**Asri Falcone Hijacked(Idenity Theft)**

If this is the case, then clearly a keylogger hasn't been used to get the information, and clearly the problem is at the Lindens' end rather than at Asri's.

No wonder they moved the posting.

I may be jaded and bitter, but even I think that you're being paranoid. As has been previously explained, the Lindens do not have access to the passwords. When someone calls up and fradulently claims to be someone else, a password reset email is forwarded to the email address on file. This is actually a very common policy and procedure. Both of the banks which I do business with have a similar policy. If the user's primary email account is compromised (due to weak passwords, social engineering, keyloggers, or any of the various and sundry methods that exist) then it becomes a trivial matter to gain access to many of a user's services. This is something which the Lindens can do little to protect against. The fact that her instant messaging and email accounts were compromised rules out the possibility that the security gaffe lies with LindenLab.

you know i thought that too hun ...but ....howd they get the pw b4 the lindens gave it to me?....i dont doubt i was compromised or maybe i still am...but im not the only one.
plus i wouldn't call a 2,000usd loss in less then a month parahnoia. Id call it a federal crime.

Eboni: As long as L$ can be bought and sold into rl currency, yes they have value. Like for Asri who used her income in sl to pay her rl rent. A thief have stolen Asri's money, it is clearly a crime - no matter what the TOS says. The bad security in sl also basically gives the thief access to Asri's credit card (can at least misuse it in sl - downgrade/upgrade account and tier size and such).

Can it be this?:

Coolwebsearch

http://www.free-web-browsers.com/remove-coolwebsearch.shtml

regarding "value" of the Linden and apparent inconsistency: /invalid_link.html

regarding security (and Coolwebsearch, which is much worse apparently than it appears): /120/91/57020/1.html

Lindens have no value as stated in the TOS. All data in SL is temporary, as stated in the TOS. These are the things everyone has agreed to, when they agree to log in SL. I can sell a pubic hair on eBay for $5,000, just because someone is willing to spend that amount of cash does not mean that a pubic hair is worth $5,000. Also, to the best of my knowledge there is no US legal precedent, for the value of virtual items in games. There is some legal precedent in Asia but not here. LL has not declared the value of X amount of Lindens to be equal to X amount of USD, unlike There, so again, Lindens have no real world value currently, it is all completely subjective.

If her machine has been hacked, then that is a crime, although I doubt it will get a lot of attention from authorities, since the value of what may have been stolen is not clear or concrete. There would be a better case if this person had made charges to her credit card (buying more land etc) while using her SL account, that would be a clear crime and local of Federal authorities may be interested in especially if the Credit Card company was involved. The identity theft part is a little tricky. My IT security is a little rusty, I haven’t done it in a few years but impersonating Asri Falcone is not the same as impersonating, whoever Arsi is in real life. The reason being is that Arsi Falcone in no publicly visible established way is linked to her real life legal name. Is it a crime to impersonate a virtual persona? I’m not sure if the case law has been established. I think as far as a criminal case, the whole thing is shaky because Lindens have no value as declared by Linden Lab, and lack of established case law. I think that a civil case should be easy to build with a good lawyer and a few subpoenas to LL.


If there is someone with better knowledge of case law in this area feel free to correct me.

Well as a short term fix, why can't LL take her inventory from her Asri avie and then move it over to her alt?

Considering when a teen "graduates" to the adult grid they transfer content, why can't the same thing be done in this case?

I took Robin's Hotline response to mean that Linden Lab doesn't assign a value and because the data is virtual, it has no "intrinsic cash value". A pubic hair also has little to no intrinsic cash value. However, it can be assigned a value by the market and eBay is proof of such things. And LL seems to allow the market to assign a value and Robin seems to confirm this in her response. So the statement "Lindens have no value" seems inaccurate on two counts imo:

- first in that the market has assigned a value to it
- second in that I assign a value to it

Robin's response doesn't seem quite in line with how I initially read the ToS, but I don't see them as conflicting (though my opinion could change - I've not given it considerable thought tbh).

