Copied Content Creators Fighting Back

http://virtuallyblind.com/2007/10/27/content-creators-sue-rase-kenzo/

The first paragraph (minus the name) for the copy and paste impaired:
"Six major Second Life content creators have filed a lawsuit (.pdf) in the Eastern District of New York claiming copyright and trademark infringement against Second Life user T--- S---- who allegedly exploited a flaw in the Second Life software to duplicate thousands of copies of the creators’ products. Simon allegedly sold these products to other Second Life users as the well-known avatar ‘R--- K---.’"

Will SL justice be served for once?

No idea. How did Stroker fare in his case?

Apparently they've located the "guy that claimed to be untraceable". Just recently - too new to know if he actually is the guy, or whether they get anything out of him though.

http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2007/10/25/eros-lawyers-id-john-doe-avatar-youth-denies-hes-catteneo/

Broccoli

Hhhhhmmm I see a big problem with this. First let me start by saying that the guy doing it is a snake and its not right... However with that being said....

Using the security flaw of SL that is well known and yet the Lindens have not fixed it he is able to duplicate items however they would have had to be trans rights in the first place in order for him to sell them. Correct me if I am wrong.

So I guess what I am saying here is I do not see where they can nail this guy for anything. It sounds to me more like they need to be taking Linden Labs to court not this guy. He is just using what the Lindens know about and refuse to fix.

Again not saying he is right but I do not see where he did anything not legal so to speak. He did not hack the perm rights or anything.

When are people gonna stop taking each other to court in SL and start taking the root of all these issue to court... Linden Labs?

Besises all this taking each other to court... What are you going to get? Nothing. We are all broke! lol Thats why we work hours and hours to create products. Linden Labs is the ones with the money.

This is the main reason they have not made it yet so that you can store your items on your own hard drive. They know as soon as they do something like that it will get hacked ASAP.

Copyright law is based on what the creator allows, not the technology. My ability to photocopy a copyrighted book and sell the copies does not make it legal.

If a creator issues an item as transfer/no-copy, they have made it clear that they are not allowing copying of their creation. Alternately, they could release the item with full permissions, but with a license describing specifically how the user may legally use the creation (this is often done with things like textures that are essentially useless in SL if not full-perms). However it's done, if a creator has indicated that copying is not allowed, any user making copies is violating copyright and can be held legally liable for their actions.

(Technically, the creator / copyright holder must specifically allow copying, but in the SL environment we can probably assume that is implied unless the creator has indicated otherwise.)

I kept trying to rotate my view around those pictures on flicker.

pfffftt

Your brains are hawt!

Ava's analysis was quite accurate.

There are good reasons for bringing an action like this even if there is little expectation of recovery of damages awarded. The first is to establish that SL works do have the protection of the court as all works under copyright should. Another reason is to send a message to other potential infringers that these rights can and will be perused. Finally, even if the defendant is unable to pay awarded damages, a lien could be filed against the infringer encumbering his property, possibly even a garnish against his income.

It wouldn't surprise me if the defendant's counsel were to try to involve LL in a countersuit, but this would be akin to trying to draw Memorex into your CD infringement suit for "enabling" the infringement, which is as silly as it sounds.

I disagree with this viewpoint. By this logic, just because Wal-Mart doesn't have metal detectors at the door, I can walk in and legally start shooting people.

The point isn't that there was a software flaw that allowed the copies - the point is to start disproving the notion that people are "untraceable" and "untouchable" in this virtual Wild West.

Can anyone touch or trace NP and get some of the Ginko money out of him? Is anyone trying?

I don't doubt that some are trying, but since it doesn't involve IP theft and there are no written contracts it is probably a bigger uphill battle to pry that information out.

Yeah, the only sure winners here would be the lawyers. Most people I know who got burned are letting it go as an expensive lesson.

Who else but the lawyers would win in the IP theft case(s)?

Ruining some dirt poor 19yo's life because he cheated someone out of a handful of dollars is hardly a triumph unless you're in it for vengeance. Stroker would have had more money if he hadn't gone to court than if he did.

The double standards on IP theft in SL are more than hypocritical (unless you're convinced that every single content creator on SL actually paid for the software they're using to design their content and every DJ on SL is actually paying royalties or even owns the music they play ).

Copyright and intellectual property law is not just about the money. It's about a creator's right to control the distribution and modification of their work.

I doubt very much that this experience will ruin said 19yo's life. In my opinion, he'll have a much better life if he learns now that his actions have consequences and that he CAN get caught when he does something illegal. Even if the court case doesn't move forward, we can hope that the 19yo's guardians will punish him appropriately.

If this kid or others do less wrong because they're scared of getting caught, then I would say Stroker's efforts were worth it.

"If he continues to deny his guilt we will seek the full damages afforded to us by law, which are considerable. Regardless of his current financial situation, a prevailing judgment will follow him until satisfied." (http://virtuallyblind.com/2007/10/25/robert-leatherwood-identified-eros/)

"Alderman says he doesn't think he will get much money from Leatherwood. "It really never was about the money," he said. "It was about the deterrent. … More than likely we'll get a default judgment, and it'll be on his credit history, and it will affect him for a long time to come." (http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/oct/25/plaintiff-says-defendant-virtual-sex-toy-suit-texa/)

(Somewhat selective quoting, I know. They have offered a less agressive settlement as well)

I don't think it should be shrugged off and end with "Don't do it again, you hear?", but just get to the point where he either admits to IP theft, or convicted of IP theft, so there's a record of past behaviour in case he just does it again in the future and let it go.

