Any incidents in which "recreations" are removed?

[Fusionbolt2000]

Just curious, but is there any known incident in which "recreations" are removed? I mean, I see lots of stuff based on TV shows and Games in the marketplace, as well as company stuff made by, well, just some random people, if you make something but don't sell it, is it still not allowed? Just wondering since I kinda like recreations if they are well made XD And how big is the chance of it actually being taken down?

[Perrie Juran]

---

Fusionbolt2000 wrote:

Just curious, but is there any known incident in which "recreations" are removed? I mean, I see lots of stuff based on TV shows and Games in the marketplace, as well as company stuff made by, well, just some random people, if you make something but don't sell it, is it still not allowed? Just wondering since I kinda like recreations if they are well made

And how big is the chance of it actually being taken down?

---

yes

maybe

VERY

[Fusionbolt2000]

If the chance is very big, how come there is so much of it?

[iCade]

They simply haven't been caught yet.

Why are there so many break ins in RL? Some criminals get caught, others don't. Same goes for everything else against the law.

Unfortunately, enough people lack higher brain functions and usually justify their law breaking with the horrenderously stupid response of "But others do it, too!" Yeah, like that will hold up in court. Heh.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Fusionbolt2000 wrote:

If the chance is very big, how come there is so much of it?

---

See iCade's response.

I am curious however why you are laughing?

[Fusionbolt2000]

Eh, I just use "" allot, I don't know, that's just me, I guess, same with "^^" Just how I write, anyway, I read that, they can only take something down if they get a report from the actual company, is that true? And I still kinda want to know if anyone knows the real answer to the stuff that makes NO money whatsoever by not selling it or giving it out for free.

[Rolig Loon]

SL works just like RL. It doesn't make any difference whether you sell stolen goods.  What makes a difference is that you stole them. 

See http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Intellectual_Property and Linden Lab's required response to IP infringement under the federal DMCA, at http://secondlife.com/corporate/dmca.php .

[Fusionbolt2000]

What happens if the owner never sends a report, or if it is a company that don't care about/likes fan made stuff?

[Perrie Juran]

[Amethyst Jetaime]

The owner of the copyright or trademark must file a DMCA notice with LL to have it removed.  If they know it is going on and don't care, so don't file a notice, then generally nothing happens.  HOWEVER, LL has been known to remove items from the MP that appear to violate well known copyrights for famous items or brand trademarks when they see them.

You also must understand that some copyright owners give the merchant a license or permission to sell the item in SL. That is why only the copyright owner can file a DMCA notice with LL. 

If you are asking all this because you are considering selling things that you don't own the copyrights too, then you really shouldn't risk it. It is likely that some people that recognize it will report it to the owner in most cases and most likely they will not only have it removed but could take you to RL court and sue you for a lot of money.  You could also be banned from SL.

If you are asking because you know that the copyright of something that is being sold does not belong to the person selling it then steer clear.  If you buy it , it will more than likely some day disappear from your inventory with no compensation to you.  You can also have your account frozen and may also be banned if LL thinks you knowingly received stolen items.

One exception is that if you buy something in SL from the creator or authorized reseller and if the item has transfer permissions you are allowed to give it away or sell the copy you have.  You however can not sell multiple copies  of the same item by copying it illegally and must sell it as a 'used' item. 

Another exception is that full perm items come with a license from  the original creator to resell an item.  Generally such licenses are given to other creators and they are required by the license to sell it only as part of a larger build or change it in some material way or the person is a licensed affiliated reseller but must also follow certain restrictions outlined in their license.

[Theresa Tennyson]

You asked basically the same question back at the end of last year and this was my reply:

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

If you want a real-fake-world rule of thumb, I suggest:

Don't violate the copyright of a company in such a way that could be detected by an intern using a web browser to search the name of that product.

Linden Lab generally only pursues copyright issues if they receive a complaint. If someone is selling an Audible the Groundhog avatar under that name on the marketplace, the intern from AudibleCo may see that web page pop up in a search and then tell their supervisor, who will then annoy Linden Lab enough that the product will be taken down. If you sell an avatar that looks exactly like Audible only you call him "Noisy" and let the buyers connect the dots, it's doubtful that the intern will find that ad. It's highly unlikely that the intern will delve deep into the Marketplace or, God forbid, go in world because that will probably find them getting up to something that will get them de-interned in a matter of hours/minutes. It would be like having a four-year-old watch your cookies.

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

There, now PAY ATTENTION TO ME so I don't have to copy and paste. Here's the new part...

Is it ever "okay" or "allowed" to violate a copyright? No.

Is it done in SL? Yes.

Does most of this do the slightest, slightest damage to the copyight holder, realistically? No.

Does that make it "okay"? No.

Will someone make it go away? Very doubtful if it isn't in everyone's face.

Will you get in real trouble for it? Super doubtful.

