Jump to content

Updated LL TOS Claims FULL RIGHTS to ALL CONTENT


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2569 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

Nikita,

I had the same thoughts already mentioned and that has been thought about a few times by the group and in the forums.

Maybe some of the major creator / merchants like this HAIR Merchant and others already have their own exclusive negotiated TOS with LL and that is why they are so flippant on the issues of the new TOS.

I cant see a creator / merchant of such a large scale be so Not Caring that their IP rights are so vulnerable and at risk.  Either that or this owner is Short Term Greedy and has no care about any long term risks.  i.e. he/she is squeezing the SL grid of any profits they can get for as long as SL exists.  Then if LL rips off their content ... they will somehow figure it out then (too late by then in my opinion).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 627
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Toy

One does wonder if some top merchants have a special side deal with LL, there are some merchants on here that spend close to $2000 a month just for a classified ad and common sense dictates that they take their business/creations very seriously and this is their RL income.

One could then  deduce that if anyone tried to hijack their creations and livelyhood and claimed to have unfettered rights to do with ,whatever they they wanted, copy,sell,resell. subsell redesign,etc,etc,etc Re TOS  that creator would be raising blue hell, banging at the doors of LL for hi jacking their creations.

By now i think the knowledge of this TOS debacle has been well publicized and most are aware of it..

Now whether those creators,,,,,,,, that spend close to a $2000 a month on  classified ads, as well as tier and i would think enhancements on MP ,,,,,,,,,are getting involved with us all on the TOS boondoggle, or not ,,,could be very telling,

One would expect those creators would have the most to lose and would be heavly involved.

Only 3 things would negate  their being involved.

( 1 )  They live in a bubble and have no other creator friends so therfore,they know nothing about it.

( 2 )  They know full well about the TOS  and are not involved with "us" and say nothing because they have a special deal with LL re their creations

( 3 ) They trust Linden Labs ( if they do that ,then they are not a very good business merchant, cos we know LL speaks with forked tongue )

Whether that might give any clues to any special deals with LL , who knows, just a thought  ,,but one would expect every merchant with a well known SL presence would be front and centre leading the cause

 I do  like this blog from Will Burns

When you click the link, click home once you get there,for some reason it wont go right to the page,but clicking home takes you there

http://cityofnidus.blogspot.se/2013/09/your-world-your-imagination.htmlhttp://

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Dartagan Shepherd wrote:

Not sure who to ask, Toy  ... do you guys at UCCSL know anything about the lawyer giving a talk on the TOS?

From Hamlet's blog: "Agenda Faromet, by the way, is giving an in-world presentation on the new ToS soon; more details when I get them."

Also mentions the SL Bar association, I'm not sure if you guys have spoken with them.

And of course mentions about how when Google tried something like this they had to answer to the FTC. The Federal Trade Commission by the way, may not be a bad idea to send a letter to, especially if you can manage it with some signatures. Can't hurt.

From:

Edited: Link not behaving, beat it with a stick.

Regarding the "one size fits all ToS" ...

large_truck1.jpg

It was right about here that Rodney Roadengineer started to reconsider the "One Size Fits All" bridge designs...

But then ...

big-truck-small-bridge.jpg

There's always subtle reminders that shouldn't be ignored ...

danbury_crash_20120215142140_640_480.JPG

Fortunately for Rodney, none of the "issues" affected his commute ...

518bdc20eadd9.preview-620.jpg

... mostly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Toy, Nikita - perhaps the reason some larger merchants don't do anything right now is because they are worried that (as this group plans lawsuits and sends letters to the Federal Trade Commission with copies sent to Rodvik) one day they will be unable to log into SL. Didn't that happen to someone who filed a major lawsuit against LL?

Link to post
Share on other sites


Dartagan Shepherd wrote:

Not sure who to ask, Toy  ... do you guys at UCCSL know anything about the lawyer giving a talk on the TOS?

From Hamlet's blog: "Agenda Faromet, by the way, is giving an in-world presentation on the new ToS soon; more details when I get them."

Also mentions the SL Bar association, I'm not sure if you guys have spoken with them.

And of course mentions about how when Google tried something like this they had to answer to the FTC. The Federal Trade Commission by the way, may not be a bad idea to send a letter to, especially if you can manage it with some signatures. Can't hurt.

From:

Edited: Link not behaving, beat it with a stick.

FIFY.

...Dres

Link to post
Share on other sites


Luna Bliss wrote:

Toy, Nikita - perhaps the reason some larger merchants don't do anything right now is because they are worried that (as this group plans lawsuits and sends letters to the Federal Trade Commission with copies sent to Rodvik) one day they will be unable to log into SL. Didn't that happen to someone who filed a major lawsuit against LL?

