Why no Xfer to alts

[Rival Destiny]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

ansd would the courts of law not also stipulate that for the Seller to have an agreement with an AGENT of the RL Purchaser, that the RL Purchaser must divugle to the seller the RL-Agent relationship prior to the selling agreement being transacted?

So you are saying a court would say that a a Purchaser can remain anonymous and have its Agent execute a legal transactions with a Seller whereby the Seller cannot control if the RL Purchaser divulges his/her agent's relationship?

Somehow I see your case would be on shaky ground.

Your Agent decided to enter into the agreement with my Agent - the agreement is between agents - not between the RL entities.

Again - the seller can be explicit and make sure buyers like you wont make assumptions.... but I still think the better practice you should follow as a buyer in SL is for you to clarify your rights when this assumption you are making is not stipulated.  

Does this not make sense?  Or would you rather take the risk and be willing to potentially be taken to court (where you might or might not win) simply because you didnt want to clarify the agreement you entered into?

Logic to me seems that its best to avoid a future legal confrontation..... but thats just me.

---

Actually you are saying that by insisting that the 'avatar' is the legal purchaser whereas I am saying the person behind the avatar, the real life person, would be considered the purchaser in a court of law.  The avatar in the virtual world be be merely an agent.  This is part of contract law.

If it every came to a courtroom, NOBODY would be anonymous of course. 

 

 

 

[Toysoldier Thor]

You are correct - each up to each person to run their lives and businesses any way they want. 

If taking chances in entering an agreement whereby he/she clearly knows of and sees a loophole that the other party's agreement because the other party didnt provide them with a 20 page long agreement prior to entering a purchase agreement and whereby this person sees an opportunity to bend or break the intent of the agreement of the other party simply because he/she didnt want to get clarification.... that is a viable way to run a life / business in SL or RL.

I tend to run my RL business more conservatively and safely to avoid future potential conflict, costs, risks to my own business operation by not taking advantage of loopholes in agreements, getting clarification on factors that I know of and am concerned about, and NOT letting the control and fate of my business operation be decided on HOPES that the courts will side with me if this poor assumption ever ended up taking me to court.

Everyone runs their business to their own level of operational risk and ethics.

In this I will completely agree with you.

[Rival Destiny]

My apologies am all over the place here and not used to replying so much.  Am also not very familiar with the formalities in here.

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

ansd would the courts of law not also stipulate that for the Seller to have an agreement with an AGENT of the RL Purchaser, that the RL Purchaser must divugle to the seller the RL-Agent relationship prior to the selling agreement being transacted?

So you are saying a court would say that a a Purchaser can remain anonymous and have its Agent execute a legal transactions with a Seller whereby the Seller cannot control if the RL Purchaser divulges his/her agent's relationship?

Somehow I see your case would be on shaky ground.

Your Agent decided to enter into the agreement with my Agent - the agreement is between agents - not between the RL entities.

Again - the seller can be explicit and make sure buyers like you wont make assumptions.... but I still think the better practice you should follow as a buyer in SL is for you to clarify your rights when this assumption you are making is not stipulated.  

Does this not make sense?  Or would you rather take the risk and be willing to potentially be taken to court (where you might or might not win) simply because you didnt want to clarify the agreement you entered into?

Logic to me seems that its best to avoid a future legal confrontation..... but thats just me.

---

IMO I'm taking no risk ... I am following the useage terms of the license as they are laid out.  So far has bode me well rl and sl.

As far as agent to agent?  That would be fine if LL was holding the court!  my humor.

But in real life, your rl bum goes to court, not your avatars lol.

And yes, I avoid legal confrontation always.  I even drive the speed limit

[Rival Destiny]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

You are correct - each up to each person to run their lives and businesses any way they want. 

If taking chances in entering an agreement whereby he/she clearly knows of and sees a loophole that the other party's agreement because the other party didnt provide them with a 20 page long agreement prior to entering a purchase agreement and whereby this person sees an opportunity to bend or break the intent of the agreement of the other party simply because he/she didnt want to get clarification.... that is a viable way to run a life / business in SL or RL.

I tend to run my RL business more conservatively and safely to avoid future potential conflict, costs, risks to my own business operation by not taking advantage of loopholes in agreements, getting clarification on factors that I know of and am concerned about, and NOT letting the control and fate of my business operation be decided on HOPES that the courts will side with me if this poor assumption ever ended up taking me to court.

