animations / poses with new TOS 2013?

[Morgane Batista]

Now that LL changed their TOS this year that gives them rights to everything we upload and can be used by them for advertisement and all.  What does it mean for poses / animations creators?

Does that mean that LL could pick any of our animations / poses from the server without purchasing it in-world and use it to make their own pictures or videos to promote Second Life, without our permission?

I know we have kinda no choice but to accept their TOS to continue to use SL, but i would be mad if i learned that LL would use any of my creations without my permission, of course it would be an honor in a  way to have a product chosen, but to not ask permission to use it?! I'd prefer having them ask me to offer them poses for ads, i'd even give them for free but i'd want to know about it.

[Monti Messmer]

Hi, there is a big thread going on about this so it would be wasted to start a new discussion.

Some creators started an inworld group to discuss and more.

Short thing. They cannot only use it for pictures and stuff, that would be tolerable, they even can resell it in SL or other virtual marketplaces !!!

Monti

[iCade]

---

Morgane Batista wrote:

 

I know we have kinda no choice but to accept their TOS to continue to use SL, but i would be mad if i learned that LL would use any of my creations without my permission

---

By accepting the TOS you give them explicit permission.....

[steph Arnott]

Simple answer is, LL own everything in world even if you copyright your own work you waived it and accepted LL can use it for what ever they wish.

ADDED: My own veiw is, LL are working slowly towards a position of a saleable asset. Whether LL are intending to sell or not, only they know, but they sure are getting in a position if they wish too at a future point.

[Morgane Batista]

thanks for the replies, i'm capped for groups and i was away for a bit as my computer was at HP, so i didnt know. But i know that i've accepted the tos and i just have to accept that fact. 

[Morgane Batista]

thing is i asked because i didnt know if the tos extended to any use of animations, i knew about textures but wasnt sure about the animations and poses.

[SpiritSparrow Skydancer]

---

Morgane Batista wrote:

Now that LL changed their TOS this year that gives them rights to everything we upload and can be used by them for advertisement and all.  What does it mean for poses / animations creators?

Does that mean that LL could pick any of our animations / poses from the server without purchasing it in-world and use it to make their own pictures or videos to promote Second Life, without our permission?

I know we have kinda no choice but to accept their TOS to continue to use SL, but i would be mad if i learned that LL would use any of my creations without my permission, of course it would be an honor in a  way to have a product chosen, but to not ask permission to use it?! I'd prefer having them ask me to offer them poses for ads, i'd even give them for free but i'd want to know about it.

---

Yes, an honor that they ripped you off.  LIke when a thief breaks into your house and steals all your jewelry, it was an honor that they choose your house.

 

[Catherine Cotton]

"Now that LL changed their TOS this year that gives them rights to everything we upload and can be used by them for advertisement and all.  What does it mean for poses / animations creators?

Does that mean that LL could pick any of our animations / poses from the server without purchasing it in-world and use it to make their own pictures or videos to promote Second Life, without our permission?

I know we have kinda no choice but to accept their TOS to continue to use SL, but i would be mad if i learned that LL would use any of my creations without my permission, of course it would be an honor in a  way to have a product chosen, but to not ask permission to use it?! I'd prefer having them ask me to offer them poses for ads, i'd even give them for free but i'd want to know about it."

 

Unfortunatly I think this is the mindset of many.  Don't stand up for your rights,  just bend over and take it in the ....

Just wow.

 

[Amethyst Jetaime]

---

Morgane Batista wrote:

thanks for the replies, i'm capped for groups and i was away for a bit as my computer was at HP, so i didnt know. But i know that i've accepted the tos and i just have to accept that fact. 

---

No you don't.  You can choose not upload anything more.  You can join the United Content Creators of SL to add your voice to theirs in obtaining more equitable terms.

The TOS changes applies to any content you bring into SL.  It is not just that they can use it to promote SL but the TOS says they have the right to sell  your uploaded content now to whoever they want to, for any price they want, without compensation to you or taking any steps to protect your IP rights in that matter. 

 

[Chic Aeon]

LOL. I actually came here to ask an animation question (and I will in another thread).

I only have two things to add. MOST law professionals (at least one does not concur) feel that the TOS covers ALL work including that uploaded before the August TOS. You can choose not to upload any longer but your previous works are already in jeapordy.

