Can you US Copyright a Prim?

No, I don't want to do it, I think its dumb. This is a simple question about a situation in world. So Can you US Copyright a Prim? Has anyone done this and has proof?

I own the copyright on half meter plywood cubes. For every half meter plywood cube you create, please send me L$1. As we're all adults (supposedly) I'll trust you all to do the right thing and send my fee to once a week.

I have the paperwork around here somewhere ... /checks pockets

I'll get that posted as soon as I find the titles, but for now, NO CHEATING!!

Well... I have just copyrighted the rectangle, sphere, torus and cylinder. All works in SL are derived from them. Therefore, all SL content belongs to me. Gimme.

Oh come on, you left off the good drama part that will make this thread pop. A well known furniture maker claimed to another furniture maker that he/she owned the copyright on prim hammocks so they must stop selling theirs. Discuss!

If you create any original creative work, it's protected by copyright law. Are we talking about a single prim? I doubt anyone could successfully claim that they own the copyright on a default prim -- except maybe Linden Lab -- because they haven't actually created anything. They've simply made a new copy of an existing design by LL.

However, the moment someone begins to modify that prim, that creates a new work that may be copyrightable. Questions to be asked at this point are:

* Is this particular prim shape ever been created by anyone before?

* If it's a new prim shape, never seen before (doubtful, if it's a single prim), does that make it a derivative work of the original default prim by Linden Lab?

I'd say that if it's a multi-prim creation, then it's a creative work and should be subject to copyright. Questions to be asked here:

* What constitutes a "copy"? An exact duplicate or an imitation knock-off?

* Does a mere imitation violate copyright?

At this point, I get bored and go read the paper instead.

Hehehe! People are funny

Ok, the case in question. A Hammock. Don't most hammocks look a like? You can copywrite a hammock? A hammock with pillows? Your copywrite of Hammock A does not prevent Person X from creating Hammock B. If that was the case wouldn't all car makers sue each other?

Right. By making a hammock, you can't claim that you own the rights to all hammock-like objects. You only have copyright on your particular design of hammock.

The prims are a medium. You can't copyright a prim, anymore than you can copyright the color "red".

You can make a work of art using prims. This can be copyrighted. Hammock A.

Anyone else can make a hammok. This is legal. Hammocks B, C, and D.

A person cannot create hammock E, an exact duplicate of hammock A...

Except that they can, because the laws on knock-off creations are very fuzzy.

But prims are not just any medium. With art in the real world, the original medium is often no longer discernable apart from the completed work. However in SL, I can right-click and edit it and see MY prims that you used to make it intact and cleary visible. So, consider this a request to cease your acts of thievery.

Woah deja vu.

Reitsuki nailed it right on the head.

To whomever claimed this "copyright infringement", I'd welcome you to put in a DMCA claim. On that mark, do take that loaded offer as whomever you are seeking damages against will most likely defeat your motion and infact most likely be elligable to counter litigate under the DMCA.

- Only an exact duplicate or a reasonably close facsimile can be found to be in conflict with a copyright.
- If you are applying this to ALL hammocks, then you're already full of it as a copyright does not cover this, a patent does. Obviously, any individual who has dealt with either will clearly know the differences between the two, so to the accusor, BS. Furthermore, your patent most likely could be easily defeated because of boundless prior-art.

Cubey, what you speak of is "prior-art". If it can be demonstrated that a specific prim or set of prims has been arranged in the same arrangement before a copyright or patent has been claimed, the claim can be defeated.

Now, for the individual who was intimidated by this individual, I recommend you heed this individual no attention. Why? Until which time they provide you either a reference to the filed copyright petition or a formal "Cease and Desist", they cannot take action. I doubt they'll produce this as it sounds more like someone going around ttrying to initimidate others then to actually attempted to enforce their copyright. We've all got to remember, this is second life and there's allot of a**hats out there who get jollies off of other people's emotions. Infact, if you don't feel comfortable, give it to me and I'll put it out. They can deal with me instead.

If you want some great references to this type of information, a good place to start is the Electronic Frontier Foundation (www.eff.org). They'll guide you to allot of great resources and prior cases of interest.

What permissions did you set on your hammock?

I have no clue who Noel is, but he is not the hammock copyrighter in question, and I am not the hammock maker in question. Just to clarify. I made this thread because my friend was very upset last night and whole thing seemed insane.

Coypright often protects from plagerism and I am one of the most vocal individuals pertaining to this subject within these forums. Now having said this, don't grant modify then! I hate to say it, but the moment you do grant modify privledges, you make yourself susceptable to this problem!

If you do want to grant people modify privledges, then simply insure that you inform the user that your works fall under GNU and so in that, you will always get some of the credit. Quite simple to license a peice of work under GNU and does still give you protection from plagorism.

My message was in jest building on the second. While I have been an artist and never a lawyer, copyright is a subject best or worse left to the experts. It's touchy situation. A copy in the eyes of one person is inspiration in the eyes of another.

...What if I copyright a Platonic ideal of a hammock? They are more real than real things... Aha!

I bet Strife calls dibs on all the tortured prims.

no, but apparently you can trademark your red

http://www.boingboing.net/2005/03/25/cadbury_trademarks_t.html

As for copyrights of actual objects in secondlife, I'd consider it the same as the copyright on a sculpture. With the interesting addition that textures can both be considered part of the sculpture, and an image on their own.

this means in the case of the hammock, a table, glasses.. so long as you didn't directly copy someone else's prims/textures you are not breaking a copyright.