Everyone runs their business to their own level of operational risk and ethics.

In this I will completely agree with you.

---

You seem to hint that I am somehow unethical here.  I take offense to that.

We disagree on a simple point here - I side with the texture creator that has no problem with alts using their textures and you side with the ones that don't want alts to use them.

I am not breaking a license agreement yet you seem to think I should be?

Neither of us are wrong and neither are unethical.

I'll leave it there.

[Toysoldier Thor]

At the time your AVATAR AGENT entered into the purchase agreement, your AGENT did not divulge to the seller who the REAL LEGAL PURCHASER WAS.  So, as such the agreement can only logicall be between the agents.  Or worse yet, based on your understanding of contract law..... since both the buyer and seller agents are not legal entities... what you are suggesting is that the sellers agreement in general is completely null and void.

So basically full perm sellers have NO PROTECTION legally in SL since obviously the agent cannot enter into any agreement - its not legal in the eyes of the court - and the buyer is not a legal agreement entering entity since the agent cannot enter into any agreement.... So I guess its a free for all.

LL does not force you as an SL AVATAR to openly and publicly reveal your RL identity nor all of your Agents you control.  Since this is clealy information not readily available to any other resident in SL - including the seller Avatar agent, it sure would be interesting so see your court case go up against a seller that you made the assumption YOU were the buyer and that the seller didnt clearly state your RL identity is the buyer.

IF by default the Purchaser is the RL human as you state or even if a Seller clearly states that the RL human is the buyer and that only one of his AVATARS can use the asset.... I guess this seller must take his products off the MP.... since MP is designed to make sales between AVATARS - not HUMANS.  Even if the Seller wanted to sell on MP - MP has no way to collect the RL Buyer's informtion prior to you making the legal purchase agreement as a human buyer.  The seller cannot force you to agree to the terms of the agreement prior to pressing the BUY button and to provide your RL info to the Seller prior to pressing the buy button.

So... if you ever do get taken to court for your assumption - I would hope you post a thread in this forum telling us if you won or lost on this case.  I would be very curious to see if your assumptions on if the courts sided with you or the seller.

 

[Rival Destiny]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

At the time your AVATAR AGENT entered into the purchase agreement, your AGENT did not divulge to the seller who the REAL LEGAL PURCHASER WAS.  So, as such the agreement can only logicall be between the agents.  Or worse yet, based on your understanding of contract law..... since both the buyer and seller agents are not legal entities... what you are suggesting is that the sellers agreement in general is completely null and void.

So basically full perm sellers have NO PROTECTION legally in SL since obviously the agent cannot enter into any agreement - its not legal in the eyes of the court - and the buyer is not a legal agreement entering entity since the agent cannot enter into any agreement.... So I guess its a free for all.

LL does not force you as an SL AVATAR to openly and publicly reveal your RL identity nor all of your Agents you control.  Since this is clealy information not readily available to any other resident in SL - including the seller Avatar agent, it sure would be interesting so see your court case go up against a seller that you made the assumption YOU were the buyer and that the seller didnt clearly state your RL identity is the buyer.

IF by default the Purchaser is the RL human as you state or even if a Seller clearly states that the RL human is the buyer and that only one of his AVATARS can use the asset.... I guess this seller must take his products off the MP.... since MP is designed to make sales between AVATARS - not HUMANS.  Even if the Seller wanted to sell on MP - MP has no way to collect the RL Buyer's informtion prior to you making the legal purchase agreement as a human buyer.  The seller cannot force you to agree to the terms of the agreement prior to pressing the BUY button and to provide your RL info to the Seller prior to pressing the buy button.

So... if you ever do get taken to court for your assumption - I would hope you post a thread in this forum telling us if you won or lost on this case.  I would be very curious to see if your assumptions on if the courts sided with you or the seller.

 

---

I never assume.  That is the part that I think you are misunderstanding here.  I am not assuming anything.  You are assuming that because something isn't stiupulated in a license that it shouldn't be considered.  I'm saying, not assuming, that legally, if it's not mentioned in the license then it isn't covered.  If it's not covered then you can legally go forward. 

