OpenSim on Windows 2003

If it's your content which you created of course you can. Copied stuff made by others, is a different story. And of course the issue of whether that sim or that grid is really just a copy of Second life is another aspect.

Certainly you see that Open Life is a copy of Second Life.

The Openlife grid can be accessed with the SL viewer or with the Rex Viewer - both can be used to access SL. So it's not an issue of computer setups at all.

In that my Mazda is a copy of a Ford, yes.

But so what?

If you cannot understand that world variables effect the individual client user then I'm at a complete loss.

Uhm...so innovation is only innovation if it doesn't make any impact on the client? Okay.

Not a good example. Ford bailed out Mazda years ago and has controlling interest in Mazda.

Sigh. Fine.

Like my sub sandwich resembles a Subway sandwich.

I'm not sure what you're after with this posting style.

There's a reference to a "libSL" and a reference to "SLlib" above, and it looks to me like both might be referring to libsecondlife. unless they've changed the name since the trademark proclamation.

Rebecca's "the oriignal libSL project " is misquoted by Stephen as " oriignal SLlib project".

actually it was me that had the original dyslexia...i edited my post but stephen didnt catch it.

Feel free to make all the submarine sandwiches you like....ummmm that sounds good. Think I'll go to Subway.

OpenSim is the software that runs the server part of SecondLife and that can be really construed only as a clone and not copy (no common source code). History has shown us that clones are usually fine unless they violate patents. IBM PC clones are a notable case that were fine. The spreadsheet also has been cloned many times.

OpenLife is an equivalent service to SecondLife providing simillar services using OpenSIM. There is also nothing wrong with this - it is called competition. The only problems they will get into as regarding copying is content as you have said before. Although if their website looks too simillar to the SecondLife website then their could have copyright and/or trademark issues.

However OpenLife is not a copy of SecondLife in any way you wish to look at it with the possible exception of the idea which LL clearly needs to show they patented the idea of having a virtual world that distinguishes theirs from everyone elses.

Hello Guys,

It's an interesting difference of opinion and obviously raises the issue of how new competitors will be perceived by the SL community.

To put things into perspective our company is a small 18 person outfit I started in my bedroom nearly 10 years ago. Seriously we're very mall minnows in the software game and our little OpenSim R&D project isn't likely to cause anyone at LL or within SL a second thought.

As for the economic realities of creativity and innovation, I obviously have my opinions based on what they teach you at business school and running my own wee business for the last decade. Not to say that those opinions are better than anyone elses, just that they've worked for me so far both in scraping through an MBA and in running a business somewhat poorly for the past little while.

The future of SL and the "Grid", and how an immersive interconnected metaverse is ultimately delivered is, to put it charitably, moot at the moment. As, to be honest, is its ultimate desirability.

I really can't vouch for how innovative or creative our work will be judged at this moment, all I know is it's an exciting time to be involved even at our less than cutting edge level.

Anyway, thanks again for taking the time to read the thread and respond. You've genuinely given me food for thought.

Stephen.

LL is not just a submarine sandwich and that standalone sim on my local computer, all the interfacing tools etc, is a clone and a copy, although renamed OpenLife.

I'm sure a court would easily see through all of this, were it to be contested.

Even the default inventory is the standard Linden inventory.

I am afraid you have things slightly wrong here Rebecca. The interface you see is provided by LL in their viewer which you are still using to access your standalone sim. That interface could be completely changed (and often does change considerably) without one piece of your local simulator (or SecondLife server code) changing. So that is not any kind of copy - LL provides the viewer and OpenSIM talks the same language to the viewer as the SecondLife server parts do.

Same with the inventory - I assure you the back end of your local simulator does not store the inventory in anywhere close to the exact fashion that SecondLife does - it just looks that way to the end user because the viewer hides the differences due to the OpenSIM speaking the same language to the viewer.

Also OpenSIM != OpenLife. OpenSIM is software, OpenLife is a service using OpenSIM (could use XYZSim next week if they wanted).

I disagree, I think that a court would not find this easy to see as any kind of violation due to the information I have posted.

EDIT: On musing further something can be a clone or a copy but not both. If it is a clone then it has been rebuilt from scratch to resemble the original closely. If it is a copy then someone took the original copied it and then used that copy. They did not start from scratch. The difference is clear - one requires much skill and can internally differ greatly from the thing being cloned, the other is identical is almost everyway except perhaps for a few slight changes that the copier tweaked to make it seem like their own.

A sim is not some act of nature that sits there being viewed by a viewer. Nor is the default inventory, some act of nature--part of some public domain.

If you clone you are creating a duplicate, if you copy you are creating a duplicate. At this stage I think OpenLife is more of a imperfect counterfeit, trying to be a better counterfeit.

I don't think there would be any legal distinction when there is a copy of some other company's things, made using that same companies production methods, modified a little to seem different. There is no point trying to further analyze what court would say, were some new CEO of LL to start taking actions. I am just stating an opinion that, were actions to be taken and considering the history of all of this, I think it is reasonable to say that LL did not intend to give away the store, but some people just took it.

