In the real world, there is a significant shame and sense of personal guilt when you steal.
for most, non sociopathic people, you feel like a worthless human being and have to learn to live with yourself for doing this
but is this so in secondlife? do people steal without feeling any guilt .. do they even feel a sense of pride for hacking the system when they steal textures and resell freebies?
is secondlife creating a culture of thieves?
Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive
These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
has stealing become a cultural norm in SecondLife? |
|
|
Anna Bobbysocks
Registered User
Join date: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 373
|
07-09-2006 09:00
|
|
Foolish Frost
Grand Technomancer
Join date: 7 Mar 2005
Posts: 1,433
|
07-09-2006 09:17
In the real world, there is a significant shame and sense of personal guilt when you steal. for most, non sociopathic people, you feel like a worthless human being and have to learn to live with yourself for doing this but is this so in secondlife? do people steal without feeling any guilt .. do they even feel a sense of pride for hacking the system when they steal textures and resell freebies? is secondlife creating a culture of thieves? <points hyper-orbiter 310 at Anna> Ok. I want the shoes. And the hair. Got any lindens? Thought so, turn 'em over. C'mon. Hurry up, I ain't got all day. Just hand it over and nobody gets hurt...  |
|
Sitting Lightcloud
Registered User
Join date: 13 May 2004
Posts: 109
|
07-09-2006 09:30
Good Question!
Question is what can we do about it? I say we get a Negative Mark system that Lindens maintain, we supply our evidence they investigate and if found guilty the person in question get a negative mark somewhere that's visible to everyone. _____________________
 |
|
Ash Venkman
Registered User
Join date: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 5
|
It's not stealing
07-09-2006 09:35
It's not stealing. Theft is pretty much impossible in SL.
You can argue that reusing other people's textures without permission is wrong, and that selling something you got for free is wrong, but please don't call it stealing, because that's not what it is. Compare to RL -- in RL, who has a problem with reselling freebies? and "stealing textures" isn't theft, but it may be copyright infringement. Neither of these actions deprives anyone of anything. Calling things by their right names is the first step to having your concerns taken seriously. |
|
Anna Bobbysocks
Registered User
Join date: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 373
|
07-09-2006 09:37
and "stealing textures" isn't theft i rest my case.. |
|
Joannah Cramer
Registered User
Join date: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,539
|
07-09-2006 09:39
is secondlife creating a culture of thieves? SecondLife, specifically? No. It's simply extension of attitude you see all around the 'net. Huge amounts of people consider it 'perfectly ok' to 'share' movies, songs, games, applications... "because i'd never buy it if i had to pay for it, so it's not like the original maker is losing out on any sales if i get it for free" For many people the concept of 'virtual' intellectual 'property' is simply too fuzzy and different from 'physical' ownership which doesn't allow perfect copies that duplicate objects rather than transfer ownership. So they find the former fine even though they may frown at the latter. Is it "cultural norm"? I don't know, but it is widespread. And until these people actually create something themselves and have it copied in similar manner, there's very small chance they'll actually see your point. |
|
Ash Venkman
Registered User
Join date: 13 Mar 2006
Posts: 5
|
07-09-2006 09:43
i rest my case.. You haven't made a case. Why do you think it is theft? |
|
mookid Widget
Registered User
Join date: 29 Apr 2006
Posts: 53
|
07-09-2006 09:45
|
|
Morgana Aubret
Damaged Beyond Repair
Join date: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 139
|
07-09-2006 09:51
And until these people actually create something themselves and have it copied in similar manner, there's very small chance they'll actually see your point. Actually, they normally don't see it then either. There is always an exception for whatever it is they want to steal. Thus you have musicians who rail against downloading their songs for free, but are happy to download images to put on their websites or album artwork, artists who cry against the theft of their images, but are content to steal Photoshop, and programmers who complain about their work being stolen, while feeling no guilt about ripping all the music they can. Confront any one of them about it, and it's always "a different thing" for what they want to steal. Some of the people ISL who scream the loudest about their "work" being ripped off have substantially "borrowed" that work from other artists ISL or online and cannot see themselves as a hypocrite. |
|
Ewan Took
Mad Hairy Scotsman
Join date: 5 Dec 2004
Posts: 579
|
07-09-2006 09:52
It's not stealing. Theft is pretty much impossible in SL. You can argue that reusing other people's textures without permission is wrong, and that selling something you got for free is wrong, but please don't call it stealing, because that's not what it is. Compare to RL -- in RL, who has a problem with reselling freebies? and "stealing textures" isn't theft, but it may be copyright infringement. Neither of these actions deprives anyone of anything. Calling things by their right names is the first step to having your concerns taken seriously. Yep and stealing from people's homes isn't called theft it's 'burglary'! _____________________
 |
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
07-09-2006 10:06
You haven't made a case. Why do you think it is theft? Because the phrase "copyright infringment" can cover a number of potential violations of copyright law. Theft is more direct, and gets the point across rather nicely. Since with the exceptioin of maybe one or two of us, we aren't lawyers, and we aren't compelled to use the correct legal terminology. The guilt of the criminal is not lessened by our misuse of terminology, nor is our sense of injustice any more justified if we do use the correct terms. _____________________
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.
