He's actually suing LL?!?
|
|
nimrod Yaffle
Cavemen are people too...
Join date: 15 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,146
|
05-10-2006 13:38
From: Cocoanut Cookie "Bragg learned of a way to purchase virtual land significantly below market values, and invested thousands of US dollars purchasing land in an attempt to resell this land at a profit."
Opinion:
He did not invest thousands of U.S. dollars purchasing this land. Unless there is something HUGE we don't know. He invested peanuts in purchasing this land.
coco Maybe he has been doing it for a while, and the thousands were the land fees? What they fail to mention is how much he gained from it.
_____________________
"People can cry much easier than they can change."
-James Baldwin
|
|
Morgaine Dinova
Active Carbon Unit
Join date: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 968
|
05-10-2006 14:42
Well we don't know how this will turn out, but one thing is for certain: Philip (or at least his lawyers) must by now see in how precarious a position they've placed themselves, by virtue of being one of the earliest crossover enterprises between the real and virtual business worlds.
In this US where earning through litigation seems to be more common than actual wealth creation, the outcome should have been fairly easy to forecast. LL will now find themselves regularly in court, simply because none of these real/virtual issues have yet been tested and therefore people will be trying all manner of things in the quest for possible $$$.
It's going to be messy. Perhaps now is a good time to start making those non-commercial community metaverses and leave the lawyers to their blood sucking.
|
|
Lorien Languish
A quiet one
Join date: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 11
|
05-10-2006 15:01
From: Morgaine Dinova Well we don't know how this will turn out, but one thing is for certain: Philip (or at least his lawyers) must by now see in how precarious a position they've placed themselves, by virtue of being one of the earliest crossover enterprises between the real and virtual business worlds.
In this US where earning through litigation seems to be more common than actual wealth creation, the outcome should have been fairly easy to forecast. LL will now find themselves regularly in court, simply because none of these real/virtual issues have yet been tested and therefore people will be trying all manner of things in the quest for possible $$$.
It's going to be messy. Perhaps now is a good time to start making those non-commercial community metaverses and leave the lawyers to their blood sucking. This is the really sad part in all this, one asshat could be setting off a chain reaction and the people who are actually going to be "paying" for it are the people who don't screw the system and just like to play. |
|
Ricky Zamboni
Private citizen
Join date: 4 Jun 2004
Posts: 1,080
|
05-10-2006 15:09
From: Lorien Languish This is the really sad part in all this, one asshat could be setting off a chain reaction and the people who are actually going to be "paying" for it are the people who don't screw the system and just like to play. heh. Which asshat are you talking about?  |
|
Lorien Languish
A quiet one
Join date: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 11
|
05-10-2006 15:22
doh, okay I can see how that would be unclear... I'm actually refering to Mr. Bragg, sit back and look at the potential path of effect on this issue. I fully admit my "ethical code" is a little on the loose side, but try as I might I just can't see him as the "innocent, unfairly treated victim" in this.  |
|
Ricky Zamboni
Private citizen
Join date: 4 Jun 2004
Posts: 1,080
|
05-10-2006 15:46
From: Lorien Languish doh, okay I can see how that would be unclear... I'm actually refering to Mr. Bragg, sit back and look at the potential path of effect on this issue. I fully admit my "ethical code" is a little on the loose side, but try as I might I just can't see him as the "innocent, unfairly treated victim" in this. |
|
Juro Kothari
Like a dog on a bone
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 4,418
|
05-10-2006 15:50
Do we know for sure that a Linden told him that? No. Do we know that not all Lindens have intimate knowledge of every aspect of LL's business? Yes, as it is with pretty much any company.
It is equally likely that the conversation never happened or happened with a Linden who was unfamiliar with the auction process and/or web site.
|
|
Cocoanut Cookie
Registered User
Join date: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1,741
|
05-10-2006 16:17
From: nimrod Yaffle Maybe he has been doing it for a while, and the thousands were the land fees? What they fail to mention is how much he gained from it. Yes, I guess that is a reasonable interpretation. He could have, for instance, bought a number of sims previously = thousands of dollars. But if that is so, then he surely would have known something was amiss when there was a sim available starting at $0? C C |
|
Doubledown Tandino
ADULT on the Mainland!
