Who's minding AWG and does any of it matter?

Well, that's the problem exactly: the terms of the license granted are unclear at this point. Hence the thread. In my earlier example, if one copies DB2 to an unlicensed CPU (or a million of them), then IBM's lawyers have everything they need to take away everything you own. As it stands, failing an overriding EULA, the in-world permissions provide an implicit license grant--it's just totally unclear what that license means, when suddenly third-party "grids" are given access to that content.

I'm by no means speaking for all content creators when I say that, personally, I'm not so much troubled by protected content leaking from other "grids" that we'd all recognize today as "grids": SecondLife-like virtual worlds that look and feel kinda like what we see now. (Not to minimize that problem, though: it is, after all, the most effective copybot anyone could possibly imagine, with the ability to clone the entire "permitted" inventory content of every visitor to the third-party grid--without the visitor even knowing about it. Nothing private in those notecards, I hope!)

So, personally, I really don't care if an avatar can take their stuff back and forth to such "grids", whatever ultra-copybot-like risk that may pose. What I'm most worried about is unintentional licensing of cross-application leakage: the unexpected legal implications of ticking the "allow intergrid permissions" checkbox.

Really, if all this AWG effort and all the hours Zero has spent on this is just to support a bunch of lame OpenGrids that maybe double the total grid size (and offer free-play areas for the would-be gamblers and ageplayers and bankers), then it's been just a colossal waste of time. I mean, sure, it's nice folks can run their own little gridlets and pretend to compete with LL, but that's not a very exciting or lucrative vision for LL. I really don't think that's what any of this is about.

Rather, they see themselves defining the interoperability protocols of the 3D Internet, as some fledgling 3D-IETF. So, granting permission to "trusted grids" is equivalent to granting permission to any application that promises (for the nonce) to not wholesale violate IP. And those applications could be *anything*--that is the whole damned point of the exercise.

Right now, this mostly affects sounds and textures and maybe prim builds; someday maybe scripts, if a Mono decompiler can be created. So, by ticking that checkbox, a builder has basically allowed any (say) Lively user to replicate that build in Lively. And to use a derived 3D model of that build in *any* "trusted" application--steampunk CAD/CAM, anyone? Same for textures and audio: it's not that somebody might produce an illicit copy, it's that the creator has unintentionally granted a *license* for anybody to make such copies and use them practically anywhere for absolutely anything at all. Even RIAA lawyers would be stuck "briefless" when the recording artist has given away their IP this way.

And note that the risk is not from existing SL users--it's from users of other applications who create SL accounts for the sole purpose of importing content for their own use in that other, potentially *very* different application.

The implied license grant is just a huge timebomb, unless and until somebody starts defining what the hell it really means.

Levi's certainly do tell you as Tesco found out when they were importing Levi's into the UK and selling them for less than Levi's RRP and undercutting their authorised distribution channels but this is a business issue.

I'm pretty sure Apple would win a case in similar circumstances too and this is a good example of the power that content creators have.

Export restrictions however aren't so clear cut in a virtual world and then there's the issue of the consumer and fair use.

There are already restrictions on usage of images on the Internet, we've seen threads whereby others have complained that certain companies are using stolen textures for instance and there are channels to protect content.

However when it's not clear what the consumer is buying or the consumer hasn't agreed to such restrictions the water gets a bit muddy.

I like the idea of a transport permission, but this needs to be made abundantly clear to the consumer.

I'm not sure I completely agree Desmond,

In my experience, there are definitely barriers to the movement of physical items around the globe, but hardly any when it comes to the more important area of ideas, knowledge, design.

Protectionism is a complex and difficult issue. I'm not sure there is a means to protect any innovation or design in reality anymore, when a cell phone can take a high resolution digital image and send it within seconds to another country.. and to be honest I'm not convinced that's a bad thing.

Countries may impose import/export barriers on physical items, including as you say, physical currency. You just have to look, however, at the way the "Virtual" representations of those items circle the globe in a moment to see that there are no real barriers at all.

