Virtual Land Dispute Spills Over Into Real World (player sues LindenLab)

While the laws may apply but the way in which it was described for him to originally get the land itself is unlawful and would result in a prison sentence or a counter suite if you actually get into legality with it...

IANAL (but my wife is... ), but as I understand, he's probably filed a straightforward breach of contract suit, claiming that his purchase through LL's online land system is a binding contract (which *they* state flat out when you make a purchase), and by not transfering ownership they have breached their obligation. He can sue for damages in the amount of whatever the land is resold for once LL sells it to someone else. All else being equal, he would win.

In turn, they can file a countersuit for "unjust enrichment" -- basically a claim that he's gaining a benefit he shouldn't due to his inappropriate actions. If they are successful in their counterclaim, they probably won't get full damages due to their contributory negligence in having website "security" that is bypassed by simply typing a publically-available auction ID into a URL.

This may, in fact, also test the validity of the "L$ have no value" clause in the TOS -- if this case goes to trial, the loss suffered assumes land sales in L$ can be converted into US$ which will require a court to actually rule that the L$ does in fact have a definable value.

I'm not sure that typing in a URL can be considered hacking.


However, Linden Labs is going to have to show that the money that they took belongs to them, and that they gave the offender a chance to mitigate damages.


What really worries me about this is that it does call the government's attention to activities in SL that could technically be taxable, regulated, or illegal, such as gambling. I sure would hate to have to start collecting sales tax.

Anyhow, we'll see how it all falls out.

The Businessweek article surely caused more "government attention" than a press release from a personal injury law firm.

Oh and most state's sales tax are on "tangible goods"... obviously what we sell isn't tangible.

In the UK we have VAT (value added tax) on fees for advice. Thats an intangible -

I will let others have a go now, sorry to hog thread, do not mean to be a troll

His phone number is on the news article ... anyone want to give him a call?

It's a press release. Big difference.

As most layers only the mighty US$ count. He Cheated, LL foudn out. Close is account as they should. The cheater think that because is his a lawer he his above the law and will make a clown of him in court. Mind you most of the LL land baron steal land from newbie using questionable method. (why don't LL sue those scum bag that troll in LL in search of freash victim to steal land from)

I find this interesting! He said he was going to sue, I wondered if he really is. Now we have a news article about it. I hope we're kept updated. Thanks for sharing! I dunno whether to wish you luck or not Marc but yeah, good luck

Now it all makes sense when IM him about acquiring more land he was really pushy to try to get me to pay for it quickly. He said that his land tier was coming up. It wasn't hist land tier since he made a fortune off of the land I bought from him, it was he wanted to cash out the lindens that he made from lands sales illegally buy usings this exploit.

I hope he looses in court. What he did was plainly hacking, yes LL messed up by allowing it but it still was illegal.

As for me I just hope they don't take my land back from me that I bought from him I bough about 44,000sq m from him. If he only paid $5US for the land, I better not run into him or I will give him a piece of my mind.

Cybertek Warrior

When an attorney opens his mouth... somewhere in the world, a kitten dies. They are often evil, often heartless, money grubbing wankers.

That being said, if the guy truly did cheat the system... I hope he is charged with a felony (hacking is no small charge).

If I have to pay full price for a sim... so does he. And being an attorney... unless he is horrible at it... he can afford the price much more easily than I.

If LL is in violation of the law by not refunding the guy... well, I hope they come in compliance with it. I'd rather their revenue and venture capital be spent on development rather than legal disputes.

I think it would not help us if we underestimated one person like Bragg.

From my dealings, observations and conversations with his avatar I received impression that he approach Second Life very systematic. While he quickly invested thousands of US$ into land and other ventures in SL, it still all seemed like the systematic exploration. He did not seem to act like normal SL business person or somebody who seriously try to build the career in SL land, malls or rental. It more was like somebody who was willing to invest (and loose) huge US$ amounts just to learn how the business and the economy works.

What's more, he seemed to be looking for some law case for some longer while now. There have been legal threats from him towards Linden Lab about really small and far fetched things in the past already. Personally, I really get impression that he has come to SL to study this new economy with the intend to find the method to further his legal career.

We should be seriously worry now. Of course the case he bring up here is weak and I don't see how he could win it, even by pull the strangest legal trick in the complicated law system in America. But this may just be the door opening for bring SL to attention of courts and regulators. And no matter what the outcome, he may position himself as the lawyer who challenge Linden Lab and bring "legal clarification" to what he call the "wild west".

Imagine what this could do to the dynamic and innovation speed of the SL economy and the culture of freedom and creativity, if every feature, every transaction and whatever Lindens or residents do must constantly be defend against some "interested" lawyers.

Don't estimate Bragg, it may be that he is one very rational and carefully calculating individual. He may not need to win this case or receive compensation to achieve what he is actually seeking. Take note of the press release and prominent featuring on his law firm's website. You don't need press release if you just seek the justice in court.

My god! You mean LL may have to actually be held accountable to their customers and the people that have invested thousands of dollars into their system?!? That would be horrible! </sarcasm>

For the record, it is such an incredibly rookie move to have an "unintended" page publicly available that it isn't even funny. Anyone who knows *anything* about web development knows that in a situation where something can be accessed with a URL, a database check should be performed, with a redirect if the page shouldn't be available. Something like "if simIsReadyToSell then proceed else redirect". Or, hey, how about setting the minimum bid to something like $10,000 until the sim is ready to go?

LL should seriously discipline whichever employee coded up that system and has caused them to be placed into this actionable position and whichever QA person let this POS code slip through to the live site. Seriously slipshod.

You're both right. LL continually dicodomously withholds some features simply because "they might be used to harm the community" but half implements others so they're easily used to harm the community. Fixing the problem will damage LL's reputation as a fun place to work, though, so is probably not on the BLOTD.

Still, Anshe hit the nail dead on. Bragg reminds me of the journalists posing as virtual world intelligencia to promote a new career track for themselves. After just a couple of years, people are seriously considering their ramblings as useful talking points. One of them is even being promoted, by another one of them, as among the most powerful people in Second Life.

No, they're guilty because they didn't implement a one-line check to ensure the URL entered is for a valid, ready-to-go auction.

Here you go:

if (minimumAuctionBid == NULL) then redirect_URL('./bad_auction_number.html')

And that, sir, is a rookie move that may end up costing LL dearly in terms of time, energy, and litigation costs. Regardless of whether the marketing department pulled the developer off the project prior to completion, somebody in QA should have caught this mistake.

I disagree. An auction -- in particular an online auction -- is a totally different animal than a fixed-price store with an unlocked store room.

Well, you know what they say about the man who represents himself in court...

An auction has the auctioneer set the starting bid. I saw the bids and names of bidders before they were pulled. There was no starting bid set by the auctioneer. Starting bid was 0 in all cases.

Not true. That is not legal. The plaintiff has the right to sue where the incident occurred, regardless of what any boilerplate adhesion language says.

Otherwise most major corporations would probably move to Alaska to avoid lawsuits

He's a lawyer.

Ha Ha... looks like P2 is going Pravada stylez!!!!