Is Copyright in SL a Myth?

Recent threads on the copying of textures etc made me wonder just how strict or loose the TOS was on this issue. I thought it was pretty clear that all residents retained copyright and intellectual property rights over all content created within SL. However, reading section 3.2 of the TOS it does start off by saying this, but then goes on to say that such rights are modified by the next clause:

The above refers to patent rights, not copyright.

Exactly how it's read is unclear. One possible reading is that it makes all possible patents invalid in SL (you grant everyone else the right to "use your content for all purposes", with your content being your intellectual property, and thus they may use your IP for any purpose, including the purpose of making similar items and competing with you). Another possible reading is that the word "use your content" is restrictive - it means engaging in only some particular set of actions, which are "using", with regard to the particular content you uploaded, not to the underlying IP. (Although you wouldn't have a patent on a particular piece of content, because they're granted on general concepts.)

Anyway - the clause above doesn't relate to copyright at all. The main difficulty with copyright enforcement in SL is that it has to go through the real life legal system with all the difficulties that involves.

Is Copyright in SL a myth?

No.


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

Is Copyright enforcement in SL a myth?

Hmmm. Possibly.

It happens but its so weak that wholesale IP theft isn't noticeably deterred.

TOS and law are 2 very different and distinct things.

Just because a company says something in its TOS does not make it enforceable in a court of law.

And yes, copyright does exist in SL. It is governed by US law. It's not often enforced in SL, but it does exist.

well yeah

TOS is like a legalese attempt by a provide at a catch all cop out.

Basically they make you agree

-They can do whatever they want
-You cant blame them when stuff goes wrong

In order to play their game. Thus limits the number of people who protest / sue them.


But like Bragg showed, the TOS only matters when it doesn't attempt to supersede any RL laws. A judge will be happy to ignore the TOS if a real actual law applies.

Strickly speaking, LL doesn't have the means, nor the authority to enforce Copyright.

If supplied with RL documentation of Copyright infringement, they will remove content as deemed nessicary. However, protecting one's Copyright, and the enforment of Copyright violations, is entirely in the realm of the real world law.

LL can, and does, say how items are used upon their platform, but only as a private entity, not as law enforcement.

Policing the Grid for Copyright infringement is not possible by LL. They simply do not have the resources. Also, it is part and parcel of Copyright protection that the owner of said Copyright is responsible for protecting their own Copyright. That is, when they see it, they are responsible to report it.

As more and more virtual cases come up, I imagine the law may be fined tuned to include virtual IP. However, in my experiance with laws and lawyers, it will more than likely, just become even more of an impediment to understanding just what in the heck they are saying. Asking a lawyer for a straight, simple answer is like asking water to not be wet.

~Jessy

But the section above about patents is probably one that _is_ enforceable and valid at court, and it would be if it was asking you to give up copyrights, too.

If it turned out to be unenforcable then every single regular game that allowed users to share content without the DRM that SL has (like The Sims, Neverwinter Nights) etc. would have to stop doing so for fear that a user would accuse the sharing host of violating their copyright.

k -

I was basically just saying that copyrights aren't changed because they are in SL really, and that the TOS is only as legally binding as a judge thinks it is.

Ill let the internet lawyers fight out all the mumbo-jumbo.

In layman's terms it is saying that when you (the intelectual property right owner) sells or gives something you created to an individual, to a business, or even to LL, they have the right to use it in the context that it was designed to be used...NOT to copy it and resell it, simply to use what they paid for.

You as the the intelectual property right owner still retain exclusive rights to market it and sell it.

The intelectual property rights, and copyright laws are the SAME in the real world as they are in the virtual world.

As far as LL goes, you have contributed to the overall benifit of the sim by submitting content, and they are not going to pay you royalties for adding it to the invironment they own.

ENFORCEMENT of your rights is an INTIRELY DIFFERENT issue...

I hope that is simple enough terms to explain it in.

I don't want to get into a big quasi-legal argument (please) but Snowflake did you really mean 'US law' or is this just a short-hand way of saying 'RL law'? Are you really suggesting that a dispute about copyright or patent infringement between two Brits would have to be settled in a US court? It doesn't seem very likely to me.

After all, we pay SL VAT under European law, and the various discussions about illegal sexual depiction have referred to German or Belgian law, I think. LL refers to collaborating with the legal jurisdictions of all its participants, not just the American ones.

(If 'US law' IS just a short hand way of saying 'RL law' - please don't. The world is not like that any more. But if it REALLY is US law that is helpful for all to know).

The part of the TOS that was posted is to do with patents, not copyrights, though - they're on general ideas, not particular items. And there is a good sign that they actually do mean to crush patents entirely, mainly because the next clause in the TOS is as follows:



In other words, the clause is meant to say that you can't create something in SL, patent it, and then ban anyone else from selling a competing product (even if they made the competing product entirely themselves from scratch). Because according to the above statement, even if they do violate your patent, you can't sue them. (Although I don't know if, legally, this actually works. It seems you could sue them anyway, when asked say "yes I am breaking the TOS by suing you, but I can choose to do that and suffer the consequences, the breach of contract is against LL and not you so our lawsuit just goes on", and the defendant can't force LL to enforce that clause. I asked LL about this and basically got a "we can't give you legal advice" response, which seems a bit unfair, as the TOS should at least be something that a user could understand and act on)

But in copyright terms there's even less protection. As far as I know for copyright, you always retain all your copyrights, except that you have to give LL the right to a) show your content in publicity for SL; b) delete your content; c) do anything they like with your content if it's part of debugging or backing up SL. I don't even believe there's any hard copyright protection for buyers, so technically the creator of something that you've bought in SL could IM you and say "I no longer grant you copyright permission on the (item you bought)", and then you could never rez it again (because that creates copies, in the same way software licenses work).

I think what it's intended to mean is that once you submit it to SL, it's free and live in the grid and you can't tell Linden Labs that they have to run around and remove your items if you change your mind. But yeah, looking at it, it could be interpreted differently.

Linden lab is headquartered in the US. Therefore it is under US jurisdiction. I'm not in a mood to get into an argument that they have a payment center in the UK, the world is not like that anymore or whatever. The main office is in San Francisco, California, USA.

As far as enforcing it, the onus is on the copyright owner to protect their own copyright. Linden lab won't do it for you.

As far as the statement that LL refers to collaborating with the legal jurisdictions of all its participants, not just the American ones, that is true to an extent, but US laws take precedence since they are based in the USA. They are doing what it takes to cover their own company's behind legally.

Fighting for someone else's copyright protection is not required to do business in the US or in any other nation that I know of. You can bet your booty though that if someone created a clone of SL and called it "Second Life", LL would take legal action as fast as you could blink an eye.

Jessy is correct. Once again it is up to the copyright owner to protect his/her copyright.

Is copyright in SL a myth?

No

Am I likely to hire an attorney to go through the time and expense which would result in a huge loss of money to both parties in the end?

No

If I found my content being infringed upon, I would definitely weigh the pros and cons of pursuing legal action, though. If someone is using my content and making a pile of money off it, I'd want my fair share.

Very true. If I was making the type of money that Sexgen or the other big markets are making then we'd be talking an entirely different story. The problem is that most of us are but simple craftspeople in SL running simple shops. We'll just have to accept theft as a given for now and succeed by continuously updating our products. Not really a bad thing IMO.

Sexgen is a perfect example. That is about Stroker Sepentine protecting his trademark. If he hadn't done anything about it, it would soon become diluted to the point where he might not own that name anymore. I don't know if he got any money but I think he did win the right to exclusive use of the Sexgen brand name (as he should).