Jump to content

Aasha Kohime

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Aasha Kohime

  1. I've been trying to get a reliable answer on this myself. Not even SL's staff have given me a common answer. When I ask whether children are allowed outside of G sims the response seems to depend on the personal feelings of who answers (combined with personal anecdotes) rather than the actual stance from LL.

    I've personally witnessed a Linden walking around in a crowded dance club that had at least one child avatar on the dance floor
    I've seen heaps of combat-system and role-play sims in my time that included at least some amount of children as characters without trouble.

    But if I ask what the rules surrounding them are the responses range from child avatars being innately reportable in and of themselves, to everything goes for child avatars as long as the child avatar itself is not participating in (or in the immediate vicinity of) sexual activity.

    So, in all sincerity, if someone has a citation-able answer (i.e. that isn't a projection of their personal opinion of what it should be) it'd help myself and others grasp the parameters of what's allowed.



    Reading through the answers again I find I missed exactly what I was looking for.

    Thank you Perrie

  2. Sassy Romano wrote:

    What I do find comical though is that LL have stated that they NEED to know the location of these items and can't work on UUID.

    If haha... IF that's the case, how come they have twice now, run jobs that wipe legally purchased animations from MY (and plenty of others) INVENTORY?!  They'd not have had that location reported duh!

    They're so full of it at times, it's sickening.

    Anyway, my advice would be to forget trying to pursue this one, make a better animation and do as suggested, have a sim side animation engine for demo purposes that remains within your ownership.

    I feel that's what they're hoping for honestly. They know that we know they're full of crap. They just want to play stupid and talk like recorded messages enough until we go away. I think their mindframe is if they "give in" to little things we'll ask them to take care of big things. They don't care about right and wrong so much as how little effort they can get away with. It's obvious if you try to talk to a Linden. It's like talking to a scripted chatbot.

  3. They ripped me off. That's the terminology I'm going for. And I'm sure that's what the term usually used for ripping originates from. I'm not wrong in using it.

    Don't confuse "easy" with "not nefarious means" - though I wouldn't actually use the word nefarious so much as just greedy myself. But just because they didn't break out a 3rd party program to snag things didn't mean they didn't steal it. They conciously realized a way to take something without paying and did so. That's the base definition of stealing.

  4. They were told the items only work in my sim. Early on a few even asked if they could get free demos that worked in other sims believe it or not. 

    They didn't break SL's terms of service when they took the animation. That much I do agree. But I'm fairly sure they did break my own interlectual property copyright of the item through the service of SL. The item was designed to only work in one sim - which was hard to not realize as the demo sword the animations were in at the time would announce it only worked in my sim whenever changing region or being attached in another region. They sought a way around it's allowed range of use. Admittedly not a very hard way but it still fits the bill for infringement.

    Perrie Juran wrote:

    Now adding to the problem is this and I understand LL's problem.  You gave them the UUID of the animation.  But they have on way of knowing which are legal copies and which are not.  In affect you have filed a DMCA using the UUID and if LL simply removes the UUID then your own copy goes 'poof' too.

    That's the intent actually. Aside for the animations in my own inventory - of which I uploaded identical backups that will function the same but have different UUIDs  - there are no legitimate versions of the animations I provided UUIDs for. At the time of those getting out the only way people could possibly attain them was via ripping them out of the demo. The full version of the sword which I released in my shop later uses the new set I uploaded. Even the new demo sword (which uses a server like many in the forums suggested to me) uses the re-uploaded animations. There is literally no negative impact to come from deleting those UUIDs I provided. The only ones that would lose the animation are the ones that ripped them and myself.

    If LL just hit the button they could clean the mess up very easily.


  5. This here is the response I got from Linden Labs to my DMCA. I just want to show how they are with dealing with it.


    IP Team

    Date: Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 12:26 PM

    Subject: Re: Your Notification of Copyright Infringement

    Linden Lab has received your notification of copyright infringement under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), 17 U.S.C. § 512.

    After having reviewed your notification we were unable to act on it because you did not provide all of the information necessary to process your complaint or you did not provide accurate information.   More specifically:  
     * You did not provide the information required in step 2 under the “To File a Notification” section of our DMCA policy.  You must tell us the name and the location for every item that you believe to be infringing and that you would like removed.  Please do not provide UUIDs.  These are not useful in helping us locate the content to be removed.  We understand this may be time consuming for you; however, you must be very specific or we may be unable to process your complaint. 
    Please review our DMCA Policy and notification requirements provided at
    and, if appropriate, correct and resubmit your DMCA notification to Linden Lab.


