Does advertising actually WORK?

I'm not Mr. Hyde here...come on. Why would you think I would hate you for what you wrote....I think it's very easy-going and honest...I write in forms hoping to meet people that aren't afraid to be honest, no matter what the general consensus is saying.

Thank you for the kind words. And yes, I'm going to change it...I'm honestly not worried about this surfacing to Nikon...the only way it would, is if one of my 'friends' here clues them in. No matter...what's done is done, and you just have to move on.

Cheers.

lol...the Nixon SL100...I like that. I think that would definitely sell the same. Thanks.

I'm not fooling anyone, nor myself. I know what I want, and I know how to get there. Glowbox is what it is not because of my Nikon camera...

MyCon SL100....Mikon...hmmm...

Not sure I like to impression I'm conning anyone...unless that's what you were eluding to you clever Moose you....err...Donkey...ummm...Horse...Horse...sorry.

This thread got derailed into the sort of thing a certain class of posters love - an opportunity to chew endlessly on an issue that matters almost not at all in reality but gives one the opportunity to assume an attitude of moral superiority over another poster and many others besides. What happiness!

As far as MB's use of the Nikon trademark is concerned, for chrissakes, it is an issue between MB and Nikon. And Nikon is big and rich, and no doubt has lots of high-powered lawyers on staff to take care of its legal interests. It is heartwarming to see how eager some are to rush to the defense of the rank commercial interests of Big Business, however, I think it is misplaced in this instance. The rank commercial interest of Nikon is precisely the opposite of what such posters are so loudly proclaiming.

If Nikon has any sense at all, and IF they ever notice MB's SL cameras, the rational thing for them to do AS A BUSINESS is to follow in the footsteps of Coca Cola and of Linden Lab itself, and send MB a stern lawyer letter giving him an exclusive, nontransferable, revokable license to use the Nikon name PROVIDED he do nothing that may harm the reputation of their trademark. After all, it is free advertising for them, to an audience (SL residents) that unquestionably includes many people who are potential customers for Nikon's RL products, at the cost of a US$ revenue in SL that would not even cover the cost of their lawyers sending the lawyer letter, let alone suing MB in court.

It is probable that Nikon is not as stupid as the posters so zealously attacking MB, and would rather not throw away a little free advertising (assuming MB's product does do them credit, of course, but that is up to MB).

Suggestion to MB: Don't throw these "moralistic" poseurs a bone and pretend it is for the common good other than in the traditional Adam Smith sense. Take pride in making a buck from gratuitously and graciously advertising Nikon's fine brand for no cost to Nikon at all.

I'm annoyed because I really would have liked to see the thread this could have been -- a discussion of whether billboard and ad-farm advertising does any real advertising good at all - rather than the self-glorifying ego-fest it has become.

So, anybody have anything to say about the OP's real question, or is this thread just going to be another indulgence in a certain form of intellectual vanity, and I am only IBTL?

I want my two minutes back.

---------------

Do you have anything to say about the original intent of this thread?

If not, Pot meet Kettle, particularly by your tone.

Har, I'm not sure whether to hug you or slap you...I hope you don't think I'm one of those egotistical posters who try to focus things on themselves...

I merely made some statements early on, people responded, and I've been in discussion about new things ever since. I never intend to hijack...in fact, my original few posts were on topic...I actually think the evolution of this thread was healthy for the most part, and is relevant to the entire thread's purpose.

I agree with you on many levels in your post Har. However, I'm honestly not thinking of 'stucking it to the man' as you sorta' implied I might do...I'm doing it because I like Nikon, love to model, and enjoy sharing my goods. Profit has little to do with it.

I agree that Nikon would like my camera. It's a high quality model, and is definitely positive marketing. Instead of paying someone to make cameras for them and give them away free...I've made one for them for free. It's a win/win for them...some people disagree however.

Anyway. I don't mean to hijack again, I felt your post deserved a response.


{ah, Collette that wasn't nice. I see there are two clear teams in the forum. Oh, and BTW, pot pot meet kettle kettle}

Look around your Home in RL, and see how many Name Brands you have Cluttering up the Place. How many of you Paid $200 for a pair of Sneakers, or Bought a T-shirt with a clothing line Logo printed on the front.

If advertising works so well meat Side, then why wouldn't it work in SL?

Angel.

Tough.

There are no teams on the forum. And if there are I'm certainly not on one of them.

The Lone Ranger, Colette Meiji. lol. I'm kidding. Despite our differences in opinion on certain things...I like you. I think you're smart and are very charismatic despite our random tiffs.

Nikon has spend billions developing and marketing their brand. Michael is taking advantage of that and so far has gotten away with it. Good for him.

But like all law-bending things in SL, it won't last. Gambling is gone. Being a Euro resident and not paying VAT is gone.

Soon blatant copyright infringement will be gone too. But in the meantime, enjoy.

I only police myself. Acting like an authority when you're not a member of a law enforcement organization isn't my idea of a fun use of time.

