All the TALK drove me to want it, haw about you?

Ok... I understand he was making that point but it went further than that. He went on to argue that therefore his loss was more severe, because they get the "source code" could figure out what he is doing and someone else just gets the texture and nothing else.

This argument would be valid if a thief had any real need for the original psd file. They don't. In fact, having it baked on the prim with the copybot just makes things easier for them, they don't even have to use gli/ps to extract the texture and retexture the prim. I'm saying look at this from the perspective of your thief. They aren't stealing textures to learn what gradient you are using or how you created that fabric, they just want to resell it. This isn't really an issue of skill, photoshop can be learned and coding can be learned. But a designer relies on their originality like a scripter relies on their unique code. The person who steals your texture gets all they need, your original texture, they obviously wouldn't be stealing it if they could come up with something original themselves.

Now I will go back and give you this, because I am fair.

Someone losing their bread and butter script, and having it released on the grid, is losing more than a designer losing a single texture, that is totally true.

But it works both ways. A scripter can live off of a single script for a while. A designer cannot, they must keep producing new things to keep up with the competition.

This is why I don't like these comparisons.

Having the layers of a psd doesn't help a theif. Theives don't want to learn about layering and masking. They want to skip that part, and/or just don't know how or care. So, in my mind, you can't really assign value to that which they would not use, even if they had it in their possesion. I think that this applies to scripts too, in most cases. Someone who rips a script probably <usually> isn't doing it to learn either. He is probably <usually> doing it so that he can place it in an object and either utilise it for personal use or sell items containing it, most likely the latter. A certain central figure in all this copybot drama comes to mind, one who was endeavouring to get his hands on Grim Baby (and likely other) scripts.

It's a bit ironic being told by open source community participants and/or defenders who proclaim that scripters stand to lose more from theft, while they defend open source. The same open source community that makes tools that are capable of ripping non-scripty things. Furthermore, non-scripter content makers don't code things like GLintercept, CopyBot, and SLICE, yet they get hammered on for complaining about the fact that these programs threaten their creations, by who? Coders...

This argument about "more complete" is fairly moot at this point, because scripts are not <currently> (to the best of my knowledge) rip-able. Which is why it's a bit irritating being lectured about how scripters stand to lose more when it's not their product that is <currently> threatened. This is a central point in my original post in this thread. The one you're apparently annoyed with.

As I said in a previous post, I would be just as unhappy if and when they (scripts) were being threatened. You can take that to the bank.

Thank you Argent... spot on and in fewer words than I would manage to, as always.

Sunspot-

"I was aware that scripts were also vulnerable in those expolits, and in fact, I'd guess that was exactly why LL reacted so swiftly. They get all dreamy eyed about scripting it seems."

I think part of why I may be hammering on you particularly in this thread is because of the seperatist slant you mix into your posts.

Content is content. *ALL* content was at risk during the exploit that LL brought the grid down promptly for... not just scripts. It was LL's bug... and their responsibility to fix it.

CopyBot takes advantage of is a 'bug' in reality, and it is one that LL can not fix effectively.

As to whom was shouting louder on the blog? Who can say, that's a subjective viewpoint. To me, it looked like the people that wanted to deny reality were shouting louder... but that was just my point of view and a rather irrelevant one at that.

The guy that released CopyBot may have a personal problem with non-scripters, but I think you do wrong by your secondlife peers if you think the rest the 'coder' types feel likewise.

That slant, as you call it, does exist - you're correct, and not just for me, because there is an opposite slant on the part some coders. For me it exists because of some of the attitudes that were on display here earlier this weak by some coders. So it's reactive on my part. I came into this not having a slant, so it can be said that that slant developed as a direct result of observing some coder's behavior. I am not labeling the lot of you here, but there was enough of an attitude of superiority to make it more than noticeable. While that may not hold true for you and Argent, there was a lot of it here a couple of days ago. Perhaps my use of "dreamy eyed" was overly emphatic and dramatic, I'll grant you that, but I still stand by the rest.

That statement about who was yelling loudest came from someone arguing the coder's POV, and it was in reference to a permissions bug, not the copybot issue. She said that coder's work was more vulnerable due to the text being available. Both you and Argent have also argued that same point, and I think that it is a flawed argument. You have to assign value on what the thieves want. Again - having a psd does the thief no good. I see this as a really off-the-mark rationalisation on the part of those trying to prove that scripters have more to lose, not to mention, the current bug does not affect scripts, so I fail to see the relevance. I do not understand why that argument is being brought to bear, and this is one of the things I am talking about when I talk about slant on the part of the coder community. Although you and Argent have been far more mellow and polite about it, it's still leaking out to a small extent. And it's certainly a lot more evident in in some coders remarks here in this forum over the past few days (did you read any of those threads?), on the blog, and those irc logs we've read where prim hair and other "lowly" things are being bashed, and where there is a general attitude of "those idiots are gonna freak out about this! tee-hee!" Yes, back slappingly good humour isn't it?

