Creator Arrogance

[Prokofy Neva]

I think in this day and age, some 13 years after the original Copybot scare in SL, creators who actually make and sell their wears commercially aren't burdened with the misconception that putting an item on "no mod" means it is "less" vulnerable to Copybot. While the mechanism of copybotting has changed since 2005, it doesn't matter what permissions are set. 

I think there are three other reasons:

1. Fear of increased customer service from people who don't copy the original, mod it, and then complain when it turns ugly. Sure, they could re-deliver it, but maybe not, not everyone has a redelivery terminal; sometimes they are strangely hard to find. In any event -- anything to reduce CS.

2. Yes, indeed, creator arrogance, which is based in creator insecurity as we all know. What if someone modded a creation, *and made it better*?! The horror! Or what if they mod it, make a mess, and go around then ruining the rep of the original creator? That seems like a compelling reason -- except many people, including myself, simply won't buy things that aren't on mod, the end. If I really, really want it for some reason, I will then take a star off the review just for that no-mod factor.

3. Copybotting isn't the only problem a creator faces. When something is on mod, you can examine it better. When it doesn't have an anti-rez script in it, you can take it out and look at it, not on you, but inworld. Sure, you can take off scripts on the land to defeat any anti-rez script. But it's that examination "in the round" off yourself that I think is also a factor. It's not just brute copying -- it's "inspiration" -- in a highly competitive and repetitive world where someone *will* make a better mousetrap than you, always.

That's what it seems like to me, but I never hear anyone mention it. Maybe it's because they  use pose stands and think that's the same as taking it off and examining it. I don't feel it is. I may be in the minority. But I don't think that anti-rez scripts are used because people still cling to the idea this "defeats" Copybot -- I think that again, they don't want people rezzing things out that they should wear, especially if high-prim, and they don't want that Consumer Gaze.

I will say that anti-rez scripts of the type that prevent food and other deliverables from being casually stolen do have a place, and do in fact work "well enough", despite the completely vicious and unjustifiable beat-down I took on this subject from a certain fabulous scripter. I need to blog about this again.

I really don't think Copybot drives people any more.

I think insecurity does.

And it's not just about copying, it's about being modded and looking better, and the "inspiration" that comes from the ability to mod that then constitutes competition.

We live in a terribly restrictive and horribly oppressive Ren Faire in SL, which a horribly feted guild class. I think many understand this isn't a "conspiracy" theory any more, but a report.

Edited November 7, 2022 by Prokofy Neva

[SpiritSparrow Skydancer]

22 hours ago, Gilliana Parx said:

I know, a bit of a rude title, but i did not know how else to put it. 

In the recent... one or two years in SL of the 14 I am apparently in here, i noticed that an absurd high number of creators not only sell their items No Modify (which i in itself find absolutely stupid) but - which i find far worse - refuse to list the permissions of the items they sell anywhere on the package. And while im sitting here since half an hour, trying to find out if a certain item is modify, i am also at the same time wondering...

Why the heck are we okay with this?

I already realized that there is a MASSIVE spike in self-importance with many creators, even tho their creative energy begins and ends with what was in a fashion magazine six months ago, but isn't it just a matter of basic decency to let your customer know what exactly they are buying? I don't agree to no mod and you might see that differently. Okay, fine! But can i at least be informed about the specifics of the stuff i put money in for, thank you very much?

I don't see any kind of movement against this, even tho everyone should be angry at that. In fact, it should be against the rules. In reality thats what we would call "buying a pig in a poke". And by now it seems to be a vast majority of clothing and accessoires related items for those big bodies that just don't tell you.

I want to mod my stuff. Either making my own texture for something, turning a piece invisible or just to link it, if some complex Roleplay-Outfit that also needs me to equip two huds and stuff makes me hit the attachment limit in day and age of extra heads, ears, hair, jewelry, eyes, piercings, a body, hands, feet and then some... I don't get whats so difficult in writing NM/C/NT or something similar on your product page. It can't be too much to ask...

What is your view on this? am i the only one seeing it this way?