Just because you have an issue with alts using textures doesn't mean that the texture creators who currently sell their textures and allow you to use them with your alts are wrong or unethical.  Because according to your theries here, they should not be doing so.

[Rival Destiny]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

At the time your AVATAR AGENT entered into the purchase agreement, your AGENT did not divulge to the seller who the REAL LEGAL PURCHASER WAS.  So, as such the agreement can only logicall be between the agents.  Or worse yet, based on your understanding of contract law..... since both the buyer and seller agents are not legal entities... what you are suggesting is that the sellers agreement in general is completely null and void.

So basically full perm sellers have NO PROTECTION legally in SL since obviously the agent cannot enter into any agreement - its not legal in the eyes of the court - and the buyer is not a legal agreement entering entity since the agent cannot enter into any agreement.... So I guess its a free for all.

LL does not force you as an SL AVATAR to openly and publicly reveal your RL identity nor all of your Agents you control.  Since this is clealy information not readily available to any other resident in SL - including the seller Avatar agent, it sure would be interesting so see your court case go up against a seller that you made the assumption YOU were the buyer and that the seller didnt clearly state your RL identity is the buyer.

IF by default the Purchaser is the RL human as you state or even if a Seller clearly states that the RL human is the buyer and that only one of his AVATARS can use the asset.... I guess this seller must take his products off the MP.... since MP is designed to make sales between AVATARS - not HUMANS.  Even if the Seller wanted to sell on MP - MP has no way to collect the RL Buyer's informtion prior to you making the legal purchase agreement as a human buyer.  The seller cannot force you to agree to the terms of the agreement prior to pressing the BUY button and to provide your RL info to the Seller prior to pressing the buy button.

So... if you ever do get taken to court for your assumption - I would hope you post a thread in this forum telling us if you won or lost on this case

.  I would be very curious to see if your assumptions on if the courts sided with you or the seller.

 

---

omg who is 'us'.  You have a mouse in your pocket?

That is the most clique statement i've read all week.

You all get jackets?

Again, my attempt at humor.

:matte-motes-evil-invert:

Edited to add:  And I still hold true to my statement that this would never leave the seller's lawyer's office.  That I know for a fact.

 

[Pamela Galli]

Sales in SL, unless stated otherwise, are always between accounts (ie avatars). You cannot, for example, buy one of my houses, copybot it, and give it to your 9 alts, "because it is the same person behind them". Yes, ppl do sometimes want me to give them a house because, they say, their alt bought the house. There is no way for me or any seller to verify who is an alt of whom, much less who the RL typist behind any account is, so it is simply specious to suggest that transactions can be consider anything but between accounts, unless it is stated.

[Ciaran Laval]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

I don't understand the issue?  You're not passing the texture to the alt full perm, you're passing YOUR creation full perm and the textures remain in the main inventory anyway.

There's no need to send the alt the textures is there?

---

If you send it full perm, you pretty much have sent the texture.

[Toysoldier Thor]

---

Rival Destiny wrote:

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

At the time your AVATAR AGENT entered into the purchase agreement, your AGENT did not divulge to the seller who the REAL LEGAL PURCHASER WAS.  So, as such the agreement can only logicall be between the agents.  Or worse yet, based on your understanding of contract law..... since both the buyer and seller agents are not legal entities... what you are suggesting is that the sellers agreement in general is completely null and void.

So basically full perm sellers have NO PROTECTION legally in SL since obviously the agent cannot enter into any agreement - its not legal in the eyes of the court - and the buyer is not a legal agreement entering entity since the agent cannot enter into any agreement.... So I guess its a free for all.

LL does not force you as an SL AVATAR to openly and publicly reveal your RL identity nor all of your Agents you control.  Since this is clealy information not readily available to any other resident in SL - including the seller Avatar agent, it sure would be interesting so see your court case go up against a seller that you made the assumption YOU were the buyer and that the seller didnt clearly state your RL identity is the buyer.

IF by default the Purchaser is the RL human as you state or even if a Seller clearly states that the RL human is the buyer and that only one of his AVATARS can use the asset.... I guess this seller must take his products off the MP.... since MP is designed to make sales between AVATARS - not HUMANS.  Even if the Seller wanted to sell on MP - MP has no way to collect the RL Buyer's informtion prior to you making the legal purchase agreement as a human buyer.  The seller cannot force you to agree to the terms of the agreement prior to pressing the BUY button and to provide your RL info to the Seller prior to pressing the buy button.

