Hello from Linden Lab’s New CEO

[Ebbe Linden]

Maybe the German museum would have been willing to pay the creator to keep it going? Not sure if the creator tried? And if they did, why didn't it work? 

[Jack Abraham]

I'm still getting up to speed on that topic. I've had several discussions about it. It's not a simple topic. 

Trust me.

It's not becuase we have an intent to arbitrarily profit from your stuff without your permission. That would be very bad for us as we're all about user to user. We could seriously harm ourselves if we started doing that. 

That's the real problem, Ebbe. The trust I had in Linden Lab has been squandered. So many apparently well-intentioned moves have turned into messes that were dumped on the customers to clean up that I, at least, no longer can trust the Lab.

The prior TOS seemed to be fine for years. What changed that the Lab needed to take additional rights?

[Jo Yardley]

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Maybe the German museum would have been willing to pay the creator to keep it going? Not sure if the creator tried? And if they did, why didn't it work? 

---

I think the RL museum did support it, unfortunately the press release was a big vague on why they closed it;

"The Dresden State Art Collections have decided not to extend the project since they see themselves unable to commit further capacities to the maintenance of the virtual gallery and have set new priorities regarding their digital strategy."

http://primperfectblog.wordpress.com/2011/12/15/sic-transit-gloria-mundi-the-dresden-art-museum-closes-in-second-life/

That could mean anything, could be tier, could just be that they felt SL was no longer interesting, or a combination of both.

In the end you can only spend those 300 dollars once and even big museums have a budget.

But maybe this is not the perfect example, but a sim nevertheless that was in my eyes very good for SL and the one example that popped into my mind.

I am sure other people can come up with better examples!

Sadly we often hear about sims being in (financial) trouble after it is too late, after they announce they are going to close down.

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

I've head from the team that they also would like to change it back to something similar from before...but it's not a trivial project and the question is about priority...I can't say yes or no yet as I don't yet understand all the things we want to do and how we should prioritize it all. 

---

Yes I was very angry about it all when Rodvik came back saying he couldn't get it done. But my anger was mostly because he first promised he would.

Don't make that promise.

If they find a way to change it - tell us when its a sure thing.

I think any solution though, is going to leave people with single-word names as they are. And so the call will have to be: do we tell those customers 'tough' in order to make other potential customers happy, or do we alienate future customers by forcing them to put numbers and special characters into account names because words they pick are already taken.

Personally I still feel it would be better to alienate the existing people on single word names than to keep having new people get stuck with yet more single word names. Especially as perhaps half of the people on single word names actually like them. And they'd all end up being 'special badges of SL history' if people in future went back to two word names.

 

- speaking of which, a feature to purge a name would be handy. When single word names came out many people registered a LOT of names 'just to see', and don't use them. Right now even if you file to have that account deleted, a future person still cannot take it. But this is because of technical reasons that may be impossible to solve, or so I have gathered (items might be in the database linked to that name - and no way to 'transfer' them to something like 'generic linden' on deletion).

 

[Trinity Yazimoto]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

 

But, the edge cases and the potential cost to us in certain scenarios are quite substantial. 

 

---

im still wondering what are those "edge cases" you are talking about .... and what are those "certain scenarios" .

What are they and what is the probability for they happen for justifying such paragraph in the TOS (what doesnt say anything else but LL can use our intellectual property as they want)

---

LL's IP policy reads almost exactly like Google's. It's not suprising that the law can't keep up with technology. Almost nothing can. I think the best we can hope for is that LL explains their intent. I think a lot of the heat generated by the change in TOS is the result of mistrust caused by lack of communication.

I found life a lot easier when I told my clients that I didn't quite know what I was doing, but I was working with them than when I just kept my mouth shut and let them wonder. When it comes to managing IP in a digital world, nobody quite knows what they're doing.

---

Well, Maddy, i don't create contents for google, i rarely post pics there except my vendors ad pics sometimes. When i want to display my artworks in google, i post a link to my Flikr wich has more friendly TOS regarding IP rights (although of course we can discuss that Flikr is not an heaven either but as you said, technologic progress came at a so fast speed that laws have some difficulties to catch up). But in any case i do create contents for google in the same way i do for SL. So its not possible to compare for me. I dont give the same ammount of my work and creativity to google than i do for SL.

Before august, the LL TOS where limitating the licence we have to give to them to the needs of the service (what could be plenty of things too but still it was a limit). They could already use our contents, crop them, not give us credits, neither retribution etc... what i find a bit hard, but still i understand, since it was for the needs of the service. 

Nowadays, the licence LL ask to us, content creators, is extended to whatever purposes.

