I just bought a texture pack and its full perm ??

[Splatulated]

theres a note card asking not to give them away 

 

but why are they full perm if they dont want them redistributed o.o ??? 

[Syo Emerald]

---

Splatulated wrote:

theres a note card asking not to give them away 

 

but why are they full perm if they dont want them redistributed

??? 

---

Because they expect people not to be assholes, thats why. Many want to sell their textures for creators, who can then use them in their buildings. But reselling them as a pack is a big NO.

[Splatulated]

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

---

Splatulated wrote:

theres a note card asking not to give them away 

 

but why are they full perm if they dont want them redistributed

??? 

---

Because they expect people not to be assholes, thats why. Many want to sell their textures for creators, who can then use them in their buildings. But reselling them as a pack is a big NO.

---

they're not even building textures 

 

its like kid drawings 

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Etinceler-Scribbles-Zoo-Pack-SET-OF-8-FULL-PERM/4924530?page=1

 

 

[Tari Landar]

---

Splatulated wrote:

---

they're not even building textures 

 

its like kid drawings 

 

 

---

It doesn't matter what the textures are, if you are given an EULA(end user licence agreement...in other words, the notecard that says you can't distribute them) it is expected that you'll behave like any normal person would and not share them. 

Just try following at least one set of instructions for once, please, and don't be a jerk.

[Coby Foden]

Nevertheless, whatever textures they are you must obey what the seller has stated in the notecard.
It's the seller's wish and condition, and so be it.

[Splatulated]

ok

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

Splatulated wrote:

---

Syo Emerald wrote:

---

Splatulated wrote:

theres a note card asking not to give them away 

 

but why are they full perm if they dont want them redistributed

??? 

---

Because they expect people not to be assholes, thats why. Many want to sell their textures for creators, who can then use them in their buildings. But reselling them as a pack is a big NO.

---

they're not even building textures 

 

its like kid drawings 

https://marketplace.secondlife.com/p/Etinceler-Scribbles-Zoo-Pack-SET-OF-8-FULL-PERM/4924530?page=1

 

 

---

 

Kids drawings could be used in a build.  I can think of a number of ways.  Two examples: in a house in a nursery , pinned on a refrigerator or In a school build.  Use your imagination.

The notecard is not just asking, its a license that spells out the terms under which you bought them and you must comply with those terms. 

 

[Sassy Romano]

The simpler answer is that they HAVE to be full perm in order for you to download them and manipulate them in external graphics packages so it's a technical limitations that full permissions must be granted in order to allow people to use them in accordance with the use granted.

As to whether embedded notecards in products that attempt to dictate limited use, would stand legal challenge, when the limited conditions that form part of the contract cannot be viewed prior to forming that contract is a different debate.

For now, just accept the general guidance already given.  Don't be a clever dick.

[Bobbie Faulds]

Let me break it down for you...

Copy...if they were no copy, you could only use them on one thing and that would be it. Once used it would be gone.

Mod...if you need to be able to use it, you need to be able to change and adapt it.

Transfer..if it was no transfer...you wouldn't be able to use it and sell or give away what you used it on. In the case of kids pictures...if I made a nursery school build and used them on the walls, I wouldn't be able to sell the building since the textures can't be transferred to someone else.

The maker is only asking that you use the textures as you please but don't give them away or sell them. They really can't stop you from giving them away, but they could, if you tried to sell them as a texture, file a DMCA against you for violting their intellectual property.

[jamajessie33]

Splat left a review for the item asking the same question and the seller left a very nice friendly comment explaining this to Splat. So hopefully Splat will follow the rules and the sellers wishes. The seller really seems like a very nice lady.

 

 

 

 

[Qie Niangao]

---

Bobbie Faulds wrote:

Transfer..if it was no transfer...you wouldn't be able to use it and sell or give away

what you used it on

. 

---

[Emphasis mine.] This may be what most befuddles people new to texture permissions, and IMHO is one of the greatest blunders in the design of SL's DRM system. The no-transfer permission setting on a texture affects not just the texture but also any objects on which the texture is painted. (If you look at such an object's contents you can see the kludge that makes this work -- and beware of the consequences of removing what's inside!)

The reason this is such bad DRM semantics is that it forces texture sellers to protect their products with EULAs, because they can't use a no-transfer permission for the one occasion for which it would actually be useful for textures, if only it were allowed to mean the same as every other asset type: that the texture itself can't be transfered, but that restriction doesn't virally contaminate everything on which the texture is painted.

But it's too late to undo that now. Maybe in SL2.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Qie Niangao wrote:

---

Bobbie Faulds wrote:

Transfer..if it was no transfer...you wouldn't be able to use it and sell or give away

what you used it on

. 

---

[Emphasis mine.] This may be what most befuddles people new to texture permissions, and IMHO is one of the greatest blunders in the design of SL's DRM system. The no-transfer permission setting on a texture affects not just the texture but also any objects on which the texture is painted. (If you look at such an object's contents you can see the kludge that makes this work -- and beware of the consequences of removing what's inside!)

The reason this is such bad DRM semantics is that it forces texture sellers to protect their products with EULAs, because they can't use a no-transfer permission for the one occasion for which it would actually be useful for textures, if only it were allowed to mean the same as every other asset type: that the texture itself can't be transfered, but that restriction doesn't virally contaminate everything on which the texture is painted.

But it's too late to undo that now. Maybe in SL2.

---

A similar problem exists with Animations and Gestures.  Unless an animation is full perm I can't even use it in my own gesture.  Can be very frustrating at times.