Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You can read the statement here : https://gyazo.com/bf9c0eb35916f8642e7bd49e407ca848 I don't know why she did it as a picture, but you can just about read the statement on there.   Edit

Hmmm. 5 lawyers cannot manage to produce any valid information. Then Mr. Superman-Lawyer joins in to save the day... leaves me with a raised eyebrow, but well. Goes to show what a horrible nonsense th

We finally have some news. From the creator's facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004352386855

Nope 😢. think this time it might be longer since the owner wants to put a stop to this once and for all lol.. hopefully soon! My head has been non stop animating and it's all buggy..

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

for me it's kind of strange, that it takes so long. again.

from the last info they gave, when the first dmca happend, there was an mail where they said that they heared nothing for 10 days after the counter notice, so they can sell the heads again.

so shouldnt it take about 14 days to one month then, and not about 3 month? even in times of corona.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bagnu said:

Someone has to be doing this. Could there be any truth to it???

Of course someone is doing this.  DMCA take-down notices don't file themselves you know.

The thing is, action like this whilst having a very public effect, is really a private affair.  If proceedings finally get into a court room it gets more public but there is a whole lot of wrangling, going back and forth between parties before that.  Sometimes even during that as well.  As frustrating as it is to not know what is going on, it really isn't the business of anyone except the parties involved.

Nobody on the outside can be certain of any time-frames because we are not privy as to when anything was done.  Just because something can be done in a particular time-frame, doesn't mean it will be.  It simply isn't possible to determine what should have happened and when except in the most general terms.  Dealing with it slowly and cautiously with lots of legal advice is normal and the wisest course of action.  What we are told is going on is simply what the affected party wants us to be aware of and in reality the least they say while things are in the air, the better from their perspective.  Things like this take time and cannot be hurried.

Best to put it out of your minds for the time being.  It may be a long wait before anything is resolved.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

This time it will require someone to physically attend court. With the whole COVID thing going on, there may be substantial delays. As it's likely to be classed as a non-urgent case, and dependent on which country/state is involved, this might be delayed a very long time due to that.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bagnu said:

Someone has to be doing this. Could there be any truth to it???

We have all of zero facts to go on... so any speculation there is basically just unfounded rumor-mongering.

Granted that is the #1 sport of the internet... we could even have a nice flame war over it... but it's kinda pointless to do so...

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

For what's worth, since no one knows who is doing this to Genus, I am not buying any other heads until this is resolved. If we ever do become privy to who filed the DMCA notice, then that person will for sure have lost my business forever. In the meantime, I don't want to accidentally give the offender any business.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Filing a second DMCA means the person who filed it is usually willing to defend it in court. That doesn't make it any more or less legitimate because we have no facts, but Genius may be gone for a long time now. :/

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Willa Heartsong said:

For what's worth, since no one knows who is doing this to Genus, I am not buying any other heads until this is resolved. If we ever do become privy to who filed the DMCA notice, then that person will for sure have lost my business forever. In the meantime, I don't want to accidentally give the offender any business.

I'm kind of feeling this way, unless a demo can prove to me that it's better than what I have.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

We may never know... if Genus loses and the other party isn't a SL creator but a person from, say Turbosquid or Daz or some other 3d platform, they aren't going to bother to come here and give us an update. It isn't necessarily another SL headmaker that's to blame.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I would switch now. I like my new Leluka head, and would hate the thought of starting over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bagnu said:

I'm not sure I would switch now. I like my new Leluka head, and would hate the thought of starting over.

I was not going to buy a Genus head, but I was very happy to get the free version that 2 alts are using now.

I am sure there will be a lot of people flocking to Genus to buy a head, if/when they open again. Personally I would not, because I am happy with the LeLutka head I have, and heads are things I do not buy several times a year. Unless it is something totally different from the Genus heads they had before closing. I did not like them enough for buying...

So I don't know why you should switch... others will happily shop there.

