Toysoldier Thor

Nefertiti Nefarious wrote: Madeliefste Oh wrote: This is an interesting case, seen in copyright light. The creator of the art work has died more then 75 years ago, so the art work falls into the public domain. Still this website that Veronika points to claims copyright since 2002. What is this copyright about, when it is not about the art work? They can claim copyright on their tapestry derivative work, and the photo in the advertisement of their derivative work. That's what ToySoldier infringed on: not the dead painter's copyright, but the companies derivative and the photo of it. If I were to nab that picture and make and sell a tapestry, Toysoldier would not be able to claim I infringed his copyright: we both used the same source. ****************** Adding ... many of my products are made from photos of old objects. I am very careful to find pictures that are either in the public domain, photos from websites where the photographers premit derivative use, or to get permission from the photographer before I start making chickens or naked Greek women. Since you brought up the added comment Nef and since Veronika has stated that the topic in this thread is to talk about Merchants true rights to copyright on content.... What proof does Veronika have Nef that the pages and pages of all those 1 prim cheapies photos on your MP site ... that you are the copyright owner? Are we all suppose to take your word for it Nef? As Veronika says, you cannot prove the source of where YOU or I got textures to all your random statues and my old tapestries I made back in 2008. Prove to us all an especially Veronika who wants to be 100% sure you are not snagging images off obscure Internet websites, clipping them and slamming the dozens of pages as cheapies on MP for a quick buck. We are just carrying on Veronika's supposed topic of concern that she wants to get LL to make her feel better that merchants like all those products you post on MP are legal. As for me.... my old tapestry prims were the first things I ever created back in 2008... even I dont remember the source of them .... and their sales (except over the past couple days) have almsot no sales nor long since not my business in SL... I only kept them there for nostalgia. Not worth keeping them up for the few lindens they make to allowed all your witch hunts and that LL allows on the forums.

Well I guess LL Moderators are allowing witch hunting and accusations of fellow Merchants. Always thought - and clearly I thought wrong - that forum discussions of a merchant's business was not tolerated. I guess this is not true. Soooo since LL allows Merchants to discredit each other's business... its time to start doing some of my own investigations. Of course Veronika is not even a merchant just a forum poster that doesnt like to be proven wrong in a forum thread. As for the others in this trhead... yup.... a pretty sas situation how low ppl stoop in this thread. And that LL condones this... well they sure as heck better be ready for more of this on the theads. Publicly attacking a merchant's business is OK in the SL threads! Right on! Like you all said... careful throwing stones... LL allows them to be flung on the forum threads.

I am glad you find my SL Tapestries so interesting as to have completely derailed all attention from the OP and of your silly suggestion of LL Regualtions against full perms sculpty creators which after all your anger you openly admitted my FIRST suggestions to you were right afterall. But if you want o keep talking about my old tapestries... why dont you keep violating Community Standard TOS (since its clear that the LL Moderators are taking a blind eye to your continued attacks of my business in SL) and expand your attacks to all the other SL Merchants that seems to have violated the exact same Public Domain content.... You have spent so much time deep drilling through each of my MP Store products in your witch hunt to get revenge upon me because you hate that my suggestions were valid afterall. You should be able to just as easy continue your witch hunt and point out all the countless other SL Merchants that are using the exact same tapestry images of public domain art as me. And... if you are so convinced to acuse me of theft.... (again... posted acusations of violating a LL TOS is a violation of TOS), then file a DMCA. Do the right thing. Have me and the dozens of other SL Merchants that you are convinced are violating copyright account for our sins. If you are right... force us all to remove our whopping 20L to 56L content. Do the right thing as you sit here violating LL TOS. LOL so funny ... how you started this whole attack with your demands that LL take measures to strengthen TOS and force all us evil sculpty creators from ripping you off..... and yet here you are - post after post - violating LL TOS. You are just lucky that LL Moderators are selecting of whom they punish and dont punish in the forums. PS... and the more you post... the more business you are generating to my tapestries.... And to think a long time ago I was going to remove them from the MP as they didnt fit my SL business anymore and made almost no revenue. Thanks for bringing these old old listings back to life.

