Mesh enablement tutorial

[Charlar Linden]

You may have already noticed the mesh enablement tutorial on aditi.

If not, well, here: https://secondlife.aditi.lindenlab.com/my/account/mesh-landing.php, so now you know. :-)

The primary purpose of the tutorial is to help those residents who may not know the ins and outs of Intellectual Property (or those that *think* they do but might have some mis-information). It's not intended as legal advice.

Given that its on Aditi, it's not finalized, so we'd love to get your feedback on the questions and answers.  

note: Obviously this is on aditi so it will have no effect on your agni account.

 

Cheers, Charlar

[Rusalka Writer]

Now that I passed the test, promise me that Linden Lab contacted Volkswagen, Ferrari, BMW, Fairchild and the rest concerning the new vehicle avatars you're offering. I forgot to ask at the Monday meeting and it's killing me.

[Drongle McMahon]

I forget the number, but the question about the well known romantic songs is complicated. Many well known romantic songs may be out of copyright, but what about a recording of a song that is out of copyright? Is the recording copyright while the words and the notes are not. I guessed yes, on the grounds that the recording artist and their arranger make a novel, albeit derivative, work, but I am not certain at all. I would like to know the definitive answer there.

My other markd impression was that anyone who guessed the most restricitive answer was always right would get 100%. It's usually good practice to design tests so that simple strategies like that don't work. How about a couple of fair use exceptions? (not internationally valid, but....).

[TriJin Bade]

I see minor flaws in this, such as people distributed a "quick cheat of what to press", but is a good start for Second Life who wish to build and create content. It will certainly place some confidence back into the residents to know that IP rights are being respected... somewhat.

I would also suggest this should be a pre-test for marking anything in Second Life as "For Sale" and also for uploading to Marketplace too. IP rights are not only for Meshies, poor primies have a life too ya know

 

[Ayako Kaligawa]

Vielleicht wäre es angebacht diese Tauglichkeitsprüfung auch in anderen Sprachen anzubieten. So habe ich einige Zweifel bei bestimmten Fragen, das Wort 'similar' übersetze ich mit 'ähnlich, vergleichbar', und ich glaube nicht das es sich vermeiden lässt das neue Produkte, irgendwie, bereits vorhanden Produkten ähneln.

. Also, der fairniss halber, den Test auch in anderen Sprachen anbieten, bitte :smileywink:

[Charlar Linden]

Thanks all for taking a look and responding.

One thing to note is that there is no advantage to getting all the questions 'right'. We only require that you review the information, there is no way to fail. 

 

Charlar

[guY Ralior]

Everything starts with a step and this seems like a step in the right direction. I agree it should be for people who are on marketplace or have stores inWorld as well.

[Marcthur Goosson]

If I doubt a question and answer yes it might be a lucky guess.

Would be good if the no's are explained too.

And if explained I am able to give a more accurate answer.

[Gaia Clary]

---

Ayako Kaligawa wrote:

Vielleicht wäre es angebacht diese Tauglichkeitsprüfung auch in anderen Sprachen anzubieten!

---

J'espère bien! Ce n'est que justice. :matte-motes-bashful-cute:

[StoneDwarf]

I have 2 questions regarding the enablement tutorial questions.

One of the questions said something about whether or not it would be allowed to use terms such as 'inspired by' or 'based on' etc.

 I see why LL says this and there needs to be a clear line of what's allowed and what not, obviously. But lets say I create a transformer-like model. Not a replica, nor does look at all like any of the existing transformer models, but it could have been used in the movie in terms of modeling, the setting, etc.

Because I am not using the transformer logo in my textures and not talking about the registered trademark 'The Transformers' and everything related to it, technically I am doing everything legit. The idea of creating a transforming transformer-like model is considered to be okay as well because there are many cartoons on tv who do this as well such as Bob the builder with his talking machines.

Am I right so far?

Speaking for myself, and with me I think a potential buyer would appreciate this as well, I would like the idea of stating where I had my sources of inspiration from. But there is a difference between: a) making it look as if your product is somehow part and/or related to an existing trademark, which is not allowed, obviously. b) Being honest about your sources of inspiration to give a clear view on a work process, to give some background information about what you are selling and how you came to whatever it is you are selling.