Now, I've said that some of that attitude (not the irc stuff - that stuff was pre-emptive and that's what makes it more maddening) may have understandably come about as a result of frustration because of the denial of reality that was on display by a few loud and stubborn idiots. But you know what? Those are the same idiots that are ALWAYS being idiots. So I ignore them, and others would do well to do the same, else you just get into a redundant loop with them. Furthermore, their existence does not warrant the adopting of a general tone of condescension toward others who may be trying to genuinely understand, learn, or who may be disagreeing in a civil manner.

If you want to talk about denying reality, deny that there tends to be a general snobbishness on the part of coders toward non-coders (I'm talking mostly about coders who fall more towards the pure coder end of the scale here). I'm sorry, there is, and it was glaringly obvious both in this forum and on the blog earlier this week. If you disagree, that's fine, we'll just have to disagree. People disagree sometimes, and that's life. One shouldn't have to receive a "hammering" because they see things differently.

We're all stating opinions here, because we are discussing perceptions. There is no black or white, and that is why I generally try to indicate that I am stating an opinion by couching statements as I did with the one you've quoted by saying, "I'd guess".

I respectfully disagree. The movitives behind theft are many.

An idiot thief is one that's going to go around using exactly what they stole and risk getting caught.

A clever and more successful thief is going to adapt their ill gotten gains to hide their crime and then cash in on someone else's hard work.

If I were a thief, I would love to get my hands on someone's source material instead of the final result. Having it would save me, (a very moderate level photoshop guy), days of labor.

Keep in mind that a texture ripper still has to pay an upload fee. Script thieves don't. Scripts may be immune to copybot, but coders are not immune to deceptive practices that might lure them into granting a private use license to someone that seemed trustworthy.

To me, the assignment of value is entirely subjective. Thief, Creator, Buyer, Observer all have different measures of value that rarely agree.



As bluntly as I can put it... the argument came because the tone in this thread was that scripts/scriptors were getting "unfairly" preferential treatment, or were being less patient with people that didn't seem to understand the severity of the problem. I was merely trying to explain why.

Keep in mind, that I do both scripting and textures rather seriously in SL. Protecting my work, whatever the medium, is an issue of serious concern for me. My textures are more valuable to me and I lose more potential sales revenue if they become "public domain" due to theft. But if someone steals my advanced scripts what I lose is my competitive advantage. Worse? Not so bad? More valuable? Less? Who can say, it's all subjective and unmeasurable.



The only person I saw making comments like that was the person responsible for CopyBot (and perhaps his collaborator). Maybe I missed the others... I did read most of it. Sure people bash on "yet another t-shirt vendor using someone else's templates and someone else's artwork.". And some even (unfairly) lump other texture makers into the same group because they don't understand.

Scripters can be just as guilty of "slapwork" and "crapwork" as the lowlest of tee-shirt sellers. And they're mocked and ridiculed by scriptors and non-scripters as well.




Sadly... I saw several people for whose talents and intelligence I have a great deal of respect take up the "torch and pitchfork of denial". I'm not sure how many have given up on SL over this snafu... I just hope that if people quit it was because they had a clear understanding of the problem.



I will happily deny that coders have the monopoly on "general snobbishness".

You seem to be arguing both sides here. On one hand saying it's subjective, which I agree with, and on the other hand your overall tone comes across such as that losing a script has more damaging effects. This is part of why I am still here debating this, because I am trying to figure out where you actually stand overall.

On thieves, I don't think clever thieves are going to waste a lot of time on SL.

I think you did miss the "You're just a bunch of unoriginal greedy clinging to old ideas", "You have a chance here to leave behind the trappings of first life, you're so wasting that opportunity", and the general "Information wants to be free" urgings. These are philosophical positions and perhaps this is why seeing that type of rhetoric tossed around comes across as snobbish. The thing about this is that Philip has said he wants SL to be like RL, with bonuses. So it's pretty unfair to condescend philosophically to people that are drawn into the CEO's philosophy.

Well, hopefully, most of those people will probably come around. Talented people can be passionate. I was not really speaking of those types. I was more so speaking of the types that jump on nearly every single issue and use it as an excuse to bitch and moan at LL and tell them they have no idea what they are doing. They were out in force this week, and all you have to do is watch this forum and the blog regularly to figure out who they are. Those people annoy the hell out of me, and I do not pay attention to them.

No, they don't, and that is not what I said. What I am arguing is that I saw a good number react snobbishly this past week, and I see arguments like scripters have more damage done to them when losing a script as compounding that. It's a subjective value judgement and for me personally it comes across as "Content creators have no right to be upset because IF there was a bug which opened up scripts we would stand to be damaged more." That is non sequitur because it's not the coders facing the reality that a great deal of their work is not and never will be safe. It has unfortunately coloured my view a bit. Hopefully that will fade with time, and it certainly doesn't mean I am going to view every scripter with a jaded eye from this point forth.

I would add that by answering the charge that scripters are treated preferentially with "Scripters are more damaged when their product is compromised" could be perceived as an admission that they believe they should get preferential treatment.

