Sins Committed in Second Life..Good or Bad SL PR..?

That's a bit of a stretch. The necessary paperwork was only filled just before the court paperwork, there was no effort to register anything before apparantly (going by the dates on the papers from the filing).

There's no international trademark registered for SexGen right now.

In SL, we are like a goldfish bowl whereby the Real World can send in 'scouts' looking for bad news, after all Bad News sells more papers than the good stuff.

I don't believe for one minute that there is a higher degree of 'Bad' things going on in SL, in relation to RL... it's just more accessible to see it. How many people actually would have the time/resources to troll the internet or real world looking for Bad News, when its easier to simply start a client window and look through into SL. Child pornography is far more rife in RL and even the whole of the internet, you just can't see the whole picture, unlike SL.

There is so much in the real world going on for all these various crusaders and do gooders to go tilting at windmills. That they keep looking here and in similar places is amusing.

Not much of a stretch, the dates on the paperwork you are looking at is for amendments to the existing copyright to deal with updated versioning. The original copyright filing was in March 2005.

And I don't know about worldwide trademarks...but here's what's listed on a US patents and trademarks office search. Note that it's first use date is 01/01/2005

Word Mark SEXGEN
Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Scripted animation system utilizing a defined menu to actuate avatars within a virtual world accessed through a 3-dimensional virtual platform. FIRST USE: 20050101. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20050101
Standard Characters Claimed
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Design Search Code
Serial Number 77202601
Filing Date June 11, 2007
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Owner (APPLICANT) EROS, LLC LTD LIAB CO FLORIDA 16207 September Drive Lutz FLORIDA 33549
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE


And for the OP.... I don't know if it's good or bad but we're standing by for the next tidal wave of newbies looking for their free prim c*cks

Also...how could anybody even dare to put SL under the microscope, when we have the internet in general rearing its ugly head at society? SL is a house cat compared to the wild saber toothed-internet(s).

considering the neko population I would say cat house was more appropriate .... come to think of it .. very appropriate!

This would be a good research issue for someone. Compare membership surges immediately following certain kinds of publicity.

How much does membership surge after an article such as: Second Life to bring business meetings into the future?

How much does membership surge after an article such as: Second Life a den for sex perverts?

Hypothesis: both are equally as inviting. But if I had to choose...more perverts would be interested in SL than businesses. However, the businesses (in general) are going to do more for the economy. I say in general, because I'm sure there are a lot of wealthy pervs out there buying up every sex pose and bdsm device available.

So I read Kidd's post on trademark vs. copyright... two questions... my store logo is trademarkable? That is non-written material, correct? And how about my actual clothing designs? Copyright, trademark, or neither? And would the Gimp files on my computer be the protected items, or would this refer to the clothes IN SL? Just curious on legalities.

There is one point about this case i dont believe any one has refered to and that is the original maker of the bed's contention that LL refused to process his DMCA complaint. LL's blog has on numerous occassions stated that if you believe another party has violated your copyright to your creation that the proper course is to file a DMCA with LL. If the original bed maker is to be believed, he did just that and was told 'no thanks' and directed to file an AR, or in other words, go shout down a well. If this is true is disturbing to see LL violate their own stated policies. I guess the likelihood this instance would actually ended up in RL court caused LL to not wish to get involved. That wish doesnt seem to have been granted as LL has been called to court anyway to provide the RL name and info of the second bed producer.

I'm told it's because when issued with a DMCA, LL will take down someone openly advertising or selling, but in this case the avatar doing the selling was wise to that and only sold by word of mouth directly from his inventory.

Publicity aside, whether or not this case will be good for SL depends on the outcome. This is a clear case of intellectual property theft that's seriously undermining the creator's ability to support himself through sales of his very popular and very profitable product. If he loses the case (or is unable to get it into the courts the first place) it will be very bad for SL. What serious content developer will want to invest their time creating products for a platform that provides them no legal protection that they would have in any other medium? Anyone who makes a substantial portion of their living selling original content in SL should watch this case closely.

A day or two ago there was a short segment on CNBC about this case. They had the creator's lawyer on, and another lawyer (unconnected to the case) to argue the other side. The first lawyer was well spoken and did a good job of presenting how this is no different from any other infringement case involving digital art and software code. The other lawyer was a complete blowhard who couldn't see past the surrealism of the case. He argued that since SL is a fantasy world that maybe the accused person's fantasy was to be a conterfeiter, and that should be a legitimate thing to do, because it's just fantasy after all. He went on to say that if the case goes forward it should be held in a virtual court, with a virtual judge, and a virtual jury. In short, he was a complete ass. His viewpoint, however, seems to be somewhat widespread in the press coverage of this case, and that's a very bad thing for SL content creators if the court takes the same position. (Link to video: http://www.cnbc.com/id/19713159)

SL bashing in the press and in blogs has become a sort of cottage industry lately. Most of it is uninformed and amounts to one group of nerds trying to pump themselves up by slagging on another group of nerds (us). It's foolish, but if the popular perception of SL becomes that it's nothing but a place for lonely misanthropes to have kinky pixel sex from their parent's basements, it's won't be a good thing for SL or for those who depend on it for income. It obfuscates the legitimacy of the commerce that takes place here and it may turn off businesses from wanting to set up a presence here, which in turn hurts the new media companies that have sprung up to service them, and the many SL creators they employ and subcontract. However people feel about coprorate presence here, SL desperately needs the air of legitimacy that it lends to the platform, and not having it may seriously stifle SL's growth into anything more than it is today.

It truly pisses me off that the press is too busy sensationalizing and playing up the "sleaze factor" and completely underplays the very real, very legitimate, legal claim.