You should just buy full perm items. Most of the items "creators" (esp clothing ) sell is full perm items anyway. They do not want you mucking around finding that out in their product. (maybe) Also, you do not need to link worn items..  

Most textures are created with a UV map, not some texture you got online so applying your own texture kind of makes the object look bad, and clicking on it people see who the creator is and think oh man they suck... so to play devils advocate.. 

Usually permissions on items are displayed, if there is no indication then move on... there are thousands and thousands of creators creating the same thing..  IF you find a unique item then "ask" the creator for a mod, usually you won't get a "copy" version then.... so if you muck it up your mucked. 

 

It is their product, they an sell it anyway they want. 

 

[LittleMe Jewell]

19 minutes ago, Anna Salyx said:

21 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

For me, it depends on what the item is.  I insist on No Mod for all of my household and landscaping items.  I don't usually care when it comes to clothing as I'm seldom ever interested in making changes to those items.  I prefer No Mod for hair, but I will accept it as long as I get a demo that shows it fits well and as long as there is a supplied color/tint that works for me.

See, I prefer for decor/landscape items to be Yes Mod.  I like linking things together.  Sometimes it can lower the overall LI a group of items by making them a linkset.  It helps me adjust and move things around, when I pack things up, I can put them all back in one step.  Also, once set if the landscape/decore things have scripts and they don't self delete the scripts, I can pull those on out too.

Eeek - that was a typo, on both the landscaping/household stuff and the hair.

I insist on Modifiable for household & landscaping.  I prefer Modifiable for hair.

I went back and edited the original response.

[Anna Salyx]

2 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Eeek - that was a typo, on both the landscaping/household stuff and the hair.

I insist on Modifiable for household & landscaping.  I prefer Modifiable for hair.

I went back and edited the original response.

I was wondering, based on the syntax, but just didn't take a chance. on it.  and it was a good springboard too. 

edit to add::  now I wonder if I should go back and edit my own post on that.

Edited November 7, 2022 by Anna Salyx

[Cali Souther]

I always assume things are no mod, unless otherwise stated.  

If you buy full perm mesh,  you are not allowed to sell it as mod.  

I like when something is mod, of course,  but you often have to pay more to have that ability - at least that's been my experience.

I never realized what a volatile topic this was....     o.0

 

[Qie Niangao]

13 minutes ago, Cali Souther said:

If you buy full perm mesh,  you are not allowed to sell it as mod.  

I wondered about this. It hasn't been my (very limited) experience, but I certainly don't doubt there are cases where it's true, and for all I know it may be the majority (I don't buy that much full perm mesh, and would never sell any so I might not notice). But I can't concoct a reason the full-perm creator would care about their products being sold on with Mod permission—other than the "counterfeit superstition" which they of all people should recognize to be bunk, so that doesn't fit either.

 

[Cali Souther]

Some say,  ok to sell as mod but obviously not as full perm - so I may be mistaken.

[Casper Warden]

Just a note - if something appears to be no-mod, make sure you actually rez it on the ground when attempting to modify it.

Items which contain no-mod items (such as scripts) will appear no-modify in your inventory when they're really not.

[Da5id Weatherwax]

I would hesitate to put this down to "arrogance" - The trend towards "no-mod everything" started as misinformation. I was around at the time and it was promoted as "protecting items from being ripped" to have them no-mod and with a resizer script (for unrigged items, which at the time were the vast majority.) It didn't. Somebody willing to risk their account by using a ripper viewer could still do so with the same ease. In the process legitimate modifications were closed off, we got the proliferation of color huds and the like. The resizer scripts were clunky and laggy, the HUDs were abysmal. They've improved a lot and the environment has changed, but the misinformation about it protecting a creator's work remains endemic. It's become "just the way we do it here."

There are technical reasons why some creations should be no-mod, there are aesthetic and other concerns that would make a creator not want any item with "their name on it" take on a "look" they didn't design. I get that. But if your only concern is "protecting it from being ripped off" then don't bother. You can't - not if it ever shows on a user's screen. It's been loaded into the memory of their computer where they have absolute control. You take other methods to protect your intellectual property which DO work, because they are backed by law, not by some technical gimmick.

