Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jo Yardley

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Recommended Posts


Gavin Hird wrote:

I don't think you understand this, do you? :-)

I can't tell if the TOS has been illegal all of the time SL has existed. Possibly not since there has been development in the legislation during the 11 year period. OK?

Secondliy, up till very recently the provisions about IP were largely there for LL to be able to render the creations in their current service to other users, to let other users use the creations and to trade the creation on the existing service. In addition it covered storage on their storage systems, backups, tnasmission over networks and such things for the service to be able to work at all.

What happened then was new provisions where you essentially gave away your creations for LL to be able to use them - also for fiancial gains in new services without even telling the creator, let alone compensate the creator. THAT is where it starts to get hairy, and where the developer and distribution agreement should kick in. 

It should be at the sole discretion of the creator to decice if they want their creations used and/or traded in an new service.  From the ring of it SLv2 is a new service. 

LL's potential problem is that the TOS are for a number of reasons not in compliance with EU legislation and therefor we have legally never accepted them. To bring the TOS up to the standard so they become legal is their responsibility alone. 

 

 

But this "new virtual world" is merely an upgrade and expansion of LL's existing service -- and a comparatively trivial expansion compared to how much the grid has grown and changed since the first creator sold content to other users. (It's not as if LL had to shutdown a sim every time they added one, or scrap everything when they updated versions.) Those who agreed to the original ToS have no grounds to resist their content appearing in the new virtual world -- it is clearly the same service from the same provider, not something new and different, as might be covered by the terms of the new ToS.

No grounds, that is, except some sleight of hand with these ToS-invalidating laws that purport to protect consumer IP. I don't especially mind if LL revises its customer agreements to accomodate those laws however silly and counterproductive they may be, but I do object to them being used to grant certain creators special abilities to screw-over the rest of us and deny exercise of license we purchased in good faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Innula Zenovka wrote:

OK.  Now we're getting somewhere.   If LL refuse to comply with the court order, I can ask the court to delare them in contempt of court, and to fine them (by attaching their funds in the EU before they leave the jurisdition).

So what is it that I'm asking the Court to order then to do, or not to do?  

You'd have to discuss that with a legal councel. 

I would imagine you could file a DMCA takedown if you discovered your creations where distributed against your will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Atma Constantine wrote:


I hope you take into consideration what was really built here and not just keep saying "better." We are pretty intelligent as a community.

Finally, I can see why you had gone to SLU instead of this forum. Many replies and bashing speak for itself.

At least I'm glad he came here and tries to reply in full sentence, and give us at least the impression he would treat us as adults. Not that his replies over here have more substance, than his "keep calm kids, uncle is buying you some ice cream tommorow, if you go to bed now" , with his "much better" only replies on SLU. :matte-motes-big-grin:

He went there because the action took place there earlier. That's all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Pamela Galli wrote:


Atma Constantine wrote:


Finally, I can see why you had gone to SLU instead of this forum. Many replies and bashing speak for itself.

I have spent a great deal of time in both forums (and previously in the SLX/Xstreet forum). All of them have had some ugly stuff in them at times.* To screen it out would mean some pretty strict enforcement of some pretty restrictive rules, which few seem to want.  

That said, I quail at the rude things that have been said in this thread. (On SLX they would have been removed.) 

* Actually the merchant forum here, tho not without some occasional heated discussions, has been moderated very well, IMO. It has been kept mostly on topic, and insults and personal attacks not tolerated. 

All forums have ugly stuff. Nothing was mentioned about restricting anything. This forum is known for the unwelcoming way it hands to people. I only said i can understand why he didn't post here first. if you read in all of these places i would think you could see a huge difference with this forum, as some of the regular posters have even pointed out.

I do agree the merchant and technology forums are a lot different and interesting topics are discussed. The GD forum has always been a place where the not so nice stuff seems to spew. I am not for censorship if that's what you got from my post, I was merely making a comment to Ebbe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


arton Rotaru wrote:


Atma Constantine wrote:


I hope you take into consideration what was really built here and not just keep saying "better." We are pretty intelligent as a community.

