What's the best way to find what channel a no-mod script uses, scanning the entire range?

[Pussycat Catnap]

32 minutes ago, MyAlt4099 said:

What I mean is everything that a ToS-compliant viewer allows me to do with the item, plus everything allowed by the LSL architecture combined with that item's scripts.

The official viewer itself has tools in it that can do IP-violating content theft...

Falling back on 'TOS-compliant viewer' is like saying "but the gun was made legally" as you stand over the victim of a shooting...
- it is the wrong rationale to use.

 

 

[Arduenn Schwartzman]

13 hours ago, Cinos Field said:

I can't even think of a situation in which this check would do anything useful, pertaining to this topic

Neither can I. Quite the opposite, actually. It's very counter-productive discouraging to the topic. As intended.

[Mollymews]

22 hours ago, Cinos Field said:

curiosity itself should never be shamed.

^^ this

 

[Mollymews]

15 hours ago, MyAlt4099 said:

In fact, that gives me an interesting idea. I don't have any plans to do this—not that I'd have any moral issues with doing it—but what if the creator sold other textures for the product using the same applier system, and they enjoyed a monopoly on it because only they know how to get the appliers to work. What if I figured it out, and then started selling my own compatible appliers that compete with the ones the creator put out? To be clear, I don't mean ripping off the creator's textures; I mean making my own textures that are entirely my work. Am I correct in assuming that would be allowed?

the Omega HUD texture applier does this

in the beginning, Omega had to reverse engineer some products. For other products the product creator was happy to work with Omega to make it happen.  Over time as customers began to like the idea of a universal texture applier system then most product makers began to work with Omega rather than against it.  To keep their own customers happy

 

[Da5id Weatherwax]

Valid use-cases that violate neither the ToS nor anyone's IP:

• You have multiple HUD-controlled items from different creators. You want to make a single HUD that controls a subset of those items functionality for your own use - you'll still use the supplied HUDs for other functions but most of the time you will only be wearing your stripped-down (and less laggy) version to control the lot.
• You have multiple scripted items, each with their own APIs and you are attempting to coordinate their actions.

Clean reverse-engineering (ie, without circumventing permissions, without reading any of the creators script code etc) is NOT an IP infringement under the protections that apply to LSL scripts and you just need to do it using tools that do not violate the ToS.

Things like detecting script/anim UUIDs that you're not "supposed to have" and using them usually is a violation so while this is actually easier than reverse engineering an API and just issuing the right commands, the latter is the "legal" way to do it.

[Sara Nova]

9 hours ago, Da5id Weatherwax said:

Valid use-cases that violate neither the ToS nor anyone's IP:

• You have multiple HUD-controlled items from different creators. You want to make a single HUD that controls a subset of those items functionality for your own use - you'll still use the supplied HUDs for other functions but most of the time you will only be wearing your stripped-down (and less laggy) version to control the lot.
• You have multiple scripted items, each with their own APIs and you are attempting to coordinate their actions.

Clean reverse-engineering (ie, without circumventing permissions, without reading any of the creators script code etc) is NOT an IP infringement under the protections that apply to LSL scripts and you just need to do it using tools that do not violate the ToS.

Things like detecting script/anim UUIDs that you're not "supposed to have" and using them usually is a violation so while this is actually easier than reverse engineering an API and just issuing the right commands, the latter is the "legal" way to do it.

How about the following use-cases:

• You want to make your own attachment to extend or replace a product you bought that uses a proprietary applier HUD, and want the textures to apply to it as well. This attachment is only for your own personal use.
• Same as previous, except you also plan on selling your attachment.
• A popular vendor sells mesh clothing items, as well as a wide variety of applier HUD's for different textures. These HUD's do not use a standard applier system, and are only compatible with this creator's products. But you want to make your own items to sell which are compatible with these textures. You don't include the UUID's for the textures in your own HUD though; your customers will still need to purchase the textures from the creator to use them with your product.
• Same as previous, except the creator either gives the textures away for free or sells them at a big discount knowing they can only be used with their own products, which they charge for. (In my opinion, the seller's only recourse in this case should be to either do nothing, or realize their business model needs some adjustments to adapt.)
• You have a no-modify attachment that comes with a HUD which lets you change from pre-provided textures, but the creator did not provide any means of using your own textures. You want to make your own textures and use those.
• A popular vendor sells mesh clothing items which are no-modify. You want to sell your own applier HUD's for these items, with your own self-made textures.
• Same as previous, but you'd also like to profit from the knowledge you discovered by selling your own applier script that works with custom textures.
• You believe that once someone buys an item, it shouldn't be up to the creator what textures you can use it with. Knowing that the terms of service do not echo this sentiment,  you want to do whatever you can to work around the rules (as in, find a way that doesn't violate them) to nonetheless give people this freedom you feel they should have. So you make your own script that lets you set your own texture on all sorts of different products that weren't designed to accept custom textures. You set restricted permissions on this script though so people can't themselves discover the channel, and get that vendor's UUID's for possibly less legal purposes.
• Same as previous, except you do publicly spill the beans about the channel. Maybe you feel that the benefits to others outweigh the potential harms to the seller. Maybe you're against DRM and want to do whatever you can to weaken it and maximize end-user freedom within the ToS, whatever the implications. (Or maybe it's a specific seller who slighted you and you want to get back at them somehow, even.)

Which of those (if any) would run afoul of the ToS?

[Wulfie Reanimator]

13 minutes ago, MyAlt4099 said:

So you make your own script that lets you set your own texture on all sorts of different products that weren't designed to accept custom textures.

Problem with this is that it's not uncommon for the textures to be hard-coded into the product itself.

For example, not only did I recently help someone implement this in a concise way, but I've also personally written certain products so that they only listen for non-UUID messages and then apply a fixed UUID from a fixed list. Even if I told you the exact channel, there's nothing you could do. That's not even deliberate, it's just a side-effect of wanting to be secure and not transmit UUIDs over any channel, especially when the channel is just "0x" + llGetOwner(). (Never mind that they can be found in your cache, but still.)

Edited February 13, 2020 by Wulfie Reanimator

[Rolig Loon]

45 minutes ago, MyAlt4099 said:

Which of those (if any) would run afoul of the ToS?

Or DMCA and other parts of the legal system? The trouble with hypotheticals is that answers are usually hard to determine until you test them and see if things blow up in your face.  If you really want to get your tinfoil hat busy, you might wonder how far you can follow this line of inquiry before someone in the Governance team puts a little "Watch this guy" tag in his notepad.

[Lucia Nightfire]

7 hours ago, MyAlt4099 said:

How about the following use-cases:

• You want to make your own attachment to extend or replace a product you bought that uses a proprietary applier HUD, and want the textures to apply to it as well. This attachment is only for your own personal use.
• Same as previous, except you also plan on selling your attachment.
• A popular vendor sells mesh clothing items, as well as a wide variety of applier HUD's for different textures. These HUD's do not use a standard applier system, and are only compatible with this creator's products. But you want to make your own items to sell which are compatible with these textures. You don't include the UUID's for the textures in your own HUD though; your customers will still need to purchase the textures from the creator to use them with your product.
• Same as previous, except the creator either gives the textures away for free or sells them at a big discount knowing they can only be used with their own products, which they charge for. (In my opinion, the seller's only recourse in this case should be to either do nothing, or realize their business model needs some adjustments to adapt.)
• You have a no-modify attachment that comes with a HUD which lets you change from pre-provided textures, but the creator did not provide any means of using your own textures. You want to make your own textures and use those.
• A popular vendor sells mesh clothing items which are no-modify. You want to sell your own applier HUD's for these items, with your own self-made textures.
• Same as previous, but you'd also like to profit from the knowledge you discovered by selling your own applier script that works with custom textures.
• You believe that once someone buys an item, it shouldn't be up to the creator what textures you can use it with. Knowing that the terms of service do not echo this sentiment,  you want to do whatever you can to work around the rules (as in, find a way that doesn't violate them) to nonetheless give people this freedom you feel they should have. So you make your own script that lets you set your own texture on all sorts of different products that weren't designed to accept custom textures. You set restricted permissions on this script though so people can't themselves discover the channel, and get that vendor's UUID's for possibly less legal purposes.
• Same as previous, except you do publicly spill the beans about the channel. Maybe you feel that the benefits to others outweigh the potential harms to the seller. Maybe you're against DRM and want to do whatever you can to weaken it and maximize end-user freedom within the ToS, whatever the implications. (Or maybe it's a specific seller who slighted you and you want to get back at them somehow, even.)

