Banned(Account on hold) Without, proof

[AnnaNicoleBelle]

Recently, I have been reported for copybotting.The person who accused me is ******  the spectacular famous person with wonderful creations, She, saw that i had a hair with the name on it that said my name as the creator

on it but what had happend was that my friend had givin me a hair that she said i had created and i told her i knew of no such thing and she said that she didnt know so i wore the hair and went to MPP to get a new one and when i was about to take it off she just banned me and i asked what was she doing and she said you're hair and i said what about it and she said copybot and i tried to explain to her that i was forged creator and that my friend had givin it to me and when i told her to unban me from her store she said that shed unabn me when LL awnsered her so now im here anyway i want to request a new rule and that it is.....

called Banned  with no Proof of stating which means that she has no proof that what she said is exactly correct and the reason why i think this rule is so important is because people struggle tring to get there account back and it never really goes trough and it just sucks.

Vote, on if you agree with me.

                                                                                                  Love, annanicolebelle

[Griffin Ceawlin]

Be careful who you accept "gifts" from.

[Venus Petrov]

Whoops.  Chalk this up as a learning experience for you.  If you were the 'forged creator', the hair was questionable, right?  Why would you then wear it shopping?

The 'proof' is that you were wearing hair you admit you did not create.

[Griffin Ceawlin]

---

Venus Petrov wrote:

Why would you then wear it shopping?

---

Yeah, that certainly wasn't the smartest thing to do.

@AnnaNicoleBelle: You do know that you can appeal, right? Unfortunately, you may have to give up your "friend" (ETA: in more than one sense).

[Perrie Juran]

---

AnnaNicoleBelle wrote:

Recently, I have been reported for copybotting.The person who accused me is ******  the spectacular famous person with wonderful creations, She, saw that i had a hair with the name on it that said my name as the creator

on it but what had happend was that my friend had givin me a hair that she said i had created and i told her i knew of no such thing and she said that she didnt know so i wore the hair and went to MPP to get a new one and when i was about to take it off she just banned me and i asked what was she doing and she said you're hair and i said what about it and she said copybot and i tried to explain to her that i was forged creator and that my friend had givin it to me and when i told her to unban me from her store she said that shed unabn me when LL awnsered her so now im here anyway i want to request a new rule and that it is.....

called Banned  with no Proof of stating which means that she has no proof that what she said is exactly correct and the reason why i think this rule is so important is because people struggle tring to get there account back and it never really goes trough and it just sucks.

Vote, on if you agree with me.

                                                                                                  Love, annanicolebelle

---

Lets see, a couple of things going on here.

1.  Linden Lab does not get involved in resident to resident disputes.

2.  If LL suspends your account for copybotting you can appeal (that is assuming you have bee AR'd for copybotting).  I believe they are able to track the origin of an item.

3.  You have a two day old account with the following stated in it:

  "New, Store coming out on 11/19/2011 as well it will also be on the marketplace we sell womens clothing, items, shoes, and accesorys. Store will be official published about a month after opening i will post the store in my profile after finished"

If I was a store owner and saw you with stolen goods and that in your profile, I'd AR you and ban you too.  And given the familiarity you seem to show with SL this acct sounds like an Alt. 

_________________________________________________

Too many puzzle pieces here.

[Griffin Ceawlin]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

3.  You have a two day old account with the following stated in it:

  "New, Store coming out on 11/19/2011 as well it will also be on the marketplace we sell womens clothing, items, shoes, and accesorys. Store will be official published about a month after opening i will post the store in my profile after finished"

---

Ha. I hadn't thought of checking the profile. Interesting.

[wiked Anton]

having and alt isnt a crime, and it is so easy to judge and condemm with all the proof you can make up in your head. 

[Innula Zenovka]

No, but when a two day old account is wandering round someone's shop, wearing hair ripped from the shop and created with her prims, and has something in her profile about opening a shop selling all sorts of stuff, you can understand why the genuine creator got a tad suspicious.

And within two days of creating an account, someone's taken a full perms prim you've given them, turned it into ripped hair and given it back to you.   That happen too often, I'm sure.   What rotten luck some people have.

[Amethyst Jetaime]

You should have immediately reported this to the Lindens and given them  the UUID number for the item so they could trace how that happened and disipline the right person.  Not only was someone guilty of copybotting, but they were using your name illegally too.  I for one would have filed an AR  immediately just for using my name without my permission.  The fact that you didn't, and actually wore the hair, regardless of the reason, is reason enough for the creators actions. 

If what you say is true, then you should be able to appeal your ban successfully.   

As far as the ban from the store, you have no absolute right to go on any land you do not personally own.  A landowner may ban you for any reason or none at all, even if the land is public access land.  They aren't even required to tell you why or that you've been banned.  I for one would not support any change to this policy.  If I am paying for land, I should be able to choose who I want or don't want on it.  Anyone that disagrees with this is welcome to pay my tiers for me. :smileywink:

[Canoro Philipp]

what if the person who made the hair is skilled enough to make a very precise copy of the hair, from scratch, is not like that person used an illegal tool to copy that hair.

i dont think it will be considered copyboting, if you made the object yourself with the creation tools that LL provides.

[Paladin Pinion]

The problem with that theory is that if the person made a copy using only LL tools, it couldn't have had your name as the creator.

[Amethyst Jetaime]

No matter how a copy is made, its still a violation of IP rights and against the TOS and DMCA.  I've had DMCA take down's done on items that people built themselves but clearly copied a build i did.

[Perrie Juran]

---

wiked Anton wrote:

having and alt isnt a crime, and it is so easy to judge and condemm with all the proof you can make up in your head. 

---

I made no proof up in my mind.  I'm just looking at it from the shop owner's perspective. 

But there is that old adage, if it looks like shiat, smells like shiat, it probably is shiat.

[Pamela Galli]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

No matter how a copy is made, its still a violation of IP rights and against the TOS and DMCA.  I've had DMCA take down's done on items that people built themselves but clearly copied a build i did.

---

Really? I thought those did not qualify.  (There is one builder who copies my houses prim for prim, but uses different textures.)

[RudolphUkka]

It probably wasn't

*

copybotting that got you

*

banned; more likely it was

*

assault with an offensive

*

comma.

***

Rudi

***

[Paul Hexem]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

No matter how a copy is made, its still a violation of IP rights and against the TOS and DMCA.  I've had DMCA take down's done on items that people built themselves but clearly copied a build i did.

---

Are you sure? Reverse engineering and using the same dimensions to build a (sometimes better, sometimes worse) product to sell and compete with the person you copied is called capitalism, not violating IP rights. Look at the Zune and iPod (and all their accessories), for example.