Jump to content

"Share" is taken out of the viewer completely?


Prokofy Neva
 Share

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1564 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

There are some astonishingly good photographs of SL on Flickr. I mean, actual, real "art." And of course, there is a larger volume of crap, including straight-up porn.

I don't know if this shift in policy reflects, at least in part, an attempt to reduce the volume of the crap, but I have often wondered why LL doesn't make better PR use of the real talent that the platform also features.

I totally agree with you on the quality but i wouldn't put most of the good ones in the "snapshot" category. I was more referring to the hastily taken pics to show context to a story rather then portray something beautiful. I look on Flickr a lot as well and some pictures there are absolutely amazing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jules Catlyn said:

I totally agree with you on the quality but i wouldn't put most of the good ones in the "snapshot" category. I was more referring to the hastily taken pics to show context to a story rather then portray something beautiful. I look on Flickr a lot as well and some pictures there are absolutely amazing.

Yes. agreed; that's a good distinction that I missed. And of course the ones that were being shared directly from the viewer were (mostly -- I've seen some great snapshots too) not very good, quality-wise.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

SL's snapshot and machimina policy is here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy

After reviewing it, I agree that yes, snapshots are allowed, unless the landowner forbids in covenants (which is uncommon), but machinima requires consent for "avatars whose names are legible," in addition to a few other special cases .  

 

Once again, Linden Lab does not have jurisdiction outside its own servers. You would not want them to have it, nor would they want it.

Everything in the TOS and things like this machinima policy refer to usage *inside the realm of Second Life*.

And again, no one has mounted a successful privacy-related lawsuit involving an avatar and a virtual world. Call me when they do.

That's to be distinguished from *copyright*-related suits, where they may have a case if there was *commercial use*.

So again, *it does not matter what the landowner forbids*. Neither he, nor LL, have jurisdiction outside of Second Life.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jules Catlyn said:

Maybe playing a bit of a devils advocate here but i don't think LL is to sad to see less snapshots outside of SL because most of them are not too good in quality graphically and really are not a good advertisement. Just like a polaroid of the Eiffel tower is not really flattering. I think they rather see good quality pictures posted on the internet.

I'd have to disagree with that. While there are a lot of amateur shots and a fair share of them come from me, there are enormous numbers of very high-quality shots, look at Flickr, look at the top blogs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

Once again, Linden Lab does not have jurisdiction outside its own servers. You would not want them to have it, nor would they want it.

Everything in the TOS and things like this machinima policy refer to usage *inside the realm of Second Life*.

And again, no one has mounted a successful privacy-related lawsuit involving an avatar and a virtual world. Call me when they do.

That's to be distinguished from *copyright*-related suits, where they may have a case if there was *commercial use*.

So again, *it does not matter what the landowner forbids*. Neither he, nor LL, have jurisdiction outside of Second Life.

 

People agree to a ToS, but its not enforceable.  Ethics is often like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I'd have to disagree with that. While there are a lot of amateur shots and a fair share of them come from me, there are enormous numbers of very high-quality shots, look at Flickr, look at the top blogs.

As i said in response to Scylla. I would differentiate between snapshots and photos. So i don't disagree with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ingrid Ingersoll said:

Really? In what way? I dont have an opinion one way or the other just curious about why it could be unethical.

In this way.  When one shares data from within SL -- like IMs -- that would be an AR'able offence if done in-world, and posts it outside SL to be out of reach of the ToS.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/13/2019 at 10:45 AM, Oz Linden said:

The services we were providing interfaces to via SLShare (Facebook, Twitter, Flicker) have not maintained stable interfaces; each of them has repeatedly changed the interface in an incompatible way (sometimes with very little notice). None has been used very heavily by the user base as a whole, and because of the interface instability we have decided that they are not worth the high maintenance cost so we're removing those features from the viewer code and shutting down the backend service.

We're very sorry that this will inconvenience those who were successfully using the service.