A balance from a bank account can be transfered, no questions asked, to a foreign country with a more lenient tax framework.

I have RL friends struggling with the effect of generic drug production, effecting their company's global bottom line. The chemical composition and processing requirements were all that was required for the actual manufacture to become relatively trivial.

We ourselves have issues where we outsourced software development overseas, only to find the issue of IP protection biting us in the bottom.

This isn't a comment at all on any country or nation, it's simply the way the RL world works.

As I say, in my opinion, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. This might be a bit off topic, but it looks in my opinion as if the human race is going to depend on ever increasing rates of innovation to even survive.. and economically this certainly acts as an incentive.

There is the argument that this situation might dissuade real innovation, however in my experience, business will always chase the high profits available (if only for a short time) by being first to market.

FYI.

A very interesting book: Wikinomics by Don Tapscott and Anthony Williams gives a thoughtful perspective on this subject.

I can't see how this is anything but an opportunity for SL content creators. SL has the economy, could become the ebay of virtual world content. Content needs to be portable and is in 90% of the case, some skillsets are more transferable than others. Instead of focusing on a permissions system, SL should try to establish a registry and licensing structure.

I think there is a big market for virtual worlds with no 'content' economy, where games and presentation creators incorporate their own economy within the game context only as in popular RPGs.

If you consider Second Life Grid as a platform I think the race for the top in 5 years time will depend on who can get the best content delivered to certain targeted audiences, between user management and content transaction system .

The advantage to piggy backing off SL's infrastructure is that as new grid or 3d venture, it is difficult to get exposure, and to convince people to sign up. In the very near future I think you will be able to preview or guest tunnel into most other opensim servers out there, who may or may not need to rely on SL's economy or inventory.

This is liberating in a way for developers in general because you can do lots of things in OpenSim that you can't do in SL in terms of changing config and the server source etc.. while using the Grid protocol to get users in. Also a big factor is the prim and square meters needed for more involved game environments.

For the time being, where better to market a new virtual space than in Second Life main grid?

These are just some random thoughts off the cuff


-whyroc

I see a lot of speculation on the future of third party grids. So I'll try my hand at it too.

Let's see how crazy people think I am! Agree, disagree, call it like you see it. But I'll try to cover all the hotspots!



Tech:

1. Most third party grids will remain total junk even when the tech makes it possible for them to be decent. This especially goes for everyone who thinks their DSL bandwidth will allow good enough access. A few will approach the main grid's rather inadequate functionality in a year or two.

2. Third party grid uptime will be so bad, we'll think the main grid is heaven by comparison.

3. The 'standard' - won't be. We'll see grids diverge from standard protocols and viewers fast, as the opensource guys eventually fight among themselves. The people who might be able to maintain things properly will slip into apathy and other hobbies, or one might even get a girlfriend. Universal interopability will be the first casualty.



Content:

4. Not only will the connectivity be bad, the assembled content in 99% of them will be bad. Welcome to Johnny's build-a-block playroom, and nobody's vacuumed for weeks.

5. Look - someone did make a nice area for a change! It's a... tropical island... check. With... a lagoon... check. And, a waterfall, check, and... palm trees, check. And a house, check. Yep. Oh wait, here's a reaaaally different one! It's a gothic castle. The mystery of the castle wouldn't be... vampires, would it? With passionate desire, bad poetry and lots of emo just under the surface? And a dark, hidden humper-bunker? Come on, you didn't guess immediately.

6. There will actually be some fairly decent, sizeable third party grids, mainly filled with broke artist types and the maingrid-disillusioned. They won't look too terribly different from a typical maingrid private estate. Yes, there will be some legitimate talent out there - and most of the old early adopters, ah, early-adopting, of course.



