Interview with Bragg's lawyer

Uh-oh, chat log posted in #143, I hope they don't terminate your account and sell off all your holdings.

Of course I'm joking, but currently LL could according to their own rules and I don't think anyone would claim that was fair or right. This is why I'm glad that this *principle* is headed toward adjudication, because no one knows the answers.

The principle of ownership in virtual worlds is important and will likely become moreso. It reminds me of the counter-intuitive statement "the ability for the bank to reposses your property benefits the borrower". Huh? If the bank couldn't foreclose, they would have no incentive to lend the money in the first place so there would be no loan and the borrower couldn't make productive use of the land.

Similarly, virtual property rights which are more like real world rights could very well induce more investment in SL. The "right" for LL to be sued might increase the security of those who might otherwise not give money to LL.

The whole body of common law represents millenia of experience of people coming to fair resolution of legitimate disputes. LL has attempted to throw all that wisdom away. Perhaps it may be restored.

Well, check out the *unedited* chat logs included (pages 15 and following) in:
http://lawy-ers.com/12b6memonew.pdf

They give some context to the allegations made in Linden's counterclaim. It's interesting to see the things LL omitted in their brief....

Edited to add: For everyone who's interested, all the public legal filings are available from Bragg's blog. They make very interesting reading.
http://secondlife.typepad.com/second_life_lawsuit_bragg/

It isn't quite that simple - renters have rights too, and the just because you own the sandbox does not give you carte blanche over the rules.

For instance the judge has already overruled the part of the "deal" which states that any adjudication must take place within a Californian court only!

Also Bragg committing fraud is only part of the claim and counter claim being persued in the courts. The case involves:

a) whether Bragg committed fraud - LL has put forward evidence and an argument that he did, Bragg that he didn't (including apparently the claim that he did e-mail LL about the exploit which somewhat weakens LL claims).

b) whether the action LL took was proportionate

c) whether LL ToS on the issue are permisable (this is the one of most interest to residents since the current ToS do have real issues)

d) whether LL misrepresented the nature of what was being sold

Even if LL wins on (a) - the issue of fraud - they could still lose over the other points.

Matthew

How do you know those are unedited, Ricky? Are you in the habit of saving a log of every chat you have in SL? I'm not, and I doubt Bragg was. Are the logs something LL had to turn over to his lawyer? Did he post his version before or after LL's counter claim? I have no reason to believe anything Bragg says.

I log everything. I don't check it every day, only as necessary (very rare).

There's an option in the viewer which if checked saves every chat and IM conversation you have for you in convenient text files on your harddisk (for IM conversations named after the resident concerned). It is not inconceivable that Bragg (like many other residents) had this switched on.

Matthew

Now I know why I'm not a lawyer. How the hell does anyone keep all of this in their head?

I now claim to lack the information or belief sufficient to admit or deny the allegations of fraud, and on that basis deny having an opinion.

Its quite simple, Bragg's lawyer will put foward evidence which supports Bragg's claim and conveniently overlook evidence to the contrary. LL's lawyer will put forward evidence supporting their claim and conveniently overlook evidence to the contrary

Making an opinion based on only one side's evidence is a little foolish.

You may notice that I've been very careful not to express an opinion on either side as to whether Bragg committed fraud or not - although I have expressed an opinion that I believe the LL ToS need review. I have however presented counter arguments to those who have argued he did commit fraud (but that is not the same as stating an opinion that he didn't), and I've hopefully illustrated that this is not a simple black and white situation nor a single issue situation and that neither side comes out particularly well as regards their behaviour on the matter.

Matthew

The fact that they are editied in the brief doesnt always mean anything - its a brief. Its intended to get to the point without muddying the waters with anything that might be open for interpretation. Presumably they will present the actual chat logs as evidence during the preceedings.

I'm pretty sure I read that LL froze Bragg's assets *after* he sued them. Until that point his account was only suspended. I mean I can read plenty of woeful tales of suspended accounts and risk API and whatnot, just without them triggering a lawsuit over it.