Finally, I can see why you had gone to SLU instead of this forum. Many replies and bashing speak for itself.

At least I'm glad he came here and tries to reply in full sentence, and give us at least the impression he would treat us as adults. Not that his replies over here have more substance, than his "keep calm kids, uncle is buying you some ice cream tommorow, if you go to bed now" , with his "much better" only replies on SLU. :matte-motes-big-grin:

He went their because the action took place there ealier. That's all.

Of course it's a good thing he came to the official forum to address concerns. I was not speaking of his replies, it is the general feeling of this forum and the replies many get and for no reason at all, just rude and harsh. It does not matter who the poster or OP is.

I would say you don't know why he went there first LOL unless you know him personally or recieved an email stating so? The "action" took place in blogs first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Atma Constantine wrote:


arton Rotaru wrote:


Atma Constantine wrote:


I hope you take into consideration what was really built here and not just keep saying "better." We are pretty intelligent as a community.

Finally, I can see why you had gone to SLU instead of this forum. Many replies and bashing speak for itself.

At least I'm glad he came here and tries to reply in full sentence, and give us at least the impression he would treat us as adults. Not that his replies over here have more substance, than his "keep calm kids, uncle is buying you some ice cream tommorow, if you go to bed now" , with his "much better" only replies on SLU. :matte-motes-big-grin:

He went their because the action took place there ealier. That's all.

Of course it's a good thing he came to the official forum to address concerns. I was not speaking of his replies, it is the general feeling of this forum and the replies many get and for no reason at all, just rude and harsh. It does not matter who the poster or OP is.

I would say you don't know why he went there first LOL unless you know him personally or recieved an email stating so? The "action" took place in blogs first.

Blogs... LOL Useless arguments to the topic anyway! So I leave it at this.

I wrote earlier anyway, not first.. but hey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Qie Niangao wrote:

But this "new virtual world" is merely an upgrade and expansion of LL's existing service -- and a comparatively trivial expansion compared to how much the grid has grown and changed since the first creator sold content to other users. 

There is no point in arguing if it is an upgrade or a new service as we speak because neither of us knows. From the ring of it, it might be a new service given that the CEO says the existing service will run as is in parallell for a long time. Secondary the seemingly large amounts of content that will not transfer or requires substantial reworking points to it being a new service. 

With the sketchy details we have at the moment I can't tell. 

Finally, this part of the TOS was contested by a number of content providers long before anyone knew about SLv2, so this is a general issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


arton Rotaru wrote:


Atma Constantine wrote:


arton Rotaru wrote:


Atma Constantine wrote:


I hope you take into consideration what was really built here and not just keep saying "better." We are pretty intelligent as a community.

Finally, I can see why you had gone to SLU instead of this forum. Many replies and bashing speak for itself.

At least I'm glad he came here and tries to reply in full sentence, and give us at least the impression he would treat us as adults. Not that his replies over here have more substance, than his "keep calm kids, uncle is buying you some ice cream tommorow, if you go to bed now" , with his "much better" only replies on SLU. :matte-motes-big-grin:

He went their because the action took place there ealier. That's all.

Of course it's a good thing he came to the official forum to address concerns. I was not speaking of his replies, it is the general feeling of this forum and the replies many get and for no reason at all, just rude and harsh. It does not matter who the poster or OP is.

I would say you don't know why he went there first LOL unless you know him personally or recieved an email stating so? The "action" took place in blogs first.

Blogs... LOL Useless arguments to the topic anyway! So I leave it at this.

I wrote earlier anyway, not first.. but hey.

There are useless for information regarding a company unless it is the company's blog. I wasn't aware of an arguement? Good choice to leave it as my comment was directed to Ebbe and only he has the answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Gavin Hird wrote:

You have to explain the screw-over bit of the equation. 

