Copy Content OK unless you specify no ?

/me nods.

It's not a place I recommend to newbies . . .

Although it's not everywhere that you get the opportunity to wear a tag that proclaims you "Stepford Meat."

/me waves "Hi" back to Chris, who serves as a useful reminder to her than it is never worthwhile or valid to assume too much about or stereotype people on the basis of their belief systems.

To be honest, I've only ever seen a handful of episodes of All in the Family. It seemed like an intelligent show, but pretty badly dated now, surely?

would you like me to organise a tour for you? You've got to promise that you won't go all funny on me and I promise I'll keep you from being lightly sauteed...

I've seen you very strongly support virtual land rights. Why would you make a distinction between virtual land and virtual property?

It's tempting. But can you convince THEM that I'm not going to start rezzing self-replicating Germaine Greer bots the minute I'm allowed over the sim border?

I've always thought that Dolcet has been missing out on a major opportunity by not combining snuff and cannibalism with age play. Jonathan Swift could see the potential:

I'll be responsible for your behaviour and if you embarrass me then I'll spit you myself

I always thought Swift was an odd one but I think even the dolcett crowd know where the line is.. although it doesn't stop them on their various forums writing about preparing the fresh meat for the 18th birthday. cue the eeew! (go on, say it out loud)

EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

(You're right. That felt good. )

Because once you sell, publish or perform something, the copy belongs to who ever buys, sees or hears it.

Or does the painter claim to own the copy of his painting that now exists in my head?

Not as badly as you would think. Just change the names in the "news" and we have been arguing over the same stuff for over 50 years.

It's not the Fair Use exemption at play here, it is the Reproduction by Libraries and Archives limitiation, and they are legally allowed to make copies of any copyrighted work under the auspices of the LoC.

Specific section of the law that applies:

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#108

This is a GOOD thing, and they don't even have to notify the copyright owner, let alone ask permission or offer an "opt-out" option.

People need to rein in their knee-jerk reactions a bit and realize what really is going on here.

Do eet. I buy ticket.

(What is stepford diner?)



weer in yer head, p0wnin all ur paintins

(won't bother to insert a LOLcat since Pep isn't here to appreciate it.)

there are some things in this world that you don't need or want to know about. Trust me on this one and don't ask or go looking.

Yes boss!

/me packs Little Red Riding Hood cape and basket back into storage.

(thank you)

/me agrees . . . sort of.

I remember directing one of my more battle-hardened colleagues, someone who has done a lot of anti-violence against women activism, to a web site featuring Dolcet pics. I figured if anyone could handle it, she could.

I received a single line reply: "Jesus H. Christ!" . . .

LOL. Every time Stepford or dolcett slithers into the discussion, someone's curiosity is aroused.

Couldbe is right. Some Things Man Was Not Meant To Know.

yep. I thought I'd seen everything until I came across my first forum. After years in SL the sisterhood and I had parted company but by the time I'd finished reading the first page of posts I was ready to light the pitchfork, sharpen the torches and assemble the mob.

even now it wouldn't break my heart if they all vanished. Yet I'm ok with stepford and the other vore sims.. In the end it's all about consent.

This is pretty close to my own attitude. It IS about consent, and while I do worry about the emotional impact of this kind of thing on some of the participants, it's not my place to decide who should or shouldn't choose to engage in this kind of activity.

That said, I will continue to write and speak against this kind of thing because of what it represents and the kind of attitudes that it embodies. It's about discussion and education. The idea is not to have it banned, but to, hopefully, awaken at least a few people to the possibility that role playing something this violent and openly misogynist may not be quite as "harmless" as they think.

It's not actually that violent - certainly I would say there is less overt violence than in any of the combat sims. As for misogyny I don't think that has a place in sl. When I first found out about it I was on the extremely vocal side of unhappy and got a lot of invites for guided tours with the owners of some of the various vore themed areas. What I discovered is that SL behaves differently to the various web based forums in that a lot of the "victims" in here are male.

Certainly I have issues with "play" reinforcing bad behaviours et al but I wouldn't put the vore sims high on your list. I'd rather see an end to the combat sims first as I think they are far more damaging.

Interestingly you may remember the german guy who ate the guy he found off the internet. That's vore and it was consensual. It may have been all manner of crazy but both parties consented.

and now we've completely hijacked the thread and driven everyone else off. I suggest you start a new thread for this and we'll discuss it in there. Hopefully some of the sim owners will chip in too.

Does that law apply to creations in SL? It doesn't appear to:

(i) The rights of reproduction and distribution under this section do not apply to a musical work, a pictorial, graphic or sculptural work, or a motion picture or other audiovisual work other than an audiovisual work dealing with news, except that no such limitation shall apply with respect to rights granted by subsections (b), (c), and , or with respect to pictorial or graphic works published as illustrations, diagrams, or similar adjuncts to works of which copies are reproduced or distributed in accordance with subsections (d) and .

Copyright law. The LoC gets to archive content and put on exhibitions. They don't get carte blanche to do things like sell or give away reproductions.

Perhaps you're right, but this is the LoC, which is pretty much exempt from infringement, since every copyright holder is required to deposit a copy with the LoC in the first place, as part of the registration process (which is required if you ever take someone to court over infringement).

Anyway, it still is a GOOD thing, and they don't have to ask. They did, which is awfully nice of them.

I wouldn't suggest it, but LL does have to adhere to the stated letter of it's own terms of service, although, as noted, federal law cannot be limited by LL's ToS...

which brings up an interesting possibility that LL could be held accountable BEACUSE they are part of the effort (IF it actually violates their ToS, not the archiving, but the removal from the service)... of course in all reality they'd be held harmless by almost any judge you can find because they doing so in compliance with federal law....

the interesting thing here is that they would lose favor with their corporate clientele if such a thing even went to court or became publicized.


I would've thought that was a foregone conclussion =P

For a project like this one, it would only make sense for the partners to have a separate contract for this project, not the generic end user service terms. To do this thing properly they would need some access to the back end, especially the sim software itself, so the normal terms wouldn't be very helpful.

no, but those terms do apply to the regular users, including their expectations of service under those terms....

I have been discussing this issue with one of the two in-world contacts, and there appears to be some disconnect about opting-in or opting-out of this project. The person I talked to thought we had to opt-in, in contrast to what the notecard said. They are checking into this. They also said that this would be a "dark archive", not accessible to the general public. They also said that if they don't get permission they won't copy the objects into the archive. This doesn't seem to agree with the notecard, and the person to whom I was talking said they would discuss it with the group and provide me clarification later. When I receive it, I will post again here.