her item descriptions in the store. This is why I think that Gabriel (Blackhearted) wasn't wrong in posting her IMs, and why I think this is not a discussion that would have been better kept in private. Stefy appears to be trying to have her cake and eat it, too; take out the license addendums that would cut down on her sales and then enforce those same license addendums on unwitting buyers. I won't even go into how she tried to enforce them, by threatening banning etc if someone didn't buy her textures. I nearly bought both "Yuma" and "Yazoo&Yoda" based on Stefy's word about removing the license requirements, which I thought was good. Since it has turned out that she has not kept her word and instead actively harasses purchasers of her work who don't do as she wants, this needed to be made clear to anyone considering buying her textures. It has been. If there's someone out there who thinks that "Yuma" and "Yazoo&Yoda" are worth the hassle, then more power to them. And if we're going to address the subject of credit, ASIA is a fine texture (though I will say that I spent more than two hours in Photoshop adjusting her excessive yellowness.) But there would be no ASIA if there was not Victoria. There would be no Victoria without Posette. There would be no Posette without those sad lumpy little mannequin people of Poser 1 and 2. Each of them wouldn't have existed without a 20-plus person programming team, a corporation, investors in that corporation, bondholders, etc. Does Steve Cooper demand credit on every Poser render posted? Why is StefyZZ's contribution more important than his, or Larry Weinberg's, or Seth Ahrens or Jinhua Shen? Art isn't a cookbook; take Vicky, add Asia, put in some Anton Kisiel hair and a light set by azl and presto, you have a gorgeous image. We have all seen pictures created using that theory and they were nothing special. But there are marvelous images that are genuinely artistic, that are much more than the sum of their store or freestuff parts. Some, like Picky's work, are so altered from their original Poser-render state that they are virtually brand-new and any Poser elements that went into them are almost irrelevant. Stefy's demand for perpetual credit offended me because it seemed to imply that in her mind if your picture was any good, it was because you used Asia ("my Asia", in her own words.) Therefore, any merit in your image rightfully belongs to her. This completely discounts the creativity and skill of the artist, her customer. And creativity is the reason why we are all supposedly here in the first place, right? There. I'm done.