Any chance I could get banned for this?

[Ted McGregor]

---

Porky Gorky wrote:

---

TDD123 wrote:

Wut ? .. yeah i'm old ... ;P

---

Wow you're so old, i bet Jesus owes you money!

---

I so old .... I even know of a time without Madonna.

 

Go figure .. :robottongue:

[Bree Giffen]

I think that in the past they auto-banned your IP address after you log in with a  copybot client. I also heard that those viewers sometimes just steal your login info.

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

MyAlt4099 wrote:

SID Riler, this account started off as an alt, hence the name, but now I use it as my main account. I wish I could change the name.

Also, I would think modifying an item I purchased (a license to) even if it says "no modify" would be considered fair use, as long as I'm not making any money off of it, or preventing the creator from doing the same.

Of course the TOS is another issue entirely, since I am still using Linden Lab's service, but in practice do they really take action against people using things like that as long as they aren't doing so unfairly? Basically, even if it

is

technically against the rules, would they actually

do

anything about it, so long as I'm not negatively affecting anyone else?

---

It is not considered fair use under any circumstance.  If it was you wouldn't need to use an illegal viewer to do it. This is just a rationalization on your part to do something that you have clearly been told is not allowed and wrong.    It is considered a violation of the license and the TOS.  Using a program to  circumvent the user license is ILLEGAL and subject to the RL DMCA laws. 

Copybot has been banned from SL.  Anyone that finds out you login with it it can AR you for it and that probably would result in a ban even if you never used it to copy anything. See the Wiki about it here.

You paid to use one copy subject to the permissions granted.  You do not have permission to copy it with different permissions. Stealing is stealing.  Is it ok for me to steal your TV if I don't sell it and just keep it for personal use?

 

[Amie Kaestner]

I used to do it for the same reason until GL intercept stopped working (it was the only program I trusted). I don't see anything wrong with it personally just so long as you don't resell the textures as your own.

As for those of you getting your panties in a twist - C'mon, how many of you have never downloaded music files?

[GothGirl Demonia]

If you have a CopyBot viewer know that there are a lot of rogue copybot viewers that have been developed by a rogue third party company, and they have been putting password loggers in their TPV viewers, do not use the viewer or you risk your Second Life account this is how a large number of SL accounts whom I have seen claim to be compromised have been compromised due to TPV's, and third party CopyBot viewers.

In general though its legit to BackUp your own work.

Its not okay to Copy something else of someone elses with the viewer however or you risk getting banned from SL, even if its to modify it.

Instead ask the merchant if you can get mod permissions and they might do it.

As for most botters they come from that one Girefer site and they do not care about being banned due to the fact MAC address & IP is easy to spoof and bypass hardware bans issued by Linden Lab so most griefers do not care about getting banned from Second Life they just make new accounts and import again and again as many times as they have to.

The CopyBot source was removed but I just happen to have the source for it which is why I would recommend if you use a modified Bot Viewer for any reason you compile your own downloading third party bot viewers risks your SL account, and they are using anyone who is not a VIP, or Preimum user.

http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/general-sl-discussion/80414-hey-guys-kinggoon-users-gets.html Check this article for information on the bot viewer thingy.

[161488303349]

---

Amie Kaestner wrote:

As for those of you getting your panties in a twist - C'mon, how many of you have never downloaded music files?

---

not me

and when your ISP cancels your account bc you breach their ToS by ripping. which will happen after you get convicted and fined about $600 for each one in your possession. then you can check your own panties

welcome to the new interwebz

+

where I live the RIAA has served over 6,000 first strike notices in the last 12 months. only 1 person so far been dumb enough to go for 3 strikes. he argue freedom. the judge said he can be free to pay the fines

 

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

---

Copybot has been banned from SL.  Anyone that finds out you login with it it can AR you for it and that probably would result in a ban even if you never used it to copy anything. See the Wiki about it

here.

 

---

Good link.  Especially of note is this statement in the link:

"The use of programs that can copy other residents' creations is a violation, even if you do not use that ability.   (my emphasis)

[Sara Nova]

No--then you're actually depriving me of my TV, since you're not just making a copy. Otherwise I wouldn't care if you sold it, lol. Bad analogy! If I were to copybot something and not sell it, I am not depriving the creator of anything. Not even a sale they otherwise would have made, since I'd still need to buy the item to copy it.

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

Amie Kaestner wrote:

I used to do it for the same reason until GL intercept stopped working (it was the only program I trusted). I don't see anything wrong with it personally just so long as you don't resell the textures as your own.

As for those of you getting your panties in a twist - C'mon, how many of you have never downloaded music files?

---

I've never downloaded music illegally.  As a creator myself I don't want my IP rights violated, so not only would I be a thief, I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't respect the rights of other creators.

 

[Amethyst Jetaime]

Why so insistent on rationalizing the use of an illegal viewer?  Is there more to your reason for wanting to use copybot than you are letting on?

In the end you are probably going to do what you want to do regardless of what is said here.  Even if you use it just the one time, which I highly doubt, you will be the same as any other copybotter - a thief no matter how you rationalize it.

