Since anyone can edit the wiki pages, a viewer's presence means absolutely nothing. Furthermore Emerald does have copying code that ignores the creator rights. In other words, if you purchase a full perm item and choose to export and then re-import it, that object will now bear your name as the creator. They also automatically set god mode, but don't take my word for it. Read the code. Oh and. Curiously, the viewer sends data to their server upon launch as well as immediately following login.
Sidenote: For those who will no doubt readily jump in to point out that it is simply displaying the login page? Please, I ran it with a port scanner. And yes, it does send data. Encrypted data, in fact. There was also one other time that occurred several mnutes after I was logged in, that it sent encrypted data to their server.
Now, you can think what you want. I personally, question any 3rd party viewer that surreptiously sends encrypted data to the server. Esp in light of the fact that the site owner is the very same individual who brought you vlife, which contained a trojan, violated the code licensing as he was selling it as closed source for USD$250 a pop, and it is the base upon which emerald has been built. But again, don't take my word for it. You can read all about it, from the horses mouth, on this jira:
Emerald was jcool410's idea and the first thing that was done wasstripping VLife off all features that were the illegal client leavingit as a base for Emerald development (Actually, took the same codebaseand copied code from VLife over to Emerald). VLife and Emerald arehighly sharing most of the same modifications and yes, even the loginscreen between VLife and Emerald looks about the same.
As for emerald's legality? It all depends upon how their governance team decides to translate this statement from the Lab's Attorney, Marty LInden, during the 2nd brown bag meeting:
Marty Linden: Well, um… that will be in the establishment of the guidelines. So, what we said in the past is, you can’t export things that you aren’t the creator of and use functionality in one of those viewers or elsewhere to do an end run around the permissions system. So, you can bet that that will be in the guidelines
in conjunction with this:
Untilthey are, the use of CopyBot or any other external application to makeunauthorized duplicates within Second Life will be treated as aviolation of Section 4.2 of the Second Life Terms of Service and may result in your account(s) being banned from Second Life.
Of course, this whole emerald discussion could be moot, considering that, again, per their attorney:
Blondin: Marty we had a follow up with that as well: Will you beemploying a similar policy for 3rd party developers (i.e.,, yourcontent seller program)?
Marty: Yes. We're probably likely to call this instead of theviewer's registry the "developer's registry" and we're also planning assoon as we can get it launched, a seller registry for people who sellcontent in second life to register to represent that they don't sellinfringing content and make whatever kind of representations we as acommunity decide that we'd like to see them make, so that they canstart to build up reputation along the same lines as we are talkingabout regarding this developer registry.
Which, if that is the case, then many on the emerald "team" already fail the "member in good standing" litmus test, since said same ressurrected themselves as alts after being perma-banned. Some, even multiply perma-banned.
But anyway, this question cannot be fully answered until which time the Lab actually a) spells out their 3rd party viewer policy, b) implements it, and c) begins to enforce it. I, for one, won't be holding my breath.
In the meantime, you are welcome to see how some (284 at the time this posting) think the 3rd party viewer policy should be handled, as I finally got around to implementing a web graphing hook to my in-world networked polling system. You can see the dynamically updated results graph here.