CaleVinson

I never take Prok's word for anything, but I do find his blog useful as a pointer to other discussions. Here is what Rob Linden had to say about the prospect of introducing a "Allow/Do-Not-allow Export of this Item to Another Grid" flag.

( https://lists.secondlife.com/piperma...st/011525.html )

(Bolding is mine.)

Aki Shichiroji

What I take from take from that quote is mainly this: LL hasn't really sat down to think of it and arguing back and forth on a mailing list isn't really appropriate to the discussion. It's not as though they haven't been open to discussing it, however, and I know Zero's office hours, as well as the AWGroupies discussions have discussed these things before. (Sadly, i don't think unmoderated office hours - chaotic at best - are the best venue for these discussions either)

So yeah, maybe one central area where many individuals (not just members of the SLDev mailing list) can view and respond to these issues in a more organized manner is in order.

__________________

Also See: Portfolio | Blog | Flickr | Illustration

Gigs

They have thought about it, there's just no debate. It's pointless to do anything other than just tag content with the license, just like everything else on the web (flickr, wikipedia, etc).

__________________
-
-
"It is the paramount duty of governments and of politicians to secure the wellbeing of the community under the case in the present, and not to run risks overmuch for the future" - JM Keynes

Cocoanut Koala

Yes, well. Since we have copybot and various similar programs, they should remove the permissions from all objects in SL as well.

coco

__________________

Gigs

I agree, permissions are a horrible way to express a copyright license. With the exception of the few permissions that actually accomplish an effective technical control, they should be removed.

I think that would leave us with mod/transfer on objects (controls how people can manipulate the object on the server-side), and mod/transfer on scripts. All the rest are just an illusion.

Aki Shichiroji

While i don't believe permissions are the be-all/end-all of intellectual property, I do believe the mark *intent*, even if only in a very limited sense. On my wish list would be the option to drag&drop a EULA right in to the object properties, while keeping the existing permissions. I would also like to see permissions options for transfer to both trusted and open grids.

Cocoanut Koala

Let me ask you a question, Gigs. Why do you want everything to be free?

Why do you want - when we could (and do) have a system which, while not perfect, puts permissions on items - why do you want to abolish this?

Why, when there are technical means, do you want to get rid of them and take away what protection we have, and the protection we all started SL with, just because some people can find their way around them?

Do you dislike the fact that people make money off the things they make and sell, or what?

coco

Gigs

I absolutely don't.

The current system misleads the uninitiated into thinking it's possible to control the copying and transfer of downloadable assets through technical means. It is not.



There are no technical means.


Yeah just ask Richie how big I am on socialism.

Gigs

They do that, but they are pretty bad at it. They also communicate to ignorant users that it's possible to prevent copying, which isn't true. That's a pretty bad side effect.

BTW- an EULA is not the same as a copyright license. An EULA is a contract, subject to contract law. A copyright license is not subject to contract law, which means it's binding even lacking things like an exchange of consideration or meeting of the minds. You don't need to "Agree" to a copyright license, it just "is". It's an important point.

CaleVinson

Yes, this is why when you go to any major site, they have a button saying "feel free to download all our server-side programs and scripts here!".

CaleVinson

Thought Experiment.

Tomorrow, LL annouce on the blog that although they are leaving permissions in place in the sense that you can see and set them, they are removing their effect. All objects effectively become copy/mod/transfer.

Do people think object sales would go up, down, or stay the same in such a scenario?

Cocoanut Koala

But the reason you give - in the second paragraph there - isn't sufficient enough reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The permission system *is* a technical means. Not a perfect or foolproof means, but then, what is?

Coupled with rules by the powers that be that copying other people's items without their permission is against the TOS, it serves quite well. It does control the copying and transfer of things without the maker's permission.

So you would get rid of the technical means of preventing wholesale copying (the permission system), just so a few people wouldn't be "fooled" for a time, thinking their things couldn't possibly be copied by rogues? Then you would have even less control, for very little benefit.

To show you what I mean, I'll put it all in purely hypothetical numerical percentages.

