Show homes are prohibited adverts ....

[Blush Bravin]

1 hour ago, Odaks said:

"Commerce" is actually a rather all-embracing word, covering the activities involved with the process of buying and selling. I would bet my bottom dollar that the lawyers , in a court of law, would have no difficulty whatsoever establishing that "commerce" includes advertising of a deliberate nature.

from the business dictionary -

commerce: Exchange of goods or services for money or in kind, usually on a scale large enough to require transportation from place to place or across city, state, or national boundaries.

from Merriam-Webster -

commerce:: the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place.

So from two different sources you can see commerce would hardly include advertising. And not only that commerce is not simply just buying and selling .. the scale of buying and selling is also implied.

A creator hosting an open house in Bellisseria couldn't possibly be considered as conducting commerce.

5 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Someone made a comment that struck me as very valid.  If all of the objects in a home are created by the home owner and the home is not actually being lived in, but is there simply to be a model / show home, then IMO that is advertising.

Whereas all the many folks that have said their house is open to anyone that wants to come look and there house has stuff by other creators (even if there is also stuff created by the home owner), then it isn't blatant advertising.

I've been to both of the homes that are hosted open houses by the creators the OP has implied are breaking the rules. While in both cases the majority of the items in those homes are made by the creators there are objects made by other creators as well in both of those homes. 

[Odaks]

From the Cambridge Dictionary:

B2 the activities involved in buying and selling things

From Collins Dictionary:

Commerce is the activities and procedures involved in buying and selling things.

From Oxford Dictionary:

The activity of buying and selling, especially on a large scale

 

Just saying, that's all.

  

[kiramanell]

1 hour ago, Odaks said:

"Commerce" is actually a rather all-embracing word, covering the activities involved with the process of buying and selling. I would bet my bottom dollar that the lawyers , in a court of law, would have no difficulty whatsoever establishing that "commerce" includes advertising of a deliberate nature.

 

Way I see it, it's not so much a matter of whether advertising constitutes 'commerce' per se, but whether ppl showing off what can be done with these homes is really advertising. Like I, for one, can't peruse the various photo threads, without thinking, every other post or so, "I want to make a house like that!" That doesn't make those photos ads (or they're all ads, for SL, depending on your pov).

[Mollymews]

9 minutes ago, Blush Bravin said:

commerce: Exchange of goods or services for money or in kind, usually on a scale large enough to require transportation from place to place or across city, state, or national boundaries.

it gets even murkier if we take this reading of the word, as what Linden intended by their use of the word

were a person to put out a tip jar on their parcel then as there is no exchange of goods or services for money then the tips received would not be commerce in this narrow dictionary meaning of the word

[Zoya McDonnagh]

5 hours ago, Cam Mode said:

In my world, we call this "Tuesday."   Pulls chair closer, tell me about the phantasies, I have a refund coming ...... ;p.

Or Sunday....

[kiramanell]

19 minutes ago, Mollymews said:

it gets even murkier if we take this reading of the word, as what Linden intended by their use of the word

were a person to put out a tip jar on their parcel then as there is no exchange of goods or services for money then the tips received would not be commerce in this narrow dictionary meaning of the word

 

It gets even murkier than that.

Allegedly, some of these homes are put on display, so to speak, with the (implicit) purpose of you buying the stuff therein. I get that. But is that really advertising? Say, a girlfriend of mine shows up, at a party we both attend, in a gorgeous dress. Now, I will definitely want a dress like that too! But it's still not advertising (on her part). Not even if she made the dress herself, and is actually selling them! I mean, we need to be careful what we call advertising. Only if she were wearing the dress with a "Buy me!" label on it, would it be adverting. Just me wanting that dress, doesn't mean she's advertising. Like I don't think ppl showing off their homes is advertising, really (unless they put a 'Buy me!' sign next to it).

Edited May 19, 2019 by kiramanell
And if only I could type properly

[Mollymews]

13 minutes ago, kiramanell said:

 

Say, a girlfriend of mine shows up, at a party we both attend, in a gorgeous dress. Now, I will definitely want a dress like that too! But it's still not advertising (on her part). Not even if she made the dress herself, and is actually selling them! I mean, we need to be careful what we call advertising. Only if she were wearing the dress with a "Buy me!" label on it, would it be adverting. Just me wanting that dress, doesn't mean she's advertising. Like I don't think ppl showing off their homes is advertising, really (unless they put a 'Buy me!' sign next to it).

yes, you are spot on with this

we should not reach for the dictionary to buttress an argument when we can apply a commonsense analogy

i also doubt that LL would accept my dictionary posit to allow tip jars, but am sure somebody will give it a go ... soon

[Luna Bliss]

For me, the issue is whether those with 'open houses' in Belliserria are actually in the community somehow and not just looking @ the continent as a way to profit monetarily -- in other words, is Bellisseria more than a market to them?