I said this recently in another thread. People thought many times the sky is falling, but this one will be the biggie IMO. Product names stolen everywhere, copyrighted images copied and uploaded for L$10 then sold for L$100, the list goes on. I don't think the sky will fall, but I think sh*t is going to hit the fan eventually with this one.

Just like Napster wasn't able to say they can't control what their clients do, LL will not be able to ignore their responsibility in this matter. It's going to be a hard one for them to deal with.

I don't think so, Dance, for reasons others have already mentioned. Though I haven't tried it. However, I do some advertising for a couple of shops, and these definitely work for clothing and homes:

> SL Forum advertising
> SLU Forum advertising, to a lesser degree
> Inworld group advertising (e.g. Fashcon, which allows designers to post "new release" notices for clothing)

For name recognition, not generally product movement:
> Advertising on the leading fashion blogs
> An occasional successful interview on a blog

It is not the defense of big business, but ALL business. Yours, theirs, Michael's, just as much as anyone's. It is a principle.

This was not the subject of the discussion but may be a good way for Nikon to remedy the situation and still protect its rights. But it's Nikon's call, not Michael's.

Pot, Meet Kettle.


Extortion sucks. No, it doesn't work.

If LL or Nikon catches wind of this, disapproves, and wants me to remove the branding...no problem. Easy as penguin pie.

As long as they catch wind of it on their own (wink wink) and not by some secret-santa.

Thanks guys. No worries. I'm working on the solution.

By the way, that couch you have in your forum hangout that I made? That's a Herman Miller...you can tell him while you're at it. He's only a millionaire...still looking for the big 'B' label.

The difference between SL and Napster is Napster's sole existence was wrapped around copyright theft. SL's is not. It's a small number of people breaking the laws. I think it will be handled like other illegal activities on the Grid: Policed on a case by case basis.

I think the sky is more likely to fall when Windlight becomes mandatory and overnight 40% of the SL population can't use the latest version.

(/me nods his head slowly.) ...yeah, right. Just place the two branded cameras side by side in your shop. See what happens. Or are you funnin' me like I was with MyCon?

Actually, my opinion of Glowbox has totally been influenced by your postings here regarding Nikon and in other threads. What it is in my mind, I'm going to guess, is much different than what you think it is. You are a major part of your brand. How people perceive you affects their perception of your company/brand. The good news is very few SLers read the forums.


It's a donkey, a Nikon donkey.

Tough to do.

Michael is an anonymous guy on the internet.

First, they would have to subpoena LL to get his information, and to do that I think they need to have demonstrable cause to do so, such as a nonfrivolous lawsuit.

I suppose he could have his RL info up somewhere.

But if Nikon's legal team is anything near normal and not as starry-happy-eyed as a kindergarten teacher on Prozac... once they find his info he risks going down hard.

Sure it can be a cute publicity stunt or a joke, but honestly, putting a 90 year old, famous brand identity in the hands of a random guy even in Second Life?

No way.

Marketing and brand identity is worth a *fortune*, hard won over decades, especially in Nikon's case.

It takes just one serious mistake to trash *all* of that. Executives get canned, and then sued for negligence for a lot less.

And even if Nikon played along, whatever Michael's next moves were, Nikon would be along for the ride. Revoking permissions, and having everyone know it was revoked are two different things.

Might be interesting to know Nikon's history, who they do business with, and how. This isn't some casual California tech company run by Bay Area liberals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu

Then consider how casually they might treat infringement.

* * * * *

Back when there were mainland telehubs, and those hubs were in frequent use over a significant portion of the grid I tried them for a while for my West Trade Imports.

It was only a modest boost - and that was for a display about as classy as it can get, where everyone *had* to go.

Use anything that could be remotely construed as an ad farm and you will probably get noticed as a company to *avoid*.

You might try NCI's - those displays aren't inflicted on the grid at large, but rather on the crowds that come to NCI campuses of their own accord.

Talk to Carl Metropolitan, or better yet, perhaps see who is advertising on them and ask them how they are doing.

Some other people here have touched on this, but I should mention: it's in the interest of all businesses, including SL ones, to make sure that other businesses keep the rules.

If MB is actually getting a sales boost from using the Nikon name, then that means that other camera makers might be losing out. Would it be desirable for multiple businesses on SL to be effectively forced to commit a trademark violation - and accept the risk of a DMCA lawsuit - because they'll have to compete against businesses that do?

If Nikon did wind up granting him a license to use their trademark, doesn't that make all the people prior to MB, who _didn't_ try to copy that trademark, into suckers? Again, what are the competitors supposed to do - call _their_ cameras "Canon" or "Sony" just in case they'd otherwise miss out on what is effectively a beneficial deal?

According to a newsgroup post I looked up on a legal group (not a very reliable source, but anyway), copyright infringement, as part of a business is a _criminal_ offense. Thus, anyone (such as a competing camera maker) can initiate the prosecution against someone using the Nikon name, provided they can prove that Nikon didn't give them permission to use it (although that probably means asking Nikon, and that means Nikon become aware of the copyright infringement and would be required to act on it within a minimum time or lose the copyright).