(I'm totally making these percentages up.)

(1) People in SL at any given time who are "uninitiated" (i.e., who don't realize Copybot and the like exists): 40%.

Merchants in SL at any given time who don't realize Copybot and the like exists: 10%.

(2) People in SL who look at the permissions and surmise that copying a no-copy item would be illegal: 99.99%.

People who look at the "no-copy" and think it would still be perfectly legal to copy it anyway, once they find a means: .01%.

(3) People in SL who use Copybot programs to copy other people's things: 1%.

People in SL who might just take a copy of something if there were no permission system preventing it, even if the maker had a paper they were supposed to honor, and even if it were illegal: Probably a whole lot more than 1%.

So . . . using my totally made-up figures here, you can see that whereas now we have 1% copying going on, if you removed the permission system (the copy part, I believe you are discussing), we would have rampant copying.

And what for? Who would you be "protecting" by removing the permissions system? Certainly not the merchants. The only benefit of getting rid the available technical means of preventing wholesale copying (the permission system), would be just so a few people, mostly incoming new players, wouldn't be "fooled" for a time, thinking nothing could ever be copied by rogues.

I don't think people need such protecting, particularly not at the expense of all the merchants. Most people realize there are hacks and cheats galore in every online game or environment. That doesn't mean that you should remove what protection exists. If you did, most people would no longer make stuff to sell in SL.

I can sit here and tell you that people are idiots if they think locks on doors will prevent all theft forevermore. Because locks absolutely will NOT prevent theft, if the thief is skilled and determined enough. They will, though, prevent most theft, for most people.

Not being foolproof isn't a good reason for throwing the locks out with the bathwater.

And doing it simply to spare the feelings of the naive is an even less compelling reason.

By your line of reasoning, perhaps we should get rid of everything else on the Internet designed to provide security, because hardly anything provides total security. But then - I don't think people would do much on the Internet at all.

So, I don't think your reason is good enough.

coco

Colette Meiji

Considering the proliferation of freebies I've seen in the last 3 years ..

DOWN

CaleVinson

I would have thought that the number of users who play SL, but have never been exposed to the limitations of technically-based copying protection anywhere else (ripped songs, movies, games, etc) would be very small. I think the argument has yet to be made that people have a disconnect, and believe that copying is possible everywhere else, but not in SL.

Colette Meiji

I am with Coco

Gigs do you lock your house?

Your Car?

Joshua Nightshade

Actually I don't agree on this at all.

And yes there are a lot of users, an incredibly worrying amount of users, who believe that copybot is technically stoppable and that LL didn't/doesn't stop it because they like libsl. There are a worrying amount of users who believe you can make GLIntercept not work.

Considering the majority age bracket for SL users is outside the prime Napster generation it's not an impossible consideration.

CaleVinson

"Not an impossible consideration" - I agree.

But thus far in this thread, the only argument that I can recall Gigs putting up as to why having the flag is a *bad* thing is that of misleading people on IP issues. So, that case has to be made. And its a tricky one. Do a survey here, and no-one will tell you that LL can stop copying of *client* side data. Ask the same question on the blawg, and 99.9% will say they can.

Also, how does one rank priority of education of some unknown percentage of ignorant users, versus (possible, see my thought experiment) protection of the economy? There are lots of people who don't understand why SL doesn't run as fast as an MMO with fixed content, but ultimately, so what? Does LL have an obligation to run an educational campaign there too? What about those who believe that child-avatar == sexual ageplayer? Where are the Lindens, and WHY AREN'T THEY ON STREET CORNERS HANDING OUT EDUCATIONAL PAMPHLETS !!!!!111!!!!!

Joshua Nightshade

Actually I think if the Lindens had done a better job of education on that issue it would've solved the huge problems and freakouts residents have had over simple things like even ripping content for personal use, and probably would've looked not as bad when Philip made some bungled attempts at explaining why they couldn't stop Copybot.

To a lot of people his response seemed like a disinterest and not an inability.

But I don't agree with Gigs on this in every point.

