Why isn't there a 'mesh ripped from game' option?

KlistiesSeMio Ewinaga · January 12, 2014

So I was creeping the mp for a dagger or something for an outfit and I came across a shop that was selling very pretty things, so I checked them out and the next thing I know I'm looking at a rip of the Statue of Dibella and a rip of the NIGHT MOTHER and a rip of some burnt corpses and other stuff I know for a fact was ripped directly from Skyrim. A lot of weapons are ripped but like barrels and gaRLIC ARE YOU KIDDING?? Anyhoo - I go to flag a few things I know are stolen and there's no "this was clearly stolen from a video game' option? Only if they stole from me? ???

????????

??????????????????????????????

Can some one please explain why this option is missing??

Kenbro Utu · January 12, 2014

Simple. Only the IP owner knows if they have an arrangement with that person allowing them to market their IP. Therefore, only the IP owner can knowledgeably say whether or not the IP is stolen.

KlistiesSeMio Ewinaga · January 12, 2014

That is incredibly unfortunate.

The fact these people are marketing these items as "pretty golden statue" instead of by name shows they don't have rights to anything, let alone a big name game company.

There should still be some sort of 'game rip' option where the items in question can be taken down until the case is resolved.

Kenbro Utu · January 12, 2014

Yes it is, but from a legal standpoint only the original IP owner can make that claim with a legal certainty.

Edited to add: If you feel strongly enough about it, the only option available to you is to notify the original IP owner, then they can decide if they want to pursue it, if the content is stolen.

KlistiesSeMio Ewinaga · January 12, 2014

So along with LLs new TOS stating they basically own whatever anyone uploads, doesn't all this ripped content mean they are laying claim to stolen things? So, if a company decided to do something about it, couldn't LL get in serious trouble?

Kenbro Utu · January 12, 2014

There has been more debate on this subject than I could keep up with. Knock yourself out on that link.

Hoshi Kenin · January 13, 2014

an excellent point! :matte-motes-agape:

There is a whole thread on the SLU about this ripped content.

I recall a friend who many years ago, was perma banned from SL because he copied for about a week some of the - frankly, mediocre - stuff inworld at the time. Still, he broke the TOS he signed up to uphold, so I was not particularly sympathetic.

However, as you have pointed out, things are now laughable vis a vis some of the stuff on MP - that LL gets a tasty cut of, let us not forget. These creators - ahem - are making money for poor Rod and his beleaguered troops.

You have to ask, therefore, does anyone from LL look at the MP? Monitor it? Are they, perhaps, the right Linden to be doing so?

Perhaps, Bethesda are doing ok enough to not worry, because rest assured they are aware of it. How long will LL's luck hold out, though, before a big claim is forthcoming from somewhere?

....replies on a plain postcard to H Kenin, please.

Ceka Cianci · January 13, 2014

it would be interesting to find out what the actual IP owners would do if they seen their things on here..

as easy as it is to rip content though ,i'm sure they have their hands full all over the net..

what i'm curious about is..when someone rips content,do they just try to just sell it here? or are they trying to sell it in any platform they can get ahold of?

and you know they would not just be ripping from one place either..they probably have many things going on at one time..

i just can't see how someone would like to live life while having to look over their shoulder all the time waiting for the day the hammer comes down on them and they are caught and have to pay all those money back as well as damages and anything else that comes with being that type of criminal..

i would just contact the IP owners really and then see if it comes down or not..

if it does..then maybe someone at least had an Oh SH*T! moment and may have wised up some..

maybe!

hehehe

Dresden Ceriano · January 13, 2014

KlistiesSeMio Ewinaga wrote:

So along with LLs new TOS stating they basically own whatever anyone uploads, doesn't all this ripped content mean they are laying claim to stolen things? So, if a company decided to do something about it, couldn't LL get in serious trouble?

The ToS also states that in order to upload something, you must be in a position to grant them the sort of license for which they are asking and if you don't, that's on you... essentially, absolving themselves of any responsibility.

