usedcars Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Too bad you couldn't move it somewhere else. That would be a surprise. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathlen Onyx Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 (edited) 3 hours ago, UnilWay SpiritWeaver said: My impression is that YouTube reacts very fast to complaints that involve content theft. File it under something like that as a copyright strike on YouTube. Hist channel could get demonetized or even removed. Inside of SL... much as I hate them put up an orb that just removes any avatar under x-days old. https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Send_home_and_ban_avs_less_than_description_field_days_old - This makes it complicated for him to make a series of alts, as it will require prep time and waiting. Let's say that I was in one of those videos. I didn't give my permission to post it on YouTube. I file a DMCA. How in the world would YouTube know that I am the owner of that avatar and it's content theft? Maybe I'm just an avatar that has my own videos and want theirs to go away. I don't see this as being successful at all and if that were me I'd be pissed if someone filed a DMCA to take down a video without having to show proof. I doubt YouTube is going to sign into SL to verify that indeed the content was stolen. I'm not even sure it's copyright infringement. Edited March 8 by Kathlen Onyx 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bree Giffen Posted March 8 Share Posted March 8 Youtube could also take down content if the video is being used for harassment and stalking. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BilliJo Aldrin Posted March 9 Share Posted March 9 5 hours ago, UnilWay SpiritWeaver said: My impression is that YouTube reacts very fast to complaints that involve content theft. File it under something like that as a copyright strike on YouTube. Hist channel could get demonetized or even removed. Inside of SL... much as I hate them put up an orb that just removes any avatar under x-days old. https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Send_home_and_ban_avs_less_than_description_field_days_old - This makes it complicated for him to make a series of alts, as it will require prep time and waiting. What content is being stolen? It's a video. And how can the person complaining prove it is even their parcel? Youtube could just as easily decide that the person complaining is the troll, trying to get an innocent person in trouble. Once again, to the OP, get over it and move on. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted March 11 Author Share Posted March 11 What content is being stolen? He is videoing our live performers. That is a copyright violation but the performers have to do it and youtube requires them to use their real names. Something our performers are reluctant to do. We can't just close the sims ether. Our sims are open to everyone as long as they follow the rules. In the convent it clearly says no video allowed. That makes his video a tos violation in accordance with the policies set down by LL. My sim alone is a park, to close it to the public defeats the purpose. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted March 11 Author Share Posted March 11 On 3/5/2024 at 6:41 AM, Liaa Nova said: Can the parcel be made group only and privacy turned on so he can't cam in from outside? Even a whole Estate can be group only I believe We have done part of that. We have set the performance parcels to private so he will have to be in them to video from now on. We can set them for group only as we are a arts and music sim, with some residential. Setting it to group only would defeat our entire purpose in SL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted March 11 Author Share Posted March 11 On 3/8/2024 at 4:58 PM, Bree Giffen said: Youtube could also take down content if the video is being used for harassment and stalking. Done that to. Some of the people that have their profiles in the video have been contacted by trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solar Legion Posted March 11 Share Posted March 11 LL's ToS in unenforcable outside of their servers and systems. You want it taken down? You'll have to work within the ToS of whatever service the videos are posted on (in this case, YouTube.). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorientje Woller Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 On 3/11/2024 at 4:19 AM, Madi Melodious said: What content is being stolen? He is videoing our live performers. That is a copyright violation but the performers have to do it and youtube requires them to use their real names. Something our performers are reluctant to do. You forget one thing. The filmed person hasn't given their "consent" to be posted outside the confinements of Second Life/Linden Labs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 1 hour ago, Dorientje Woller said: You forget one thing. The filmed person hasn't given their "consent" to be posted outside the confinements of Second Life/Linden Labs. ..but that is outside of LL's control.. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted March 13 Author Share Posted March 13 On 3/12/2024 at 6:04 AM, Dorientje Woller said: You forget one thing. The filmed person hasn't given their "consent" to be posted outside the confinements of Second Life/Linden Labs. We did not give consent, in fact we sent him, in writing, well a notecard, that he didn't have consent to video our estate and he still doing it. I'm done playing nice with this guy. I just got off the phone with support and brought this to their attention. There suggestion was to continue to file AR reports and it she would bring it to the governance board attention. I've files 12 today against him and his alts, 1 harassment and 1 doxing information in profiles. He is now creating accounts to get around our bans, This crosses the line into stalking and harassment. Others are filing similar reports. As of this counting I know of about 24 AR that have been filed. I'm done with youtube doing nothing. He is showing profiles with real life information, recording copy righted pictures and information for his videos. I've scheduled a meeting with my lawyer on Friday to send youtube a letter on the subject and see what my other legal options are. If they won't pay attention to their own system, maybe a physical letter from a attorney will get their attention. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 (edited) On 3/12/2024 at 8:36 AM, Love Zhaoying said: ..but that is outside of LL's control.. While this is true, the clause in the ToS about requiring permission for machinima and snapshots says nothing about publishing videos or pics: it's about taking them. Quote (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: 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. 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. In other words, it's the activity of capturing the machinima without permission that is a violation of the ToS, and that is occurring within the platform itself -- just as any other activity that is in violation of the ToS is. In theory, the machinima need not even be published anywhere to be in violation of the ToS; the existence of a copy on YouTube or elsewhere is important largely as a form of proof that the ToS was violated by the capture. Edited March 13 by Scylla Rhiadra 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 4 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: While this is true, the clause in the ToS about requiring permission for machinima and snapshots says nothing about publishing videos or pics: it's about taking them. In other words, it's the activity of capturing the machinima without permission that is a violation of the ToS, and that is occurring within the platform itself -- just as any other activity that is in violation of the ToS is. In theory, the machinima need not even be published anywhere to be in violation of the ToS; the existence of a copy on YouTube or elsewhere is important largely as a form of proof that the ToS was violated by the capture. I wonder, if you gave everyone a pop-up notice upon entering, "By being here you consent.." if that would be legal? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 3 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: I wonder, if you gave everyone a pop-up notice upon entering, "By being here you consent.." if that would be legal? I'm not sure how that would work in this instance, other than to stipulate that consent is required. Overall, though, I think that would be rather like those people who have things in the profile that say something like "By engaging in conversation with me, you consent to the possible publication of all transcripts." Which is to say, no, and unenforceable as well, I suspect? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: I'm not sure how that would work in this instance, other than to stipulate that consent is required. Overall, though, I think that would be rather like those people who have things in the profile that say something like "By engaging in conversation with me, you consent to the possible publication of all transcripts." Which is to say, no, and unenforceable as well, I suspect? Or like those bogus Facebook posts that declare "I do not consent for Facebook to own my photos.." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 3 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said: Or like those bogus Facebook posts that declare "I do not consent for Facebook to own my photos.." Yeah. I'm not a lawyer, as they say on the internetz, but consent usually (ethically if not legally) has to be explicitly given, rather than implicitly triggered by another action (such as TPing into a place). That's why platforms like FB, or SL for that matter, make you explicitly click an "I Agree" option to the ToS. It's not enough to say "Well, by merely using this platform, you are agreeing to . . ." It has to be spelled out, and you have to explicitly, deliberately, and for the record "agree," i.e., consent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Mistwalker Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 On 3/8/2024 at 10:50 AM, Chaser Zaks said: "GET OUT IF MY HOUSE!") It's only effective if you have the windows open ready to ban, block and eject in that order. It can be fun to watch them squirm when they get caught in the "no man's land" on the edges of regions that do not connect to any other regions and see how long it takes them to realize they need to log out. 😇🤭 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Love Zhaoying Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: Yeah. I'm not a lawyer, as they say on the internetz, but consent usually (ethically if not legally) has to be explicitly given, rather than implicitly triggered by another action (such as TPing into a place). That's why platforms like FB, or SL for that matter, make you explicitly click an "I Agree" option to the ToS. It's not enough to say "Well, by merely using this platform, you are agreeing to . . ." It has to be spelled out, and you have to explicitly, deliberately, and for the record "agree," i.e., consent. Peeve: when you meet someone really hot and see no red flags or warning signs, so you peek around them to look for their TOS. Edited March 13 by Love Zhaoying 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowan Amore Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 34 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said: While this is true, the clause in the ToS about requiring permission for machinima and snapshots says nothing about publishing videos or pics: it's about taking them. In other words, it's the activity of capturing the machinima without permission that is a violation of the ToS, and that is occurring within the platform itself -- just as any other activity that is in violation of the ToS is. In theory, the machinima need not even be published anywhere to be in violation of the ToS; the existence of a copy on YouTube or elsewhere is important largely as a form of proof that the ToS was violated by the capture. You forgot the most relevant part...Regardless if the LAND allows it 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. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scylla Rhiadra Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said: You forgot the most relevant part...Regardless if the LAND allows it 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. Yes, agreed. I omitted that part because it did not make explicit the distinction between "taking" or "capturing" a snap or machinima (something that occurs within the platform itself, and which therefore is "actionable" by LL), versus "publishing" it on an external platform (something LL won't respond to). That was my main point. But I definitely agree: I don't think that there is any question, from a number of perspectives, that this is in violation of the ToS, and falls within the purview of LL's governance team. Edited March 13 by Scylla Rhiadra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clem Marques Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 (edited) On 3/5/2024 at 12:18 PM, BilliJo Aldrin said: I personally take pictures whereever i go in SL, I don’t recall ever checking to see if it was permitted. It's permitted, don't worry. I take lots of pictures as well. Quote (a) Land Owner Consent for Snapshots and Machinima (...) 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. Source: https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy Private Estates might have rules regarding Snapshots set in the covenant. In that case, it has to be respected. But if you are anywhere on the Mainland or in the Linden Homes contents, you can take as many pictures as you want, wherever you want, whenever you want. Another important part: Quote (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. Source: https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Snapshot_and_machinima_policy So you can do whatever you want when it comes to Snapshots and have fun. As long as it's not in a private Estate that has a covenant prohibiting it, it's all within TOS. (P.S. Machinima is different from Snapshots, and comes with stricter rules, as others have pointed out earlier in this thread) Edited March 14 by Clem Marques Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madi Melodious Posted March 15 Author Share Posted March 15 On 3/14/2024 at 4:37 AM, Clem Marques said: It's permitted, don't worry. I take lots of pictures as well. Private Estates might have rules regarding Snapshots set in the covenant. In that case, it has to be respected. But if you are anywhere on the Mainland or in the Linden Homes contents, you can take as many pictures as you want, wherever you want, whenever you want. For the record it clearly states in our covenant that pictures are allowed but video isn't without permission. Our covenant hasn't changed in 9 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WereBeast Alpha Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 I would suggest if you or your workers have twitter or X is what it is called now to actually make a post about the video with the link and tag teamyoutube in the post most likely the team behind that will work with you and your workers on getting the videos taken down. that is how content creators can get disputes and videos dealt with. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now