Ripping Content from SL and using in other Worlds?

It doesn't look like something that could get out of hand as far as I can see. There's just the one company offering a service. I'd imagine they are fairly vulnerable to legal pressures. Looks like they are also stating that they won't let you export something that is not yours. Is it useful to use it to develop an fps or rpg type game? You'd have to own an entire region to create levels.

I am curious how many unique scripts can someone extremely gifted come up with?
I don't know much about scripts but I assume there is standard language and list of possibilities. Is this true? Just curious.
By the way earlier, I was looking at their licensing downloads...no clue what they do or how it would be used personally.
Anyone able to make sense out of any of it?

there are only possibilities until they are all used up..unlikely..you can think of new uses constantly and probably still take years to use it up, especially since you can communicate with off-world databases and such.

Technically I suppose if you're creative enough you can make it do just about anything you want

How many different paragraphs can be written in English?

That gives you a very rough idea of how many different scripts can be written. True, the number is greater for English. But in either case it's an extroardinarly high number.

I'm going to patent the script that outputs the number: 029384930293888838929299933334

I was considering writing a script that says "Hello, Avatar!", but I hear it's been done already.

the tool to do this is allready out there, and it's free and open source

Right, the code is open source. That is, the source-code of the SL client. 3D models are not programs.

For what is is worth, this company placed an ad for this service here in the SL forums about two weeks ago. One of the things stated in there was "And we need to make sure that you own the content you want exported from this world." If they intend to stick with that, those demos aren't making a very good first impression.

I am still learning but I thought there was only series of set functions that scripts could do.
That is interesting to know.
I figured the reason why their is similar scripts from like LSL wikipedia is that their is only standard very basic
things we can do with LSL.
Thanks Lear and all who responded.

I wasn't attacking the guy at all???? My questions were not even specific to the person at all but to what his operation was about.

The main concern I have is the ability to copy anything from SL, not just textures, and copy them and re-upload them. They say you have to own the content but that means nothing really. If you buy someones content you now technically own it and can download it, copy it, and re-upload it with full perms.

Also being able to put his stuff in other worlds has it ups and downs also. If someone bought someone else's content in SL, had it downloaded and then re-uploaded it into another world and went to sell it it would be hard to file a claim against it has they would have proof they first uploaded it to that world. Also if that world happens to be in China and that person is also in China then good luck with any law suits.

Just another reason in my opinon to not invest in virtual worlds what you can't afford.

If I find my treehouses on sale in anoter virtual world I will be a very angry dragon. My building style is rather unique and easily identified. Foxes make nice warm stoles.

It's clearly a ToS violation if you use it to pull any content that you don't own copyrights for -- and who owns copyrights for all the content on their property? If you use a single texture from TRU, for example, then you can't use the service without violating TOS.

To use this sevice within the TOS, you have to have created every texture and built every item (or any items you didn't make must be copy/xfer).

In other words, there are nearly zero practical uses of a service like this without violating ToS. And since it doesn't get object contents like scripts and animations, the resulting builds won't "work". Doors won't open, elevators won't go up or down, TP's won't TP, poseballs won't pose, and vendors won't vend.


FD, there is a finite number of functions you can call, but you can call them in any order, and create lots of variables, and do lots of math, and and and and. The number of permutations of *possible* scripts is really astronomical, limted mostly by the 16K of memory each script is constrained to.

Imagine all the English paragraphs you could write, even if you limit yourself to a small vocabulary. It's a surprisingly big number. And there's no shortage of clever ideas for things to do.

That's not to say that reproducing scripted content is easy, or that innovative scripts can be easily reproduced at all. I've got a few scripts that are able to work as a single script where others require two or three scripts to achieve similar things. A lot of the stuff on the wiki/library is good for learning and to get started with scripting something new to you, but a lot of it also isn't always that great (no offense to the creators, it's great of them to release it!).

Some scripts require hours and hours of work to make in the first place, and by experienced scripters, so reproducing these is going to take at least the same time, if not more as the exact workings are hidden.

That's a bit laughable considering they didn't themselves create anything they ripped off to use in their demo. LL should send these people a cease and desist.

All I know is that I found a new forums signature...

Do you mean GLIntercept? Isn't this thread kinda discussionish for Resident Answers or does "news" now count as Resident Answers? Has anyone considered whether this proof of concept is covered by the Fair Use exception to US copyright law?

The open source bed was made and now they have to sleep in it---or they can realize the errors made and radically fix it before it's too late.

Open source or not doesn't change copyright laws, the only person holding the copyright on an SL object/design/texture is it's creator, not the actual owner.

Peoples keep comparing it to car ownership while it is a completely inaccurate comparison.

Open Source is like selling cars with no locks and a button to push to start the engine. No one is going to want one of those.

Copyright may be wonderful, but it's like sweeping back the ocean to defeat theft, if the security is so poor.

I think this is cool. It proves that virtual worlds can be opened up so we can travel from one world to another. Isn't that the ultimate goal - to set a common standard for 3d content? This has nothing to do the with copyright issues. Website designs might also be copyrighted, but still HTML itself is open and free for everyone to be hosted on their server.

Incorrect, an open source car would be one provided with all the blueprints and tools to modify it or make a new one.

Most of the internet is run by opensource softwares and they are reconised as more secure than their closed source alternatives.

Maybe but if someone is offering to other peoples to violate your copyrights, you know who is going to get sued.


>>Monalisa Robbiani : sound cool as long as the designer's IP is respected , which isn't the case here.

Interesting.

To be honest I was more or less waiting for this to happen.

Two examples.

1) For those of us who play World of Warcraft it might just be possible to reproduce a perfect identical copy of say Ironforge within Second Life. Which might just include the bots (NPCs). Together with shops, offices, homes, and anything else. But it would be clear breeches of copy write under UK law.

2) From the real world it would also be possible for someone to reproduce an in world copy of a book, for example one of the Harry Potter series. Again a breech of copy write and illegal under UK law

As far as I am aware only one general exception may make this legal and that is if it was reproduced for the exclusive use of the user alone, in isolation, and not for fungible profit or gain. That is the general exception that allows the recording of TV programs via tape and disk.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Strife is right, this has the potential to be a huge legal minefield

Naaah

The claim that open source is somehow less secure is just simply wrong, and that's known to all who have passing familiarity with current security practices. This isn't the first thread in which this claim has been made, and it's getting embarrassing.

To protect content, ultimately the only recourse is legal. Even the great steaming pile of stuff that is HDCP relies solely on a legal prohibition; cryptographically, it's not even interesting.