Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Clive Hendes

SL hates entrepreneurs

Recommended Posts

 

 


Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

Oh, and content creators are not the "sole" supporters of SL.   They are one-side of a symbiotic relationship.  The other side is the consumers.  Some consumers are also content creators...but many more are
just
consumers.  These are people who come to SL and buy/rent land, buy clothing, hair, skins, houses, and furniture.  They spend money/Lindens at clubs, art galleries, shows, and keep the money flow going.   These consumers import money into SL for the purpose of spending...and it is their form of entertainment.  Both content creators and consumers are needed for the symbiosis to work.

 

I selected this part of your post because sometimes in the forums this point gets missed. I suspect that happens because such a high percentage of forum aficionados are merchants/creators. No doubt that is because the original forums (back before i was born) had most to do with creation and selling. Fact is, if consumers did not outnumber creators/merchants by a very wide margin, things economic in SL would go south in a rush.

I also selected it because I am one of those who just consumes. I am here because I like being here. I spend my money for the pleasure I get from being here. I have zero problem with people who spend nothing; I just enjoy SL more if I can have what I want.

Of couse (like you) I could just be another victim of the establishment, my 'uncritical' mind an open book.

 

 

ETA: I am so tired of getting the post line wrong in quotes. I just can't seem to figure out a foolproof way to get the quote as quote and my stuff as post. In case it is not obvious: my comment starts under the line.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


JeanneAnne wrote:



I'm complaining cuz it burns my butt that LL runs SL in a totally authoritarian manner. Cuz executive & investor parasites get rich off the labor of others.

Jeanne

Do you watch any TV? oh wait, you use the internet, better question. Do you think the execs at the ISP do any real work? Do you think ANY exec does real work? Welcome to the real world. Big business runs the world, always has, always will.

I put $L into SL when i want. I  try to earn enough as a DJ and creator to pay for my house and stream.  Some moths i do, some i dont. but i dont whine and complain about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

.....but without a way to make that determination the ISP would be making a judgment without facts.  That is the problem with digital content........it's next to impossible to know who's right and who's wrong when an accusation is made.  You are saying that LL should take the risk of financial penalties without a way to know with any reasonable assurance that that risk is minimal.  

They don't have a choice unless you believe a company should take risks that could very well be financially damaging.  That's not a smart way to do business. 

Let me emphasize that I am talking about DMCA notifications that are invalid on their faces, i.e., if all of the facts alleged were completely true, it is obvious that there would be no copyright infringement.  These are cases in which all the facts needed are in the notification itself.  No research is needed; it just needs to be read.  It is abusive to file such notifications, and LL should not abet obvious abuse of its customers.  Practically, it would take less effort to read the notification than to take down content.

It is arguable that companies that look out for their customers' interests, even when it costs them something in the short run, can prosper more in the long run because of the appreciation and loyalty that their care engenders.

Let me bring up something that I've never seen discussed here: DMCA subpoenas.  Instead if filing a notification and getting the allegedly infringing content taken down, someone can present a subpoena demanding the RL identity and contact information of the alleged infringer.  I imagine that most residents use their home addresses on the credit cards and Paypal accounts that LL has on file.  So, any psycho who is willing to abuse the DMCA can get anyone's home address!  That's scary, particularly considering that it is very easy to be an unwitting infringer who unknowingly bought infringing content in good faith.   After all, there are plenty of kooks in SL, and giving out someone's address could make her susceptable to RL harassment or even endanger her.   I think LL definitely should take a little risk if it receives one of these subpoenas, at the very least delaying responding until it has informed the target and the target has has time to file a motion to quash the subpoena.  Don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me emphasize that I am talking about DMCA notifications that are invalid on their faces, i.e., if all of the facts alleged were completely true, it is obvious that there would be no copyright infringement.  These are cases in which all the facts needed are in the notification itself.  No research is needed; it just needs to be read.  It is abusive to file such notifications, and LL should not abet obvious abuse of its customers.  Practically, it would take less effort to read the notification than to take down content.

It is arguable that companies that look out for their customers' interests, even when it costs them something in the short run, can prosper more in the long run because of the appreciation and loyalty that their care engenders.

Let me bring up something that I've never seen discussed here: DMCA subpoenas.  Instead if filing a notification and getting the allegedly infringing content taken down, someone can present a subpoena demanding the RL identity and contact information of the alleged infringer.  I imagine that most residents use their home addresses on the credit cards and Paypal accounts that LL has on file.  So, any psycho who is willing to abuse the DMCA can get anyone's home address!  That's scary, particularly considering that it is very easy to be an unwitting infringer who unknowingly bought infringing content in good faith.   After all, there are plenty of kooks in SL, and giving out someone's address could make her susceptable to RL harassment or even endanger her.  I think LL definitely should take a little risk if it receives one of these subpoenas, at the very least delaying responding until it has informed the target and the target has has time to file a motion to quash the subpoena.  Don't you?

