Linden Labs protecting thieves/Who do we sue?

You've managed to completely ignore any of the points I posted. Why should any of us take you seriously if you resort to ad hominem at the drop of a hat?

Then why is it posted on the SL Website? Why would they waste their time dealing with DMCA complaints? Which honestly - I really don't understand as it has been proven that they are a waste of time. It seems like a big waste of manpower.

As opposed to your brilliant idea? Not a waste of manpower at all...

For an admitted socialist who claims to be a representative for the little people, you sure have a disdain for the little people you claim to champion for.

Not sure I understand. Are you saying I have you on ignore? (Perhaps a good idea.) If I did, I would not be responding. When you are put on ignore, I will not be able to see your posts therefore not responding to them.

Seems to me more like disdain for the DCMA

However, the "thief" could still argue parallel development (ie, that they came up with the same thing but never saw yours)

It's a lot more likely with some things in SL, especially scripts and genetic textures.

So Yumi,

I'm interested on your opinion in which case the thief DID in fact purchase the original item. What would you say to that? Would they be able to argue parallel development? Would they be able to argue ANYTHING?

I did not say you ignored my post. I said that you ignored the points I made in my post. Rather than providing a cogent response, you decided to attack my post based on the length of one of its paragraphs. Do you not understand how pointless that response was? If you're trying to convince people that your proposal is right, learning how to argue might be a good first step. Especially if you ever plan to hop on down to the magistrate and file a claim sans representation...

I am sorry dear! I accidentally pressed that lil button!
That's all I see sadly.



Dang! All this time I could've been using that? Saves a lot of time when trying to stick to the discussion...not having to read personal attacks and bigruntogetherparagraphs really helps!

Thats not how it works in the United States of America, hun.

With mean-spirited and ignorant jackals like this, it's no wonder the general forum has become such a cesspool...

Ardith, I'm not sure what part of the world you're joining us from, but in the United States there is such a thing a "small claims" court. These courts generally hear cases in which damages may not exceed $5,000 or so. They are used extensively in the US and usually in cases were it would be financially prudent to do so because the award gained in the final judgement may be small and not worth the sometimes very expensive cost associated with an attorney.

In the case of a claims for design infringement in which the designs may cost L$250, small claims court would be the perfect option.

Unless of course you wouldn't mind taking the case pro-bono, in which case please forward me your business card.

Then please, explain how it works. Are you in The U.S.? I did not start this thread to force my opinions on anyone, but to ask help in finding a solution so I CAN enforce my rights in a court of law.

So if you have some helpful input. Please share it with us. I for one would love to hear how it should work.

If the thief actually purchased the original item they would certainly not be able to argue parallel development.

You should think more highly of yourself. I sense a lack of self esteem maybe?

Nicely put.

That line of reasoning relies on presumption their development started _after_ purchase was made. One can most certainly argue their own development originated long before that moment, and they bought what they found to be competitor's product (for comparison) when it was released earlier than one's own product was finished.

Which may or may not be true, but just the fact of purchase alone is hardly damning.

I acknowledged small claims as an option in my bigruntogetherparagraph. However, Mme Zagato specifically mentioned civil court as an option. Her exact words were "then I can just go down to magistrate or small claims court (whichever the amount justifies) and file suit against them. I don't have to hire an attorney to do that for me."

I took issue with her claim that going to civil court without an attorney was something that was actually feasible. Pursuing a claim of copyright infringement without an attorney in civil court (not small claims court) is not as simple as she disingenuously put it.

Small claims court is possibly an option, but claims of copyright infringement are rarely (if ever) adjudicated in small claims court.

For those of you interested in a serious examination of the issue (this clearly rules Madame Zagnut out) then you might find it interesting to read this resource. Be warned! It has bigruntogetherparagraphs in it!

Could you PLEASE apply to be the defense counsel of the individuals I plan to file suit against? With that argurment I'm most certain to win! (Be sure to use those exact words k?)

It provides a certain level of apparent legal recourse for residents, though in practice, the time, money and effort required to actually pursue a case if you don't have a legal team on standby means that it's not actually meaningful protection. I don't think it is really a big deal for them to deal with these cases - receive a notice, receive a counter-notice, no need to do anything. Ardith is quite right in that its purpose is as a tool for corporations to restrict development that harms their bottom line.

Incidentally, if anyone was wondering, "little people" is a reference to the famous quote by Leona Helmsley: "We don’t pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes."

This also appears to be an interesting resource: http://www.asmp.org/commerce/legal/copyright/protect.php

They have a DMCA policy because they are legally obliged to. I'm pretty sure they'd rather clean the Augean stables than deal with DMCA.

Linden Lab isn't your friend, they are not your protector; despite their press releases, they don't give a damn about the content you make to draw people to their game and buy their L$.

Design theft is indeed galling, but LL is doing exactly what they are obliged to, which consists of following the letter of the law as they are required to do and then continuing to not care.

Copyright infringement cases are absurdly long, expensive, rarely satisfying or just. And, as Ordinal noted, do not well serve the individual.

Uhmm i don't get this one. If someone can actually prove that they've been developing their product even before they purchased yours, you cannot claim they stole your idea. (because development that started earlier sort of shows they did have this idea without your item inspiring them, or whatever) If on the other hand they cannot prove such thing then yes, obviously such line of defense would be pointless, but then there'd be no reason to try to use it due to futility? o.O;

Thank you Ordinal. Point taken.
It still leaves the open issue of "What CAN we DO?" - after that counter complaint has been received by LL. Then starts the real process...