Really no loss on those, especially FB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It 

16 hours ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

People agree to a ToS, but its not enforceable.  Ethics is often like that.

It most certainly is enforceable -- in the most brutal way, like Russia or China or Iran. For "any reason or no reason," the Lindens can simply expel you from the service and block you from logging on again. This is done routinely without appeal for new accounts; older accounts might get a review but generally if the Lindens arrive at a decision to ban you, they will. And this will be for violation of the TOS -- as they see it, without recourse.

Perhaps by "not enforceable" you mean that they don't bother to chase all violators, they don't have the resources. But that is really different than "not enforced" because generally the Lindens do enforce their TOS, and brutally, without appeal.

And once again, they CANNOT enforce a TOS of their making as a private company OUTSIDE of their realm, i.e. their servers, to which you are logged in, either the world or forums or any other related property. The end.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

And once again, they CANNOT enforce a TOS of their making as a private company OUTSIDE of their realm, i.e. their servers, to which you are logged in, either the world or forums or any other related property. The end.

Exactly.  When people use SL, they agree to a TOS.  Violations of their agreement--like sharing IMs without permission--inside SL are unethical and LL does have in-world enforcement powers.  Violations of their agreement--like sharing IMs without permission--by posting outside SL are still unethical, but LL does not have enforcement powers.

Edited by Desiree Moonwinder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Desiree Moonwinder said:

Exactly.  When people use SL, they agree to a TOS.  Violations of their agreement--like sharing IMs without permission--inside SL are unethical and LL does have in-world enforcement powers.  Violations of their agreement--like sharing IMs without permission--by posting outside SL are still unethical, but LL does not have enforcement powers.

What possible grounds do you have for continuing to say that it is "unethical" to share photos outside of SL?

For something to be "unethical," there first has to be a law or even just an ethics such as to violate.

What would that ethics be?

That you can't take pictures of people in public places and post them? Where do you find such ethics? Where do you imagine they reside? WHY do YOU believe them? This is really the question. I'd really like an explanation.

I personally think this notion is a feature of the general totalitarian trend of online life that inevitably follows hedonism and extremism. That you are in a context where you are encouraged and indeed wish to express yourself to the max, in every imaginable way in dress and behaviour, yet you then double back and imagine you should restrain someone from photographing you, an anonymous avatar. Why?

Example: I'm wandering around the large plaza where I live, snapping phone shots of the buildings, the sunlight, and a group of boys playing soccer. These amateur photos are clearly not high resolution and couldn't be. (I do know that it is possible to take very professional pictures even with an i-phone camera, but if you are standing a half a block away from a group of people, there is no way you will have recognizable faces. 

I continued snapping flowers and such when suddenly this 10-year-old boy came up, one of those preturnatural sophisticates that you often find nowadays, who began denouncing me for taking this photo, and threatening me that his father, who was a lawyer, would sue me. I laughed in his face. I suggested he use his self-same obsessive Internet to research the jurisprudence on this matter. There wasn't a court in the city that would take such a frivolous harassment case, no matter how fancy the lawyer. It is well-established that you can take photos of people in public places. There was no setting of reasonable expectation of privacy -- private property that allows the public entry (and I myself live there) would not be such a venue. There was no commercial use. So it's out of the question.

How is it that this boy, who chatted and snapped photos and shared with his friends endlessly (it was a rare moment these kids were actually getting physical exercise; so often they are huddled with their phones), who in his short lifetime had consumed and shared more media than say, my 107-year-old aunt had in hers, could come to such a pernicious conclusion that this was "illegal" and "dad" would "get me"?

It's much like the issue of college date rape, where girls get drunk or take drugs and go with college boys and expect some different outcome than what all too often happens. The problem begins with her failure to assume responsibility for her own incapacitation. That's truly the story. That doesn't exonerate the boy; it merely explains how you PREVENT this sad outcome reasonably. 

