Bragg Case

And "a Second Life member in good standing" means anything Linden makes it up to mean at any given moment. Of course, that does NOT mean that its legal, or will stand if challenged in court.


Yep, and right below the second part you quoted, the next sentence is even more onerous:

"Linden Lab has the right at any time for any reason or no reason to suspend or terminate your Account, terminate this Agreement, and/or refuse any and all current or future use of the Service without notice or liability to you."

For *ANY* reason or *NO* reason. Now, if everyone read that, LL would have gone broke long ago, for lack of customers. But Chip, just because they wrote those words doesn't mean they have the right to enforce them against you, or that they're valid, legal or have any weight at all. We have laws to protect the populace from unscrupulous sellers like that, Chip - they're not allowed to write whatever they wish and enforce it against customers.


Well, in my opinion, and more importantly in the eyes of the law, yes it would be their liability if their contract is found to be unconsciable, unreasonably lopsided, or not valid for any other reason by a Judge and a Court.


If one takes your argument on its face, Chip - then if Linden decided to amend the TOS tomorrow, and declare that its now against TOS for any single entity to "own" more than 10 regions, and anyone who does will be suspended and terminated - then Anshe Chung, AzureIslands and others should have no recourse at all, because after all, if they had read the TOS including the part allowing Linden to change it at will, then its their own damn fault according to you, right? Or even more to the point, lets just say that Anshe wakes up tomorrow to find herself suspended and terminated - and when asked, Linden says "there's NO reason, but our TOS allows us to do it to you for NO reason, didn't you read it? Bye Bye..." Taken to its logical extremes, your argument looks pretty foolish.

Taken to logical extremes, most arguments can be made to look pretty foolish.

Inconceivable!

Actually, Har, *good* arguments and *good* legal documents can withstand that scrutiny. I have significant background in formal debate, and that's one thing you learn quickly if you're going to be at all successful. Your own arguments should hold up if taken to logical extremes, and taking the opponent's arguments there quickly exposes the flaws. I'm not a lawyer, but have been an expert witness a few times - and you'll also see the same arguments used in legal cases a lot. Look at the extreme of what the disputed documents would allow if let stand, in terms of whether it should be allowed to be left standing.

Then of course there is problem of being so good at arguing, and so wrapped up winning the debate that you miss the Point of what the other side is trying to say.

While the forums contains a lot of debate - it really isnt a debating society. People shouldnt be expected to be expert debators, nor to have all of the rules of logic memorized.

If you take a step back to look at the problem, when you "win" at the forums, everyone else loses.

Which really doesnt help anyone understand anything.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Dont you have some Yellow Post-its to write, or some Serial Killer to catch or something?

QFT

I love intelligent, *respectful* discussion, even when it differs from my own conclusions on whatever subject it is.

That love turns into disgust when discussions morph into a presidential debate, where no one listens, and the focus becomes 'selling' one's position by whatever means neccesary rather than simply communicating it.

I don't remember that line in the Movie

Shhhh - trying to see if Zaphod figures out what I meant.

Agreed. When it devolves into an intellectual pissing match, the discussion has lost its value.

On topic, an interesting prior case involving Blizzard Entertainment as plaintiffs vs two WoW players who had reverse engineered the client software to connect to non-sanctioned networks. Blizzard of course prevailed on appeal, but the really interesting thing is this:

Blizzard Entertainment's Terms of Use for its WoW software is almost *identical* to Linden Lab's Terms of Service. ALL of the terms being discussed in this thread, in Bragg's complaint, Judge Robreno's memorandum and order, are present, in virtually identical fashion, in Blizzard's document. Now, the -=really=- interesting bit:

"The 8th Circuit also cited a contractual agreement that Combs and Crittenden OK'd when installing Blizzard software. That agreement prohibits reverse-engineering."

The agreement also contains language giving Blizzard every single lopsided advantage Linden confers to themselves in their own agreement.