Yes that is nice but again, for legal purposes, someone would have to be an expert on virtual goods and testify to the value of the Linden at the current time to establish a value fo the Linden, since Lindens have no established value. The majority of people in the real world look down their noses at virtual goods, I believe Paypal still doesn’t and this has burned GOM a few times. The value assigned by the "market" doesn't necessarily hold up. Lindens aren't traded on recognized stock exchange and you can't purchase them from LL (if you could purchase them from LL, that would establish a value). IGE is a shady company at best that operates breaking the law everyday, there ethics are beyond murky, to nonexistent, they don't necessarily make the best witness. GOM is ran by 2 Canadians in their free time, they may be able to assist in establishing the value of the Linden since they have over a year of data tracking the value in relation to the USD, but still I doubt GOM is a Nationally recognized stock exchange by the US government.


I still think from a current legal standpoint, Lindens have no value.

Did the Lindens also give out your IM password?

As for the paranoia bit: that was directed at Selador, who had suggested that the Lindens pushed this thread into the notices forum as a way of covering up their negligence. This is a view which the evidence does not support. It's obvious, from the breadth and severity of the security blunder, that it does not lie on their end.

I quoted and was responding to two of your comments:

"Lindens have no value as stated in the TOS"
"Lindens have no real world value currently, it is all completely subjective."

Given Robin's comments and a review of the ToS, I don't believe it's accurate to reference it and interpret it as you did. I'm unsure the ToS clearly states the Linden has no value. I however you can point to something in the ToS and states this unequivocably, please share.

If by "real world value" you were actually meaning "current legal" value, then I'd say you're entitled to think as you will (obviously). However, I take "real world value" to mean value in other ways as well. People often assign value to what others consider worthless junk. Conversely, commodities to which most everyone assigns a significant value, such as oil, are worthless when you're dying of thirst. And neither virtual Lindens nor paper US dollar bills have any value in that context. "Subjective" is the rule imo, not the exception.

It's only a matter of time imo before a case (like this one perhaps) makes its way into the U.S. legal system and sets new precedents.

From the TOS



I don't think I can make it any clearer than that. LL states that Lindens and the any data you have on the servers has no intrinsic cash value, and they do not endorse and EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM any value cash or otherwise. I think that even if this went to court, the accused person could point this out and say that Lindens have no acutal cash value as stated by the company that provides them.

I posted a link to Robin's response. Please comment on her explanation.

Robin's comments are nice, but we are talking legal precedence, not marketing and conjecture. It is pretty clear cut, I can't make it any clearer.

well in this case the value of the linden in theory is totally controdictory to the application to real life....and to me the value of the linden means the difference between me haveing a roof over my head or not.



LL did recover a portion of my lindens and restored them to my account...yay! From one particular case that happend at the end of July. Im not sure if this thread had anything to do with it but i appreciate everyones concerns..... Its not even close to being 1/3 of what was taken from me but its definately a start and it shows me that maybe the person/company that bought from this thief saw this....Thank You! I know you didnt Know

First off, I'm glad to hear that Asri has recovered some of her things.

As to the other issue:



{}'s are mine.

I was commenting on this quote of yours: "Lindens have no value as stated in the TOS". This original comment of yours is far too broad imo... unexpected from someone discussing legal issues as you do.

The ToS does not state the Linden has "no value", only that it has "no intrinsic cash value" (and I notice you've added that detail now). I take that to mean that it has no cash value outside the market activity surrounding Second Life (which would include GOM and other SL-related websites, imo).

To give a more clear example, one might ask if there is "no value" in the lobbying power of a former United States senator. Of course there is value... and they're paid handsomely with real cash for it. But outside of the political world and it's activity, that value disappears. So a former senator's lobbying power also has "no intrinsic cash value". Google around and you can find similar discussions on the "intrinsic cash value" of stocks. Many believe that they have no value outside of what someone will pay for them... just like the Linden.