Business:

7. There will be tons and tons of corporate third party grids, so agonisingly boring that they will make anyone with a soul cry out in pain. Lots of lecture halls, New Brutalism architecture and Bauhaus stuff like the beginners make. Fake virtual bare concrete amid tropical plants. Meetings will never be worse. The Japanese will coin a term for 'death by exposure to bad virtual corporate art' in 2012.

8. The scum of the metaverse will set up shop on third party grids, almost as a rule. With only one exception: they will still visit the heavily populated, moneyed main grid to recruit suckers into their scams.

9. If you think stolen content is bad on the main grid, you ain't seen nothing yet. There will be many private grids operating in complete, utter defiance.

10. There will be third party grids that will uphold content creator permissions even better than the main grid does. Ironically, they will never be able to prove it.

11. Nobody in their right mind will skip the main grid when setting up a shop. Unless it's gambling or vice. The money for legitimate activities is here, and is gonna stay here.

12. There will be those that *do* make money by selling "any grid anywhere" content. A lot of people, in fact.

13. There will also be legitimate content creators who will lose their first life income because they were robbed blind. Ironically this will coincide with the overall success of the metaverse for the common man.

14. Most land barony will be history. Watch estates fold as people opt for third-party hideaways on their own servers, rather than fork over 75 a month. They'll port into the main grid to party, then play at home where it's cheap.

15. Some super-premium areas will get even more expensive and exclusive. When there are 200 million people in a globally distributed metaverse, don't even *think* of affording a parcel in the main grid's Bay City.



Social:

16. "18 or older" will be even more laughable off the main grid than on. Congrats, that little sexy chat you had last night was a felony. Good thing you didn't know, or you'd be hating yourself. Not that the ageplayers who all fled the policed main grid will care much.

17. Third party grids are going to be pretty desolate and empty most of the time.

18. People will be just about as interested in other people's economy-less art grids as they were interested in other people's VRML project in the 90's, or Activeworlds right now. The #1 behaviour will be "visit ME, PLEASE - look at MY stuff" and it will mostly be as boring as watching other people's vacation videos.

19. A few grids will achieve critical mass, and become a halfway decent destination unto themselves. But not that many, for a long long time. Five years at least.

20. Most people will be a 'blend' - there won't be many people who are strictly 'main grid' or 'third party grid' - but rather will have a stake in each.


* * * * *

Well, that's my vision of the future. Feel free to comment; I invite all views no matter how different.

I've been right about stuff before (as evidenced by my business) and utterly wrong before (I thought voice chat would be far more divisive than it turned out to be).

Let's hear what you guys think!

I don't think inter-grid connectivity is going to be that popular, I think the general theme will be that people do as they do now, have different logins for different places.

I can see professional virtual worlds being setup where people sell RL products based on real cash, not Linden dollars type cash.

Gambling will be back in a legal form somewhere. This won't be good news for those who used to run gambling in Second Life because they won't be licensed to run gambling sims.

Initially there will be many people who try their hands at their own grids, they'll then find it's too costly and they don't have the time. If you think complaints about estate owner scams are bad, wait till these guys start disappearing.

Land barony won't go away, it will merely change. Like gambling bigger companies will fill the shoes of current land barons, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the likes of Go Daddy get involved.

As on the internet now there will be adult only areas, but the checks and balances to enter will become more strict than they currently are on the internet.

Tax will become an ever increasing issues as tax auhtorities finally get their heads around virtual worlds and realise that there's gold to be found in them there hills.

The main grid here will become a small part of Linden Lab's business model and eventually they'll look to someone else to run it as a franchise.

There will be a lot of gaming worlds.

There will be a lot of different worlds, so different that people won't realise they're using the same technology.

My take on it: You're a genius. And a very good writer, as well.

coco

Desmond,

Great post, but ..

Several of your points actually pretty accurately and eloquently describe the situation in SL at the moment.

As for your post as a whole, I accept it as a possible future for a possible set of businesses set up to take advantage of the legup SL has provided in the form of OpenSim/LibSL.

