Stolen Textures

Oddly, in this IP-crazed era, clothing designs are generally unprotected. They don't qualify for copyright as useful items, and registered designs don't hold up very well when the variations often are pretty small and the application process can take longer than the garment is in style. That's part of why designer logos tend to get emblazoned on things these days, they can fall back on trademark protection. There has been talk over the years of extending copyright to cover them, but so far that hasn't happened.

However, the photograph of the clothing design (eg. found on the web), or an original drawing (eg. in Photoshop) of a real or imaginary clothing design, *IS* fully protected by copyright.

Also, people seem to suggest that the worst that can happen is that you might get a DMCA "takedown" notice, forcing you to remove the item. But the DMCA notice is not for you, it is for Linden Lab, to protect them and distinguish them, that LL is not the offender. *YOU* get hit with copyright infringement, which is an action that can easily cost you hundreds of thousands $US. Removing the infringing textures from Second Life does not protect you - you've already committed the act of infringement.

Also, not knowing that you had purchased unauthorized textures does not protect you. Jut because you didn't know, that doesn't let you off the hook in any way.

I don't see how it could possibly be safe to ever use any texture on anything in Second Life, to be honest. Except for textures that you personally created from scratch.

Maybe, and it is a very big maybe! Copyrights for photos of unprotected material have been thrown out if the photos themselves didn't show enough originality, so it's a big ugly gray area.

IMO, photosourcing whole outfits like you describe is thievery, Especially if creator did not take the photo of the outfit themselves. *Shrug*


No one in SL. Anyone who sources like that, without written permission from the copyright holder(s) is infringing. The answer to your questio would more than likely be the photographer of the photo or whoever photographer passed copyright license to.

Its a tough call and I am glad I am not a clothes designer, its a tough market.

But if we go the notion that those who photo source usually from clothing catalouge sites e.t.c. are thieving.. then thats a hell of a lot in SL, including a lot of big names. Or it could be that they lifted the images from such sites where you pay a fee to have access to stock pictures to work with...?

What I find interesting is in regards to SL.. if two designers sourced the same texture, whilst both may be wrong you can bet your bottom dollar there would be a shouting match between the 2 claiming ownership.. who 'wins' inside our virtual world regarding this?

But in this case Jesseaitui it most likely that neither had the copyright passed to them by the photographer.. Where maybe the right thing to do is to both take them down if that is whats happened here.. its highly unlikely that will happen.. so who gets to claim ' ownership'? the person who sourced it first? The bigger name in the fashion world of SL?

Its a hornets nest

i just wanted to say thank you for so much interesting and indepth discussion.

after a good nights sleep, i feel that they were stolen. i don't have any proof of purchase because i bought them in december, and the transaction history expires after 30 days. i didn't bother saving it, because i really am naive and didn't think this would be an issue. the three i showed here are from the same person. it's clearly a scam. i don't know about the other 2 outfits. i guess i never will.

i am going to write ANOTHER note to the person i got them from (whom i still have not heard back from, but know he got the messages because suddenly his name disappeared from my friends list), explaining my position and anger at him, and consider exposing him if he doesn't answer me the way i prefer. i'm probably already muted.

i used to buy most of my textures inworld, and now i just nab them from the net .... but most are used for personal use.

i'm sorry that i'm just not clever enough, yet, to create a clothing line from scratch. so, if you bought anything from me, it was photosourced.

i will not be putting these items back for sale, i will be writing an apology letter to the owner, and i think i sold 2-3 outfits total, so i will be going back to the owner store to find her pricing, and pay her for my misdeeds.

expensive lesson. but i will rest easy with my head on the pillow now, and be much more cautious in the future. i am sorry to all creators for this. i am embarrassed, because this is a RL violation, and even though i'm a big mouth, i'm an honest one. generally i don't give a damm wut people think of me (or my alts LOL) but in this case, i hope you will forgive me and not judge me based on this error. subject closed. *whew*

3Ring, I hope the you don't get discouraged from doing YOUR thing because you didn't realize the textures you bought were possibly ill gotten sloppy seconds. Just be more careful when dealing with outside sources. Realize that if you buy textures from someone else, even if you get exclusive rights to them (very unlikely), there is a good possibility those textures will be used by others too (legally, or not). This obviously makes them less unique, unless you use them in a way that makes them unique. That is sometimes part of the creative challenge with photo sourcing, unless you shoot your own photos.

