another ethical question

lets say i want to make a change to someone's skin for a price, is it ethical to glintercept the person's former skin , add my modification and reupload it to sl, giving it to the person as notransfer only and supressing my copy once done?

technically what i would sell is the modification and since it would require the peson to own the original skin i am not ripping anybody off technically.

any suggestion?

I don't make skins but I'm thinking that wouldn't be a cool thing to do without getting permission from the creator first.

cosidering i am not making a buck on his back but solving a texture layer problem (only one face texture) i don't see in what it is concerning him if i respect his notransfer permission

and for me not re useing it, i would not reuse it, i have a minimum of respect for other's work, the problem is that it's only my words

Would you still make this buck if the person hadn't created it in the first place?

If you want to do this, what would be the harm in notifying the creator?

It is an interesting question either way. As with a lot of SL, though, if you want to minimize your drama quotient, I would contact the creator first.

When I upload the textures I've spent countless hours creating, it is (or used to be) with the perception that my textures would be safeguarded against theft and alteration. If I wanted my textures altered, I'd alter them myself or offer them as modifiable. They're MY work, took MY time to create, but most of all, it's my art, and as such, I make it no-mod because I do NOT want it modified, altered in any way, or stolen.

I do see your point, but I disagree. If you have to use something underhanded like the GL Interceptor thing, it means you know that if you go to the creator to ask permission you know you'd get a negative response.

Bottom line, interception of a texture is NEVER ethical, period.

Your notion that you're not ripping anyone off is completely flawed. First, whether or not you're making money on the deal has nothing to do with it. Second, the customer who bought the skin from the creator is buying limited rights to use the texture only as part of a finished product (the skin), not the texture itself, and not any rights to use it for any other purpose including modification or incorporation into a new product (which is what the new skin would be). Therefore, neither you nor that customer has any right to modify the creator's work in any way, shape, or form unless the creator has expressly granted you permission to do so.

No matter how you might want to twist and bend the semantics to try and thinly justify the piracy of the thing, the fact remains that it is the creator and only the creator who owns the IP, and it is not for anyone else to decide what should be done with it. If a customer wants a skin modified, he or she should contact the origninal creator and request it. If the creator says no, then so be it. That's the creator's decision to make, no one else's.

The customer is always free to do business elsewhere if he or she feels a particular creator is not responsive to his or her needs, but under no circumstances does the customer get to be entitled to what he or she wants purely because of said want. You can't go into a supermarket and take bread off the shelf just because you want it, you can't illegally copy music just because you want it, and you can't hack someone else's texture just because you want it. It's wrong.

Now, if you want to use your own artistic talents to create a similar skin from scratch by yourself with the customer's requested alterations, you're certainly free to do that. You don't get to cheat though by piggybacking your minor alterations on top of someone else's blood, sweat, and tears. Make it entirely yourself, get the creator's permission, or simply live without the item. Those are your only ethical options.

its more complicated, back in time i used to make head garments, the problem is that it used the tatoo layer, and 90% of the sl users have already a skin, so after a little time i stopped selling em since peoples where not satisfied with them.
Now that it exist a technology tyhat allow a honest designer to melt an extra texture into the skin layer, i am considering about using it in respect of the original designer.

My problem is that most skin designers are:

-very protective of theyr work
-have not a single interest to help me in this
-would be so many requests to send if i have lets say 10 orders, i would have to put them in wait until each skin designer "maybe" accept?

what seems to be ethical to me:
do it only on a notransfer skin and create the garment notranfer also, so the work of the skin maker isn"t leaked in any form.

i wouldn't have to do this if there was more than 1 texture layer on heads

for memory the client itself is baking the final texture for the avatar by meting skin and clothes into unique textures, so it's my fault if in this process the only way to add an extra layer would be to overwrite the client files with a skin that most skin maker will never ever provide in tga form?

What part of you don't get to take it just because you want it wasn't clear?