SL is full to the gills with creative people. Even the folks that have never laid out a vertex in blender or any other 3d prog. They will mix and match items from different creators to produce looks and effects the creator of each item could never envisage. Others will want to join together bits and pieces of different creations to make a totally different whole. Still more will want to make their creations work with somebody else's, if only for their own use, and might need mod perms on the things they buy for that to work.

Bottom line is that for a fairly large chunk of the SL population, no-mod is an irritation that doesn't need to be there. There is a spectrum from "No mod? No buy!" to the less hardcore about it but it still peeves them and why would a creator want to P off their customers if they don't have to? Still, it's the creator's choice and whatever our opinion of it, we do need to respect it.

 

 

PS: There are also ways to cleanly reverse-engineer a mesh, much of its weighting and its UV map without infringing the creators IP, by the way. They just take more effort, knowledge and time than possessed by the kind of bloke that would just rip the original.

[Conifer Dada]

If a creator makes something 'mod' and 'copy', then customers can make as many different versions as they like from the original. If it's no-mod, then customers have to purchase each version separately, so no-mod might lead to an increase in sales.

Also . . . suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Conifer Dada

[Gabriele Graves]

5 hours ago, Sid Nagy said:

Discussing isn't whining, that is totally true. But the OP tossed in a few extras that were totally not needed for such a discussion, IMHO.
Like the title of this thread for instance.

Indeed they did.  I would expect a respected and professional creator to rise above that and give a professional and courteous response nonetheless otherwise it's extremely bad PR they create for themselves.

[Casper Warden]

4 minutes ago, Conifer Dada said:

suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

Creators are, of course, free to set their products to any permissions they wish. However, I find this particular argument a little hard to swallow.

I can buy a pair of designer trainers in real life and deface them in any way I choose - no reasonable person would assume that they came like that, would they?

There are many legitimate reasons to make stuff no-mod, but I think this one is a bit of a reach.

[SpiritSparrow Skydancer]

2 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Eeek - that was a typo, on both the landscaping/household stuff and the hair.

I insist on Modifiable for household & landscaping.  I prefer Modifiable for hair.

I went back and edited the original response.

all that, and I remember when I was a noob... I had a Wonderfull palm tree arrangement from a creator, I think Luna. anyhow.. I accidentally dragged a photo of my dog into it instead of the prim beside it.. MAN that sucked because the pack only contained 1 of that type... powerful lesson learned. (it might not have been a bliss item but they were prim heavy back in the day elaborate real like display) and I mucked it up! 

[Paul Hexem]

On 11/6/2022 at 2:08 PM, Charalyne Blackwood said:

"no mod" in SL prevents counterfeiting and protects the creator's ownership of the design.

That's not even remotely true.

On 11/6/2022 at 2:43 PM, Charalyne Blackwood said:

So? Copybots are a great way to lose your account.

That's actually not true either. Ripping the content isn't what gets you into trouble. Reuploading it is where you run the risk.

19 hours ago, Jules Catlyn said:

Don't like a creator? Move on with your day and don't buy from them.

Creators can do what they want. The moment they become merchants, they're opening themselves to customer criticism. If said criticism upsets them, maybe they need to reconsider their decisions.

3 hours ago, Prokofy Neva said:

I think in this day and age, some 13 years after the original Copybot scare in SL, creators who actually make and sell their wears commercially aren't burdened with the misconception that putting an item on "no mod" means it is "less" vulnerable to Copybot.

You'd be surprised.

57 minutes ago, Conifer Dada said:

Also . . . suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

If you want protected art, put it in an art gallery. Selling it to someone for them to use and then expecting them to not use it is naive at best.

[Theresa Tennyson]

1 hour ago, Conifer Dada said:

Also . . . suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

 

People keep saying this one. Yes, I often see things that I think, "That looks cool - who made it so I can get one?" so I inspect it to find the creator.

Something that looks awful? Why would I want to find the creator of it?