So people overshare and put pictures and chat all over the Internet, and live in that environment, and want nothing to restrain this, yet they reach out with a totalitarian impulse to try to control a mom who is their neighbour from merely snapping a picture of her park, which at best a dozen people on Facebook might notice. It's truly insane.

If you don't want your photo taken in Second Life, never go to any public places and remain in your bunker on lockdown.

Edited by Prokofy Neva
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/13/2019 at 6:20 PM, Desiree Moonwinder said:

SL's snapshot and machimina policy is here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy

After reviewing it, I agree that yes, snapshots are allowed, unless the landowner forbids in covenants (which is uncommon), but machinima requires consent for "avatars whose names are legible," in addition to a few other special cases .  

Quote

License Conditions

The Licenses are subject to the following conditions:

(a) Land Owner Consent for Snapshots and Machinima

If you wish to take a snapshot or capture machinima of content on another Resident’s land, then:

  1. For Snapshots, check whether the covenant for the land prohibits snapshots. If it does, then you need special permission from the land owner to take the snapshot. If it allows snapshots or doesn’t address them, then you do not need special permission from the land owner as long as you comply with any terms that may be in the covenant.
  2. For Machinima, check whether the covenant for the land allows machinima. If it does not or doesn’t address machinima, then you need special permission from the land owner to capture machinima. If it allows machinima, then you do not need special permission from the land owner as long as you comply with any terms that may be in the covenant.

For Mainland or Linden Homes parcels where Linden Lab is the estate owner, you do not need land owner consent to take snapshots, but you do need special permission from the land owner to capture machinima. The “land owner” is not the estate owner, but the Resident identified as the land owner in the “General” tab under “About Land.” For private islands where Residents are estate owners, you must check the covenant for the private island as provided above.

(b) Avatar Consent for Machinima

For machinima, you must have the consent of all Residents whose avatars or Second Life names are featured or recognizable in the machinima. This includes avatars who are featured in a shot, avatars whose names are legible, and avatars whose appearance is sufficiently distinctive that they are recognizable by members of the Second Life community. Consent is not required if an avatar is not recognizable and is merely part of a crowd scene or shown in a fleeting background. Consent is not required for any snapshots.

(c) Other Intellectual Property Licenses

It’s important to remember that the Licenses are only copyright licenses for the 3D content we created that is displayed in-world. They do not include any permission to use the trademarks of Linden Lab or Residents, and they do not give any copyright permission to use music or sound recordings that may be performed in-world. They also do not give any copyright permission to use any website or video content that may be streamed from outside the Second Life virtual world environment.

If the content that you capture is subject to any trademark, service mark, trade dress, publicity rights, or other intellectual property or proprietary rights, you must obtain the necessary licenses and permissions to use the content, and you use it at your own risk.

 

Edited yesterday at 06:23 PM by Desiree Moonwinder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Desiree Moonwinder, citing the TOS which -- for the third time -- only applies inside of Second Life -- does not explain where you get the idea that it is "unethical" to share photos outside of SL.

You and others have developed this wrongful idea from somewhere, and it's helpful to know from where. Where is it said that this is not ethical?

You might want to review some recent lawsuits on this issue which failed.

Why do you think that the Lindens could write "Consent is not required for any snapshots" if there is some ETHICAL reason why this should NOT be allowed?

Edited by Prokofy Neva
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/13/2019 at 12:37 PM, Desiree Moonwinder said:

""Share" is taken out of the viewer completely?"

 

Yay!  Posting SL stuff outside always struck me as unethical

@Desiree Moonwinder - well, let me quote you again.

You said that posting SL stuff outside always struck you as unethical.

Why? 

On what grounds?

I find in general, when people acquire such fears, and use empty alts to post on the forums, that they are afraid that something about their SL will be discovered in RL, usually the fact that they  have changed their gender, but not only that.