I just wish the lawsuit wasn't over a sex bed but over something creative.

That sure doesn't help fight the "SL is for lonely sexual deviants" image.

/me waits patiently for the impending Age Verification Exodus...

You're being generous.

Second Life is the future of business meetings? That sounds really interesting. I'll check that out some time.

Second Life is a haven for sex perverts? I'm dropping everything right now to sign up to see this immediately.

Two weeks later:

Oh, there's that Second Life in the news again. That thing about business meetings sounds really interesting. I should check that out soon.

I wonder if Second Life has been in the news recently, I've been too busy having pixel-sex to follow the news.

3 weeks later: Another Second Life Story (Yawn). They still haven't gone too far with the business aspect I see. HEY! Is that ME they are showing having sex with a penguin?!!!!

Umm, don't bother - the TOS forbids you from getting patent protection on anything you do within SL:

Something "being copyrighted" is never at issue. If it's a creative work (original, creative, and fixed in a perceivable medium) then it automatically gets copyright protection.



It doesn't matter. It's very common for copyrights to be registered just before a lawsuit. There's nothing unusual about that. The only effect this has is with regard to what kind of damages a copyright owner can seek.



This makes zero sense. Trademarks are trademarks and copyrights are copyrights. Two different things.



Wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. It is not just about who gets the paperwork first. If you are legitimately using a distinctive term or image as a source identifier in the course of business, you have trademark rights, and they are not just eliminated like that by a subsequent registration.



Not a judge. An administrative law judge. Two different things.



In Washington, D.C.




That is not how trademark and copyright infringement litigation works. And what's this about patents? Patents are completely different from trademarks and copyrights.



You can't get a patent just by paying for one. You have to show that you have a novel, useful, and non-obvious idea. And you don't have to pay for a copyright. You get copyright protection as soon as you create something.

I think the first lawyer had no backbone. He really didn’t stick up for Second Life very well…he could have focused on the idea that many professional designers work part or full-time out of Second Life, selling their content for legitimate USD. The jerk lawyer who said the word “virtual” and “fantasy” a hundred times walked all over the other poor sap. He didn’t stand a chance.

Obviously they are both oblivious. Graphic designers create digital content all the time in the real world. Why is not a logo designed in PS and imported to SL the same thing as a logo designed in PS and printed on a letter head? Both should be in the same arena of intellectual property correct?

Yes, it didn’t help that it was a sex bed…that made the word “fantasy” a lot easier to slide off the tongue. And it makes us look like sleezy digital dwellers. But the “good” lawyer should have taken the focus off the sex bed, off the term “fantasy”, and focused on digital content creation in general. How can you say with a straight face that a logo created by a designer to be used in Second Life is any less an IP than leaving Second Life out of the equation?

It’s ludicrous. A creation is a creation. Especially if it’s being sold and making money. I don’t know…Both of those lawyers pissed me off…even the anchor guy ticked me off.

hehe, yep, I agree with you. That video really pissed me off too. At least the first lawyer recognized the legitimacy of the case (even if he's been paid to do so). That second guy just made me fume. I'm sure the only reason he was there was because he was available and willing to argue the other side (however inane his argument was). It was a worthless segment since the validity of the case shouldn't even be a question. It just gave CNBC a chance to do a segment with "sex" in the headline.

http://www.wipo.int/ipdl/en/ is where I'm looking for international trademarks.

From everything I know (which isn't much ) a trademark used on SL would have to be an international one in order to have any meaning.

I don't live in the US so I could register the SexGen mark for the exact same kind of services where I live. If a SexGen bed was sold to someone who lived here then they'd be violating my trademark (only the residence of the purchaser seems to matter) and I can sue (not relevant to the case).

So it seems the only way the accused could have been guilty for trademark infringement is if he sold copies of the bed to any US citizens, if he was smart enough to only sell to internationals he might be in the clear (for the trademark aspect of it).

Heh, I'll stick to the facts that I know Being something of an innocent in the world of trademarks I would have guessed that US trademarking would have been sufficient for products sold on a US based service, but I really don't know.

Chip Midnight. Nice to see that someone reads beyond the headlines and understands the implications of the case for both content creators and the future of SL itself. A pleasure to read your well reasoned comments.

The first attorney on the CNNBC clip is I believe a specialist Virtual world lawyer who has been involved with SL for quite some time. The one putting the opposite view did strike me as someone who had Googled SecondLife 10 minutes before the clip was recorded

I don't know either. I just remember looking into some when we had the whole forum debate about the term "realtor" .

I can't seem to find the same references I used then, but others seem to say about the same thing on national vs international trademarks:
Does a Federal registration protect me worldwide?
http://www.carrferrell.com/expertise/ip-trademarkFAQ.html#7

Can the owner of a foreign trademark make any claim against me?
http://www.chillingeffects.org/trademark/faq.cgi#QID239

And for good informative measure :
What is the difference between copyright and trademark?
What defenses are there to trademark infringement or dilution?
http://www.chillingeffects.org/trademark/faq.cgi#QID402

Ah yes but...what if the person purchasing the bed was...a citizen of Second Life....

I have to wonder, all this talk of copyright in SL.... which to this day, has large open stores selling 'DVD's' that play ingame of the latest movies even before they are off the cutting room floor.. or pictures stolen off the internet and sold as original art etc... music ripped from CD's and sold... Avatars that defy copyright and trademark laws etc.... Where do the people in SL draw the line? Where do the Lindens draw that line? Once the door is open for the likes of Time Warner to take a peek into SL, may well spell the end of some business's in SL and introduce 'policing' then followed by the patent office, licensing etc....