It's supposed to be free damnit!!

Except we have, because it does.

I give (or sell; the law makes no distinction) you a book I made. I say "you can't sell this book, you can only give it away". Right there, I would be infringing on the First Sale doctrine, which is a protected fair use exception to copyright law.

You may give away the book. You may burn the book. You may sell the book. The law supports all of those "fair" uses, despite my wishes as the book's "content creator".

By giving creators a DRM option which abrogates that right, it becomes unfairly biased towards creators, and thus, is a bad thing.

Now, you will say "but it doesn't protect the right to make copies and sell them!", which is true, but the REST of the rights will still be abrogated with this one change, not simply the right to copy.

Freebie reseller boxes the item and slaps a texture on the box showing the item.

The item is also resold as NC/T or C/NT which makes checking or unchecking "Allow Anyone to Copy" rather pointless because the owner won't have permission to give others a copy.

So in the end the resellers aren't bothered or hurt by your proposal at all, and people who don't resell and want to have the option to uncheck it no longer can.

So do you suspect that LL are allowing freebie owners to disable the 'Allow anybody to copy' permission because the freebie sellers are always going to find other ways to sell free items?

i think there should be an extra tickbox , one that prevent the next owner to untick the permissions granted to the next user. This would give symetry to the permission system currently, only the restrictive permissions are sticking, not the permissive ones.

When you get a free sample wich is labeled "not for resale" well guess what, you don't have the right to resell it.

That's pretty much the suggestion that is being debated. The primary argument against it is that it allows for DRM which is unfairly balanced towards content creators in opposition to copyright law. The secondary argument is that, barring some magical implementation, it won't do dick to stop freebie selling, since they can just put it in a vendor, or in a box in a vendor and still sell it. You'd have to do something silly like disable being able to put it inside another object; something which would be breaking dangerous new ground in terms of code and rights.



Use an already-existing (and questionably infringing) option: no-transfer.

Edit: DoRD non-compliance.

LL doesn't care about freebie resellers.

You retain the full rights to your creation so if someone is using it in a way that infringes on your rights as the copyright owner then you sue the infringer and LL will have to remove the content if that ends up being the court's decision.

That's really besides the point though, simply boxing the item would evade the new restriction you're proposing so it wouldn't really be all that useful to implement it.

I doubt that many people would buy an expensive item that's hidden inside a box without having some reassurance that the seller wasn't a scammer. I'm sure most people see an item in-world, finds out who created it and then goes visit their store. After all, anybody can drop anything into a box and put a nice picture on the side.

The problem is that a quality free item is being shown to a potential victim and because of the quality they're being easily scammed into paying for it.

Boxes aren't a problem at all. And the freebies that do get sold in boxes (if any) are probably being sold for such a low price that it just isn't worth losing sleep over.

O.o

Uhh, dude, it happens THOUSANDS of times every day! You go into a mall or a store and there are vendors and/or boxes EVERYwhere and people buy stuff sight-unseen from them. Hell, I don't think I've bought a single item yet that hasn't come in a box at least, let alone out of a vendor.

That's not even touching on the THOUSANDS of sales that occur through out-of-world marketplaces like SLEX/SLB/OnRez/etc.



Well, no, the problem is that someone is taking a free item and simply putting it out for sale in their market space. People who don't know any better see the item for sale, not knowing it is a freebie, and they buy it. Later on, they find out it was a freebie available elsewhere and either kick themselves and scream at the uncaring scammer, or just shrug their shoulders and move on, lesson learned.



I would go so far as to say freebies getting sold is such a small issue that it just isn't worth losing sleep over.

o.O

Yes, until it's YOUR items that are being resold. By giving something away as a freebie, I as a content creator am giving back to the community. If something I created is being sold by someone else without my permission, I want the proceeds - or a least a hefty cut of them.

Wrong.

I have already stated several times that, if someone resold my freebies, I WOULD NOT CARE.

The act of reselling my gifts back to the community by another does not diminish my giving of gifts back to the community in the first place one whit.

If it would for you, use no-transfer to prevent resale of your items.

Simple enough?

*moves*

Put a no-mod script in it that when rezed it informs the owner that if they paid money for it, they got screwed.

on_rez() {
llOwnerSay("This is a freebie item available at [my store]."
}

Actually the drms are already in place, something nocopy is somehow drm enforced. being able to lock the tick on copy mod trans would actually ensure that none of the next owners will be able to put a restrictive drm on it.