The RL media is on the CopyBot story

Hi,

I'm a n00b. I created an account 3 days ago. I've been in world for a total of about 3 hours. I haven't even left help island for the mainland yet.

I came to the forums to read up on community, etiquette and the like before transporting to the mainland for the first time.

When I read all the posts about copybot, I thought "Damn, I missed it, it's over already."

And if LL doesn't change their public relations approach to copybot and fix it (before the Q1 '07 release, wtf? there'll be no economy left well before then!) it will be over.

The media is already all over it. Perhaps that will wake LL up to the severity and effects of copybot.


CNET story


ZDNet story


InformationWeek story


CBC Story

Check for more stories since this post:
Google News Results

Think Dell will stick around for this? I think not.

Can you say "Showstopper?"

Can you say "Overblown to hell"?

Hi Talarus,

Overblown? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what Copybot does. I am a n00b after all.

It's hard to find a clear description of what it actually does, but from what I've been able to surmise from what I've read here and on the blog, Copybot allows the user to copy any object which has perms set to disallow copy and disallow reselling, and then turn around and sell those copies, or to release them into the wild as copyable objects, thereby making a previously non-free object completely free and copyable to anyone.

Is that not what Copybot does?

If not, please set me straight on what it actually does, because I've read that in a few threads and haven't seen it countered. (Of course, I haven't read every thread on the matter or all 900+ blog comments, so I could easily have missed a correction to that rumor.)

If that is what copybot does, please set me straight on how it won't completely destroy the economy in a matter of weeks.

Thanks!

I don't think so. Second life is different from other MMO 3d enviroments because it has the following properies.

1) "You can own land"
2) "You can create simple objects that you can sell or buy"
3) "You can greatly customise your land and avatar with those objects you can buy"
4) "You can sell and buy money for real dollars without breaking the terms of service"

The existance of an instant coping machine removes your ability to do 2, and so removes any advantage to 4 except to people who provide "services". If there is no longer profit from making content, many people will stop making it, and so that undermines 3. That just leaves a game where you can buy land. So you've killed or watered down 3 of the 4 things that made the place special.

"Ah", counters Strawman Zeta, "But the copybot only did copies of people, and deleted the textures on exiting"

I've heard nothing to suggest that the designers of the copybot couldn't make a hack to make a copy of everything you see and put it in your inventory, with full permissions, and make the hack user friendly. Clearly the have the knowledge and skills to do something pretty close.

Nice post, and welcome to Second Life.

You won't see those "headlines" on the front-page of secondlife.com.

@Talarus Luan
You should be able to see that even if there wasn't a technical solution, this is a huge PR problem for LL. LL has advertised SL as a great place to start a business, where ownership of property and products is enforced, and that content-creators have FULL CONTROL over their works.

People can argue if CopyBot can be stopped or not, but LL definitely has a problem. If they can't ensure that their DRM is enforced, all their claims about their fantastic "virtual economy" is a lie. It's like if someone cracked iTunes and now anyone could use an unauthorized client to infringe copyright and download songs from iTunes. It's a pretty big deal...

It should be noted that several of those articles are the same article. Many of those websites are owned by the same organization/subscribe to each others news feeds. So in reality you only have 3 unique stories listed.

Oops, good catch, sorry, thanks. Shall tweak.

(edit)
Actually I only found one redundancy (ZDnet/GameSpot) so I deleted the GameSpot link.

Though CNET and ZDNet are the same company, those links are to two different stories.

Let me know if I missed a redundancy there due to a passing palsy of my mind.

Dearly Darling,

Dispite the acrimony right now there are nice people in SL.

Visit the following:

The new Citizen Center
The Shelter
Second Life Support Lotto
Free Dove
and of couse, my house in Green.

Ever Yours,

Mrs. Showdog Tiger

Unique stories or not, each one reaches a different plethura of people.

If the same article is reposted on 10 sites, that are each read by 50 people... 500 people still find out about it.

Thanks Showddog. I'll put those spots on my itinerary for my first few days on the mainland!

I could scream each time I read that official Linden rumor. "Not all copying is theft". Of course it isn't - if an item has copy permission, it isn't theft! Otherwise it clearly is! So CopyBot can, aside from illegal things, also copy objects with copy permission which can be copied perfectly fine without CopyBot, and that makes it hard to decide if the tool is legal? I still fail to understand that.

This is what I have gleaned from what I have been told:

Simply put, CopyBot copies prims and prim parameters from rezzed prims by reading the properties of existing prims and then auto-rezzing new prims with the same properties in the same configuration. It copies the texture KEYS from the existing prims, but does not copy the texture ASSETS. It copies little else, other than baked textures on avatars, and can mimic another avatar as long as it is logged in (but has no way to save any avatar data, or otherwise interact with the world). It does NOT copy prim contents or prim parameters which are server-only (like the Script PIN). Anything built by CB has to be picked up by the agent used to create the build, which means logging out, then logging back in.

It comes with NO instructions, requires two simulataneous logins to operate, doesn't work on no-build land, or land which doesn't have enough available prims for the build to be made.

Now, that said, yes, it is still a problem. However, it is JUST A TOOL. By itself it is not inherently evil. In fact, the whole point why it was created was to TEST parts of the LibSL library that they were working on related to prim manipulation and rezzing. They were aware that it could be used to copy prims, but they didn't make it for that sole reason. Someone else built a copy to sell on SLX precisely to cause this turdstorm we are all enduring now.