So this all started (for me at least) when Ebbe said something like "the TOS will not be a problem" in the context of making existing SL1 content available in SL2. That's important to everybody because it would imply that, subject to technical constraints, folks may continue to purchase content in SL1 today with a reasonable expectation that they may be able to use it in SL2, if supported by the technology. If, however, a whole class of that content -- that from European creators who choose to exercise exemption from licensing to which they agreed in the ToS -- if that content cannot be used in SL2, the buyers of that content were screwed-over by the sellers.

It's bad enough that sellers would do this retroactively, to content already sold before SL2 was ever discussed. It's really despicable now, where the very threat of it could halt sale of SL1 content and collapse the economy before SL2 is even developed.

The logical conclusion would be that buyers should demand to know whether sellers are from a jurisdiction where they could pull that scam with impunity, so as to avoid them in the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Atma Constantine wrote:

All forums have ugly stuff. Nothing was mentioned about restricting anything. This forum is known for the unwelcoming way it hands to people. I only said i can understand why he didn't post here first. if you read in all of these places i would think you could see a huge difference with this forum, as some of the regular posters have even pointed out.

________________________________

I have indeed read extensively in "all these" forums (and even posted in the SLU thread the other day).  SLU has many good points and people, but I do not consider it by any means a kindler gentler or more polite forum, and I very much doubt any such reputation was the cause of Ebbe posting there initially. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what? 

You need to direct your anger at the right address; namely the service provider that has not pulled their act together and cleaned up these matters. Sulking over who may or may not exercise their legal rights is nothing but childishly selfish. 

The animation or texture that is so precious to you could be gone the next hour because of DMCA takedown. People are entitled to excercise the law when law is due. Deal with it! ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Pamela Galli wrote:


Atma Constantine wrote:

All forums have ugly stuff. Nothing was mentioned about restricting anything. This forum is known for the unwelcoming way it hands to people. I only said i can understand why he didn't post here first. if you read in all of these places i would think you could see a huge difference with this forum, as some of the regular posters have even pointed out.

________________________________

I have indeed read extensively in "all these" forums (and even posted in the SLU thread the other day).  SLU has many good points and people, but I do not consider it by any means a kindler gentler or more polite forum, and I very much doubt any such reputation was the cause of Ebbe posting there initially. 

No one said you didn't read extensively. Your opinion on the forums is yours and the forums politelness or lackthereof, either one has nothing to do with Ebbe, what even gave you that idea? maybe you didn't understand my comment to him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NPpZ6FO-300x199aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.jpg

R.I.P. Second Life; Linden Labs announces a new game coming in 2015.
http://gorfail.com/?p=2934



Second Life announces plans to relaunch with Oculus Rift support
http://www.dailydot.com/technology/second-life-oculus-rift-relaunch/


Linden Lab announces that a sequel to Second Life is in the works
http://www.counterfrag.com/linden-lab-announces-sequel-second-life-works/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Gavin Hird wrote:

You know what? 

You need to direct your anger at the right address; namely the service provider that has not pulled their act together and cleaned up these matters. Sulking over who may or may not exercise their legal rights is nothing but childishly selfish. 

The animation or texture that is so precious to you could be gone the next hour because of DMCA takedown. People are entitled to excercise the law when law is due. Deal with it! ;-)

I have plenty of disappointment with the Lab for all sorts of reasons. I can't say that I'm particularly exercised over their handling of this ToS kerfuffle, and especially not how it may or may not apply in the provinces. That's all prefectly hypothetical anyway, inasmuch as the Lab hasn't actually done anything even plausibly contestable, however ugly their ToS may have become in theory.

In this case, however, you're proposing somthing creators could do that would in fact harm other residents.

Remember that those sellers are allowed to trade in SL only because they agreed to terms they'd now claim don't apply to them. That's false pretenses, no better than selling stolen content. 

(Also, I doubt a court would seriously consider a claim that a virtual world is a distinct service from... a virtual world, all from the same provider. It's not as if they merged with Stratasys and started 3D-printing everybody's avatars.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Gavin Hird wrote:

You are absolutely right that the general picture of intellectual property right is very complex across Europe, but that is not the discussion here. The discussion is consumer legislation where such TOS are covered. Consumer legislation is reasonably unified across the EU due to directives from the union.