If the "needs of the service" could be already a lot of things, the "whatever purposes" is a lot more and has no limits.

Knowing that there are edge cases that could justify that isnt satisfying... Why all creators should pay for the edge cases ?

Why is it not possible to add a chapter for the edge cases ?

And this thing about "edge cases" is new... Before we have been explained it was because LL wanted to be our agent for Desura market place... but before thinking such thing.. it would have been good to ask us if we want to be on Desura marketplace, and in what condition, and if we agree for a licence for whatever purposes in exchange to be on Desura marketplace.

i dont care Desura marketplace, i have zero intention to got there... so why should i pay for that ? why should i give an unlimited licence to LL since i will never ask them to be my agent there ?

You pointed something really true, however... all the problem came from a lack of communication. Indeed. This is why i think its important to tell Ebbe. Because Ebbe is not Rodvick. And at least, Ebbe is open to discussion (till now... time will tell if this will go on).

And while, Jo talk about beautiful sim... I will never forget that the beautiful piece of art that was Empyreal Dreams left SL because of the new TOS, precisely.. And i still miss this place a lot.

So its not enough to discuss about how LL can support art and beautiful sims in SL, its important also to find a way artists dont leave SL because they are afraid they IP rights are stolen.

And to finish, i know it was not LL's intention to steal our work, but with such paragraph in the TOS who knows what can happen in the future ?

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Marigold Devin wrote:

Maybe we should have a competition to see if any of us can shock/disgust/induce Sir Ebbe to vomit by showing him stuff inworld. I haven't vomited yet, but I have used several bottles of eye bleach along the way.

Maybe not :matte-motes-sour:

---

Heh. When I first decided to move my SL Home to Zindra (if you shop, it really has the best land. If you don't... well "stuff" is out there)...

I had found the perfect beachfront spot for a build I had in mind and a spot to set up a little waterfront scenery and all...

Then I googled up the meaning of the name of the people who would be my neighbors... and yeah... some of the things in SL can be pretty freaky...

Though I do wish there were two categories of 'A', one for violent and the other for whatever... then I'd not have the chance of running into something that potential neighbor.

 

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Jo Yardley wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Thanks! But not my thing. I will just have to ask someone across the hall to re-instate my account. Best of luck though!

---

But I am sure you can find a volunteer to keep an eye on that side of SL and get some first hand experience.

---

In the search engine companies, being on the team that reviews 'adult searches' is a volunteered and rotated thing - complete with 'emergency procedures' should something highly illegal turn up.

But its also highly needed to control spam / predator issues - and best done with an eye to a RL-gender balanced team.

(Its a volunteer thing because without a waiver signed, exposing someone to all of that in a workplace environment is a sexual harrassment issue. And that is the kind of waiver you dare NOT pressure an employee into signing.)

 You have to rotate a position like that to keep the people on it from getting 'isolated' from their peers or seen as 'work pervs'...

 

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

Personally, I would like to see staff in all their business areas making an appearance in the forums rather than office hours. Office hours at set times are unfavourable to different time zones, it's far easier to engage in a forum thread (preferably without adverts and daily mumbai prostitute spam thanks!)

---

 

I strongly agree with your suggestion that a lot if not all of the Lab-Resident communication be through a forum or something similar. Real life meetings are bad enough, but the transcriptions I've read of some Office Hour and CG meetings have just been beyond belief. Total lack of continuity.

I know forum threads will draw flames and derails and even trolls, but it's easy enough to just go on and read the actual ideas. I have to think it would be a more efficient (if slower) process.

[Scooter Hollow]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

 

But, the edge cases and the potential cost to us in certain scenarios are quite substantial. 

 

---

im still wondering what are those "edge cases" you are talking about .... and what are those "certain scenarios" .

What are they and what is the probability for they happen for justifying such paragraph in the TOS (what doesnt say anything else but LL can use our intellectual property as they want)

---

LL's IP policy reads almost exactly like Google's. It's not suprising that the law can't keep up with technology. Almost nothing can. I think the best we can hope for is that LL explains their intent. I think a lot of the heat generated by the change in TOS is the result of mistrust caused by lack of communication.

I found life a lot easier when I told my clients that I didn't quite know what I was doing, but I was working with them than when I just kept my mouth shut and let them wonder. When it comes to managing IP in a digital world, nobody quite knows what they're doing.

---

Unfortunately, intent is irrelevant when it comes to using content from 95% of the content sources out there. LL could give an extremely convincing, stirring speech about how they will never use their content for their own purposes, and it doesn't matter. Legally we cannot use non-public domain content, or content otherwise not given away virtually entirely license-free.

