Inter-grid permissions discussion

Note: I've stuck the links at the bottom for clarity since apparently links are not enabled.

This is an introduction/preamble for the topics raised by the jiras:
MISC-1272: Create a set of permissions flags immediately (to support inter-grid permissions settings) (1)
and
MISC-1277: Request for policy clarification concerning cross-grid copying of assets. (2)

Prokofy Neva (3), and no doubt others, have have blogged about these issues. It's an important enough issue that the AWG has debated about it for a year, and recent Linden Office Hours have touched on it:

Protecting_content_in_an_open_grid (4)
10 June 2008 AW Groupies discussion (5)
Discussion at Zero Linden's office hours 10 June 2008 (6)
Discussion at Zero Linden's office hours 17 June 2008 (7)

The Issue has arisen due to Zha Ewry's recent demo of logging into a beta-test SL grid and arriving in a private IBM=hosted OpenSIm (, as part of the AWG project to make SL and OPenSim interoperate in various ways, as well as the creation of 3rd-party utilities that allow users to copy assets to OpenSim simulators.

It has gathered enough attention due to the discussions in the above jiras that Xan LInden will be guest-hosting Zero Linden's office hours on Tuesday, 1 July 2008, at 1PM SLT, to discuss them specifically.


Zero's meeting went off rather well, even though Xan couldn't make it due to scheduling errors. The chat-log is found here:

https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Zero_Linden/Office_Hours/2008_July_01

NOTE: We will be meeting about this topic reasonably often. Next Zero LInden office hours is on Thursday at 8:30 AM. Topic to be arranged. Don't know if Xan can make it then or not.


Links:
1) https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-1272
2) https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-1277
3) http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/second_thoughts/2008/06/how-they-sign-y.html
4) https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Protecting_content_in_an_open_grid
5) https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/AWGroupies-2008-06-10
6) https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Zero_Linden/Office_Hours/2008_June_10
7)https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Zero_Linden/Office_Hours/2008_June_17
http://zhaewry.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/happy-jumpy-ruths-interop-takes-a-step/

My own thoughts were expressed in Misc-1277. I'll try to summarize:

The process to create a new permissions system needs to be done in at least 3 stages (stage 3 may turn out to be ongoing):

!: We need clarification on the blog of what the TOS says (or doesn't) about copying assets, regardless of permissions set, to other simulators outside the Second LIfe grid. My own belief is that one must obtain permission from the content creator because he or she never signed up for releasing even "full permissions" objects to another grid. Some kind of mention of this in the viewer may or may not be appropriate, but certain a blog entry is needed in the official Linden Blog.

2: A simple flag that makes a distinction between "creation grid only" and and a full permissions option for "any grid" should be devised to give 3rd party tools a heads up even before a more complete permissions system can be devised.

3: A new permission system to handle the new inter-grid system needs to be implemented after input from the community and developers and legal people.

See you at the meeting on Tuesday.

Eh I think people need to start attaching a *real* license saying what you can do with the content. Simply

We don't need set ourselves up to argue about "what is a simulator exactly" and all that later...

A key feature distinguishing SL from other multiplayer games is user-created content. Last week I watched an old video of Phillip and Cory Linden addressing an IT audience. Phillip highlighted resident content creation, creators' rights; how content fuels the economy; LL's commitment to content protection, etc. One of them went on to explain the permissions system to the audience.

More recently, note M Linden's Birthday speech, SL's commitment to content creators' rights are reiterated.

Since Linden Labs has consistently applauded their creators and asserted their commitment to the creators' rights, there is an implied promise to continue in that vein - especially as new worlds emerge.

As a content creator, I want to retain the right to set permissions regarding use in SL or other grids. I DO NOT give LL the right to unilaterally open my content to other worlds that did not exist until recently.

I am in full support of Saijanai's 3-point proposal.

Additionally, while there is no foolproof way Linden Labs can protect content, they certainly can make it more difficult for the majority of users - those lacking technical sophistication - to circumvent permissions. I would like to see much more effort in this direction, which is consistent with Linden Lab's stated commitment to it's creators' rights. Perhaps a licensing system for sellers is in order if this can't be accomplished technically?

One more thought, and please forgive my technical naivete, but I wonder if it is possible to develop a means to detect content that originally had partial permissions in SL and is subsequently re-rezzed or re-imported with full perms and new authorship.