Which of those (if any) would run afoul of the ToS?

Send your questions in a ticket requesting they be answered by a Governance rep, else, all you're doing is falsely reassuring yourself based on if at least one person agrees to your laundry list of hypotheticals.

[Da5id Weatherwax]

10 hours ago, MyAlt4099 said:

Which of those (if any) would run afoul of the ToS?

 

2 hours ago, Lucia Nightfire said:

Send your questions in a ticket requesting they be answered by a Governance rep, else, all you're doing is falsely reassuring yourself based on if at least one person agrees to your laundry list of hypotheticals.

 

ToS is, as Lucia pointed out, something that we may try to read with common sense but the LL Governance team are the "supreme court" where that is concerned - it means what they say it means. I can see one or two in the "laundry list" that I suspect they might raise an eyebrow or two at, but that's just my opinion and of marginally less significance than spitting in the Atlantic. If you think you're even skating close to the limits of the ToS then all you can do is try and get their answer to a ticket in advance or risk making it and see if they slap you for it.

 

In general, reverse engineering an API, as an act in itself, cannot fall foul of any IP protection. IP laws, whether patent, copyright, trademark or any other variant thereof, do not - and cannot - protect knowledge. That's what secrecy laws and NDAs within contracts are for. IP laws protect the expression of it, as creative or artistic works or particular methods and mechanisms applying that knowledge. Provided you use no tools that are otherwise prohibited - an SL example would be a hacked viewer - reverse engineering itself is fine. Even if you do use a "prohibited tool" to do it, it is the use of the tool that would attract a sanction not the acquisition of the knowledge. It is only in making use of what you learn in that process you need to consider whether you're crossing any IP lines, whether or not you are making use of an IP resource you do not own in a way that you are not permitted to.

 

[Arduenn Schwartzman]

Why is this in People / General Discussion and not in Creation / Scripting ? To scare a wider audience into thinking that their clothes and furniture are going to be troll-retextured soon?

Oh, all the dresses and underwear that will get the TEXTURE_TRANSPARENT treatment at public events.

Edited February 13, 2020 by Arduenn Schwartzman
Added potential consequences of finding a solution to the topic problem

[Mollymews]

36 minutes ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Why is this in People / General Discussion and not in Creation / Scripting ?

it doesn't belong in Scripting really.  If it did then the conversation would have ended when Wulfie answered the question asked

[Innula Zenovka]

On 2/9/2020 at 8:39 AM, Wulfie Reanimator said:

Even if someone was to use a random number generator, many will react to the first result with "well that doesn't look random enough" and keep "randomizing" until they find a number they like, which might end up being predicable in some way like a certain range.

I keep a text file of numbers from a web-based random number generator, and simply cut and paste the top one (so control  x, not control v) when I need one.   

[Sara Nova]

19 hours ago, Rolig Loon said:

Or DMCA and other parts of the legal system? The trouble with hypotheticals is that answers are usually hard to determine until you test them and see if things blow up in your face.  If you really want to get your tinfoil hat busy, you might wonder how far you can follow this line of inquiry before someone in the Governance team puts a little "Watch this guy" tag in his notepad.

I guess another answer is, just closely read the ToS, between the lines. If it can reasonably be construed not to forbid something, I figure you'd have a pretty good case if you do get in trouble. I don't know that from experience, but it makes sense.

This is kind of sort of getting off topic though, I suppose.

[Sara Nova]

11 hours ago, Arduenn Schwartzman said:

Why is this in People / General Discussion and not in Creation / Scripting ? To scare a wider audience into thinking that their clothes and furniture are going to be troll-retextured soon?

Oh, all the dresses and underwear that will get the TEXTURE_TRANSPARENT treatment at public events.

Yeah I posted it in the wrong section by mistake, sorry.