Logo

Dancien Graves · 11-20-2008, 12:05 PM

Lillybeth Filth may indeed be on drugs. « Brutal: Because Nice Isn’t Cutting It

Dancien Graves · 11-20-2008, 01:37 PM

Having asked Grid Diva a direct question about the matter at hand and gotten a complete run around I have decided to uninstall LCO.

**Vertigo Paris** · 11-20-2008, 01:38 PM

What was the run around?

Dancien Graves · 11-20-2008, 01:40 PM

I asked

Quote:

Out of curiosity I am wondering what your stance is on the TRU EULA and the fact it's been stated that we can not transfer Textures purchased at TRU in SL to LCO even though they are also for sale in LCO?

Since after all Grid Diva just made a big announcement about content theft.

To which I got the reply:

Quote:

You should address your concerns about TRU's Eula to TRU.

**Vertigo Paris** · 11-20-2008, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dancien Graves

I asked

Since after all Grid Diva just made a big announcement about content theft.

To which I got the reply:

Uhm? Did you forget to copy what she said?

Dancien Graves · 11-20-2008, 01:42 PM

Fixed it

Dnate Mars · 11-20-2008, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dancien Graves

I asked

Since after all Grid Diva just made a big announcement about content theft.

To which I got the reply:

She has corporate speak down pat.

Dancien Graves · 11-20-2008, 01:44 PM

Yeah. If I wanted corp speak I would have never bothered logging onto LCO and just stuck with SL.

**Vertigo Paris** · 11-20-2008, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dnate Mars

She has corporate speak down pat.

Be that as it may, it's not like she can override the EULA.

The first course of action is to find out if what TRU is even leal, did the content creators agree to have their textures be solely a part of TRU/SL?

Did they hand over copyright rights? If not, then TRU doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Dancien Graves · 11-20-2008, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vertigo Paris

Be that as it may, it's not like she can override the EULA.

The first course of action is to find out if what TRU is even leal, did the content creators agree to have their textures be solely a part of TRU/SL?

Did they hand over copyright rights? If not, then TRU doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Verti, that's not the point. The point was I asked for their stance and got the run around.

**Vertigo Paris** · 11-20-2008, 01:52 PM

Still though, what would you consider an appropriate response?

Her bashing it? That's not incredibly professional. There isn't much she can say without looking like an ass. She has her own property to protect.

I understand your frustration, I just can't think of something she could have said that would have appeased you without sacraficing something herself.

Lordfly Digeridoo · 11-20-2008, 01:57 PM

Yeah that's not really LCO's call, it's TRU's.

Although, considering TRU is about as legit as a two-card monte operation down the street when it comes to copyright legality, I suspect it's okay to disregard any policy they might have (considering they most likely cannot prove they own the copyright on most of their textures).

In other words, they can scream EULA all they want... they would never dare file suit against you, due to you being able to open them up to about 500 more lawsuits from the companies they pilfered from.

BEARintheMorning · 11-20-2008, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lordfly Digeridoo

Yeah that's not really LCO's call, it's TRU's.

Although, considering TRU is about as legit as a two-card monte operation down the street when it comes to copyright legality, I suspect it's okay to disregard any policy they might have (considering they most likely cannot prove they own the copyright on most of their textures).

In other words, they can scream EULA all they want... they would never dare file suit against you, due to you being able to open them up to about 500 more lawsuits from the companies they pilfered from.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Samantha Fuller · 11-21-2008, 04:29 AM

The problem with that line of Logic is she dose not have to file a lawsuite she has only to inform a Legend and the offender might or might not be banned from LCO until we get clarification it is not safe to build a business on LCO using any texture that looks like it might have come from TRU.

Lordfly Digeridoo · 11-21-2008, 06:47 AM

So find out where TRU got most of their textures (hint: Games), provide proof, and counter. She shoudln't be able to upload another 100k of stolen textures just because she's roleplaying an IP lawyer.

MoxZ Mokeev · 11-21-2008, 02:57 PM

Holy shit wrong thread....

scrim Pinion · 11-22-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lordfly Digeridoo

roleplaying an IP lawyer.

A new kink is born.

Joshua Nightshade · 11-29-2008, 12:37 PM

Heh I just came across your blog entry Dancien.

It amuses me endlessly that once again Lillybeth is puffing her chest out about theft and such, considering the vast majority of content from TRU is stolen in the first place. I have heard that she has finally begun employing artists to make actual stuff but frankly as long as she's running it and it has that name it will never have any reputation other than "Thieves-R-Us."

Anyway I don't think it's right to complain about the grid owners. Her response might not have been what you wanted, but it was valid. She has no recourse if Lillybeth DMCA's content that you have on her grid because the DMCA doesn't empower people to do their own investigations. She has to deal with it by passing the message on to you or removing content. So a problem with TRU's EULA is something TRU has to address because the Legend City grid owners have no power to override it.

