Logo

bladyblue · 11-03-2009, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arilynn

You've said this before, and it is wrong. Munch and Stroker requested that a class be certified. Simply filing a request for class certification doesn't create a class, so one does not yet exist, as far as I know. If the judge agrees to create a class (and it is up to the judge, not LL), in all likelihood other plaintiffs will have the option to join the class or pursue their own cases. They just won't be able to do both.

Ok I had said I ws not sure of this - but I have heard of judges ruling that identicle class action suits be merged.

My concern for smaller content creators stems from LL's content certification program. At the momment it is a choice. After the ruling from this case I beleive it will be made mandatory.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyn Linden Aug 4th

A Content Seller Program for Better Content Purchasing Experiences
As our community grows, Second Life needs a content seller program to help the community trade content safely and trust one another. By “content seller program,” we mean a program that sellers may participate in if they meet certain eligibility standards intended to show a level of trustworthiness and quality of content. For example, we currently offer the Gold Solution Provider Program for Solution Providers with a demonstrated track record of successful Second Life projects and client satisfaction.

At some point we will offer a program specific to content sellers with criteria devised to indicate a level of aptitude in Second Life content transactions. Sellers' participation in the program will then be publicly indicated to potential buyers.

A seller program benefits both content buyers and sellers alike because it helps provide greater transparency in the content purchasing experience. Many Resident content sellers have built successful brands and reputations within Second Life, but this may not be readily apparent to buyers when they are shopping for or purchasing content. Giving buyers more information about sellers not only helps protect buyers against the inadvertent purchase of potentially infringing content, it helps keep Second Life a safe, well-lit place to trade in virtual content. By encouraging open, honest, and accountable content transactions, a seller program helps attract more content buyers and consequently helps create more opportunities for content sellers.

We are starting the process of planning a content seller program, and we would like your input on possible program criteria. At a minimum, participation in the program will require that the selling Resident:

1.have identity and payment information on file with Linden Lab;
2.be in good standing and not have been suspended for any violation of the Second Life Terms of Service;
3.meet a minimum threshold for content transactions; and
4.affirm that all necessary intellectual property rights and licenses have been obtained for all content that the Resident has for sale.
Join the discussion in the forums and tell us what other criteria you believe should be in a content seller program. We are in the early stages of planning such a program, and we would like your feedback on possible criteria in advance of our planning and implementation.

This from the full program information: https://blogs.secondlife.com/communi...gement-roadmap

Sooz Pascale · 11-03-2009, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arilynn

It is my understanding that, except in rare circumstances, one is able to opt out, usually within a deadline imposed by the court. Maybe Trout, C-M, or Sooz has more info.

you are absolutely correct here. There may be exceptions, but I am not aware of them.

Sooz

Aztek Aeon · 11-03-2009, 03:45 PM

I did not have sexual relations with that content creator....

But if I did, the stolen SexGen bed we used would not have been my responsibility.

Shelly · 11-03-2009, 04:00 PM

"wherefore defendants pray for the following relief
C That linden be awarded it's attorney fees and costs

Does this mean the Plaintiffs could end up paying for LL legal expense if they lose? How much would that end up costing, ball park?

Sooz Pascale · 11-03-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shelly

"wherefore defendants pray for the following relief
C That linden be awarded it's attorney fees and costs

Does this mean the Plaintiffs could end up paying for LL legal expense if they lose? How much would that end up costing, ball park?

You always ask for that. If you don't ask you don't get it. You only get attys. fees (1) if the contract between the parties indicates that attys. fees will be awardded or (2) if the applicable statutes set forth an award of attorneys fees.

Sooz

Gigs · 11-03-2009, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argent Stonecutter

I'm pretty sure the DMCA does not refer to "DRM" but to "technical measures". Whether something is or is not DRM is, legally, a red herring.

Right:

Quote:

1 Effective technical measures for the protection of works and other protected objects cannot be circumvented.

2 Effective technical measures are defined as; Technologies and contraptions, such as access and copy control, encryption, distortion and other processing, which are suited and intended to, limit or prevent unauthorized usage of works.

3 Forbidden is: to produce, import, offer, sell, distribute, rent out, lend, advertise and posses (possession for commercial use) of any: Contraptions, products, parts and services which:

1. intend to increase sales of, advertise or market things with the goal of circumventing effective copy protection measures.
2. prime purpose is the circumvention of effective copy protection measures and have only limited commercial use; or
3. are primarily designed, produced, customized or rendered in order to circumvent or ease circumvention of effective copy protection measures.