I shall be reading more about this case. On the surface, it just seemed relevant enough to mention it here.

I must say, whether or not people assume they really don't "own" the land or not doesn't matter. LL tells us that we own land and are purchasing it for ownership, then THAT is the agreement on the land, and I support Bragg for holding a loosed mouth corporation responsible for the words they say. If I sell you a motorcycle online, stating that when you buy it, you own it. and then six months later I see you jumping it; Do I have the right to repossess said bike? Just a thought. There is no contract made when one buys land, At least not that know of. Just money transfer and the land is supposed to be yours.

I don't ever think I ever said people should be expected to be expert debaters, Colette. But it IS useful for understanding to take a look at what happens at the extremes. That's whether you're talking about TOS terms, software design, computer hardware design, automobile design, or many other things.

Would you be comfortable driving a car which has been shown to have a high propensity to rollover when pushed beyond certain limits, as long as its ok while you drive it around town at 30MPH?

The current Linden TOS would allow them to suspend Anshe Chung tomorrow, confiscate her hundreds of islands for absolutely NO valid reason, just on a whim or to profit from her holdings, and not pay her a penny of compensation. Are you *really* comfortable with a TOS that gives LL that kind of power? Do you think its legal? Should a court let it stand? I think not, and that's not expert debating, but pretty common logic.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

The Mighty World of Warcraft! Yet another Corporate Whore in the Capitalist Gang Bang...

Backing off the blizzard reference just a bit, as the document noted in that case was the client software's EULA, not the Terms of Use for the service. Still, interesting to note the extreme similarities between theirs and Linden's.

I don't have any problem with that, except for the last part: remain a SL member in good standing. I wouldn't worry if it was that easy. Reality is: LL thinks they could kick me out for any arbitrary reason they happen to come up with. If they decide to ban me for creating "broadly offensive" content tomorrow, they'll not only sack everything of value I bought from them as well as my L$ funds paid to me by other residents, but also a few thousand US$ if I happen to leave them in my account.
How can they assume that anyone would invest into something they try to sell as a business platform under these conditions?



I'd certainly read the fine print if I'm about to buy a house. But if I order a new PC for $2000 in an internet shop, I'll assume that sale means sale and ownership means ownership. No one expects any fine print in an internet shop. You don't assume that Dell or Amazon are trying to trick you out of your money. It's reasonable to expect that, if you buy something that is advertized as a sales object and not a rented object or service, you'll recieve permanent ownership on the advertised ware. And that's exactly what the land store promises: complete ownership. If the TOS says anything different, it's false advertising.

Where are the two pages of information? Are you referring to the TOS? How do I view the TOS once I accepted it? I only get to see it the first time I start the client; at that time, SL was nothing more for me than a free computer game I intended to test. Once I clicked OK, I never got to see it again (until it was changed, which happened after I purchased land). That's not what I'd call in plain sight.

All that is spelled out on the website and within the store, as I already told you, is "buy your island", "imagine your own island", "visit the land store to buy", "A region will give you complete ownership of each grid space you purchase" and so on. A server rental or a limited form of ownership isn't mentioned anywhere, and I don't get to review the TOS.

As for Bragg... yes, it's sad that a potential cheater and exploiter is the one to point out that customer rights are kicked and spit on here, but I don't really care for what reason his account was terminated. What I do care for is that LL pull arbitrary rules out of their noses, so blurry and unclear formulated that at the moment no one knows what's allowed and what not. LL deliberately refuses to clarify terms like "broadly offensive" or "sexual violence". Daniel Linden made it clear that a violation of the new rule "don't do anything that the community could somehow find offensive" is punished with a termination of the offender's account and loss of land + account balance, without any questions being asked first, and asks all residents to denunciate their neighbours. Under these conditions, I can only keep my fingers crossed for Bragg, hoping that he creates a precendence.