 

The law says that clauses in such TOS are null and void if they don't meet the minimum requirements of the law. Actually you cannot legally accept such TOS even if you did, simply because they are null and void and therefore does not exist from the law's standpoint in this event.

 

Again the sensible thing for LL to do is to remove the clauses in contention from the TOS, and move them into a developer agreement that also covers distribution if the creator wants to have the creations distributed on the marketplace and to other services rendered by LL.

Gavin you keep saying this. The minimum requirements of the law. What exactly is the minimum requirement of the law where you are?

i already gave mine earlier in 3 short sentences. So if you can summarise what they are where you are then that be good.

if is way to complex then can you provide a link to the consumer law in Germany or UK or whereever it is that contain the minimum requirements of the law in the EU that nullfies the LL/SL ToS in EU. and I be happy to look at it myself

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Pam,

we are feeding the Troll. :matte-motes-big-grin:
 

But he/she is right, you got as well an un-welcoming, rather personal offending reply. Fun part is, it's him/her who did it. lol

Isn't it entertaining? :matte-motes-bashful-cute-2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ebbe,

While catching up on the last 10 or so pages of posts which happened last night, I've noticed a lot of you saying, in essence, "SL1 won't change; if you don't like it, don't switch." I can understand the reason behind that response. I, too, am getting tired of reading dozens of rude comments by the same handful of naysayers. But, speaking as one of many content creators whose full real life income is earned from Second Life, this response isn't helping to build my confidence. Any way you look at it, the launch of SL2 will divide our user base between two virtual worlds. (Possibly four, depending on launch dates of High Fidelity and the Facebook virtual world project.)

I believe all that I, and several other creators in this thread, want to convey to you and the SL2 dev team is that we need as much backwards compatibility as we can possibly get between the two grids... because, for us, not switching is not an option. If we don't move forward to the new grid, we divide our income in half. Even when we do switch, we as creators will be slowed by having to format our products for two different worlds. We won't be able to put out items as quickly as we could. My avatar projects require a detailed rigged mesh, dozens of textures, 100+ animations, sounds, scripts, HUD designs, addons, accessories, and third-party creator tools to be made, as well as extensive bug testing. Each of my avatars takes me an average of 10 months to complete (working full time, because SL is my full time job). By the time I complete my next avatar, SL2 will be in beta. By the time I've finished the one after that, SL2 may be approaching its launch date. Will those 20 months of work still be worthwhile when SL2 launches?

I'm thrilled to see that custom skeletons are something that have appeared on your roadmap; I'm hopeful that this will allow a lot of re-use of older meshes and animations, and I look forward as well to seeing the improvements that can come as a result of that feature. I'm hopeful that SL2 can grow to be a wonderful thing, and I'm eager to see what you come up with. All I ask is that, as you move forward and lay the groundwork for this new world, you don't fall into the trap of "you don't have to switch if you don't want to". Make us WANT to switch. Make it EASY to switch. And put high priority on maintaining as much backwards compatibility with SL1 as you possibly can. Custom armatures will greatly help with reusing meshes and animations. What can you do to reduce the workload of re-writing scripts? How about textured clothing and skins? The idea posted earlier of allowing some sort of method of matching old SL1 content in users' inventories to new SL2 updated content is a good one. Please make the transition as painless as possible. Don't let yourself become dismayed by the panic; find a way to excite us. Be on our side. Because we, the creators who form the backbone of the virtual world, need to be on your side too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's examine things a bit, shall we?

Section 2.3 of the Linden Lab TOS reads "You retain any and all Intellectual Property Rights you already hold under applicable law in Content you upload, publish, and submit to or through the Servers, Websites, and other areas of the Service." You never 'gave away your creations.'