Another thing that puzzles me, is the trust in Genus. It is still lots of new releases for Genus only. I wonder if how long that will last. One year, in hope that Genus will return? 6 months?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I regret that I missed out on Genus because I was away from SL since 2012 and only got back a few weeks ago. My mesh upgrade could have been by Genus and I would absolutely buy one in case they make a miraculous comeback to the market. The heads exude some distinct features that I could easily recognize ( and secretly envious of ) on other AVs especially the Baby Face, which is perfect for “kawaii” or Korean-inspired looks. It’s the face that I want in real life as well but do not have the means to undergo something as extreme and invasive as surgery in Korea to achieve that look so I hoped for my AV to bear that head. I settled for the ubiquitous Catya which was quite flexible in terms of shape and compatibility but for some reason no amount of sliders, skins, or appliers could give rise to those immaculate and delicate contours that Genus Baby Face seems to have from the get-go ( or I am just terrible at tweaking shapes lol ). Now I am considering a move to LeLutka Ryn after buying its male counterpart Kane for my alt, but I am still longing for Genus...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been puzzled about what's going on with Genus since I first heard about it.

As I understand it, the DMCA process works like this:

  1. Someone files a takedown notice with a host alleging that content infringes their copyright.
  2. The host takes the content down.
  3. The owner of the removed content files a counter-notification with the host saying that the content was not infringing, or not. If they do, the host restores the content.
  4. If the content was restored, the original complaining party files suit in U.S. District Court, or not.

So, my question is, if content wasn't infringing, why would it be offline more than a day or so? In addition, if it was taken down because it was (alleged to be) infringing, why weren't all copies removed, including those in users' inventories. I remember years ago that LL replaced copies of unwittingly-acquired infringing items that were in my inventory with placeholders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Jennifer Boyle said:

I have been puzzled about what's going on with Genus since I first heard about it.

As I understand it, the DMCA process works like this:

  1. Someone files a takedown notice with a host alleging that content infringes their copyright.
  2. The host takes the content down.
  3. The owner of the removed content files a counter-notification with the host saying that the content was not infringing, or not. If they do, the host restores the content.
  4. If the content was restored, the original complaining party files suit in U.S. District Court, or not.

So, my question is, if content wasn't infringing, why would it be offline more than a day or so? In addition, if it was taken down because it was (alleged to be) infringing, why weren't all copies removed, including those in users' inventories. I remember years ago that LL replaced copies of unwittingly-acquired infringing items that were in my inventory with placeholders.

I'm sure there is a process to prove it wasn't an infringement but that probably takes some time.  As far as removing said content from all users, I'd hope the 'innocent before proven guilty' would apply.  It's understandable they wouldn't want them to continue profiting if the content was in violation but they also have to assume they're innocent of doing so.  Just my interpretation of how it works.  The content may eventually be removed if they were guilty.  I guess we all wait and see.

 

 

Edited by RowanMinx
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it was locked and deleted like many other threads, the original thread about the Genus DMCA tragedy had explanations to answer those questions.

In short: nope, no "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply and you can happily hire services to keep filing new claims for you.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Lillith Hapmouche said:

Unless it was locked and deleted like many other threads, the original thread about the Genus DMCA tragedy had explanations to answer those questions.

In short: nope, no "innocent until proven guilty" does not apply and you can happily hire services to keep filing new claims for you.

I was thinking something similar the first time it happened. 

I wouldn't hold my breath on this and here's why:

I'm not saying anybody is guilty or innocent here, just speaking from my understanding. The first time it happened, Genus lawyered up and filed a counter-claim, the accuser had x amount of days to respond and they didn't. The store opened back up. It stayed open for about 2 weeks and someone filed another DMCA and they had to take the store down again. However...this time Genus is suing the accuser, not just filing a counter-claim. With the way things are now and I'm 99% sure this will be an international case, its going to be a while.

I feel like Genus would have to do it this way to give them some kind of protection from someone just filing DMCAs against them whenever they feel like it.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The next step after the subject of a DMCA notification files a counter-notification, a simple one-page document, is for the accuser to seek a court order against the alleged infringer, or not. If they do not do that, the host must put the material back up within 10-14 business days. In either case, they can file suit in U.S. District Court. There are penalties for filing false DMCA notifications and counter-notifications.

You can read all about it on page 12 of this document from the U.S. Copyright Office.

 

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

We finally have some news.

From the creator's facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100004352386855

It is astonishing to me that an anonymous person, behind a fake Identity can cause so many problems.

But her message to other creators to copyright their work to avoid this, is perhaps the takeaway message from her experience.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...