Join date: 9 Mar 2006
Posts: 1,020
|
05-10-2006 16:19
Of course they'll settle.... they'll settle when LL decides to communicate. What other course of action was the lawyer to do? He took ALL steps to try to communicate to aleviate the situation.... LL zero response... that's why this is now a court case....
And why not build a case if youre headed to court.
Marc, I applaud you. You're doing exactly what you should be doing. Personally, I'm not certain you'll win.... but I doubt you'll lose. I would be doing the exact same steps as you if I were in your situation. What the hell else was Marc gonna do if LL refuses to talk?
Being the first courtcase regarding virtual land is much cooler than anything else.
So, in court... who tells the whole truth, RL name or avatar name?
_____________________
http://djdoubledown.blogspot.com
|
|
Peter Nelson
holds your death in hand.
Join date: 25 Nov 2005
Posts: 89
|
Case Closed!
05-10-2006 16:22
I just wanted to repeat this part of the SL TOS: From: Terms of Service
2.6 Linden Lab may suspend or terminate your account at any time, without refund or obligation to you.
Linden Lab has the right at any time for any reason or no reason to suspend or terminate your Account, terminate this Agreement, and/or refuse any and all current or future use of the Service without notice or liability to you. In the event that Linden Lab suspends or terminates your Account or this Agreement, you understand and agree that you shall receive no refund or exchange for any unused time on a subscription, any license or subscription fees, any content or data associated with your Account, or for anything else.
Case closed. In the TOS it clearly states that his account can be terminated at any time for ANY or NO reason, and that you may or may not get a refund. Whether or not he was exploiting the system, it DOESN'T MATTER. His account was terminated for whatever reason you choose, or no reason at all. And about how he is complaining about his loss of money... get over it. According to the TOS, it clearly states that you may or may not get a refund of your Linden dollars and that they can refuse any and all future use of the Service WITHOUT NOTICE. I really want to see him defend his case with this piece of information clearly stated in the Terms of Service. My opinion: The chance of the lawyer winning? 0.001% The chance of the lawyer getting attention? 100% The chance of me wanting to see the outcome? 100% |
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
05-10-2006 16:51
From: Peter Nelson Case closed. In the TOS it clearly states that his account can be terminated at any time for ANY or NO reason, and that you may or may not get a refund.
Whether or not he was exploiting the system, it DOESN'T MATTER. His account was terminated for whatever reason you choose, or no reason at all.
And about how he is complaining about his loss of money... get over it. According to the TOS, it clearly states that you may or may not get a refund of your Linden dollars and that they can refuse any and all future use of the Service WITHOUT NOTICE. Not exactly. EULA and TOS are not all-powerful - there are rights you just can't make disapear with a EULA.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
|
|
Juro Kothari
Like a dog on a bone
Join date: 4 Sep 2003
Posts: 4,418
|
05-10-2006 16:52
From: Doubledown Tandino He took ALL steps to try to communicate to aleviate the situation.... ? |
|
Joshua Stork
Registered User
Join date: 9 Apr 2006
Posts: 2
|
A thought
05-10-2006 22:58
Here's a thought about all this immediate termination. The TOS also states the the individual owns all IP right to anything and everything they make. So in this regard, could a person who was banned then turn around and send a revokation of rights and a cease and desist order on all things they created? Just a question to get you guys thinking.