Gigs

I dont' lock them using masking tape. That's what the current permissions are, masking tape.

Gigs

OK fine. Lets assume the flags actually did work, that they were an effective measure. The creator doesn't get to decide what rights the consumer has under copyright, not with absolute authority. Copyright is not an absolute right.

The consumer potentially has fair use rights, compulsory license rights, the work may have fallen into the public domain, or the user might even live in a country where it's not illegal to copy things that are all-rights-reserved for personal non-profit use (a lot of europe).

There is no way that a mechanized enforcement method can express the nuanced and sometimes variable and unclear rights that a consumer has under copyright law. The only thing that can decide that are humans.

So we have flags that are bad when they are ineffective, and if it even were possible to make them effective, they are bad in a different way.

Gigs

This is not correct. Using a copybot style program to circumvent the permissions is not a TOS violation. Using a copybot style program to infringe on copyright is. They are not the same thing. See my above message. You seem to believe that copyright is absolute, it is not. If it were, then maybe browsers wouldn't have "save page as" features. But they do.

Colette Meiji

You need to watch that "It takes a thief" on the Discovery Channel.

Anyone that knows how can easily break into most locks ..

Hmmmm A bit like the SL copying situation.

Cocoanut Koala

OKay, then, add the word "infringement." That part I assumed is understood.

I said that using copybot to copy items belong to others without their permission is against the TOS, and I based that statement on what has been said on the blog.

Here is a review of those comments from LL, beginning with the most recent and moving to the first. The last one (which is the first response they made to copybot) is the one you will probably like best, but subsequent to that, the use of copybot to make copies without the creator's permission became against the TOS (I've bolded those parts).

(1) Protecting Your Copyrighted Content
Friday, April 11th, 2008 at 12:15 PM by: lauraplinden

Imitation may be the highest form of flattery, but it’s important to protect your creations in the Second Life world. We respect Residents’ copyrights in works they create, and we’d like to tell you about tools you can use to protect your copyrighted content and how we’re working to improve them. As a reminder, you don’t have to register with the U.S. Copyright Office for copyright protection, but registration is useful in supporting your copyright claim. For more on this, visit the Copyright Office website.

Object Inspector Feature

If you’re concerned about infringing copies of your inworld objects, check out the data we’ve made available about when objects were first created or rezzed inworld. This feature is available for objects only (not textures), and should help Residents determine which object came first in Second Life and empower them to better resolve copying claims among themselves. If you right-click on an inworld object and then click More > More > Inspect, you can see the creation date and creator of each prim in a linkset. For more information on this feature, check out Torley’s new video tutorial called “How old is an object?”:

If you find this feature useful or have suggestions, please let us know!

The DMCA Process

Our DMCA policy is also a valuable tool for combating illegal copying. The DMCA provides a specific process for removing content that’s much faster and less expensive than a copyright lawsuit. Otherwise, courts resolve copyright claims - usually only after reviewing evidence about a work’s creation, ownership, permissions given, and defenses like fair use.

It’s important to note that the DMCA process is a legal process. The U.S. Congress created it for online service providers like Linden Lab because it’s hard for them to know whether a work is infringing without a court’s determination. So it’s critical to follow the steps in the DMCA policy.

To make sure DMCA claims are processed quickly, we’ve committed more resources to the process. As part of a more robust process, we’ll be sending an additional status notification. After receiving from you a clear notice that meets the DMCA’s requirements, we’ll send you an email so that you know your claim is in progress. We also notify Residents whose items are the subject of the claim so they have an opportunity to remove the items from both inworld and inventory locations and, if appropriate, submit a DMCA counter-notice. When Residents don’t immediately remove the identified items from these locations, we act to remove them. We then notify you of your claim’s resolution.

To help with information required under the DMCA, we’re also developing a new form for submitting DMCA claims. The goal of the form is to help Residents provide all the necessary DMCA information upfront and reduce the number of claims that require supplementation (which slows down the process because we need to ask the Resident who filed the claim for more information).