|
|
Sitting Lightcloud
Registered User
Join date: 13 May 2004
Posts: 109
|
07-09-2006 10:35
Some of the people ISL who scream the loudest about their "work" being ripped off have substantially "borrowed" that work from other artists ISL or online and cannot see themselves as a hypocrite. That is probably why so many think it's ok to steal. We can't assume that everything is already stolen, it's not. A lot of people actually buy pictures poses 3d models animations etc then spend a lot of time creating and formating them for SL. _____________________
|
|
Phedre Aquitaine
I am the zombie queen
Join date: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1,157
|
07-09-2006 10:36
Yep and stealing from people's homes isn't called theft it's 'burglary'! That's a semantic hair split so fine that you could beat atoms to death with it. _____________________
everyone loves phedre (excluding chickens), its in the TOS |
|
Surreal Farber
Cat Herder
Join date: 5 Feb 2004
Posts: 2,059
|
07-09-2006 10:46
I'd agree with an earlier poster. SL is a reflection of the larger culture. It seems like many people are only deterred by locks or punishment, rather than a personal sense of right and wrong. Some folks even when caught red handed are only pissed they got caught.
_____________________
Surreal
Phobos 3d Design - putting the hot in psychotic since 2004 Come see our whole line of clothing, animations and accessories in Chaos (37, 198, 43) |
|
Namssor Daguerre
Imitates life
Join date: 18 Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
|
07-09-2006 10:50
It's not stealing. Theft is pretty much impossible in SL. If what you say is true then why would Linden Lab say WE OWN what we create? Why have Linden dollars? Why have a permissions system? Why have the TOS? Why pay $ to own land? Why bother? |
|
Joannah Cramer
Registered User
Join date: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1,539
|
07-09-2006 11:17
That is probably why so many think it's ok to steal. We can't assume that everything is already stolen, it's not. A lot of people actually buy pictures poses 3d models animations etc then spend a lot of time creating and formating them for SL. I think there's bit more to it... e.g, just looking at number of parcels providing the streaming audio and such... how many of them actually do it with all legal aspects sorted out, having made sure they are permitted to do that, having gotten possible due royalty fees paid, etc. How many even considered that legal angle in the first place, for that matter -.o |
|
Io Zeno
Registered User
Join date: 1 Jun 2006
Posts: 940
|
07-09-2006 11:35
The outright theft doesn't bother me half as much as the reselling of said matieral for profit. If I stream copywritten music on my land, I'm not charging you to hear it, and I may well have paid for that music in the first place. But people in SL steal the hard work of others for their own profit, and then act as if it's no different than downloading some free texture for your sofa or as if those who made that skin or pants or whatever are no different because they sourced the zipper on the outfit. Fuck them all.
_____________________
|
|
Kamilah Hauptmann
Um, what?
Join date: 10 Nov 2005
Posts: 122
|
07-09-2006 11:53
I think there's bit more to it... e.g, just looking at number of parcels providing the streaming audio and such... how many of them actually do it with all legal aspects sorted out, having made sure they are permitted to do that, having gotten possible due royalty fees paid, etc. How many even considered that legal angle in the first place, for that matter -.o Interesting thought. Here's another: If I play a webradio station on my parcel is it no different between than playing a radio in my house? Perhaps the legal aspect might roll in if you play your own Shoutcast server and CDs cum MP3s? Even then, would that not be the same as playing a CD in your own house? If you put up the Buy Pass lines, does it change anything? |
|
Zonax Delorean
Registered User
Join date: 5 Jun 2004
Posts: 767
|
07-09-2006 11:56
SecondLife, specifically? It's simply extension of attitude you see all around the 'net. Huge amounts of people consider it 'perfectly ok' to 'share' movies, songs, games, applications... People have been lending books, movies, reselling them, copying or just watching vhs's with friends. Maybe they just think because it was okay then, its okay now? For many people the concept of 'virtual' intellectual 'property' is simply too fuzzy and different from 'physical' ownership It is fundamentally different, yes. Anyone who thinks a copyrighted work works the same way as a physical property (house, car) is an idiot. If you have a house, it doesn't go to the public after 75 years. If you have made a creative work, it goes to the public after a time to build and enrich culture. Also, intellectual property is too broad a term, and it shouldn't really be used. Choose either patent, trademark or copyright to describe what you talk about, the 3 are so fundamentally different that they just can't be put in one bag. |
|
Chip Midnight
ate my baby!
