Easy way to look at it: Less complainin, more fappin! XD.

It's less about if you use FA to earn money or not and more about now imvu can earn money off of your work, without giving you a red cent.

So?

If you're REALLY worried there ARE legal actions you can take. Their TOS isn't going to hold up to a DMCA takedown notice, for example. but who gives a damn if they make a few illicit bucks of a pic I put up for free viewing and download anyway.

IMVU is currently in a class action lawsuit over ignoreing dmca requests and doxing personal information(have to get a payed account to use their working dmca takedown system) of dmca requesters.

In other words they will not honor your copyright. But will use the system to make money off of you.

They were also in a class action lawsuit over violating user's copyrights on audio files, the briefing is available online, but linking to either will result in a ban from dragoneer.
Though when you search google for 'imvu class action lawsuit' they are the first few results.

Except, unless/until they change the FA TOS, they still can't.

Re-read it. particularly section 4.1

Yup, section 4.1 says (paraphrased) 'we have the right to provide the service of making your uploads available on the internet and nowhere else.' Which is basically the whole point of uploading art to FA.

Or any site that allows user generated content, all of which have that same clause in their TOS.

no they can't. there is nothing that allows IMVU to just use your artwork. that's just a rumor being spread by people wanting complain.

IMVU works like SL in that their users can upload art and objects for personal use or to sell to other imvu users. IMVU did not create the objects in their store their users did. If there is a copyright violation IMVU will remove the art/object but they require a legal copyright documentation not just someone pointing to a website saying "see it's mine". You can get your entire current gallery legally copyrighted for 35$. (application fee is same for 1 object or a bulk upload so better to do in bulk.)

Re-read section 4.1 of the current t.o.s. and keep in mind in all their other holdings they have an even stricter version.

Truthfully any clas action suit that's filed by a site called sueeasy doesn't sound like a reputable source to me. also those are from 3 years ago. what's the verdict on them?


also you should re read the tos.. particularly this part of 4.1 "These permissions do not transfer the rights of your content or allow us to create any deviations of that content outside the aforementioned purposes."

And 4.1 has always been like that. it's not something new that they added because of IMVU. While the terminology is specific and old they are basically talking about how a website works that you are allowing them to do what a website does in order for people to view your artwork. a bit old school, what on fa isn't?, but reading the tos on weasyl and deviant art they talk about how you aren't allowed to do any of those things. so sharing a link to your own gallery could be a violation of their tos if I'm reading their tos like you're reading fa's. I do like the fact that weasyl decided to put the entire liability section in bold capitols telling you it's your fault if art is stolen not them.

Companies get aquired by other companies all the time. If the new owners understand where the value of the company they bought comes from, they'll keep it in tact (example: yahoo buys tumblr, changes absolutely nothing).

Are you on Weasyl at all?

Not currently but it's been on my todo list for a while now. I'll post a link when I get it sorted out :)

But the people who are doing business on FA haven't been screwed at all either. Nothing has changed, at all.

I found a tool that lets you easily use several art sites at once.
I haven't used it myself yet, but I hope it's useful for you. http://artwatcher.binarte.com/