 

Edit, to give a little more info: I work for a company that creates virtual worlds for paying client organizations. We've been leaning towards OpenSim over SL since the beginning, due to things like control over the servers and such. But the current TOS is basically the final nail in the coffin. Under the current terms, we essentially cannot work on Second Life, as A) we would have to produce every single texture and model from scratch ourselves (very time consuming and expensive) and B) all of that expensive work would be given to LL for free as soon as we uploaded it.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Scooter Hollow wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

 

But, the edge cases and the potential cost to us in certain scenarios are quite substantial. 

 

---

im still wondering what are those "edge cases" you are talking about .... and what are those "certain scenarios" .

What are they and what is the probability for they happen for justifying such paragraph in the TOS (what doesnt say anything else but LL can use our intellectual property as they want)

---

LL's IP policy reads almost exactly like Google's. It's not suprising that the law can't keep up with technology. Almost nothing can. I think the best we can hope for is that LL explains their intent. I think a lot of the heat generated by the change in TOS is the result of mistrust caused by lack of communication.

I found life a lot easier when I told my clients that I didn't quite know what I was doing, but I was working with them than when I just kept my mouth shut and let them wonder. When it comes to managing IP in a digital world, nobody quite knows what they're doing.

---

Unfortunately, intent is irrelevant when it comes to using content from 95% of the content sources out there. LL could give an extremely convincing, stirring speech about how they will never use their content for their own purposes, and it doesn't matter. Legally we cannot use non-public domain content, or content otherwise not given away virtually entirely license-free.

---

If you can craft Terms of Service that address all these concerns, yet protect LL, I'd love to see it. I'm not happy about the state of affairs in IP management (look at the hot mess that is patent law), but I've got no solution. Trust in intent may be the best we have at the moment.

[Scooter Hollow]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Scooter Hollow wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

 

But, the edge cases and the potential cost to us in certain scenarios are quite substantial. 

 

---

im still wondering what are those "edge cases" you are talking about .... and what are those "certain scenarios" .

What are they and what is the probability for they happen for justifying such paragraph in the TOS (what doesnt say anything else but LL can use our intellectual property as they want)

---

LL's IP policy reads almost exactly like Google's. It's not suprising that the law can't keep up with technology. Almost nothing can. I think the best we can hope for is that LL explains their intent. I think a lot of the heat generated by the change in TOS is the result of mistrust caused by lack of communication.

I found life a lot easier when I told my clients that I didn't quite know what I was doing, but I was working with them than when I just kept my mouth shut and let them wonder. When it comes to managing IP in a digital world, nobody quite knows what they're doing.

---

Unfortunately, intent is irrelevant when it comes to using content from 95% of the content sources out there. LL could give an extremely convincing, stirring speech about how they will never use their content for their own purposes, and it doesn't matter. Legally we cannot use non-public domain content, or content otherwise not given away virtually entirely license-free.

---

If you can craft Terms of Service that address all these concerns, yet protect LL, I'd love to see it. I'm not happy about the state of affairs in IP management (look at the hot mess that is patent law), but I've got no solution. Trust in intent may be the best we have at the moment.

---

...How about the ToS they've been using right up until August?

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

Jo Yardley wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Brilliant beautiful art and experiences. Tough and sad if it's not commercially viable for us or the resident. 

---

True however there are some sims that pop up now and then that are so stunning, show such a new and unusual site that it might be something SL should consider supporting or at least help to survive.

It is not all about commerce, it is also about showing new users, the media and everyone else that there are amazing places in SL that are not just about playing Barbie or the hanky panky.

 

---

Chalk these up to marketing expense and use them to showcase the best that SL can be.

---

I was about to reply in a similar vein.  I understand there needs to be a ROI. 

The biggest ROI is showcasing what can be done in SL.

I'm not talking about a lot of places.  And while I know little nooks and crannies, Nemo for instance was something that went above and beyond.  Right now I don't really know any place that equals it.

You wouldn't even need to keep them all on line all the time.  The Lab could build a small library of places to cycle through.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

Why is it not possible to add a chapter for the edge cases ?

---

Because, as when exploring the Grand Canyon in the dark, you don't know where the edge is until you awake in the emergency room. The crafting of the legalese is problematic for two reasons...

• It attempts to protect against the unanticipated.
• It's crafted by lawyers.

I understand the concern some feel over the TOS. I don't share it. Ebbe and his team can hopefully find the right mix of comforting assurances and tuned legalese.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Scooter Hollow wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Scooter Hollow wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Trinity Yazimoto wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

 

But, the edge cases and the potential cost to us in certain scenarios are quite substantial. 

 

---

im still wondering what are those "edge cases" you are talking about .... and what are those "certain scenarios" .

