Furniture and the Copy Permission

So your answer is, because you want to. That's alright

I wouldn't say that you should have bought three to start with. I'd guess that in most cases, you'd be able to get the chair you want, either because it's still on sale, or from the creator if it's been changed.

Coincidentally, I had that happen yesterday. A customer had bought three dining chairs and now wanted four, but I've changed the chairs since she bought the three - I reduced them from 3 prims to 2. So I offered her one of the old chairs, or swapping her old ones for the new ones, so she could get the 4th. She chose to have the new ones and save a few prims. (I gave the the 4th one - she didn't have to pay)

There are many valid reasons for wanting to buy copyable furniture and the biggest is probably one that you said - because I want to pay only for one and be able to rez as many as I like. But that type of reason doesn't answer my questions, which were about whether people think they *should* be able to rez as many as they like after paying for only one, and, if so, why.

Because I've made a point of buying a copyable item in order to be able to to do if I want to -- and, in my case, I might want to so as to be able to match my furniture if I rearrange stuff and I would rather not have to go back to the store to buy matching items if the need arises.

You don't want to sell copyable items.. fine.. there's plenty of people who are happy to buy (probably prefer to buy) no-copy, transfer ones. Your success is proof of that. What's to worry about?

Yes, it does, if you pay attention. People should be able to rez as many X as they want, because in SL the default is for them to be able to rez as many X as they want, because in Second Life there's no cost to rezzing an extra X if you have the spare prims, because Second Life isn't like real life where you have to buy wood and cloth and cotton batting and nails and thread and glue and varnish, so the assumption that you should even HAVE to have a reason for being able to rez as many copies as you want is not there.

In SL you don't buy "one chair", you buy "the right to rez a chair". Like in the real world you don't buy "The White Album", you buy "the right to play the music". Why should you only be allowed to "play the chair" in your living room, and not at the same time in the den? SL allows you to sell it with that limitation, but that limitation isn't inherent in the way SL works.

In asking the question, you introduce an assumption that you should need such a reason.

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

If people are tp'ing into your store and seeing things they like but don't end up buying because they don't like the permissions you set then that's all the "why" you need.

Figure out what's most important to you and if it's the average customer then figure out how many people visit your store and might not buy something because what you sell is set to "no copy". If there's enough of them to be worth the effort then you sell things copy as well, if there's not enough leave things as they are.

What they may or may not do with something once they bought it is really not something to worry about.

Kitty. I don't know if you're doing it intentioinally or not, but you haven't managed to grasp the questions yet. You could go back to the OP and start again, or you could take my word for it that the questions are nothing to do with what may or may not be best for me or for a furniture creator/seller. They are entirely to do with what a buyer thinks s/he *should* be able to do after paying for just one item.

If it makes you feel any better, you are not the only one who didn't grasp the questions.

Because both scenerios represent 2 valid economic models. SL allows a vendor more choices than the described 'buy once, use many' scheme.

Eventually the vendor cares about the made revenue. This is #sales * price.
If you 'artificially' increase #sales by using the 'buy once, use once' model, you can sell for a lower price to get the same revenue.

This means that all those buyers only wanting 1 chair for 1 spot, can now do so for a lower price. Alternatively, by suggesting everything should be 'buy once, use many', you basically make those people only wanting to use the product once pay for your wish to use it many times.

So the fairness of each model is in the eye of the beholder.

Perhaps I should have expanded the questions. I'm not asking about what people think they should be able to do when they've specifically bought an item that allows them to do what they want to do.

If your audience fails to understand, it's your fault, not the audience's.

Alright, for you, I'll explain what I'm trying to get at a bit more. There are people who think that everything in SL should be free, and people who sell things are wrong to *sell* stuff. They think that everything in SL *should* be free. There may be people who think that, regardless of the seller's wishes, when they buy one item, they *should* be able to rez as many copies of it as they like and, if they can't do that, then the seller is at fault. I'm asking people if they think that. In other words, when I asked if you want two identical armchairs why shouldn't you pay for two?, I expected answers such as, I should pay for two if I want two, or it's immoral to insist that I buy two if I want to use two - answers like that. It goes without saying that "because I want to" is a vaild answer but it doesn't even try to answer the questions.