You did, however, when accepting the new TOS, "grant to Linden Lab, the non-exclusive, unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, worldwide, irrevocable, perpetual, and cost-free right and license to use, copy, record, distribute, reproduce, disclose, sell, re-sell, sublicense (through multiple levels), modify, display, publicly perform, transmit, publish, broadcast, translate, make derivative works of, and otherwise exploit in any manner whatsoever, all or any portion of your User Content (and derivative works thereof), for any purpose whatsoever in all formats, on or through any media, software, formula, or medium now known or hereafter developed, and with any technology or devices now known or hereafter developed, and to advertise, market, and promote the same."

LOL. Yup, they pretty much gave themselves all rights to your works. Rather scummy, really. But they're not alone. The Facebook EULA, for instance, also says "You grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook." MySpace, Youtube, they all have similar provisions.

Importantly, courts have held 'click-wrap' EULAs enforceable, and basically ruled that, unless the terms are objectionable on grounds applicable to contracts in general (for example, if they violate a rule of positive law, or if they are unconscionable), they are pretty much enforceable. Thus, these licensing provisions in the Linden Lab TOS are very likely also enforceable. Primarlity because they do not restrict the rights of the content-creating users: they merely grant LL non-exclusive licenses.

With regard to the Linden Lab TOS allegedly being illegal in the EU, presumably people are referring to recent changes regarding EULA's and software licenses within the EU. Linden Lab, however, has registered as a non-resident EU business, meaning they have no sales offices in Europe, and are thus not affected by these changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Teager wrote:

Ebbe,

While catching up on the last 10 or so pages of posts which happened last night, I've noticed a lot of you saying, in essence, "SL1 won't change; if you don't like it, don't switch." I can understand the reason behind that response. I, too, am getting tired of reading dozens of rude comments by the same handful of naysayers. But, speaking as one of many content creators whose full real life income is earned from Second Life, this response isn't helping to build my confidence. Any way you look at it,
the launch of SL2 will divide our user base between two virtual worlds.
(Possibly four, depending on launch dates of High Fidelity and the Facebook virtual world project.)

I believe all that I, and several other creators in this thread, want to convey to you and the SL2 dev team is that we need as much backwards compatibility as we can possibly get between the two grids... because,
for us,
not
switching is not an option. If we don't move forward to the new grid, we divide our income in half. Even when we do switch, we as creators will be slowed by having to format our products for two different worlds. We won't be able to put out items as quickly as we could.
My avatar projects require a detailed rigged mesh, dozens of textures, 100+ animations, sounds, scripts, HUD designs, addons, accessories, and third-party creator tools to be made, as well as extensive bug testing. Each of my avatars takes me an average of 10 months to complete (working full time, because SL is my full time job). By the time I complete my next avatar, SL2 will be in beta. By the time I've finished the one after that, SL2 may be approaching its launch date. Will those 20 months of work still be worthwhile when SL2 launches?

 

This is my situation. SL is my full time job as well (and I dont just support myself but also partly several family members, so retiring is not an option.) 

 

I do not have the option to just stay in SL (or trust me I would, since the technology is not a significant factor to me). Having the overhead and the work of running two stores on two grids is going to be a challenge.

 

I have kept my schedule of weekly new releases even as in my spare time I learned Blender and replaced 2/3 of my four sim store with mesh content. Now it is daunting to contemplate redoing all this content again on another grid AND at the same time keep up my release scedule in SL along with all the other tasks running a business. 

 

Not saying that SL should revolve around me, but I imagine many full time creator-merchants who depend on their SL income have similar concerns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


irihapeti wrote:

Philip wants to change humanity. Is his calling. He hoped to get that when he envision SL. He never got change. We just brought our same old humanity (developed over 1000s and 1000s and 1000s of years) into SL with us and never changed at all

I like Gwyneth. She is a humanity changer as well. Not all the time but she thinks and writes a lot about the greater things. She writes really interesting stuff from that perspective. And I quite like that she can express those thoughts and ideas very well. So I think about them also

Ebbe (and Rodvik before him tbf) just want to make some good software for us to express ourselfs in and with. And make some money for the LL company

if I have to choose between changing humanity or letting humanity change itself then I prefer to let humanity find its own path

and I settle for a game/world that dont crash please. And a spaceship. I want a sim spaceship please that can fly to the stars. So i can leave humanity behind. At least for an hour or two (:

