Failed delivery

[Phil Deakins]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

Why isn't it a copyright issue once permission is withdrawn for the not unreasonable reason people's money is being taken and nothing received. In just the same way empty box sellers using pictures of another product are taken down. The situations would seem to be the same. Furthermore there would seem to be no legal risk anyway because doing so is in the resellers interests assuming from what has been said their health is preventing them manage their store

---

I don't believe that it's a copyright issue because no goods are sold that are subject to copyright or intellectual property rights. Although, if the seller's signs state that <brand name> goods are inside, then it may well be a DMCA issue because the brand name itself is a copyright issue - I think

There's a company here in the UK called Easy Jet. They also have companies like Easy Hotels and such. If anyone starts to use Easy <anything> the company is onto them like a shot, and the name usurper has to stop using the word 'Easy' as part of its name - always. So brand names may well be subject to copyright.

It is the same as selling empty boxes but, correct me if I'm wrong, the marketplace staff deal with those as fraud, without anyone filing a DMCA claim. Other LL staff should deal with this problem for the same reason but LL is so bad that they allow the fraud to continue. They actually knowingly facilitate it. LL is legally liable, imo, but I don't think it's necessarily a DMCA issue, although it may be.

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

There's a company here in the UK called Easy Jet. They also have companies like Easy Hotels and such. If anyone starts to use Easy <anything> the company is onto them like a shot, and the name usurper has to stop using the word 'Easy' as part of its name - always. So brand names may well be subject to copyright.

---

Psst, that's a trademark.

Trademarks and copyright differ slightly, important thing with trademarks is that they must be defended else they fall back into 'common use' - like, say, Cellotape.

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

It is the same as selling empty boxes but, correct me if I'm wrong, the marketplace staff deal with those as fraud, without anyone filing a DMCA claim.

---

This is interesting (I'm shrinking the rest, where you use words like 'should', 'knowingly' and 'liable', intentionally ) but does set a standard for LL's behaviour. I do wonder why it's not consistent.

[Phil Deakins]

Yes, of course. Silly me

[Freya Mokusei]

Easy to confuse! Was not impugning your intelligence and knowledge on this issue.

Just trying to keep things straight for Aethelwine and others, it's not an easy subject. Probably why they call it 'legalese'.

Would probably not apply, either way, since Trademarking requires local registration.

ETA: some edits above and in my previous post - realised my post was pretty short. Urgh, first economics now law, I am awkward at all of this.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Alwin Alcott wrote:

the person at least

had

a agreements because he sold loaded danceballs and dance packs for lot of big creators for many years, and still today. The animations at the original store were mostly no trans, and he had it in his balls, so it must been a agreement in one or other way.

<snip>

 

 

---

Are you sure about those perms?  Bits n Bobs, the original creator of some of the dances have always been no copy/transfer and perusing my couples dances from other creators with rare exception they are all no copy/transfer.

 

[Phil Deakins]

I didn't take it as impugning my intelligence, Freya. I couldn't because, for something to be impugned, you first have to have some of it

I should have known better. It's not all that long ago that someone usurped my well-known at the time SL business name, by applying for a trademark on it. I could have prevented it due to provable prior use, but it would have cost me the same to do that as it was costing him to apply for it, so I didn't bother. His business failed quite quickly, anyway, and mine still continues under a different name lol.

Although I am dead against Linden Lab as a company, it reminds me that there are, and have been, some very good Lindens. One of them warned me that the guy had applied for a trademark on my SL business name. He didn't have to warn me, but he did. And I've come across others too. It's the company that's bad.

[Aethelwine]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Alwin Alcott wrote:

the person at least

had

a agreements because he sold loaded danceballs and dance packs for lot of big creators for many years, and still today. The animations at the original store were mostly no trans, and he had it in his balls, so it must been a agreement in one or other way.

<snip>

 

---

Are you sure about those perms?  Bits n Bobs, the original creator of some of the dances have always been no copy/transfer and perusing my couples dances from other creators with rare exception they are all no copy/transfer.

 

---

Bits and Bobs for a few years now have sold all their dances in Copy form as well as No Copy at their main store.

