CG Textures Announcement - FYI

[Vick Forcella]

---

Kwakkelde Kwak wrote:

You could even take out the "

except break the law

" part, since nobody is allowed to break the law. That would save at least another $85,000. (How much do spaces cost?)

---

Covered: 2.3 first paragraph. No modification, no attorney fees

---

That would be very nice. Problem is LL would have to verify every single upload and verify it again and still risk not having verified enough. That would cost a whole lot more.

---

Covered 2.3 paragraph 6

---

Even worse, if those would be the ToS, LL wouldn't be able to move, show, let alone distribute our content, because they wouldn't have any rights or licenses to do so.

LL needs certain rights to make Second Life work, they don't need the right to sell our content "

for any purpose whatsoever

".

---

Covered 2.3 paragraph 5

Problem is, CG Textures retains ownership of their work, so we never had the licence to use their textures. CG Textures Licence sub paragraph INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY and LL TOS 2.3 paragraph 2, they don't match.

[Kwakkelde Kwak]

I have no clue which paragraphs you refer to. par 5 is the one I quoted completely. Are we looking at the same ToS?

You also confuse me by saying "CG Textures retains ownership of their work, so we never had the licence to use their textures" CG retaining ownership does in no way imply that we have no license to use them. The two are completely different things.

CG Textures doesn't allow reselling of textures (as textures), LL now claims that right. That's new and that's where everything goes wrong.

[Morgaine Christensen]

I thought CG already had a TOS in place that usage of their property was not allowed for upload or derivative form for Second Life regardless if for commercial/non-commercial usage.  I think the the old TOS was in place for a year or more by CG, which was one of the reason I stop using the site.

LL's new TOS may or may not hold water in a court of law.  We all know how up to date the laws are on virtual commerce ans such. 

[Rya Nitely]

CG Textures would be happy to allow us to upload and use their textures in SL as before, if LL reversed the section in their latest ToS that is causing the problem. So, it was OK before and would be OK again if the new ToS is changed back to the old wording.

[Chic Aeon]

Agree with Rya. If you go to the CG Texture explanation page it is the CHANGE that is causing the problem. Before we could use the textures in our builds and mesh, just not sell as textures. Now not only are textures which are LICENSED prohibited, so are creative commons etc. If we didn't make it and own all rights to it, it cannot be uploaded.

I cannot even legally upload photos from Flickr which I have expressed permission  to do so but not in any legal document in order to add to the gallery. They are not MINE and I don't hold the COPYRIGHT. It is very unlikely that the photographers want to sign a legal document for use . So that is no longer happening.

BTW I wrote a letter awhile back to support at CG Textures thanking them for bringing this to our attention. Honestly no one seemed to know or care until they pointed out that very nasty TOS clause about rights. I received a nice note back. So personally I am thankful they did this. Bigger issues than textures that most wouldn't have noted.

 

[Rex Cronon]

Do you think that the new ll tos is draconian?
Maybe you think is poorly written?
Do you want ll to change the the tos?
Than come and vote here: http://rcds.nfshost.com/blog_show.php/?id=_blog_09262013091334_llsl=Rex-Cronon
Lets show to ll that we stand united.
If enough of us do it, than maybe ll will listen.
After all we are its customers and supporters.
We are the users and creators of the things that fill this virtual word.
I don't know what are our chances of success, but I know that is better than doing nothing.

[Tyiler Scarborough]

Use them anyways...   

[Rya Nitely]

---

Tyiler Scarborough wrote:

Use them anyways...   

---

ya think? :matte-motes-confused: because I respect and am considering all opinions on this issue. I'm not dismissing anyone's thoughts. So I will certainly be taking yours on board with everything else mentioned on the topic.

thank you :matte-motes-big-grin:

[Kylie Sabra]

Check the United Content Creators of SL Blog for links to articles, blogs, forums regarding SL TOS. 

http://unitedcontentcreatorsofsl.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/test-post/

 

You can also download information from the group's Google Drive.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B6WF8NkOyoV4R3NOTm1YME5IdGc&usp=sharing

 

Top Headlines:

 

10-07-13 Avastar Takes a Softer Stance on SL TOS, by Kylie Sabra

10-07-13 Huge Problem for All Creators in Second Life, by Jo Yardley

10-06-13  Response to Post from Mona Eberhardt by Kylie Sabra  

10-05-13 From Gamasutra – “Linden Lab Acquires Distribution Service Dasura” 

10-05-13  Bryn Oh says, “Farewell, LEA.”  