Hugz everyone!
Eirynne

I think JUST policy clarification AND making permission system(as in set of flags "I think i want to use object in this way" more detailed is enough. No limiting sellers(do that and people for whom it's important will start making item gifts, after being gifted L$ -, and majority of people just find one more hassle to work on creation of items)

I also agree with Saijanai Kuhn 3 points. But I am not sure I will be able to make what will be a very interesting meeting . Thought I would leave some of my views, ideas and observations in relation to the JIRAs and points mentioned above:


Flag system

Regarding point 2, the flag system is a very good idea. There will need to be clarification whether the existing permissions will remain intact – as is - (ie ‘modify’, ‘copy’ and ‘transfer’) alongside the ‘any grid’ or ‘creation grid’ options. There are other concerns that may have to be addressed in relation to existing permissions http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-2909

VWR-2909 aside, there is probably scope to include the ‘modify’, ‘copy’ and ‘transfer’ options for each grid permission flag to 'refine' a creator’s intentions for those items across all grids. Maybe creators will be particular about what items go to which grids. Again a flag denoting ‘which grid’ the content is allowed to transfer too may also be desirable. But I do think that there is a danger that overcomplicating flags may be more trouble than it is worth. We don’t want to slow down the grid database anymore with extra data...

There are of course still a number of factors that could hamper progress and implementation. The mind field of legal issues, as Saijanai and others have already mentioned (MISC-1277), all of which will need to be reviewed before any progress is made.



Terms of Service (ToS)...Old content may have to stay?

I suspect that any new content sharing system/s put in place is/are likely to apply ONLY to content created after the new system has been set-up, so that all legal agreements are not broken under original systems regulations (ToS). This could mean that certain content will never leave LL (Linden Labs) servers, due to existing rules and regulations.

There are other reasons why items may not be transferred (this is not an exhaustive list): creators wanting items to remain in SL; are no longer active in SL; are not interested in converting old builds for grid sharing; a part of their build contains content that is owned by another person (permission cannot be sort) or their decision not to convert forms part of a business strategy to promote new content creation for multi grids. Not forgetting the use of scripting language changes or variations that may effects grid to grid exchanges. Mono may help here.

I think we can take it as red that content should not move without any proper agreements in place. I am sure there will be those that will say that transfer is not possible at all...

Notes: http://secondlife.com/corporate/tos.php section 1.3


Implement a standard inter-grid content / avatar?

In the early stages, I can imagine a few Avatars emerging in other grids with missing attachments etc... Solution - perhaps a standard inter-grid Avatar and inventory content could be created to aid the transition period, so we don’t all look Ruthed and get to trial the cross grid process.

I wonder if this is already happening to some extent: http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2008/04/02/ibm-to-host-private-second-life-regions/
someone to learn from. This is currently private (not for the public) but how many others will be able to use their own servers connected to SL?

All of the permissions and sharing agreements could ultimately lead to certain grids having different content with some undoubtedly being more established than others, inter-grid competition is probably not a bad thing in some cases and would probably allow LL’s system to remain a viable economy in its own right.


Standardised Inter-grid content converter software?

This would be more for old content, but there is scope to integrate this with new creations too. Additional software (SL client plug-in?) may need to be made available for creators to convert or ‘repurpose’ old creations to comply with the new systems; the intention of course is to overcome copyright, transfer and compatibility issues. This approach may be the only way around current copyright agreements... breaking the said ToS is an important issue a debate that has been highlighted already elsewherehttps://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-1277

I would say that this software/plug-in could be used on all grids that include a common sharing and legally binding agreement, but lets see...


Exciting multi-grid times ahead

The TOS is a non-issue, it was never changed to include third-party viewers either. The first section makes the Linden Lab provided viewer an integral and inseparable part of the SL "service". Noone's making a point of it that their content is being streamed to Nicholaz' viewers to name just one so noone should be making a point of it that their content might get streamed to an external grid. It's hypocritical to agree with one and not the other, it's flip sides of the exact same coin.

As far as new permissions go, "trusted grid" needs clarification but there's no real reason *not* to send content along to other grids just as long as you don't accept uploads back. I really can't see a difference between textures and prims being streamed to the viewer or to a third-party hosted sim.

Whatever the viewer receives, it can copy/steal, whatever the other sim receives, it can copy/steal. Once again there's little difference between the two (other than scripts obviously). If you're fine with content being streamed to inherently untrusted viewers then there's little reason to not send it out to trusted grids since they're far more accountable than someone random logging on with a copybot.

Streaming content to another grid (and not accepting uploads back) doesn't expose any content other than scripts to more content theft risk than is already possible. It's far safer to stream content to a trusted grid provider than it is to send it over to the viewer even. The risk to scripts can be mitigated as well so that's not really an issue either.

---

Edited to add that the reason to be liberal is because in the end being restrictive has the exact opposite effect: I've had several people IM me when I was somewhere and offer to create a "custom" skin of my skin with the tattoo baked on it to free up the underwear layer for a few hundred L$.

If people can't do what they want to do with things they bought they'll end up looking for alternatives and the end result will be that either everyone learns how to copy content which ends them up with full permission items, or you'll have people offer content export across grids for a nominal fee.

If external grids aren't popular it's a non-issue both ways; if they do turn out to be popular then you will have sharing to some extent whether it's an inherent ability or not. It's better to have control over what can and can not be done from the start that pleases most everyone rather than encourage a black market noone will have any control over or will be able to stop once it starts.

The issue is 3rd party grids will have their assets exposed directly, via their respective asset server. If someone takes something I make, and takes it to 'Kewl Grid' which is run by, lets say, some kid who wants all code to be free, once the scripts are transferred to this grid (they would have to be to make it work), he could simply dip into the asset server and get them. It's many levels less secure than the current situation.

Which is where the "trusted grid" concept comes in.

"Trusted" could included variations like: trusted-for-prims, trusted-for-scripts and even trusted for L$, BTW.

Hi,



Unfortunately, besides the technical challenges, this would also cover a number of totally legal actions.
For instance, uploading a texture from a free textures site would trigger on the texture already existing. Yet no law was broken.
Same goes for free audio samples, and the plethora of free BVH animations on the internet.

Even prim objects can be imported legally.

Assume I build in my OpenSim grid, then export this to file. I post this file to my website, where people download it and use an offline builder importer to import it.
The second and any subsequent uploaders would trigger fraud warnings.

It is to be expected that that would also be used to DOS the Linden fraud department, that copycats/griefers would upload so much intentionally copied content as to overload the department, and the items they really want to import will slip through the cracks.

There is no technical solution that I can imagine, that would not be open to expoitation and cover all illegal cases of coopying without also being resistant to false positives on legal activities.

This, IMHO, needs to be addressed by content licensing and TOS provisions, as well as leveraging existing law to deal with IP theft.

At the very least, those who copy content for commercial reasons should be prosecuted in RL as a deterrent to professional thieves.

Melanie

Well aside from linking to Prokofy's blog entry which outrageously misrepresents the issue and the viewpoints of many who have participated in the in-world and jira discussions, I don't think you're representing your own proposal very accurately either.

The original proposal you made before closing it and starting a nearly identical one for reasons I don't quite understand was one I supported on the surface. In your second proposal it became clear that you weren't interested in a technical implementation at this time and were simply looking for a policy decision to be made.

As I've stated a few times now I completely support a change to the permissions system that allows content creators the ability to decide where their content goes.

Unfortunately, that's not really what you're asking for right now. You want a cosmetic, locked-out checkbox that determines for everyone that their content can only reside in SL, stripping content creators who want to take their creations elsewhere of that right and putting them in potential violation of the ToS.

It really strikes me that your interest in this is more about being able to take that cosmetic checkbox to the developer of Second Inventory and other legitimate tools and tell them that they have to cease operations or something.

There's no technical implementation in your proposal at this time and there's no choice-- the second part is my biggest aversion to what you ask. Even Zero has suggested that this would be better served by simply a blog entry clarifying current policy and has said your proposal is unfeasible.

I support a greater change to the permissions system to make way for the future interop of SL and third party grids. I don't support you making the decision for me and other content creators that we can't take the things we've made outside of SL if we want to, and I don't support anyone being grid nanny against those who create legitimate tools to facilitate that purpose.

- Joshua Nightshade

You DO realize that the TOS and permissions system is all about YOUR expression of YOUR choice as a content creator. If, at any time, you chose to change your mind and give explicit permission to copy, that overrides teh bloody bits in the asset permission system.

And that LL doesn't do anything unless they receive a complaint from the content creator, regardless of what permissions bits are set...

And the original jira's discussion had gone on for well over 100 messages so no-one could understand what anyone was saying anymore. The request for a policy clarification was a simpler request, and evoked less discussion. And it DID get a response. There will be 2 meetings about it this month during Zero's office hours, and likely several more after that.

Yes, the remaining question is how the trust mechanism would work. Would it be a trust ranking set up by LL, by the residents? Would it be based on resident votes?

I'd recommend a trust system similar to banlink, where each banlink member can decide what other members to trust, so only the trusted members bans get recognised in your own sims.

