Should the Lindens be able to take down your builds due to whims of your neighbors?

In point of fact its not about precedent, its about policy. LL has expressed a policy,mthey are not bound to it, there is no stare decisis, but they have stated clearly they will not go into a residents land a remove the build. This is not so muhc about fredom of expression, but the right to build on virtual land. We are establishing the limits of virtual property here, not free speech. This is about the ability to purchase and maintain virtual property and, within the bounds of that property do what you wish. This is about what the limits of the rights we have from LL are.

What does it mean to purchase land? What interests does a user have in that land? What are the limits of builadnbility, what are the limints of alienability? Property, even real property, is largely about various rights and interests one has in land. Depsite the lack of any mechanism to set plegal precedent, the nature of the interests we do get in virtual property needs to be defined. LL has gone an step in that direction. LL seesn that the right to use land which you purchase for your own purposes is more important than proctecting the property valuse of the neighbooring property.

The most dangerous claim to "entitlement" I see in SL today is the calim that people are "entitled" t o have thier land value protected. When you purshase virtual real-estate, there is no guarantee that it will hold the purchase value. If you want to maintiant he value, form a land group and implement zoning to protect yourself from others. But don't ask LL to enter into someone's land and take down a build without better proof of extorition.

Silly poll. Of course your build/stuff shouldnt be removed on whims. But thats not to say builds should never be reviewed for removal by LL, there are valid cases that are not 'whims'. None of this matters. We simply need a technical solution like using the land tools to select an area for filtering from view. No loss of freedoms, no drama, no LL admin/policing needed, no server side work.

"FUCK NO!" isn't listed in the poll but thats my answer.

If it dont violate "TOS", it stays. period. simple nuff rule there.

I like the land/view filtering idea.

Jake, they HAVE gone into resident's lands and removed builds.

coco

Simply because the neighboors complained? Have they done this one a whim? Or have they done this because the land contained a TOS violation, like x-rated material in a PG sim?

Because it contained a TOS violation, like Nazi stuff. And because neighbors didn't like it, like some resource hogging thing someone mentioned once, with layered textures or something, which was pretty whim-y. And for various other reasons no doubt.

And as you know, I think this situation is clearly against the TOS as well.

You had just written your post in a way that made me think you weren't aware that they had done this before, which is why I pointed it out.

And we are just talking about removing signs here. We aren't talking about taking away land - which they have also done.

coco

Heh, I am not qualified to post an opinion on this thread, because I consider 90% of the builds in sl to be unbearably hideous. The decision for me becomes one not of which builds are attractive, but which builds are intentionally unattractive and which are just build by people who are aesthetically blind.

Those building intentionally ugly things I consider griefers, and as such would feel free to remove their builds.

"philosopher Geddy Lee" heh heh

What a difference a day makes. After news of Stagecoach Island being hoisted out of game without the permission (at least some) of the creators, the particular verbiage has become suddenly not so much an academic debate.

this was kind of a no-brainer to me.

I can understand certain levels of decency, but personal taste and "whim" don't cover it IRL -- why should it in SL?

I think the Lindens should only be able to delete builds on the request of neighbours if the land the build is on is for sale. That will make damn sure that nobody can use ugly builds to try and get people to buy their land.