I'll step back from this now, I've made my position clear I think by now. I've learned from both content creator and scripter alike this week, and I thank you for you part in that Jopsy, as well as your patience while entertaining my thoughts.

Lastly, please bear in mind I am neither a scripter nor content creator, I have no horse in this "race".

Definitely one of the interpretations I left wide open!

To finish that admission completely:

If scripts' natural immunity to copybot is "preferential treatment" ... then okay, yes, scripts deserve it. (but only because that immunity is both possible and effective. It has nothing to do with the 'value' of scripts. )

No one but thieves would benefit if that immunity were foolishly thrown away in the name of 'fairness'.

--
Let's have some fair preferential treatment for everyone!

hrmm.. I prefer not to get !quit im'd from COPYBOT KILLER or COPYBOT DEFEAT SCRIPT or COPYBOT I PWN YOU objects while enjoying my paid for SL.....

yea that what I'd prefer not having to mute every assmunkie script who talks to me....

Believe it or not I enjoy the company of many scripts who are not as obnoxious as the copybot prevention scripts or for that matter most of the people I meet in SL......

I've said it from day one.. stop crying... stop bitching... LIVE THE LIFE... ENJOY.. GODAMNIT!

/me shoves the good life down your frickin throats cuz someone has to do it

AFAIK copybot can't change the name of the creator, so anyone who tried this would be caught out very quickly. Any honest citizen who discovered what was on offer would check back with the original creator.

AFAIK it does the complete opposite, it doesn't preserve the name of creator. It just uses the parameters of the object being copied to create an object with identical geometry in the name of the copybot alt.

Anyone who can confirm either way?

Yes, it does. You rez the object and you are now the "creator".

Well this is all I got to say about wantin C.B.

My Thread. (short)

CopyBot is actually just RecreateBot, if it actually copied things then it would be a permissions exploit and the grid would be down.
(Texture copying aside; especially the behaviour where the LL viewer happily provides the UUID of any texture on request is still questionably an exploit to me. It may need it internally, but little reason to display the UUID on screen it as well).

I still don't really understand why the fact that the copier's name is on the "copy" is a bad thing though, it makes the entire process traceable. It rules out any "someone gave me a full permissions copy and I didn't think it was wrong to resell it" excuse. If it still had your name on it, that might be true, or it might not be true. The fact that their name is on it helps in this case.

It also makes every single copy they sell proof of their copying. If you see furniture you made in someone's house, and you check who created it and it doesn't have your name on it, you know who to go after. If it had your name on it, you'd have no idea if it was a copy, or the original thing. Sales records don't do a whole lot of good with transfer items because they could have bought it at a yard sale, or a friend gave it to them.

Or imagine that you find out, and for any reason they're on to you and take their vendor down. If everything they sold has your name on it, how are you still going to prove that they stole it when they stopped selling it? If on the other hand, their name is all over it, then there is no way for them to cover up the fact that they did it.

EXACTLY.

Therefore, unless your item is "super famous" (sic), there's nothing you could do. I doubt LL has any code in place that could differentiate between the copy and the original.

I think you can make arguments for one or the other: For someone who sold no-transfer obects only, retaining creator name would be a great way to check for copies.

It's a pretty shitty situation either way, and hopefully with some help from LL, we can minimise any damage caused by such individuals.

I still don't see it .

Not only is it more work to check sales records, if it retains your name, you don't know if you found a customer of a copier, or the copier him/herself. Someone who bought a copy of something that was stolen isn't guilty of anything (assuming they didn't know obviously).

It's easy to check transfer history, you just download the excel file each mnth and sort by avatar name in alphabetical order; it takes seconds.

As for your other point, well that's where you would have to do a little more research. If the owner of the object has a store set up, it will be pretty easy to find. At the end of the day, if it has your name as creator, you have never sold it transfer enabled, and you have no record of the owner of said object purchasing from you, you know something is amiss, that's the crucial point.

I might start a copybot-related investigation bureau

Agreed, I would MUCH prefer the copies to retain the name of the infringer. Makes it so much easier to track them down. If you could copy the original creator's name into the copy, you couldn't trace them without some sort of scripting check or aid (IE, they were missing scripts or other contents also created by the original creator).

Now, once we find out who they are in SL, that's probably about as far as it will ever go because it will probably be an unverified alt who was created solely to copy and sell said copies.

Stupid what your doing is trolling, not me. how the heck do I troll my own thread?

Well the way it's usually done, is to start with one's OP, and work out from there.

How did you get that I was trolling in my own thread and the question was ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

All the TALK drove me to want it, how about you?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With all the talk and publicity give to CopyBot here has made me want to go out and get it now, now that I know everything about it, ways around with out getting caught using it, all the talk how it works. Etc…

Thanks for all the info put out here about copybot I now know everything I would need to have and use it… be sure to post many more post of all things like this in the future so MYSELF and anyone else that had no interest in items like this before will now be informed on what we were missing out on and tempt us to go out and get it….


NOW DO YOU SEE WHAT YOU DID? if only others would use there head and not get caught up in the heat of the passion to publicize and bring to the attention or the limelight items like this in the future.