It's a shame that photo sourcing is looked upon as "cheating" or "less creative", or "not the right look for a cartoon world". I wish people wouldn't confuse the legal issues of usage and ownership with the technical aspects of creation in a virtual world. Photo sourcing can be even more challenging to pull off well than hand rendering, ESPECIALLY with SL avatars and over all consistency. Do people seriously think that the next generation virtual worlds will be "cartoony"? Look at what has happened with SL over the past five years (skins, animations, sculpties, flexy prims, Windlight). If an avatar skin looks more realistic than the clothes on the avatar, or vice versa, who's fault is that? Certainly not the fault of the creators. Perhaps it's the buyer's fault (in the same sense that one can buy a lot of different but well designed furniture for a room and have it all look like CRAP when it's together in the same room). Such are the pitfalls of user generated and supported content.

In some cases source photographs ARE essential tools of creation (i.e. custom skins/faces where the client wants their avatar to look like their RL self). Imagine how difficult a job like that would be if the client was asked to describe themselves with just words, or pay for a plane ticket and lodging expenses while the artist had them "sit" and pay for the digital portrait. It could be done, but at what cost in time and money?! Digital photo sourcing and the internet makes that type of work much more feasible.

The clothing/textures are not identical in any of the 3 pairs, but they are so similar that they could be seen as being stolen. However, one aspect that I don't think has been mentioned is that the 3 non-3ring outfits are to be found in the same store, so there are 2 stores with the same outfits. That's too big a coincidence for me.

To my mind, either 3ring's creator stole the designs and modified them a little for 3ring, or he created and sold slightly modified 'exclusive' designs to both stores. If it's the latter, then 3ring is ok to sell them. It could be that the other store owner has been duped in the same way that 3ring has been. If it were me, I'd contact the other store's owner and ask where s/he got the designs because they are excellent, and hope that the reply sheds some light on the truth. If I was in 3ring's position, I wouldn't want to have wasted the cost of the designs if I didn't have to, and if the other store owner was duped in the same way, I wouldn't have to waste the money.

Phil, it is the owner of the other clothes who came to me about this. I had no idea, and visited his/her store to see for myself.

her versions are much better actually, and she has many many designs that are very attractive, and similar in taste. i feel he/she was stolen from, because they said they were. this person threatened me, which is partly why i took it so seriously immediately. i don't want to get into trouble, and i can think of no reason this person would accuse me if they had also purchased them. but i will possibly ask, altho at this point i just want to put this behind me and move on.

due to RL circumstances, i am deciding to leave SL and remove my internet from my home as soon as i can, and until further notice. so, the whole thing is moot at this point anyway.

i'll be leaving soon, and i'll be back, i just don't know when for either.

basically, i won't be leaving until i sell my properties. i have a 2048 with home, and a 4096 with store. i hope they sell fast. i have made this choice with my RL and i need to follow up on it as soon as possible. but until i actually remove the internet, i might be around, just not be online as much as i like either. and that's ok. RL beckons, and it takes priority, obviously.

I heard recently that clothing designs are or will become something that can be owned by those who create them.
Truthfully in my opinion if you come up with original design like a original song or painting it should have same copyright protections of a Movie or some song produced in hollywood by a boy band...
I am sorry 3ring you're so busy you may have to leave soon.
I will miss your post even though we have never met I have always enjoy reading your post.
There is a lot of people I have never spoken to directly here that I enjoy reading whatever they post its like important to me in some strange way.
Your name is on top of that list of those important to me in some strange way

heard this by accident while looking property for sale.
Marco Grockle: si
[8:30] Marco Grockle: no
[8:30] Marco Grockle: che fa?
[8:31] Marco Grockle: ah,,,avevo letto una serie di trucchi
[8:31] Marco Grockle: per rubare texture
[8:31] Marco Grockle: non funzionano
[8:31] harleydavidson Tomorrow: a gina le rifa sfuocate ma credo che ia da sistemare
[8:32] harleydavidson Tomorrow: si per rubare le texture
[8:32] Marco Grockle: io sai che faccio quando mi servono?
[8:32] harleydavidson Tomorrow: ecco...
[8:32] harleydavidson Tomorrow: vabbè
[8:32] Marco Grockle: semplice
[8:32] Marco Grockle: metto la luce giusta
[8:32] Marco Grockle: e le fotografo
[8:32] harleydavidson Tomorrow: e ppoi?
[8:32] Marco Grockle: poi le elaboro in RL
[8:32] Marco Grockle: e le importo
[8:32] harleydavidson Tomorrow: ecco...a essere capaci
[8:32] harleydavidson Tomorrow: semplice si!
[8:33] Marco Grockle: anche solo la foto a volte va bene
[8:33] harleydavidson Tomorrow: come va qua?
[8:33] Marco Grockle: qui ho messo questa
[8:33] Marco Grockle: la il modello...diciamo rubacchiato, mofdificato e rimpicciolito

what language is that? seems Spanish, but i can't make most of it out.

italian

and for those of us who can't read the mulch that Babelfish turns this into? What are they saying?

