Kampu Oyen

I'm pretty sure that proves that the MadMen5 image used to be part of the Second Life Marketplace front page, and that the image now used is the same. No? I seriously think it's way past time to shut down that promotion. Every day it continues, the person who is trying to hide the connection to Mad Men is just digging herself into a deeper hole.

In fact, check this out... http://www.google.com.co/imgres?q=5424408+Mad+Men+5&um=1&hl=es&sa=X&rlz=1C1SNNT_enCO408CO408&biw=1366&bih=611&tbm=isch&tbnid=m4Si2hiYCjUq8M:&imgrefurl=https://marketplace.secondlife.com/%3Fname%3DMarketplace%26file%3Dindex%26Favorites%3D1%26lang%3Des-ES&docid=bNYy8bH43MkyFM&imgurl=https://d1ij7zv8zivhs3.cloudfront.net/assets/5424408/original/MadMen5.jpg%253F1334696563&w=700&h=275&ei=riisT_T1AsWOgwfH-vTAAQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=51&vpy=56&dur=444&hovh=141&hovw=358&tx=72&ty=164&sig=111337807164410179178&page=1&tbnh=55&tbnw=139&start=0&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0,i:68

http://www.google.com.co/search?rlz=1C1SNNT_enCO408CO408&q=5424408+MadMen5&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=es&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=8iasT9uTCYKo8QTFwZ0a&biw=1366&bih=643&sei=9SasT_uvAcW9gAfgwOmEAw Yes, the search link goes to a Tribe.net thread. But the thread doesn't include the image thumbnailed on Google image search. It comes up as thumbnailed because Google indexed it and thumbnailed it before the image was pulled off of the MadMen5 link shown on the Tribe.net link. So, what can I say? It's still there as far as Google is concerned. Maybe if someone were asked nicely, someone could delete the Tribe.net thread. Hmmm...

It's more of a trademark issue than a copyright issue. And, yes, there is an abundance of dubious IP practice in SL, as in many other parts of the internet. Nothing special about that, per se. LL shouldn't be setting this kind of example, though, much less continuing to set it by allowing the promotion to continue after the cat's out of the bag.

My frustration has almost nothing at all to do with my own sales as such. My sales (not on this account) are acceptable on the whole. My frustration has to do with the fact that I see what is probably just one person being allowed to gradually cripple SL's growth potential by variously botching every visible aspect of what that person is doing. I don't criticize because I think Linden Labs owes me a pile of money. They don't. I criticize because Second Life used to be real awesome cutting-edge stuff and attracted some people with real creative and etrepreneurial skills who were driven to make stuff as much for the sake of making it as for making it profitable, and yet, somehow, other platforms that seem to be designed for teens to pretend to be cooler than they believe they are in RL are starting to surpass Second Life in terms of the comparatively consistent value they provide to people of other ages as well. It's like someone at LL just doesn't want SL to succeed, and they've either decided to gradually break everything, or they've decided to employ someone who does that, and won't fire that person, no matter what. It's maddening sometimes, sure. But, mostly, it's just plain SAD.

That's definitely happening, too. Just not with this particular account. Of course, we'll all lose some sales tomorrow when the market gets shut down for some kind of unspecified "deploy". It seems like it shouldn't take them a whole hour just to scrub all evidence of the MadMen5 link off of their system, but I guess they might like to be extra-sure about it or something.

Well, they deleted the image from the link, but the link, itself, is still there, and it still says "MadMen5". I wonder what kind of explanation they're preparing for Lion's Gate Entertainment in terms of: A) why a such-named link even exists if not to be connected in some way to the "Madstyle" promotion B) what other than the same image currently being used to promote "Madstyle" would have been in the now blank link C) why so many people believe they saw the same image on the same link, and not anything different from that image D) how I would have been able to pull up the link in the first place, if not by clicking on the Madstyle promotional image on the Marketplace front page Nonetheless, I suppose they are at least beginning to follow my damage control instructions, so I might as well make with a more complete checklist, in case they want to get a jump on the rest of the process... 1) get the MadMen5 link off of the Marketplace front page DONE 2) get the image shown on the Marketplace front page out of the MadMen5 link DONE 3) shut down the whole Madstyle promotion and replace it with - well- practically any other word that is not as legally dangerous. The word "and" comes to mind, although "shoes" or even "pants" might actually work better. If they want a word for which they can blame me in case something goes wrong, though, I can only offer "museum" (you're welcome). 4) terminate with prejudice the person ultimately responsible for creating this problem in the first place 5) issue an official public apology to Lion's Gate Entertainment, to fans of the TV show Mad Men, to Second Life users as a group, and to Second Life Marketplace merchants, more specifically

Well tomorrow is a "deploy", which means they'll probably tell us what it was only if it works. Really, I'm sort of OK with that. What I'm hoping it will be is the rest of the permissions support for DD. What I fear it will be is just another box system bork, attached to maybe some way for people to search in-world shops by using the Marketplace website.

No, they shouldn't. Someone else should be flagging them, though, just as the whole promotion should be flagged. Sort of a moot point now, though, since a take-down notice for the whole thing is most likely in the works anyway. Maybe it's extra-complicated to send a fax to San Francisco from North Vancouver, BC?

>WHAT NEXT,anyone have anything else to try,ill keep trying everything What else? I suppose you could just admit that they've beaten you and pay for some land in order to move all your business in-world.

Still no action? You guys might want to consider picking up the pace a little bit (not that I think it will ultimately help, but... you know). For one thing, it's probably just a matter of a few hours before the Google spiders start to bite on this: http://tribes.tribe.net/secondlifemarketplaceproductsearch/thread/f66b9216-9db9-436e-ba7a-b7f8809b2cbe?newpostingid=cbd0fd3d-e556-422c-b1ff-dd98863384e9#cbd0fd3d-e556-422c-b1ff-dd98863384e9

>Linden Speak can be as hard to decipher as Klingonese or Ferengi. That's why I compare what they've previously said to what they've previously done in order to make sense of what they say they are going to do. What you can expect, based on the prevailing pattern of precedents: On 1 June, boxes will be disabled while breedables and items of similar permissions will still not be supported by DD.

Before you all start pushing for a dental plan and free donuts on your coffee breaks, the first thing you should try to organize to accomplish is just to get LL to honor its own end of the service agreement as it currently exists. If what already exists is unenforceable, there's no point in asking for anything else. One of my long-term hopes for SL is that someone (me?) will eventually be able to create a sim environment where people can donate $L to a smorgasbord of various nonprofit organizations. It seems to me that as a first step to that, we might be able to create a nonprofit corporation inside the State of California specifically dedicated to providing a legal incentive to LL to keep its nose clean in terms of how it treats users, and the funds for such a nonprofit could be raised inside SL. Why would anyone at LL like this idea enough to allow it to happen? They should like it because they should recognize that in a consequence-free environment, normal people will simply tend not behave as well. And they should like it because, really, most of them would probably prefer to work with subordinates and/or superiors who really, ultimately can be held accountable for things that are ethically dubious. LL already polices users. That is, they already police the people who put food on the table for them. So if users haven't already done more to protect LL from its own misbehavior by providing some kind of system of real consequences, part of the blame might be said to fall on the users. Everyone, at some point, eventually, needs help to decide to do the right thing. Maybe we haven't helped LL enough, and maybe a legal fund specifically for holding LL accountable to users is one of the kinds of help we could offer.

I understand that "not before" could also mean "after" or "never". With LL's previous use of language, though, it would be more consistent either with "any time after 11:59 PM on 31 May, but only once we've had time to first deploy all the associated borks that will make it sort of a moot point". And by "will not require", I suppose they could also mean "will gladly allow to go out of business anyone who choses not to comply", which could mean a shutoff date before 1 June, even assuming that the whole statement isn't of the same degree of credibility as that in which Brooke told us that no DD code would be deployed without advanced notice to merchants (see 13 September 2011 incident).

The "MadMen5" link is still there, guys. https://d1ij7zv8zivhs3.cloudfront.net/assets/5424408/original/MadMen5.jpg?1334696563 So just go ahead and delete that too, I guess. You're welcome for the heads up on that. As for getting everyone to pretend they never saw it or didn't understand what it signifies, I don't see how I can help with that, sorry.

>This is too funny. I checked out the image just now and it is now relabelled as 'MadStyle.jpg'. Yes. Brilliant. Maybe that would even have some value with Lion's Gate Entertainment's legal department if LL had bothered to also delete the previous link, which you can still see here, much as at the top of the this thread: https://d1ij7zv8zivhs3.cloudfront.net/assets/5424408/original/MadMen5.jpg?1334696563

>Don't you have anything to do at all? Other than my 2 day jobs, not all that much, actually. I used to have 5. What do you need done? Studio orchestration? Spanish lessons? Show you how to extract a kidney stone from halfway up a p3n1s for free by using a tool improvised from a large paperclip?

It wasn't vague at all. It was ambiguous, but only in terms of being derivative of Mad Men or not being derivative of Mad Men. And now it is not ambiguous, either.

You know, maybe it's just coincidence, but some of those images for companies I can't find on the SLM are for companies that are turning up just fine on websites that compete with the SLM. Why would such stuff be stored along with an image provided to LL for an SLM promotion? I'm sure it's perfectly innocent, so please just explain it to me.

While I'm at it, let me just point out what else is inside the mystery box with the MadMen5 image... https://d1ij7zv8zivhs3.cloudfront.net/assets/5424408/original/MadMen5.jpg?1334696563 (cut to) https://d1ij7zv8zivhs3.cloudfront.net/ I'm no programmer, but if you grab the text strings starting with "asset" and paste them into the MadMen5 image URL, so that "asset" is in the same position as before, you'll see some interesting stuff. (example) https://d1ij7zv8zivhs3.cloudfront.net/assets/1000124/original/3d14c320625c6d2d239c88a7997060ee.jpg Maybe I'm not a very smart person, so help me out here, please. I haven't checked every single one yet, but why are so many of these images for a small group of product lines I have trouble tracking down on SLM or in-world, except for "Nyte'N'Day" ? Can someone please explain this to me?

> I find it hard to believe that a company would act this way intentionally Of course. Which is why any responsible company would at least have denied by now that the anti-merchant outcomes are intentional.

>Because there are certain individuals on this forum that will go to any extreme to prosecute a vendetta against LL. I don't think it's vendetta against LL to repeatedly point out rock-solid reasons why they need to remove one specific person from a position where that person is destroying untold thousands of dollars of brand value on what may even be a daily basis at this point. I think it's being their best friend, actually. >Just why did posts go from actual Lindens names to now the undefined Commerce Team Linden. Simply because Brooke lied, and the fact that she lied was documented. If she wanted to keep lying under her own name, I suppose she could have done that. No one outside LL did anything to force her to start hiding. >Why would they post more information when every time they post something the pitch forks are raised and the theories begin to fly. That would be what responsible, proactive companies call "rumor control". Of course if all they have to offer as "rumor control" is a bunch of lies, maybe they might do better to stay quiet until they come up with anything true that happens to be to their favor. Just like you, I'm eager to hear what else they may have. >I mean think about we have at least one person out that actively is/was trying to get people to sue LL, posting the address of the jurisdiction of where to file court cases in the Jira etc. It's appropriate civil recourse for a civil wrong. If provided sooner rather than later, it may go down as bitter medicine, but it might also be a lot better than allowing the patient to continue sickening himself. > Why would LL start communicating more effectively in that environment? Because they should realize that, on at least enough of the most important points, the specific critic is dead correct, and that they should start taking more seriously criticism offered by that person before LL passes some kind of misbehavior singularity threshold from which there is effectively no way to turn back. >When you know there are people trying to twist each and every little thing you do? What is twisted and what is not twisted is what they need to step up and explain. So far, they have contested NOTHING, ANYWHERE. There is no "twist" to the statement that Brooke lied about the 13 September deployment, and there is no "twist" to the statement that the name "MadMen5" will meet the burden of proof in the question of whether the Madstyle promotion is derivative of the Mad Men television program.

> I never heard of before. This is the ONLY thing I can imagine would enable you to fail to see it as derivative.

>You claimed they shut down all of the market place because of your post? No no conspiracy theories here . . . . lol I claimed "they" were specifically not allowing me to access one web page. "They" being a group of people who would otherwise normally allow it. That's not a conspiracy unless you construe the same "they" all to be in on it, which I did not suggest. Build the biggest straw man you like and you'll still have a straw man. None of this is material to the original point of this thread and you know it.

>I can perhaps see that they didn't think this all the way through Well, they at least didn't think through to anyone possibly looking at the name they gave to the image, so, that, alone, suggests they could have acted stupidly enough to produce other problems unintentionally, sure.