The difference is that Blizzard and other MMORPG publishers don't sell and never claimed to sell any digital content, other than the client software. All they charge is a minor fee for the server usage. They even prohibit sales of virtual currency and other game objects. If they offered the Flaming Spork of Vengeance for $1200 to their customers, they'd get into the same legal trouble sooner or later.

The two pages of information in question are both linked from the "own virtual land page." They are the "pricing and fees" page and the "Islands" page. Both are easy to find, and both are linked everywhere there's blurbage about owning virtual land. The TOS is linked at the bottom of every page on the site and you can go back and refer to it at any time. Whenever changes are introduced to the TOS it's put right in front of you and you are asked to accept it on your next login. Is your argument that you shouldn't have to seek out relevant information before making a purchase? In the case of buying a computer from an online retailer you're buying goods, and you would expect to receive the advertised goods, but it would still be extremely foolish not to read all the information about delivery, return policies, warranties, and so on. In the case of SL land you're buying a service, not goods, and you should be expected to inform yourself about what that service actually entails before paying for it. All the information is there in plain sight so any argument alleging false advertising or obfuscation is a bit disingenuous in my opinion.

As for the "any reason or no reason" bit in the TOS, that's a standard boilerplate CYA clause and you'll find the same thing in the terms of service or EULA of any virtual world. It has to be there because if it wasn't LL would be unable to add new rules or ban people for doing malicious things LL hadn't thought of or planned for. For example, let's say someone comes up with a new client hack or a new form of griefing and a great public outcry ensues. Without the any reason clause, if it wasn't previously spelled out explicity that that new hack or form of griefing was against the rules, LL would be unable to address it and ban the offending parties without getting sued. It only sounds onerous if you assume SL is run by power-mad dolts who'd rather make up non-sensical and arbitrary rules than to keep customers through sensible reaction to unanticipated situations. If and when LL decides to take action against landbots, it will be the "any reason or no reason" clause that allows them to do so. Without it they'd have very little power to police their own property. You have to look at it sensibly rather than at the extremes of "omg what if they decide to ban everyone with green eyes?!" or the previously mentioned "ban anyone with more than 10 sims" example. LL's intent with that clause is to keep themselves in business, not drive away all their paying customers.

The actor who played Inigo Montoya, who you quoted,

Also Played Rube Sofer in "Dead Like Me" (yellow Post-its)

And is Special Agent Jason Gideon in "Criminal Minds" (catches Serial Killers)

OMG I totally missed the Post It connection. You are good, girl.

I followed the same links that I used back when I bought my island. The link "Buy your own island today" is the eye catcher, and the first advertised promise. It leads to this page: . The only linked pages I find there:

– Island FAQ (). It's supposed to lead to the SL Wiki, as the page says, but the linked page shows "knowledge base" and what I'm finally forwarded to is "Locations for Support Information".

– Terrain file (). Previously led to a knowledge base page explaining how to download and edit a terrain file, now I end up at "Locations for Support Information" as well.

– "See note below", only applies to educational and non-profit organizations.

– "Wire Transfer Information". No use for me if I intend to pay via credit card, paypal or my account balance.

– "Go to Land Store".

That's all I can find there. I have no idea where the "Own virtual land" page is, and why I should get the idea to search for a page that I don't know of, when everything related to an island purchase seems to be outlined on the pages that LL's advertisements on island ownership lead me to.
I'm not playing dumb; I'm recapping what I clicked and read before my land purchase. In my opinion, I had read all relevant information. Besides, I thought of LL as a respectable business at that time, had no bad experiences with LL and no reason to mistrust them.