[Da5id Weatherwax]

1 hour ago, Conifer Dada said:

 . . . suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

IRL I buy a boat - let's say a 24-foot GRP-hulled sailboat with a lovely shade of teal blue in its gel-coat. Now I glass in a new through-hull fitting on the port side and discover that its such a proprietary shade I cant topcoat the new fiberglass to match - the maker wont sell matching colors. A drunken buddy (it WAS a hot afternoon in the boatyard, after all) says "hey, I got some in orange, why not use that and more to the point stencil 'F [boatbuilder's name redacted]' into the bargain?"

If I've had enough beer while we were working to agree and deface my boat that way, that's on me, not the builder.... even though anyone who looks at the boat will identify her class and know who built it...

[diamond Marchant]

1 hour ago, Conifer Dada said:

Also . . . suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

There is an after market for sail and hull textures (in which I participate) and everyone I encounter appears to understand that most high-end boats (e.g. Bandit, Mesh Shop, Trudeau) can be retextured, and in fact, many owners retexture (at least the hulls). One always has the option of going with the out-of-box textures, which they see when they try a demo. I have never encountered any confusion about this.

An exception might be for  classic "woody" power boats, which may look great out-of-the-box, or certain specialty boats like paddle wheelers or tugs.

Edited November 7, 2022 by diamond Marchant

[Jennifer Boyle]

On 11/6/2022 at 1:08 PM, Charalyne Blackwood said:

Cell phones are a very "no mod" item, are they breaking some nonexistent rule by being so? "no mod" in SL prevents counterfeiting and protects the creator's ownership of the design. Not all creator's set it up and that's their right to do so. 

Any owner of a cell phone with the necessary knowledge and skills is free to modify it.

Please explain how making items non-modifiable prevents counterfeiting.

On 11/6/2022 at 1:38 PM, Charalyne Blackwood said:

Yes i read your whole post.  Seeing if a purchased item is no mod or not isn't at all difficult. Get the demo.  Wear it (or rez it, whichever is the intended method of deployment). Right click.  Select "edit".

Demos may be, and likely will be, no-mod even if the product in mod. After all, if the demo were modifiable, it would be pretty easy to turn it into the product, wouldn't it?

Edited November 7, 2022 by Jennifer Boyle
Added content

[Finite]

On 11/6/2022 at 2:08 PM, Charalyne Blackwood said:

Your use of "pig in a poke" is completely wrong. It goes along with "the cat is out of the bag". Both refer to purchasing something under completely false pretenses, and "no mod" is pretty up front.  Don't buy anything without trying the demo first, that way you have a much better idea what you're purchasing or even if you want it at all. 

 

     Cell phones are a very "no mod" item, are they breaking some nonexistent rule by being so? "no mod" in SL prevents counterfeiting and protects the creator's ownership of the design. Not all creator's set it up and that's their right to do so. 

No-mod does not prevent counterfeit. Not remotely. And yes they own the design and rights as such but the thing they just sold to a customer they do not own. Besides, I find most just make things no mod to hide the fact it is premade mesh as most original creators are mod.

[Ceka Cianci]

To be honest, to me it feels more like evolution than arrogance..A younger generation of creators getting guided by the ones before, while picking up new ways to do things a long the way, then becoming the older creator that becomes the one getting asked for information.. Then older ways fade away over time..

Same with customers.. older customers are aware of things and newer customers to sl are less likely to know why things are the way they are, they just are.. hehehe

I really don't think there is an us or them thing where there is this board meeting that takes place once a month for creators..

I know there sure isn't one for the customers.. if there is then damn you all for not inviting meh to them damn meetings.. I call favortism and scriminations!! \o/

 

hehehe

 

Edited November 7, 2022 by Ceka Cianci

[Jennifer Boyle]

7 hours ago, Conifer Dada said:

 . . . suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

If the boat were mod, then no reasonable person would assume that the appearance had not been modified by the owner.

[Akane Nacht]

10 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

I was responding to how your post seemed to say that the "maker owes you nothing", but that if the thing you purchased was literally sold broken, you'd just be "reasonable to ask" for it to be fixed.