----------------------------------------

Somehow I don't think you understand the legal system in the US (and I also, somehow, believe you reside in the US).  A subpeona can only be issued by a court of law.  To get a court of law to issue a subpeona credible evidence must be presented that establishes, reasonable evidence that a crime has been commited.  Then the court gets the information from Linden Lab.  It's important to remember a DMCA is not a criminal complaint.......it's civil complaint (no one is going to jail but they may be fined or otherwise "punished", unless a criminal act is used to gain evidence or powers to persue the civil offense.....serious jail time is possible if that happens).  Rules of evidence are less strict but rights to privacy are still required making it not "automatic" that the person suing is going to get any personal information  until the court determines that it's necessary and/or proper to give out that information.  A DMCA is not a subpeona......it's a complaint accusing someone of infringing on the person's IP rights (a broader term than copyright).  Nothing has been proven.......just the accusation.  The complaint can be negated easily by the accused with a counter complaint.  At that point it's up to the accuser to "take it to court".........where a subpeona can then be issued.  The subpeona is not served on LL.......it's served on the accused.  The accused also has the right to subpeona (in fact I think it's automatic if the accuser serves the accused.......that part of the US law that requires the accused the right to know who's accusing them (remember that from your civics classes?).

Linden Lab is out of the equation once it takes down and/or re-instates the content in question.  And if you will read the ToS anyone making false claims about another in SL that person is subject to being banned.  That's for DMCA's as well as AR's.  And, in case you forgot, it is a criminal offense (not civil) to make false accusations to a court of law (civil or criminal).  Anyone using a false DMCA to gain personal information is committing a serious crime......and that person is going to have be a very stupid individual to even attempt spoofing the court into being an accomplice to that crime.  There are far easier and less risky ways to get personal information about someone........ways that don't let the court get involved in the crime.

You're grasping now, Jennifer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dillon Levenque wrote:

ETA: I am so tired of getting the post line wrong in quotes. I just can't seem to figure out a foolproof way to get the quote as quote and my stuff as post. In case it is not obvious: my comment starts under the line.


Dillion, I think one thing that SL residents can agree on, is that the SL forum software is dreadful!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Rival Destiny wrote:

I think it's totally legit topic.  If something is transferrable and has no user license, then it's not against any LL regulation or TOS to sell it.  Full permissions do not mean the product cannot be resold.  Unless there is a license stating it can not be.

Selling freebies on the other hand, is a totally different topic I think.  And again, if it's transferrable then there will be people that will sell them.  This is also, not against and rules or regs but is of course frowned upon.

Since the OP speaks of reselling a full perm item but doesn't indicate whether it came with a license or not, can't really judge whether or not he is doing so against the creator's wishes.

I was talking about full perm textures or build kits. You can't give those away as is.

One thing some people are missing is that sometimes these are given away and the next person to get them does not know they are not full perm freebie textures or build kits. They either got them in a folder or in a box minus the original creator's licensing. Some groups exist to share legal full perm freebie textures or scripts. I have seen people pass them out and think nothing of it. Other people have to step in and tell them it's wrong, and notify the group owner so everyone who got one knows they should delete it.

So no just because there is no licensing with it does not mean that it is legal to pass around or resell as is. Some skin templates were stolen for example and a skin shop had to shut down for months to redo all their skins. The only way to be sure is buy it from the creator themselves, a reputable creator. Or check who made it and check their profile to see if they have a shop or if they say something about "I make things to give out free."

We don't know what is going on here we just have a post from someone who sounds upset and entitled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Clarissa Lowell wrote:


Rival Destiny wrote:

I think it's totally legit topic.  If something is transferrable and has no user license, then it's not against any LL regulation or TOS to sell it.  Full permissions do not mean the product cannot be resold.  Unless there is a license stating it can not be.

Selling freebies on the other hand, is a totally different topic I think.  And again, if it's transferrable then there will be people that will sell them.  This is also, not against and rules or regs but is of course frowned upon.

Since the OP speaks of reselling a full perm item but doesn't indicate whether it came with a license or not, can't really judge whether or not he is doing so against the creator's wishes.

I was talking about full perm textures or build kits. You can't give those away as is.