 I would guess this is not allowed, and I can see why because there is a thin line between creating the illusion of products related to existing trademarks or just giving some background information.

But what about a non-sl site. A blog for instance. To take the transformer example, lets say I post on my blog an article where I explain how I came to this idea etc and I say that one of the sources of inspiration was 'The transformers'.

Would LL remove my model from the market place because I posted an “Inspired by” article on my blog? They would, if I posted in my product details ON the marketplace, if I understood it correct, right?

But what about non-sl sites?

Also, another thing that concerns me, how does LL check things in terms of stolen merchandise when it comes to 3d models?

 I worked on several mods for a variety of games where I created weapons. These weapons are created from scratch by myself. The mods they have been used for, are not official which makes them my property.

 Lets say somebody sees a screenshot of a game on the internet where they see my model in-game. And I am selling it on the marketplace as well. The person who would fill in a report does not know that I have all the appropriate rights to sell the weapon most likely.

 LL receives an accusation, they check attached 'proof' and see the screenshot and conclude I have been a naughty dwarff. 

Will LL check things with me first, asking me for an explanation, or will my model be removed without a warning whatsoever?

And one more thing that could be answered with a simple yes or no. I was reading that one must use payment info on file in order to upload meshes. What I wondered was do you must have payment info on file at all times in order to upload a mesh, or can you do it once, get verified and upload all the way?

 My apologies for the big chunk of text but there's a lot of haziness left to me. 

 



 



[Zalandria Zaius]

I don't know about this whole "can't make an avatar that resembles a celebrity" deal. I have known people who look similar to celebrities. If they make an avatar of themselves are you guys gonna say it's illegal because it's similar to a celebrity? All human avatars are gonna look like someone eventually.

Vehicles have design copyright, so just making a mesh that looks like a real vehicle could potentially be a copyright violation whether you tag it as that brand or not.

[Tapple Gao]

making something from scratch is never a copyright violation. It may be a trademark violation, but that's completely different

[Rusalka Writer]

There is no way to fail, as the educational aspect is secondary. The primary function is to protect Linden Lab from charges of aiding an infringement. This isn't really a test, it's a "you were warned!" statement required by LL's invisible lawyers.

Now about the status of the SL avatar armature...

And the status of that Ferrari F-40 avatar...

[Drago Artful]

After doing the questions, the first model I ended up uploading was Giga Pudding. Took me a few minutes to realize what I did... lol...

Anyway, what about the braziers I made? I modeled them from some images I found on Google. I can only guess the brand/manufacturer on one of them. And they look pretty generic-looking. I don't know if they have "design copyrights".

[Medhue Simoni]

---

Drongle McMahon wrote:

I forget the number, but the question about the well known romantic songs is complicated. Many well known romantic songs may be out of copyright, but what about a recording of a song that is out of copyright? Is the recording copyright while the words and the notes are not. I guessed yes, on the grounds that the recording artist and their arranger make a novel, albeit derivative, work, but I am not certain at all. I would like to know the definitive answer there.

My other markd impression was that anyone who guessed the most restricitive answer was always right would get 100%. It's usually good practice to design tests so that simple strategies like that don't work. How about a couple of fair use exceptions? (not internationally valid, but....).

---

 

 

 

I kinda think the point is to not be vague at all, and to be as easy as possible.

[Marcthur Goosson]

---

Tapple Gao wrote:

making something from scratch is never a copyright violation. It may be a trademark violation, but that's completely different

---

Do you have a resource for that?

Thanks.

[Tapple Gao]

no. sorry. my statement is just accumulation of 4 years of discussions about license, license changing, and reverse-engineering in an different open source project. I'm familiar with copyright mostly as it applies to open source software.

Can get some information on it from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_Property

Here's a long primer from my project's lawyers: http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/foss-primer.html

I'm unable to find a short document to explain the difference written by anybody I trust, but googling copyright vs trademark leads to quite a few results

[Tali Rosca]

I am fairly sure that is not correct in general. That would make pretty much everything fair game if you just take time enough to copy it manually, since very few things are trademarked, which is an active process, as opposed to the passive granting of copyright simply by creating something.