4 The prohibition of circumvention can not be applied to People who are primarily circumventing for the purpose of a legal use.

Up until now, the official Linden Lab line has claimed that the permission system doesn't mean anything, that it wasn't an effective means of controlling copying. Their position was that programs that ignore permissions are fine, since the permissions are irrelevant to whether you were infringing on copyright or not. Copyright infringement activities were forbidden under the TOS.

By calling it DRM, they are trying to say that it does serve as a technical means to limit unauthorized use of works. They are potentially re-framing things under the DMCA.

Arilynn · 11-03-2009, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bladyblue

Ok I had said I ws not sure of this - but I have heard of judges ruling that identicle class action suits be merged.

That is a very different scenario. What you are talking about is two certified classes being merged, not individuals being forced into a class. Here, a court hasn't even certified a class yet. LL does not have complete control; the decision to create the class will be from the court, with arguments and evidence presented by both sides.

Trout Recreant · 11-03-2009, 05:07 PM

You can always opt out as far as I know. I'd be really surprised if you couldn't.

Sooz brings up an interesting point when she says she would have brought a 12(b) motion. (12(b)(6) is only one of several motions that can be brought under 12(b)) That point is that there is never one clear "right" way to litigate. (Although, there are several wrong ways) These cases are not ever the same, and there are several ways, usually to achieve a certain result. I would not have brought a 12(b) motion, but there is nothing wrong with doing so to buy a little time, and there are often several very good reasons to do so. But you can bet there would be some pretty heavy summary judgment motions at two different stages - the beginning of discovery - which is an unusual tactic, but one I like - and the end of discovery.

The first ones are a feint. They force the opposition to show its hand and tell me what it is going to argue, and they also serve to start educating the judge about the case. It helps me craft my discovery a little better. The second ones we bring to try to knock out issues pre-trial and refine the issues for trial. Once discovery is almost done, you have a much better chance of winning.

These things are all about positioning at this stage. Civil litigation is a marathon, not a sprint. There are all sorts of things going on that you can't see here and will never see, but each side is feeling each other out and seeing where they can apply pressure.

Sooz Pascale · 11-03-2009, 05:08 PM

You guys really don't need me, Trout or Carter around as long as we have Arilynn. Her comments are cogent, accurate and to the point.

Sooz

Ann Otoole · 11-03-2009, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigs

Right:

Up until now, the official Linden Lab line has claimed that the permission system doesn't mean anything, that it wasn't an effective means of controlling copying. Their position was that programs that ignore permissions are fine, since the permissions are irrelevant to whether you were infringing on copyright or not. Copyright infringement activities were forbidden under the TOS.

By calling it DRM, they are trying to say that it does serve as a technical means to limit unauthorized use of works. They are potentially re-framing things under the DMCA.

Guess I know what some people will be screaming about at this week's office hours. What was it they were saying at the last ones over the 3rd party client registry? Calling lindens "technically incompetent" and saying that is not an insult? lol

Seems to be two completely separate camps in LL now. Could there be a civil war in progress?

Gigs · 11-03-2009, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ann Otoole

Seems to be two completely separate camps in LL now. Could there be a civil war in progress?

The war is over. The wrong side won.

Trout Recreant · 11-03-2009, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sooz Pascale

You guys really don't need me, Trout or Carter around as long as we have Arilynn. Her comments are cogent, accurate and to the point.

Sooz

Nuts. We've been replaced by an Arilynn. I knew I would eventually be redundant. I didn't figure they would lay us all off.

It's good to see you, Sooz.

Arilynn · 11-03-2009, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trout Recreant

You can always opt out as far as I know. I'd be really surprised if you couldn't.

There are such things as mandatory non-opt out classes, but I don't know under what circumstances they occur except in very limited financial cases. Here's a link with one example but not much explanation: link

Ned Easterwood · 11-03-2009, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trout Recreant

Nuts. We've been replaced by an Arilynn. I knew I would eventually be redundant. I didn't figure they would lay us all off.

Let's face it - she's cuter.

Trout Recreant · 11-03-2009, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arilynn

There are such things as mandatory non-opt out classes, but I don't know under what circumstances they occur except in very limited financial cases. Here's a link with one example but not much explanation: link

Those are very limited, and don't apply here. But you're absolutely correct. There are some very limited circumstances where you cannot opt out. I dislike those circumstances on general principle, because while I understand the theory behind them, I really think there is something fundamentally wrong with not allowing people to seek their own remedy apart from the class-action. That's just my personal opinion, though.