10-03-13 A Scrutiny of the Recent Changes to Second Life’s TOS, by Mona Eberhardt – A thoughtful, pa...

 

[Kylie Sabra]

If you are concerned about the Second Life Terms of Service, I encourage you to join the United Content Creators of SL group.  It is an open group offering a structured approach to effecting change.  

Click link to join. 

http://search.secondlife.com/?lang=en-US&collection_chosen=groups&query_term=united+content+creators+of+SL#

[Treasure Ballinger]

Hello; I'm not a content creator, I just have a question about your post here. All these blogs, and groups and forums and people discussing, and petitons and things. Does LL care about any of it? Or even respond or pay attention to anything anyone says? To effect change, both sides of a coin have to be on board for it, so I was just wondering, what kind of change can be effected, if no one at LL is on board for what the customers think? Does anyone have their ear, any back and forth, any communication or response at all to the huge outcry?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Treasure Ballinger wrote:

Hello; I'm not a content creator, I just have a question about your post here. All these blogs, and groups and forums and people discussing, and petitons and things. Does LL care about any of it? Or even respond or pay attention to anything anyone says? To effect change, both sides of a coin have to be on board for it, so I was just wondering, what kind of change can be effected, if no one at LL is on board for what the customers think? Does anyone have their ear, any back and forth, any communication or response at all to the huge outcry?

---

Good morning, Treasure!

LL has responded (I don't have the link handy) with approximately, "We love you creators." The change in ToS seems to me akin to what Facebook and every other cloud service provider is doing to avoid rights management issues, put the burden on the uploader. The law is generally behind technology's curve. It's no different here.

I just talked to Sup Maximus, co-founder of Builder's Brewery. He'd not heard a peep about all this, so I'm not sure we can call it a "huge outcry"... yet.

[Kylie Sabra]

MESSAGE FROM THE UCCSL

 

This Notice also available on GoogleDrive at https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6WF8NkOyoV4ZkdkOEFJRngwYk0/edit?usp=sharing

The Rumors
It has been brought to my attention that rumors are arising as to the activities of the group. Your board members are Kylie Sabra, Toysoldier Thor and Trinity Yazimoto. Only communications coming in the form of group notices or documents on Google Drive represent the activities and messaging of group; everything else is conjecture or opinion. Rumors are destructive to the group’s purpose, causing misunderstandings and undo fear.

When discussing the TOS, and for your own legal protection, I suggest you avoid attempting to interpret the TOS for others. You can’t go wrong with quoting it, however, there could be some liability in trying to interpret it publicly, as that could be seen as attempting to act as an attorney.

To clarify, the group is not planning a lawsuit. Last I checked, this whole group put together likely lacks the funds to take on a corporation with the deep pockets of Linden Lab.

To keep things simple. If you didn’t see in on Google Drive or in a group notice, then do not assume that everything you are hearing attributed to the UCCSL is indeed fact.

The Purpose of the UCCSL

The UCCSL convened in response to concern over the Second Life TOS. It is not our purpose to determine whether the TOS is harmful. We decided we believe it to be so by starting, joining and participating in the group. The ongoing arguments within the group as to whether the TOS is harmful is a diversion from our purpose.

To state our purpose as simply a possible is to say that we endeavor to effect change to the Linden Lab’s August, 2013 Second Life TOS in a manner that is equitable for all. We welcome, in fact need, your support in growing this group’s numbers to increase our impact and credibility. We welcome and need your input as to how to go about effecting change. Walt’s art protest is a wonderful example. Let’s gather around this event with videography and invite magazines and SL TV to take part. There is so much you can do to help, and your constructive ideas and activities are warmly welcomed.

Are we going to get exactly what we want, likely not. However, we are striving—with your input—to alert Linden Lab to our concerns. Before involving authorities, we will endeavor to open communications with Linden Lab.

I hope I’ve been able to clarify some key items for you and to set your mind at rest. Yes, there will be rumors; you know where to find the facts.

Kylie Sabra