 

---

Alwin Alcott wrote:

<snip>

Biggest problem is he is one of te very few ( as far i know) resellers of the most known, but old, couple dance machine...so lot of people will still go there. More or less happens with another dance seller... H. .... vanished too, but still selling.

---

It is hard guessing around the innuendos, but I think that this other business you might be talking about is back and releasing more dances, and doing promotions...I presume whatever the problem with the website and the dance hud is fixed now.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Alwin Alcott wrote:

the person at least

had

a agreements because he sold loaded danceballs and dance packs for lot of big creators for many years, and still today. The animations at the original store were mostly no trans, and he had it in his balls, so it must been a agreement in one or other way.

<snip>

 

 

---

Are you sure about those perms?  Bits n Bobs, the original creator of some of the dances have always been no copy/transfer and perusing my couples dances from other creators with rare exception they are all no copy/transfer.

 

---

Tagging my own post here. 

I know I'm terrible.    But thought of this afterwards.

If you think through the permission system there are only two ways the reseller could resell the dance.  The dances would have to be either copy/transfer or no copy/transfer from the creator. Once a permission is restricted the next owner (in this case the reseller) can not change it.

The creator is NOT selling them full perm to the reseller.  In that case there would never be a delivery problem (shortage).  The reseller must be buying then no copy/transfer and runs out of stock.

[Ina Fairport]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

 

 

If you think through the permission system there are only two ways the reseller could resell the dance.  The dances would have to be either copy/transfer or no copy/transfer from the creator. Once a permission is restricted the next owner (in this case the reseller) can not change it.

The creator is NOT selling them full perm to the reseller.  In that case there would never be a delivery problem (shortage). 

The reseller must be buying then no copy/transfer and runs out of stock.

---

That is exactly what happens Perrie

[Perrie Juran]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Alwin Alcott wrote:

the person at least

had

a agreements because he sold loaded danceballs and dance packs for lot of big creators for many years, and still today. The animations at the original store were mostly no trans, and he had it in his balls, so it must been a agreement in one or other way.

<snip>

 

---

Are you sure about those perms?  Bits n Bobs, the original creator of some of the dances have always been no copy/transfer and perusing my couples dances from other creators with rare exception they are all no copy/transfer.

 

---

Bits and Bobs for a few years now have sold all their dances in Copy form as well as No Copy at their main store.

<snip>

---

Been ages since I shopped there so didn't know this but checking their Marketplace Store all of those are no transfer.  So those are not what the reseller is using.

[Aethelwine]

If you check the transfer box in search instead of the copy one you will see they do still sell transfer ones.. So it is possible that they used to have someone popping over to buy from Craig and then stuffing them in dance machines ready to go in their hippo venders.

The MOM dances they could have bought full perm when MOM shut up shop, Perhaps 3FX did the same? I am not sure.

[Ina Fairport]

As I told before I talked with two of the of the original creators. Craig and Cecilia.
The reseller buys their products which are no copy/ transfer.

The reseller runs out of stock often and the buyer who buys a preloaded danceball does not receive their purchase. Reseller does not react on support ticket and does not pay a refund.

On the marketplace was an adv with  reviews and 23 comments about failed deliveries. The adv has been removed.

That is what is happening here.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Ina Fairport wrote:

As I told before I talked with two of the of the original creators. Craig and Cecilia.

The reseller buys their products which are no copy/ transfer.

 

The reseller runs out of stock often and the buyer who buys a preloaded danceball does not receive their purchase. Reseller does not react on support ticket and does not pay a refund.

 

On the marketplace was an adv with  reviews and 23 comments about failed deliveries. The adv has been removed.

 

That is what is happening here.

 

 

---

May need to get one of the Merchants to comment on this because I'm not expert enough.

But if my memory serves me correctly No Copy (to the seller, like in Gatchas) get special handling bu the MP.  Once the copy sells it get's delisted from the MP.  (Hope I've said that clearly enough)

[Ina Fairport]

It is still going on. Almost for a year now. Lots of failed delivery and no refund.

LL does nothing despite the AR's.

Creators of dance animations have banned him from their shop and dont support him anymore.

In the meanwhile he keeps gettin people's money without delivering the goods.