Now if I was to make some type of non-generic prim man, and made a series of them.. if you were to mimic the design (so it looked like of the series but in a different position or doing something different) this would be as much copyright infringement as making an anime character AV. (or worse a Marvel character av ). This is to say as far as US law goes very clearly illegal. (though many companies won't complain so long as its only a small hobby of the players involved)

I admit that was me and I'll explain. It was part of a situation inworld that combined the issue of using the trademarked name Relic which is a real life shop in Las Vegas whose SL profits go back into the brick and morter shop. (let me amend this. the situation for me actually covers two seperate circumstances/people. The first was retail of a knockoff design that looked exactly like the productin question without using the Relic name and the other was labeling their design a Relic knock off but distributing it for free.)

Wha happened was an inworld designer was selling a product that was design wise my hammock configuration perfectly. Someone alerted me inworld it was that recognisable. There are other hammocks inworld ..many but most people design their own and they all have their own look.

This hammock in particular is being looked at for exact production in real life. the prims of the virtual product will be manufactured in RL exactly. Many of the textures are already registered copyrights in the US. I alerted the owner of Relic in Las Vegas and as an inworld agent for the company I was asked to represent them by serving a cease and desist IM in person and provide the real life mailing address for litigation correspondense.

What I did was request this person to remove for retail their hammock which copied this hammock that is trademarked and protected in real life. The reason I did this is a bit more complex as well. Relic as a company is looking at SL as a platform for expanding when they begin their webpresence. I actually don't recommend that because of these very problems with rights to things but they were willing to begin a process for testing protection of copyrights and trademarks on virtual items to see if it would be worth using the SL world as an extension of sales on websites. Virtual goods for sale next to the real lfie goods for example.

This incident was also part of a series of inworld requests to remove items that use the Relic name in the title or description in products that are not created by Relic. More a matter of disassociation to not confuse customers...as many of these items were not sold but freely distributed and labeled as direct knockoffs of Relic hammocks.

I would rather not be involved in something like this...lol who does...but when you have a place that mixes companies designing for profit with headquarters in real life with people copying those designs exactly there are going to be confrontations.

I don't profess to know wha the laws are on these things. Those I leave to the lawyers and they will decide. But it is my job to serve the letter and get the ball rolling.

(addendum: The case was dropped because the designer altered their design.

------------------

If you'd like a little bit of insight into how the owners company uses SL please continue. Relic uses me as an inworld designer to test market designs. Right now I am the only employee designing inworld but there may soon be more designers hired to texture and model inworld. If a product that does well inworld has a good response, it goes to a list of products to be manufactured in real life. So in that way it's like autocad design and a test market for production. It's a tool and the business writes off the account and all SL expenses off for taxes. lol Not sure if it will hold up. We'll see! lol

And there brings up another thread...game? not a game? Business development tool? Hmmmm. What IS it? lol

If some schmoe was able to register the "frownie" emoticon as a trademark, chances are you could in fact glean a patent for a lot of what's listed here.

That was and is not the point, though. Enforcement is the issue, and I don't think anyone is naive/stupid enough to think we'd adhere to a "patent on all plywood cubes in Second Life" even if it existed.

Naturally, it's a double-edged sword.

Yes, which makes me think of what an absurd "Call all the sentient cattle home!" situation it is. It's kinda like:

"ALRIGHT, YOU PATENTED ALL THE PRIMS? WHOSE CHOPS YA GONNA BUST DOWN NOW, Y0???"

So the prosecution might have to pick out some of the more prominent targets from the crowd, like they're doing in the case of Internet music fileswapping, but oh, that only gets the ire of the masses more to chant louder and multiply. It backfires badly and in some cases, instead of restraining, even if it's something you created, a little bootleg action and leeway may be undesirable but can help with publicity and point others that yours is a superior product worth being copied. Of course, I leave the judgment to this in the hands of the respectful creator.

But this default plywood texture... gosh... that's gotta be 05ed.

I have some questions.

Relic in Las Vegas an incorporated business? Where can we find this information? I can find no information for a "Relic" in Las Vegas, not even a phone number.

I did a trademark search on http://www.uspto.gov/main/trademarks.htm Can you please tell me which Trademark is for "Relic Furniture"? There is not Relic furniture that I can find. Trademarks are pretty specific.

Can you please use http://www.copyright.gov/records/ and point me in the direction of a copyright?


Also can you post the letter here so the community as a whole can see the content. Afterall, Copyright, Incorporation, Patents, and Trademarks are all public knowledge.

Please relate this request for information to the owner of the hammock and have her send this request in writing to the store in Las Vegas.

Relic 4800 South Maryland Parkway Suite #C, Las Vegas, Nevada USA 89119

Please also have her IM me privately should she like a direct number to talk to someone at the company concerning this case.

All requests for information will be gladly provided.

Baron,

For your Relic tale, first of all, what is the name of this company you represent? What is their specific trademark (got a trademark serial number)? Is it specifically a trademark or copyright that is being applied in this situation? Furthermore, what RL action have they taken against other companies that bear the Relic name or have products that have the word Relic in their name?

Sorry, I'm still doubtful of what you have to say at this point in time. Doubtful enough that I have erected a flaming TeaCup on the mountain of Spittoonie just for you.

Indeed.. Seeing how I live in Las Vegas - and I'm at work, I decided to go the low tech road i.e. The phone book.

Nada - Zero - Zip.

I'd advise this company to expand its "phone presence" before worrying too much about it's "web presence"..

Maybe I should pass it on to on of our investigative reports as a pet project - See if they can find it..

addendum:



Sweet - thats pretty close to where I work - I might swing past there!


Siggy.