In your case, though, I suppose you are answering the questions. Maybe I should have asked them in a different form such as, "Is a seller wrong to sell things so that any number of copies cannot be made. On the other hand, I probably shouldn't have asked the questions in the first place - I'm not getting answers that I'm looking for, and I don't mean answers such as, "I should have to pay for two if I want to use two". I mean the other side. I'm trying to find out if anyone has an opinion that is akin to those people who think that everything in SL should be free. E.g. "I feel that I have a right to be able to make as many copies as I like when I buy something."

It came up when somebody said that she doesn't see any reason why a landlord shouldn't be able to rez hundreds of copies after buying just one copy, and I asked why she thought that. Does she think it's a moral issue, for instance, and that everything in SL should be buy one, make as many copies as you like? I also asked her why she shouldn't pay for two chairs if she wants to put two chairs in a room. Unfortunately, she came back with what may or not be good for the seller, so it was a waste of time asking.

Incidentally, I haven't referred to any RL parallels, so I'm not going to get into them. This is SL, and that's all I am discussing on this topic. SL default permission are irrelevant as long as SL provides the creator with a range of permissions. SL works that way.

I know - or sometimes it is. I was writing the post that follows yours while you posted. It's included in there. To be honest, the questions I asked are better understood if asked during a conversation rather than as the start of one. They do seem to have been misunderstood by some people.

ETA:
I've just read my OP again and I don't really see how it could be misunderstood.

There are multiple reasons to sell copy:
1. Easier customer service/redelivery
I sell complex items or items people frequently mod as copy/no-transfer. The risk of the owner accidentily breaking them, and the ease of being able to just send a fresh copy are more important to me than multiple sales to one person.
This is compensated in the sales price. (Less #sales = higher price)

2. If the amount of people using the item more than once, is limited.
If you don't lose a lot of sales, because people usually only use the item once (think houses, big furniture pieces, cars etc.). Sell the item copyable. You will gain sales from those that enjoy the security of a backup. And the few sales you misss from multi-users are generally compansated by that. There will be some landlords/superusers, but the chance is small they would have bought the item on such a large scale if it wasn't copyable. (plenty of fish)

3. If you plan on updating the item in some fashion.
You can simply send out new update items. People can't transfer the original anyways.

4. Exposure
A copyable item used by a landlord in dozens of plots will be seen by a lot of people, all potential customers.

5. Prevent (bulk) resellers.
A transfer item is an item you no longer have control over. ESP. with bulk discounts etc. the customer could easily turn it aroind and resell your item for a lower price than you offer it.

I didn't write the OP to get answers concerning the seller, Damanios. The questions I asked in it are only to do with the buyer.

I am now utterly confused. I buy an item -- any item -- for my own purposes. If you have an item for sale that meets my requirements and I am prepared to pay you the price you want for it, then I give you the money and you give me the item.

What I want to do with the item, so long as it's in accordance with any conditions of sale you've attached, or why I should want to do it, is no more your business than it is mine why you want that particular price or how you propose to spend the money.

Why complicate things?

It all comes down to choice and what you're happy with. I do rez buildings more than once if they're copy, I've always assumed the creator factors this as part of their business costs and price the item accordingly.

Some creators do put a note in their item suggesting that they don't think it's right to rez more than one copy, or that the copy permission is for backup purposes only and if that's the case then I'm more than happy to respect that, although I'd rather know that's the deal before purchasing.

Transfer has advantages, you can sell it, and again unless there's a note saying you shouldn't sell it I see nothing wrong with that, although off the top of my head I can only ever recall going to one yard sale with transfer items of mine to sell for a few L$. I don't see how a reseller is going to do much damage to the creator as they'll have paid full price for the item and unless they're a vindictive so and so who is prepared to spend money trying to drive a rival out of business I don't see much to be concerned about with furniture.

You are right, of course, and I haven't disagreed in any way, but it isn't the topic of this thread. The topic is my first post, which needs to be read in its entirety. I'm not complicating anything. I'm trying to stick to the topic.

