PeterGray @ LL Responds to UCCSL RE: LL TOS Concerns

[Toysoldier Thor]

---

Alicia Sautereau wrote:

All they need to do with the ToS is to change it back to limited use but add a clause of some sort that all content can be sold through desura with permissions/restrictions set (for example, the perms used when uploading to the marketplace)

Think something like this would fix it all along with an option some where to restrict sales to SL or desura.

---

I agree.  The key is the clear expression in the TOS of the limited intent.  And yes - why not have the limit state as per the actual scope of a list of LL products .... "... as stated in section X.X".  Then whenever they release a whole new platform or product - they can amend the TOS to include the new product.  LL changes the TOS a couple times a year anyway so this would not be so difficult.

Finally, there should be a stated limitation of rights - i.e these rights are granted to LL and these right cannot be transferred off to any another legal entity without some 90 days written notice to the creators AS WELL as a feasible means for a creator to completely disagree and remove / protect his IP prior to the transfer of rights occurring.

Creators / IP rights holders must have the right to exit their IP if LL every ceased to exist or planned to sell off their assets to another entity.

 

Sorry a few edits on poor spelling

[Catherine Cotton]

Over the past 10 years,  11 come March. I have have seen how LL does business, I have often spoken out against what I thought were very bad business decisions.  Its true this avatar moved on a year ago to another grid.  Being with LL/SL so long of course I held out for a sign of hope that things would once again be what I signed up for.  I believed the promises of Philip LInden.  I know naive right, dreamer, artist, what ever.  I thought at least I might still have a presence on this grid if even in a small way.  Of course we all have alts, so I was here in that respect.

Fast forward today:

I don't trust that LL will have our best interest in mind.  I have seen one bad business decision after another; and I have not see many cases where LL put the needs of the user base above the needs of their corporate bottom line. I understand fully they are in the business of making money.  $100 million in user to user content per year...I read the facts on concurrent users; and how many grids have been closing weekly now as well.  They are making money hand over fist,  they do not need to add my content to the corporate pie. Perhaps if they had asked rather than just drop this on ppl we might be in a better place,  I don't like anyone assuming what is mine is there's.  Just because  this is a virtual grid does not mean that it is not a tangible thing.  My content will not be used to improve their bottom line.  There are so many things wrong with the current TOS, this is how they do business.  This is how they will continue to do business. It is not in my best interest to have those that wrote this tos and those that have explained their position on this tos to represent my best interest with zero limitations on those rights.  

  I cannot agree to the new Tos.  I think that is all that remains to be said.

Perhaps you should delete the Catherine Cotton account as well as her content.  If I want to agree to this new world order I will create an alt knowing full well where I stand from the get go and not be angry over an age old bait and switch routine.  Or maybe my *BLEEP* cup just exploded.

 

EDITED TO "BLEEP"

[A3123]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

Today. Kylie from the UCCSL has received an emailed response from Peter Gray of LL regarding the concerns that the UCCSL as well as several other sources of similar concern have been brought up to him and LL.

Here is his email response to Kylie of the UCCSL as was communicated to the UCCSL group recently:

Link to Peter Gray's Email Response in UCCSL Library

 

---

So basically you guys were told to calm down, grown ups at work here. Good job guys. 

[Storm Clarence]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

jujmental wrote:

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

The sentence in that response that both concerns me and somewhat confirms some speculation that content may be used for LL's other products is:

Accordingly, the revision to our Terms of Service was made in order to further extend the ability for content creators to

commercially exploit

their intellectual property through user-to-user transactions across Linden Lab's other products and services (including our distribution platform, Desura), not just within Second Life.

---

It concerns me too. It's a really nasty and unnecessary split infinitive.

© The Judge

---

Does it sadden Hizzoner that the Oxford Dictionary no longer strictly treats split infinitives as a solecism, that they even go as far as encouraging their use?

 

 

 

---

It was very funny, regardless of how the OED strictly treats split infinitives. 

[A3123]

You are too ignorant to not know how to non italicize your post?