...Dres

Dresden Ceriano · January 13, 2014

Hoshi Kenin wrote:

You have to ask, therefore, does anyone from LL look at the MP? Monitor it? Are they, perhaps, the right Linden to be doing so?

LOL!!! LL monitors nothing... they expect us to do that for them.

...Dres

Sassy Romano · January 13, 2014

Comparing orders of magnitude of difficulty:-

1) monitoring MP for content

2) keeping the forums clear of daily whore spam

They haven't managed number 2) so you can figure the rest.

jwenting · January 13, 2014

if any troll or griefer could spam intellectual property theft reports "on behalf of the real owners" against residents, each of which would have to be investigated and acted up as potentially real in case LL missed a real one and got held liable by the actual owners, not only would thousands of content creators and innocent customers end up banned from SL every day, LL would be seriously overloaded and incapable of doing anything but investigating those reports.

Not a good idea at all.

The current system is a good compromise. If you're suspicious about something that you think is owned by a 3rd party, contact that third party and they can handle it themselves.

I've actually done so once or twice in case of blatant violations on a large scale and it works. You might even get a reward.

Qie Niangao · January 13, 2014

It's pretty disgusting -- enough so that the situation has pretty much turned me off to Second Life as a whole now, after seven years.

So I'm not sure I'd recommend that SLU thread (mentioned above) that names-and-shames some of the worst rippers. It will likely tell more than one really wants to know. You'll discover that some surprisingly "reputable" merchants are in fact just rip-off artists. And there's no comprehensive way to tell which ones, although that thread is the best, most practical source I've found.

FWIW, I've pretty much stopped buying anything that uses Mesh, especially from newer merchants, because such a huge share of it is ripped. I thought it would get better after the first crap rushed in to fill the vaccuum of content, but if anything it's worse now.

I don't know that there's really any way for Linden Lab to do better. But it's now to the point that the Second Life model of user-generated content seems more a sham than a success.

Perrie Juran · January 13, 2014

Qie Niangao wrote:

It's pretty disgusting -- enough so that the situation has pretty much turned me off to Second Life as a whole now, after seven years.

So I'm not sure I'd recommend that SLU thread (mentioned above) that names-and-shames some of the worst rippers. It will likely tell more than one really wants to know. You'll discover that some surprisingly "reputable" merchants are in fact just rip-off artists. And there's no comprehensive way to tell which ones, although that thread is the best, most practical source I've found.

FWIW, I've pretty much stopped buying anything that uses Mesh, especially from newer merchants, because such a huge share of it is ripped. I thought it would get better after the first crap rushed in to fill the vaccuum of content, but if anything it's worse now.

I don't know that there's really any way for Linden Lab to do better. But it's now to the point that the Second Life model of user-generated content seems more a sham than a success.

I don't know what or why it is but somehow I think there are many people who don't get it when it comes to Intellectual Property Laws.

They know that in RL about illegal music downloads (though too many ignore the fact what they are downloading may be illegal) or they know that a Gucci knock off purse is illegal.

But when people get on the Internet and specifically when they come to SL they don't seem to get it. New (as well as Old) users don't read the ToS or CS and just click through. As consumers it never dawns on them that the content they just bought could be an IP violation. They may not even realise that IP can be violated in SL. Just look at the number of "why can't I find this or that" in SL threads we see in this Forum.

One In World merchant I know produces knock offs of vehicles (cars and motorcycles) left and right. I honestly have been wondering if they even realize that what they are doing may be illegal.

Then of course there are those who do really know and have figured that the odds of them getting busted RL are pretty slim. They are the worst.

While I do understand why LL can not be proactive in policing ripped content, there is no reason why they can not be more proactive in educating people. The problem still remains though for me as a consumer. There is no real way for me to know as a consumer whether content is ripped or not. Some things may be obvious but the vast majority of what I see may not be obvious to me.