[Dillon Levenque]

I don't understand why this question has gone on for so long. It's really very simple.

You bought something that did not have Modify permission. Period. By taking that action you agreed IMPLICITLY and FULLY that you accepted the creator's requirement that you not modify the object.

If you then modify the object, you were lying when you bought it. If that's okay with you then well, I guess that's okay with you. It's probably not okay with most people.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

MyAlt4099 wrote:

 

Also, I would think modifying an item I purchased (a license to) even if it says "no modify" would be considered fair use, as long as I'm not making any money off of it, or preventing the creator from doing the same.

 

---

I know of some merchants who sell the same item in a variety of colors, thus making the item no modify so if someone likes two of the 10 available colors, for example, she would need to purchase the second copy separately.  In clothing many merchants offer "fat packs" at a reduced rate as compared to purchasing the same amount of different colored items separately.  In these cases making the items modify would possibly cause them to lose some sales.

Edit: clarification

 

[Czari Zenovka]

---

TDD123 wrote:

 

Even if a woodchuck could chuck wood and even if a woodchuck would chuck wood, should a woodchuck chuck wood? :robotindifferent:

---

Not according to this guy:

[Czari Zenovka]

---

TDD123 wrote:

---

Porky Gorky wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

 

ps: The Monkey Island games were fun but nothing tops Grim Fandango

---

For me i think the Monkey Island games caught me at the right age, around 16. I saw what Grim did to push the boundaries of adventure games, but by the time that came out I was late 20's and didn't really care for those types of games any more. I was more into shooters and RPG's then. 

From a personal enjoyment standpoint, and a standing the test of time standpoint, Baldur's Gate II is the best game of all time IMHO

---

All together a different era. Swapping floppies ( Insert program disk / Insert save disk / Insert disk 1 / Insert disk 2 / Insert disk 20 ) and and envying capatalists who owned harddrives that had a staggering 100 MB storage capacity.

And then Monkey Island asks you to insert disk 144 ( which no one had ) when entering a hidden passage through a tree trunk. But there's no disk. So everyone was required to cancel. And of course because of the game's title only, everyone went nuts about what was inside that tree trunk.

Hilarious then. Unimaginable now.

 

Wut ? .. yeah i'm old ... ;P

---

Probably not as old as me - I was teaching application software at a Jr. College right after the IBM clones came out.  128K RAM; 1  5.25" floppy disc drive (the "floppy disc shuffle" became a nightmare); DOS machine.  When TWO floppy disc drives were introduced we were ecstatic!!! The program disc could go in one disc drive and the storage disc in the second!  Par-teee!!!!

Then we went through the 3.5 floppy disc phase which we all thought was great because these diskettes could fit in a shirt pocket, were more durable, and had an inbuilt security feature against accidental erasing/over-writing of info.

Later on - a HARD DISC DRIVE????  As part of the PC????  No more labeling/storing/keeping track of discs???  AND it could hold 10 MEGABYTES of info!!!!  No one would EVER use all of that storage!!!  *Bigger Par-tee*

Win 3.11 is introduced - Instructors attend a workshop to learn how to use the new OS. 

*Where do we access the DOS command prompt?

*What happens if I click on this icon?  Ohhh...opppsssss...ummmm, can the recycle bin be unemptied?

Good times!

Edit: typo

 

[Drake1 Nightfire]

yes. you could get banned for it

[Bernie Shippe]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

I know of some merchants who sell the same item in a variety of colors, thus making the item no modify so if someone likes two of the ten available colors, for example, she would need to purchase the second copy separately. In clothing many merchants offer "fat packs" at a reduced rate as compared to purchasing the same amount of different colored items separately. In these cases making the items modify would possibly cause them to lose some sales.

---

and what if someone wants the item in a color/pattern not offered? "i'll make it for you for a fee". it might be about preventing copy and distribute but it's also about $$$

personally, i feel that merchants have every right to try to prevent people from ripping copies of their stuff. but, i also feel that consumers have every right to mod stuff that they've bought. not everyone who wants to c-bot want to rip people off

i've never used a c-bot viewer and i never will. it's way too risky in terms of getting your password stolen and in terms of getting your account banned. simply. not. worth. it. at all

note: i don't know why, but it won't let me post numbers, so i changed your number to the word "ten"

[Czari Zenovka]

If another color is desired and it doesn't involve much extra work or upload fees for the merchant and if asked politely, I expect some merchants would happily provide the color at no extra fee.  I personally offer retexturing of most of my items at no extra fee or, at most, the upload fee of 10L if it includes a new texture. (My items are mod to begin with, but some people don’t know how to retexture and/or would rather someone else do it.)  Sometimes another color suggestion that a merchant didn't think of will be added to their product line.  Some merchants offer items in either a copy or a transfer choice, which is really great, but that is usually the exception.

On the modify issue, I prefer the items I purchase to be mod, thus I offer this permission in my products; however, there is a very successful furniture merchant who only offers transfer perms...and her sales don't seem to be lacking.  It is not my preference but apparently her customers are ok with it.