First Luna, not that I am aware of.  The only one I am aware of was a case that the individual took LL to court because they banned him - not the other way around.  And in that case I believe LL settled out of court and un-banned him.

Second, I seriously doubt these major Creator Merchants - like this Hair Creator - had the flippant response and went back to selling because he/she was worred about being blocked from logging in.  It is likely moreso the case of naivety of trust in LL or short term greed that they dont want to disrupt their current revenue or they have inside knowledge that in their case LL doesnt have those right.

Thirdly, the UCCSL currently has a membership of 225 and growing each day. Are you saying LL would ban 200+ of their creators - some of whom are pretty big merchant creator names - simply because they are part of a group that is standing up for their IP rights?  

I would think as much heat and bad PR that LL is getting now throughout the blogs and media for their holding fast position on a completely out-of-touch TOS, banning a large swath of their own creator / customers for a TOS that is pretty much agreed by most to be a horribly bad business move on LL's part would become 10 times worse on their part.

Not to mention LL's reputation in the industry that they would be seen a Bullies to their own Customers for not conforming to their will - no matter how outrageous and questionable their demands.

Not to mention that a portion of these 200+ would likely file law suits for being banned simply for challenges a TOS that was potentially violating their rights in the first place.

How many potential new Indie Game Developers and new Content Creators would want to in any form of partnership with a Game platform that would treat their customers / co-creators with this draconian respect?  Who would risk developing games or content for LL any longer if they knew that LL could demand anything in the future and will ban them or destroy their games/content if there is ever a future disagreement?

As bad a move as the latest TOS was for LL, banning content creators for challenging their TOS and standing up for their rights as IP owners would be 100 times worse for LL.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Luna Bliss wrote:

Toy, Nikita - perhaps the reason some larger merchants don't do anything right now is because they are worried that (as this group plans lawsuits and sends letters to the Federal Trade Commission with copies sent to Rodvik) one day they will be unable to log into SL. Didn't that happen to someone who filed a major lawsuit against LL?

PS... I am part of the group and I have not heard of the group making any active plans to file any lawsuits.  I am not sure where that rumour got started.  Letters to the FTC yes... as one of many forms of communications as well as to help the creators better assess where they stand on this latest LL TOS - if our rights are being violated by LL's TOS or not.  

But there are no plans being talked about to file a lawsuit.  That takes money.  Something the group doesnt have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Drake1 Nightfire:
the lindens know that quite a few people dislike the tos. there might be even lindens that also don't belived that the tos is just, but they r employed by ll and it is very likely they can't say anything publicly about it. its possible that there might be even an internal strugle regarding it. besides, i think that the UPPER managment changed it.
@Dartagan Shepherd:
i personally don't have too much faith in the "SL Bar association". imo its just a lot of hot air.
@nikita Jefferson:
have u ever heard of FIC(fetted inner core) :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

DG's Famous Analogy Time:

I live in a town with only one grocery store nearby. The next closest one is over 200 miles away. (Not really, but bear with me on this.) Those other stores are also smaller, understocked and don't have a lot of the foods and items I've come to enjoy.

Every so often, when bringing home the groceries, I notice that some of the items I put in my cart and bought were switched by the courtesy clerk as she loaded my items into the bags. Why do I notice? Because some of the things I find are rotted, spoiled, different brands or completely wrong items. (For example, shoe polish instead of mayonnaise.)

Eventually I stop shopping at that grocery store. Even though it costs me much more in time, gas and frustration, I am left with no choice. Even though I complain often to the store management, speaking directly to several managers, I can tell that even though their face is looking at me, their minds and attention are not present.

Through it all, I have also realized that they don't see these incidents as a problem, leaving me to surmise that they aren't accidents but are in fact intentional. Quite frankly I am left bewildered why a business would so actively work to systematically destroy their own business and income.

___________________________________________________________________ 

As totally unbelievable as this sounds, it is in fact exactly the situation we face routinely in Second Life. And every time we run into one of these, I am left with an intense internal conflict in which I demand of myself "Why am I putting up with this level of disrespect?!?"

These days, my answer is fairly simple and straightforward: I still have friends here that I support and share time with .. and I still love the emotional bump I get when someone buys one of my products and sends a "Thank you" for providing whatever value, service or other attribute they found in their purchase.

