Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

Second Hand Shops?

Shiryu Musashi
Veteran Designer
Join date: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 1,045
02-26-2005 05:10
From: Reitsuki Kojima
This is the same line of logic used to defend building 2000 invisible prims at 700 meters on someones land because they have the land set to build.


Perfect analogy i'd say :)

From: someone

"Because you didn't say I couldn't" is the most juvinile of all excuses. Is it that hard to ask?


I guess it's hard because it gives the option to the evil content baron to say no :)
_____________________
Unhygienix Gullwing
I banged Pandastrong
Join date: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 728
02-26-2005 06:02
From: Reitsuki Kojima
This is the same line of logic used to defend building 2000 invisible prims at 700 meters on someones land because they have the land set to build.

"Because you didn't say I couldn't" is the most juvinile of all excuses. Is it that hard to ask?


"Because I don't want you building on my land" is the most juvenile of all pouts. Don't want me to? Fine, then set your land to group; set it to access lists. Ban me from it, or set objects to autoreturn.

People who are re-selling your items using the transfer permissions that you set on them are not at all saying "Because you didn't say I couldn't". They are selling your items because you said that they could. You gave them that permission when you put a transfer permission on your item.

We DO need much better, more flexible permissions, but if you're a landowner, it's your responsibility until then to manage your land. If you leave build permissions turned on, your land is a 3-D equivalent of a wiki. Asshats can and will come along and contribute their "art" to your hosting space. Do the best with what you have at the moment.


Shiryu, are you very particular about your customers? Do you pick and choose who you will sell to? If you and I got into a nasty name-calling match in this thread, would I still be able to buy your products from your vendors?
Shiryu Musashi
Veteran Designer
Join date: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 1,045
02-26-2005 06:13
From: Unhygienix Gullwing
"Because I don't want you building on my land" is the most juvenile of all pouts. Don't want me to? Fine, then set your land to group; set it to access lists. Ban me from it, or set objects to autoreturn.


Oh, so according to you it's acceptable to go to someone else's land and build 2000 invisible prims at 700 meters? Not only that, if the landowner complains it's a "juvenile pout". Well, go read the linden posts in the thread that came out when someone raised a mountain in mocha when Sio forgot to turn off the edit land.
Anyway, now that i see where you stand i can avoid answering to your posts further, have a nice day.
_____________________
Unhygienix Gullwing
I banged Pandastrong
Join date: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 728
02-26-2005 06:39
From: Shiryu Musashi
Oh, so according to you it's acceptable to go to someone else's land and build 2000 invisible prims at 700 meters? Not only that, if the landowner complains it's a "juvenile pout". Well, go read the linden posts in the thread that came out when someone raised a mountain in mocha when Sio forgot to turn off the edit land.
Anyway, now that i see where you stand i can avoid answering to your posts further, have a nice day.


No, Shiryu. It's not OK.

It's not nice.

It's an ass thing to do.

And when I said it was juvenile, I was just turning Reitsuki's argument back on itself. I was asking in effect, "It's juvenile to do what you wish with the permissions that others have set, but it's NOT juvenile to complain when others do something that you don't like and which you were in a position to prevent?" Go back and read his post, where he characterized such an argument as juvenile, but which apparently did not affend your sensibilities like my post did.

The land is the responsibility of the landowner to manage, however, and it is sensible to ask yourself, in a 3D hosting space as with a web forum or a wiki, how closely moderated it should be. What types of things might others do with this space, and how might their activities be different from what I plan? What is the least noble thing that someone else could do with the permissions I have set?

Then, protect your interests accordingly, using the means at your disposal.