**Jesse Barnett** · 11-03-2009, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gigs

Up until now, the official Linden Lab line has claimed that the permission system doesn't mean anything, that it wasn't an effective means of controlling copying. Their position was that programs that ignore permissions are fine, since the permissions are irrelevant to whether you were infringing on copyright or not. Copyright infringement activities were forbidden under the TOS.

By calling it DRM, they are trying to say that it does serve as a technical means to limit unauthorized use of works. They are potentially re-framing things under the DMCA.

DRM, DMCA and legalese I do not know anything about. But one thing has me interested along these lines. When Copybot came out Cory issued a blog statement saying that Copybot was forbidden and within a couple of days LL backed away from this stance. It was at this point that Robin made a blog post and said that Copybot was not against the TOS, only using it or any other means to infringe copyright. She then made a point that people needed to also consider "fair use".

This is where we have been since then, libsl and Copybot etc were basically "protected". What has changed in the last month policy wise that allowed LL to start banning accounts where Cryolife was detected without infringement and can this change in policy be used against LL during the trial???

Sooz Pascale · 11-03-2009, 05:25 PM

I didn't say I would have filed a demurrer [12(b)(6) motion], I said I was suprised LL didn't. I regard them as a gigantic waste of time usually. All you are doing is alerting the other side to defects in their complaint and the judge usually grants leave to amend anyway. Its a tactic often favored by big law firms with big deep pocket corporations as clients. It costs everyone money and time and just delays things. Its part of the numbskull idea that papering the opposition to death is an intelligent legal strategy.

Sooz

Trout Recreant · 11-03-2009, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ned Easterwood

Let's face it - she's cuter.

Cuter than me, without a doubt. I make no presumption to speak on behalf of my fellow counsel who are both strikingly beautiful, nor would I ever think to be able to judge their beauty in comparison to that of Arilynn's. It would be like staring into three suns, side by side and trying to determine which is brightest.

Trout Recreant · 11-03-2009, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sooz Pascale

I didn't say I would have filed a demurrer [12(b)(6) motion], I said I was suprised LL didn't. I regard them as a gigantic waste of time usually. All you are doing is alerting the other side to defects in their complaint and the judge usually grants leave to amend anyway. Its a tactic often favored by big law firms with big deep pocket corporations as clients. It costs everyone money and time and just delays things. Its part of the numbskull idea that papering the opposition to death is an intelligent legal strategy.

Sooz

Sorry - I misread your post. My point was that there are several paths to follow and every lawyer is going to take a different approach.

**Eboni Khan** · 11-03-2009, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eku Zhong

not a trivial piece of change at all.. and some of that is from stolen stuffs...

Actually if you do the math, Xstreet is with breaking even or a loss for SL. 1.6 million a year in sales, most of that is going to content creators. Xstreet takes what 3% commission or something? Subtract programmers, customer service employees, bandwidth and hosting. I am pretty sure Xstreet is not a cash cow.

Dancien Graves · 11-03-2009, 05:41 PM

Say there, anybody in this thread speak english?

Sooz Pascale · 11-03-2009, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dancien Graves

Say there, anybody in this thread speak english?

Arilynn does.

Sooz

Tranquility · 11-03-2009, 05:49 PM

What do all the 16 or so "Affirmative Defenses" quoted by LL mean for the case? Is there a decent chance it will be thrown out based on their Answer?

Hypatia Callisto · 11-03-2009, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eboni Khan

Actually if you do the math, Xstreet is with breaking even or a loss for SL. 1.6 million a year in sales, most of that is going to content creators. Xstreet takes what 3% commission or something? Subtract programmers, customer service employees, bandwidth and hosting. I am pretty sure Xstreet is not a cash cow.

lies, lies and of course, statistics.

Lots of people use XStreet as a catalog, and then buy inworld. No way to track those sales on XStreet.

But I don't think XStreet is a cash cow. It's collecting fees when cashing out over the LindeX that's a cash cow.

Trout Recreant · 11-03-2009, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tranquility

What do all the 16 or so "Affirmative Defenses" quoted by LL mean for the case? Is there a decent chance it will be thrown out based on their Answer?

Almost no chance.

You have to plead what are called "affirmative defenses" in your Answer, so often they get thrown in whether you think they will fly or not. You do this not to try to mislead anyone, but because if you don't plead them now, you can be prevented from pleading them tomorrow. And you don't have all the information you need yet.

The difference between your defense, which the first part of the Answer is, and an affirmative defense is that the defense basically says, Nuh-uh! No we didn't, and no you weren't damaged, and some other dude did it, but not us! And your affirmative defenses basically say, if we did it, then we had the following excuse which removes or mediates our legal liability.

It's ok to plead in the alternative, which basically means saying, "We didn't do it, but if you decide we did, then we still have no liability because..."

Affirmative defenses, like a lot of the pleadings at this stage are essentially just place-holders. They stick them out there now, and then come back later to decide if they want to pursue them.

11-03-2009, 03:45 PM	#53 (permalink)
Aztek Aeon I hate birthdays I'm your Buzzkill Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New England Posts: 408 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 2 SL Join Date: 12/07 Business: Ethereal Nature Collaborative ~ The Rescue Park @ Canis Beach	I did not have sexual relations with that content creator.... But if I did, the stolen SexGen bed we used would not have been my responsibility. __________________ Waterfalls & doggie stuff

11-03-2009, 04:00 PM	#54 (permalink)
Shelly Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Auckland Posts: 170 My Mood: SL Join Date: 29/04/2008 Business: Creative Licence Prefabs	"wherefore defendants pray for the following relief C That linden be awarded it's attorney fees and costs Does this mean the Plaintiffs could end up paying for LL legal expense if they lose? How much would that end up costing, ball park? __________________ Lead me not into temptation, I can find it myself

11-03-2009, 05:41 PM	#71 (permalink)
Dancien Graves What? Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 7,075 My Mood: SL Join Date: 12/2006 Awards: 1	Say there, anybody in this thread speak english? __________________

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-03-2009, 05:07 PM	#58 (permalink)
Trout Recreant Oncorhynchus mykiss Incomprehensible gibberish Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: West Coast, USA Posts: 5,998 My Mood: Blog Entries: 3 Awards: 1	You can always opt out as far as I know. I'd be really surprised if you couldn't. Sooz brings up an interesting point when she says she would have brought a 12(b) motion. (12(b)(6) is only one of several motions that can be brought under 12(b)) That point is that there is never one clear "right" way to litigate. (Although, there are several wrong ways) These cases are not ever the same, and there are several ways, usually to achieve a certain result. I would not have brought a 12(b) motion, but there is nothing wrong with doing so to buy a little time, and there are often several very good reasons to do so. But you can bet there would be some pretty heavy summary judgment motions at two different stages - the beginning of discovery - which is an unusual tactic, but one I like - and the end of discovery. The first ones are a feint. They force the opposition to show its hand and tell me what it is going to argue, and they also serve to start educating the judge about the case. It helps me craft my discovery a little better. The second ones we bring to try to knock out issues pre-trial and refine the issues for trial. Once discovery is almost done, you have a much better chance of winning. These things are all about positioning at this stage. Civil litigation is a marathon, not a sprint. There are all sorts of things going on that you can't see here and will never see, but each side is feeling each other out and seeing where they can apply pressure.

11-03-2009, 05:08 PM	#59 (permalink)
Sooz Pascale Long Distance Sailor Ribald Lewdness Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,751 My Mood: SL Join Date: January 27, 2007	You guys really don't need me, Trout or Carter around as long as we have Arilynn. Her comments are cogent, accurate and to the point. Sooz

11-03-2009, 05:25 PM	#67 (permalink)
Sooz Pascale Long Distance Sailor Ribald Lewdness Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,751 My Mood: SL Join Date: January 27, 2007	I didn't say I would have filed a demurrer [12(b)(6) motion], I said I was suprised LL didn't. I regard them as a gigantic waste of time usually. All you are doing is alerting the other side to defects in their complaint and the judge usually grants leave to amend anyway. Its a tactic often favored by big law firms with big deep pocket corporations as clients. It costs everyone money and time and just delays things. Its part of the numbskull idea that papering the opposition to death is an intelligent legal strategy. Sooz

11-03-2009, 05:49 PM	#73 (permalink)
Tranquility Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 996 My Mood:	What do all the 16 or so "Affirmative Defenses" quoted by LL mean for the case? Is there a decent chance it will be thrown out based on their Answer?

Logo

Site Navigation