So... if you ever do get taken to court for your assumption - I would hope you post a thread in this forum telling us if you won or lost on this case.  I would be very curious to see if your assumptions on if the courts sided with you or the seller.

 

---

I never assume.  That is the part that I think you are misunderstanding here.  I am not assuming anything.  You are assuming that because something isn't stiupulated in a license that it shouldn't be considered.  I'm

saying

, not assuming, that legally, if it's not mentioned in the license then it isn't covered.  If it's not covered then you can legally go forward. 

Just because

you

have an issue with alts using textures doesn't mean that the texture creators who currently sell their textures and allow you to use them with your alts are wrong or unethical.  Because according to your theries here, they should not be doing so.

---

The statement you made that started this discussion between you and me....

 

This is a real grey area IMO with regards to the 'purchaser'.  Unless it states in the license somewhere that the definition of 'purchaser' is the 'avie' then myself, I would consider my real life self to be the purchaser.

To "consider" is in my opinion to "assume".

If you said that ...

Unless it states in the license somewhere that the definition of 'purchaser' is the 'avie' then myself, contract law would state that the "puchaser" in the agreement is myself"

 

then this would not be you making an assumption or considering the situation - it would be stating the fact that if the seller does not define the definition of the BUYER - they BUYER is the human.

Also, you said in this statement that unless the seller states in the agreement that the buyer is the avatar....   but later you state that contract law NEVER sees an avatar as a buyer - that an Avatar is only the agent.  Since as you state that contract law only see an avatar as an agent - then any seller that includes in the agreement that the buyer is the avatar would not be valid in the eyes of the courts..... hmm???

 

Anyway... we can go round and round.  Maybe you are right - maybe you are wrong.  I do not agree.

[Deja Letov]

Thank you all for your comments. This thread is full of legal questions. Wouldn't it be nice if LL reads this and just decides to add a matrix table to their database hooking up an avatar ID with a store ID and letting us have multiples! Yay!

Just FYI...to be on the safe side, I am waiting to hear back from all the creators I have contacted. 1 so far has told me alts are no problem I just had to provide her name. I can't start listing anything quite yet anyway because I just made the alt and it won't let me create a marketplace store yet. So I have time to get it all straight. For those who say no or just don't get back to me, Ill probably go ahead and repurchase on her what items I am missing permission for.

Thanks everyone!

[Toysoldier Thor]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Sales in SL, unless stated otherwise, are always between accounts (ie avatars). You cannot, for example, buy one of my houses, copybot it, and give it to your 9 alts, "because it is the same person behind them". Yes, ppl do sometimes want me to give them a house because, they say, their alt bought the house. There is no way for me or any seller to verify who is an alt of whom, much less who the RL typist behind any account is, so it is simply specious to suggest that transactions can be consider anything but between accounts, unless it is stated.

---

  I  100% agree with you Pamela.  And I would ASSUME most sellers in SL see it the way you and I see it.

Most do not assume that the BUYER is the hidden human behind the Avatar.

[Rival Destiny]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Sales in SL, unless stated otherwise, are always between accounts (ie avatars). You cannot, for example, buy one of my houses, copybot it, and give it to your 9 alts, "because it is the same person behind them". Yes, ppl do sometimes want me to give them a house because, they say, their alt bought the house. There is no way for me or any seller to verify who is an alt of whom, much less who the RL typist behind any account is, so it is simply specious to suggest that transactions can be consider anything but between accounts, unless it is stated.

---

Yes ITA 100%

[Toysoldier Thor]

Deja....

I think you are doing EXACTLY what you should do.  Wherever you assume or are not sure of the Seller's agreement in any way, it is ALWAYS the wiser move to remove doubt and uncertainty and go back to ask the Seller what his/her intent was in the agreement - even if he/she did not clearly make a point in the agreement.

This is prudent and it also keeps you out of any future potential problems.

The advice is..... IF YOU ARE UNSURE - ASK THE SELLER !!

[Rival Destiny]

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

---

Rival Destiny wrote:

---

Toysoldier Thor wrote:

At the time your AVATAR AGENT entered into the purchase agreement, your AGENT did not divulge to the seller who the REAL LEGAL PURCHASER WAS.  So, as such the agreement can only logicall be between the agents.  Or worse yet, based on your understanding of contract law..... since both the buyer and seller agents are not legal entities... what you are suggesting is that the sellers agreement in general is completely null and void.

