Krillion Hax

Simply stated as above. What feature, condition or settings allow a sim or parcel owner to know what region I TP'd from? Client - LL stock viewer revision V2 exact version unknown RLV - none scripted obcjects worn - none embedded scripts - none Is it within TOS? Is it considered proper to do without asking or announcing first? read comments above please I am a scripter and I also understand consent in terms of roleplay and the use of RLV None of this aplies here. Linden Viewer = no RLV Scripted objects worn - none Embedded scripts - none Thanks Krill === Resolution: Such as I thought as well. I have never been a sim "owner" so I did not understand all the finer details of what infomation the sim owner might recieve as debug info perhaps as anti griefer information. But even if that were available and used, it would be, in general, a breach of privacy. So if not that, then someone could have been using a hacked viewer. ty

For "most" of my purchase history, the attemp to wite a review generates: "You must purchase the product before you can review it." in a green bar towards the top of the page. I'm in my purchase history when I select the item.

llGiveInventory(string object, key id); fails I know this was working. I tried it with several clients and on several sims. The item in inventory is named "Boxed Set" and has been tried with permissions T, M/T, C/M/T. All fail to transfer to the receiver For the final it requires only next owner may transfer be set causing the item to be removed upon sending. This happens with string box_set = "Boxed Set"; // current item in prim inventory key namek; // this is input via listen() .code, code, code llGiveInventory(box_set,namek); llInstantMessage(llGetCreator(),"Sending a boxed set to: "+box_set+"\n"+ // box_set == the inventory contents llKey2Name(namek)+"\n"+ // llKey2Name(namek) matches the AV key so the key is valid (string)namek); // displays the actual key properly. llRemoveInventory(box_set); // removes the correct content from the prim inventory.

Right in the middle of the rolling restarts, the sim I was on "Clake" failed to restart. Clake (187,46,23) - actual elevation was approx 550 This was approx 10:00am SLT Oct 2, 2011 The parcel "owner" (edit) contacted me stating he had no idea what was wrong and indicated that the tier was paid. No response from the estate owner. Some of my items were returned, but the expensive and critical things were not. (edit) Cleared my cache, relogged and checked lost & found (as I said, some things were returned) The listed items were still missing. (1) - Loaded Intan dance ball with approx 46 dances (several) - objects with scripts accounting for upwards of 40 hours of work and research. (several) - Misc objects I require all items that were mine returned asap. I appreciate your time and efforts. Thank you. Krillion Hax (edit) Will try to file a ticket. ======================== update found missing items in lost and found as a composit single item. ty to the support person that worked with me directly - saved my ... well, skin!

If a process is observed in SL (scripted action) and it is obvious and not unique to methodology, can a different scripted method be determined a copyright violation simply because the end result is similar? And before that item is removed from SL, is the script evaluated for content or is it taken at face value from another competitor? That is what real content creators are, competitors, not thieves. In "Real World" situations, if the method is different, then it is not a violation. i.e. I prepare, cook and serve you bacon and eggs. If I violate a patented or copyrighted method exactly in the preparation, then I am at fault. However, even if that method is similar and debatable, the actual end result - bacon and eggs - are never considered a part of the violation or subject to patent and/or copyright. (baring GM eggs or calling them some trade name end result, such as "McBacon or McEggs") Anyone that claims unique rights to an end result should be looked at very closely.

Please validate/verify the following info. I was under the impression that when Linden Labs does a scan of your inventory, the following steps take place: 1.) Scan for infringing IP content 2.) Remove any infringing content and replace with generic items (as given in the wiki) Please verify if all replaced items have "IP REPLACEMENT" appended to the end of their name.3.) Send an accompanying notecard found in the folder or item container and an email to the account holder. They do not: 1.) Scan for infringing IP content. 2.) Rename content "ItemName IP REPLACEMENT". 3.) Come back at some later date and ban your account if items named "IP REPLACEMENT" are found. === (quote taken from LL FAQ) I received an IP complaint about content that I purchased from another Resident inworld or through Xstreet SL. What should I do? Most Second Life merchants offer legitimate items for sale, but just as in the real world, it pays to learn about products and those who sell them before you buy. Below are some tips that may help protect you against inadvertently obtaining content that may be infringing. If you're unhappy with a purchase from another Resident, we recommend that you contact the Resident directly to try to resolve the issue. In our experience, vendors are often willing to cooperate, and try to resolve reasonable complaints. Linden Lab does not generally get involved in transactions between Residents; so you should use caution and judgment when making your purchases. === The section "If you are unhappy with..." seems to be a non-sequitur. We are not talking about happiness here. We are talking about legality and ethics. If someone is given "an item" that infringes on someone else's work, there is no recourse except normal steps given. People receiving infringing content are victims as well at this point. If a product is purchased in good faith from another "vendor or resident" and found to be infringing, then reversal of funds should take place. The comment "Linden Lab does not generally get involved in transactions between Residents" does not seem to ring quite true here. Vendors are residents as well. A little worried that they are a in a "class system" above other residents. In SL, the term "caveat emptor" is still true for all cases, but when a governing entity like SL takes items away and the account info is given, shouldn't they be responsible for recompense from the sellers account? Thanks