Sure, you wouldn't have to do it if there were more one texture layer, but as of now there isn't, so accept that and move on. It's unfortunate that your headware business is impractical in SL, and we can all feel sympathy for you for that, but that doesn't give you license to mess with other people's artwork. Find a way to make your product that doesn't breach ethical constraints, or make a different product. It's that simple.


I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say here since this is not a complete sentence, so correct me if my interpretation of it is wrong. I think what you're trying to say is it's not your fault that the SL client works the way it does, and it's not your fault that skin makers might not want to share their textures with you, so somehow that's supposed to vindicate you and hold you not at fault if you decide to steal those textures.

To that, I'll repeat what I said earlier. It doesn't matter how you try to twist the semantics to justify piracy. It's still stealing, and it's ALWAYS wrong. Again, find a way to make your product that keeps you in the right, or don't make the product.

Kyrah has an interesting and valid quandary here.

If a person wants to wear two tattoos by two different artists it can't be done without the method she outlined.

With the level of care she proposes I'd say she has her ethics in place. Though the procedure is one that's frowned upon, the intent is nothing to frown upon.

Fact is no one can stop a GLinterceptor. The crimes will happen anyway.

What Kyrah outlines is not a violation of IP because the act would not be needed if we had additional layers to work with.

thanks for the support aodhan

i know it is a slippery slope, and i am balancing between providing what i have been asked over and over and getting my reputation dragged in the mud by the designer community because of a misunderstanding

No one's disputing that the quandry exists. For the third time now though, you don't get to take something that's not yours just because you want it, no matter how you try to justify it.


So? That doesn't make it right. SL is what it is. If you want to wear two tattoos by two different artists, your options are find some other virtual world that allows that, wait for LL to impliment the appropriate avatar improvements, or contact both artists and ask them if they can collaborate to make what you want for you. What you don't get to do is go around whining, "but the system wouldn't let me do what I wanted so I had to steal."


Which is why I trust that she'll take what I've said to heart.


The ends don't justify the means. Yes, we need more texture layers on the avatar. but just because they're not there doesn't give anyone the right to take someone else's work without permission and modify it. That's all kinds of wrong.


So? That doesn't make it right. Murders "happen anyway" but they're still wrong and still illegal. If your neighbor wants to kill you badly enough, there's no power on this Earth that will stop him. That doesn't mean it's not wrong.


You can't be serious. I'm sorry I don't have a more polite way to say this, but that's the most rediculous statement I've ever heard. The system is what it is. Its limitations don't make IP theft any less real just because you might be able to think of a way you think the system could work better.

Again, when you buy a skin or a tattoo or a piece of clothing in SL, what you're buying is the limited use right to the texture for that item. Using it for any other purpose including combining it with another item to create a third is by definition IP theft.

what about fair use?

anyway:

- the person already own the said skin paid to the creator and no transfer so i am not stealing the designer a sale or giving his work for free
-what i provide is an alterated version , what i charge for is the aditional layer on the said skin.
-i do not keep a version for myself so i am not even stealing the designer's work

-i used glintercept for totally legitimate uses (capturing the mesh of one of my builds for using it in 3dsmax, grabbing a melted version of my own textures, i also used ot to write my essay on sol and polygon use) so the tool in itself is clearly not evil, just that peoples can use it for evil purposes

Since the designer didn't got ripped off in the process how can it be thievery?

What you're proposing isn't fair use.

US Copyright law defines reproduction of copyrighted work as "fair use" for purposes such as "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholoarship, and research." The idea is if you want to write a news article criticizing a book, you'd be free to cite passages from the book in order to show what it is you're criticizing. You wouldn't get to take the wole book though, put it inside your own cover, and then say "see, that was fair use."

The law also stipulates that the evaluation fair use on a case by case basis must consider "the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work". I would argue strongly that when you intercept a texture you are destroying the value of that copyrighted work. If you want it, buy it from the creator, or ask him to give it to you freely. If he refuses to sell it or give it away, that's his right. You don't get to make the decision for him, just because you want what he's got.