So basically full perm sellers have NO PROTECTION legally in SL since obviously the agent cannot enter into any agreement - its not legal in the eyes of the court - and the buyer is not a legal agreement entering entity since the agent cannot enter into any agreement.... So I guess its a free for all.

LL does not force you as an SL AVATAR to openly and publicly reveal your RL identity nor all of your Agents you control.  Since this is clealy information not readily available to any other resident in SL - including the seller Avatar agent, it sure would be interesting so see your court case go up against a seller that you made the assumption YOU were the buyer and that the seller didnt clearly state your RL identity is the buyer.

IF by default the Purchaser is the RL human as you state or even if a Seller clearly states that the RL human is the buyer and that only one of his AVATARS can use the asset.... I guess this seller must take his products off the MP.... since MP is designed to make sales between AVATARS - not HUMANS.  Even if the Seller wanted to sell on MP - MP has no way to collect the RL Buyer's informtion prior to you making the legal purchase agreement as a human buyer.  The seller cannot force you to agree to the terms of the agreement prior to pressing the BUY button and to provide your RL info to the Seller prior to pressing the buy button.

So... if you ever do get taken to court for your assumption - I would hope you post a thread in this forum telling us if you won or lost on this case.  I would be very curious to see if your assumptions on if the courts sided with you or the seller.

 

---

I never assume.  That is the part that I think you are misunderstanding here.  I am not assuming anything.  You are assuming that because something isn't stiupulated in a license that it shouldn't be considered.  I'm

saying

, not assuming, that legally, if it's not mentioned in the license then it isn't covered.  If it's not covered then you can legally go forward. 

Just because

you

have an issue with alts using textures doesn't mean that the texture creators who currently sell their textures and allow you to use them with your alts are wrong or unethical.  Because according to your theries here, they should not be doing so.

---

The statement you made that started this discussion between you and me....

 

This is a real grey area IMO with regards to the 'purchaser'.  Unless it states in the license somewhere that the definition of 'purchaser' is the 'avie' then myself, I would consider my real life self to be the purchaser.

To "consider" is in my opinion to "assume".

If you said that ...

Unless it states in the license somewhere that the definition of 'purchaser' is the 'avie' then myself, contract law would state that the "puchaser" in the agreement is myself"

 

then this would not be you making an assumption or considering the situation - it would be stating the fact that if the seller does not define the definition of the BUYER - they BUYER is the human.

Also, you said in this statement that unless the seller states in the agreement that the buyer is the avatar....   but later you state that contract law NEVER sees an avatar as a buyer - that an Avatar is only the agent.  Since as you state that contract law only see an avatar as an agent - then any seller that includes in the agreement that the buyer is the avatar would not be valid in the eyes of the courts..... hmm???

 

Anyway... we can go round and round.  Maybe you are right - maybe you are wrong.  I do not agree.

---

---

Yes with regards to how the license is written, the terms used, a lawyer will look to define the 'purchaser'.  Again, please refer to contract law and the use of agents. etc. 

 

I'll stop the discussion here:

Toy Soldier said:   To "consider" is in my opinion to "assume". 

and refer you to a dictionary.

I stand by my statements. 

You are more than welcome to disagree with me.  I enjoyed the debate.

I think everyone should keep in mind that this discussion was about a few texture creators that stipulate in their licenses that alts are not to use their textures.  I brought to the table at least one that stipulates in their license that alts are permitted to use their textures.

 

[Madeliefste Oh]

For the law an avatar has no rights at all. An avatar simply doesn't exist as a legal entity, it is not a juristic person.

IP rights are rl rights. You as a creator can provide a license to use your products, you can do so because you as a private person are a juristic person. Your avatar is only a representation of you and your rl rights. But your avatar doesn not hold the copyrights. Your avatar can also represent a business in stead of a person. A business is also a juristic person.

The same what counts for you as a creator, counts for the buyer. An avatar cannot agree on terms of use or a user license, only the juristic person behind the avatar can do so.

