A thought regarding the copy/transfer-thing.... what do you think?

I have been thinking a bit recently regarding the copy/no-transfer vs no-copy/transfer.

While I fully understand that it would be impossible for creators of most items (maybe with exception of some spcific high-priced ones) to release their items as full-perm, I honestly miss the possibility to, just like in RL, give (or sell) e.g. a piece of clothing away - and with most items today being copy/no-transfer, that is not possible.

Some creators provide no-copy/transfer, but not all, and in some instances it will in the future be even more impractical with no-copy than today (e.g. script limitations!)

Hence.... after thinking a bit, I have come up with an idea, that I would be willing to open a JIRA on against LL... but before doing so, I would like to ask you guys here (creators in particular), if it for some reasons would be a totally no-go for you:

> Introduction of a special permission 'master-transfer' to be used in connection with 'copy'.
> Once a 'master-transfer' item is inserted into inventory by the asset servers as part of a transfer from one inventory/asset server to another(i.e. NOT when as result of a copy/save as or anything like that), the item gets an internal 'master id-key'. The SAME key is also saved as 'secondary id-key' for the inventory item. Specifically, this procedure must include items packed inside rezz-boxes.
> On subsequent copy/unpack from rezz-box/save as, etc, operations within the same inventory, the original 'master id-key' will follow-on unchanged to the new copy, while a DIFFERENT value will be inserted as 'secondary ID-key'.

Suggested Rules:

> A 'master-transfer' where 'master id-key' does NOT match 'secondary id-key' CANNOT be transfered. i.e. it is a NO-TRANSFER item.

> If the 'master id-key' matches the 'secondary id-key' a 'master-transfer' item can be transfered, but ONLY provided there are NO items anywhere - i.e. considering local inventory as well as items no longer in inventory but rezzed anywhere in-world - having matching 'master id-key'.

In short, the system will have to veryfy that all copies created from the master have been deleted (and trash-can emptied) before permitting a transfer. If you have deleted the master, well, then you are out of luck.

A disclaimer:

I admit there can still be some loophole, but that is not the important matter at this time (unless you think it cannot technically be solved in any way). In particular, some thoughts may be required when it comes to current and future possibilities to export items. What do you think?

point being to have the usefulness of copy, and the ability to transfer without keeping a copy? yes, i'm for it.

Excellent idea. I'd be all for it. This could eliminate a lot of tedious decisions and prim tweaking if every newly rezzed prim had this as the default permission state as well.

Lindens don't want to talk about it but a few months back they added the foundation for being able to create shortcuts to inventory items (at least for clothing, body parts and objects).

If all you want is to be able to use the identical asset multiple times (ie a pair of shoes) then that should work fine with NC/T.

If you want to have multiple copies that are not identical (a hair that comes with a hairbow and a copy where you unlinked the hairbow) then you'll still need C/NT.

Cross your fingers that it'll be part of 2.0 .