No they are content (data) on your disk or on the disk of a hosting company such as LL or the OpenLife company. The server software serves that content in the same fashion to your viewer. Just like not all web servers are the same but can host *exactly* the same content.


You are wrong OpenSIM was based only on libSecondLife which in turn was programmed from scratch with knowledge of the LL language. The rest of OpenSIM was also programmed without looking at LL source code at all. Go to the OpenSIM website for a statement about that. If you have any evidence to the contrary i would like to see it please. Cloning != Duplication.

Counterfeits are not duplicates nor use the original product to be produced except perhaps as a comparator - You are mixing terms like clone, counterfeit, copy when in fact in they are different.
Do you really beleive that OpenSIM took LL server side source code, looked at it and then used it to create OpenSIM? That seems to be what you are suggesting. If so then you are wrong.



EDIT: I took your comment here originally to mean that you thought a there is no legal distinction between duplicating and cloning. Now I have reread this I have taken out my original comments which really replied on that basis. My response to your above comment is now :-

OpenSIM was not copied (imperfectly) from LL source code - it has taken a team of coders many months to get to a semi-working stage that is just useable. That is not duplication or copying. If they copied the original source code then it would be feature equivalent should they want it to be and as perfect as the original. It also takes minutes to do rather than months. In software are no imperfect copies. If it is imperfect/feature reduced and still in active development then the original software is being cloned and it can involve as much time and skill from the programmers as the original one did.

The methods used are not the same as LL server code is most likely written in a programming language called C++ (same as the viewer) and the OpenSIM code is written using a language called C# which to a programmer is a completely different thing.

If you mean that they implement the same programming architectural design then you are right but like I said in my previous comments, almost all programs of a type use the same design and that is acceptable programming practice.

Anybody trying to discern a copy from a clone would have to obtain the two source codes and compare them. Programmers who started with the original source code and even made heavy alterations would be detected over a complete rewrite from scratch by programmers who have never seen the original source code.



If there is no point in doing this then why do you continue to do so?



This also I disagree with, LL has repeatedly stated that they want SL to be the 3D internet, that may have changed over time - that I cannot tell. However them publishing the protocols and open-sourcing the viewer were steps to make that vision happen. The source code to the viewer is like a road map to implement new server software. They even annouced their intention to release the server code too which indicates they intended other hosting companies to spring up and is consistent with the original message. This would be vital to becoming a 3D internet, how much of the internet would we have today if one company made all the Web servers and browsers? I suspect not a lot.
OpenSIM has sprung up because people got tired of wating on LL to do as they said they would. That might be because LL wanted the product to mature and the big technical hurdles to be solved before putting it out there. I suspect that is the case.
In such a 3D internet world where LL has given away the farm, their rewards would be fame (being the original hosting company and creator of the 3D Internet), and being a major land owner - that is quite a revenue (who can create so much land so quickly given how many servers LL has?), operating the currency and financials, and perhaps moving on to the next greatest thing.

SL is not the 3D internet. The way it's been heading is a direction of total chaos and anarchy---a scammers dream, designed for newbies, entranced by hype, to get scammed. The same thing will happen to the Open Grids.

Sounds like a good description of the internet to me (how many people get caught by phishing, nigerian spam e-mails, web scams, viruses, etc....)

Matthew

Interesting topic.

As many may know from my posting history, I'm not too keen on those who sweep in and compete dishonourably - but the 'open sim' situation isn't that.

The Company defends its turf where it sees fit (note the recent trademark announcemments).

But there has been an intentional, officially announced sharing of technical data: client code, protocols and so forth. You simply can't call foul on competition after sharing like that!

So why would the Company do this?

Oddly enough, it makes a certain amount of business sense. The cheap opensource grids are more of a threat to potential competition than to the main grid itself, which holds its super-premium draw. Damn brilliant if you ask me.

* * * * *

So what of the future? Well, two main issues with open source grids.

One, our service provider isn't the threat. Content creators wielding DMCA's are, whistleblowers are, the US Feds are.

A well-placed DMCA email to an ISP and down the server goes - or if someone blows the whistle on gambling, sexual ageplay, what-have-you. Not everyone will have the clout our service provider has with its ISP. Or done its homework by working with the Feds, or have high-paid legal counsel on tap.

So how does an opensource server owner defend himself? Not very easily, quite frankly.

And once money is involved, trust opensource competitors to get medieval with each other. I don't say much about it, but I've seen what some land barons are capable of. We ain't seen nuffin yet.

Second point: standards. Even if you make improvements - the moment you diverge from Main Grid standard, suddenly you have a whole bunch of standards.

"A whole bunch of standards" - think about that. Basically no standard at all. This is the number one risk for openspace regions over the long term, as I see it.

Even so, there will always be a place for opensourced servers just as there will always be a market for a Volkswagen Bug.

* * * * *

So what of impact.

Discount land providers will definitely be in trouble. But super-premium land providers may not even feel anything - in fact, they may very likely *benefit* as openserver adopters get a desire for persistent, functional servers where commerce is stable.