Does that make it "okay"? No.

Will I think you're a bad person if you make a SL T-shirt with a picture of Pikachu on it without getting a license? No.

Will I buy it? No.

Would I buy it if it were Felix the Cat, under the same circumstances? Maybe, because Felix is cool.

Would I feel guilty about it? No.

Does that make it "okay"? No.

 

Nobody's going to give you permission to violate copyright - they can't. Don't ask for it. You can ask for forgiveness afterwards. You'll probably get it. Don't count on it though. The choices are yours, grasshopper....

 

[Rolig Loon]

---

Fusionbolt2000 wrote:

What happens if the owner never sends a report, or if it is a company that don't care about/likes fan made stuff?

---

D'uh.  What happens if you shoplift a pack of cigarettes from the corner grocery store and the cashier doesn't catch you?  You're still a thief.  

You're asking the wrong questions.  The right question is "Is it wrong to steal?", not "Will I get caught?"

[Madeline Blackbart]

Actually to be fair you actually could use felix the cat as I believe it's public domain now to the best of my knowledge. Especially since it was first pudlished before 1923 and things before that date aren't covered by the extension on copyright. Also public domain is popeye and some bettie boop cartoons.

[jwenting]

---

Fusionbolt2000 wrote:

If the chance is very big, how come there is so much of it?

---

Simple, because people upload stuff that violates the TOS faster than LL can delete it...

A dozen LL employees pressing delete vs several thousand SL users pressing upload, it's a losing battle.

But it's a battle that's being fought, and if you buy from those uploaders you're out of money and out of product when it does get deleted and the uploaders are liable to lose their accounts if they get caught repeatedly.

So don't do it, and don't buy it.

It's ok to create something that looks similar, is based on, a real world thing, but it can't be an exact reproduction, especially it can't use the name, logos, trademarks, colour scheme of the real world thing.

There are of course corner cases. Like the sailboat textured and named "la rie qui vache", getting around the trademark on the cheeseproduct called "la vache qui rie", or motorcycles called Darley Havidson.

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

jwenting wrote:

 

There are of course corner cases. Like the sailboat textured and named "la rie qui vache", getting around the trademark on the cheeseproduct called "la vache qui rie", or motorcycles called Darley Havidson.

---

There is nothing about these examples that are corner cases.  The first example is clearly not a trademark infringement because the products being sold are not the same.  That is why Apple computers doesn't infringe on the trademark of Apple the music recording company.  However if Apple computer used the name Apple to sell music that would be an infringement.  That is why they use iTunes instead.

The second example is most likely a violation of trademark law in the US, even though the name is different.  Using Darley Havidson to sell motorcycles clearly is an attempt to profit from the RL name of Harley Davidson.  Counterfeit goods in RL are often sold under names that are just slightly off from the real brand name, like your second example, and are regularly confiscated by authorities.

But clearly a virtual motorcycle is not a RL one you say?  Under trademark law one standard of violation is the  "likelihood of confusion." To be more specific, the use of a slightly different trademark in connection with the sale of a good constitutes infringement if it is likely to cause consumer confusion as to the source of those goods or the sponsorship or approval of the actual trademark owner. It also could be a violation of the standard of dilution of a trademark.  The owner of a mark can bring an action against any use that dilutes the distinctive quality of that mark through "tarnishment" of that mark Tarnishment occurs when the mark is cast in an unflattering light, typically through its association with inferior products or services. Of course this all would have to be proven in court but even if you win your case its going to cost you a ton in legal fees to defend yourself.  So why risk it?

Finally just altering a trademark slightly is also against the TOS. The Intellectual Property policy of LL is incorporated into the TOS by reference.  It states; "If you don't have permission [sic from the trademark owner], please don't just use a misspelling of the brand name, for example, "Njke" instead of "Nike". 

[TishaRogue]

If you see something that has an actual logo or is a likeness of something that you know would have a copy write or tm in rl then its probably someone going against the rules. It may have an odd chance that they got the license rights and if that is the case they would be happy to show proof of that. If you ask if they have the license and they don't respond ... then guess what.. they aint got none.

 

Any makers out there that use logos or likenesses should automatically state that they have the legal rights in their products listing so you have no doubt. 

Often i will pass over a product with tm stuff on them assuming they don't have the permissions so if they want the sale they will give the proof.

[Lewis Luminos]

---

jwenting wrote:

---

There are of course corner cases. Like the sailboat textured and named "la rie qui vache", getting around the trademark on the cheeseproduct called "la vache qui rie", or motorcycles called Darley Havidson.

---

Trademarks only apply to similar products. A sailboat and a motorbike are different enough that it probably wouldn't breach trademark laws.  It's to do with preventing product confusion. You can't invent a drink and call it Pepsi, but you can invent a new tech gadget and call it Pepsi, if you want to.