LL Recreating GOM is necessary and good for the community

As mentioned in another thread here:
/130/78/59120/1.html

This WAS INDEED discussed in OCT 2004
============
You: Salazar Jack: The idea of providing an inworld interface for exchanging Lindens and US dollars, or buying Lindens directly with our credit card has surfaced recently, any comments on that?
Philip Linden: That change is lower priority... clearly people have ways to do that now. Bug fixing most important.
Philip Linden: But long term, we figure there needs to be some ways to exchange currency better than creasting a new account at a website...
Philip Linden: but not feeling like we need to have that tommorow.
Philip Linden: folks in that thread get confused...
Philip Linden: we aren't talking about LL selling currency,
Philip Linden: but about whether we should figure some way to do what is done today straight from the UI
Philip Linden: and in a way that works for a newer user with less time and interest.
Oz Spade: Not like There? But more like GOM through the interface?
Philip Linden: Right, like GOM in the interface.
==============

Now, to me... it sounds VERY clear that LL planned to do EXACTLY
what they are doing now, and nothing more. Nothing "new"
has been added to their plan after talking to GOM.

We all take risks in SL biz every day... even in just assuming
that we can log in and access our accounts! Some people do
have much more invested than others... and some of us take
more risks. I'd say that if GOM decided to move ahead with
their currency exchange.. and ONLY delt with $L (rather than
E2gold, WOW, etc), then that was pretty silly. Are you going
to hang LL for doing what they said they were eventually moving
towards, an entire year ago?


As far as "what else" ...
I have heard mention of making it easier to search/shop/buy
items via the GUI... so SLexchange and SLBoutique should
make note. Anshe has mentioned in another thread that
SLexchange does more, so perhaps they will fair better,
but it's silly for these websites to stick their head in the sand.


These are changes to the GUI (not creating content), which
make our SL lives easier and more convienent. Let's not
lose track of THAT critical point either.




Yes. I think that while the GOM story at first sounds tragic, and
seems to put LL in a bad light... the quotes from 2004 should have
been writing on the wall back then.

In the end we will have a stronger economy... after all LL
wants the SL world to succeed - they aren't going to do
anything to purposely damage it.

Gabrielle

(a) It was not an entire year ago.

(b) I've been under the impression that GOM and/or the others have been around longer than October, 2004. Correct me if I'm wrong.

coco

a) you are going to quibble about one month? Also, that is not the only mention of the in game currency purchase concept that has been made over time by LL.
b) Yes, both GOM and IGE have been around much longer than a year. IGE started in 2001. GOM seems to have started in late 2002/early 2003. They were not originally SL specific - they dealt in SL, There, UO, TSO, SWG and Horizons currency. They ultimately stopped all but L$ after problems with fraud and lack of cooperation from other companies except LL. Contrary to public portrayal, Gaming Open Market was not business created by SL residents for SL- they became SL residents as part of their business.

I'm really hoping this is the case. In other words, seller's don't post on the SL web site or in the viewer... GOM/IGE/Anshe/etc do.

Regards,

-Flip

Cris, what you're not reading is that GOM already has this code, has offered this code to LL in the past for immediate and secure implementation. They told LL how they were going to do it, code it for security -- and were put off. Now LL decides to implement this. GOM even offered to write it so that other conversion companies could use it as well.

That's a huge difference between "ease" for new users. There are two issues on the table -- one is the need for new users to be able to access Linden money easily. The other is the theft of existing code.

This is probably just a little oversight on your part (unless you know something I dont) but that's off by about a year. Earliest GOM page on archive.org is Nov 22 2003 and they hadnt traded much by then.
http://web.archive.org/web/20031122085921/http://www.gamingopenmarket.com/

I am not missing that they are implementing GOM's concept. However, theft of code is a major accusation. If they had it built after talking to GOM and not being able to come to an agreement, that is not theft of code. It can certainly be argued they did not act in good faith, but I do have to say that none of what GOM is doing is rocket science. That is not a dig at GOM, it is a simple reality. Others have created the major components of their functionality - all of the ATMs for the online stores are based on exactly the same concepts as the GOM ATMs. Their web market software could be developed by an experienced web application developer. All of the third party sites - mine included - could be recreated without using a line of existing code from the site they are replicating.

If GOM feels they have a strong enough case against LL for some kind of breach of contract, which I don't think they have, then they should pursue it. It does not seem there is any basis though - there was no contract. If LL's implementation uses any of GOM's code, then I would gladly pick up the torches and pitchforks. I don't see any evidence of that. I see evidence that negotiations broke down between the two, and LL went on to implement the system without them using their own developers.

A) Oh my God... are you serious? Oct 2004 to Sep 2005
Ooops! you're right. I'm sorry... 11 months (and 3 days, ~8 hours)

B) I never said GOM came in to existance after LL mentioned their
plans to include $US <-> $L in the GUI.... if that is what you
misinterpreted me to say. I said exactly what I meant. It was
(just about) a year ago that quote was taken, and I don't know
if or how often before that.... but the point was, that LL had
made the statement they WERE going to do this, before any
of the recent discussions/meetings they had with GOM, so
it's unlikely anything stolen... they ALREADY had the idea
for certain!

Again, once you present an idea to LL, explain how you could implement it, then have it duplicated by LL -- talk to me then.

I do sincerely hope that Jamie and Tom have detailed notes on the discussions, what questions they were asked, what details they provided.

You have a grassroots "company" having the idea and code to make SL's interface better. Instead of implementing it, LL decided to duplicate it. If nothing unethical was done, why would LL want to purchase the code and the company in the first place?