You don't have to explain yourself if you don't want to, but you should question why you are trying to promote an "ethics" that isn't based in anything.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/13/2019 at 6:20 PM, Desiree Moonwinder said:

SL's snapshot and machimina policy is here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy

After reviewing it, I agree that yes, snapshots are allowed, unless the landowner forbids in covenants (which is uncommon), but machinima requires consent for "avatars whose names are legible," in addition to a few other special cases .  

Quote

License Conditions

The Licenses are subject to the following conditions:

(a) Land Owner Consent for Snapshots and Machinima

If you wish to take a snapshot or capture machinima of content on another Resident’s land, then:

  1. For Snapshots, check whether the covenant for the land prohibits snapshots. If it does, then you need special permission from the land owner to take the snapshot. If it allows snapshots or doesn’t address them, then you do not need special permission from the land owner as long as you comply with any terms that may be in the covenant.
  2. For Machinima, check whether the covenant for the land allows machinima. If it does not or doesn’t address machinima, then you need special permission from the land owner to capture machinima. If it allows machinima, then you do not need special permission from the land owner as long as you comply with any terms that may be in the covenant.

For Mainland or Linden Homes parcels where Linden Lab is the estate owner, you do not need land owner consent to take snapshots, but you do need special permission from the land owner to capture machinima. The “land owner” is not the estate owner, but the Resident identified as the land owner in the “General” tab under “About Land.” For private islands where Residents are estate owners, you must check the covenant for the private island as provided above.

(b) Avatar Consent for Machinima

For machinima, you must have the consent of all Residents whose avatars or Second Life names are featured or recognizable in the machinima. This includes avatars who are featured in a shot, avatars whose names are legible, and avatars whose appearance is sufficiently distinctive that they are recognizable by members of the Second Life community. Consent is not required if an avatar is not recognizable and is merely part of a crowd scene or shown in a fleeting background. Consent is not required for any snapshots.

(c) Other Intellectual Property Licenses

It’s important to remember that the Licenses are only copyright licenses for the 3D content we created that is displayed in-world. They do not include any permission to use the trademarks of Linden Lab or Residents, and they do not give any copyright permission to use music or sound recordings that may be performed in-world. They also do not give any copyright permission to use any website or video content that may be streamed from outside the Second Life virtual world environment.

If the content that you capture is subject to any trademark, service mark, trade dress, publicity rights, or other intellectual property or proprietary rights, you must obtain the necessary licenses and permissions to use the content, and you use it at your own risk.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Prokofy Neva said:

It's much like the issue of college date rape, where girls get drunk or take drugs and go with college boys and expect some different outcome than what all too often happens. The problem begins with her failure to assume responsibility for her own incapacitation. That's truly the story. That doesn't exonerate the boy; it merely explains how you PREVENT this sad outcome reasonably.

Did you really just trivialize date rape by comparing it to the expectation of privacy in public places?

Yes. Yes you did.

Maybe the best way to prevent date rapes is to teach "boys" not to rape women?

Just a thought.

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think someone needs to review what the definition of "ethical" (and therefore, unethical) is. I am just dumbfounded by that remark. Then again, someone who posts just to get enough points to change their status in the forums, is also dumbfounding to me. Perhaps one should just stay to the games section?

Edited by Seicher Rae
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Did you really just trivialize date rape by comparing it to the expectation of privacy in public places?

Yes. Yes you did.

Maybe the best way to prevent date rapes is to teach "boys" not to rape women?

Just a thought.

I responded the way I did, with the sad face to your comment above, because... holy crap. Yes, yes this was what was said, and trivialized. Yikes.  

I can't even... even... Yeah. No.

 

I can't even.gif

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Seicher Rae said:

@Scylla Rhiadra why the sad face to my pondering about not having drunk enough for this thread? Is that encouraging me to drink more? (I don't need encouragement.) :)

 

Those moments when life's awful little moments (and Prok's awful little posts) outpace the capacity of remedial drinking . . . are always a little sad.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1564 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...