And I believe it's only a matter of time before the judicial system is presented with a case that equates virtual currency with, for example, an experiential activity like attending a ballgame or a concert (there are afaik currently U.S. laws against things like "scalping" - why? There is no intrinsic value in attending these events so why are there laws on tickets for something that only exists virtually?).

The "accused person" would also have to explain a number of things that are counter to the concept of "no value" - such as cashing out Lindens for real U.S. currency (if that's shown to be the case here and elsewhere). If they materially benefit from this activity, then they themselves have assigned the Linden a real world value - even though it still may not have an "intrinsic cash value".

imo, so long as SL and it's market exists, the Linden has value even though there is "no intrinsic cash value". And this position is well within the scope of the ToS as I understand it.

I was talking about the inaccuracy of your comments and what I considered a misreading of the ToS. Further, I was pointing to the Hotline response as Linden Lab's position on what was pointed out to be a potential discrepancy between disclaiming "intrinsic cash value" and trumpeting real cash value. I thought they made it pretty clear - it's clear cut - they're using language that allows them to have it both ways (oh, surprise)... although maybe they can make it clearer still!

It's clearly unfortunate that you're unable to make it clearer.

Perhaps Asri or someone else will soon settle this in court and the issue will be decided more clearly. Until then, I fall on the side of "value" - even though I'm clearly aware there is "no intrinsic cash value"... just like some of the stocks I own. Because clearly I value my stock portfolio.

Sorry, double posting.

Ardith,

<<I may be jaded and bitter, but even I think that you're being paranoid.>>

Paranoia occurs when a person suspects a conspiracy directed at themselves. I don't think it's a conspiracy, and I don't think it was directed at me.

I think it's a QED situation: if the password was obtained *before* it was sent to Asri, then clearly the problem did not occur with her.

Unless of course I am missing something, that seems pretty obvious. If I *am* missing something, I would be grateful if someone could explain what it is.

Wow, you used a lot of words to say nothing that proves your point any more than I can prove my point. We are speaking in hypothetical and opinions here only, the precedence does not exist in the US. Your real world examples are a little flawed and in the interest of time I will gloss over some, but address one, since it has the most relevance to the actual topic at hand and isn’t grandstanding with no purpose. LOL


Stock in IBM has value because IBM has assets. IBM has more assets than just the people who work for them, they have a well respected an well known brand name that have a real world value and could itself sell for millions. IBM again beyond intellectual property has real assets that are globally recognized as having value, these could include buildings and land that IBM owns, business machines, furniture, etc. Even with the possibility of liquidation, IBM has assets than can be sold in a global market that can support the company. Similarly US Currency is back by gold, the US Military, and the government of the United States. The current Linden trade is dependant upon 4 things, Linden Lab, GOM, IGE, and Paypal. Hopefully some day soon Sony Blizzard and others will be able to shut IGE down for their illegal practices and they will no longer be part of the equation. Paypal does not recognize virtual goods as real goods or services (which is a little odd, since services can be just as subjective as a virtual item). Linden Lab could fold and Lindens would have no value. The guys at GOM could decide its really not worth their effort and fold. Lindens have an extremely limited and insecure value. Linden Lab has expressed in the TOS that your Lindens can disappear at any moment and they are in no way responsible, at least if American Express folds, my funds are secure up to 100,000. There are many more reasons just the TOS and perceived value why Lindens have little to no value. The way the market currently stands for Lindens and the massive amount of them that are in circulation will probably in the next few months decide the value or lack thereof for the Linden quite shortly. Currently, there are 2 or more people with enough Lindens to lower the value of the Linden to nothing at all in a matter of hours. Someone recently lowered the value of the Linden to $3.80 and the Linden in the past few weeks has been unable to recover back to levels of just 2 months ago. The same action by one or a few people can have a further damaging effect.


Anyway, WoW is open now, so I leave you to refute my comments in peace.