[Perrie Juran]

---

Storm Clarence wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

jujmental wrote:

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

The sentence in that response that both concerns me and somewhat confirms some speculation that content may be used for LL's other products is:

Accordingly, the revision to our Terms of Service was made in order to further extend the ability for content creators to

commercially exploit

their intellectual property through user-to-user transactions across Linden Lab's other products and services (including our distribution platform, Desura), not just within Second Life.

---

It concerns me too. It's a really nasty and unnecessary split infinitive.

© The Judge

---

Does it sadden Hizzoner that the Oxford Dictionary no longer strictly treats split infinitives as a solecism, that they even go as far as encouraging their use?

 

 

 

---

It was very funny, regardless of how the OED strictly treats split infinitives. 

---

Oh, I thought it was funny also.

[A3123]

Read

[Catherine Cotton]

Your a clever bunny lol

[Chic Aeon]

It's difficult for me to express how I feel over this letter.

I am happy to hear SOMETHING, so there is that. Does the letter say much? Not really. It does put us further into the Desura camp rather than the selling to Amazon or closing scenario and that is probably a good thing.

Only time will tell if this was a hint about the future or simply another PR spin. Meanwhile more sims are closing from all of this. Such very bad "planning" or lack thereof.

I will be joining Kylie at the Tuesday at 1 filming of Designing Worlds  if my Skype connection is compatible with the filming system. If not, I will look forward to watching.

 

[jujmental]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

Does it sadden Hizzoner that the Oxford Dictionary no longer strictly treats split infinitives as a solecism, that they even go as far as encouraging their use?

---

I actually do not believe that any grammatical "rule" is inviolable, in the appropriate circumstances, particularly if you know that the rule exists and decide that for coherence, elegance, or emphasis you decide to break it anyway.

Having said that, I dislike almost everything that issues from the legal mind, which leads to obfuscation when the underlying intent should be clarity. But then, I have never met a lawyer who wasn't incompetent or a crook, or both.

© The Judge

[Perrie Juran]

---

jujmental wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

Does it sadden Hizzoner that the Oxford Dictionary no longer strictly treats split infinitives as a solecism, that they even go as far as encouraging their use?

---

I actually do not believe that any grammatical "rule" is inviolable, in the appropriate circumstances, particularly if you know that the rule exists and decide that for coherence, elegance, or emphasis you decide to break it anyway.

Having said that, I dislike almost everything that issues from the legal mind, which leads to obfuscation when the underlying intent should be clarity. But then, I have never met a lawyer who wasn't incompetent or a crook, or both.

© The Judge

---

Reflecting on what you said here, I'd hope that the intent was clear to most people but life's experiences have taught me that often it is not.

Occasionally my boss would get calls from people complaining after they'd been in the store that I was "pushy."  Actually he'd get calls like this about all his sales people.

Sometimes he'd thank the people for calling.  He'd say, "Thank you for calling.  I was wondering if my people were doing their job.  It's good to know that they are."

We weren't hired to give people guided tours of the store.  We were hired to sell.  In other words we were hired to make (earn) money.

[jujmental]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 we were hired to make (earn) money.

---

So were the Joker's henchmen.

© The Judge

[Perrie Juran]

---

jujmental wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 we were hired to make (earn) money.

---

So were the Joker's henchmen.

© The Judge

---

Some of whom appear to now be working at Linden Lab. 

[Cincia Singh]

It seems the most profitable concession would be selling tinfoil hats to SL creators/merchants who spend way more time anguishing about their intellectual property rights than producing intellectual property.

[Toysoldier Thor]

---

Cincia Singh wrote:

It seems the most profitable concession would be selling tinfoil hats to SL creators/merchants who spend way more time anguishing about their intellectual property rights than producing intellectual property.

---

Or make even more money sell "Time Management" courses to those that have no care about LL abusing their IP rights (or dont even have any IP rights to abuse) yet waste their time Posting in these threads to troll and poke at those that truly do care about protecting their rights.