I have nothing stated in my user licenses about alts. Because at the time I made them I did think it was for a deal between avatar and avatar. But now, some years laters, after reading a lot about copyrights and a talk with a lawyer, I think different about it.
Point for me as a creator, is that I don't know the rl names of my buyers. (Though there are some rare exceptions, I do have customers who ask me to put the licenses on their rl name). I also don't know who the alts of my customers are. But when people contact me personally with the main avatar that they have bought our items with, and explain their situation and the need for transfering my products to an alt, I think it is realistic to allow them do so. Because it is the rl person behind the avatar that agreed to our user licenses. And since we did not state in our user licenses that the license is limited to use of just óne avatar that represents the rl person, I don't see a need or justification to force them to buy a new copy of my merchandise. But I do want to know the name of the main avatar as well as the names of the alt(s) that use our products.

 

[Rival Destiny]

---

Deja Letov wrote:

Thank you all for your comments. This thread is full of legal questions. Wouldn't it be nice if LL reads this and just decides to add a matrix table to their database hooking up an avatar ID with a store ID and letting us have multiples! Yay!

Just FYI...to be on the safe side, I am waiting to hear back from all the creators I have contacted. 1 so far has told me alts are no problem I just had to provide her name. I can't start listing anything quite yet anyway because I just made the alt and it won't let me create a marketplace store yet. So I have time to get it all straight. For those who say no or just don't get back to me, Ill probably go ahead and repurchase on her what items I am missing permission for.

Thanks everyone!

---

Awesome!  Am glad that you have it partially sorted and that so far one has replied positively and has no issue with your alts using their textures. Well done.  Maybe others will follow suit. 

You may have made an LL legal precident my friend

Congrats!!!

[Rival Destiny]

---

Madeliefste Oh wrote:

For the law an avatar has no rights at all. An avatar simply doesn't exist as a legal entity, it is not a juristic person.

IP rights are rl rights. You as a creator can provide a license to use your products, you can do so because you as a private person are a juristic person. Your avatar is only a representation of you and your rl rights. But your avatar doesn not hold the copyrights. Your avatar can also represent a business in stead of a person. A business is also a juristic person.

The same what counts for you as a creator, counts for the buyer. An avatar cannot agree on terms of use or a user license, only the juristic person behind the avatar can do so.

I have nothing stated in my user licenses about alts. Because at the time I made them I did think it was for a deal between avatar and avatar. But now, some years laters, after reading a lot about copyrights and a talk with a lawyer, I think different about it.

Point for me as a creator, is that I don't know the rl names of my buyers. (Though there are some rare exceptions, I do have customers who ask me to put the licenses on their rl name). I also don't know who the alts of my customers are. But when people contact me personally with the main avatar that they have bought our items with, and explain their situation and the need for transfering my products to an alt, I think it is realistic to allow them do so. Because it is the rl person behind the avatar that agreed to our user licenses. And since we did not state in our user licenses that the license is limited to use of just óne avatar that represents the rl person, I don't see a need or justification to force them to buy a new copy of my merchandise. But I do want to know the name of the main avatar as well as the names of the alt(s) that use our products.

 

---

Yes I do believe this is the standard for most countries as well.  At least the majority.

I can only speak for myself but I would have no issue with providing rl information in license useage situations. 

 

[Sassy Romano]

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

I don't understand the issue?  You're not passing the texture to the alt full perm, you're passing YOUR creation full perm and the textures remain in the main inventory anyway.

There's no need to send the alt the textures is there?

---

If you send it full perm, you pretty much have sent the texture.

---

How?  You can't open the texture and save it to inventory or then download it or transfer it (the texture) to a third party.

You can however get the texture UUID but NOT via script but through the viewer UI and then apply it via script but guess what, you can do that even if the alt or main has never bought the item and just sees it in world.

So no, it's nothing like sending the texture full perm.

[Nefertiti Nefarious]

Alts are merely multiple manifestations of the same LEGAL persona ... the real person behind the keyboard. They have no standing in law, they are not real persons, they cannot be sued for anything, and they cannot  sign a binding contract.

Only the human behind the alts can.  A sale to Nefertiti Nefarious is really a sale to the person whose credit card pays for the stuff.  Likewise, a sale to my Anonymous Alternate is also legally a sale to that real person, not a bunch of pixels.