    The IP Team at Linden Lab


    Now first off. The things that are ripped are sword animations. They can't possibly have an in-world location to point out. I clearly mentioned they are animations in the DMCA. So this is a technicality that LL is using to not take action.
    Secondly the UUIDs are probably the easiest way to pinpoint data in storage. Very much so better than providing the name of the animation seeing how that can be changed. I'm very certain they need the UUID to get rid of the animations had they actually decided to do it.
    I honestly believe Linden Lab's intention is to deny action for the sake of LL's own convienence as long as they can hold out; hoping we just give up and go away defeated. I feel they don't care about our rights. Had I sent them a DMCA with the name of the animation they likely would have told me they required UUIDs instead. After all what feasible good is the name if the person can just change it?
  6. At this point I'm considering pulling one of you to the side and having you put the server object together for me if you're willing. My partner working on it is pretty busy with life and ever since the demo has gone down the activity around the game has dropped.

  7. You're going off on a tangent that isn't relevant out of your own "I want more" mentality. It's basically a "Stop being greedy, because I want to be greedy" argument. If you don't want to buy something than don't. If you do want to buy somethign than do. If people actually try selling animations as scripts they most likely won't sell unless they're part of something impressive enough to make it - like a combat system. That's a no brainer. When those people that try to sell them as just scripted animations and find no sales going on they'll realize it too.

    Also don't just relate every merchant as some rich music industry trying to live it easy. That knocks the wind out of your argument as fast as possible when you realize we're just normal people. Like you. Only that happened to put a lot of time and effort into making something. Your argument is even further crushed when it keeps going on about selling them when this whole issue is about a free demo that gets taken advantage of. 

  8. You act like this isn't the case for textures and sound. Just because animations would be activatable via UUID doesn't mean everyone would sell them only as script parts. Honestly when selling animations I'd give the actual animation itself. I just want the option of security other things get when it comes to things like this.

    If someone makes a texture they can apply it to things and it's rather safe. It won't get reused for something else unless the creator allowed it by adding the texture in the contents.

    If someone makes a sound it's rather safe too. A script can activate it with the UUID and no one is going to snag it from the contents. Unless the creator wanted to sell a sound itself.

    Demos of other things are fairly safe too. If I were to make a demo of a vehicle it would be easy to keep secure. If I want to make a demo of a simple dance it'd be easy to keep safe as well. Builds? Just plop the object down and people can crawl all over it. Sounds? Sure. Just toss the sounds in a scripted object that plays from a list of sounds to show what each sound sounds like. So on and so forth. It's harder with weapons though.

    Now I'm well aware there will always be people that buy things specifically for the animation. That's fine. There are peopel that buy things just for the sound too but sounds are not always directly included in the contents of things that aren't meant to sell the sounds. Sounds still sell though. Textures sell as well despite not being included for direct use from the players' inventories if they come plastered on other things. Animations would be no different. You're just thinking of them this way merely because it's what you are used to. It's the same reason you likely aren't saying this same argument towards texture and sound creators.

    That said I do sell the actual animations with the object. And plan to even if UUIDs were usable. Though I do think it should be a right that we can decide how to give it out I also do think customability is a thing people deserve if they paid for it.

  9. Hm. You learn something new everyday. I guess it wasn't originally UUID capable after all. That was where a fair part of my frustration with the subject spawned from; designing the game to use it then just restricting things lazily at the expense of other factors rather than securing them. Now it strikes me more the case of them trying to give it a chance but people abuse the chance.

    I still believe it's possible to fix though. 

  10. Been working on other methods. Including one that was based on Temp attach and another like you said with the server object giving permissions.

    TempAttach doesn't work perfectly. They can get the contents out of it with a normal viewer.

    The server object is still in the middle of testing/scripting.

    Days into this single little part and so many things that should work that don't we can't help but just say this is convoluted as heck. Not only would it be easier with UUIDs but we can't help but feel the anti-theft restriction makes it easier to steal.

    -and yes yes I know you're going to say it's be worse with UUIDs being allowed. I'm talking about them fixing it so UUIDs can work without being stolen so easily. Like I said the "how" is their job.