 

[Toysoldier Thor]

I see that LL's self-appointed Forum Savior & Warrior has come to troll the thread.  Flagging him as violating SL forum conduct for trolling would likely have little value as he likely was placed here by LL to disrupt.

So welcome A49488408482729920290393 and your other alts to the thread.

 

[Trinity Yazimoto]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

I see that LL's self-appointed Forum Savior & Warrior has come to troll the thread.  Flagging him as violating SL forum conduct for trolling would likely have little value as he likely was placed here by LL to disrupt.

So welcome A49488408482729920290393 and your other alts to the thread.

 

---

Yes, this is pretty impossible to discuss seriously here since the mods let it like this. This is why im glad we have the guilds google communities, ppl start to discuss there and its really more pleasant.

 

 

[Dartagan Shepherd]

---

Cincia Singh wrote:

It seems the most profitable concession would be selling tinfoil hats to SL creators/merchants who spend way more time anguishing about their intellectual property rights than producing intellectual property.

---

Actually we both anguish and produce, just like artists in the entertainment industry, musicians, artists, architects, writers and a host of other people who value their IP. Or companies like LL that anquishes over how to gain those IP rights over others works for no upfront costs.

Either way, it's still more productive than casual trolling. If you search the marketplace though, you'll find that we already produce and sell tinfoil hats.

We have plenty of products available for the apathetic and bored as well. It's a fairly large market, as you can imagine.

 

 

[Catherine Cotton]

If anyone is posting here they have a stake in something related to SL.  I am not going to question the motives of others. If you want to question my movtives go ahead. Yeah I read where my motives too were questioned. So let me clear this up for ya.  I have been in SL for 10 years, I have created vast amounts of content as well as run entire sim wide projects. I have taught countless newbies.   Currently I am creating on another grid.  Will I ever create in SL again? I dunno,  will they change the TOS? There is my stake in this.

[Storm Clarence]

---

Catherine Cotton wrote:

If anyone is posting here they have a stake in something related to SL.  I am not going to question the motives of others. If you want to question my movtives go ahead. Yeah I read where my motives too were questioned. So let me clear this up for ya.  I have been in SL for 10 years, I have created vast amounts of content as well as run entire sim wide projects. I have taught countless newbies.   Currently I am creating on another grid.  Will I ever create in SL again? I Dunn,  will they change the TOSS? There is my stake in this.

---

Well ain't you just the bees knees... all that is boss... the best of the best.

PS I personally think you are a phony ***bleep***.  Go figure. 

 

[Catherine Cotton]

Well that was overly insulting.  I will let the mods handle it. 

[Amethyst Jetaime]

I am far from convinced there isn't something else going on here.  If they wanted to act as agent and facilitate the ability for user to user sales of SL content to Desura, they don't need unlimited rights to do so.  They don't need them for MP, why would any other type of transaction be different. I should be able to choose which items that I created are sold to other platforms, set the price, and what terms are acceptable to me. They should be a lot more transparent and allow discussion and input with the creators, who, after all have the most to lose in all this.

A legal agent is not given carte blanche and is not free to act as they choose.  They have a fiduciary duty to the principal, in this case creators, to act in their best interests.  So far I see no evidence of this.

 

[Pamela Galli]

I'm with you Amethyst.  They clearly have no intention of "fixing" the new TOS, which they are holding firm to despite the uproar, so this is not just an error. But the explanation by Peter Gray makes no sense to me. I suspect it was designed to leave us all scratching our heads feeling like he must have said something that made sense but we were too dumb to understand it. 

 

I still have not read any explanation that makes sense, of why LL would suddenly need me to give them unlimited rights to resell my content.  Whatever that reason is, it is top secret.

 

 

[Czari Zenovka]

I'm with you and Amethyst on the LL response.  (And I still don't like anyone from LL using the word "exploit" regardless of it possibly being meant in the positive manner.)

[Catherine Cotton]

Amethyst;  how do you feel this new TOS relates to the new handheld version of SL? I agree with ya so far too