Who do I report this to?

I was in a new shop this weekend, it was on the event search in game as a new store selling Neko furniture and other items.. being a Neko at least half the time I thought I would pop over and check it out.. wandered around the store a bit and met the owner who was there, we talked a bit and he was showed me some of the poses on the furniture (just the cuddles you deviants!)

Anyhow, I asked if he made the poses himself to which he repled "Naa some were freebies and some I ripped off" ....now I dont know if he was serious or just trying to impress me (he was sort of a gangsta looking AV and may have just being acting Tuff)

Also I noticed on some of the furniture he had for sale he was not listed as the creator.. but again he may have a partner who makes the stuff...

With all this talk of content theft is there someone I can contact to have him investigated?

Should I AR him? Though he did nothing to me directly.

Should I try and contact the person listed as the creator?

Sorry im fairly new here and am not sure what the "proper" procedure is when you suspect someone of content theft.

I think you kinda answered that question yourself. It could be his RP to talk like that. (^_^)

Really, unless you have the name of the animation and the person it was stolen from, you don't really have any proof of theft. (=_=)

What he could have meant was that he found the 'ripped off' animations with full permissions in other furniture items he had gotten from other people. Full perms is full perms and I would sooner say that he 'recycled' the animations and included them in his own work. (^_^)y

Content creators are very appreciative of anyone who alerts them to theft. You don't have to prove the theft, just report your concern to the animator listed as the creator on the anim. A simple notecard outling the situation, with an LM to the store, will allow them to pursue the issue if they feel theft is likely.

That's not actually true even if it's used as such in-world.

Full permissions just means it's possible to copy and transfer and modify the *asset*, it says nothing about the actual content for which the actual use is dictated by the creator of the item.

Without a copyright waiver or a license you should never assume that an item is free to use, regardless of permissions since those don't apply to the content but the medium only.

For instance: you're able to copy a CD, but you're not allowed to make copies and distribute the music on it. Permissions on the medium don't equal permissions to the content, they're different things.

Particularly in SL, I see it as the other way around. If you don't want people copying your stuff - [No-Copy]. If you don't want people modifying your stuff - [No-Mod]. If you don't want people tossing your stuff around - [No Transfer].

If you leave those permissions open, you should include a "please don't" note with the items to keep the honest people honest. (^_^)y

/327/c2/265609/1.html

There is a link that you can use to check on if its likely that an animation was stolen or not.

Thanks guys, thats why I didnt out him here... didnt want to start a witch hunt on the poor guy if he was showing off acting tuff... though to me saying I used ripped off scprits is like joking about having a bomb in your bags at a airport....


So there is no "official" complaint channel through Linden Labs then?
Just im or drop a note to the creator and let them deal with it?

Correct. It's a courtesy on your part to inform the owner of the property. It's their responsibility to take it further with Linden Lab.

Nope.
Full Perms items can be sold that way to developers.
The developers *should* modify the perms when they incorporate the items and sell on their own creations.
Some stuff escapes looking like "full perms" due to carelessness or dishonesty, but that doesn't make it legit for third and subsequent parties to use it that way.

I'm just one to take things at face value. Since the permissions system is called "permissions" I'm going to continue to assume that I have the permission to do whatever isn't blocked in an items permissions. It's how I prefer people handle the stuff I give them. (^_^)

I'm having to deal with this with a lot of stuff in SL... For my closest friends, I have "Find me on map" enabled so that they can do just that. But, what comes of it is that most of them are afraid that I want private time and never visit me even if they want to. It's not a toggle I hit by accident. Why can't it be taken at face value for what it is? Full time permission and invitation to visit me where ever I am, when ever I'm online. (o.o)

With item permissions... If I give it to you full perms... Face value... Take it, mod it, copy it, include it in your stuff, trade it with your friends, enjoy! If I block something, take that as an unsubtle hint that I don't want you doing that stuff with it. (^_^)

What little crud I have up for sale is set to no-transfer, but, I have given some things to my friends full perms for free. I could care less if they give copies away. If I cared... No-Mod No-Copy No-Transfer... Simple. (^_^)y

One problem here is that, even if one obtains a license waiver from somebody in-world, there's absolutely no way of knowing that the person who granted the license actually has proper ownership of whatever s/he's purporting to license.