This makes a lot of sense, as it prevents the situation of someone - say - selling Spider-Man web shooters without permission, counting that the extra publicity will mean they'll have taken over the market by the time the cease and desist letter arrives. I think there have been one or two real examples involving Harry Potter..

My very personal opinion:

On the original thread topic - I don't buy anything on billboards. I think they are ugly, so I avoid looking at what's on them, they just clutter the landscape and are more likely to STOP me from buying from the merchant rather than what they intended.

On the Nikon thing - I find the opinion of "I can get away with breaking the law, so why is it a big deal?" quite offensive. If I see ANY dishonesty in the way a merchant does business (campers, spamming search words, copyight infringement, etc.), I don't do any business with them. I figure if they will be dishonest/break a law in one area, they can't be trusted to do honest business with me. I just don't go there.

Um. What did I do to you to deserve this? You think I'm the only one on these forums that has stabbing remarks? Think again.

You don't know me. Pure and simple. And I don't need your business...thank you. I'm not even in SL for that.

The first part of your post...I don't think it's fair to place them side by side...now is it? Kind'of defeats the experiment. But I see you just had to be difficult. No problem.

Spread the word...Michael Bigwig of Glowbox Designs is a jerk who steals other peoples IPs...what you're forgetting...is that all these biting remarks...are increasing my business, not diminishing it. It's true you know.

Happy Holidays.

I think they can call it whatever they want really. The company they mimic is the only one that should get involved. It's nobody else's business really...I think.

I have not, nor would I ever steal another "person's" design. I've been in graphic design for over a dozen years, and I hold my scruples and ethic high. The day I steal one of [your] ideas, then you can crucify me...but come on...one camera from a billion dollar industry--and I'm not even doing it to make profit. I'm here for all the right reasons, but you guys treat me like I'm here for all the wrong reasons.

Many of you have strong personal opinions about me--and you openly call me out about my choice of words. These same people are constantly being jerks and insulting to me and others...what makes it OK when [you] do it?

I don't buy the 'It's on principal' or 'What MB is doing is hurting other companies, who suffer sales because MB is using the Nikon name.' --I honestly thing that's all poppy-cosh.

I sell my product because of my product's high quality standards, my marketing strategy and ad placement, and the overall quality of my studio and sample work. To claim the name Nikon is boosting my sales and decreasing other peoples' sales is stretching. And no...my 'marketing strategy' is not "steal a big brand name."

And because I have a single product, tucked away in a quiet sim, I think all this 'immoral' and 'on principle' and 'unethical' talk is going way overboard. I highly doubt my inclusion of one name-brand item is going to influence the economy and choices of other designers.

Whether any of you want to admit it or not, the entire situation has been WAY overblown. I personally think this gives (some of you) an excuse to flame me relentlessly because, technically, you are 'right', and I can't beat that...

Yes, leave it to me to tell it like it is. I'm not at all being a jerk...or any of the other names you like to call me. I'm simply being honest, and logging this whole situation down as a learning experience.

I hope you guys can see past some of my more curt replies, and understand where I'm coming from. It's so easy to point the finger. I ask that you really think about why you choose to be so hurtful about it all...

Can't we all just get along?

I'm not shooting dirty pool you know...I'm not in this for profit or to screw anybody else--and to be completely honest, none of the other camera makers (yes we know each other) have any qualms about me selling a Nikon brand name. They like my work, and respect Glowbox. The only people that have problem with it are a handful of you here on the forums...you act like I'm copybotting another SL citizen's product.

Serenarra...you've completely skewed my point of view, belief, and quotable material...you couldn't be more wrong.

I never said anything like what you say I'm saying. So...why again are you offended?



Ah...so THAT'S why I'm not getting any business. I knew something was up. So, once I remove my one single 'Nikon' branded item...I'll increase my companies business exponentially.

Seriously though...if you think Glowbox and myself are 'dishonest' and 'can't be trusted' because I'm selling one product by a brand-name billion dollar company...then, well, you have trust issues. Sorry to be so upfront, but...hey, you were. I'm extremely trustworthy and reliable...my selling of that product has nothing to do with 'bad business' or 'immorality.'

I don't know. I know I can't win here...just know that I'm going to change it...'on principle.'

And BTW--I feel I've handled myself very well considering the flak I've received. Other than a few touche' moments, I haven't lost my cool. As long as we all try and keep it cool...things will be fine.

*Sometimes* it's SL's most professional newspaper. They've been having a lot of problems over there missing deadlines, forgetting to run ads, and the like. One person having RL issues does not essentially close down a professionally run newspaper.

Hmmm...OK. In the years I've known them, they have always been extremely capable and competent.

Sometimes sh*t happens. Unavoidable. I wouldn't worry about a few discrepancies here and there--they run a tight ship, and I love their publication (I even wrote for them for a short time).