There is something to be said though on sourcing all the stolen textures and reporting them, which would amuse me endlessly.

I don't think it's possible to retroactively update an EULA that way though, legally. Not to mention that the legal ground for EULAs are already questionable to begin with and it won't shock me if they're shot down entirely in a couple years after one big case brings it all to light. But I'm fairly certain one of the provisions is that you have to agree to each revision, which is why you see a big notice in your face on every update to one on different MMOGs. It's also the responsibility of the person giving out the EULA to demonstrate you saw and accepted it in the first place, and I don't see how she could do that with a revision.

Most companies have provisions saying if you don't agree then you can return the software for a full refund. Try that angle with your L$20k textures.

At any rate I hope this gets google spidered as another example of why people shouldn't buy shit from that place. Rampant theft aside the behavior of its owner is textbook stupidity.

Sophia Tantalus · 11-29-2008, 12:55 PM

Your commenters are right- you can't retrofit a EULA and have it be binding. It's a contract- both parties have to AGREE. She would have to get you to agree again, unless this use was covered by the original EULA. Theoretically if you do not consent to the new EULA she may have to refund all your money on past purchases.

When did TRU start using EULAs? Were textures ever sold without them?

Now... copying textures over to another grid *is* a violation of copyright, so she does have a leg to stand on in that regard (the reason EULAs came to be was that computers require copyright violation in order to work)-- unless the EULA you agreed to gives you broader rights to copy than you would have under copyright.

Lordfly Digeridoo · 11-29-2008, 12:58 PM

her EULA is a moot point -it is unenforcable. It'd be like if I put an EULA at the end of every email I sent. "By reading this email you agree to give me your bank account number, social security card, and firstborn child."

SL notecard = hilariously unenforcable. So are bots that shout at you when you land at her store. And the popups.

Joshua Nightshade · 11-29-2008, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophia Tantalus

Your commenters are right- you can't retrofit a EULA and have it be binding. It's a contract- both parties have to AGREE. She would have to get you to agree again, unless this use was covered by the original EULA. Theoretically if you do not consent to the new EULA she may have to refund all your money on past purchases.

When did TRU start using EULAs? Were textures ever sold without them?

Now... copying textures over to another grid *is* a violation of copyright, so she does have a leg to stand on in that regard (the reason EULAs came to be was that computers require copyright violation in order to work)-- unless the EULA you agreed to gives you broader rights to copy than you would have under copyright.

It's not a violation of copyright. If he were to resell the textures as his own creation in a store, that would be a copyright violation.

Copying them to another grid for personal use is easily arguable as fair use.

EULAs developed because of a need to address the concept of copyright in a medium where duplication was potentially infinite and cost-free. I can't use a magic machine to take a Ford Taurus and make a billion duplicates to sell out of my garage at prices that undercuts the original auto maker, but I can bootleg Windows Vista with relative ease. EULAs are contracts and have nothing to do with copyright.

Not to mention that again, increasingly, they're being viewed as unconscionable contracts as that.

Sophia Tantalus · 11-29-2008, 01:06 PM

Absolutely questionable as you point out, Lordfly, although there is the position that you agree when you purchase the texture. There's also the question of how SL perms function. Is it some sort of license? The no-trans option violates the doctrine of first sale. The whole thing is a hairball.

Sophia Tantalus · 11-29-2008, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshua Nightshade

EULAs developed because of a need to address the concept of copyright in a medium where duplication was potentially infinite and cost-free.

And also because in order to install software you must make a copy of it which under law at the time required purchasers to violate copyright.

Quote:

EULAs are contracts and have nothing to do with copyright.

EULAs have everything to do with copyright. Agreeing to a EULA limits or expands your rights as an end user or a copyright holder. They have become commonplace because copyright law is insufficient to protect the interests of copyright holders in the digital environment.

Joshua Nightshade · 11-29-2008, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sophia Tantalus

And also because in order to install software you must make a copy of it which under law at the time required purchasers to violate copyright.

Fair use.

Quote:

EULAs have everything to do with copyright. Agreeing to a EULA limits or expands your rights as an end user or a copyright holder. They have become commonplace because copyright law is insufficient to protect the interests of copyright holders in the digital environment.

Legally, EULAs have nothing to do with copyright. If you violate an EULA, you get sued. Alternatively, copyright violations are a federal law with criminal penalties. Yes, they were developed because copyright law was lacking with regards to digital content, but they are not legally a part of existing copyright law.

When Blizzard brought the case against the guy who developed WoW Glider, it was a lawsuit off of him abusing the EULA/ToS.