I remember years ago when various corporations and entrepreneurs swooped into SL with dollar signs in their eyes -- it just felt tacky as I knew they didn't appreciate SL but only saw it as a way to fill their greedy little pockets. I had a similar feeling when I told various people in RL that I earned some money here -- immediately they wanted to know how to join SL when previously they denigrated SL by characterizing it as some silly game with perverts and time-wasters.

I'm not saying any of those setting up show homes are like the above people -- I don't even know who they are. Most of them probably do look at SL as more than just a market, and being a creator IS their primary role and way of participating in the world (it has always been mine).
I'm just pointing out what seems tacky to me, whether or not complexities such as 'intent' could be codified into any kind of Linden law.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

It's a slippery slope if we (again) start trying to police how much time people spend in their homes, their intent in owning the homes, etc. If you have to dig that hard to determine whether there has been a technical violation, I think you should just leave it be. I think it's telling that the only actual neighbor of one of these homes who has spoken up is in FAVOR of the homes.

As someone who lives next door to a person who has questionable decorating taste to the point I am wearing out my derender finger, I would be THRILLED to have one of the beautiful model homes next door to me!

[Cam Mode]

6 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Someone made a comment that struck me as very valid.  If all of the objects in a home are created by the home owner and the home is not actually being lived in, but is there simply to be a model / show home, then IMO that is advertising.

 

"Actually being lived in"..... we go through the trash can for food wrappers ? Look how much water they use? Did they sign up for broadband? Bang on the door at 3 am their time "you here-sleeping?"   Where do they vote?

Oh gosh, I hate to break it to you, we don't LIVE in SL. If someone wants to decorate the whole inside of their house with cats or fishes or decor from just one shop or boxes of textures, that's their choice.

Now if they use one maker for the garden, again, so what - it will blend better.

No sales tag = not a store, not commerce.

[Chic Aeon]

1 hour ago, Mollymews said:

were a person to put out a tip jar on their parcel then as there is no exchange of goods or services for money then the tips received would not be commerce in this narrow dictionary meaning of the word

I think pretty much everything has been said by now but I did want to ask --

Did we ever get an official OK or "no" on the tip jar question?  I remember a thread asking for clarification for DJs and such for their "club".  Did we ever get a clarification on the "club" thing?  It really is difficult for folks to follow the rules when they are murky (even if they are the kind of folks that DO follow the rules). 

My only bit of info is that when LEA began long ago "commerce" was excluded in the land tab (still is). Any items for sale must be for $0 lindens. Tip jars were OK for a time, then banned --  but CURRENTLY are now  only for special occasions:

Quote

 *Objects that allow payments of any kind are not permitted on LEA land.  This includes vendors selling objects, objects set for sale for anything more than L$0, and general tip jars.  You may hand out landmarks to other places where your art is available for purchase, or other places where people can tip or donate money.  You may, however, set out a tip jar for specific performers for a one time event or performance for the duration of that event or performance. Please note that the LEA organization itself does not accept donations or payments of any kind from anyone.

So it would be good in the long run for the Belliseria continent to spell things out a bit better I think. 

Note also that the very top of the LEA lands covenant reads: The LEA is not affiliated with Linden Lab ...

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by Chic Aeon
tab not "tag"

[kiramanell]

13 minutes ago, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

It's a slippery slope if we (again) start trying to police how much time people spend in their homes, their intent in owning the homes, etc.

 

^^ You said this so very well!  

Say, I were to make a beautiful Bellisseris home one day, but would not be present every day (the likelihood of the latter far exceeding the former, but I digress), then could it be said I have my beautiful home just on display for advertising? And why? Because I'm not around all the time? And who determines when I'm considered actually, actively living there, and not just 'advertising'? Who determines how much time I need to spend on the sim to be a 'good' neighbor?

I don't mean to rock the boat, but if you really think about these matters, what it essentially keeps boiling down to, is that there be some ppl -- in threads like these -- who, one could say, are 'passive-aggresively' (LOL, a term that's popped up quite a bit this week) indicating how one should live on Bellisseria -- even when they don't even realize per se they're doing it. And I just feel, with you, that we shouldn't go there. It leads to entirely too much imputing of motives (often deemed sinister, of course), as to why ppl aren't there 'enough', or why their home isn't decorated enough, or -- as the case may be, here -- why it's decorated too beautifully (Sic!). It all leads to impossible speculation, and, worse, inevitable, and undue judgement.

Much like I don't wish to pressure anyone into giving up their second home, I likewise don't want to tell ppl how they should live their lives on Bellisseria (or be told myself, should I ever make it there). Live and let live. And if policing needs to be done, leave it to the Lindens, is my motto.

[KasimiraMathilde]

As it turns out, every home is advertising then. Because the ability to cam into homes, that you are not invited to, offer the same potential to create a desire to buy a particular item or items, that are seen, as it is from a home that is open to visitors. Just sayin. 

