(snip) however, I dont understand how no transfer protects developer rights.
I can sell my used car, I can sell my used software, I can sell anything I buy to someone else. It doesnt hurt the people who made them. Im not trying to argue, I honestly would like to understand your point of view.
I can sell my used car, I can sell my used software, I can sell anything I buy to someone else. It doesnt hurt the people who made them. Im not trying to argue, I honestly would like to understand your point of view.
To use your example- when you sell a rl car, you cannot go out to your driveway & rez another copy & drive off or put a new for sale sign on the copy, can you? (Chevrolet etc would be out of business in about 10 minutes) You can't give the same single sweater to 6 different people, can you? (ditto Tommy Hillfiger) When setting permissions, an item can be no copy OR no transfer NOT both. Modify is completely independent of the other 2.
Selling items with open permissions will likely eventually land the item in a freebie box somewhere or, worse, resold by a greedy someone who bought a single copy & now has a cash cow if the item is good. Obviously, this undermines any compensation for the original artist. For the hours & love most of us put into creating lovely & well-detailed items, the profit-margin is narrow enough already.
A fair solution is for sellers to clearly state the permissions on an item in their shop or vendor. If its no transfer & you want to gift it out, contact the creator & ask him/her to lay one on your friend & let you pay for it. Most of us are happy enough to make the sale that we don't mind doing this small customer service for you.
In summary, I will sell it to you either copyable or transferrable, not both. Sorry, Hun.