Basically, whatever a merchant offers isn't going to please everyone, but in SL, a similar product can generally be found elsewhere with the permissions someone wants. 

[Pamela Galli]

Me too Czari (about trouble posting, tho you deleted your post about it!)  -- I tried to post in another thread and it said I could not because my message included an "&" (which it did not) and such filthy language was not allowed in this community.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Me too Czari (about trouble posting, tho you deleted your post about it!)  -- I tried to post in another thread and it said I could not because my message included an "&" (which it did not) and such filthy language was not allowed in this community.

---

That's exactly the message I got, Pamela.  I didn't know the post where I said that even showed up because on my end I kept getting the "&" isn't allowed error.

Ok, who at the Lab jiggled a wire?

[Bernie Shippe]

actually, when i was responding to you i got the bad & message too (after bad 1 and bad 0).  i had to go into the html view and remove where there was a ampersand nbsp semicolon to get it to post.  it looks fixed now.

[Staralien]

Personally, regardless of risking your account or not, it is really a matter of ethics, integrity, and honor. If you use any sort of copybot, then you clearly do not have any of those qualities.

[Phil Deakins]

---

MyAlt4099 wrote:

If I were to copybot something and not sell it, I am not depriving the creator of

anything

. Not even a sale they otherwise would have made, since I'd still need to buy the item to copy it.

---

You are totally wrong. If you were to copy something that you don't have permission to copy, you'd have two instances of the thing but you'd only have paid for one. That's theft. If you have two instances but you'd only paid for one, the seller will have lost a sale.

I've always sold my furniture with the mod and transfer permissions, but never with the copy permission, and there is a very good reason for that. Many people rent out furnished homes and, if they could pay for one couch, for instance, and make copies to put in all their homes, I would have sold just one couch but the buyer would be using many of them. And that's not very fair, is it?

If you bought a couch from me, made a copy of it and put one in each of two rooms, you'd be getting two for the price of one, and that wouldn't be very fair to me, would it? even though you didn't sell or give away either instance of the item.

There are reasons why sellers set permissions on their stuff, and circumventing those permission is wrong and often theft. If you circumvent the permissions, and you end up with two copies of an item, even if one of them never leaves your inventory, you'd be a thief, and you'd deserve to be punished as a thief. If an item isn't exactly what you want, don't buy it. It's as simple as that.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Bernie Shippe wrote:

and what if someone wants the item in a color/pattern not offered?

---

Just a quick reply...

If the desired colour/pattern isn't offered, don't buy it. It's not a justification for circumventing the permissions.

 

Just out of interest...

Some of my furniture is sold in fixed colours or fixed textures, and they are priced at a certain amount. I also do the same items in colour/texture-changing versions that are priced a little higher.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

MyAlt4099 wrote:

If I were to copybot something and not sell it, I am not depriving the creator of

anything

. Not even a sale they otherwise would have made, since I'd still need to buy the item to copy it.

---

I've always sold my furniture with the mod and transfer permissions, but never with the copy permission, and there is a very good reason for that. Many people rent out furnished homes and, if they could pay for one couch, for instance, and make copies to put in all their homes, I would have sold just one couch but the buyer would be using many of them. And that's not very fair, is it?

If you bought a couch from me, made a copy of it and put one in each of two rooms, you'd be getting two for the price of one, and that wouldn't be very fair to me, would it? even though you didn't sell or give away either instance of the item.

There are reasons why sellers set permissions on their stuff, and circumventing those permission is wrong and often theft. If you circumvent the permissions, and you end up with two copies of an item, even if one of them never leaves your inventory, you'd be a thief, and you'd deserve to be punished as a thief. If an item isn't exactly what you want, don't buy it. It's as simple as that.

---

Thank you for posting this, Phil.  I have wrestled with copy vs transfer for my furnishings.  When I first started selling my items, I made them mod/trans because, as a customer, I liked being able to give an item to someone else if I didn't want it anymore or *coughs* held a yard sale.  Then I started hearing people in the forums complain about trying to mod an item and essentially "breaking" it or not being able to get it like they want and stating that if an item is sold as mod, it should be sold as copy so a fresh version is always available.

I then did a small survey here in the forums to see if people preferred mod/copy or mod/trans and if a home furnishing item was mod/copy would they pay more for it than a mod/trans.  The responses were mixed.  With the asset server sometimes "eating" inventory, I like having a copy of anything I purchase tucked away so I sold my items mod/copy

The copy vs trans "debate" is still stuck in my head, however.  The reasons you mentioned above are what plays into leaning toward trans perms.  Especially for the low prices of my products, I think going back to mod/trans is prudent for me.

[Bernie Shippe]

---

Staralien wrote:

Personally, regardless of risking your account or not, it is really a matter of ethics, integrity, and honor. If you use any sort of copybot, then you clearly do not have any of those qualities.

---

yeah it's "a matter of ethics, integrity, and honor."  that doesn't mean everyone who uses or wants to use copybot lacks those qualities.  that's a myth