It may be more true when it comes to blackbox reverse engineering of software, as you mention, since in that case, you're copying the non-copyrightable idea of what the software is doing (unless you run up against patents, which is a whole other kettle of fish).

 

I am a little unsure about the "inspired by" thing. My feeling, and experience from what I've seen, is that it's a matter of making it perfectly clear that you're not endorsed by or affiliated with the original brand in any way, but it can probably be a fine line where it's better to simply recommend to err on the side of caution.

[Zalandria Zaius]

This is from Belgium, but still.

http://www.ipfrontline.com/depts/article.aspx?id=25172&deptid=7

[Tapple Gao]

yikes. I guess the lesson in the belgium article is don't get in the way of the copyright holder's profits

[Nacy Nightfire]

I got 100 YAAAY!  It's only "test" test BOOOO! :matte-motes-asleep-2:

 

[Madeliefste Oh]

I also have a question about 'inspired by'...

Is it allowed to advertise your car on the marketplace as 'NOT inspired by Mercedes, Jaguar or BMW'.

 

[Failed Inventor]

Due to Linden Lab's policy on harrasment I am not really allowed to speak my mind and call some one an idiot, as I have already been warned by the moderators for throwing out that one liner. ( sorry but if you do something stupid expect to be called on it. )

Most of you may be wondering.. what the hell was that about. Well I hate to say it but people can be at times *enter censored word*.

IP infringement, in my mind is pretty clear, atleast in the methods in avoiding it. You can avoid IP infringement by going to your corner, thinking of an idea, not based of something you have seen, owned or made by another company. 

Yes it can get complicated, but this test covers none of the complications, and as linden labs stated there is "no way to fail." means *entered censored word* will remain *entered censored word* cause in most cases believe it or not... Suzy B. is not as innocent and helpless as one may believe, though Suzy C. could be.

For the most part, people infringe for the money, they know damn well they are doing it, so I really don't see this changing much. But I am glad to see you are protecting your @** LL, cause if you didn't I would have one less place to sell my items.

Oh and I hate to say it, but if someone IP infringes there isn't crap you will do to stop it outside of US. Change IP, new account and back to profit, cause US Patent & Copyright laws don't really cover most countries where IP infringment now originates.

 

Anyways, disagree if you like, I am sure there are points of my statement which may be disagreed upon, and I would have loved to see this question on the test.

 

#11 - ??? Linden has gone to google sketchup, and has downloaded a model clearly infringing on the rights of Bungies, Halo Warthog. Is it ok for ??? Linden to upload this for "Testing"?

If you said F#@* NOOO!!! - You are correct! 

[Rusalka Writer]

The legal principle underlying trademark law in the U.S. is subtly different from copyright law. Copyright law, obviously, protects the expression of a creator's unique idea. Note that it does not protect the idea, just the expression of it. There is no protection for an idea.

Trademark attempts to define the source of a product or service, and eliminate confusion for the consumer. So, for instance, in RL you certainly could not invent a new soda and call it Pepsi, as the consumer would expect that they were buying genuine Pepsi from the Pepsi company. The same holds true in SL if you use Pepsi's name or can design or font on your SL beverage. Your SL customer would be misled into thinking they might be doing business with the Pepsi Company.

Note that copyright automatically takes effect when you complete a creative product, be it a novel or a movie or a mesh. Filing for formal copyright allows you to later file a claim of infringement relief in federal court and to recover certain costs, but basically when you create something, you hold copyright over it. The same is not true for trademarks. You must file your trademark and then you must conduct a trademark campaign to protect it. Which is why the Kleenex people have been taking out ads in writers' magazines for decades to remind writers that Kleenex is not a generic term. Same with Xerox , etc.

[Failed Inventor]

Not sure if you are replying to me or just in general, but regardless of difference, either way it is difficult to enforce any form of any of these outside US especially in 3rd world countries etc.