So prohibiting transfer among alts is a concept that you would have a very hard time enforcing legally ... all my alts are ME. And if I bought it, I would expect to be able to freely use it.

[Ciaran Laval]

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

I don't understand the issue?  You're not passing the texture to the alt full perm, you're passing YOUR creation full perm and the textures remain in the main inventory anyway.

There's no need to send the alt the textures is there?

---

If you send it full perm, you pretty much have sent the texture.

---

How?  You can't open the texture and save it to inventory or then download it or transfer it (the texture) to a third party.

You can however get the texture UUID but NOT via script but through the viewer UI and then apply it via script but guess what, you can do that even if the alt or main has never bought the item and just sees it in world.

So no, it's nothing like sending the texture full perm.

---

You haven't been able to get the UUID that way for a while.

[Sassy Romano]

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

---

Ciaran Laval wrote:

---

Sassy Romano wrote:

I don't understand the issue?  You're not passing the texture to the alt full perm, you're passing YOUR creation full perm and the textures remain in the main inventory anyway.

There's no need to send the alt the textures is there?

---

If you send it full perm, you pretty much have sent the texture.

---

How?  You can't open the texture and save it to inventory or then download it or transfer it (the texture) to a third party.

You can however get the texture UUID but NOT via script but through the viewer UI and then apply it via script but guess what, you can do that even if the alt or main has never bought the item and just sees it in world.

So no, it's nothing like sending the texture full perm.

---

You haven't been able to get the UUID that way for a while.

---

How much do you want to bet with the latest LL official viewer?

[Toysoldier Thor]

---

Nefertiti Nefarious wrote:

Alts are merely multiple manifestations of the same LEGAL persona ... the real person behind the keyboard. They have no standing in law, they are not real persons, they cannot be sued for anything, and they cannot  sign a binding contract.

Only the human behind the alts can.  A sale to Nefertiti Nefarious is really a sale to the person whose credit card pays for the stuff.  Likewise, a sale to my Anonymous Alternate is also legally a sale to that real person, not a bunch of pixels.

So prohibiting transfer among alts is a concept that you would have a very hard time enforcing legally ... all my alts are ME. And if I bought it, I would expect to be able to freely use it.

---

Then Nef... based on your understanding and beliefs stated here... and the fact that you are basically saying that regardless if a full perm creator in his agreement tells you that his/her creations can ONLY be used by the ALT of yours that bought it...

do me a favor... dont buy my products as you would be violating my agreement and intent in my agreement.

Your statements are saying that your LINDEN TOKENS that bought a creator's product entitles you - the HUMAN behind all your SL ALTs - to move and copy the creator's content to any of your ALTs regardless if he says you cant.... buecause you believe what you believe?

i.e. all Creator / Merchant agreements and terms of use to Nef are null and void and have no meaning.

pretty sad.

 

EDIT: So expanding on Nef's beliefs..... since the Creator/Seller's avatar is an agent of their REAL HUMAN.... the stated contract that we have posted whereby the Creator TELLS you in his terms of use that "only your buying ALT has the right to use his creation and cannot transfer it to ANY other SL account".... you - the human behind your ALT must abide by the contract the creator behind his alt tells you.

If you dont like the terms.... walk away... but you surely are not entitled to rights the creator told you that you are not.

[Rival Destiny]

Yes I actually followed a convo in one of my scripting groups a while ago that was talking about this exact same thing.  The ability to grab the UUID of a texture.

[Rival Destiny]

---

Nefertiti Nefarious wrote:

Alts are merely multiple manifestations of the same LEGAL persona ... the real person behind the keyboard. They have no standing in law, they are not real persons, they cannot be sued for anything, and they cannot  sign a binding contract.

Only the human behind the alts can.  A sale to Nefertiti Nefarious is really a sale to the person whose credit card pays for the stuff.  Likewise, a sale to my Anonymous Alternate is also legally a sale to that real person, not a bunch of pixels.

So prohibiting transfer among alts is a concept that you would have a very hard time enforcing legally ... all my alts are ME. And if I bought it, I would expect to be able to freely use it.

---

This is my understanding also in regards to what the law defines as a legal entity.  SL is a platform where real people do business with real money using our avies as our agents.  We cannot circumvent the legal system by assigning legal rights to a virtual being that is in fact driven by a real person.  This is yet another instance where you cannot separate rl from sl.