However, in my opinion it's like writing off all future e-commerce websites because Amazon got there first and does it pretty well, or all future social networking sites because MySpace exists (and I'm pretty sure even an SL evangelist as yourself wouldn't put SL in that company yet).

The statistics for business startups whether they are online or bricks and mortar, aren't good. Conservatively (very conservatively) 4 out of every 10 new businesses in the UK will fold in the first year and the future only looks bleaker when we look into the 2nd and 3rd years.

But, for every 3 half hearted, misguided, lazy, half *rsed attempts at starting a business of any kind, there is at least 1 person who does it properly and builds something worthwhile.

If the future of SL like environments is as you describe, and as a business model it only attracts flaky wannapreneurs then it actually doesn't bode well for SL going forward either.

In the strict context of SL-like environments based on LibSL/OpenSim I do however think that you're right.

Mainly because to me the technology platform looks old, bloated and creaky.

Also the business acumen of the management team looks pretty suspect. As far as I can see SL can still only boast an average of 40 to 50 thousand concurrent users at a time, potentially 20% of which are actually BOTs. This isn't good bearing in mind that they've pretty much had the field to themselves for the past 5 years.

I think that now the idea of an immersive 3D virtual commercial environment has been proven as having legs (although it would have been nice to see LL make a bit more/any money), we will see completely new technology frameworks come along and blow SL out of the water.

It's the nature of the beast. If SL has proven a demand and a business model exists for this sort of environment, then smart competitors will jump in and compete.

If they don't, and the space really is left to Nigel eating Dorritos in his underpants in his bedroom, then that says more about the attractiveness of the model and the market than it does about the genius of LL.

Smiles... thanks Cocoa

Good points Stephen. It's hard to say.

The market is a funny thing. Anyone can make sugary fizzywater in their sink. Anyone! For pennies. But how does one dislodge Coke and Pepsi? At best you'll be RC Cola.

Technology is a funny bird. Automobiles were hobbies for nutcases, decades before they were useful. Amazon.com - people regularly dismissed that idea for years.

Ebay - seriously, a website that doesn't do much more than let people can trade their stuff? Who would have predicted success there?

Even Yahoo was just a directory of links once. I remember when it was a grey page.

I guess we'll just have to see.


But you've convinced me. I'm laying off these Doritos right now...

"one might even get a girlfriend"

Possible responses:

1. You been hitting the bottle?

2. You make the rest of your speculation seem much less plausible when you throw in obvious absurdities such as that.

3. Pass that thing over to me, man, I think you've had enough.

etc.

When other grids diversify it probably will be a good thing, not to limit themselves to the same mistakes as SL has and also they aren't bound by a necessity to keep every thing 2003 content friendly like LL is.
Imagine if one of the others comes up with improved avatarmesh, restrictions on texture uploads and a locally stored default wall/floor texture set. A mappable keyboard system, more common programming languages, CAD importing?
SL that looks as good with half the constant downloading may work just as well as SL on a lesser spec server system and lower spec users could probably have more chance of it working for them too.
In truth the other parallel grids I've visited don't show much spark and although they have advanced rapidly to where they are, there has been little advancement in the last 6 months, they have no grand plans to share for their residents and all the wizzbang launch promises seem to have sunk leaving them as SL clones without economys or community.

I agree Tegg,

To some degree I'd like to see LL announce a new software development initiative, and ask for our patience while they focus all available resource on that.

My feeling is that it is the technology platform holding back its growth. I've read wonderful reports of a party held inworld by Sarah (Nerd was it?). While everyone who could get in seemed to have a great time, it seemed that once over 60 to 65 people arrived, some were even hesitant to move their cameras for fear of crashing.

That's just not really what you want to hear from a platform which has been in production for the amount of time SL has.

5 years is a long time technologically speaking and I really do think that it's time to draw a line under SL 1.0 and look at SL 2.0.

I know as well as anyone I think, the difficulties of supporting a large user base on one version of software while starting afresh with a completely new framework. I do think that this is exactly where LL need to be brave though and take what they know and start afresh.