I wish I knew an easy solution.

Pussycat Catnap · January 13, 2014

Kenbro Utu wrote:

Simple. Only the IP owner knows if they have an arrangement with that person allowing them to market their IP. Therefore, only the IP owner can knowledgeably say whether or not the IP is stolen.

This is basically making the rule for the 1 in 10,000 exception rather than the 9,999 more common situations.

Flawed logic on LL's part to do it that way. As far as I know, since 2009 when I returned to SL, the show Gossip Girl is the ONLY case of an outsider IP coming into SL.

There were some in SL's early days - but nearly all if not all of them have since left. Including Gossip Girl.

A more logical situation would be for LLs to have a place for an outside IP to notify them of approved content in SL, and then let anything otherwise be AR'd. Legit cases are so few they could list them on a single popout within the AR in a 'do not submit if you are complaining about this one guy right here.'

Pussycat Catnap · January 13, 2014

Hoshi Kenin wrote:

Perhaps, Bethesda are doing ok enough to not worry, because rest assured they are aware of it. How long will LL's luck hold out, though, before a big claim is forthcoming from somewhere?

They might be more surprised that SL is still around, than that someone who uses it is ripping them off. As in; probably not aware.

Perrie Juran · January 13, 2014

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

Kenbro Utu wrote:

Simple. Only the IP owner knows if they have an arrangement with that person allowing them to market their IP. Therefore, only the IP owner can knowledgeably say whether or not the IP is stolen.

This is basically making the rule for the 1 in 10,000 exception rather than the 9,999 more common situations.

Flawed logic on LL's part to do it that way. As far as I know, since 2009 when I returned to SL, the show Gossip Girl is the ONLY case of an outsider IP coming into SL.

There were some in SL's early days - but nearly all if not all of them have since left. Including Gossip Girl.

A more logical situation would be for LLs to have a place for an outside IP to notify them of approved content in SL, and then let anything otherwise be AR'd. Legit cases are so few they could list them on a single popout within the AR in a 'do not submit if you are complaining about this one guy right here.'

Something I have never seen on the MP or In World is something you see regularly RL, a statement on an item saying, "Manufactured (or Sold) Under Liscence by (or from).

While it would be true that any one could say this it could prove deadly to an infringer if they did. It would be prima facie evidence that a rip off was done knowingly and intentionally. If a Court was considering punative damages it would way heavily against an Infringer.

From a practical point of view I don't know how welll your suggestion would work. It would mean that 3rd party content providers would have to track and approve every legitimate user of their content. Not a small task.

Things that Linden Lab can do is send occasional reminders to everyone about property rights via E Mail or on the log in page.

Also, I don't know what kind of pop ups people see when they upload items to the MP, but a reminder or warning could be added to the pop up, once again removing any "oh, I didn't know" arguments from people.

As a consumer it is still a big problem for me. For instance is Betty Boop public domain? How about Cinderella? Fleischer Sudio's version of Cinderella IS public domain, but not Disney's. The story of Cinderella itself is considered a folk tale and you can not Copy Right a folk tale. So I could develop my own rendition of Cinderella.

Try deciphering the Court's logic regarding The Wizard of Oz. It's simply not as simple as it looks on the surface.

Pussycat Catnap · January 13, 2014

Oh that reminds me of something I heard on NPR the other day. All but the last 8 years of Sherlock Homes stories are now in the public domain. And the Estate of Conan Doyle is fighting bitterly to keep hold of that last bit - even though every year, one more year's worth of it will go public.

But for the next 8 years - do anything Sherlock Homes and it better have shown up in the first 2 million novels at least once... and not only in the last dozen or so...

I agree on your note for liscensed products. The thing is: there really aren't any. Gossip Girl for last half decade is pretty much it. With that experiment, the rest of the world finally decided we no longer exist.

(Ok, Serval Furry avatars are also liscensed. There are currently I think 2 or 3 makers of them in SL. The Serval is some fictional lizard wolf thingy from an artist on a random furry art website that is for some reason very popular in furry circles.)