What are they and what is the probability for they happen for justifying such paragraph in the TOS (what doesnt say anything else but LL can use our intellectual property as they want)

---

LL's IP policy reads almost exactly like Google's. It's not suprising that the law can't keep up with technology. Almost nothing can. I think the best we can hope for is that LL explains their intent. I think a lot of the heat generated by the change in TOS is the result of mistrust caused by lack of communication.

I found life a lot easier when I told my clients that I didn't quite know what I was doing, but I was working with them than when I just kept my mouth shut and let them wonder. When it comes to managing IP in a digital world, nobody quite knows what they're doing.

---

Unfortunately, intent is irrelevant when it comes to using content from 95% of the content sources out there. LL could give an extremely convincing, stirring speech about how they will never use their content for their own purposes, and it doesn't matter. Legally we cannot use non-public domain content, or content otherwise not given away virtually entirely license-free.

---

If you can craft Terms of Service that address all these concerns,

yet protect LL

, I'd love to see it. I'm not happy about the state of affairs in IP management (look at the hot mess that is patent law), but I've got no solution. Trust in intent may be the best we have at the moment.

---

...How about the ToS they've been using right up until August?

 

---

Ebbe said that didn't cover the edge cases, and so it doesn't meet the criteria.

[Jo Yardley]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

Jo Yardley wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Brilliant beautiful art and experiences. Tough and sad if it's not commercially viable for us or the resident. 

---

True however there are some sims that pop up now and then that are so stunning, show such a new and unusual site that it might be something SL should consider supporting or at least help to survive.

It is not all about commerce, it is also about showing new users, the media and everyone else that there are amazing places in SL that are not just about playing Barbie or the hanky panky.

 

---

Chalk these up to marketing expense and use them to showcase the best that SL can be.

---

I was about to reply in a similar vein.  I understand there needs to be a ROI. 

The biggest ROI is showcasing what can be done in SL.

I'm not talking about a lot of places.  And while I know little nooks and crannies, Nemo for instance was something that went above and beyond.  Right now I don't really know any place that equals it.

You wouldn't even need to keep them all on line all the time.  The Lab could build a small library of places to cycle through.

---

The installations 'AM Radio' made comes to mind, I think a little part of that is still here, it is famous, you know, the old steam train in the corn field with the floating chairs.

There used to be a whole set of displays like that, all stunning.

I think every photographer in SL went there at least once.

A great place to show how beautiful SL can look.

Maybe LL could also invite some artists to build a little setup on one of the Linden Lab regions.

After all, they can then invite their PR relations, press people, etc there.

Interview Ebbe in a mysterious cottage on a snowy plain with violins floating in the air!

Then they may stop using random screenshots from 2007 to illustrate their articles.

This video was made in 2009 and still looks better than a lot of other places I know today;

[Wooja]

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Wow, seriously? Must be great to be perfect...

---

Some of us try to be. You are admitting that you don't try very hard. What is your ambition at LL? To be barely adequate?

Wooja...betryingtodumbyourselfdowntoingratiateyourselfwiththelessadvantaged

[Wooja]

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish...

---

The feeling is mutual then.

Wooja...stopcopyingmyellipsisstyle

[Storm Clarence]

---

Wooja wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish...

---

The feeling is mutual then

.

Wooja...stopcopyingmyellipsisstyle

---

 

 

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Wooja wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish...

---

The feeling is mutual then.

---

Wooja, you've got a lot of as yet undeserved rage at the new guy there. Not sure where you're coming from as you appear to be as new to the forums as the new CEO - but if this were any other thread and this an argument between you and another resident, you'd be getting moderated right about now. I suspect they're holding that back for appearances sake but as a fellow resident I'm going to say it: I think you're out of line here.

You're taking it way too personal when he tries to be gracious and engage with us.

There might come a time for us to all collectively rage at him - but that's at least several months from now after we've seen how things shape out. Right now, its too early to be making any accusations. Right now is the time to try and engage. To try and break past the hurdles of past eras - and see if an open line of things can be established EVEN WHEN we and they don't agree. In fact I'd say its especially important to see if we can learn to keep it civil when we disagree.

I know that as customers its not our job to be "the adults in the room" - I've made that point myself many times here. They have to engage with the customers they get not the ones they want. BUT THAT SAID, we should strive to be better than this. We don't need to be trying to bait the new CEO into a flame war and trying to drive him away from talking to us at this hour of things.

I get that maybe his responses don't sound as wonderful as you would like them to. There's a new bloke in charge up there and he doesn't yet get our 'culture' of things... Like it or not, we are stuck with a new CEO, and he is not you nor I, but him.

