Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Vanity Fair

Controversy over a new feature in the next release of the Sansar software

Recommended Posts

An interesting read. I am not there of course and would side for the rights of the creators. But that said, with H and G items, it has long been known that no mod items don't sell near as well as mod. And yes, folks CAN make a mess of your items -- LOL, agreed, but the other side of the coin is that your items don't get out into the world at all. 

The exception to this is gachas which are often sold no-mod.  I have a few of those and I DO WISH they were mod as they are sized way far from realistic size --- and of course the folks playing the machines seldom KNOW that.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I am sure there would be just as much of an uproar in SL if the same rules became mandetory. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a consumer I really do hate no mod items and I try to avoid them as much as possible.
I guess the fear some creators might have "but they will ruin my creation if it's modifiable" is quite unfounded.
It might well be that those who don't know much about editing won't do it even if the item was modifiable in fear that they would ruin it.

I have been able to make many modifiable items more beautiful than they originally were, by adding specularity, or lessening it if the creator had put too much of it.
(Lots of creators even now either don't use materials or don't know how to use them properly, which is a pity.)

I don't understand this no-mod craziness trend at all - not in SL and not in Sansar. It's really a very bad thing.
The creators don't lose any money if they sell their creations modifiable.
On the contrary they actually could make more money with more sales.
The creator is happy, LL is happy (because they get their slice from the sales), the consumer is happy. Everybody is happy.
So why no-mod?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Coby Foden said:

I don't understand this no-mod craziness trend at all - not in SL and not in Sansar. It's really a very bad thing.

I can think of three possible reasons, one irrational, one commercial and one traditional.

The irrational one is when the creeator is so in love with their own creative genius they can't stand the thought of others tampering with their perfection.

The comrmecial one is if the merchant sells a gazillion texture variants and want the customer to buy them all.

The traditional is that is you sell or give away a modifiable prim or sculpt, the new owner can use it to buid all kinds of monstrosities and with your name as the creator, you get the blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2017 at 6:36 PM, ChinRey said:

The commercial one is if the merchant sells a gazillion texture variants and want the customer to buy them all.

   That's probably what some seller is whining about. They want to sell T-shirts or something similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Calling creators 'irrational' or 'whiners' or their preferences 'unfounded' is not really an argument.

Assuming that I worked hard to conceptualize, sketch, block out, model, texture and compile a creation for use in SL, that PROVIDES CONTENT for users, and  having the ability to make a few meagre Lindens to fun my efforts - should not be tread upon or met with scorn.

Yes, I take pride in my creations, put blood, sweat and tears (and time learning) how to do, so I should be able to determine the END USE of it, unless of course you are willing to pay EXTRA for it.

SL Users are not buying the model as a GAME ASSET to freely edit and redistribute as they see fit (and presumably to make money from their sims and experiences based on YOUR modified works, with no compensation to you), they are buying it to enjoy on their own sims for their own enjoyment.

As a creator, my workflow and time invested is directly related to the end use of an item.. As a work of art to be admired and used to improve fun in SL, or as a Lego building kit?

It is not 'irrational' then, to have pride in one's work, and NOT want someone to change it. Presumably, they bought the piece because they liked how it was presented. It would be like buying a painting at a gallery and taking it home and repainting it. You COULD do that, yes, but MOST people don't need to or even think of it.

You frown on 'commercialism' that a creator would create variants on an existing mesh, who also spends EXTRA time (for those of us who don't simply apply a textures.com texture and call it done), on their textures to suit a certain theme?

On so-so "oh look at me, I basically copied a piece of furniture from a magazine" model creator may not mind, since they didn't put any creative effort into it, then THEY may not care if their work is bastardized, or frankensteined into a new creation - with no credit to them. Any business that is allegedly lost to those sim owners who want cheap building part kits, is regained by folks seeing your works on their friend's sims and getting their own copy - and supporting the creator in the process..

Gees, Chin. It's like one topic you can see the other side and agree that it's fair, then you just return to your old and tired (and frankly demeaning) statements of creators who choose to market different than you.

Edited by entity0x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gheez, someone really must have hit a mark on your "no mod" items, or you would not necro all those threads...

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2018 at 9:06 PM, Fionalein said:

Gheez, someone really must have hit a mark on your "no mod" items, or you would not necro all those threads...

Yet you feel like continuing by posting off-topic responses, instead of ever offering a counter argument.

But yeah, sometimes I haven't been to the forums in a month or so, and don't read the dates, I just respond to those of interest that are listed at the top of the forum. So sue me.