But again (third time) increasingly that sort of argument is being seen as invalid. (Section 117 applies to the comment above about copying software too.)

Quote:

Blizzard Entertainment, the company that makes the hugely popular massively multi-player online role-playing game World of Warcraft, sued Michael Donnelly, the developer of Glider, a program that helps WoW users raise their character level to 70 by “playing” for the user while the user goes to get a cup of coffee, read the paper, etc. The WoW licensing agreement ostensibly forbids using programs like Glider. Blizzard says that Donnelly illegally interfered with that agreement by selling Glider and, therefore, encouraging users to breach the license agreement by using the program.

Here’s the scary part: Blizzard also insists that because the license agreement forbids using Glider with WoW, Glider users are committing copyright infringement when they load copies of WoW into RAM in order to play the game. (Blizzard says Donnelly is contributing to that infringement.) If Blizzard’s theory were correct, Glider users could be on the hook for statutory damages, which could start at $750 per RAM copy. Blizzard’s theory would also give software vendors the power to stop the sale of software that interoperates with their product.

But Blizzard’s theory is wrong, because it confuses a copyright holder's intellectual property rights in the software it develops with a buyer's rights in the actual copy of the software. An owner of software has a right to copy it if that copy is essential to the customer’s use of the software. (See Section 117 of the Copyright Act.) This rule is a crucial part of the balance Congress crafted between the rights of the copyright holder to manage and benefit from its expressive work, and the rights of the public to innovate, recreate and otherwise use and build on that work.

Blizzard argues that players aren’t owners but merely software licensees, so section 117 doesn’t apply. But court after court has held that the question of whether a user is an owner for purposes of Section 117 depends the substance of the transaction, not just how one party wants to describe it. For example, if you buy the software, keep it on your own computer and don’t have to return it when you are done, you probably own it.

This is not to say that there might not be a contract, like the license agreement, that restricts use of the software. But violation of that agreement is a matter of contract law, not copyright, which means that different standards apply and there is no minimum statutory damages requirement.

Sophia Tantalus · 11-29-2008, 01:23 PM

Copying for personal use is full of lots of fine points. Porting stuff to other grids requires making a fixed reproduction. If the textures are used in creating things for sale then it is a commercial use. I wouldn't be in a rush to see if my claim of personal use held up in court, although I've been wrong before.

11-20-2008, 12:05 PM	#1 (permalink)
Dancien Graves What? Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 7,055 My Mood: SL Join Date: 12/2006 Awards: 1	Purchased Textures:SL,LCO, and TRU Lillybeth Filth may indeed be on drugs. « Brutal: Because Nice Isn’t Cutting It __________________

11-20-2008, 01:57 PM	#12 (permalink)
Lordfly Digeridoo Grid.Living Buy my prefabs! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 2,318 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 5 SL Join Date: 7/21/2003 Business: Grid.Living XBOX Leaderboard: 18^th Awards: 1	Yeah that's not really LCO's call, it's TRU's. Although, considering TRU is about as legit as a two-card monte operation down the street when it comes to copyright legality, I suspect it's okay to disregard any policy they might have (considering they most likely cannot prove they own the copyright on most of their textures). In other words, they can scream EULA all they want... they would never dare file suit against you, due to you being able to open them up to about 500 more lawsuits from the companies they pilfered from. __________________ http://www.lordfly.com/

11-21-2008, 04:29 AM	#14 (permalink)
Samantha Fuller Senior Member Mostly quiet Lurker Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 339 My Mood:	The problem with that line of Logic is she dose not have to file a lawsuite she has only to inform a Legend and the offender might or might not be banned from LCO until we get clarification it is not safe to build a business on LCO using any texture that looks like it might have come from TRU. Last edited by Samantha Fuller; 11-21-2008 at 04:33 AM. Reason: spellchecking

11-21-2008, 02:57 PM	#16 (permalink)
MoxZ Mokeev Invisibly Delicious Wewtie! I has Two Ghosties Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Arkansas USA Posts: 812 My Mood: SL Join Date: 8/25/07 Blog Entries: 2	Holy shit wrong thread.... __________________ Wipe your mouth, there's still a tiny bit of bullshit around your lips.

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

11-20-2008, 01:37 PM	#2 (permalink)
Dancien Graves What? Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 7,055 My Mood: SL Join Date: 12/2006 Awards: 1	Having asked Grid Diva a direct question about the matter at hand and gotten a complete run around I have decided to uninstall LCO.

11-20-2008, 01:42 PM	#6 (permalink)
Dancien Graves What? Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 7,055 My Mood: SL Join Date: 12/2006 Awards: 1	Fixed it

11-20-2008, 01:44 PM	#8 (permalink)
Dancien Graves What? Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Fort Worth, Texas Posts: 7,055 My Mood: SL Join Date: 12/2006 Awards: 1	Yeah. If I wanted corp speak I would have never bothered logging onto LCO and just stuck with SL.