So that is even more reason to back off the offense meter and give space for trying to interpret what someone says in the best light possible rather than the internet norm of the worst light possible.

[Storm Clarence]

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

Wooja,

you've got a lot of as yet undeserved rage at the new guy there.

.... but if this were any other thread and this an argument between you and another resident, you'd be getting moderated right about now. I suspect they're holding that back for appearances sake but as a fellow resident I'm going to say it: I think you're out of line here.

You're taking it way too personal when he tries to be gracious and engage with us.

---

 

Funny, I felt that way about Trinity's post, and a few others as well. 

[Ebbe Linden]

It's sad that we lost your trust.

Obviously I will do what I can to regain that trust.

I have no intent to steal your content. 

[Wooja]

---

Pussycat Catnap wrote:

---

Wooja wrote:

---

Ebbe Linden wrote:

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish...

---

The feeling is mutual then.

---

Wooja, you've got a lot of as yet undeserved rage at the new guy there. Not sure where you're coming from as you appear to be as new to the forums as the new CEO - but if this were any other thread and this an argument between you and another resident, you'd be getting moderated right about now. I suspect they're holding that back for appearances sake but as a fellow resident I'm going to say it: I think you're out of line here.

You're taking it way too personal when he tries to be gracious and engage with us.

There might come a time for us to all collectively rage at him - but that's at least several months from now after we've seen how things shape out. Right now, its too early to be making any accusations. Right now is the time to try and engage. To try and break past the hurdles of past eras - and see if an open line of things can be established EVEN WHEN we and they don't agree. In fact I'd say its especially important to see if we can learn to keep it civil when we disagree.

I know that as customers its not our job to be "the adults in the room" - I've made that point myself many times here. They have to engage with the customers they get not the ones they want. BUT THAT SAID, we should strive to be better than this. We don't need to be trying to bait the new CEO into a flame war and trying to drive him away from talking to us at this hour of things.

I get that maybe his responses don't sound as wonderful as you would like them to. There's a new bloke in charge up there and he doesn't yet get our 'culture' of things...

Like it or not, we are stuck with a new CEO, and he is not you nor I, but him.

So that is even more reason to back off the offense meter and give space for trying to interpret what someone says in the best light possible rather than the internet norm of the worst light possible.

---

What makes you think it's Ebbe himself who is making these posts? If I was a new CEO at ANY organisation the first thing I'd do would be to find a competent PR person to keep the unwashed multitudes happy with platitudes, expressions of concern and delaying tactics - but making no real commitments - which is what is happening in the various communications channels. Hell, it's standard practice in show business even.

And I would consider my time much better spent talking to my staff, reading the financials, reviewing project reports and a whole pile of other things like working out who should be staying and who should be going - which he has started with in terms of some of the product portfolio - than listening to people whinging about names, how slow systems are and complaining about the legal conditions under which they are permitted the privilege (not the right) to play.

Perhaps his shill is deliberately mis-spelling words to enhance his chosen personality of amiable ESLer, or maybe he's just another lazy PR donkey who thinks he knows how to spell and doesn't need to use a spell-checker or doesn't believes that his audience warrants a little care to be taken in expressing coherent messages.

Despite all that, nah, it probably is Ebbe, but I would encourage him to avoid this misuse of his time and reputation and get on with managing the product and rationalising the efforts of his workforce. LL needs a strategic leader, not someone who is good company at the water cooler.

Oh, and if you think this is "rage" you should see me when I'm angry, like Painless in M*A*S*H*

Wooja...expectanythingless

[LaskyaClaren]

---

Wooja wrote:

LL needs a strategic leader, not someone who is good company at the water cooler.

 

---

LL does indeed need that.

And one of the best ways, sometimes, of devising strategy is to listen to those best positioned to be able to tell you somethng about the product, and something about its stengths, its problems, and its potential.

I have some hope, or maybe even something that is beginning to approach belief, that Ebbe can listen. 

To those who have something worth saying, of course. :-)

[Wooja]

---

LaskyaClaren wrote:

---

Wooja wrote:

LL needs a strategic leader, not someone who is good company at the water cooler.

 

---

LL does indeed need that.

And one of the best ways, sometimes, of devising strategy is to listen to those best positioned to be able to tell you somethng about the product, and something about its stengths, its problems, and its potential.

I have some hope, or maybe even something that is beginning to approach belief, that Ebbe can listen. 

To those who have something worth saying, of course. :-)

---

The Romans didn't waste any time asking the people they conquered what sort of plumbing they would like once they were subjugated.

Wooja...preferacomparisonwiththevandalsandgoths

[Jo Yardley]

What have the Romans ever done for us?