Crazy? Here's a prior example: Tier prices went up 150% back in Nov 2006. Did it hurt the established? Not at all! We just raised prices to match. It basically hurt future competition a lot more (killing much of it stillborn) than it hurt the established, causing a lot of market shakeout in our favour.

I wouldn't be surprised if we see similar effects for a long, long, time.

Hi Desmond,

Thanks for your view, it's safely filed away to help us as we move forward.

Basically we're looking at developing the business collaboration functionality, and exploring the potential of the same avatar/identity being able to move between OpenSims.

As an example Companies A and B both have their own OpenSims for internal collaboration but Mr Jones From A is going to a meeting with B. Basically the idea of him simply taking his avi to the new Environment and sitting down as himself, with his inventory has appeal to several we've talked to.

I know this could happen within the main grid, but the business clients we have just don't see SL as a place of business for the forseeable future.

They worry about the security and privacy, perceptions among other members of the business community (recent press as hit SL credibility hard in our experience), and certainly on a more concrete level the lack within SL of real business collaboration tools and integration with RL applications.

Also, for our guys at least, they don't need a grid with huge volumes of users. In fact this would be a downside to them.

They don't see SL as a marketing channel, because (again a difficult topic to raise) either they're B2B companies or they are B2C but don't see the demographics present in SL at the moment as their target market.

It's envisaged that the OpenSims we develop will simply be PG (which is again very important to our clients) business environments. So very low concurrency, no lag, and lots of new collaboration tools integrated with standard business applications.

At the moment, because we're working with our current clients, we're thinking of offering the OpenSim option simply as a value add to our existing solution/service portfolio but this may change.

If we did market as a standalone,

We'd either market a hosted service on the same basis as a standard dedicated server. It would therefore be priced way below what it costs to own and manage an Island or even Sim in SL, but that's fine because we'd not have to support the overhead of many free accounts.

Or simply sell it as an off-the-shelf application server, to download and run on your own servers. Obviously the customer could then decide whether to make it accessible via secure intranet only or open it up to the internet and thus allow access to other OpenSims.

Anyway, that's what we're thinking for now.

Stephen

So learn from the mistakes. Why repeat all that in 3D. Security is formost with anything serious on the web and in SL there is real money floating around.

Free Sims local to one's own computer is inevitable. Plugging all that together seems inevitable. Vast amounts of content has already been copied and is in people' inventory. It's inevitable that all the bootleg content will be floating everywhere and it will be out of control.

Seems to me that the only way all that future chaos can be prevented would be for SL to assert themselves and get tough, but because of their previous laissez-faire attitude, they would need to have some real powerhouse business people asserting themselves to reverse the trends.

Now maybe LL really hopes to get out of the business or sell it, before it get's uglier or maybe they will suddenly stop presenting themselves as a "service provider," which truly contradicts the rest of their own TOS, where they say, "we really own everything including your account, you only own creations you made."

Were SL to pull the plug tomorrow, it would all go "Poof," and all the sims people "own"---they don't really own, unless they are on there own servers---even then the software running all that is still the property of LL.

I would love to see SL start taking charge and stop with the hands off attitude, but maybe it's too late...or maybe not, as it has been, "Community Standards," has no teeth.....or an exercise in Anarchy Online, for the truly masochistic.

And now the other grid projects will proliferate until they become like all those zillion clone webpages filling up the web.

Eventually there will be InfoCommercials on at midnight selling seminars and kits to senior citizens, get rich quick schemes in "virtual reality."

"How to make the Best Bots"..."You too can profit from the Virtual Reality, Bot farms", Imagine making money while you sleep.....in ten minutes a day...........Robots can make you money now Act fast....no previous knowledge necessary, we will take you step by step.......!

I think they need to revise their entire plan and stop being in the server business and start being in the MMO business, where they are responsible for their residents security. Stop with absurb sim fees. Forget Open Source. let people have sims on their own local systems, where what you "own" you really own....and please stop it with the counterfeit money, it's just going to bring it all down....The TOS(simplified): "its fiction and we will not exchange it, ...oh wait.... and we have an exchange...but it's not us...it's them---we only print the money and it's all fake."

Frankly I think the TOS as it is, is schizoid and contradictory.

Hi Rebecca,

I'm very, very grateful for all your input to this thread, I've filed it all away because I think you've raised some valid concerns which we will have to answer as we go forward.

I understand that we're probably not your favourite people right at this moment. All I can say is that really I have an almost missionary zeal when talking about the ideas of SL.

There are however many problems with the current SL Grid in the eyes of business.. not the least of which, as you point out, is the L$.

I think by taking the approach of OpenSim and almost providing a "Grid in a box" you decentralise control and actually decentralise the overheads. I think this allows business people to use real hard currency in their transactions rather than a proprietary token - albeit transferrable for money. This will increase confidence as well.

As you also rightly say, all the lip service paid about "ownership" in SL is pretty much that. The risks to any business or content creator are dramatically reduced if they own the infrastructure (or means of production) on which their environment is running.

Just my thoughts anyway, and bound to change minute by minute as I think about it more and read more here on the forum.

Anyway, thanks again.

Stephen