|
|
Crissaegrim Clutterbuck
Dancing Martian Warlord
Join date: 9 Apr 2006
Posts: 277
|
05-10-2006 23:05
From: Aimee Weber ...case law for electronic assets on third party servers which actually isn't completely new ground.... And the determination of the thing is precisely the point, isn't it? |
|
Lorien Languish
A quiet one
Join date: 31 Oct 2005
Posts: 11
|
05-10-2006 23:44
Nope, we'll have to agree to disagree on that interpretation. When I look over the website info about "Private Islands" which I equate to "Private Sims" it clearly states a minimum upfront cost. The difference between the $1250 price on an island and the standard minimum bid of $1000 for a mainland private sim likely represents the difference in customization levels. IF he did in fact contact a Linden, I highly doubt he in anyway mentioned anything about a minimum price of $0, and I doubt all Linden's have full knowledge of the workings of every facet of the "platform" (don't want to get flamed for using the evil "game" word ). Try as I might I just can't seem to find anything on the website or in any Linden post that states "if you can find a backdoor or loophole to slither through, feel free to screw us."  I'll give on the point that LL messed up and if I was them I would give back what he had earned prior to the sale and tell him he wasn't welcome to return. I still stand by my view that the people who will get hurt by this are the ones who just want to play. If he should win, then I would find it completly understandable for all the other sim owners out there who paid the full price to go after LL for "unfair" practices. Then we'll have a long list of other wankers thinking they can score a few free bucks, and since LL currently runs on funding from others... it's funny how that funding dries up when lawyers go on a feeding frenzy. Anyone wanna give odds on a hard-right group/politician preaching the Evils of Sex, Gambling, and Free-thought will want a piece of the "champion of the oppressed scam-artists glory" that Mr. Bragg is after. P.S. on the "severly unbalanced" TOS clause issue... you might want to read ofer the TOS for your bank accounts, credit cards, and a whole lot of other things |
|
Warda Kawabata
Amityville Horror
Join date: 4 Nov 2005
Posts: 1,300
|
05-11-2006 02:10
That clause about LL having the right to cancel an account for any or no reason and claim control of any financial assets within teh account is, I suspect, unenforceable legally, and there more as a scare tactic than a serious legal barrier.
I fully support this case if it succeeds in removing that clause.
|
|
Robbie Dingo
Registered User
Join date: 3 Jan 2005
Posts: 68
|
05-11-2006 02:59
|
|
Morgaine Dinova
Active Carbon Unit
Join date: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 968
|
05-11-2006 03:49
From: Warda Kawabata That clause about LL having the right to cancel an account for any or no reason and claim control of any financial assets within teh account is, I suspect, unenforceable legally, and there more as a scare tactic than a serious legal barrier.
I fully support this case if it succeeds in removing that clause. I agree, totally. We like LL, they have nice friendly people, but that clause is totally out of step with that friendly face. No sane person likes a company that says "We can do what the fsck we want, so screw you", which is what that clause says. Lindens, please get rid of that people-hating paragraph, and try to follow Google's "Don't Be Evil" philosophy. |
|
Morgaine Dinova
Active Carbon Unit
Join date: 25 Aug 2004
Posts: 968
|
05-11-2006 04:02
Actually, this issue goes beyond mere ToS issues.
LL has made it clear that the world which their servers run is actually being built by the community, and that all objects belong to their creators in the community, not to LL.
Well that doesn't fit at all well with LL's proclaimed right to instantly terminate accounts. The avatars and characters and personalities and reputations being built in Second Life are as much a part of the world as are the "harder" objects, and they belong to that community-built world too, not to LL. The world would be nothing without its people.
Instant termination is execution of a virtual persona, without trial or opportunity for reasoned defence. Somehow that doesn't seem right, and no ToS clause that says it's right can make it right.
|
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
05-11-2006 04:16
From: Warda Kawabata That clause about LL having the right to cancel an account for any or no reason and claim control of any financial assets within teh account is, I suspect, unenforceable legally, and there more as a scare tactic than a serious legal barrier.
I fully support this case if it succeeds in removing that clause. The siezure of assets, maybe. The first part is absolutely within their right. In fact... From: Morgaine Dinova I agree, totally.
We like LL, they have nice friendly people, but that clause is totally out of step with that friendly face. No sane person likes a company that says "We can do what the fsck we want, so screw you", which is what that clause says.
Lindens, please get rid of that people-hating paragraph, and try to follow Google's "Don't Be Evil" philosophy. Actually, the "do whatever we want" is standard, and for a good reason - It's to deal with people who are causing problems, but not technicly breaking any other rule. Trust me, you will find something to that effect in just about any agreement you sign, online or off. Hell, I Think the stuff I signed when I set my bank accoutn up has words to that effect. The siezing of assets, however, is much less justifiable.