Whether this analogizes to grid owners deciding who to trust (opens the door to anti-competitive action) or individual creators maintaining trust profiles (which could become heavily burdensome although not significantly more than a typical DNS).

I agree that a trust system is mandatory. The two flag (this grid/all grids) concept raises significant barriers against legitimate commercial activity and hampers opengrid growth, about as much as no grid based permissions would destroy all commercial activity.

Right. THe trust system is what LL has planned on doing all along. The simple flag thing is my quick-fix proposal to clarify matters for third party utilities which are already operating independently of whatever cross-grid system LL eventually sets up.

I don't see how it will work, honestly.

"Trust" is dubious at best. LL may set up some criteria for "trusting" another grid for exporting/importing assets, but what does that mean? Let's say that I, as a scripter, allow my products to be transferred to Grid X, who has met whatever (potentially flimsy) criteria for being "trusted". A few weeks later, I find my scripted products full-permed, not only on Grid X, but also on SL's grid itself, floating around in freebie and BIAB boxes.

The reasons it got out are really immaterial, but let's say, for argument's sake, they are one or more of these:

1) Bugs in Grid X's system allowed the assets to be copied full-permed
2) Lax security practices in Grid X's system caused the assets to be copied full-permed.
3) Untrustworthy employee/volunteer takes full-permed copies and gives them out (Lindens aren't above this, either, but it still is a significant concern in this case, too)

So, what do I do? I have to DMCA both Linden Lab AND Grid X to get them to take the content down, but it is too late, really. The source code and IP are already lost to the public domain no matter what I do. I realize that's the whole point of content protection, and that it is a hard deal for content creators, and I accept that responsibility. However, this whole "intergrid" thing for me falls apart at this point. I am not even convinced of the real utility of the constituent components of the concept, especially since there can be no way to interconnect heterogeneous virtual worlds. IE, we're not going to go from WoW to SL to TSO to Multiverse to whatever. Not only are all the asset systems incompatible, the cross-world pollution would never be tolerated. Even amongst homogeneous ones, there's going to be a lot of difficulty in making them anything remotely resembling seamless.

We're never going to get to the point where I, as a private business, will connect my "sims" to the main SL grid; there's too much liability involved should someone decide to bring protected content into my "world".

Well, the short-term goal of the AWG is to make it possible to be seamless if the grid operators want it.

Login between SL and OpenSim was demoed a few weeks ago, and programming-wise, the new protocols for login and TP are just inches apart, so TP will happen Real Soon Now.

Of course, without asset server connections, this will be just a ruthed avatar with the right name. However, the technical details of connecting asset servers between SL and OpenSim will be very easy compared to the social and legal issues, as you point out, so the first asset sharing will almost certainly be using a special asset server that contains only generic LL assets and maybe stuff that avatars created on TP-testing sim *specifically* for test-carrying between SL and OpenSim.

Anything more "open" than that will need to wait until the legal/social/technical issues of a new permission system are worked out. Tuesday's meeting is the start of a long process on that front, I suspect. Folks in LL and AWG have been discussing the issues for months and lots of ideas have been tossed around. Now we are at a point where the ideas need to be turned into technical options and tested,. discussed, and tested some more.

Personaly, I think that testing for these things will go smoother and faster than testing has traditionally gone for SL. As the new protocols for interoperability are devised, they will be testable using the new Python library, so folks wont need to wait for the 500,000 line SL client to be modded before they can start testing. The new design for the Python lib should allow multiple tests on multiple issues using the same code, with only a few lines changed for each kind of test. Much faster than trying to work with the regular viewer or even libsl.

And the more we test, the fewer mistakes will happen by the time things make it to the main viewer for regular testing.

Zero's office wont' hold everyone, I'm certain. I suggest the Pooley Auditorium at the corner of Pooley, Seascale, Brampton, and Borrowdale.

And let the poor Linden talk. I haven't been able to warn him that he's facing 2-3x the usual number of avatars that show up at Zero's office.

You don't really grasp what you're asking for then if you think that's the case. If the ToS is modified to prohibit me copying my content out of SL then, regardless of whether or not it's feasible and in line with US copyright law, it's still in violation of their ToS and can result in my suspension or banning from their service.

This is what choice you're taking from me.

Secondly I don't understand who put you in charge of any of this. Deciding when the discussion in the jira had reached its apex (and the second issue got less discussion because everyone had already said their comments in the previous, nearly identical one and to repeat themselves would be redundant), deciding where the discussion should be and how many people should be foisted upon the hosting Linden. This isn't a town hall, that's not the purpose of the office hours nor are the office hours really the best medium to have a discussion about such an integral issue.