It’s extremely important to submit a DMCA claim if you’re unable to resolve your issue by contacting the other Resident. Your DMCA claim not only lets us know about your dispute, it gives us more complete information about “repeat infringers,” or Residents who’ve been notified of infringing activity or had content removed more than twice. Repeat infringers are issued warnings and may be suspended or ultimately banned from Second Life.

CopyBot Infringement - A Terms of Service Violation

Finally, to reiterate our policy on CopyBot: Any use of it to make infringing copies violates the Terms of Service and may result in suspension or banning of Second Life accounts. If you believe that a Resident has used CopyBot (or a similar application) to make infringing copies of your content, please file an abuse report and provide as much information as you can to support your claim. Although technology can’t prevent the copying of data drawn on your screen, we don’t tolerate Residents who seek to profit from infringing use of CopyBot.

We’re sometimes asked why Residents are allowed to have or sell copying devices. The answer is that there are legitimate uses of a copying mechanism. It’s the infringement that we don’t allow and won’t tolerate.

We’ll keep you posted as we continue to work on improving our tools and policies that help copyright owners manage their content in Second Life.

(2) Today’s Town Hall with Philip now available.
Thursday, November 16th, 2006 at 5:20 PM by: Chadrick Linden

. . . Philip Linden: In terms of things to talk about, I want to start with
copying
Philip Linden: The copybot discussion is an important one, I want to
reiterate for those who haven't been with us the past few years,
regarding copying
Philip Linden: Before I talk about copybot, I want to talk about how
copying works
Philip Linden: Like the web, there are things in Second Life you can see
and copy, and things you can't
Philip Linden: In Second Life, the things you can copy are the things
you see - textures, shapes, objects - works the same way you can view
source on a website
Philip Linden: There's no real way to stop people doing that on the
web...no DRM for textures on a webpage.
Philip Linden: In a similar sense, there's no way to keep people from
copying textures or shapes of things they see in Second Life, cause that
info has to be sent to you so you can see it on the screen.
Philip Linden: Much like the web, there are things you can't copy in
Second Life, such as scripts. That info is info you cannot get access
because it doesn't have to be sent to you, similar to backend structure
of a website. You can't copy amazon.com because you cannot copy the
databases in the backend code that sits behind the website, you can only
copy images/text on the page.
Philip Linden: I think that it is important to talk on our position on
these categories for things you can copy in Second Life, what we're
going to do is add a lot of attribution. You’ll be able to easily see
when an object or texture was first created. We can do this better than
the web, since we know the identity of people and when they uploaded it.
So we're gonna make that info available to everyone.
Philip Linden: It will help in two ways, helping file DCMA takedown
requests, the second thing is it will help with the formation of groups
and policies for people setting their own rules. Like someone setting a
trade bureau.
Philip Linden: This attribution info will let them take actions
internally and get enough info in Second Life to prove that copying is
happening, for things you cannot copy like scripts
Philip Linden: The architecture of Second Life prevents them from being
copying. we might make a mistake, but will rapidly make patches to
secure that
Philip Linden: I like to remind people that the copybot software is not
able to copy anything beyond what I described. Only what you see, it
cannot copy scripts, like a program that could copy websites.
Philip Linden: Some of the same people who worked on copybot are people
who have helped us by finding/reporting bugs about copyability.
Philip Linden: So the next thing I wanted to say is, regarding the
impact of copybot, there's no evidence that it has any visible effect on
the economy
Philip Linden: We'll treat inappropriate use of copybot as a ToS
violation.

(3) Copybot Action
Thursday, November 16th, 2006 at 11:49 AM by: daniellinden

In the last two days, Linden Lab has received slightly fewer than 100 complaints regarding the use of Copybot by close to fifty individuals. These Second Life Residents have received notices from Linden Lab explaining that the use of Copybot constitutes a violation of the Second Life Terms of Service, and that their actions may put the status of their Second Life accounts at risk.

We’re continuing to review various data sources to identify additional Residents who have used Copybot, so that we may extend this warning to everyone who has connected to Second Life with Copybot.