_____________________
I am myself indifferent honest; but yet I could accuse me of such things that it were better my mother had not borne me: I am very proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offenses at my beck than I have thoughts to put them in, imagination to give them shape, or time to act them in. What should such fellows as I do crawling between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves, all; believe none of us.
|
|
Siobhan Taylor
Nemesis
Join date: 13 Aug 2003
Posts: 5,476
|
05-11-2006 04:19
From: Morgaine Dinova Google's "Don't Be Evil" philosophy. Surely, these days that should be their "Don't admit to being evil" philosophy.
_____________________
http://siobhantaylor.wordpress.com/
|
|
nimrod Yaffle
Cavemen are people too...
Join date: 15 Nov 2004
Posts: 3,146
|
05-11-2006 06:28
From: Morgaine Dinova No sane person likes a company that says "We can do what the fsck we want, so screw you" Sounds like a certian president here in America! 
_____________________
"People can cry much easier than they can change."
-James Baldwin
|
|
Zuleica Sartre
Registered User
Join date: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 105
|
05-11-2006 06:44
From: vivi Odets For me this whole issue is about personal ethics. From what I understand, this fella had bought land at auction before, so he was familiar with the opening bids as set by LL. Just supposing he "accidentally and innocently" stumbled into these auctions and "won" them for US$1 or whatever the insanely low amount was. As an ethical, responsible human being, he should have immediately contacted LL and said, "OMG, here's what just happened -- I think there is a problem you should be aware of and correct immediately."
Instead, whether by accident or intent, he plunged ahead, took advantage of the situation, and started re-selling the land at a personal profit. (I can just see him, wriggling in his chair like a small schoolboy, ready to pee his pants with excitement...).
To me, it's like in RL when you are at the check-stand and the clerk fails to ring up an item or gives you back too much change. What kind of person are you? Do you keep knowledge of the error and the money to yourself? Or do you point out the problem to the clerk and make things right.
Legal issues be damned: This is an educated man -- he knows right from wrong. He chose -- and continues to choose -- to take the lowest moral ground. Then again, and pardon my bias, he's a lawyer.
Dewey, Cheetham & Howe The rest of you are picking nits. Vivi is dead on here. Only a complete moron would not know ethically that what they were doing was wrong in this situation. I think, since he made it through law school, we can assume he is not a moron. Misguided maybe but not a moron. He is simply a scammer. |
|
Siobhan Taylor
Nemesis
Join date: 13 Aug 2003
Posts: 5,476
|
05-11-2006 06:48
If the FIC really existed, they'd know his IP address.
_____________________
http://siobhantaylor.wordpress.com/
|
|
Zuleica Sartre
Registered User
Join date: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 105
|
05-11-2006 06:55
From: Ricky Zamboni Apparently the minimum bid isn't always $1,000, since this guy (and several others) was able to get to an auction page, bid $1, and win the auction.
Your "front door unlocked" argument is a complete red herring -- theft is always theft. This situation is a breach of contract -- it's more like you offering a $20 reward for your lost dog, me finding your dog and bringing him to your house. I find the door unlocked with a $20 on the kitchen table. I take the $20 and leave the dog. Then you get mad at me for taking the $20 because you weren't ready to pay me the reward yet. OK, so maybe I was wrong. You're obviously not a moron Ricky yet you utterly fail to see the ethically WRONG nature of what he did. It's like finding a bunch of incorrectly priced grocery store items...maybe some innept employee priced them at 12 cents instead of 12 dollars. You ask another employee (MAYBE) if they checkout person will notice and they say; "Yeah right, go for it." Then you all innocent like walk to the checkout counter and try and pay 12 cents for what every freaking idiot KNOWS is 12 dollars. Most of us see that this is unethical...maybe not illegal but most CERTAINLY unethical. Apparently there really are non-morons out there that don't get ETHICAL. |