Seriously, who gave you the appointment to make any of these choices? I'm going to assume no one and while I respect the tenacity and pro-activeness, your tone is not striking me as someone who realizes they are simply a volunteer and frankly I could do with a whole lot less dictation.

Me too. As far as trust goes, I am not too worried about some Linden going into God Mode and looking at my stuff. But what's to keep some OpenGrid operator from doing the same?

Guess what. I spam the existence of Zero's office hours every time it happens. When its a technical meeting, about 20-30 people show up. When its a non-technical meeting, as many as 80 people have shown up. Zero's on vacation and I haven't been able to reach Xan to warn him, so I took it on myeslf to change the venue because otherwise, Xan will either arrive a minute or two late and not be able to get in, or will need to spend 15-20 minutes of office time arranging a new venue anyway (as happened last time).

ANd MOST of the people with some legal background on copyright issues are agreeing with me (I didn't come up with the idea--they did) that the TOS doesn't cover copying out of the SL grid, so the most conservative and legally safe thing to assume is that you can't copy out of the grid without permission, regardless of what permissions bits are set, so you need to talk to content creators directly before copying. If you are the content creator yourself, well, one assumes you have permission to do the copying. Otherwise, you need to talk to the other person directly.

My proposal is for the blog to mention this issue and for LL to create a flag to make it clear. The issue of automatic transfer of assets to another grid is another issue requiring lots of discussion for design and implementation. But the first issue is to clarify what the TOS means in the situation where someone wants to copy assets off grid. The second might be a simple flag to signal 3rd party apps to "do the right thing." The long term issue is redesigning the permissions system.

Well, here's the issue. We tried to have a discussion in the SL Dev mailing list, they said "it's not a technical issue." (which to me is total B.S., but fine.)

We go to the JIRA, and guess what, it gets ignored along with all the other JIRAs that are in there, and it's not any way to hold a discussion either. Again wrong venue.

So now you say Office Hours aren't the appropriate place to discuss it either. Can you tell me, exactly where is the right place for everyone to get together, Lindens included, and get this straightened out?

The problem is there is no place to discuss such a matter, because it's not a normal, run of the mill subject discussed on a weekly basis anywhere. But we just can't sit on our hands and say "oh well, we can't discuss it anyplace, so we'll just go home and forget about it."

Frankly, I'm glad *someone* is trying to organize this. I only wish I could go but RL prevails.

I'm not really interested in a contest between who has more l33t internet lawyering behind them.

I do agree with you however that a policy clarification is necessary. You did not want a blog entry at first though, that was my suggestion incidentally as far as I saw (which Zero agreed with as a better idea), which you later added. You seemed to be pretty steadfast against that until Zero said otherwise. Regardless, the flag you want LL to create is not one that a content creator will be able to add themselves. Which is not a solution. It's a toy so you can run to the developer of SI and demand he stop working on his program. I don't really want an issue so delicate as this to be controlled by individual dislikes and grievances and I can't really get my head around your particular objections to any idea that isn't your closed checkbox. You also can't make an argument about assumptions-- I personally assume if someone makes their content full perm they've given it away unless otherwise explicitly stated (which most people ignore if they're malcontents). You assume otherwise. So me assuming that I can take my content out of SL if your checkbox passes stating that the ToS says otherwise might be counter to what the Linden who decides to ban me for transfering my creations thinks.

But I do applaud your initiative, I would just prefer a little less attitude like this is your show, regardless of what you've done to organize things. This is a community issue and the whole community is involved in it. I don't know where the best venue for this would be, my complaint was more about the technical horror of having a delicate discussion like this in a laggy sim with forty people yelling at one another. It wasn't a declaration on where this should be held but a statement on how difficult conversations with lots of people are in SL.

AH, yeah, I tend to be a tad arrogant at times, sorry. However don't underestimate the Power of Spam. Last time Zero Linden Office Hours topic was non-technical, 80 people showed up after a 15 minute notice.

My reasoning is that its better to prepare for the worst than to spend 15 minutes getting everyone to the new venue AFTER the meeting starts.

Zha Ewry lead a discussion about "trusted grids" today at the AW Groupies meeting. Covers some of the issues about the more convoluted "trusted" issues that need to be ironed out when dealing with inter-grid permissions:

https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/AWGroupies-2008-07-01

And don't forget Zero's office hours today at 1PM at Pooley.