Cocoanut Koala

(4) Use of CopyBot and Similar Tools a ToS Violation
Tuesday, November 14th, 2006 at 3:47 PM by: corylinden

Second Life needs features to provide more information about assets and the results of copying them. Unfortunately, these are not yet in place. Until they are, the use of CopyBot or any other external application to make unauthorized duplicates within Second Life will be treated as a violation of Section 4.2 of the Second Life Terms of Service and may result in your account(s) being banned from Second Life. If you feel that someone has used CopyBot to make an infringing copy of your content, please file an abuse report. Note that this is completely separate from any copyright infringement claim you may wish to pursue via the DMCA.

Like the World Wide Web, it will never be possible to prevent data that is drawn on your screen from being copied. While Linden Lab could get into an arms race with residents in an attempt to stop this copying, those attempts would surely fail and could harm legitimate projects within Second Life.

There are features to allow Second Life residents more choices about how they respond to potential infringement beyond the DMCA. Specifically, we will add data to allow residents to compare asset creators and creation time; incorporate Creative Commons licenses so creators have the option to create content that allows free copying, modification, and exchange without having to utilize outside applications; expand ban lists and reputation so residents can share information about those who abuse copyright; and, publish additional statistics on the website so creators can make rational decisions about the health and strength of Second Life’s economy.

These are important features because the implications of copying should not be about Linden Lab’s approach to copyright enforcement. We are not in the copyright enforcement business. The communities within Second Life should have the tools and the freedoms to decide how and when they deal with potentially infringing content. Many will decide on less restrictive regimes in order to maximize innovation and creativity. Others will choose more restrictive options and ban visitors who do not respect them. Consumers, creators, and all residents need to have the final say about which approaches work best for them.
Please recognize that using the Terms of Service is not a permanent solution. Nor is it shift in Linden Lab’s support of libsecondlife (who have removed CopyBot from their Subversion repository), machinima creators, or others who have explored Second Life beyond the features of the Second Life client. I continue to feel that libsecondlife is an incredibly important part of Second Life’s development and community.

I do not extend those feelings to residents attempting to profit off of infringing use of CopyBot.

To the community, I am very sorry that we have not already completed the features needed for you to address these concerns yourself. We are working very hard to complete them and will release them as soon as they are ready. In terms of prioritization and scheduling, additional asset data will be deployed in Q1 2007. Adding in support for CC and expanding the ban lists will be deployed 3 to 6 months later. Until then, as described in the first paragraph, use of CopyBot or similar tools to create infringing copies within Second Life will be treated as a violation of the Terms of Service.

(5) Copyrights and Content Creation in Second Life
Monday, November 13th, 2006 at 9:57 PM by: Robin Linden

. . . CopyBot allows the user to create a replication of an object, including textures, that is fully permissive. Needless to say this product has caused tremendous worry among content creators who want to understand how its use may possibly affect their business. In particular, they are concerned about theft of their creations, and the potential for unscrupulous people to undercut their prices and essentially take away their business.

First a caveat. Copying does not always mean theft. There can be legitimate uses for copying, just as there are on the web. As Cory has written previously, copying is not necessarily theft, and in fact nowhere in the copyright laws does the word “theft” appear. Instead, the language focuses on the idea of violating a copyright — i.e. I have an idea which I own a copyright on, and you have profited from presenting that idea as your own. You have violated my copyright.

Merely copying something doesn’t mean that a copyright violation has occurred. The law discusses ‘fair use’, for example, as one type of copying that is not a violation. If you DO think someone has copied something you made and is violating your copyright by profiting from the copying then you do have the option of using the DMCA process to file a complaint. It’s a difficult process, but it is one that we’re willing to help enable because we agree that copying is a disincentive to creation.

Ideally we’ll build ways that you can better identify your work as your own so that copying it is not profitable. For example, here are some ideas that we’re pursuing to help you prove your ownership of an idea or object . . .

-----

I'll get to the issues of "fair use," "in the public domain," and so forth, when I have more time.

coco

Colette Meiji

/me recommends Gigs back away slowly when Coco is in /PWN mode.