Dillon Levenque · January 14, 2014

Perrie Juran wrote:

Qie Niangao wrote:

It's pretty disgusting -- enough so that the situation has pretty much turned me off to Second Life as a whole now, after seven years.

So I'm not sure I'd recommend that SLU thread (mentioned above) that names-and-shames some of the worst rippers. It will likely tell more than one really wants to know. You'll discover that some surprisingly "reputable" merchants are in fact just rip-off artists. And there's no comprehensive way to tell which ones, although that thread is the best, most practical source I've found.

FWIW, I've pretty much stopped buying anything that uses Mesh, especially from newer merchants, because such a huge share of it is ripped. I thought it would get better after the first crap rushed in to fill the vaccuum of content, but if anything it's worse now.

I don't know that there's really any way for Linden Lab to do better. But it's now to the point that the Second Life model of user-generated content seems more a sham than a success.

I don't know what or why it is but somehow I think there are many people who don't get it when it comes to Intellectual Property Laws.

They know that in RL about illegal music downloads (though too many ignore the fact what they are downloading may be illegal) or they know that a Gucci knock off purse is illegal.

But when people get on the Internet and specifically when they come to SL they don't seem to get it. New (as well as Old) users don't read the ToS or CS and just click through. As consumers it never dawns on them that the content they just bought could be an IP violation. They may not even realise that IP can be violated in SL. Just look at the number of "why can't I find this or that" in SL threads we see in this Forum.

One In World merchant I know produces knock offs of vehicles (cars and motorcycles) left and right. I honestly have been wondering if they even realize that what they are doing may be illegal.

Then of course there are those who do really know and have figured that the odds of them getting busted RL are pretty slim. They are the worst.

While I do understand why LL can not be proactive in policing ripped content, there is no reason why they can not be more proactive in educating people. The problem still remains though for me as a consumer. There is no real way for me to know as a consumer whether content is ripped or not. Some things may be obvious but the vast majority of what I see may not be obvious to me.

I wish I knew an easy solution.

So I'm slow. I read this when it was posted and wondered about it and tonight I took a look at the 'ripped mesh watch' thread on another forum that's been mentioned here already.

It's a humongous thread and I only read the first five or six pages before resorting to sampling, and not a lot of sampling at that. But nearly ALL of the posts had to do with digital creations stolen from their original sources. The bulk of it was things ripped from online games. Weapons, avatars, vehicles, etc. There were other posts about ripped mesh not necessarily having to do with games but that still had digital creation sources. In other words, all of the posts I saw had to with someone using the computer generated product of the original creator's imagination and reselling as if it was the thief's creation.

If I understand this correctly, that would be no different me copying one of Ansel Adam's photographs of Half Dome and reselling it as a photograph taken by me (admittedly to a very gullible and inexperienced customer). In other words, not only illegal but clearly wrong in every sense of the word.

I don't see how that can apply to SL-created take-offs on real vehicles or to similar things. I own a vehicle (pre-mesh, but that doesn't really matter) that is a serious attempt to look exactly like a vehicle that exsists in RL. It doesn't use the original maker's name (except in my inventory) but it's clearly a copy of what I think it is. I don't see that as a theft of someone's IP. The IP of the original makers was their design of a lightweight car that would get quite good acceleration from readily available small displacement engines and could in fact be shipped to the end user in kit form. Not only that, once assembled the owner could climb in and drive somewhere in real life.

My vehicle does none of those things. It cannot in anyway compete with the original. If the SL creator had ripped an existing digital version of the car, THAT would be IP theft to me. Making one from scratch that looks like the RL original seems like it should be allowed since it can never really do anything the original did.

There are plenty of creators in this thread. Am I wrong in thinking this way? Where are the lines drawn, or are they?

Perrie Juran · January 14, 2014

Dillon Levenque wrote: