Alicia Sautereau
-
Posts
1,416 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Alicia Sautereau
-
-
Drongle McMahon wrote:There are some with large businesses that will be seriously affected by the changes. I would be surprised if they have not already thoroughly involved their attorneys. In that case, those attorneys will surely have told them not to say anything in public. So the silence may be a sign of action, not of inaction.
We can always hope some one will share the answer
I`m curious as hell lol
-
Not much to say about the ToS besides trying to find a hole in it, it ultimately depends on a few people who are or have an attorney to nitpick all the possible twists that can be found to nullify it and report back to the community.
-
Perrie Juran wrote:Alicia Sautereau wrote:No problem
You said that you and others wrote on that real contract that you were forced to sign it.As that isn`t possible with the ToS, maybe the complaints and the texture sites removing SL specific usage, maybe some judge will see it the same way as that legal document that was signed under force.Ofcourse this would only work for old items and not for any new ones, but maybe it`s enough of a bone to throw to a judge that every one is being held hostage, same as the tenant example.
A Judge will recognize you couldn't "write" on the TOS.However, his next question might be did you contact LL as explained in the TOS."All notices given by you or required under this Agreement shall be faxed to Linden Lab Legal Department at: (415) 243-9045; or mailed to us at: Linden Lab Legal Department, 945 Battery Street, San Francisco, CA 94111."Reasonable expectations could come in to play here. Gets interesting.:matte-motes-wink-tongue:
Will all rich merchants with their own lawyers with alot to lose please step forward and send a few faxes for the sake of virtual humanity?
:matte-motes-bashful-cute-2:
* edit *
Disclaimer: I only make stupid requests in the weekend. (usually)
I guess the best assistant lawyer is a clueless nub with commen sense to ask and twist points to a point that the point becomes a hole :matte-motes-nerdy:
Think I`ll start thinking about looking for a new job...
-
No problem
You said that you and others wrote on that real contract that you were forced to sign it.
As that isn`t possible with the ToS, maybe the complaints and the texture sites removing SL specific usage, maybe some judge will see it the same way as that legal document that was signed under force.Ofcourse this would only work for old items and not for any new ones, but maybe it`s enough of a bone to throw to a judge that every one is being held hostage, same as the tenant example.
-
As that can`t be done when accepting the new ToS, I think all the threads and the permission revaking from CG would qualify of the hostage situation some are expiriencing to prove it`s a pita in court when it is a grab on pre ToS date uploaded content.
Never knew of that duress word, kind of a neat way to say you got royaly screwed on a legal document lol
-
Not so strange
-
Just helped a guy with a small scripting problem and started to think how even helping out some one is affected by the ToS.
As he doesn`t gives much about aswell, he agreed to keep my little joke in the modified script:
/* Terms of Service of modified code/* This script has been modified by Alicia Sautereau./* Any modification is strickly forbidden by Linden Lab employees or it`s owner(s)./* Distribution limited solely to _______________ with limited rights to modify as needed./* __/__/____/* Unlicensed distribution of this code will be prosecuted to the full extend of the law within the United States of America and the European Union.
Knowing it will never see the daylight with LL, but couldn`t resist to start sticking it to them and it will most likely hold up in court as much as their own ToS, but ffs, I`ve got to try
ps; I know, spelling errors and the header doesn`t makes much sense, joke in progress
-
Not to mention that with materials coming, content will start to be up to par (with creators who know what they are doing
) -
Marigold Devin wrote:shan Ampan wrote:I do not expect forgivness Summer,I have not earened that..I said some harsh and cruel things and for that I am truly sorry..as for tracking you down,as we live sort of localy I just wanted to meet you and explain myself to you,for as you know there is much for me to explain.
This is creepy now. Months have passed and you have not moved on? Are you stalking Summer? Desist. At once. Move on.Creepy is an understatement.
* Redacted while editing *
Would have been a violation :matte-motes-evil:
-
Most likely implementing a new ToS to the payment gateway that they have the right to use your credentials as they see fit, ontop of your IP rights hehe
-
By me quoting you, you grant me all permissions to add/modify/delete/copy/repost your text to as I see fit.
I just pulled a Linden Loop, now every one is paranoid with no date, blank permissions and if only a handful of people read it (like the ToS changes) then they are sh!t out of luck.
Good example right? I wonder if it will stick with the forum part of the ToS hehe
-
Cerise Sorbet wrote:Rya Nitely wrote:Even if it only applies to new content, all those full perm items such as animations, scripts, textures, mesh, sculpties etc can no longer be used in a new creation unless the original creator agrees to the new ToS.right?
Rights to older or outside-created stuff isn't theirs to claim, period. Including such stuff in your builds would be a pretty efective way to poison them against these doomsday scenarios.If it`s true that it`s only with new content
The headache lol
-
/kills quote
That`s why I`m doubting that Chosen would be in trouble when accepting the new ToS, aslong as she won`t accept new contracted work, she should be fine to tie up lose ends or continue on a personal level as it does not affect her previous contracts and content created under it, only future work.
I can pretty much nitpick on everything to a point of annoyance =)
-
IvanBenjammin wrote:Often when it comes down to the wire, what's 'legal' is what holds up in court. There have been a number of cases in the US and elsewhere where EULAs (Those agreements you click 'agree' to when installing anything) have been ruled to be invalid. But then the software company appeals the decision, and it becomes lawyer-war...It is more complicated with international law, although in theory everyone who uploads content to US servers is bound by US law.Its also worth pointing out again that LL claims 'non-exclusive' rights. Not much of a consolation to scripters are other creators whose work is very SL-specific, but it does at least mean they're not able to take away your rights to continue selling your work on your own terms.
I`m starting to dislike this cross posting lol
The new ToS might be legal and all with new items, but like Chosen`s case (and all merchants), can LL implement such a ToS that it also affects all past created content and to make it worse, with no warning about such a drastic change if they claim everything since SL`s first day now falls under it.
No lawyer here either, but some grains of commen sense says that it can`t be legal and only applied to newly created content (if that holds is another story)
-
Perrie Juran wrote:Drake1 Nightfire wrote:I've been saying since the start of this that the new ToS isn't leagal. Somehow that makes me a troll in some eyes.. Thanks for the support from both you and Darrius.
I don't think you are a Troll.I just think you don't understand "content rights."Do you understand the difference between exclusive and non-exclusive rights? Do you understand the difference between a limited and an unlimited right? With all due respect, so far I have not read anything in your posts that shows that you do.Comparing granting someone license to use your digital creation to granting someone the right to commit murder? Really now? Do you have any concept of what kind of an apples and oranges comparison that is?ETA: My first thoughts on this when I read it was that it could not be legal. But the more I thought about it and read people's comments the more my opinion changed. Of course, I am not a lawyer. But applying my limited knowledge of copyright laws, yes, I do think this may very well be legal.It most likely is legal from the ToS start date, but like I posted in the other thread, putting a ToS that affects all past created content can`t be legal and if you don`t agree with it, you have had no warning to close up shop and in essence are being held hostage.
Sure, for new content you will have to make a choice to continue or switch grid to to be able to create new content while remaining here in a private environment and just support old content.
-
Chic Aeon wrote:While I personally agree with your idea about the TOS not being retroactive (legally anyway), or at least READ it that way,there have been many reports of creators contacting their RL lawyers who CONFIRMED that the intent (not necessarily the legality as we won't know that until tested) is to take ALL content from the beginning.Honestly everything I have read lately from all sorts of people including lawyers, seems to conclude EVERYTHING is covered (well maybe not homemade shapes - LOL). Not ALL lawyers agree on that, but the majority it seems.So Chosen, I believe, is right with not logging in.I also believe that if you dig around you will see that the TOS for the WEBSITE has some iffy language that could be problematic. Bleary and tired and not going there again.I WAS wondering what would happen if one felt they could not log in because of yet more TOS changes in the future (could it get any worse ? Well probably.) I am not sure that my alt has the ability to edit my objects as I sometimes used her for testing and the editing ability sort of negates that. But I will make sure she can now.That might be helpful -- but only in some cases. Very messy.
But that is the thing that I`m actually curious about, ofcourse they can implement a new ToS from a specific date, but is it legal to suddently claim it for all the past years where items were created under a different ToS?
To add to that question, is it even legal to do this without warning for people to close deals, remove their assets, notify clients and basically close up shop.
Lets add to it international laws, like for instance the EU ones as we like to make things complicated lol
If something like this is actually legal to do, no matter what LL put in all previous ToS`s but pure law, then I feel quite stupefied!
-
Drake1 Nightfire wrote:I've been saying since the start of this that the new ToS isn't leagal. Somehow that makes me a troll in some eyes.. Thanks for the support from both you and Darrius.
Your not alone, I can`t believe something like this can be legal, no matter how you turn it heh
-
Gaia Clary wrote:I guess that "legal" and "reasonable" do not necessarily go hand in hand. Anyways section 2.6 doesn't sound like a practical option especially when thinking about creators who also sell (or have sold) their content within SL.BTW i wonder if the following part of section 2.3 in the TOS is also applicable to LSL scripts:...and otherwise exploit in any manner whatsoever, all or any portion of your User Content (and derivative works thereof), for any purpose whatsoever in all formats...Some very interesting scenarios could emerge. But i guess that was not meant in the TOS... no ?
Don`t look at me
Like most people, I just want to see this rights grabbing ToS be reverted and can ask 1000 question and remarks
-
No worries Darrius
Gaia Clary wrote:Alicia Sautereau wrote:You can login and do everything you want within the personal part of SL, including cashing out money.It was said that the new ToS would be from that moment and not on items/assets from befor that date, so you can login with no problem but be restricted of not taking on new jobs.
I could not find where in the TOS this limitation to only new content is mentioned.However i found in the TOS (section2.6) that if you delete your content from your inventory and from all locations on the grid and if you never have given any copy to anybody else, or if everybody else who has a copy of your content will also delete it from their repository and from their locations, then the license agreement would also terminate for the deleted content...well...That can`t be legal, can it?
Crazy person can ask more questions then a professor can answer, so I`ll throw another one for Chosen`s case:
If he doesn`t accepts the new ToS but his clients do, does this include his work or not?Simple reasoning: they own the IP rights to Chosen`s work as he is just the contractor so in essence, it`s their work in their inventory even if it`s not created by them.
Being a little bit more funny, Chosen had to sign real life contracts to be able to do the work, how will those hold against the ToS regarding the abouve IP holder conflict as he doesn`t have any rights to the work he has created yet LL demands the right to use it (throw in #1 into the mix abit aswell)Must be getting into the real of the headache
Chosen, as you have done contracted work for some powerfull and big entities, wouldn`t it be funny to show them the new ToS and the conflict of interrest here?
They have their own legal department and it is to defend their own products/IP, even if one is willing to let legal dig into it regarding the contracted work you will have an answer for all your work.Doubt the CIA would be saying to LL "sure, do what you want, we don`t care!" with your project leader logging on and accepting the new ToS
-
Darrius Gothly wrote:Alicia Sautereau wrote:[....]Still wrong?
My personal actions are designed to not give them (LL) anything new to claim rights to, however it will take an official legal decision to determine if that is a viable defense or not. If Chosen has a large catalog of very expensive (from a personal investment perspective) content then a good course of action might be to stay totally out of SL and never agree to the new ToS.But, if Chosen DOES have a healthy investment in content and is possibly losing some serious meaningful income because of it then perhaps retaining an attorney would be the best course of action.That was not the question.
-
Darrius Gothly wrote:Alicia Sautereau wrote:I`m going to call you on a part of itYou can login and do everything you want within the personal part of SL, including cashing out money.It was said that the new ToS would be from that moment and not on items/assets from befor that date, so you can login with no problem but be restricted of not taking on new jobs.Unless I`m wrong...
I tried to open and view the Transaction History from the main dashboard for one of my Alts before agreeing to the ToS on that account. It stopped me and informed me that I had to agree to the ToS before I could view my account details. So yes, Chosen is correct .. you must log in with your Viewer and agree to the new ToS before having access to Account Functions from the website.(Which detail being handled that correctly is out of character for LL .. further leading me to believe they MEAN IT with the new ToS!)Yes, but I was talking of the date that the new ToS would be in effect and only for items uploaded after that date.
Chosen would be able to login and cash out/do personal stuff as all previous items are still under the old ToS while newly contracted work would be an issue under the new ToS.
Still wrong?
-
I`m going to call you on a part of it
You can login and do everything you want within the personal part of SL, including cashing out money.
It was said that the new ToS would be from that moment and not on items/assets from befor that date, so you can login with no problem but be restricted of not taking on new jobs.Unless I`m wrong...
-
Alright, you`re right about that, but the blank claim on everything sure makes it stinks from all sides as they are knowingly keep stolen content inworld and on the marketplace.
-
If you have stolen content in your warehouse and claim in court you have the right to re/sell stolen content, do you think they`ll let you walk away when you have it written in word and in your possession? I`m pretty sure you will get a hefty fine or jail time.
Every one just looked at it from their own personal point and not the other way, I`m really curious what a lawyer would say of a third party with the new ToS.
LL knows about ALOT of violations from wich you can be damn sure the uploader has no rights of reselling.
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Updated LL TOS Claims FULL RIGHTS to ALL CONTENT
in Merchants
Posted
requesting