Addendum: I've just realized that the page "Locations for Support Information" is meant to be the login page to the new support portal. Didn't need to use it so far. The login is hidden at the bottom of the page, out of sight unless you scroll down. There's no hint that you need to log in and search for the name of the knowledge base page that you were supposed to be automatically forwarded to. Nothing is anywhere in plain sight, it's a total chaos.
Anyway, I read the Land FAQ ("Ongoing cost of OWNING land", "You can OWN as much land as you choose" etc., no mentioning of LL keeping ownership of the land that I supposedly own) as well as the Estate and Private Region FAQ (same here, "estate billing and OWNERSHIP", "Regions and can be PURCHASED", "If you already OWN an Estate and want to PURCHASE another" and so on, everything suggests real ownership and nothing suggests otherwise). That's what I was supposed to read before my island purchase, according to the Island advertisement page I linked above.




I know that LL rather wants to keep their customers than scamming them. But I worry about what LL might do in order to satisfy corporate customers and avoid negative press. "Sexual violence", "broadly offensive"... all that sounded as if LL might crack down on BDSM content and other... uhm... rather uncommon sextoys.
By now I rely on my SL income; I had the choice to either commit tax fraud, close my shop or give up my meager early retirement pension and register a trade. I decided for the latter, less safe but more profitable option. I guess it's understandable that I dislike the thought of LL being able to close down my business for whatever reason, no matter how much I try to adhere to their unclear rules.

Actually, if you go to the store and 'buy' a boxed software package, almost assuredly all that you have bought is a license to use that software in accordance with the terms, terms which you have no control over, of course, and increasingly the software can be disabled at the whim of the company you 'bought' it from, since everything is so network dependent. And if they -can- do it, they have the right to do it. They probably won't come into your house, though they actually can if they so choose; normally they will only insist on physical inspection in the case of corporate licenses. They can and will disable your access to the program remotely.

Anyway, none of the rights of first sale apply (particular the right of resale), and, while I think the practice is egregious, Linden Labs is hardly unique. It's an industry-wide practice to 'sell' you software that you 'own' while reserving the right to cut you off at any time. Not that what Linden is doing is exactly the same (virtual goods and network services vs. a boxed program), but, as a counterexample -- this isn't one. It is an example of something very similar to what Linden is doing. If you think you own your software, you're not paying attention.

I'm not sure where you're linking from. I'd guess from the community pages? If so, those are only open to members (who should have already read the info on the main site and in the TOS). The pages I'm talking about are linked from the front page of the SL site. There's a button that say "own virtual land." If you click it it takes you to a page with links to the two other pages I mentioned, under a section titled "Acquiring Land." Also, once you're in the body of the main site there's a link on the left side menu that also says "own virtual land" that takes you to a different page with links to those same two pages.

I can understand your concern about arbitrary banning after the "broadly offensive" thing, but it's important to remember that it was in response to pressure from government and law enforcement, not at the behest of corporate clients, and LL did the absolute minimum possible to appear to be addressing the issue without actually cracking down on anyone. The same is true with the gambling issue when it became illegal in the US. All LL did was forbid casino operators to advertise. They've stated repeatedly that they expect us to police ourselves and to comply with the laws of the jurisdictions we log in from. Those are not the actions of an intolerant and capricious dictator. Quite the contrary, actually.

Well I saw a fairly good unique weapon for sale in the online auction houses last night (a legal in game WoW clearing house for weapons, armour, and other WoW essentials) The cost was around 5,500 Gold. An approximate conversion rate from Gold into Pound Sterling is about 1,000 Gold to around £13 (say $25 US) It does vary slightly from Realm to Realm

Therefore that weapon cost in US dollars is about £70 or say $140 US (or $L38, 000 Linden Dollars) To put that into perspective that amount of gold is more or less unobtainable for most average or even dedicated social players in terms of farming in-game resources.

In short you would have to purchase Gold outside (from a web site) to do it. Blizzard does not like the practice of external gold purchase and indeed it is against the TOS. However the reality on the ground is that at a certain level it appears to be tolerated.

What I am saying is that almost every game/platform that has an in game currency appears to also have a first life economic link/value.

So I think the Bragg case will be interesting.......