[Odaks]

3 hours ago, kiramanell said:

 

It gets even murkier than that.

Allegedly, some of these homes are put on display, so to speak, with the (implicit) purpose of you buying the stuff therein. I get that. But is that really advertising? Say, a girlfriend of mine shows up, at a party we both attend, in a gorgeous dress. Now, I will definitely want a dress like that too! But it's still not advertising (on her part). Not even if she made the dress herself, and is actually selling them! I mean, we need to be careful what we call advertising. Only if she were wearing the dress with a "Buy me!" label on it, would it be adverting. Just me wanting that dress, doesn't mean she's advertising. Like I don't think ppl showing off their homes is advertising, really (unless they put a 'Buy me!' sign next to it).

I absolutely agree. Of course that isn't advertising, just to be wearing an item, or having an item in your home. That is why I used (and made bold) the word "deliberate".

[Wulfie Reanimator]

21 hours ago, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

If all they have is a sign with their name on it (not a billboard, just a small tasteful sign), then I think you are being too harsh. You're basically saying I can put a sign in my yard with my name on it, but A.F. cannot?

You represent an individual person, A.F. does not.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Just now, Wulfie Reanimator said:

You represent an individual person, A.F. does not.

AF is an actual person in SL. 

[Wulfie Reanimator]

Just now, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

AF is an actual person in SL. 

Cool, you didn't make it sound like it. Let's try again.

If Person A runs a for-profit business and names it "Person A", that brand name -- even if it is the same as the sole individual running it -- does not represent an individual person. It is a brand, and the person running it is separate. There are lots of examples of this, where the company includes the name of the founder (either partially or in full).

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Oh, look. My memory had faded a bit, so I just went back to the AF house. The sign doesn't even have a name on it.

ETA: And the parcel's name is not the name of the store, either. 

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by Sylvia Tamalyn

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

And here is the other home in question. Again, no store name on the sign, and the parcel is not named after the store, either. What exactly is the issue here??

 

[LittleMe Jewell]

3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

For me, the issue is whether those with 'open houses' in Belliserria are actually in the community somehow and not just looking @ the continent as a way to profit monetarily -- in other words, is Bellisseria more than a market to them?

As others have mentioned, there really is no way of knowing "for sure" how someone is using a home, but with a few creators, the above does come to mind.  I truly believe that the vast majority (better than 99%) of people that have said their house is Open have done so truly to show the place off, give people lots of ideas, and foster a community feeling. Likewise, IMO, there are a few that I think have done the whole Open House thing for a different reason -- again, totally my opinion.  While I cannot know for sure what the intentions are, I can make a very reasonable assumption.  And like most people, my assumptions about things will color my opinion of people & places.

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by LittleMe Jewell

[Coffee Pancake]

There is no requirement for advertising or promotional material to include the company or brands name in the title.

Some of the best and most innovative adverts manage to sell a product without even featuring it or the brand directly.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

Just now, CoffeeDujour said:

There is no requirement for advertising or promotional material to include the company or brands name in the title.

Some of the best and most innovative adverts manage to sell a product without even featuring it or the brand directly.

If I have to actually click on an item and go into Edit mode just to see who made it, I don't consider that to be "advertising". Again, what exactly is the issue with these houses? The owners dared to use their own products? Didn't you do the same with your own home? 

[Coffee Pancake]

6 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

As others have mentioned, there really is no way of knowing "for sure" how someone is using a home,

Intent matters and where intent is hard to identity, then the benefit of the doubt must prevail. There is no doubt concerning the homes that prompted this thread.

2 minutes ago, Sylvia Tamalyn said:

The owners dared to use their own products? Didn't you do the same with your own home? 

My home has one item made by myself, the bulk of the stuff isn't even owned by me because I share my singular Linden home with a friend.

[Sylvia Tamalyn]

1 minute ago, CoffeeDujour said:

Intent matters and where intent is hard to identity, then the benefit of the doubt must prevail. There is no doubt concerning the homes that prompted this thread.

And I have no doubt concerning the intent behind the posting of this thread.

[Louminca]

edited because I believe the Op's to be quoting from an outdated rule book. 

so really the below is moot.

special since people are saying patch already came in for one dispute and settle against the old rules 

 

people that write these contracts know what they are doing. 

 

BUT in contract law (trust me I took an only line class hahaha  https://www.edx.org/course/contract-law-from-trust-to-promise-to-contract-3 )

there could be a valid argument that : if the business owner has it as their residence and has opened it to the public for FREE tours "

Well then a court aka Lindens would have to decided. A contract has to be put into practice and interpreted. 

 So does that mean I cant be a home psychic, massage therapist, any therapist, a pub, or a roleplay daycare?? 

 

Edited May 19, 2019 by Louminca