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 10,231
|
07-09-2006 12:00
It's not stealing. Theft is pretty much impossible in SL. You might want to invest in a dictionary. It is indeed thef, which is simply "an unlawful taking." Circumventing DRM (the SL permissions system qualifies) for the purposes of obtaining intellectual property is illegal, and hence, an unlawful taking. Even without the DRM issue it's still breach of copyright which is also illegal. You really have to twist your ethics into a pretzel to justify any of it. That people do attempt to justify it is a pathetically sad statement about our culture, and not just in SL. Welcome to the napster generation. _____________________
 My other hobby: www.live365.com/stations/chip_midnight |
|
Zonax Delorean
Registered User
Join date: 5 Jun 2004
Posts: 767
|
07-09-2006 12:01
how many of them actually do it with all legal aspects sorted out, having made sure they are permitted to do that, having gotten possible due royalty fees paid, etc. How many even considered that legal angle in the first place, for that matter -.o Yes, this is a valid question. However, I do think that if you go to your local RIAA/MPAA/whatever and say that you plan to play music for 1-2 hrs/week for 10-25 people, they'll laugh at you or kick you out, becuase you're so insignificant. If a net radio that plays for 10 000 people for 24/7 pays a few hundred USDs/month, the proportional royalty would be something like 50 cents/month, for the case above? I have no idea where the limit is. |
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
07-09-2006 12:14
Yes, this is a valid question. However, I do think that if you go to your local RIAA/MPAA/whatever and say that you plan to play music for 1-2 hrs/week for 10-25 people, they'll laugh at you or kick you out, becuase you're so insignificant. The RIAA has their own opinions of what is signifigant or not. They rarely mesh with other people's opinions. _____________________
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.
|
|
Reitsuki Kojima
Witchhunter
Join date: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 5,328
|
07-09-2006 12:18
People have been lending books, movies, reselling them, copying or just watching vhs's with friends. Maybe they just think because it was okay then, its okay now? Copying tapes for friends was never "ok", it was just a public secret... everyone did it, nobody cared, so what could you do about it? The difference betwene that and lending a CD or book is that in lending you are deprived of it for a time, then the original returns to you... at no point has a second copy of the work come into existance without recompense to the artist. Also, intellectual property is too broad a term, and it shouldn't really be used. Choose either patent, trademark or copyright to describe what you talk about, the 3 are so fundamentally different that they just can't be put in one bag. They aren't that fundamentally different, really. Only in some legal specifics. Conceptually, they are the same thing: Temporary ownership over the rights to an idea. _____________________
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.
|
|
Zonax Delorean
Registered User
Join date: 5 Jun 2004
Posts: 767
|
07-09-2006 12:23
The RIAA has their own opinions of what is signifigant or not. They rarely mesh with other people's opinions. I looked up my 'local' (country's) RIAA-like thing rates. The example I took would cost about 1-2 USD/month. That sound about okay (though not cheap for so less ppl).. however, there's a clause that says you must pay at minimum 35 USD/month, even if you only owe them 1 USD by the per-user rates. I say f**k them. |
|
Zonax Delorean
Registered User
Join date: 5 Jun 2004
Posts: 767
|
07-09-2006 12:34
Copying tapes for friends was never "ok", it was just a public secret... everyone did it, nobody cared, so what could you do about it? Well, I don't remember the RIAA suing home customers about video tapes. But now they're suing home users about digital stuff. The difference betwene that and lending a CD or book is that in lending you are deprived of it for a time, then the original returns to you... at no point has a second copy of the work come into existance without recompense to the artist. It doesn't matter. If you ever lent a book, you stole money from the book's author (because your friend didn't buy the book, but read it). They aren't that fundamentally different, really. Only in some legal specifics. Conceptually, they are the same thing: Temporary ownership over the rights to an idea. Trademarks don't have much value after their 'payed life'. Coca cola is a trademark, and is protected, so noone else may make and sell a drink under the same name. However, should the whole business cease to exist (let's suppose noone on earth wants to drink more cola), and the name be freed, it would have no use, no value. However, a book (originally copyrighted) can be useful for culture later, too. See Shakespeare  And patents aren't patenting the idea (you can't patent an idea), they're inventions. Though inventions are not that far from ideas, that's true. A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to a person for a fixed period of time in exchange for the regulated, public disclosure of certain details of a device, method, process or composition of matter (substance) (known as an invention) which is new, inventive, and useful or industrially applicable. Copyright is a set of exclusive rights granted by governments to regulate the use of a particular expression of an idea or information. At its most general, it is literally "the right to copy" an original creation. In most cases, these rights are of limited duration. The symbol for copyright is ©, and in some jurisdictions may alternately be written (c). A trademark or trade mark[1] is a distinctive sign of some kind which is used by a business to uniquely identify itself and its products and services to consumers, and to distinguish the business and its products or services from those of other businesses. A trademark is a type of industrial property which is distinct from other forms of intellectual property. (wikipedia) |