One thing some people are missing is that sometimes these are given away and the next person to get them does not know they are not full perm freebie textures or build kits. They either got them in a folder or in a box minus the original creator's licensing. Some groups exist to share legal full perm freebie textures or scripts. I have seen people pass them out and think nothing of it. Other people have to step in and tell them it's wrong, and notify the group owner so everyone who got one knows they should delete it.

So no just because there is no licensing with it does not mean that it is legal to pass around or resell as is. Some skin templates were stolen for example and a skin shop had to shut down for months to redo all their skins. The only way to be sure is buy it from the creator themselves, a reputable creator. Or check who made it and check their profile to see if they have a shop or if they say something about "I make things to give out free."

We don't know what is going on here we just have a post from someone who sounds upset and entitled.

Of course - but my comment was based on the OP having done his/her due diligence. This would include looking to see who the creator is & from there, determining whether the item is resellable or not. 

And ITA, we don't know what is going on here, I said that in my comment:  "Since the OP speaks of reselling a full perm item but doesn't indicate whether it came with a license or not, can't really judge whether or not he is doing so against the creator's wishes."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dillon Levenque wrote:

 

 

ETA: I am so tired of getting the post line wrong in quotes. I just can't seem to figure out a foolproof way to get the quote as quote and my stuff as post. In case it is not obvious: my comment starts under the line.

 

An easy way to get your cursor to the right spot in your post (whether or not you are editing the post you quote) is to click the space below the quote line (not in a specific spot) and start your text there.  The cursor will naturally appear a couple of lines below the quote line.  Just do not start your text immediately below the quote line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I was doing that, having noticed it seemed to work. Does not always work for me possibly, because I'm doing something else wrong. It never happens with quotes I don't edit. Thank you for the advice in any case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Dillon Levenque wrote:

I thought I was doing that, having noticed it seemed to work. Does not always work for me possibly, because I'm doing something else wrong. It never happens with quotes I don't edit. Thank you for the advice in any case.

I too find that when I have problems it is when I have edited a quote.  Not all the time but enough to be an annoyance and I haven't been able to peg the cause.  Everything looks good until I submit the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand and I wasn't disagreeing with you, just pointing out that we can't assume a person does their due diligence or isn't a newbie who doesn't know the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Perrie Juran wrote:


Dillon Levenque wrote:

I thought I was doing that, having noticed it seemed to work. Does not always work for me possibly, because I'm doing something else wrong. It never happens with quotes I don't edit. Thank you for the advice in any case.

I too find that when I have problems it is when I have edited a quote.  Not all the time but enough to be an annoyance and I haven't been able to peg the cause.  Everything looks good until I submit the post.

If you want to make really sure, just check the HTML tab and ensure your text falls outside the closing </blockquote> tag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Peggy Paperdoll wrote:

 

A subpoena can only be issued by a court of law.  To get a court of law to issue a subpoena credible evidence must be presented that establishes, reasonable evidence that a crime has been committed.  Then the court gets the information from Linden Lab.  

 

Many people mistakenly believe that subpoenas in civil cases are reviewed by judges before they are served.  The only routine review involves the court clerk making sure that required signatures, statements, etc. are there; there is no routine review of evidence or justification.  You can find information about the misuse of DMCA subpoenas here and about the process  here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Many people mistakenly believe that subpoenas in civil cases are reviewed by judges before they are served.  The only routine review involves the court clerk making sure that required signatures, statements, etc. are there; there is no routine review of evidence or justification.  You can find information about the misuse of DMCA subpoenas here and about the process  here."

------------------------------------

I don't think I ever mentioned the word "judge".  I mentioned "court of law".  A court clerk is an officer of the court which means the clerk is a representative of the court and acts on the court's behalf.  The burden of proof in a civil action is lower than the burden of proof in a criminal action.......I said that too.  I was responding to your claim that someone could use a DMCA complaint to gain personal and private information about someone.  That's not possible unless the person making the claim and commits a criminal act by lying or making a false claim (it can be done if someone really thinks they can get away with it and has money for just that purpose).  But it's not automatic that any information is gained until it gets in the court system.  With all the other ways people wanting personal information about someone attempting to use the US court system is probably the least effective way.......not to mention there is serious criminal charges that can be issued and if convicted, some serious jail time.  Subpeonas are not some magic bullet for information.........not even for DMCA suites.

 

BTW, court clerks are almost alway very knowledgable in law...........it's like a job requirement.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peggy. I very much respect you and love you.  I am just a person who is interested in SL and IP law who has no professional qualifications.  I understand that you think that the sanctions that are in place against people who abuse the DMCA are sufficient to prevent abuse.  I do not.  The last I heard, which was a few years ago, a US Attorney would not prosecute a case in which the stolen property was less than $10,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...