OK, how's this sound:

If I buy something that is usually used in sets or groups I'd suggest I should expect to be able to rez multiple copies of it. If it's something that's usually used singly, I shouldn't expect to be able to do so. How about a dining table and chairs as an example: I would expect to be able to rez as many of the chairs as I wanted - and use them in other rooms, seperate from the table too, but I wouldn't expect to be able to rez multiple copies of the table.

(Though having said that I'd probably make my own furniture to begin with, and I wouldn't buy no copy furniture as a matter of principle, except perhaps in the case of a piece that is so outstanding that it could be considered a work of art in its own right. But I'd need to get a home first, anyway )

Does that help at all?

Then you're confusing me. As when people WERE answering it from a buyers perspective, you said they didn't understand the question either.

My ADD's getting the best of me so I'm going to have to pass on the extended debate in this new thread, but I do want to repeat one more time, loud and clear:

I AM WILLING TO PAY MORE FOR COPY PRIVILEGES!!!

Never asked to get something for nothing.

no copy? no mod? no sale =)

the landbaron issue is negligible (especially since people tend to prefer unique designs and not cookie cutter layouts)

however the SL ate my product issue is far from negligible, and buying items that are set with those permissions puts me at risk so I won't do it... period.

If that's your question then, no I don't think I should be able to rez multiple copies of a no copy item. I do think though, that it has reduced value due to reduced functionality (can't be copied). How much less depends on the item and my intended use for it. Say, it was a couch for a private home I wouldn't discount it's value much. If I was looking to furnish 100 sky boxes it's value to me would be reduced to near 0. Possibly even less than 0 because I'd have to click "buy" 100 times and you would have to pay me for that .

If I bought a copyable item I certainly don't feel there is any arbitrary moral limit to how many I could copy. It's just what the seller allows me to do and I bought that right.

Disclaimer: I do sell a little furniture (no copy) but I tried to answer this as a consumer.

my thoughts as follows:
yes, if I buy a copiable item and it has no note informing me of limitations about copying, I will rez as many as I need. It is the creators choice about permissions and they should price accordingly.

If I see something that is transfer and not copiable and I want to use it in my rentals, I will invariably ask the creator for a different price for copy permissions to enable me to use it as I need, and expect to pay more for the item.

If a creator doesnt want an *evil landlord* to make as many copies of their item as they wish, then make it transfer or, as many do nowadays, make one of each and price accordingly.

Phil, I use a LOT of your gear in my homes as you know..and many many of my residents ask where particular items of yours are from , I always hand them a landmark without hesitation.

I have done, Phil, and I've read your reply above to Argent, and I still don't understand what you're asking.

You told Argent, Well, yes. If I buy a copyable item, I do have the right to make as many copies as I want. If I buy a transfer item, I have the right to give it to someone else, and so on.

If what you mean is, do I think it would be a bit tacky for me to buy one chair for whatever low, low price you sell them and then rez umpteen copies of it in identical skybox rentals, then yeah, probably it would be. But since I'm not in the skybox rentals business, it's an hypothetical question.

I'm not being deliberately obtuse -- all natural talent on my part. But I'm not really clear what you are asking. I mean, I make scripts for people and, rather unusually perhaps, I almost always give them the final product full rights. That's partly because it simplifies life for both them and me if they can just change the values of some clearly identified global variables up at the top of the script rather than faffing round with notecards, and partly because people have been so generous to me showing me how stuff is done, I feel pretty mean giving out no mod scripts most of the time.

I always often say to people that, while the script is theirs to do as they want with, I will be upset if they start giving out open copies of it themselves, and I always say I'll be absolutely furious if they sell it to anyone as anything other than part of a build, but I can't stop them if that's what they're going to do.

No one has upset or annoyed me yet, bar one person who included a few of my things in her "let's try reselling freebies" enterprise.

Dining tables are individual items - at least mine are - but it's usually desirable to rez more than one dining chair but, even then, if a person wants 4 dining chairs, why shouldn't s/he buy 4?

As an aside, I sell my dining chairs both individually and in boxed sets of 3 and 4 - the boxed sets being cheaper than buying the same number individually.

Thank you, Cal. That's a good answer.

I know you do, Faithless, and you know that it's appreciated