Policy Clarification

If this rule truly applies to reality, then we wouldn't have photos like Robert Doisnaux's 'The Kiss'...I cant tell you how many great crowd images I have seen...Did the photographer who photographed the last evacuees from the US embassy in Vietnam go around asking permission? I doubt it. I doubt that everyone in the Tsunami footage was asked, either, but many agents (advertisers in news programs and magazines for example) are out there profiting from it.

I think that copyright is a VERY delicate issue...however if SL reflects certain aspects of RL, and if photographing people in public environs is acceptable in RL, then of course SL should reflect that reality.

If SL by law *is* different than RL, i.e. the environment is classified as something else, then that needs to be hammered out. The fact that LL kindly allows us the rights to all of our unique creations is amazing....after almost 10 years in ActiveWorlds and coming away with NONE of my builds or any rights to all of that creative work (most of which got deleted arbitrarily by them), I am grateful for LL's sensitivity to the work that we put into things.

My $.02 ($.00008L)

OoPs!

We should keep in mind the origin of this clarification and its likely enforcement. Someone was taking photos UP the skirts of women and using them in his museum without the subject's knowledge or consent, and insisted he was not only morally right, but he felt that nothing in the TOS/CS could stop him.

This debate raged on and what emerged was "mature content" and "consent" are difficult terms to perfectly define, and the Lindens have no intention of creating volumes of examples to anticipate every scenario (nor should they). Robin's clarification will disappoint those who want a clearly defined line with limits they can push.

What we have instead is a very polite reminder that the Lindens are NOT granting you cart blanch rights over other peoples images. When you showcase photographs of someone else, you WILL need to take their feelings into account. If you you are adamantly opposed to considering the feelings of your subjects, then there exists a chance that the subject will file an abuse report, and that the Lindens will take appropriate action.

The likelihood of getting an abuse report filed against you, and the severity of the punishment will without a doubt vary depending on the level of embarrassment or humiliation your publicly displayed photo causes the subject. Again, for those of you who like clearly defined lines this is bad news as a Linden may very well eyeball appropriate punishments. The results are going to be different if you publicly display a photo of me in a crowd attending a town hall meeting without my consent vs. if you publicly display a naked photo of me when my clothing had not yet rezzed without my consent.

While some of you just tuning in may actually be confused, I think a lot of the hyperbole over Robin's clarification is a case of sour grapes. The intention for some opponents is to make everybody reject Robin's clarification out of fear that the Lindens are incapable of reasonable judgment, that we will get banned for taking friendly snapshots, and that whole genres of legitimate art will disappear. Don't fall for it.

You guys REALLY have no concept of how badly this is going to blow up in peoples faces.
A small amount for logic applied to this whole "Upskirt" thing and you would have saved your self righteous indignance for another battle.

While I do not condone or endorse any such policy anymore than I condone or endorse taking pics of virtual panties, I can already see a half dozen REALLY bad things that could potentially happen as "fallout" from such a policy... and guess what kids?
There wont be a single solitary thing you would be able to do about half of them.

Wave bye bye to the frying pan, and say hello to the fire.
*sigh*
Sorry guys... I feel bad for you all if you were unhappy, but I feel worse for the potential unhappiness to come.

/me prepares for the impending armegaddon about to befall these poor girls as soon as some creep puts 2 and 2 together.