Actually... this depends on the EULA. If there was a definitive clause in the EULA that allows modders to pull resources from the original files then yes, it's fine. If not then that member was wrong for distributing them. The reason for this is that while one person may use the model for educational purposes they cannot…
The commercial exploitation of these assets are likely illegal, but simply making the assets available probably isn't. Certain uses of the assets can fall under fair use if the purpose of making them available is any of the following: education, review, and parody. The nature of the work, the amount and substantiality of…
Fair use is the worst part of copyright law due to its terrible vagueness, but this is generally a simple moral question. For those that don't know - Fair Use allows for certain uses of copyrighted work without permission of the copyright owner for purposes deemed "Socially Beneficial." Examples - Education, Criticism,…
EQ: Saying that redistribution in any form is illegal makes it impossible to use works for education, review, and parody. For example, if redistribution for any reason is prohibited, I can't make a parody of a work and distribute that, because redistribution disallows it. The same would go for education and…
The true wording of copyright laws can be vague, however this is a fairly clear cut case of illegal distribution. You do NOT need to generate income in order to break copyright law. Downloading/Exporting a file in order to fiddle around with in Max or Maya is completely legal, as it could easily be explained as "for use in…