Logging infomation TOS question..

[Carl Thibodeaux]

This happened at a infohub on SL. I accidently bumped into someone whose standing right near the landing spot. He's unavailable, so he's not moving and is always standing here. I bumped into him on accident and this happened. If i know my TOS well, i can report him back for it saving my infomation to possibly report me?

 

[Bernie Shippe]

there's no tos violation there.  stop whining.

[Carl Thibodeaux]

Actually your wrong there. Logging infomation is in violation of the TOS. 

Want to see where?

That's why you can be reported for sharing IM's.

[Bernie Shippe]

logging info is NOT a tos violation

that is NOT im sharing

stop whining

[Malanya]

Was it said in local chat for others to see? I don't think LL would do anything if this person reported you, they obviously have something enabled for that text to appear. The info hubs are so crowded you can't help but accidentally bump someone. I wouldn't worry about this at all. The av is not actually logging you, it could be a combat hud or something.

 

[Amethyst Jetaime]

That is not logging information.  Your avatar key is public information available to anyone.  There is no indication he is going to AR you either.  Even if he did, LL would not do anything.  People accidental bump people all the time.

My advice is to chill

[Tari Landar]

Local chat doesn't fall into the same category as private ims do.

So, no, no violation at all. All of that information is readily available in every viewer.

[Dilbert Dilweg]

The viewer logs the same information by default. can be accessed looking at "Bumps, Hits, and Pushes"In develop menu of SL viewer 3

The user simply has a push logger Hud attached to him/her. It is probably set more sensitive than the SL viewer. Who knows. you might get some spam at a later date tho lol.

Relax a little, 

[Qwalyphi Korpov]

---

Carl Thibodeaux wrote:

Actually your wrong there. Logging infomation is in violation of the TOS. 

Want to see where?

That's why you can be reported for sharing IM's.

---

You seem to have a different TOS than me.  So yes, I'd like to see where.  Feel free to quote the exact item you feel is relevant.

[Qwalyphi Korpov]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

Local chat doesn't fall into the same category as private ims do.

So, no, no violation at all. All of that information is readily available in every viewer.

---

Your view of things seems very reasonable.  However the TOS aren't necessarily reasonable.  Below I've quoted to items that address disclosure of conversations.  They don't set out separate categories for local chat and private IMs as you do.  There may be other places that specify private IMs can't be disclosed.  Those don't change the meaning of the TOS as written.  I've bolded some of the text for emphasis.

From the Community Standards:

• Disclosure

• Residents are entitled to a reasonable level of privacy with regard to their Second Life experience. Sharing personal information about your fellow Residents without their consent -- including gender, religion, age, marital status, race, sexual preference, alternate account names, and real-world location beyond what is provided by them in their Resident profile -- is not allowed. Remotely monitoring conversations in Second Life, posting conversation logs, or sharing conversation logs without the participants' consent are all prohibited.

From LL Official: Residents privacy rights:

Disclosing private Second Life conversations

Sharing or posting a conversation inworld or in the Second Life forums without consent of all involved Residents is a violation of the Terms of Service.

NOTE: This does not include posting of chat to social media sites or other websites. Posting such logs on web pages, emailing them, or printing them out and posting them on utility poles in the "real world" -- are all actions beyond the scope of the Second Life Terms of Service. ; while that might be illegal, but those laws must be enforced by the proper law enforcement agencies.

"Conversation" means text that originally came from Second Life chat or Second Life instant messages. If it's totally unattributed, then it isn't considered disclosure. Additionally, Residents are not punished for sharing or posting a comment such as "Bob Resident said, 'You're the greatest!'"

 

[Malanya]

Local chat does if it's doing something against the TOS as with a certain vendor how it spurts out in local that you are an alt or a griefer. That is against the TOS.

If local chat violates a persons privacy re: rl it can't be used either.

[Perrie Juran]

First off, looking at the color coding in that "Chat" it appears to be what would be referred to as a 'direct message (IM)' sent by an object, in this case the HUD the bumpee was wearing, so only you and him would have seen it.  No one else.  See this thread (pops) and especially note Qui's comments for more info.  (I don't know why the colors as chosen from the color picker don't appear exactly the same in the preference window as they do in text.  It makes it a bit confusing).

As others  have pointed out, the logging of bumps and pushes is a Viewer function.  Also this does not qualify as a conversation.

In addition, by your logic, really anyone who uses a visitor tracker on their SIM or Parcel would then be in violation because they gather and save your info and to view it that info shows up in the chat window.  There is nothing in the TOS that requires I inform you that I am logging  your visit to my place.

The gist of this HUD is that all it is doing is telling you that this Ava knows it's been pushed by you.

No, there is no Violation here. 

 

[Tari Landar]

---

Malanya wrote:

Local chat does if it's doing something against the TOS as with a certain vendor how it spurts out in local that you are an alt or a griefer. That is against the TOS.

If local chat violates a persons privacy re: rl it can't be used either.

---

True, if the information it's spurting out is something like listing the alts you have, sharing any rl information about you, or sharing private ims even, that's a tos violation everywhere on sl property(forums, inworld, etc.)

My comment about it not applying was more for the whole logging/saving info part since that seems to be what the op is most worried about and thinks IS the tos violation. It's not a violation for an object, or person, to log anything said in local chat. . That object could have just as easily called the op a purple people eater. It still wouldn't be a tos violation to state, and then log, what it said. If that were the case even visitor counters would violate tos, and they don't either.

[Nova Convair]

Obviously a troll that waits for people like the threadstarter.

I often wonder how threads grow around nothing and this time I add some nothing to the nothing

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

Tari Landar wrote:

---

Malanya wrote:

Local chat does if it's doing something against the TOS as with a certain vendor how it spurts out in local that you are an alt or a griefer. That is against the TOS.

If local chat violates a persons privacy re: rl it can't be used either.

---

True, if the information it's spurting out is something like listing the alts you have, sharing any rl information about you, or sharing private ims even, that's a tos violation everywhere on sl property(forums, inworld, etc.)

My comment about it not applying was more for the whole logging/saving info part since that seems to be what the op is most worried about and thinks IS the tos violation. It's not a violation for an object, or person, to log anything said in local chat. . That object could have just as easily called the op a purple people eater. It still wouldn't be a tos violation to state, and then log, what it said. If that were the case even visitor counters would violate tos, and they don't either.

---

Just for reference, no where in the TOS iirc is the phrase "Local Chat" used.

The word is "Conversation," which is defined in The Wiki as:

"Conversation" means text that originally came from Second Life chat or Second Life instant messages."

I'd be skeptical to think that was meant to include text generated from an object.

 

 

---

Nova Convair wrote:

Obviously a troll that waits for people like the threadstarter.

I often wonder how threads grow around nothing and this time I add some nothing to the nothing

 

---

I was kind of thinking the same things but it was bright and shiny and I couldn't resist playing with it. 

 

[Malanya]

No, I understand. The OP seemed worried about someone reporting him for a generic message that possibly came from a hud (or whatever the object was) but didn't say anything that could make an AR against him successful. I was just adding that there are some things in local that is against the TOS.