Rodvik? Don't you enjoy getting that Emotional Bump too?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Feted Inner Core (also known as the Fetid Inner Core) is a conspiracy theory that exists among certain residents of Second Life. It is an argument that certain groups of players use their relationship with the staff of Linden Lab to obtain favors that advantage their in-game businesses at the disadvantage of others.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The FIC was disbanned a few years ago.  Ppl talked about the inner workings of the group....but they started to go missing.  The only evidence left behind were a few alpha channels that resulted in little to no informaiton.   lol

Wayyyyy back in the early days of SL everyone was given a little extra to get the ball rolling.  PR stunts were done.  Some ppl tried sucking up to a few Lindens and failed.  While others had friends that were Lindens . Even in the early days conspiricy theories ran wild.  There was discounts on land before SL went live.  We used to have to collect prims and use them as our building blocks storing them in our inventories.  Ppl hid money in alt accounts in the early days as well, prim tax evasion.  At one meeting the Lindens told us they knew ppl were doing it.  :D I know stuffz but its old stuffz so now its just funny to me. 

The new stuffz is just scary so I ran away to play :D

"Philip Linden: We will not be successful unless we are fully open and the control over the world is in your hands."

Link to post
Share on other sites


Catherine Cotton wrote:

The FIC was disbanned a few years ago.  Ppl talked about the inner workings of the group....but they started to go missing.  The only evidence left behind were a few alpha channels that resulted in little to no informaiton.   lol

Wayyyyy back in the early days of SL everyone was given a little extra to get the ball rolling.  PR stunts were done.  Some ppl tried sucking up to a few Lindens and failed.  While others had friends that were Lindens . Even in the early days conspiricy theories ran wild.  There was discounts on land before SL went live.  We used to have to collect prims and use them as our building blocks storing them in our inventories.  Ppl hid money in alt accounts in the early days as well, prim tax evasion.  At one meeting the Lindens told us they knew ppl were doing it. 
:D
I know stuffz but its old stuffz so now its just funny to me. 

The new stuffz is just scary so I ran away to play
:D

"Philip Linden: We will not be successful unless we are fully open and the control over the world is in your hands."

I know we are getting off on a tangent with these posts but I found that quote fascinating.  I don't remember hearing that one before.

It makes me think that when Phillip said he was, "Building a Country,"  he envisioned a Utopian Society in SL.  Which would (or could) at least in part explain the Community Standards.  Do you know when those were first instituted?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So LL... maybe you should learn how to better communicate a TOS Change like other providers do.  Look at how another provider does it...

 

Terms of Service update

October 11, 2013

We are updating the Google Terms of Service. The new Terms will go live on November 11, 2013 and you can <read them here> 

Because many of you are allergic to legalese, here’s a plain English summary for your convenience.

We’ve made three changes:

  • First,  xxx xx xx x xx
  • Second, ccc ccc ccc cc
  • Third, xxx xx xxx

Here are some more details:
xxxx nnn xxx nnx  nnnnx

Notice that they give their users a 1 month lead time before the TOS actually goes into effect?  Notice that they provide a simplified summary of what changes are in their new TOS version?

Ohh yes... but LL didnt want their users to notice the changes in the TOS... they wanted these evil new IP hijacking changes to sneak through with few people noticing it and they didnt want creators have some time to be able to take actions if they didnt agree to LL's content hijacking.  It was a better strategy for LL to pretty much confuse the content creators and then force them to accept if they do see the hijacking.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

Link to post
Share on other sites


Chic Aeon wrote:

A very good article that explains a bit of what "may" happen in the future legal-wise.

 


Yes it was a good article to read.... I even enjoyed the humour within it that Darrius is good at when describing his points.

It does cover most aspect of the issue I could think of... including how LL's bonehead move and iron clad silent stance on this IP HiJacking shows again how Rodvik and the LL management not only have NO REGARD or RESPECT for the creators that made SecondLife the success it has been, but not even no respect for their own corporation as they shoot any required trust with those current/future parties that they need to succeed.

Honestly, what future Indie Game Developer for Desura with any common sense engage in a business relationship with a corporation that has waved its flag proudly how willing it is to pull the rug out from other any other partnering content provider in the past???  

If an Indie developer is going to spend a ton of time and $ inventment to create a game that goes to market using Desura as a platform, they must have done some research about Linden Lab and its platform.  It wont take them much effort at all to find the countless google results from many of LL's current SecondLife content creators that as screaming how LL has arbitrarily hi-jacked their IP rights and with no care at all on their move.

These Indie Game Developers should be asking themselves....   If they have clearly screwed these content creators, why wouldnt they do it to us???  Even if we read the TOS to use LL's Desura and it looked acceptable when starting.... LL has proven clearly that signing ANY AGREEMENT WITH LL carries no form of consistent protection.  LL forces its customers and partnering creators to agree to terms on shifting sands.

So the agreement you had as an Indie Game Developer on Day #1 very likely can be mutated and turned against you if Linden Lab is your partner.  You are taking on HUGE BUSINESS RISK when working with Linden Lab.  Its like dancing with the devil.

Most Game developers cant afford this risk with their investments.

So LL continues to screw its customers and itself as they stand by this TOS.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 2569 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...