I suspect the whole "open source" initiative was probably to help accelerate an improvement in stability and functionality within the current platform, but in my experience that won't help a dramatic re-engineering from first principles, which I think is what SL needs.

All of your suggestions were excellent and it makes me wonder if perhaps LL should look into a new Forum of citizens, possibly invited members only, to help draught the blueprint of a new SL.

I realise this all sounds drastic, but the technical issues experienced this week alone (in what should be a mature application by now) I think indicate that a big brave leap is what's needed.

If they don't I suspect this whole thread will become irrelevant because a new player will come along with a shiny new 2008 sleek, scalable technology platform and any "grid" based on LL's old bloatware will look like the Mary Celeste before you can say OTOY.

PS.. I know, having read other threads that the whole "sky is falling in" perspective is getting a bit old and tired.

I'm not actually saying that, I think SL as we know it will be around for a few years yet. I guess the question is do we want it to remain as a creative and innovative force or simply as an also ran with some loyal citizens hanging on because they've too much invested to move.

Reminds me of the IBM compatibility discussions in the late 80's.

Generally a true technological leap can be amazingly back-compatible without much loss. By the time a 2.0 comes along, it can work with 1.0's data in all important respects - and if it can't, well, it's not terribly 2.0. More like 1.5 with something shiny, and busted featurewise.

Second thing, is that there are hundreds of millions of dollars invested here. Forget about guys like me. Talk to universities who set up their online campuses here across dozens of regions, paid for the development, trained staff. Many of them barely just got here. One year... maybe two.

Back-compatibility is a rather useful asset, insofar as it's the thing that ensures you can continue to get paid by your existing customerbase.

It's not an either/or question - it's generally expected that improvements require back-compatibility. That's quite normal for the software industry.

As for the white-knight competitors that blow SL away without any substantial flaws... my challenge is simple: if anyone spots one of these, tell me who, and how many shares you are buying. Maybe I'll buy some too, but I'm not holding my breath waiting.

Things will either improve or eventually someone will come along. But the magic of the grid isn't technical really; it's sociologic, it's economic, it's popular culture. It's not software 2.0 but mindset 2.0 that will drive change.

I agree that backward compatibility is a pre-requisite. If for no other reason Desmond, because of everything you and people like you have built in SL.

I'm also the last person to see any new entrant as a white knight, they'll be here because they smell some money, but I'm not actually bothered about their motive only their offering.

Oh and I promise, if I see the next big thing coming over the horizon I'll tip you the wink. Although I suspect you're as avid a technology watcher as I am and more shrewd at identifying the opportunity!

I also agree that SL is a sum of all its parts, of which the supporting technology isn't necessary the most important. It is however the substrate on which everything else depends, a bit like the oxygen which supports all the society and culture we appreciate in RL.

I think Mindset 2.0 (to use your metaphor) will push the change, but the change will include a more sophisticated facilitating technology. My view is that we're approaching Mindset 2.0 (if we're not already there) and SL's current technological incarnation is what is holding us back.

Ok, this is going to sound a bit soppy, but I actually see this Mindset 2.0 a bit like a butterfly. When we evolve far enough down this road, we will have to drop the constraints of our dry old caterpillar and the chrysalis and grow wings, which will be by necessity based on the nitty gritty of current if not bleeding edge ICTs.

See I told you it was a bit soppy..

Spot on Desmond.

It's not just Second Life either, how many people rushed into something like Age of Conan because it offered to be graphically superior and offer more realistic combat than World of Warcraft and how many have gone back to World of Warcraft because, despite the bells and whistles, World of Warcraft is where it's at.

The reason Linden Lab are concerned about worlds like Kaneva and Lively isn't because they are technically superior, because quite obviously they aren't, but they don't need to be if they tap into popular culture, that's where this battle will be won and lost.

Second Life is in the driving seat, it would be a great shame if the driver got ejected.