Such a deal I have for you on a bridge...

I'll swap it for a big green statue I own.

Many creators of full perm items, including myself, put a condition on the purchase that the buyer is permitted to use textures to create their own item for sale but is not permitted to resell the textures themselves or their items made with the texture at full permissions. Buyers who violate this agreement are not violating the second life permissions system, they are violating the purchase agreement. This is cause for filing a DMCA if the creator wants to do so.

Actually iirc that would be under contract disputes and not a DMCA

Since the product was sold under license and the license was violated.

It wasn't actually stolen, but misused.

The *ability* to copy things does not give you the *right* to do it. Full-perm may be an indication what the creator intended, or, as has been pointed out, it may be a technical requirement for the item to be used for it's intended purpose (textures spring to mind).
If I come across a full-perm texture pack with the names prefixed with TRU (Textures'R'Us), or 60 full-perm animations from well-known animators, I am not going to stick my fingers into my ears, go "lalalala", and say "They are full perms, so the creator must have meant them to be freebies". Common sense goes a long way; denying to listen to that is just a flimsy excuse.
(That said, in the current case with restricted animations embedded in furniture for resale, it may be hard to discern if the originals are legitimately licensed or not, though again, in many cases, it doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to sense if something comes off as "too good to be true".

Well... when this whole recent debacle came up, I remembered a sexbed that somebody just threw at me at the Concierge Party (?!), so I dredged up its contents from Inventory. It looked mighty suspicious to me--and, embarrassingly enough, I sent Chaz on a wild goose chase instead of hunting them down myself. Turned out every single one of them was a licensed animation.

It frankly bugs the heck out of me that consumers are put in the position of having to judge whether to believe claims of "creators" about the validity of licenses for objects they produce (or worse, for their contents). I mean, I trust Craig Altman implicitly: if he tells me the full-perm anims I got from FlyByNight Furriers are bogus, I know he's telling the truth. But that's because it's Craig. Why should I believe such after-the-fact claims of Arbitrary Animator--even if s/he was the creator?

I'm not disagreeing with you... In fact...Totally. (^_^)y

Win money giving a simple click! :

With just a few clicks on the day,


-- -advertising spam URL removed by Katt Linden ----------

what the heck was that???


okay guys, look at this:
http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-1654


a request to extend and clarify the permissions system, so that full perm assets can be sold to developers as tools, and not accidentally/on purpose end up floating around as public domain 'freebies.'


content creators also note: there is a description field for textures/animations/sounds. you can put your copyright information there. no, that doesn't do doodle-squat. however, if someone like me or the original poster come along and see that on the description, and the item is sent to full perms, we might know something is probably wrong.

i also like when content creators put their initials on the name of their creations. "TRU" on all textures r us textures, for example. when i see that, i know it is earmarked by the creator to retain the creator's rights (or at least credit). on textures, of course, they are pretty much useless unless they are full perms. but there's no real reason why animations and sounds can't be 'no mod' so the name/description cannot be changed when re-using them.


to answer the original question.... i would expect that ripping off animations meant he somehow got them uploaded under his name, so the original creator could not be traced. so i just would have said something like, "well, i certainly wouldnt buy ANYthing from someone who rips people off." and stalk out.

Report the spammer. I will take the extra step of muting this person inworld when I log in.

Already reported, with a note that every one of his posts is the same spam..

Former lurker with an idea.

Full perms should mean full perms i.e do what you want with the item. If you sell an item such as textures that need to be copy but don't want them to be sold on by others as textures, then how about another option "transfer restricted". This could be somthing that only the original creator could set and can not be changed. I,m sure that a script could be used to issue a notecard with details of the restrictions. This would not stop theft or misuse of these items but it would make it easier to spot.