It is not contradictory to talk about the real value. Yes, you can exchange it for money, which places a value on it. You can lose $10,000L and say that you are out approximately $40. However, to go to court to establish that to get money back for having virtual currency stolen is unproven legal ground. How do you set the value exactly? GOM's rate? IGE's? Anshe Chung.com? Ebay? Also, LL could close tomorrow with all the money in our accounts, and all the items, and we would have no recourse to get that "money" from them (not to mention the market for it would collapse anyway so it would be worthless).

That is what it means to say it has no real value - it is all balanced on a house of cards right now, which makes it very very risky. The rewards of cashing out are wonderful - but it is all happening in a legal grey area that you don't have any protection from when something goes wrong. I am glad you are getting some of this resolved without needing to involve the courts.

I was just trying to be clear.



"Hypothetical"... will be going back to that...

With regard to precedence, not in the U.S. to my knowledge; however, I think it's a likelihood that rulings outside the U.S. will at least be reviewed. To dismiss them as irrelevant would be to insulate the U.S. in what are increasingly global matters. And considering that we already share legal concepts and opinions with foreign countries (e.g. copyright), this area is ripe for cooperative effort.



Some? I only see one example addressed. And I'm sure you meant to say "Your real world examples are imo a little flawed". May I suggest that you not casually write in absolutes.



Exactly. It has "value". But if IBM is suddenly found to have "cooked the books" (now that doesn't happen in corporate America!) and is, in spite of all those assets, hopelessly in debt, then the "intrinsic value" of their stock is effectively nothing. Their stock has no intrinsic value.

Which is my point: so long as IBM remains solvent, their stock has value. And so long as Linden Lab keeps SL going and people use it, the Linden has value. As for assets, there are plenty of cases where investors and creditors have lost money after all the assets are sold off. Consequently, I consider your view of the "intrinsic value" of stocks to be flawed.



Incorrect. The U.S. has not been on the gold system since 1933. But in "hypothetical" terms (your word), the U.S. could collapse and the dollar devalued to nothing. Countries devalue their currency; it's not as if it doesn't happen. Money is a virtual concept. It is representational and has value only so long as the system that created it, supports it. Something like water or food however, has intrinsic value because it doesn't depend on an abstract human construct to achieve its value. That's the difference here.



Who cares? During the Cold War everyone lived with the thought that we could all be wiped out by the stupidity of one paranoid military officer and an overly gung-ho bomber pilot! There are no guarantees... either in the future of countries, or IBM, or software firms, or our own lives. Risk assessment is not the issue we're discussing here, and I'm unsure why it is even raised in the context of whether something has "value".



Are they? You know this for a fact? Considering that the U.S. can no longer cover pension funds, I'd be hesitant to depend 100% on any so-called security. And I've heard plenty of former Enron employees who thought the same about their investment in their own company. They thought they knew. Perhaps the one thing we all should know is that we never know.



In the early days of the United States, there were a few families with this kind of power. But this is irrelevant and I'm again unsure why you raise issues of risk - in this case in the form of currency stability. You seem to be drifting from the core issue on whether Lindens have value. Risk is not a determining factor in whether it has value.



Done.

You're missing the mountain for the molehill. That particular datum does not compensate for the abundant evidence that the breach of security is not limited to SL, nor does it make any technical sense when you consider the security measures which SL has in place. Not to mention I find this little anecdote to be suspect at best. How did the other user get the password before her? How does she know that he got it before her? By what channel did this new password supposedly get transmitted to him? To her? The Lindens have previously affirmed that they don't have access to the passwords, and the password itself is encrypted en route. Technically, it is phenomenally more likely that the breach of security lies with the user and not with LL.

I don't have time to read all of this, but in the United States, the justice system does not use case law from foreign governments to establish case law in SL, Hiro. Also, copryright, and IP laws vary greatly from country to country, anyone who has done International Business understands this, so that arguement is a strawman arguement and doesn't hold up to the light of logic. If you aren't going to use any sort of logic or basic understanding this debate cannot continue.

I have asked for this long time ago and been turned down