And on the brighter side, animations made for LL avatars don't play well on other platforms so it is unlikely (not impossible) that The Lab actually WANTS your stuff *wink*. That doesn't solve the problem but may let you sleep a bit better.

Welcome to the new world.

 

PS. There are several videos on this subject that you can watch. Check the threads in MERCHANTS.  Or do a Google search for videos on the theme.

[Scooter Hollow]

---

Morgane Batista wrote:

Now that LL changed their TOS this year that gives them rights to everything we upload and can be used by them for advertisement and all.  What does it mean for poses / animations creators?

Does that mean that LL could pick any of our animations / poses from the server without purchasing it in-world and use it to make their own pictures or videos to promote Second Life, without our permission?

I know we have kinda no choice but to accept their TOS to continue to use SL, but i would be mad if i learned that LL would use any of my creations without my permission, of course it would be an honor in a  way to have a product chosen, but to not ask permission to use it?! I'd prefer having them ask me to offer them poses for ads, i'd even give them for free but i'd want to know about it.

---

Just to point out, LL could have always done the things you mention there in your post. The difference with the new TOS is that now they could open a website called www.animationswestolefromMorganeBatista.com and sell them for money (among other things).

[Catherine Cotton]

bvh files are not exclusive to Second Life.  Motion Capture is used in many mediums.  If LL resells your animations, their value elsewhere goes down.  Same goes for everything sold in SL.  Scripts can be converted to C as well as other formats, meshes can be converted to obj files, music, art, poetry, have never been exclusive to the SL format. Legitimate creators convert their work to work in SL or create specifically for the SL format.  SL is unique but I personally don't think it's smart to make LL agents assets sitting on their servers created by the community. Since the rights they have given themselves would not EVER fly in the real world.  If LL wants our assets then they must come to the table with a real life compromise that also to the advantage of the creators in SL,  not just to the advantage of LL.

[Cerise Sorbet]

LL doesn't have the BVH files. The viewer converts them to a format that only SL uses, and it's a lossy conversion. That, the limited skeleton support, and the reliance on built-in viewer motions, make these assets really unappealing for reuse in other environments.

 

[Catherine Cotton]

---

Cerise Sorbet wrote:

LL doesn't have the BVH files. The viewer converts them to a format that only SL uses, and it's a lossy conversion. That, the limited skeleton support, and the reliance on built-in viewer motions, make these assets really unappealing for reuse in other environments.

 

---

That is correct but if they are claiming all assets now fall under the new tos,  doesn't that infact make the animation LL property within SL;  to include the original bvh file.  After all they are claiming that with mesh, textures, sounds, art, and so on.  In theroy LL themselves could file a DCMA against creators after they upload these assets if they find the assets on other sites.  Since they evoked "agent" status for all creators.

I am not assuming anything here, I am openly asking, because the tos left me with more questions than answers.

[Scooter Hollow]

The rights LL claims are non-exclusive, meaning the uploader still has the right to use them themselves and give them to other people. It's pretty much the only right they didn't try to take.

 

If the bvh file is converted on the viewer side then the server never gets it. Which isn't to say the animation is entirely worthless, but it'd be less so than textures and mesh models.

[Cerise Sorbet]

---

Catherine Cotton wrote:

---

Cerise Sorbet wrote:

LL doesn't have the BVH files. The viewer converts them to a format that only SL uses, and it's a lossy conversion. That, the limited skeleton support, and the reliance on built-in viewer motions, make these assets really unappealing for reuse in other environments.

 

---

That is correct but if they are claiming all assets now fall under the new tos,  doesn't that infact make the animation LL property within SL;  to include the original bvh file.  After all they are claiming that with mesh, textures, sounds, art, and so on.  In theroy LL themselves could file a DCMA against creators after they upload these assets if they find the assets on other sites.  Since they evoked "agent" status for all creators.

I am not assuming anything here, I am openly asking, because the tos left me with more questions than answers.

---

The BVH version of the animation never becomes an asset in SL. It is never uploaded in the first place, all the grid ever sees is a simplified derived version. On the rest, I'm just going to say that a contract interpreted in a vacuum is a misinterpreted contract, and leave it at that.

 

[Catherine Cotton]

Thanks for the replies

[iAntonio Vyper]

The point is, it's not your house. I'd consider it mostly as a rented car parking

Anyway I'd be proud if LL would choose my creations.