Veronika Garzo wrote: You really are a victim ya know, now some other site has gone and ripped off the finials and tassles!!! Must be ye olde photoshopper!!! http://medievalwalltapestry.com/la-belle-dame-sans-merci.html My goodness you have some misfortune don't you?? Ever heard the expression 'People who live in glass houses, should not throw stones'? Not bad for a naive child eh????? See again you dont stop putting your foot in your mouth (similar to the uneducated and emotional knee jerk attacks I have received from Zanara). Both of you have no clue what you are talking about on this topic and these images of old public domain art. So let me keep it simple for you Veronika... it might help the lgic sink in since you have no interest in talking about this thread's OP and since you clearly have admitted that my initial posting to you was in fact right and you have nothing else to talk about in this thread but to talk about off topic discussion in attacking my business and my reputation. (PS... your off topic accusations and attacks on my business as well as that of Zanara's are violations of LL TOS but even though I have filed AR's - my history on filing ARs against those that are in LL's favors usually goes nowhere. So I guess I will have to keep responding to the attacks from you and Zanara on this thread until the LL Moderator decides to take action against tthe violators) What you fail to grasp is that in order to be a victim one first has to be victimized. Do yourself a favor and get the name of any one of my 19 tapestries and search for that name in either MP or even in Google. See how many responses you get on any one of these medieval artworks. WOW... surprising how many 1000's of supposed victims there are in both MP and the Internet. Is it not puzzling to you or Zanara why the content you both are accusing me of somehow stealing, copybotter (huh??) or violating copyright is the same content that 1000's of others are stealing? Normally this would turn on a lightbulb for most people.... but I guess not all. Is there any more attacks you or Zanara wish to post against me and for me to defend until hopefully LL Moderators wake up and start enforcing Forum Posting rules? PS... the only bright side benefit from both yours and Zanara's attacks on my business is that I have had one of my best couple days of daily sales in the past month - specially sales of my oldest content - my tapestries. So thanks at least to for that.

Zanara Zenovka wrote: Toysoldier Thor wrote: Veronika Garzo wrote: I hold copyright issues very high and I am fully aware of them and have had to learn the countless fine details of copyright both in making sure i protect my IP of my hand created landscape sculpt maps as well as and even moreso my growing involvement in the art industry. I do not want to alarm you, but I feel I should bring to your attention that your copyright is being infringed by a company who are selling your art/tapestries as their own!!!! Would you like me to tell Linden Labs about this or will you report it yourself to defend your IP rights? the items in question can be clearly seen with their own watermarks to protect from copying at this site:- http://www.worldwidetapestries.com/tapestry/godspeed.html and http://www.worldwidetapestries.com/tapestry/chenonceau-castle.html just for a couple of examples. LOL.... you really do need to stop putting your foot in your mouth so many times as it just makes you look foolish. And attacking me and my business as you hide your business and the background reason why this topic angers you so much. As for your recent attempt to attack my reputation and business, you were so excited to use my oldest products in my store as a juicy "I GOT YOU" to fling around on the forum..... what you failed to do is realize that the textures on my tapestries are ancient old textures who's copyrights have expired and are deemed PUBLIC DOMAIN. Since you are not aware what that means... it means that the texture has no copyright restrictions anymore .... are you wondering why you are finding many others that use these same textures? The other creator that is using the same texture for whatever he/she is using it for is not violating my copyright since not only is it not mine.... its no ones! Stop being so childish Veronika and focus on the topic. Haha. Priceless. No the tapestries aren't "ancient textures", they're ancient tapestries. And this company has reproduced them on cotton (and yes legally because of their age) . And someone, within the last 75 years (within copyright) and definitely since the advent of colour photography, has taken that photo and has rights to it. Which seems to be the exact some one, wrinkles, shadows and all, that appears on My Toy's product, with....wait for it...SAMPLE... plastered across it in red text, in case, oooh someone might copy it. How are the legs on that high horse? Getting a bit wobbly? So before I once again need to defend my SL business and merchant reputation from another personal attack in this forum - this time from LL's Queen Cheerleader, lets deal with the attack itself on this thread... Maybe Veronika is not aware of SL Merchant / Creator etiquette on best practices since she is not a merchant and doesnt know better.... her attacks on my SL business is simply an emotional childish knee jerk behavior. So I have let is slide in this forum thread and not filed an AR against her. But, for a fellow Merchant ... and moreso one that openly promotes herself to being beyond reproach on the SL Merchant forums and better then most other posting merchants and telling everyone else how immature and disruptive the rest of us are because we are critisizing her beloved LL... this blatent unprovoked attack on my SL products and business practices from a forum poster that was not even involved in this thread is completely the lowest form of behavior from a SL Merchant and a behavior that I will not tolerate. I rarely press the AR button on anyone even though I get frequent personal attacks, but I cant stand idle and allow a fellow merchant to attack my business and reputation. Now Zanara.... as for my defense on your attack of my oldest of products in my store (product I created 3.5 years ago when I was first learning to create products and my first products that got me into xstreet)... my 19 Castle Tapestries... 1) You are playing with semantecs of my wording??? The textures / images of tapestries are not ancient - any idiot knows that since textures didnt exist before a few decades ago. So you are laughing at something that pretty much everyone else knew what I was talking about? Wow are you smart. 2) The reason I put SAMPLE on my tapestries is that although the textured image on my tapestries are raw... I photoshopped / photomanipulated almost all of them to add the tapestry rods and ends onto the basic texture. But for a few exceptions, most of my tapestries have my own added rods to them to make it look more like a medieval castel tapestry. As such, I didnt want anyone copying my version of the tapestry image. Not because of copyright... because I wanted my work on the texture protected from others using it to sell a tapestry with my added rod. So... two final point... and its ironic but the attacks on my old castle tapestries by Veronika and now Zanara have been dismissed by the viewers of this thread since I have made more sales of my Tapestries in the last 2 days then I normally make in a month. The fact that your attacks on my business have helped my sales is no excuse for your unprofessional attacks on my business and reputation.

ROFL ohhh Zanara... it is so amazing how a forum posting like you that does all she can to look good in front of her beloved LL Gods.... would stoop to these levels in your post here and the one posting I will deal with very shortly on the other thread. So Zanara makes a lame unproven statement about how problems can best be resolved in LL - against the popular belief that JIRAs have been proven to be an utter joke.... and I give her a perfect challenge to prove herself and her statement on a perfect example of one of countless LL neglected JIRAs.... and how does Znara respond? 1) She doesnt take on my challenge (predicted as she knew full well that she her logic would fail) 2) She plays the typical lame debating trick of "a good defense is a strong offense" ... You get off the topic and start personally attacking me - once again. Purely Childish Zanara.... I guess my point has been clearly proven thanks to you. (now to deal with your more serious attack against me and my business on the other thread)

Sassy Romano wrote: Reality is that they will cherry pick the issues that they want to work on, whether motivated by problem size or commercials. They can fix all of the bugs in all of the JIRA's but there also comes a time that "new shiny" needs to be offered to attract interest. So given a choice between putting developer resource on completing some new functionality or fixing a 4 year old JIRA issue with ~30 watches, you can see why they effort goes elsewhere. I suppose on that JIRA issue the workaround is to rescale the texture outside of SL and import back again, which will work where the texture scale doesn't have to be dynamic. It is frustrating when a pet issue isn't fixed, we all have them, some do get fixed, others don't and that won't change, the only thing that's within our control is how we deal with the assumption that our pet JIRA won't be fixed. Anyway, the biggest message today is:- TO AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT ON VALENTINES DAY, IF YOU'RE BUYING A GIFT VIA MP, ORDER A WEEK EARLY!!! Exactly Sassy.... It really is the reason why the JIRA should remove / disable the WATCHES & VOTES function. All it is is a placeba put in by LL to make those LL customers that actually take the time and effort to report a bug to make them believe things will happen if their is enough support for it. So as LL ignores the JIRA... they know their customers will be distracted in trying to gather votes for some magical threshold of votes that doesnt exist. As for a pet bug being fixed or not.... there is a difference between being impatient for a bug to be fixed that you care about and one that basically is all but abandoned by LL. The least that LL could do if they had any care about serving their customer is to basically go to JIRAs that they clearly have no intention whatsoever to work on (a 4 year old bug would count) and close it with a message saying "we understand this is a bug but we do not have any intent to fix this bug - so please stop hoping that we will". The issue is that LL is a company made up of developers that only like working ont shiny new features and are completely bored fixing old bugs. Its not fun to fix existing features - no matter how much the customer wants it fixed. So they just keep putting it off and focus on the new features. You are right Sassy that there comes a time when shiny new features need to be focused on to attract new customers.... but with LL most of thier focus is on shiny new features. They have no balance between new and maintenance. Look at MP... LL put all their focus on getting an overhaul of Xstreet out the door. But once the rough system was deployed, they have spent almost NO effort fixing the missing functions ans features that the initial MP didnt address. Didnt matter that the merchants wanted them fixed. They have been ignored by the commerce group.

LOL so Zanara.... basically your response to my challenge is "No I wont take it on" Wise move because you know as well as I do that calm cool quiet diplomacy with LL to get a problem fixed has proven to be the most ineffective way to get LL to take action. The JIRA I showed you did not need any further Customer problem analysis. It has been proven and isolated and it is very well known what the bug is. This problem has just sat in the LL JIRA for over 4 years rotting. None of your quiet diplomacy and calm cool resolution and what ever else you suggested will get LL to work on this 4 year old JIRA. I know that. Most other LL Customers know that. And you know that. But again.... shut me up and prove me wrong Zanara and take on the challenge. Show everyone that LL is a customer service oriented business and this 4 year old jira was just handled poorly by us customers and that you have some secret better way to get this JIRA resolved by LL. This JIRA is stuck until LL finally agree to pick it up and fix it. Its a developer bug - LL knows it and they also know what the bug is. They just wont ever solve it.

That was very informative Chosen. Thanks for the background why mesh wasnt and likely wont me flexy path. Understanding the reason why makes sense... too bad though as Flexy has been a very useful feature to add easy environmental animation to SL. (i.e. trees flags etc.)

Veronika Garzo wrote: I hold copyright issues very high and I am fully aware of them and have had to learn the countless fine details of copyright both in making sure i protect my IP of my hand created landscape sculpt maps as well as and even moreso my growing involvement in the art industry. I do not want to alarm you, but I feel I should bring to your attention that your copyright is being infringed by a company who are selling your art/tapestries as their own!!!! Would you like me to tell Linden Labs about this or will you report it yourself to defend your IP rights? the items in question can be clearly seen with their own watermarks to protect from copying at this site:- http://www.worldwidetapestries.com/tapestry/godspeed.html and http://www.worldwidetapestries.com/tapestry/chenonceau-castle.html just for a couple of examples. LOL.... you really do need to stop putting your foot in your mouth so many times as it just makes you look foolish. And attacking me and my business as you hide your business and the background reason why this topic angers you so much. As for your recent attempt to attack my reputation and business, you were so excited to use my oldest products in my store as a juicy "I GOT YOU" to fling around on the forum..... what you failed to do is realize that the textures on my tapestries are ancient old textures who's copyrights have expired and are deemed PUBLIC DOMAIN. Since you are not aware what that means... it means that the texture has no copyright restrictions anymore .... are you wondering why you are finding many others that use these same textures? The other creator that is using the same texture for whatever he/she is using it for is not violating my copyright since not only is it not mine.... its no ones! Stop being so childish Veronika and focus on the topic.

Veronika Garzo wrote: Thank you so much for such a concise and logical response to this aspect of the thread. I do feel however, that without listed amendments, the buyer would be wise to take a screen shot at the point of purchase, if the terms are not the same when the pack is opened or not included. I would say be very careful and cover yourself from those that would charge you with infringement at a later date. I know this might sound cynical, but there is nobody else gonna help you out in this regard. The other issue is that some 'hide' terms and conditions in the policies section relating to their SLX profile, rather than displaying it or relating to it from within the listing itself. It would be so easy for most to miss this and then find they have spent money on an item that is not fit for purpose. I really do think the system sucks as it is!! Your analogy beautifully illustrates exactly how it is at present! WOW Veronika.... so after all your attacks and anger at my advice.... you are NOW 100% agreeing to what I tried to tell you right from the beginning??? You just now said and agree with everything I first told you... BE A SMART WELL AWARE BUYER! Too bad you had take us through all this anger and defensive attacks before you finally agreed with what I tried to tell you from my first post.

Nefertiti Nefarious wrote: Veronika Garzo wrote: What I ask of Linden Labs is some uniformity to listing policy in order that customers can find terms in a reasonably visible and accessible location. Further that those who purchase under one set of terms are not then confined by subsequent change made by sellers at a later date. I do not expect to have to result to such extremes to make what should effectively be a simple and straightforward transaction. Veronika -Here's how contract law works: If you purchase under one EULA and the creator later changes their terms, you are not bound to the new EULA for that product. Period! Any further purchases from that merchant would be under his/her new terms, but they can't retroactively change the terms for using your purchase. As for the "click wrap EULA" (with terms that are only accessible after you have purchased something), they are not enforceable. There are court rulings about it that say so! If I buy a box of textures where the listing says "full perms" with no restrictive text in the product description and there is a notecard in the box that says I can't use the textures to make/sell any items of a certain kind, or that compete with products sold by certain merchants ... it's not binding on me because they hid it where I couldn't see it before the purchase. I can say FOAD and there is nothing they can do. It would be like buying a box of gears and finding out when you open the box that they forbid you from using them in washing machines ... it is sooooooooo not enforceable. Yes Nefertiti, your points are correct and your example is correct but consider a few points: If I buy a box of physical gears and inside it forbids you from using it the way you intended, you can puts the gears back in the box and return it to the seller for a refund. i.e. both parties can cleanly back out of initially agreed transaction / contract. I give the gears back - you give me the money back. no residuals. This example does not fit well with a "license to use a creators IP copyright", specially one where the creator is putting a lot of trust in the buyer to honor the license because he/she is handing the buyer full perm content. A subsequent disagreement of the purchase does not allow for a clean backout of the transaction. BUT again, if the Creator wants to avoid alot of future hassle for angry customers - he/she should post some form of the usage agreement's intent in the pre-sales portion of purchase. Your point is correct that if a creator puts NO form of limited use restriction notice for the potential buyer to see prior to the purchase then the IP creator is asking for future hassles from his customers (as much as the buyer can potentially expect hassles from the content from the creator). BUT... if a creator places even a summarized version of the larger usage agreement that is in a notecard OR even if the creator states something as simple as "this content has usage restrictions - please content creator for more information", the buyer has been informed and is agreeing that he/she knew the content had limits and would agree to what ever the limits are... STUPID BUYING DECISION but the buyer still was notified prior to the sale and agreed. This is the type of scenarios that my initial advice was trying to suggest to Veronika and that she was so upset about as an idea. A smart and full aware buyer would either walk away from these bad situations or ask for full recorded clarity on the creator's usage limits. EVEN IF the creator has no stated restrictions, the smart buyer would assume there is potentially some restriction and would either walk away from these creators OR ask for more clarification. Is this a stupid concept?? Remember that we are all basically talking about business-to-business transactions here when we are talking about a buyer of SL ful perm CONTENT (not just sculpties) - i.e. buyers of full content for the intent to build with them and resell their builds to other customers. We are not talking about the transactions where a customer bought full perm content only for personal non-transferred use. This raises the stakes and impact to the BUYER decision on how he/she will use this other creator's IP content. So based on point #3, and knowing your example is correct and the buyer purchases a Creator's sculpties and then makes an amazing build and goes onto MP and sells tons of his/her builds.... then 6 months later the IP Creator comes back and says "take down all your content with my stuff in it since you are violating my content's limited use agreement in some way". You turn around and say "go to hell - you didnt properly inform me in advance so I dont have to abide by the agreement in the pack I bought".... Well even if you are correct Nefertiti, you know full well where an angry and/or unethical creator can take this argument. Arguments like "You contacted me prior to the purchase and I warned you" or "if immediately after purchasing my pack you read the notecard and understood my limited use agreement - you could have come back and asked for a refund but by subsequently using my sculpty maps and creating your own builds and reselling them - you agreed to the terms in the pack". These claims by the IP creator might or might not win in court.... but guess who is the person in this dispute with the most to lose? Not the creator... it will be the Buyer that established his/her own business operation from this ASSUMED NO AGREEMENT or INVALID AGREEMENT. Would a smart buyer/customer with the intent to buy full perm packs to build and resell want to rely upon interpretations of the law to protect their business model??? I think I can be safe to answer you... NO! Worse yet is if the IP Creator puts no usage restriction in their content at all - no before the buy and not in the pack. If there ever was a dispute after - the creator can say "I had an agreement in the pack and here is my copy of what was in it." and you as a buyer has nothing in writing with a date/time stamp (i.e. a notecard ) to debate with him. All you can say is "No you didnt have any notecard or anything about your limits". Guess which side in a court case has the edge on that.... the side with something in writing or the side with nothing in writing? Basically, this is what I have been trying to say all along in my postings.... The best protection any buyer of any full perms content can have to protect their own interests (ESPECIALLY those who intent to buy full perm content for resell) is to be a wise well informed buyer. I am shocked at how much negative response I have got for this common sense advice.

Zanara Zenovka wrote: History would indicate that more problems have been solved by intelligent people quietly working through a problem by collecting and examining evidence and testing rational theories, than by baying mobs waving pitchforks. Yes, you can apply political pressure to give a particular task a higher priority, but that doesn't change the evidence and processing requirements of scientific method. OK Zanara, I'm sorry but that statement is only true coming from those that are generally "friends of LL Staff". But I am gonna give you a chance to proof to me and everyone else that you are right. Here is the JIRA that is over 4 years old. It has been posted it has been watched and voted upon. It has had countless pressure placed upon it. It is CLEARLY a bug and can be repeated countless times over and over. It is... https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-4018 Here is your chance to prove me and lasher and everyone else that does not believe you that you are right. Take this 4 year old Jira and use your "intelligence" and work "quietly" through the problem to get LL to work a Jira that no one else has been able to get to action. You can shut me up 100% on this topic if you can show me how you can use a calm rational approach to get this long standing problem resolve. I am pretty sure that you will either back down from this challenge because you know full well that what you are sayin has little truth or you will fail trying. 

Cherry Charlesworth wrote: Thanks again for your informative comments, again duly noted. Please once again dont judge an avatar by its age you really do not know who your talking to. I speak from my own personal experiences be in no doubt of that. Do you have to earn your stripes to be able to have an opinion. Congratulations on running a sucessful, in your opinion business in Sl. Well done! I am delighted you make a healthy cash flow from your business you are obviously a fine citizen. One to lead by example. I am interested to see you chose to ignore the Copyright issues raised in my previous posts. As a fellow Artist i applaud you and your unique creativity. As you say you have many happy customers, for your customer service and creativity. I hold copyright issues very high and I am fully aware of them and have had to learn the countless fine details of copyright both in making sure i protect my IP of my hand created landscape sculpt maps as well as and even moreso my growing involvement in the art industry. I am not sure what response you wanted from me. But this is getting off the OP topic. None of what you have introduced into this thread changes the debate on if LL should be mandating TOS changes on user agreements for SL items sold vs if it makes more sense that the buyer just be more aware on protecting their own interests when buying full perm content - assumed for the purpose of building with it and reselling this content. I stand by my position that : Hoping LL will change their TOS to force merchants to be more clear on IP rights that are not LL's responsibility in the first place is just wishful thinking - they wont consider the idea... ever. Since Veronika's idea wont realistically fly, my suggestion stands that the BUYER of creator content (specially full perms) is the best option to protect the buyer. I gave her very clear examples of how a Buyer can protect themselves against unethical creators (which she dimissed angrily) I suggested to her that she should not assume all creators are out to screw her and that she should proactively communicate with SL creators that could use improvements and just dont know. I suggested that the best form of improving the situation she seems so angry about is to Speak with her Feet. Dont buy from any merchants that dont openly offer the agreement information she is looking for in the way she wants the agreement to be. A merchant losing business has the most powerful effect on changing their business operations. No where did I dispute any rights she had as a PayPal customer asking for a cancelling of a payment transaction. In fact if she has a valid argument that she was "ripped off" by a fellow merchant, she should open a ticket with LL directly. But.....I was pointing some of the ramifications to her paypal idea. Are you saying my points were wrong? I would like to hear how my points were wrong? Anyway... this discussion is no longer of value to me. You Veronika and Mickey can all go back to agreeing with each other and not worry that any countering points will be brought up for you all to get upset about. Enjoy your group think love-in thread.

Thanks Made for posting the video. It was very informative. Also explains why the ACTA that was created by the Music and Movie industry and secretly rammed into Governement hands to get signed in laws is being hidden from public inspection. they know full well that the outcry would be overwhelming like it was with SOPA. Thansk again Made

So talk about hiding and not being virginal... ."Cherry Charlesworth" steps in completely out of the blue - she has never been seen before in the SL forums until today's whopping first 5 posts in her entire life on the SL Forums. Who knows where she came from or her personal intent for stepping in NOW on this thread, Hmmm interesting. You really dont have much to stand on Cherry with regard to any reputation in any way with a whopping 5 posts in the entire history of SL Forums interaction. What SL MP or inworld store do you run? How long have you been a merchant in SL? What position of experience do you speak from? My SL business is well known and can stand proudly on its own. How bout you? Lets also be clear here Cherry (or whomever you are behind this new Cherry account), your posts are accusing me and my business practices in SL or RL of being corrupt and unethical? Are you threatening me? If so... be clear of your accusations right here and now. If you are going to make threats - be clear so I can take action to protect my reputation against your accusations. Instead of you and Veronika dealing with counter points to Veronika's initial finger pointing anger at the full perm sculpty creators, you focus your anger at anyone that counter pointed you. I disagreed with Veronika's position and provided her a more realistic approach. Her response was vile anger at me personally for having the nerve to suggest SHE was responsible for protecting her interests on IP Usage Agreements. All your points Cherry... you are so all over the map you didnt even realize that many of your points I never even argued about. Try the approach of not coming out of SL Forums nowhere to defend someones honor that didnt need defending... and try focusing on the topic. I have been running a business in SL since 2008 - longer than your avatar has existed on SL. I have well over a 1000 customers in SL made up of some of SL's best known builders, landscapers, artist. I have a 100% satisfaction from my customers and even get countless rave word of mouth positive compliments and recommendations from my amazing customers. I provide and am proud of the amazing pre and post sales service. And I make a very healthy positive cash flow from my business and the reputation I have established in SL over the years. So if you are making accusations upon me or my business in SL... make it clear now and stop beating around the bush.

Thats pretty sad Faye that LL is trying to mute customer concerns in the forums. We are within forum posting TOS. We are posting content / topics that fall within the Forum group. And our topics are of interest to others in the group. Yet LL removes threads anyway?

From reading... seems like ACTA and all the Government signatories of ACTA have sworn to secrecy about the details of the act that they have signed onto to. Several attempts have been made to release the details of ACTA but all have failed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement So how can an act to protect against supposedly criminal activity be so secret that it cant be openly revealed and scrutinized by the public? From the wiki publication linked above, here is what happened when the US Government was challenged to release the ACTA details... United States Both the Bush administration and the Obama administration had rejected requests to make the text of ACTA public, with the White House saying that disclosure would cause "damage to the national security."[94] In 2009, Knowledge Ecology International filed a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request in the United States, but their entire request was denied. The Office of the United States Trade Representative's Freedom of Information office stated the request was withheld for being material "properly classified in the interest of national security."[95] US Senators Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) penned a letter on 23 November 2009, asking the United States Trade Representative to make the text of the ACTA public. So Rene.... how does ACTA affect the Internet and SecondLife? Who knows if you dont know the details of the act.

Maybe you and Veronika should grow a thicker skin and not be so defensive. If you look at my first postnig here .... my suggestions were that the responsibilities of making sure a buyer of content - especially one that has the intent to use the Seller's content to resell as part of their new content - clearly rests in the hands of the buyer. My initial response was to her posting that was painting an abusive picture of all full perm sculpty creators - as if we as a whole carry on a bad practice ... one that needs added protection from an authority like LL and their TOS. Even though I was angry at her pointed wild swing anger post of "being ripped off" by us full perm sculpty creators, my response was in the light of telling her that LL legislation was not valid and better buying practices are the better and more viable approach. It is then that Veronika - instead of considering my point - took offence to it. This started the bitter defensive posts from her. Dont believe me - its all in writing. I will not stand by and let someone degrade the reputation of my category of SL business because she had some bad past experience and made a poor buying decision with a less that reputable merchant. As for your responses Cherry.... really not worth responding to as you did not even read my post from what you posted. PS... a creator does not post a TOS.... LL does. As for the rest of your points... go back and read my responses to her PayPal idea then try to formulate a more on the mark response.

First of all, my business is not on trial here. If you are truly a customer or potential customer of mine and you have questions, do what my product listings suggest you do... contact me directly inworld. Stange how you your postings of "bring ripped off" and anger at LL and the pull perms creators and merchants is percieved by you to be postings of common sense reasonable posted commentary but my responses to your weak thought out concepts is deemed by you to be "diatribe" and "vitriole". Is this how you feel you will win over debate of your concepts? Here is an idea... instead of flinging no-value posted statements attacking the poster.... why dont you focus on the content I am responding to you. Answer my comments on if it is still wise to shop by PayPal. Answer my responses that explains why LL TOS is not something to be dismissed. Answer my question to you on if you are prepared to be counter sued by the IP creator that you must have made $L / $US revenue from by using his/her content as part of your re-selling products. You must be a content creator and reseller of products that includes products from us full perms sculpty creators because no other customer would have any issues with the usage agreements of our content and that the terms might have changed out from under you. The only possible customer of ours that would be so deeply concerned is on that has bought out content and made 10 - 100 times even more revenue from it than the 1 sale we got from you. If you are a re-builder and re-seller of our sculpty products then shame on you for not looking out for your own interests if you planned to make your own revenue from our content. I would not consider your relationship with us full perm sculpty makers to be a Business - to - EndCustomer relation.... it is a Business to Business relationship. As such, YOU as a fellow business should be more aware than any end-customer that only intends to use our products for personal use. YOU as a fellow SL business should know the impacts of making a poor decision of entering into a relationship with another creator where your intent is to resell his/her content to others. It impacts your business and even legal standing BIG TIME if you dont make a wise fully-aware decision. Why? because if there is a dispute later.... the content creator is the IP rights hold and if it ever went to court, you might get your $3 or $5 US back from the Creator for the sale he made from you but you will be legally liable to pay him back a portion of each sale you made with his content. Who do you think should have the greatest incentive to ensure his/her rights to the seller's content than a reseller of than creator's content? YOU. So if we are here to expose intents... the question goes to you.... Are you a buyer of other creator's full perms content for the intent of building more complex content and reselling that content? Are you ranting about this topic because in your past (I assume recently) you got burned by a ful perms sculpty creator (you seemed to focus on our category when there are several other full perm content creators that would have the same issue) and it is now impact the validity of the content you are selling on the market because of this poor agreement you initially got into with this creator? If so I am assuming you would not be posting using your actual Merchant account. That might not be a wise thing to do if this was the case. Something is the root cause to your anger and it must be a big issue.

You seem to believe and are infuriated by others throwing the LL TOS in your face. The LL TOS does not override any federal regulations - if it did then LL would be hauled to court for promoting and operating an environment that violates the laws of the land they run their business in. TOS is LL's interpretation and local expansion upon any and all Government laws they must abide by themselves. It does not contradict it. But, TOS is the final layer of rules that Merchants of the MP service must abide by. As such, the responsibility and authority of how a merchant operates a store on MP and even inworld is purely dictated by LL's TOS. So stop getting so upset about semantics of LL TOS vs Federal laws. In fact LL TOS has more universal level playing field enforecement then a US federal law. Since I am Canadian, US Federal law has no direct meaning to me but I must abide by LL TOS or else I cannot sell on MP. Does that make more sense. As for your example on using paypal to buy MP goods and executing your right to get a refund if you could prove you have been ripped off by an evil merchant in SL. I guess you could follow that practice - specially if you could prove to PayPal that you actually were decieved by a merchant on LL's MP and you want your $3US back. and it would give you an added sense of control for you and make you feel better when shopping in SL. But, a few things to point out with that strategy: Buying products with Real $ accounts will inflate your costs of shopping since LL charges about 30% more for a REAL $ account transaction then a $Linden purchase. You still need to prove to PayPal that you were duped. This means writing them and opening up a transaction dispute. Then PayPal needs to contact the Merchant to get their side of the story (I have gone through this with PayPal as a buyer wanting $ back from an online reseller). Then finally PayPal will make a decision. All this for $3US? Really? Pertaining to point #2... who does PayPal contact and how? Does Paypal set up a SL Avatar account so they can IM the merchant? Does Paypal delegate the investigation over to LL? We all know how long LL takes to settle disputes. Since you bought full perms virtual content... not actual physical product that you can return and not retain a copy of - how do you honestly return the content you bought from the Merchant if the $ is refunded? The Merchant is entitled to his/her content back but you know full well that with full perm there is no way to assure that you have no access to a remaining copy of it. By you getting your refund - the sale transacation has been reversed an the corresponding userage agreement between the IP holder and you the buyer has ended. Finally, related to point 4, how will you remove all other instances of the licensed content you yourself created with this merchant's licensed content and distributed to all your customers? Your creations that were built and resold to others with his/her creation in it is now in violation of his IP rights - as stated in another federal law. So now YOU are in violation of a law unless you can get all your customers to delete their copies of your builds with his/her content in it. In fact by you cancelling the transaction and ending your rights to his IP, you have just done him a big favor. He can now take you to court for damages and seek to get a portion of all revenue you made from all sales of your content with his IP content in it. So.... do you want to do this? So you see... nothing is black and white Veronika.... The best solution is to be a wise and full aware buyer and try to encourage good practice of being a merchant by rewarding good merchants with your business and punish bad merchants by not giving them your business. And I will repeat myself again... SL is loaded with a lot of non-business types as merchants. Most just want to be creators and would like to make a bit of $ on the side for what they created. Dont pre-judge everyone that they are out to screw you. Take the time to IM them and educate them with what you would like to see them do regarding usage agreements. If they hear it enough times - they will change their operations.

I summarize the main intent of my usage agreement to the potential buyer since the notecard agreement is much longer to deal with interpretations and most LL distribution systems did not have a convenient way of making large formats of this information easily available without it dominating the entire limited space to actually focus on the product itself. And as you pointed out yourself, I openly invite any potential customer to contact me for more information or to ask questions or to address any concerns they might have prior to deciding if they wish to buy. And ultimately, if I cannot satisfy their concerns then they do have their full right to just not agree to buy my product. I can tell you in the 3 years I have been selling content inworld and xstreet and MP... I think I can count on one hand the number of times a customer has ever contacted me to even ask further questions or ask to clarify the usage agreement message that I provide in my listings. AND... I will tell you that of those 3 or 4 times, NOT ONCE has anyone said "you usage agreement is too vague for me to understand" or "I think you should openly post the entire agreement on your listing". So... I run my business based on demands that would improve the satisfaction of my customer's experience. Other than you generally posting here that all sculpty merchants need regulation because we are here to rip you off, I generally dont make major changes to my business operation or start a lot of effort restructuring all my inworld and MP listings and marketing because of 1 person that has a general sore spot on how all merchants should be more regulated. What I have in place clearly is more then acceptable - as clearly has been proven by my actual customer experience. If you are a potential customer of mine and you IM me and ask for what ever information you have for a specific product (as different products have different usage agreements - its not a STORE POLICY), then please IM me and I would be happy to provide you further clarification and even a copy of the agreement in question. I dont see a whole hord of your fellow customers on these forums posting here in strong agreement with you that the full perm sculpty industry is in bad need of LL reform and added controls. If that were true then maybe you could get LL to see the light and have LL mandate new controls. PS - you are right we dont all live in the US... I am one of them. PPS - If you feel what I provide you is not good enough for you - the sure - dont buy from me. The good part is that I have a ton of other customers that love my product and have never expressed any concern for my usage agreement or how I present it prior to them selling. MY agreement is very common for full perm items and the summary pretty much already spells out the general intent.

Lasher Oh wrote: I prefer to preserve what semblance of sanity I have left rather than accelerate the the degradation process by collaborating in the messy hell hole they call a Jira. The whole Jira system is a confused farce and a PR con created to make it look as if LL are paying heed to bug reports whilst systematically doing what they have always done - mainly , address those issues they feel like dealing with. I've observed over the years that the best way to get LL to react to a problem is to kick up an unholy stink everywhere else - so that it is both embarrassing and impossible for them to ignore. The quicker the Jira farce is disassembled the better - but I won't be holding my breath for that. ^L^ Your solution on the best hope on how to get LL to respond to a problem or work on a new feature wanted/needed by us is exactly what I have been saying for a long time. In fact I mentioned that to Mickey in another JIRA-Promoting thread that is active now. I said that all the votes in the world will not be the factor that makes LL decide if they will or will not put effort behind a JIRA. Nor will the age of a Jira (hence my poster child 4 year old JIRA that to date has not been action). LL has their own internal priorities on which Jira they will focus on and over the years of me being here it has become clear that the method with the highest success ratio is the method you just said. PUBLICLY EMBARRASS LL ON A BUG THAT SHOULD BE FIX. My 4 year old JIRA was not even looked at by a LL support person until it was 3.5 years old and only because I went on a campaign to tell anyone that would listen in Twitter and these forums (tweeted Rod directly) how embarrassing it is for a bug that impacts the user experience of most users in one way or another has not even been looked at for 3.5 years. I also talked to my friends at Phoenix who also agreed and hated this long standing bug and said they would investigate the possible root cause. Then I flung that PR around that a 3rd party has to solve LL's own problems The campaign sorta worked as Rod must have quietly told Oz Linden to make a presence on the Jira and make it look like LL was finally going to do something about the bug. Oz asked for our help on showing him the bug (which is very easy to do). We showed him... but sadly that was the last we heard of Oz or LL since. But.... the point I wanted to make was that only through LL embarrassment can you get LL to take action. The Jira system itself is exactly what Dart said.... a placebo. Ohhh.... to promote my poster child JIRA... It is... https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-4018

OK folks.... i stayed up and at 2:20am her stuff all showed up.... 53 minutes after she bought the items Guess LL didnt fix the problem between midnight and 5am

DONT ALL GET SO EXCITED....... At 1:27am slt my friend bought from MP via Shopping Cart with multiple items (5) from multiple merchants. All the items are dollarby items. The money was taken already... as u can see the TX details 02/04/2012 01:27:24 5ee076d0 Destination: Commerce Linden MKT2 Item Purchase Description: Order #1289388545 L$13 It is now 2:15am SLT (updated the time on this post as i kept wating) and none of the items have showed up. She said..."it will time out like it has on Jan 25th and Jan 30th." And it might end up timing out - gave up waiting... but INSTANT DELIVERY??..... sorry folks... seems the late night delviery delay is still alive and well on MP.