  11. I get my idea isn't perfect. But the bottem line is it's their (LL) job to figure out the how. What they have set now is not working. What they have right now pretty much gives the animation itself away if people get animated at all. Stop sitting here and acting like because I don't have the magic solution it can't be done. I am the victim here - as are others in my position. LL is the one that should provide the magical solution. So aim all your "how" questions towards them. It's their job.

  12. PERMISSION_TAKE_CONTROLS may or may not work in this situation. The player doesn't have direct control of the weapon functions. It isn't free-range combat so much as a combat mini-game where the players are technically sat down and inputting various commands and movements on the hud to perform different actions and move around the board. Worth a try though since nothing worked perfectly yet.

  13. That honestly seems like something they can change. Just like they had viewers change to suit security in the past. Make it so it's only possible to get the animations' UUIDs if they are full perm. Logically yes people can still find tricks to get the animation. The same way they do with everything. But it'd be harder.

    Anyone that used tools and functions that managed to see through the perm restrictions and get the UUID would be treated the same way anyone that used a tool or viewer that could copy a texture or object would now.

  14.      True point. Past full-perm scripts could be potentially dangerous for many animators. Unless it only effected scripts created after the date of the hypothetical update that enacted it. I'm completely uncertain if that could be done smoothly though.


    Another idea then:

         Add a 4th checkbox to the no-mod, no-copy and no-trans list. A "no-contents" checkbox that denies any emptying the contents into the inventory or direct manual opening/playing the contents (the actual name of the checkbox could probably be clearer but that's beside the point). This would benefit quite a mountain of creators but especially the animators.

  15. Not to mention simplify things. Replacing the animation name with the animation UUID just feels pure and simple compared to the hoops I've gone through lately. Scripting things to only work in one sim. Scripting temporary attachments. In the end even with all that it doesn't work since when you get right down to it people can still more or less legally steal from you.

  16. Fellow animators,

    There's a pretty annoying security issue for us. Many of us that have specialized in this field have probably known about this a good long while but animations are easily ripped off. If you add animations to something attachable at the moment there's no way to keep someone from being able to take it out of the object. 

    llStartAnimation only works with actual contents. Why? LL has never given a valid reason. I've read from past posts that they say it makes them harder to steal. It probably did help keep people from just grabbing the UUID in the past, but what's easier to rip? The UUID of an animation in a script, or an animation you have in the actual contents of your weapons, dancers, furniture, vehicles and AOs? Imagine how hard to steal  textures would be if textures had to be included in the contents. Much easier, right? Exactly.

    I've started a jira bug report about it and they closed it with the vaguest explaination possible. https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/BUG-8162? (Notice other animation based bugs of the same nature reported in it's links are still standing). Even following up and IMing the Linden why directly provided the equilivant of vague prerecorded messages before they logged off.

    TempAttach seemed like a light at the end of the tunnel to me at first but even that was found to leave the item's contents rippable after a little testing. It takes a little knowledge, but you can do it easily with any viewer once you know how (I hesitate to explain the process publicly though).

    The way things are set up now people don't even need a copybot viewer to rip animators off.

    I'm working on a DMCA to have ripped animations removed but I have a feeling LL's mentality is to sweep complaints of this nature under the rug and hope it goes away by making it inconvienent for us to persue. So I'm making sure everyone is aware of the issue. LL is more likely to make it less possible to rip our work off in the future if we're aware of it today.

    • Like 3
  17. At the moment this is the script I use.

    integer gRegCh;

    key gAv;



    touch_start(integer num)


    if (!llGetAttached()) llRequestPermissions( llDetectedKey(0), PERMISSION_ATTACH);


    attach(key id)


    gAv = id;


    changed (integer change)


    if (change & CHANGED_REGION)





    run_time_permissions (integer perm)


    if (!llGetAttached() && (perm & PERMISSION_ATTACH)) llAttachToAvatarTemp(ATTACH_MOUTH);

    if ((perm & PERMISSION_ATTACH) && (gRegCh)) llDetachFromAvatar();



    When it gets rezzed from the box - no matter if I rez it or they rez it - I get the blue box pop-up asking for permission to animate my avatar.

    They click the sword and attach it to themselves all well and good. That part works fine.

    The animations of the sword (which are in a different script that I don't want to publicly display) won't play for them. But if I happen to wear the sword and use it everyone around me will perform the animations and sounds with me. Is there any way you can tell me what I need to do from this without needing the other script?

  • Create New...