Yes, you should be polite about things, and yes, sometimes things are broken by accident or unforseen changes, but if someone's selling something I'd be inclined to say that they should fix it. Or at least allow you to fix it yourself.

Yup you heard me right, they owe us nothing. SL goods are completely 'buyer beware', partly because there is no control mechanism (are we going to sue a creator for a broken HUD?) nor any set standards. Had I been obnoxious or threatening in asking for my HUD to be fixed, should she still have fixed it? I think this is a non-problem if we are just nice to each other.

And consider, if we start getting strict about quality control and standards and purchase contracts, what effect will that have on small time, hobbyist creators who just throw stuff together for fun and put it up for sale? We have gotten used to higher quality goods in SL, but I think it would be a shame to squeeze out all other levels of creators. Or would such rules only apply to big name mesh makers? 

[Rick Nightingale]

I think it's often ignorance, compounded with arrogance. Ignorance about why something should be no-mod. Arrogance which prevents them from seeing a different perspective to the one they've chosen/been told. Plus or minus insecurity/paranoia/hiding something.

Not always though. I know creators whom I would certainly not describe as either ignorant or arrogant, but who choose to sell their products no-mod. That's their choice and while I still disagree with it, I  respect it and at least in those cases it is a considered decision, not just a knee-jerk reaction. I still don't buy much from them.

I've never seen full perm mesh sold with a stipulation that it be re-sold as no-mod specifically. NC/Trans, or C/No-Trans obiously yes, but not no-mod.

I find no-mod and the excuses for it quite insulting really from most sellers; or would, if I let other people bother me. As it is it tells me about the seller (and what they think of me as a customer!) and strongly influences my desicion about giving them my money. Being told I can't have something with mod perms because I might then steal it in some way (yes we know it makes no difference) is effectively calling me a thief and punishing me for my, or someone else's, potential behaviour. Or that I might damage it and need customer support, or it is rigged so I can't mod it anyway. I'm not stupid any more than I'm a thief. I've never liked 'group punishment', at school, the workplace or in law.

Yes sellers can sell any way the T&C allows. That doesn't justify anything. Most stuff has no reason to be no-mod. Some, yes, but not most.

A final note to sellers... if you are so worried about people retexturing your single items to save paying you again for a re-tinted version (that took you two seconds to do) at least make the fatpack mod perms. Some do that and it very much encourages us to buy that fatpack even if we don't want all the options.

Edit to add: The argument regarding being inspected to see who made the thing... I am not an advert for the seller. If you want me to be an advert, pay me to use your no-mod advertisements. Otherwise, I bought it, it's mine, I'll do what I want with it (or more likely not to all that if it's no-mod).

Edited November 8, 2022 by Rick Daylight
No smellchecker, and dyslexic fingers

[Akane Nacht]

21 minutes ago, Rick Daylight said:

Yes sellers can sell any way the T&C allows. That doesn't justify anything. Most stuff has no reason to be no-mod. Some, yes, but not most.

I think some creators got into the habit of no-mod as re-delivery wasn't always as seamless as it is now. For customers who like to tinker but may not know the best way of doing so, they can wreck their item with a couple clicks. I've done my share of messing up textures and scripts, and though I was mostly careful to make a backup, not everyone remembers to do that. 

[Polenth Yue]

7 hours ago, Conifer Dada said:

If a creator makes something 'mod' and 'copy', then customers can make as many different versions as they like from the original. If it's no-mod, then customers have to purchase each version separately, so no-mod might lead to an increase in sales.

Also . . . suppose you make a boat and texture it carefully. If a customer chooses to apply different textures to the boat, which might look awful or even include obscene slogans, then other people might assume it was your work, which reflects badly on you.

I've been selling mushrooms for over a decade and I've never had issues with someone seeing an ugly modded version and holding it against me. I've also never had issues selling multiple colour/pattern versions of the same basic item. I saw sales increase after I made all my basic particle scripts mod, so people could edit the code directly if they wanted.

I can understand why you'd think it though, because people told me those things when I started out. Turns out they were wrong.