I can't read Italian so I gave it to a friend who can but is not an SL person and she says they are talking about stealing textures.Since it's illegal I thought it would be better to post the original chat and let someone who can read this actually translate it on line, rahter than post what my friend thought they were saying. That way if there are any translation mistakes someone would probably notice.

Now we need a friendly Italian.

I don`t think its a tough call. It`s thievery plain and simple. (I do not believe photosourcing in itself is thievery, though. I believe surfing online and using images one has no permission to be using is thievery). I personally do a mixture of both sourcing and hand drawing. However, i NEVER source full outfits, I will use pieces such as wrinkles, folds, zippers, pockets, etc when I feel it will give the clothing a better look.



Right, alot of people do this. Doesn`t make it right, it only has made it acceptable. I think majority of people do not even understand its infringement especially with how widespread this movement is in SL.

I was once at a shop that photosources whole outfits, my jaw dropped when I saw that not only did the creator leave on the original clothing art, but also the brand logo. So not only did creator infringe on someone`s copyright, she also infringed on someone`s trademark rights.

There are sites out there, like www.3d.sk, that you are royalty free and you can make things out of the outfits they wear.


Exactly. And that`s the Irony of it all.

But just because someone sources doesnt automatically mean it was wrong or illegal. Concerning people in sl, I would bet it normally is, but photosourcing does not always equal a crime.

That has happened to me. When I first started out, I used a photo of a gown to make a gown and sold it for a while. Then I saw a very popular designer had the same dress in her shop...only she includes a photo on the promo display of the dress worn in R/L with all her dresses. My jaw hit the floor and I immediatly pulled every copy of that dress I sell now. It doesn't matter, to me at least, who designed it first. I was willing to pull mine down and just not mention it to anyone. Since then, my dresses are original designs. As I've said, I may use a photo for inspiration, or as a "starting point" but I edit most everything I use so it is not what it originally appeared to be.

Some Sl designers are delusional. If someone is going to take a public image from online and use it, they have to understand that there`s a chance other people might take the same image and use it.

If someone is going to look at RL outfits and draw the exact same thing, they also have to be aware someone else might do the same thing. There`s nothing they can do about it, they don`t own it.

Countless people use RL designs and images as a basis for their work and then when someone else in SL does the same thing, they start throwing a fit and calling that person a thief.

And then, it escalates to the point that whoever is the "bigger" designer is looked upon as some "original artist" who made it, while the lesser known designer is accused of stealing from the other. Ive witnessed this happen several times. Pretty sad if you ask me.

Wake people !!! copybot is all over sl and its newer and better then the old one .Soon there wont be any buying and selling in sl . Laugh if you want but you will see whats going on grrrrr

so, if we no longer buy textures from inworld, it should be ok? that seems extreme though, and there are a lot of creative artists whom i respect and adore their creations. i will buy, but for personal use and not resale. lesson learned!

I got enough of it to say - yes, they are talking about stealing textures - very happy that it is easy - they work on it in RL then upload it - I will share it with a friendly Italian I know and get back to you with the right translation.

The second sentence here is already the case. If you come up with an original song or painting it has the same copyright protection as one produced in Hollywood. You have the same right to register it as they do. The only real difference is whether you can afford the same lawyers they use to enforce their protections.

It is specifically the design of real life useful objects (i.e. not including artistic sculpture) that is treated differently. This includes fashion design. A quick search turned up http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/st_org/iptf/articles/content/1997121201.html . Although dated, and hence possibly wrong with regard to current law, it gives a decent background to the issue of copyright right protection for fashion design.

Italian friend agrees- we didn't miss anything- are you going to pass that on as an AR- offense?

Can I pass it on just as it is?
Or do I have to prove that somebody did something?

I don't have a business and nothing anyone can steal, but I don't like crooks. I'm an honest hooker :-}