I remember the furor over Sio's wrecked sim a bit back, and the earthquake on multiple sims last summer. I noted that the Lindens involved themselves and punished the offender, which was one way of dealing with it, but not in my opinion the best way. I also remember that Sio never answered a couple of uncomfortable questions of mine, for example:

-If the terraforming was an act of griefing, and the lindens are responsible for setting things aright and punishing the offender, what was Sio's responisbility? Should she be held responsible for leaving her permissions set open, and perhaps be charged more money because she allowed it to happen? Would the lindens fix her island again, free of charge, six months from now when she leaves the terraforming turned on again? Once a month? Every week? Could she safely leave the terraforming turned on, all the time, and expect a sim rollback every morning, free of charge, whenever people come by and use the permissions that she set for asshat acts?
Hopefully her island sim won't be attacked again. Hopefully, if she doesn't want people to terraform her land, she'll leave it set to "off". Hopefully, we'll get better land permissions, ones that aren't so binary in nature. I would and did suggest that the best solution would be to charge a rollback fee in cases where a private sim owner has been negatively impacted by permissions that they themselves set. Since Sio paid for a private island and pays tier at the rate of $195 per month, I think that the Lindens are less than likely to be strict with her than with whoever the griefer was.

If these forums were not moderated in any form, they'd quickly be taken over by spam advertising for viagra and weight loss supplements. Similiarly with your land.

Feel free to ignore my posts if you wish, Shiryu. I won't do the same to you. I don't insult you because I disagree with you, and I'll continue to argue my points against yours, particularly when I feel that you are not being logical.
Heather Nyak
Second Life Resident
Join date: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 184
02-26-2005 06:41
OMG you have all been busy while i was asleep :)

If it goes ahead this is the plan.

Only items No-Mod,No-Copy and transferable will be purchased.

No items will be sold at a higher price of the content creator.

All items could come with a notecard explaining the product is not from the creator so the creator is not responsible for anything that has gone wrong with the item (also maybe a landmark of the creators shop if possible).

Items won't be bought in bulk they will be bought from people who just don't want the items anymore.

I would im each creator if one of there items was bought from me and ask if it is ok to buy future items created by them.

Would there be anyone against this idea? Add any other ideas if you like im flexible :)

btw i never knew i could create so much debate WOW
Shiryu Musashi
Veteran Designer
Join date: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 1,045
02-26-2005 06:50
Unhygienix Gullwing: as a personal rule i decided to stop answering to devil's attorneys that get off on their false lawyery to defend griefers that should NOT be defended in any case. Have fun.

Heather: all good, but if i were you i would IM content creators previously as soon as you find a chance to buy one of their products. That way you can avoid to buy a product made by a merchant that doesnt want it reselled, having where he stands on it clear from the start will avoid any losses to you (buying articles you can't resell) and make him happy as well.
Since we are at it, for what concerns my products i ask you to please not have them as part of your business. If you want to buy them used for your personal use from someone that wants to clean her inventory all good, but not as a part of a regular commercial enterprise.
_____________________
Heather Nyak
Second Life Resident
Join date: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 184
02-26-2005 06:58
From: Shiryu Musashi
Heather: all good, but if i were you i would IM content creators previously as soon as you find a chance to buy one of their products. That way you can avoid to buy a product made by a merchant that doesnt want it reselled, having where he stands on it clear from the start will avoid any losses to you (buying articles you can't resell) and make him happy as well.
Since we are at it, for what concerns my products i ask you to please not have them as part of your business. If you want to buy them used for your personal use from someone that wants to clean her inventory all good, but not as a part of a regular commercial enterprise.


This is fine as long as the creators are online and reply in good time. I assumed you wouldn't want your items sold :) i could also im well known creators i have heard of and ask them before anyone even comes with any items from that creator.
Shiryu Musashi
Veteran Designer
Join date: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 1,045
02-26-2005 07:00
Good idea :)
_____________________
Unhygienix Gullwing
I banged Pandastrong
Join date: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 728
02-26-2005 07:16
From: Shiryu Musashi
Unhygienix Gullwing: as a personal rule i decided to stop answering to devil's attorneys that get off on their false lawyery to defend griefers that should NOT be defended in any case. Have fun.


