No transfer, no ban

If winnings from gambling are convertible ONLY to items that are no-transfer, then they are not banned under the new guidelines. This means you can no-longer make a living from gambling, but you could certainly obtain many useful/entertaining/pretty items.

The reason why the prizes at gaming stores are so cheap is because they can't be resold because they are so cheaply made. There's nothing to say that a casino owner cannot obtain a wide assortment of the most sought-after Second LIfe goods, and offer them as no-transfer prizes.

If hey can't be resold, they have no "intrinsic value," no matter how much the casino operator paid for them.

I'd agree with this statement - but does LL?

Just because something is no transfer, doesn't mean it doesn't have value. It has no resale value, but that's different.

If you expect people to pay L$ for a chance to win item X, then item X clearly has value to those people, or they wouldn't pay for a chance to win in the first place.

Well, if that were so, than Chuckee Cheese will soon be out of business

http://www.chuckecheese.com/the-experience/prizes.php

Chucky doesn't run online....

Well, what about WoW then? You pay blizzard money for the chance to win highly desirable prizes (which have resale value).

The key term is "no intrinsic value."

A ratty old picture of Grandma has value to you, but no intrinsic value unless she is famous


The latest bling bling mecha-avatar creation from some famous second life designer is of great value to the person who buys it but of no value at all to everyone else if it is no-transfer.

An item that is actually USEFUL to someone in-game, might have "intrinsic value," but those are few and far between and usually have some real world connection, like sculpty scanners or something.

It states in their terms of service - You cannot resell items, characters, accounts, gold etc to anyone or face account suspension.

Yes, I think that was the OP's whole point. It's even the title - "To transfer, no ban".

I'm well aware of that you made the statement about wow though so i covered that point.

As for value, that is a HUGE vague area as like others have said - what one item has no value to some may have value to others.

Nowhere does the blog post make that distinction. If it has value, in whatever form, it qualifies.

You're just contradicting yourself here repeatedly.

"Most sought-after Second LIfe goods" implies that it has value to a wide audience, the permissions on it don't matter one bit.

It is only of value to the person who won it. He/she/it can't resell it so it has no intrinsic value.

If it were sold as a transferable item it would have intrinsic value.

Unfortunately, this debate is academic. The real question is what LL thinks.

And what LL thinks can not be determined by a rational discussion because there is little that they do which is particularly rational. Allowing casinos to begin with was certainly not legal, but they did it anyways. Pretending the L$ has no value and running the lindex at the time? Selling L$ on the lindex?

This was all "let's try to get away with this" logic. Neither rational nor legal, just delaying the inevitable.

Rental plots are sold/rented with no transfer houses because people perceive added value to a plot that already has a house on it that they like. The fact that they don't own the house and that the actual owner of the house can't transfer it to them doesn't change that.

If someone has a no transfer sexgen and offered to rez a copy of it at people's home for L$100, they'd be rich in a day. Clearly the bed would have value to others, despite being no transfer.

If I had a unique no transfer Starax sculpture and offered to rez only a single copy of it in-world to the highest bidder, that would be of immense value to a wide number of people. Again, a no transfer item that has value to someone who doesn't own it.

No transfer does not necessarily imply valueless in any way.

No intrinsic value is not the same as valueless. What you say is true, but likely won't be on the list of prizes offered for that very reason: it is valuable despite being no-transfer.

If a House (structure ) sit on a lot of land and is not transferable the value of the home ( if not owned buy said person does not apply) rented or sold Lots of property.



First of all this doesnt make sence, Only if the maker has allowed said owner of the Sexgen bed ( but rely this is just a ASSUPTION) since they are no tranfer to start with.Makes no sence in discussion here.....next




Do you know what your refering too? Better examples are needed here........ You explain one direction in the writting above this, and then you go off explaining in a direction direction.......shakeshead wonders how you balance so well on a fence when Trying to explain things.........



If one can`t transfer objects or copy it and either sell of give away.........The valve to said person is almost ZERO. Since they can`t either give it away or rent it ( unless the are with said object to demand rent fee of said object.)

Nice piece of techical law here, but it fails to give real examples, and answers......Anyone can talk in this fashion, BUT little good comes out of it. More off you lost the topic issues that he tried to express................

Usagi

Agrees with this statement and like the idea frankly

.......as you said

Intersting possiblity.........AGREES!

Who says a SL dress has any value anyway?

I wouldnt buy one if you paid me too, but if i can play a fun game for $1l i dnot really care weather i win the dress or not.

Again, please point out where you see that distintiction in writing. It only says: "b) any real-world currency or thing of value."

I like the see the reasoning behind your thoughts really..........