----- I have more to say, thanks for reminding me by you necroing too :D ------

If SL end users want copy and mod on all items in SL, then we as creators have to rethink the price we offer on our items. If we sell on Turbosquid or the Unity/Unreal Stores we are selling the customers a license to use our assets as they see fit in their projects. This includes resizing, modifiying, de-constructing, etc. We also understand that our products will be resold FOR PROFIT in these ventures, and so price accordingly for that license.

It's not about pride, or ego, or artisitic vision, though we certainly as  creators are entitled to do as we wish anyway.

Although I don't care what the end result will be (if mod is truly desired by all), I would like to come to a consensus as to what and who and why we are creating stuff in SL and for what now.

Sansar almost brings a different consumer model than SL does - in that the end use of items will be purchased and modified more by 'experience creators' trying to make money doing so, vs just an average SL'er using your fridge in their Barbie Castle. This is why there is a debate as to what permissions LL will default to on that platform. If a sim/experience owner wants full access to assets, forward them to online asset stores to pay the appropriate price for such access.

An average SL user is not using your stuff for commercial end purposes, but pretty much for their own enjoyment. Of course, I'm sure most creators would like to serve the market best as possible, and provide the best experience with the products they can - the end use MUST be determined to determine price.

A commercial big-sim SL Mogul making money with sim visitors (and in some cases GRANTS FROM THE GOVERNMENT!) ARE in fact using your stuff for monetary gain, and therefore should be subject to completely different licensing - and therefore a HIGHER CHARGE.

At this point, you are not simply a user or fan of a creators work - supporting them with your Lindens so they make more content for you, for passive enjoyment, but rather you want to own them as ASSETS to use as you see fit in the pursuit of making $$$ from it.

I'm sorry, but there are licenses for end uses of many things in life. Don't think that buying a premade house for yourself allows you the license to tear it apart and use the individual walls and parts to create what you want, on your own sim that is designed for profit. Fair enough if that is what the license and end use was intended.

But many of us creators KNOW FULL WELL WHY YOU WANT MOD, and we're not fooled.

The average SL'er doesn't even care or even notice it, but those who would exploit low prices for high access to cheap assets certainly know better.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, entity0x said:

A commercial big-sim SL Mogul making money with sim visitors (and in some cases GRANTS FROM THE GOVERNMENT!) ARE in fact using your stuff for monetary gain, and therefore should be subject to completely different licensing - and therefore a HIGHER CHARGE.

You're one of those persons who would charge a Cinema producer hundreds of times as much money because they would use your RL furniture in their million dollar box office movie, because they make all that money with it, right? I tell you a secret: You can try to do that, but they will just go to the next carpenter ;)

Edited by Fionalein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, entity0x said:

A commercial big-sim SL Mogul making money with sim visitors (and in some cases GRANTS FROM THE GOVERNMENT!) ARE in fact using your stuff for monetary gain,

Yay, people using the stuff they bought!

1 hour ago, entity0x said:

and therefore should be subject to completely different licensing - and therefore a HIGHER CHARGE.

Huh?! Maybe this is some type of new logic. If it’s not in a TOS or legal use notice, they can do what they want to with it. You’re funny!!! Make more Jokes please?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, entity0x said:

A commercial big-sim SL Mogul making money with sim visitors (and in some cases GRANTS FROM THE GOVERNMENT!) ARE in fact using your stuff for monetary gain, and therefore should be subject to completely different licensing - and therefore a HIGHER CHARGE.

You're going to be very busy checking how every purchaser uses your stuff so you know what to charge them. I suggest getting thyself to Sansar. If I've read correctly, creators whose content ends up in an experience build get a cut of whatever money is made. (Assuming they find visitors willing to pay to enter the experience.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, entity0x said:

But many of us creators KNOW FULL WELL WHY YOU WANT MOD, and we're not fooled.

Is conspiracy? 

3D6A263C-3730-42E2-BB99-B2DA624CE0D4.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I was one of the vocally opposed to this change in policy. The biggest reason is because Linden Lab was changing permissions on products we had made and listed for sale prior to the policy going into effect. So all those items which we had listed and sold as no mod all of a sudden became mod.

This was how Linden Lab responded to requests made by creators to have an easier way of retexturing items they had uploaded without having to upload the item all over again by making all objects in a scene modifiable nullifying all prior permissions regardless of who created the content. Had the policy only applied to objects being sold after the new policy I wouldn't have been as concerned, but to change permissions on objects having been listed with certain permissions and then to have those permissions changed without consent of the creator to me could lead to a very slippery slope infringing on creator rights.

Edited by Blush Bravin
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/12/2017 at 3:36 AM, ChinRey said:

The traditional is that is you sell or give away a modifiable prim or sculpt, the new owner can use it to buid all kinds of monstrosities and with your name as the creator, you get the blame.

This one, to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×