What do you think?

[Tari Landar]

I'm sorry you're as frustrated as you are(as anyone should be when it comes to theft of any sort, including myself), but we have clearly not had the same experiences and I am pretty sure I can't really offer anything more helpful to the thread.

Hopefully someday a solution comes along that satisfies your desires for a proper answer that can prevent all copybotting and theft the world over. Until then, I recommend doing the best we can with what we have available to us, and trying to find solutions that do not merely cause more problems. As I am sure most would agree that a solution that creates yet another problem, is no solution at all.

Best of luck to you

[Qie Niangao]

---

Min Barzane wrote:

 I am not any different from movie company,or game company! My intelectual property is MYNE! You steal from me ,you get cought,you pay for damage done! End of story!

---

If it's so valuable then don't leave it out in places where it can get stolen, like Second Life. Hire goons like the MPAA does to pay-off ISPs and legislators, if you like that model so much. Or face the facts: your precious stuff is just not worth that level of effort and expense.

Instead, there's the DMCA. LL took measures to improve DMCA effectiveness, notably the requirement for RL identity to upload Mesh (and then made the "model = instance" mistake, to reduce the bookkeeping necessary to track guilt).

And I'm serious about OnLive and SLGo: It's not practical as a complete replacement of all SL viewers right now, but a relatively modest shift in economics could change that. Then there's nothing delivered to the user's machine that could be ripped (not from SL, that is; games still using client-side rendering would still be easy prey, as evidenced by all the blatant game rips on sites like TurboSquid).

Incidentally, for those watching Rosedale's High Fidelity, that architecture depends on a similar shift in network economics as does OnLive, but for the opposite purpose: to distribute processing among participants rather than to centralize rendering. Philip got his start at Real Networks, and even SL shows he's apt to bet on bandwidth too cheap to meter.

 

[Ceka Cianci]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

my opinion is they may try but will fail,because SL was made open source.

---

The viewer - not the server.

---

Well!

:smileytongue::smileywink:

[Phil Deakins]

---

Min Barzane wrote:

 DMCA isnt alarm bell or a lock,nothing even close to it! Alarms and clocks are ment to  stop and warn BEFORE theft! DMCA is only use AFTER theft and AFTER theif has been cought! "What we need is shoot to kill defense before actual theft hapens! Theif uses ilegal viewer,SL server detects it and sends "fry graphics" or some other equaly nasty thing to thefs computer! Barbicue!!! btw idk is that possible but would be sweet if it was!

" 

None of the above. My answer is "dunno".

" 

That  is type of answer i was looking for,not all other  BS you and others wrote!

---

I didn't mention DMCA so that wasn't a reply to me.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Min Barzane wrote:

And you did understand wrong! I didnt say creators with good reputation should upload cheper  or anything like that! What we should have is more atention from LL,so they finaly listen what is being sayed! They dont even try to work with us to make SL better,less laggy or more secure!!

---

Then make up your mind what you did say. In a reply to me you said it was "more lindens", so I re-read your first post and, putting it together with the "more lindens" phrase, I concluded that you probably meant cheaper uploads. Now you say you didn't mean that at all. Now it sounds like you're saying that LL should listen to the better creators who have good reputations. Am I right this time?

I know that english isn't your first language but you do need to be very clear about what you're saying - especailly as english is not your first language.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Min Barzane wrote:

 DMCA isnt alarm bell or a lock,nothing even close to it! Alarms and clocks are ment to  stop and warn BEFORE theft! DMCA is only use AFTER theft and AFTER theif has been cought! "What we need is shoot to kill defense before actual theft hapens! Theif uses ilegal viewer,SL server detects it and sends "fry graphics" or some other equaly nasty thing to thefs computer! Barbicue!!! btw idk is that possible but would be sweet if it was!

" 

None of the above. My answer is "dunno"

.

" 

That  is type of answer i was looking for,not all other  BS you and others wrote!

---

If all you wanted was "yes" or "no" answers you could have created a SURVEY (pops) and saved yourself all the headaches.

But the question you are asking is like asking if I think, "Will pigs ever fly?"

The great danger of surveys however is that you can control the outcome by either/or how you ask the question or limiting the answers people can give.  You apparently do not like that we are not allowing you to get away with that.

 

[Richie Kanto]

Min,

Sadly, your answer is no, LL will not do anything more to prevent copybotting. You see here the reason why; its users just do not see copybotting as anything LL can or should do anything about.

This is, as I said before, a big reason why Second Life is failing and they just don't "get it". I could point out ending the open source nature of Second Life doesn't kill alternate viewers. LL already requires approval and a vetting process now to get an alternate viewer approved for use here. I see no reason they couldn't restrict the source code to only those who were approved first.

This is just one example. There are solutions (several suggested in this thread) and while they might not stop all copybotting... showing they do more than the minimum the law forces them to do would perhaps convince creators that LL cared. Right now, it's clear they are on the side of those who copy other people's work and they really do not understand this as a problem.

Fixing the problem first has to start with seeing it as a problem. Once identified, you can start to think of how to fix it and eventually make it at least better. I just don't really think LL sees it as a problem worth any time and effort to fix, and as most of the people here demonstrate, the most vocal in the SL community accept that copybotting is just part of Second Life that can't be fixed.

 

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Richie Kanto wrote:

LL already requires approval and a vetting process now to get an alternate viewer approved for use here.