Snapzilla is successful, LL without telling you took in-world mail addressed to your site and put it onto their website without acknowledging or telling you. You have spoken to them on how you implemented your software with the postcards. What if in the future, LL decides to do their own postcard/live snapshot site on their website and can't come to an agreement with you about the purchase price? What if they "blow off" your hours spent scripting and hosting the site? No one has your notes or knows the details of the discussions with Phillip.

Yet it could happen.

This is a bit frightening for future designers/content creators within SL on how creations that interact with the SL client will be treated in the future.

Yes, that's very true Lynn.

The question then becomes, lets face it - was the offer fair?

My conclusion is that given the press that LL has received, and the fact that GOM wasn't going to be successful if SL wasn't successful, the developer stock options was more than fair.

Yeah, it's really coming down to that.

Well finally caught up on all the threads here As I trade a lot on GOM its concerning to see. But well I suspect it makes sound business sense for LL to do something like this. But it looks like the squabbles is about implementation of the idea.

Have to say after re-reading the post by Philip Linden a number of times I get the opposite impression. IE it will be direct user to user sales, with GOM, IGE and Anshe Chung being just another set of users and that there will be no restrictions on who can put up L$ for sale.

Why didn't LL do this from the beginning?

Thank you Hair, you are one of the few in this thread who make sense to me.

When I was younger, going to the arcades, I had to buy "tokens" to play the video games. Buying Linden dollars is the same thing. Why should I have to step outside of the arcade to get more tokens from someone who happens to sell them on the street?

If LL wants to implement a button in their interface to allow users to buy tokens from other players, it's their privilege to do it. It's their business after all. If users object to how the owners of SL run their business, there's not much they can do about it.

When all of us users got into SL, we all were aware that SL is a "virtual" world. Yet so many users are so taken with SL they seem to loose sight that SL is not real. Exchanging Linden dollars for U$ does not make it real. I can only use the tokens in the arcade anyway.

As for all the conspiracy seekers who seems to know more about the economy than the world bank, where were you when Enron was swindling investors from their money?

No doubt you're right.

But then the motto should be, as someone else said, "Our World/Your Imagination."

coco

1. HTML in SL
2. Customizable GUI.

Users will make their own GUI that will link into GOM and similar services.

End of story, now please get back to fixing my bugs.

I don't get this 'someone did it or something like it so Lindens never should' mentality. Just seen another post to Hotline demanding to know if those dastardly Lindens intend on competing with residents.

Presumably by that token they should never implement the popularly requested P2P teleporting because it'd destroy the need for ROAM and therefore kill Francis and Rathe's business model? Heck, they should never have introduced custom animations because it destroyed the need for my pre-custom anim dance machines! Evol Lindens, advancing and evolving and integrating features into their world!

It's not like they're 'ripping GOM off'. It's their world, their currency. It was inevitable if they could build a way of trading it into the UI and get over all the technical and legal implications, then they would. Right from 1.2 that was obvious. So GOM found a viable method first. Kudos.

And it seems to me GOM have enough fans that if they dont throw their teddy in the corner and quit over this that they'll still do good business. Otherwise they can leave the whole pie to LL. And maybe a nice slice for IGE - cuz I doubt they'll stop trading.

By all means, spit your bile in this direction. I'm not really reading the thread anyway

Because it was easier to ask GOM to do it for them. Also, there are some very unclear laws that come into play if LL converts L$ to US$ which is likely why the latest LL proclamation (that I've seen) says that they won't be converting in that direction.

One way conversion does not necessarily relieve them of in-fact providing services as a currency broker.

The IRS will define this as they see fit...

Remember Mala months ago where all this was hashed over re: why LL would NOT do exactly what they are now doing?

Thank you Philip for your response!


GOM --> Continue Discussions

If L$ sold through SL can only be converted to account credit that would mean that 3rd party exchanges where it can be sold for USD will still be every bit as vital as they are now.

I think the closest example would be Sony's Station Exchange for Everquest II as another company thats implemented an exchange/auction system.

Have to say the system is very limited because of International Law. So its only available to the USA Player Base.

I think this issue might see the LL Exchange be limited or perhaps hampered by international considerations.

Sony marketed a game. Lots of people thought it was great but were too lazy to play it properly and were prepaired to pay other people to get the power-ups and advanced characters for them.

These other people realised there was a huge market of kiddies who wanted the best game characters but were to lame to play the game as it was intended.

Sony, naturally, objected to people ruining the game for everyone else, but found that the only way to stop them was to out do them by selling the game items themselves. So they create their own exchange...


LindenLab, on the other hand, has spent the last two years specifically encouraging third party business. One such example being GamingOpenMarket who initially traded in many diffferent "game" currencies. The encouragement by LindenLab, along with the difficulties of delivery to the other "games" and a big fraud resulted in the "games" being dropped. Now GOM is dedicated to trading L$ only.

So what happens next? LindenLab announce that they intend to build their own currency exchange (which just happens to work the same way as GOM) and build it into the UI.

So how is this any different to Sony? Sony specifficaly tried to stop 3rd party trading and admitted it. LindenLab have followed the same path claiming "fair competition". How can the result be any different?

The reasons for implementation are very different, thats for sure. But my point is more about legal implications. If Sony, who are a large company, have difficulty making their exchange international then its possible that LL might not be able to get around the same problem and will be forced to make their system US only.

If thats the case then the likes of GOM, IGE etc... have a chance to compete by providing this capability.

Very good point indeed.