But you ARE stealing a sale. For the umpteenth time now, you don't get to take it just because you want it. The person who bought the skin bought the right to use it on his own avatar, not the right for you to do anything at all with it.

And likewise for the umpteenth time, what the customer bought was the right to use the texture on one and only one product, the actual skin that he bought. Using it for any other purpose or on any other product is stealing. Otherwise, there'd be no permissions system in place, and everything would be infinitely distributable.


What you do and don't charge for is irrelevant. You don't get to add a layer to a texture you don't own or that you have no rights to. Again, make the whole thing yourself, get permission to do the alteration from the creator, or leave it alone. It's that simple.


This is equally irrelevant. Whether you keep your copy for 2 second or 200 years, you still stole it. If you rob a bank and then return all the money, guess what; you still go to jail.


That was never in question.


The designer DID get ripped off. It's not for you to decide what gets done with someone else's artwork. It's their right to make that decision, and if you deprive them of that right, you ripped them off. There's no other way to define it.

The bottom line is if you had the right to modify a texture, it would say so in the item's permissions. If it doesn't say that, then you can't do it, period.

re read me, i am not providing the skin , for someone to get my mod they would have to own the said skin already and so have paid their right to use it

@Chosen

That's why I said it was a quandary. Ethically she isn't stealing the texture.

The product Kyrah sells is not the texture but the additional item. If the person had no body tattoo layer on then her product would be an ordinary one, and there's no quandary.

But as it stands there are tattoos and skin textures. They currently stand as separate products that can't be used together. So tattoo makers make their tattoos on various skin types in the hopes that they've covered enough ground. They can use underpants and undershirt layers, but there's no equivalent for the head.

What process would you propose in return if someone wanted to use a clean skin texture supplied by one artist, then add a tattoo by another artist?

It's certainly touchy because of the method. I'm not comfortable with it myself. But I also can't call her a thief.

Frankly, even if I don't need it myself, I'd really much rather that LL add even just a second skin layer since the skin is baked anyway. At least we'll be rid of the problem Kyrah has and open many more markets.

Re-read me. How many times do I have to say this. It doesn't matter that you think you're "not providing the skin". The person who bought the skin paid for the right to use the texture it contains on that skin and only that skin. When you take that texture and apply it to a new skin (modified or unmodified), you're using it for a purpose that was not paid for. Therefore, you're stealing.

How many times do you want to go around the same circle here. Don't take anyone else's work without their permission, ever. It couldn't be more simple.

Ethically she IS stealing the texture. As soon as she hacks her video card to get ahold of it and puts it somewhere else, it's stolen.


The "additional item" is an altered version of a pre-existing texture, correct? There's no quandry there. It's stealing, plain and simple. You don't get to take someone else's work and change it without their permission. I don't see why that's so hard to understand.


I already answered this. You either contact both artists and ask them if they're willing to collaborate or you live without the product you want. Until LL adds more texture layers to the avatar, and artists rework their product lines to take advantage of the changes, those are your only ethical options. Again, you don't get to have something just because you want it. I don't know where this sense of entitlement comes from, but it's soooooooo wrong.


I can't call her a theif either because at this point my understanding is she's trying to determine if what she's proposing is okay or not. If and when she actually does it, then she'll be a theif.


Everyone would rather there were more texture layers, but again, the fact that there aren't doesn't give anyone the right to steal. I'd like to have more money in my bank account, but that doesn't mean I get to just take it out of someone else's account. I'd like to have a nicer car, but that doesn't mean I get to just take one off the street. I'd like to have more texture layers on my avatar, but that doesn't mean I get to grab a bunch of other people's artwork and illegally mash it all together onto the one layer that I do have.

hm chosen could you let some other voice their opinion?

i already asked to skin makers to give me the tga files to apply the modification, the problem lay that nobody can be trusted in SL and a tga file hold no permissions so its like if they where giving me they buziness.

