Could one model in the Student Version, then load that into a one-month rented Max licensed version to compile and export their project?
If you purchased a one-month licence to produce professional products, you have the right to make use of that license. So anything exported from that licensed version
may become a commercial product, if only the scene and materials were all created within that license time frame.
Student version -> export scene -> commercial use forbidden.
Student version -> Import Source in licensed version -> export scene -> commercial use not allowed because the student licensing still applies in the pipeline process
the moment you imported the source file. (there's something stating nearly that in the EULA, but it's not that obvious. Different interpretations can be made) There is a commonly known "underlying creed" about 3DS Max :
"DO NOT USE 3DSMAX Student". By the way, you'll have a warning in the one month license version that the scene components you're using were made from a student version...
However (again) during the "export scene" process there is no student licensing information written anywhere in the exported material/files
for FS (as far as I know) So basically, you would be the only one to know whether there was a student license involved somewhere. Anyway, noone will really care (I think) If you're the author of the student licensed source file, you'll have to deal with it on your own... If you got the source files elsewhere, with that student license, it becomes trickier... You should officialy reach an agreement with the original author, and for anyone that knows about the licensing origin of the source file, be able to provide proof of said agreement (a clear licensing migration chart)
including an agreement with Autodesk.
Fact is, the
Student version of 3DS is named after for one unique purpose :
Learning curve. Anything you do in there must remain in the limits of training, testings, experiments or private demonstrations purposes (homework, tests, exams or alike) And you should not make anything you did there public, except in the context of studies. That's why the asked question has a so complex answer. It's difficult for most of us to have a clear picture of what is a student context and all the things that context implies. Lazaro is right, it's a philosophic, legal-aspect related issue. That's why there are people around that are sick of this Autodesk policy (I do, honestly) and we get something like Blender (GREAT ! - just my opinion BTW)
Back to the basics, 3DS Student is
a tool that produces a
result, just like a book you borrowed in the library where you found a theorem
to create a new theorem, you can't claim the former theorem as yours even if you found a new law, so you can't sell that result because the theorem you borrowed is part of it. And like mathematicians, you should NOT advertise your work because the theorem you used belongs to someone else.
The process of creating the 3D objects belongs to Autodesk through the Student version of their tool. So in order to make your own new theorem public, and get credits for it, you must meet an agreement with the owner of the theorem you borrowed (or with the official mathematic comitee)
=> That is, you must meet an agreement with Autodesk. Once they'll know
most part of the work has been done through the student version, the answer will be nothing else than a big "
NO!" and you're stuck ! That's the well known Autodesk policy : you want become commercial, do it from the very start.
People has used "workarounds" since, like exporting the scene as Wavefront OBJ or similar format, or using scripts... In a juridical context, this doesn't discard the fact you produced the scene in a private student license. But that doesn't stop people doing it anyway (and honestly, I wouldn't personnaly blame them. Games like FS are mostly an hobby, and we wouldn't have that much fun if every single contributor has to buy a commercial license from the start... because a scenery wouldn't cost 18.99$,
but 199.99$ - just my opinion again)
So in the end,
for a lot of people, it's more a matter of
doing the least (a one month commercial license for the project rollout) than how far you can get in trouble with Autodesk. If Autodesk was to pursue every guy contributing for the virtual world, it would not make that much money because most contributors are common people, scattered around the world. And that would create a very negative image of Autodesk, and drastically increase the volume of alternative volunteers to break its monopoly. Autodesk products are undoubtedly great softwares. Yet, it's very expensive to get them usefull.
So, it's up to you, but if one would do that, he/she ought to
NOT make it public. By the way I didn't said you would
you just asked a simple question (with a complex answer) IMHO again, even if I knew someone did it,
I won't care !