Thanks for the unpleasant characterization, Shiryu. I won't offer you one in return. I will have fun. There's lots to be had in Secondlife, and despite my involvement in some meaty forum debates, I'm pretty lighthearted and easygoing in-world. Cheers.
Chip Midnight
ate my baby!
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 10,231
02-26-2005 08:38
From: Shiryu Musashi
omg, chip and me agreeing on something... it's gonna rain willing girls :P


hehehe. I don't think I'm quite as passionate about it as you are but really it wouldn't matter if I felt opposite from the way you do. I'd still agree that it should be your right to set your own terms, not someone else's. We're limited by a permissions system that's inadequate to address the myriad things people might want to allow or disallow with their creations and we do need to be realists about that. In the meantime, the polite and ethical thing for people to do is simply ask the creator how they feel about things rather than making assumptions about it... or worse, not caring how the creator feels out of some sense of entitlement.

Heather, hats off to you for trying to find creative ways to build a business and for opening up the topic for debate to see how people feel. I wish you much luck and success.
_____________________

My other hobby:
www.live365.com/stations/chip_midnight
Rylei Madison
Just Ducky!
Join date: 2 Jul 2004
Posts: 5
02-26-2005 09:25
I think its a great idea theres some people out there that really cant afford the things they want in SL and if your done using things that you've bought and they are just lying around collecting dust I dont see anything wrong with reselling them .. and both people come out good. You get some cash for something you already paied for thats no longer of use and some one else gets the chance to buy something that they wanted/need for less money. :o


-------------------------and thats all I have to say about that... :o
Alan Palmerstone
Payment Info Used
Join date: 4 Jun 2004
Posts: 659
02-26-2005 09:37
If we had a box next to the transfer checkbox that allowed a creator to set maximum resale, would that help out the creators?

Selling a collectible, leave it blank.
Gift only, 0.
Half price, (half price).

Also, the description of other people lucrating at the creator's expense has made me very curious. I hereby offer L$500 for the first person to make me an animation of this taboo. Contact me in world when you have it complete.
_____________________
Visit Parrot Island - relax on the beach, snuggle at the waterfall, ride the jetskis, make a movie and buy a pool!
Unhygienix Gullwing
I banged Pandastrong
Join date: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 728
02-26-2005 09:56
Chip, I am entitled.

I am entitled to the permissions that the creator sold me their items with, and no more.

Although personally, I am polite enough that I would seek the goodwill of creators, if I ran a resale store or a secondhand shop, it is exactly my politeness and sense of community that would lead me to do this, not a moral imperative.

"Some sense of entitlement....."

Hmmm, I have an exact sense of entitlement. If I buy something from a creator that has transfer enabled, then I may give it away, or resell it at any price.
From: Phoenix Linden
* Transfer

If transfer is enabled, the owner can transfer the item to another person. If an item is not transferable, the owner cannot sell, give away, release or embed in something they sell, give away, or release. The transfer permission only applies to the owner, since no one else can initiate a transfer.

During a transfer, the next owner field is copied into the owner field and dependent permissions fields are recalculated given the new owner permissions.

From: Phoenix Linden
Right of First Sale
===================

The right of first sale applies when an item is transferred without next owner copy. Since you are allowed to specify no derivative works by specifying next owner cannot modify, this right is interpreted as next owner can always transfer that single instance of the item to anyone else.

See? I have more than "some sense of entitlement"
I have a pretty good and exact sense of my entitlement. :)
Chip Midnight
ate my baby!
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 10,231
02-26-2005 10:11
From: Unhygienix Gullwing
Hmmm, I have an exact sense of entitlement. If I buy something from a creator that has transfer enabled, then I may give it away, or resell it at any price.


Yep. You may. No one is arguing that. However, if you try and make a business out of it the creator might have something to say about it and should be given the opportunity to consent or decline, and have that wish respected. I do not believe that people are "entitled" to forego common courtesy just because the system allows them to do so.
_____________________

My other hobby:
www.live365.com/stations/chip_midnight
Unhygienix Gullwing
I banged Pandastrong
Join date: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 728
02-26-2005 10:37
From: Alan Palmerstone
If we had a box next to the transfer checkbox that allowed a creator to set maximum resale, would that help out the creators?

Selling a collectible, leave it blank.
Gift only, 0.
Half price, (half price).

Also, the description of other people lucrating at the creator's expense has made me very curious. I hereby offer L$500 for the first person to make me an animation of this taboo. Contact me in world when you have it complete.


There is no way to set maximum resale. If you set a max resale at $500L, I could simply tell the next person, "If you pay me $750L, then I will give this item to you".

I restrained myself from asking what exactly it means to lucrate, but I have a feeling that it has something to do with this. It's not an animation, but I think this is what lucrate means, based on Shiryu's descriptions.
Alan Palmerstone
Payment Info Used
Join date: 4 Jun 2004
Posts: 659
02-26-2005 11:32
From: Unhygienix Gullwing
There is no way to set maximum resale. If you set a max resale at $500L, I could simply tell the next person, "If you pay me $750L, then I will give this item to you".

I restrained myself from asking what exactly it means to lucrate, but I have a feeling that it has something to do with this. It's not an animation, but I think this is what lucrate means, based on Shiryu's descriptions.


Good catch. So, an added "Gift only" check box in addition to transfer is really the only way to stop the lucrating. NoCopy/NoMod/GiftTransfer would be the setting, right?

And I guess I should IM RacerX Gullwing then.
_____________________
Visit Parrot Island - relax on the beach, snuggle at the waterfall, ride the jetskis, make a movie and buy a pool!
Unhygienix Gullwing
I banged Pandastrong
Join date: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 728
02-26-2005 12:03
Nonono, transfer will always mean "can sell for any price". Even if you make it "Gift only", I can still choose to "Gift" it to to someone only once they have -ahem- compensated me for my generosity. Imagine a secondhand store filled with items set to gift-only, with a sign that says "Widget A is $250, Widget B is $600. IM the proprietor if you are interested." It's unenforceable in practical terms, which is why I imagine LL decided to forego any attempt at it.

And, God Yes, RacerX is probably the person to speak to. From what I hear, his snails have been lucrating all over the place.
Ralek Queso
Registered User
Join date: 3 Feb 2005
Posts: 32
Content creators time is more valuable than others?
02-26-2005 13:55
I'm pretty new in SL and I admit I haven't read all the posts in the thread but there are a few arguments here that I strongly disagree with.

I'd also like to say that I admire Shiryu's work and have in fact bought most of his male clothing.

On the issue of reselling, content creators, such as Shiryu have argued that people which resell are making money out of the contents creator's creativity. That's just wrong. They are making money out of their salesmanship, which is as valid a skill as content creating in the first place. If people devote time and money creating a sucessful shop and marketting their wares and they are good at it, more power to them. There are very few content creators (the people that actually create the item) in RL that sell directly to the public. Selling to the public is an art form on itself.

On the second-hand business model there's something you are forgetting. What drives the original buyer to get rid of it in the first place? Most of the times they bought something which wasn't really what they were looking for. Given that most content creators dont have a refund policy, the original buyer is stuck with it. So a second-hand shop is actually giving some protection to the buyer and taking some from the creator. Curious how most RL laws always protect the consumer.
In any case, running a sucessful second hand shop takes an awful lot of money and skill (you either are there to buy the items and have to know about the market value of them if you expect any sales, or you make a pretty darn good script to automate it). Doesn't this time and effort deserve to be paid? Who exactly are they harming? Not the original buyer, cause he could recoup some of the money. Not the new buyer since they are buying it cheaper. They are hurting the content creator who sold something to someone who didn't want it (either because they thought it was differnent or they found something better).
Jauani Wu
pancake rabbit
Join date: 7 Apr 2003
Posts: 3,835
02-26-2005 13:57
i like surreals suggestion of being able to control maximum resale prices through permissions. in rl, companies can contractually control the prices that vendors and wholesalers sell theri items for. this is particularly useful for frebies or cheapies being marked up by scammers to exploit nubes.

From: Heather Nyak
After reading about selling other peoples creations if they are transferable would it be possible to have a second hand shop? Buy items of people and sell them for more but still less than the original price.

Of course the item would have to be No Copy, Trans


heather i am all for this idea! in fact i'm going to open my own now. would you like to work together on this? anyone else that's interested, contact me.
_____________________
http://wu-had.blogspot.com/
read my blog

Mecha
Jauani Wu
hero of justice
__________________________________________________
"Oh Jauani, you're terrible." - khamon fate


Shiryu Musashi
Veteran Designer
Join date: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 1,045
02-26-2005 15:11
Another piece of my mind:

Someone told that by buying an used item one has the disadvantage of giving up any possibility of receiving support or updates on that product.
This may be true, but only if the original merchant is willing to receive a reputation hit.
Let's make a simple instance: resident X buys a clothing set made by me from a reseller and then has lets say a sizing problem, or maybe a scripted item whose script ceased to function, something that only i could solve.
Of course he reads my name as a creator of the item and asks me to solve the problem for him.
Now i have two options:
1: solve the problem and make him happy, even if he didn't reward me for my creativity and effort in any way (and that is what i would normally do and i have done so far), in that case my reputation hasnt been hit, but the customer received normal customer service, exaactly like he bought the item from me, even if i didnt get a penny from him, since the earnings on that item have been hijacked by the reseller.
2: refuse any kind of support: That would be probably more fair, but i would get a reputation hit. Why? Simply because i just created an unhappy customer. And since he is not happy about an item I created he will not be angry with the second hand reseller, but he will be angry with ME, because the item is more related to my brand than to the second hand shop. It's my name that the unhappy customer will read in the description of the item everytime he sees it.
A secodn hand reseller retailing products made by me hands out items that still have my brand on, and that buyies will STILL hold me responsible for, consciously or not. It doesn't matter from who they bought them from.
_____________________
Shiryu Musashi
Veteran Designer
Join date: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 1,045
02-26-2005 15:43
From: Ralek Queso
On the second-hand business model there's something you are forgetting. What drives the original buyer to get rid of it in the first place? Most of the times they bought something which wasn't really what they were looking for.


i'm sorry, but this is absolutely untrue, you overlooked an infinity of intermediate cases:
Just to makea couple of examples someone might just be in sheer need of money and getting rid of all the items he has that are not absolutely necessary.
But the main case is fairly simple. The item has got old, and after extensive usage it has gradually slipped out of one's interests. My iinventory is full of items that i use very seldom or don't use at all because of this, but this doesn't negate AT ALL their initial quality and the fun i had with them when they were newer (otherwise their reselling value would be minimal anyway, unless you see a second hand shop as a way to trick other resident into buying items that you yourself consider poor, that wouldnt be nice), nor it makes me feel elected to sell them in my shop to earn money over them.
Why? Because i had fun with them, and the creator of the itme FULLY deserved what i payed him for them, because he spent time and effort on them, and fully deserves to earn it's price from anyone else that wants to use them. A second hand reseller, by earning money on such an item deprieves the creator from the sale to a new user that would in another case buy the creator himself. Does the second hand reseller deserve that money as much as the creator? I don't think so, unless the creator explicitly authorized him (and an overly simplified permission system is not an explicit permission to make money over the creator's work in a regular commercial enterprise, sorry). Just to make an example, the male set i am currently working on is composed by 35 pieces and costed me about 45 hours of work (without counting the time i will spend for putting it for sale all around my shops). What does make anyone feel he has the roght to deprieve me of a part (big or small, this is not the question at hand) of my earnings on it for his own advantage?

Now another little piece of my mind:

Someone told that by buying an used item one has the disadvantage of giving up any possibility of receiving support or updates on that product.
This may be true, but only if the original merchant is willing to receive a reputation hit.
Let's make a simple instance: resident X buys a clothing set made by me from a reseller and then has lets say a sizing problem, or maybe a scripted item whose script ceased to function, something that only i could solve.
Of course he reads my name as a creator of the item and asks me to solve the problem for him.
Now i have two options:
1: solve the problem and make him happy, even if he didn't reward me for my creativity and effort in any way (and that is what i would normally do and i have done so far), in that case my reputation hasnt been hit, but the customer received normal customer service, exaactly like he bought the item from me, even if i didnt get a penny from him, since the earnings on that item have been hijacked by the reseller.
2: refuse any kind of support: That would be probably more fair, but i would get a reputation hit. Why? Simply because i just created an unhappy customer. And since he is not happy about an item I created he will not be angry with the second hand reseller, but he will be angry with ME, because the item is more related to my brand than to the second hand shop. It's my name that the unhappy customer will read in the description of the item everytime he sees it.
A secodn hand reseller retailing products made by me hands out items that still have my brand on, and that buyiers will STILL hold me responsible for, consciously or not. It doesn't matter from who they bought them from.
_____________________
Unhygienix Gullwing
I banged Pandastrong
Join date: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 728
02-26-2005 19:31
3. (As stated earlier....I think somewhere around page 7) "Sorry, you didn't buy that from me. How much did you pay for it? Oh, that's much less than what I sell it for. You must have bought a used copy; unfortunately, one of the things that goes along with the cheaper prices of used items is a lack of support. I'm going to send you a landmark to my shop, feel free to take a look around. If you like the look of my products, rest assured that I give anyone who buys from me a great deal of customer support. Tell you what; if you happen to spend more than $XXX in there today, I'll even help you fix that skirt, even though you didn't buy it directly from me and I normally don't support second-hand sales....."
:)

Know what your own self-interests are, as merchant.

Know what your customers' self interests are.

Know what your potential customers' self interests are.

In cases where you are not able to control your customers' actions, use what means are at your disposal to steer your customers; encourage thier self-interests in such a manner that they will match their actions to your own.




Of course, this is a poor example. This describes situations where you have no control over how your items are used. Actually, you do have a great deal of control over how they get used, more so than if you were selling things in Real Life(tm), and if you don't want your items to be resold after the initial sale, you should probably sell them with no-transfer permissions, instead of (as I've repeatedly pointed out) selling them with resale permissions, then complaining that someone might resell it without your explicit verbal permission.
:)
Chip Midnight
ate my baby!
Join date: 1 May 2003
Posts: 10,231
02-26-2005 20:03
From: Unhygienix Gullwing
3. (As stated earlier....I think somewhere around page 7) "Sorry, you didn't buy that from me. How much did you pay for it? Oh, that's much less than what I sell it for. You must have bought a used copy; unfortunately, one of the things that goes along with the cheaper prices of used items is a lack of support. I'm going to send you a landmark to my shop, feel free to take a look around. If you like the look of my products, rest assured that I give anyone who buys from me a great deal of customer support. Tell you what; if you happen to spend more than $XXX in there today, I'll even help you fix that skirt, even though you didn't buy it directly from me and I normally don't support second-hand sales....."


The only problem with that line of reasoning is that it assumes it's easy for merchants to keep records of sales. People don't tend to remember where they bought things or what they paid for it. They just look and see the creator tag. In order to avoid providing customer service on second hand sales (if the creator of the item was so inclined) the burden would fall on the creator's shoulders to be able to know how the item was purchased. An example of this would be someone selling a widget that's fairly complicated ot use and consequently spawns a lot of IM's for pointers. The creator might have to keep answering those questions for an open ended number of people when they only made one sale. This is a burden that can't be managed well with the current tools we're provided and consequently is asking a bit much. There's more to self interest than just trying to hook new customers. Part of it is trying to keep demands on our time manageable. Your point of view is reasonable Jinx, truly, but you're trying to tell an individual creator what his position on this should be. That's up to him to decide and no one else.
_____________________

My other hobby:
www.live365.com/stations/chip_midnight
Prokofy Neva
Virtualtor
Join date: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 3,698
02-26-2005 23:15
Ugh, I really, really hate this long, oppressive, overreach of content barons who think they are God's gift to virtuality because they can work PSP.

A bunch of feted stuffed shirts.

Thank GOD this new fellow Queso has spoken some common sense.
From: someone

No i have a firmly-vested belief in the ideology of rewarding creativity and i believe i am being robbed or harmed if someone buys and resells used items i make on a regular basis as a form of personal and regular business and income, undercutting me and thus stealing my customers with MY OWN products.


At least this is ardently said, and with belief -- it's religious, and I can't really challenge someone's religion. But you've hit the nail on the head when you say you are "harmed" and something is "taken away from you" merely because someone resells your items. This notion comes from a deeply-ingrained cultural norm that is different than other cultural norms -- it's not "right" it's just *yours* but it is not *someone else's.* First of all, it stems from that sense that everything is scarce and limited and there can't be freedom as a result. Second, it stems from a deep-seated allergy to commerce. There's craftsmanship and creating goods for say, a medieval village, where everyone has their very well-typed and established rols to play, the cooper, the blacksmith, the tanner, etc. where you don't so much sell goods as you interact with other people's goods in a rote way. Then there is mass commerce of the modern era.

Jauani, licensing someone to wholesale is about the *price*. But it is not control of *the act of reselling* which is what these feted are trying to do. It's wrong. It's not free. It's oppressive. And if they have this attitude of unfreedom, they will lose their customers. They can go on being craftsmen in a medieval village, if they want, but most people are used to Walmart and will simply skip over them.

From: someone
If you make assumptions about the creator's intent based on an overly simplified permissions system or you feel some sense of entitlement to profit from the work of others without their consent, then *you* are the greedy one


See, whereas Shiryu is at least honest in his ardent expression of a religious belief, what you are doing is placing an evil judgement on someone and accusing them of heinous crimes merely for the good and natural human act of *selling second hand*. Why stop human nature? It does not profit from someone's work if I sell his good because it retains its value in a marketplace, continues its visibility, helps to sell more goods, and in general helps the overall free economy. We can't all live in a world of Limited Edition Engraved Signed. Sign up for Franklin Mint if you want that, don't play SL.

From: someone
I have a big problem with that line of reasoning... it boils down to something along the lines of "if I don't have the talent to do something myself, then I should be entitled to profit off someone else's back if they like it or not." No. Sorry. Life doesn't work that way


Er, well guess what Chip! Life DOES work that way, RL and SL! LOL! Because it is not evil, what you are saying. It's normal. Have you never once sold something on ebay? Did you never once go to a garage sale in your life or a church basement jumble sale? Please. Get out more. I don't profit from someone's work when I re-sell their object because DUH they *already valued and already sold their object*. Now what's happening is that I am valuing it and selling it to someone who values it too and buys it. Value gets spread. Value is not a scarce resource. It does not harm you if I take it, it extends it. This is a fundamental belief. Try to become aware of your prejudice here. Nothing has been lost. You made a thing, put in the time, and got paid for the thing. End of story. Put out more copies, sell more. And be free and get your strangelhold off my neck.

From: someone
On the issue of reselling, content creators, such as Shiryu have argued that people which resell are making money out of the contents creator's creativity. That's just wrong. They are making money out of their salesmanship, which is as valid a skill as content creating in the first place. If people devote time and money creating a sucessful shop and marketting their wares and they are good at it, more power to them. There are very few content creators (the people that actually create the item) in RL that sell directly to the public. Selling to the public is an art form on itself.


"That's just wrong" is the kind of argument you make from your set of beliefs in almost religious fervour, against their set of beliefs. So my goal here is to get people to become aware that there is a fundamental difference in cultures here, which is about the attitude toward commerce and how commerce works.

I fully agree that if all someone does is put up a yard sale and resell stuff they bought, that is an art, too, as to time, place, and manner. If they seized the initiative and found the market and reached it, more power to them! This is how free markets work!
_____________________
Rent stalls and walls for $25-$50/week 25-50 prims from Ravenglass Rentals, the mall alternative.
Alexa Hope
Registered User
Join date: 8 Dec 2004
Posts: 670
02-27-2005 00:00
Unlike in RL, we can't try on clothes, nor return them for a refund if we don't like them or the seams are uneven etc. Until we have that option in SL, then I think a second hand shop would be an excellent idea.

I am in the process of creating items for sale and providing the person who bought it didn't then copy it and sell the copies, I would have no problem with the item being sold on. I have had the original sale, and what they do with it after that, is not something I'm worried about.

Quite frankly, I don't see a difference between having a yard sale or having a second hand shop.

Alexa
1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11