Still i do not think it is theivery and labeling me as a thief with all the precautions i want to take is just like charging like a bull on a a red cloth, just because it involve glintercept.

Hmm. i'd try to contact the original maker of the skin and ask them if either they could add the extra layers to the skin file themselves, or if they're too busy for custom work (which often seems to be the case) then if they would give you approval for this sort of operation. In the latter case, as long as they're reasonable person and can actually trust you to get rid of the modified file after you're done with alteration and the client receives the skin, i don't see much problem.

The whole 'zomg it's my art don't you dare touch it!!11one' drama is a bit over the top, imo. When i put on an outfit, the game client does exactly the same thing the original poster wants -- i.e. combine layers done by multiple people into single texture applied to avatar. So what's next, skin makers flipping out and demanding people to go around only naked, so their beautiful art never gets altered from original when it's "no mod"? o.O;

How exactly am I stopping anyone from voicing their opinions? I happen to feel very strongly about this, so I'm emphatically presenting my opinion (along with facts, like the legal definition of fair use). That doesn't stop anyone else in any way from doing the same.

Look, when I think someone's wrong, I make no bones about saying so. Piracy is wrong, and the arguments pirates always come up with to justify their actions always erk me, so when I encounter them, I usually feel the need to speak up as loudly as I can. Anyone and everyone else is free to do the same. Nothing I could possibly say could change that, so why are you implying that I could? I can promise you I have no power to delete anyone else's posts.


If they choose not to give you their files, that's their right. You have to respect that. If it means you don't get to do a few things you might have wanted to do, then you have to live with that. To go against their wishes and take their textures anyway would be stealing, and I think you know that.


Look, you said you were asking for opinions about whether this was right or wrong. However, you appear to want so badly to believe it's right that you seem completely unwilling to listen to any arguments that it's wrong. You keep repeating the same weak justifications endlessly. I can only conclude then that you never really wanted a discussion on this; what you really wanted was approval. The only people who approve of piracy in any form are other pirates. The rest of us will keep telling you it's wrong. I hope you'll listen.

I'm sorry you feel that my opinion of the textures I create being my art is drama. However, your ridicule of my statement will not change my opinion that it is, in fact, my art, and I don't want it altered by someone who does not have my permission. The whole clothing issue is irrelevant - I am selling complete skins with the understanding that people will wear whatever clothing they want over it. I am not selling individual textures so that someone will download my files, alter them however they please, and then upload them for their customers or themselves.

I think Chosen has explained it all quite clearly.

I think we might have a misunderstanding here. I don't think it's unreasonable to object to having your work modified without permission... the unreasonable part is imo refusing to give such permission on the ground of 'i don't want my art modified' ... while at the same time one is allowing people to do exactly that, modify appearance of this art through the use of clothing layers.

What you seem to be failing to realize, Joannah, is that the use of clothing layers to obscure relevant parts of skins is part of the intended purpose of the skin. That's very different from modifying the base texture itself. You can argue all you want that the end result either way is an avatar that looks different than the pure naked skin, but I think you know that that's not the point.

The bottom line is, whether or not you agree with the artist's grounds for giving or not giving modification permission, you have to respect his or her decision. You don't have to like it, you don't have to feel that he or she had a good reason, but you do have to abide by the decision, no matter what. It's the creator's right to grant or deny whatever permissions he or she sees fit on his or her own creations, for whatever reasons he or she chooses. No one has the right to take that away for any reason.

this what i am trying to explain, of course i posted here to get an opinion but i wasn't thinking i would encounter so much of "dunt dare to touch my files!!!"

what i don't understand is, the skin maker got his money at the beginning, so why is it such a problem? itsnot like if i had the intention to distribute it freely or not, i plan to sell it as a piece of clothing, but due to the SL limitations i am forced to melt it into the existing skin, so peoples can enjoy the expensive skin they used in adition of my head garment without having to beg for a tga (wich, knowing how skinmakers are proud of theyr work, will never happend) file so they can override the skin files in their client directory