No offense to either, but both Phillip and Gwyneth have ideologies that are riddled with contradictions. This is good, in a sense, as it means that they don't accept what it handed to them. The problems are the contradictions, which can lead to decades of traveling in the wrong direction. The contradictions, IMHO, are because of the propaganda that we are all fed from the time we are born. I fight daily to correct the false rhetoric that tries to pull at my emotions, rather that appealing to my intellect. If you don't see it tho, then you'll actively pursue things that are selfdestructive.

I don't agree with you on Ebbe, and Rodvik, but I also see profit much differently than most. The first responsibility that every business has, is to be profitable. It means that you are actually producing value to the world. Without profits as a measure, the producer has no way to know if they are doing something productive with their life. By productive, I mean helping humanity. The more profitable something is, the more value it added to people's lives, or they would not have purchase it. The people that are changing the world, are those that are the most profitable, as long as they do not use public money to do it. It's not the Preachers that change the world, it is the Producers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


irihapeti wrote:


Gavin you keep saying this. The minimum requirements of the law. What exactly is the minimum requirement of the law where you are?

 

The most important is clauses on what is governing law. 

Here is an example in a filing against Apple where they had to change their terms for iCloud:

«[...] If (a) you are not a U.S. citizen; (b) you do not reside in the U.S.; © you are not accessing the Service from the U.S.; and (d) you are a citizen of one of the countries identified below, you hereby agree that any dispute or claim arising from this Agreement shall be governed by the applicable law set forth below, without regard to any conflict of law provisions, and you hereby irrevocably submit to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts located in the state, province or country identified below whose law governs:

If you are a citizen of: Governing law and forum:

Any European Union country or Switzerland, Norway or Iceland The laws and courts of your usual place of residence

Specifically excluded from application to this Agreement is that law known as the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods.» (Our emphasis) 

The interpretation is that the law of the country of residence applies for services like this.

 

Further from the same ruling, 

The Council Directive 93/13/EEC on unfair terms in consumer contracts applys to such TOS

Pursuant to the directive’s article 3, first paragraph

“[a] contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer”.

According to the directive’s article 3, third paragraph, the directive contains an annex which contains an indicative and non-exhaustive list of terms which may be regarded as unfair. It is laid down in paragraph 1 subparagraph j) of the annex that it will be regarded as unfair

“enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract”.

Further, pursuant to paragraph 2 subparagraph b)

ubparagraph (j) is also without hindrance to terms under which a seller or supplier reserves the right to alter unilaterally the conditions of a contract of indeterminate duration, provided that he is required to inform the consumer with reasonable notice and that the consumer is free to dissolve the contract”.

Paragraph 1 subparagraph j) of the annex limits the businesses’ right to reserve to themselves the right to unilaterally alter the terms of the contract. For a change clause to be deemed fair, a reason for the change must be specified in the contract. This ensures a certain degree of control and predictability for the consumer. Further, the reason for the change must be “valid”. Subparagraph j) offers no further guidance as to what constitutes a “valid reason”

 

The privacy section of the TOS is also important and must be in accordance with governing law. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say I'm looking forward to redoing the work either... especially since this news has come right in the middle of a massive update to my highest selling avatars, which bumps the workload on each of them from 8 months to 14 months. Having to redo it all again in two years' time is akin to a nightmare.

As for sims... I already know I won't be able to afford to keep sims in both worlds. I'll just have to wait and find out where the bulk of my customers will be, and have the sim there. It will be hard to maintain identity in both worlds without full sims, though. The way my sim is set up now, only about 1/16th of the sim is my main store. The rest is dedicated to hosting shops for the 80ish third-party vendors who sell accessories and addons for my mesh avatars. I'll be very sad to lack that kind of one-stop shop feeling on one or the other of the grids. It will be a difficult transition for some time, until one grid or the other shows dominance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...