But that's really not how I'm reading Stroker's statements.

And it still doesn't change the double standards. The general SL culture is that it's perfectly acceptable to pirate RL content, just don't do it with SL content. The first can't help but erode the second.

A clothing creator shouldn't go on a crusade against all the pirated Photoshop copies being used for SL content, or the illegal DJs, but they should still take a firm stand against any kind of infringement, whether it's their own content, an SL competitor's or RL content. Until that happens I can't help but see any lawsuits as only serving selfish interests.

Hmmm... I'm sorry, but to me it seems entirely appropriate that the copyright violator should be punished for what he's done. He knew what he was doing was wrong and illegal, but he kept doing it because he thought he could get away with it. He is an adult and I see no reason to protect him from the consequences of his own actions.

As for the double standard you perceive, I see no reason why unethical actions by a few should prevent all content creators from enforcing their copyrights. I guess I haven't seen all the stealing of RL content that you suggest... I'm not much of a shopper, so maybe that's why. I certainly wouldn't support someone who argued ownership of a texture they didn't create, but merely uploaded into SL from a CD or the web, but I don't think that should affect the rights of legitimate copyright holders.

As I read this I keep hearing an old saying....

"Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time."

An explanation for those that need it clearer...

"A "hip" expression of the 1960's-70's that advises you not to do something risky unless you are willing and able to accept the full weight of the consequences."

I never said there should be no consequences at all, but my understanding is that copyright infringement penalties are actually quite severe compared to the more materialistic equivalent (phsyical theft of something in a store for instance).

I don't see this as anything more than petty theft, which doesn't mean he shouldn't get punished, but in the proper proportions.

I didn't mean one wrong should lead to another, quite the opposite . SL is full of ongoing copyright and trademark infringement and to me it's just hypocritical to condemn one form (IP theft of SL creations) and tolerate or support another (IP theft of RL creations).

I don't see a difference between a resident copying someone's creation, a content creator using a pirated copy of Photoshop and a DJ streaming pirated music without a license. All three are forms of infringement and equally wrong, but only the first is being condemned, the other two are tolerated or encouraged.

You don't see a problem with a high-profile SL content creator posting "I love warez (=pirated software)" on her store's blog (nothing to do with the cases from this thread btw)? That just reads to me that she doesn't care about copyright violations, just as long as someone doesn't infringe on her work because then it's suddenly wrong. That's what I mean with double standards.

Plus, of course, if a creator _is_ using a pirated copy of Photoshop, that _does_ damage other creators, because other creators have to either pay for their copies of Photoshop (and thus have that much further to go in order to make profit), or use another package (and do without the features PS provides).

Holey moley woman, I never said that!

In all my time in SL, I've never seen anyone admit to using pirated software. Not to say it's not done, just that I've never seen it even mentioned in relation to SL.

But I agree that someone who overtly states their love of stealing software would be a terrible hypocrite if they complained about people stealing their work. I only oppose the idea that the judgment should be so broad, that we shouldn't fight for any creators' rights just because some creators are unethical.

(Now I'm dying to know who it is who "loves warez"!)

There are violations of the social contract that are viewed as being both undermining of societal structures and simultaneously difficult to enforce. Counterfeiting currency and postal theft are two examples that come to mind and both of them carry wildly severe penalties to act as deterrent.

I don't know this to be the case, but it would surprise me not if this same philosophy underlies the harsh penalties for copyright infringement. Recall that copyright and patent were inherited from English common law and have had centuries to be hammered out by the courts toward equitability.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that . It just felt like we were somewhat agreeing with each other but missing the other's point and then I remembered that specific instance and added it because it fit what I was trying to point out .

you can bet it will be the very same ones who would even try to file 'double-standard' as a legal defense for their own behavior.

Well, don't throw rocks at me too hard, but I'm of two minds.

1) I don't want people to be ripped off from all their hard work by those just copying thier work.

But..
2) I don't want SL to turn into a police state with every one looking at every thing.

It's not that I condone illegal behaviour or want that "wild west" attitued in SL, but I've seen "laws" and "lawyers" used against honest people all my life. The slimey ones find the "loopholes" then use the laws meant to protect people agasint those that are not doing a blasted thing wrong.

Point of fact: That a$$ that abused the auction system then turned around and sued LL when they took the "stolen" land back. While some might not think of the Resident in question as "winning" his case, it was "settled" out of court. I'd be willing to bet he got a fir chunk of change jsut to STFU and go away. What he should have got was a boot so far up his rear he could taste shoe-leather.

Stroker may well set his "precident", but what will be the result? People giving up trying to copy other's work? Or people making copies of other's works then sueing the originators for copyright?

"Lawyers use the law like hillbillies use corncobs."

~Jessy