My "overblown" comment not only referred to what is happening here in SL, but also to the notion that EVERYTHING that ends up in the mass media about SL is hyped and overblown. However, that's what the mass media thrives on.. controversy. "A MILLION AND A HALF USERS' COPYRIGHTS ARE BEING INFRINGED TODAY!" (paraphrased) the headlines read. Yeah, right. Again I am reminded why the only television I own is a BROKEN one.

All this "ZOMG!! THE END OF SL IS NIGH!!" doomsaying over this situation is completely and utterly ridiculous. News flash for those just joining us now: Copiers have been around for some time now. There are in-world copiers (Jeffrey Gomez' Prim Mirror and derivatives), SLProxy copiers, as well as cache copiers. There's been more than enough infringement going on, almost since inception, that caused enough hyperbole to be expended to launch Mt' Everest at the Moon. Yet, SL is still here and growing. More content creators than ever, people making money hand over fist. Where's all the infringement that is gonna kill SL? Where? Yeah, it is there; I have no doubt. I also have NO doubt that my stuff will be copied and sold someday. However, I am not gonna shoot my heart upon the white whale trying to kill something that I can't do ANYTHING about, except fight using my own wits, and the tools that LL and the Law provides to me. Ultimately, if EVERYONE has my stuff, and isn't willing to pay for it, then sure, I will leave, but I am not gonna quit making things. I am not gonna freaking DIE. I will move on to the next big thing that keeps me awash in cash. SL isn't the whole world, ya know.

I mean, I am willing to WAIT for the world to explode, instead of chewing my talons off worrying about it, assuming it will. I am FAR more concerned with the stupid Island price hike than CopyBot, as it puts a MUCH larger crimp into my plans than a handful of SFBs making copies of my stuff.

Talarus, regardless, it can copy prims like shoes and hair and houses and furniture with textures intact. Which can then be copied and resold.

Thanks for the reply Talurus, some good points in there.

So, in trying to unravel your first paragraph through my n00bie perspective, I'm not able to glean an answer to this question:

Does copybot strip permissions from a prim and allow the permissions to be reset to different perms? In otherwords, does it allow you to turn a non-copyable, non-sellable object into a copyable, sellable object?

If it doesn't, then I agree, the hype and sky-is-fallingism is totally out of whack.

If it does then, well, um, time will tell I guess.

Great Ralph Koster blog post on this issue (thanks Cory Edo for the link):
http://www.raphkoster.com/2006/11/15/copybot/#more-807

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=itunes+cracked&btnG=Google+Search

Uhh, yeah. Sure thing.

Yes, and?

Copying stuff not necessarily BAD (unless you didn't own it).

Reselling/giving away said copied stuff IS BAD.

CopyBot is a tool. Punish the user.

Stop worrying that everyone is going to use it for BAD.

Next?

Ok, I'm game, I'll ask a third time:

Does copybot strip permissions from a prim and allow the permissions to be reset to different perms? In otherwords, does it allow you to turn a non-copyable, non-sellable object into a copyable, sellable object?

It doesn't "strip" anything.

Like I said, it looks at existing prims, whether they be yours, or someone else's, and it rezzes new prims with the same parameters as the ones it looks at.

Effectively, it makes a "copy" which is wholly owned, with full permissions, by the account it is run under.

Technically, it is not much different than you sitting down and copying a build by hand (yes, you can do this, too!), just a lot faster, more accurate, and you get the same textures painted on it (something you don't get doing it by hand).

Still, it is a copy of someone else's work, and must be recognized and treated as such. Thus, having said copy without permission is against the ToS as well as the Law.

I knew iTunes was cracked and that's why it's a perfect example. What did Apple do?

They changed the authentication of their client to adjust. According to Linden Labs... Apple should have instead threw their hands up into the air and said, well we aren't going to "start an arms race" with people who crack our software.

What would happen if iTunes did not update their client to address the problem? Who would still sell music there? You proved my point exactly because Apple did what I want LL to do... try their best to change their client and protocol to stop illegitimate use. Inaction is not a solution, waiting till 2007 is not a solution, posting the hopeless situation on the blog is not a solution... just like Apple, Linden Labs should work their asses off to get a new version out.

Actually, if you *read* the articles, what was cracked was the DRM, not their authentication scheme. It also has been broken repeatedly. Hence, they are in a losing battle with people constantly re-breaking their DRM scheme. Sure, they keep trying, but they WANT to be in an "arms race" with people who crack their DRM, futile as it may be.

LL opted instead for a different approach. Is it gonna work? *I* don't know. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Only time will tell; I'm patient, the sky is not falling, they can have that time.

What other choice is there? Cash out and quit? Go ahead; I'm going to ride this one out.

To go literally: According to LL Apple should have said it's okay to crack Itunes if you have permission to copy the songs you choose to copy... and the Itunes users need to police themselves... If you see anyone stealing the music, please report them, and they may be banned from Itunes.

Considering the fact that Apple is dealing with this issue in the REAL world, and LL is dealing with it in a VIRTUAL world, there is a significant difference in how it COULD be handled.

As such, the analogy is fatally flawed on that one point alone.

Jesus what a fool. Yes and? Did you even bother to read what I posted before spamming this thread with your bs?

Well, Captain Obvious, you posted a single line of what everyone and their cat already knows about the subject. What was your point in posting it? DID you HAVE a POINT?

Apparently not, if that's the best you can do.

Care to try again? This time with more FEEEEEEEELING??