---

This is not the case.  TPV's only need their approval to be included on the TPV directory, which is done my "self-certification" and not at all required in order to connect to the grid.

...Dres

[Richie Kanto]

Here's LL's official policy on third party viewers. http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php

No where does it say this only applies to those who want to be on the official alternate viewer listing.

Applies to everyone creating a viewer offered to others as I read it. There SHOULD be a vetting process by LL (if there is not) to make sure their rules are being followed.

Problem is LL doesn't enforce these rules either... and many don't even know they exist. People want viewers that can do neat things... many would like a viewer that can copy no copy objects. I'm sure many feel only in a few narrow and very limited instances would it be wrong to use their viewer to do such if their viewer had the capability to do it.

Only the content creators understand the problem, hence, my point once again LL will not fix it... they don't even see the problem. To them... they comply with the letter of the law and that is all they are required to do.

 

[Phil Deakins]

And nowhere does it say anything about LL requiring "approval and a vetting process".

You wrote: LL already requires approval and a vetting process now to get an alternate viewer approved for use here

So Dresden was right and you were mistaken.

LL does not vet or approve each TPV before it is allowed to connect to the grid. They require that all TPVs adhere to the set of rules that you linked to, but that's the only involvement they have, and it's hands-off. That is unless a TPV that doesn't adhere to the rules is reported to them, such as one that can be used for copybotting. In such a case, they may well look into it.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Richie Kanto wrote:

Min,

Sadly, your answer is no, LL will not do anything more to prevent copybotting. You see here the reason why; its users just do not see copybotting as anything LL can or should do anything about.

 

---

When you show me something VIABLE they can do then I will absolutely say that Linden Lab SHOULD DO IT!

It's not that we are saying LL shouldn't do something.

What you are failing to see is the technical complexity of Digital Rights Management.

You bring up "Ending the open source nature of Second Life" as a solution.  But CopyBot happened before the Viewer became open source.

Yes, we know it's frustrating for you as a MERCHANT.

Give me a workable solution and I'll support it.

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Richie Kanto wrote:

Min,

Sadly, your answer is no, LL will not do anything more to prevent copybotting. You see here the reason why; its users just do not see copybotting as anything LL can or should do anything about.

 

---

When you show me something VIABLE they can do then I will absolutely say that Linden Lab SHOULD DO IT!

It's not that we are saying LL shouldn't do something.

What you are failing to see is the technical complexity of

Digital Rights Management.

You bring up "Ending the open source nature of Second Life" as a solution.  But CopyBot happened

before

the Viewer became open source.

Yes, we know it's frustrating for you as a MERCHANT.

Give me a workable solution and I'll support it.

 

---

The SL viewer renders using OpenGL. I know of no other cross-platform (Win/Mac/Linux/Android/iOS) rendering solution. There are freely available content rippers that will capture virtually anything rendered in OpenGL. I imagine the same is true for DirectX on Windows machines and would be true of any rendering system popular enough to run cross platform. No rendering system can achieve traction without debugging tools. The moment those tools become available, ripping becomes reasonably easy.

The only way to really put a dent in in-world copybotting would be to abandon the current viewer/server model and stream live video from a proprietary rendering farm. That's precisely what SLGo does. Even in that scheme, some texture rips would still be as easy as snapping a photograph of an oil painting at your local art museum.

After seeing what the internet did to the music industry, you'd think people would see how hard it is to stop the copying and dissemination of intellectual property.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Richie Kanto wrote:

Min,

Sadly, your answer is no, LL will not do anything more to prevent copybotting. You see here the reason why; its users just do not see copybotting as anything LL can or should do anything about.

 

---

When you show me something VIABLE they can do then I will absolutely say that Linden Lab SHOULD DO IT!

It's not that we are saying LL shouldn't do something.

What you are failing to see is the technical complexity of

Digital Rights Management.

You bring up "Ending the open source nature of Second Life" as a solution.  But CopyBot happened

before

the Viewer became open source.

Yes, we know it's frustrating for you as a MERCHANT.

Give me a workable solution and I'll support it.

 

---

The SL viewer renders using OpenGL. I know of no other cross-platform (Win/Mac/Linux/Android/iOS) rendering solution. There are freely available content rippers that will capture virtually anything rendered in OpenGL. I imagine the same is true for DirectX on Windows machines and would be true of any rendering system popular enough to run cross platform. No rendering system can achieve traction without debugging tools. The moment those tools become available, ripping becomes reasonably easy.

The only way to really put a dent in in-world copybotting would be to abandon the current viewer/server model and stream live video from a proprietary rendering farm. That's precisely what SLGo does. Even in that scheme, some texture rips would still be as easy as snapping a photograph of an oil painting at your local art museum.

After seeing what the internet did to the music industry, you'd think people would see how hard it is to stop the copying and dissemination of intellectual property.

---

There used to be what was referred to as the 'analogue gap.'  Before a movie could be viewed on your screen it had to be decoded/unscrambled.  Your cable box did that and once unscrambled you could record it.

What the Movie industry wanted was for Congress to mandate that the final unscrambling took place in your television.  In other words they wanted the Manufactures to have to build the hardware/software into the television.  The manufacturers said no **bleep**ing way.  That solution would have created nightmares for them. 

Windoze did make changes to the way sounds (music) was handled by a computer, a software solution.  Before Windows Vista I could use Audacity or a dozen other programs to record any sound playing on my computer.  You can still do it but it takes jumping through a few hoops.