LL is hardly going to release any assets while he's in the middle of suing them?

i reckon ll encountered somebody exactly like themselves in this instance. i think they deserve eachother, but if i had to pick one to come out on top id pick governor bragg.

what would they have done with his holdings if he hadnt sued them?

Well i'm sub leasing some of my servers for a small company, but it's extremely clear that my contract with them is:

-you pay me, i give you a service (dirt cheap).
-every started month is a fully paid month.
-i'm not liable for data losses.

And yes usually if you depend of some company's service and on the other side try to screw you them, don't be surprised if they cancel all your assets in return.

Well he deserved to have them deleted.

the difference is i can back up my db and website locally, and am not out for anything but the hosting. i can take the website and the db and take it to an alternate host. maybe if we had that option on this 'platform' ll wouldnt be so cavalier with their decisions.

well we already know my value of your opinion chris norse.

I seem to see this a bit differently in that I think it might be precedent setting case in determining the value of virtual property in general. It may not reflect any RL situations but be something that is hammered out in case law to deal with a new and emerging business and social situation.

There is another case before RL courts now too that will play a role in this; the SexGen Bed creator is suing someone who copied his work for damages.

So this appears to have a lot of possibilities besides that Bragg was cutting ethical corners (land bot anyone?). I would like to see how they determine the value of virtual property.

And what protection (or lack of it) the ultimate decision provides for all of us.

Yes, we all know you love and adore me.

Sure, but your comparison is like saying:

"That custodian keeps the temperature in this building 5 degrees too warm, hundreds of us are uncomfortable and annoyed... he should be made to suffer 3rd degree burns."

SL is a fragile and immature world... and one I'm fond of. I'd rather have LL invest the wasted money this law-suit is costing them into making our world better.

But if petty vengeance on LL is your goal, please, rant on.

Bragg makes much of his sending LL an email informing them about the auctions. I did find where he lists the date sent as 29 April 2006 at 08:xx. Did he ever say who he sent it to at LL? Did he really think an email sent on a Saturday morning was going to be read in a timely manner? Yes, 29 April 2006 was a Saturday. So to me it seems he knew that this email would not be read in a timely manner.

Interesting.

What day did he auction the sims off to himself?

OK, but why does it matter? A crook is a crook is a crook.

If you want to cavil about whether his was a criminal offense rather than a civil matter,

A douchebag is a douchebag is a douchebag.

This guy ought not to get off scot-free, because if he does, there is a legion of opportunists out there who will line up to take their lottery tickets to see if they can exploit SL = all of us who are Residents along with LL, because who do you htink ultimately pays for it?, because they hit the lottery if they succeed and it costsw them nothing or next to nothing if they fai8l.

It needs to cost them so much if they fail they will not take a chance on this lottery ticket.

Well its interesting

He claims hes not a bad guy cuase he emailed LL on a saturday.

If he auctioned himself the sims before monday - how did he expect LL to respond in time?


Thats all.

I think the "Emailed LL" is a crummy excuse anyhow, but the timing is just interesting to me.


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

Yes, someone is a sleeze when they auction off someone else's property to themself when the rightful owner doesnt even know about it. Period.

Oh, you mean sorta like a* Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation?

I happen to think that the SL Terms of Service are not only grossly one-sided, but as I noted above, in a manner that limits *both* LL and their customers. I would have the same objection if <pick your favorite game> allowed real money transactions and economy. LL wants customers to think they have property rights while denying them in the ToS.

So let's assume that Bragg is an amoral sleezebag. I still think - as does LL (as I noted above) - that the question of virtual property rights needs to be figured out. If not in Bragg v. Linden then somewhere else. Sadly, my expectation is that the court will try to find a way out of addressing the issue of ownership as they tend to get the willies in uncharted waters.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SLAPP

Unless LL is dumping tons of heavy document requests and frivolous motions on Bragg, it is my opinion that this lawsuit is Bragg's own doing and too bad so sad if he wakes up and finds out that it's expensive. Consider it the cost of being a douche.