11-20-2008, 01:52 PM	#11 (permalink)
Vertigo Paris is fiesty! SLU Supporter Now hiring minions Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Displaced Bostonian living in a weather confused Texas Posts: 8,904 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 2 SL Join Date: 11/22/2006 Blog Entries: 1 XBOX Leaderboard: 40^th	Still though, what would you consider an appropriate response? Her bashing it? That's not incredibly professional. There isn't much she can say without looking like an ass. She has her own property to protect. I understand your frustration, I just can't think of something she could have said that would have appeased you without sacraficing something herself.

11-21-2008, 06:47 AM	#15 (permalink)
Lordfly Digeridoo Grid.Living Buy my prefabs! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 2,318 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 5 SL Join Date: 7/21/2003 Business: Grid.Living XBOX Leaderboard: 18^th Awards: 1	So find out where TRU got most of their textures (hint: Games), provide proof, and counter. She shoudln't be able to upload another 100k of stolen textures just because she's roleplaying an IP lawyer.

11-29-2008, 12:37 PM	#18 (permalink)
Joshua Nightshade Account Closed Unedited Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 33,567 My Mood:	Heh I just came across your blog entry Dancien. It amuses me endlessly that once again Lillybeth is puffing her chest out about theft and such, considering the vast majority of content from TRU is stolen in the first place. I have heard that she has finally begun employing artists to make actual stuff but frankly as long as she's running it and it has that name it will never have any reputation other than "Thieves-R-Us." Anyway I don't think it's right to complain about the grid owners. Her response might not have been what you wanted, but it was valid. She has no recourse if Lillybeth DMCA's content that you have on her grid because the DMCA doesn't empower people to do their own investigations. She has to deal with it by passing the message on to you or removing content. So a problem with TRU's EULA is something TRU has to address because the Legend City grid owners have no power to override it. There is something to be said though on sourcing all the stolen textures and reporting them, which would amuse me endlessly. I don't think it's possible to retroactively update an EULA that way though, legally. Not to mention that the legal ground for EULAs are already questionable to begin with and it won't shock me if they're shot down entirely in a couple years after one big case brings it all to light. But I'm fairly certain one of the provisions is that you have to agree to each revision, which is why you see a big notice in your face on every update to one on different MMOGs. It's also the responsibility of the person giving out the EULA to demonstrate you saw and accepted it in the first place, and I don't see how she could do that with a revision. Most companies have provisions saying if you don't agree then you can return the software for a full refund. Try that angle with your L$20k textures. At any rate I hope this gets google spidered as another example of why people shouldn't buy shit from that place. Rampant theft aside the behavior of its owner is textbook stupidity.

11-29-2008, 12:55 PM	#19 (permalink)
Sophia Tantalus wants fruit dabbles Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 318 My Mood:	Your commenters are right- you can't retrofit a EULA and have it be binding. It's a contract- both parties have to AGREE. She would have to get you to agree again, unless this use was covered by the original EULA. Theoretically if you do not consent to the new EULA she may have to refund all your money on past purchases. When did TRU start using EULAs? Were textures ever sold without them? Now... copying textures over to another grid is a violation of copyright, so she does have a leg to stand on in that regard (the reason EULAs came to be was that computers require copyright violation in order to work)-- unless the EULA you agreed to gives you broader rights to copy than you would have under copyright.

11-29-2008, 12:58 PM	#20 (permalink)
Lordfly Digeridoo Grid.Living Buy my prefabs! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 2,318 My Mood: SLShopper Ads: 5 SL Join Date: 7/21/2003 Business: Grid.Living XBOX Leaderboard: 18^th Awards: 1	her EULA is a moot point -it is unenforcable. It'd be like if I put an EULA at the end of every email I sent. "By reading this email you agree to give me your bank account number, social security card, and firstborn child." SL notecard = hilariously unenforcable. So are bots that shout at you when you land at her store. And the popups.

11-29-2008, 01:06 PM	#22 (permalink)
Sophia Tantalus wants fruit dabbles Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 318 My Mood:	Absolutely questionable as you point out, Lordfly, although there is the position that you agree when you purchase the texture. There's also the question of how SL perms function. Is it some sort of license? The no-trans option violates the doctrine of first sale. The whole thing is a hairball.

11-29-2008, 01:23 PM	#25 (permalink)
Sophia Tantalus wants fruit dabbles Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 318 My Mood:	Copying for personal use is full of lots of fine points. Porting stuff to other grids requires making a fixed reproduction. If the textures are used in creating things for sale then it is a commercial use. I wouldn't be in a rush to see if my claim of personal use held up in court, although I've been wrong before.

Logo

Site Navigation