Second Life Sued For Allowing Sale Of Impostor Virtual Goods

If the end result is a settlement in which LL agrees to more proactive steps for detecting copying, and more responsiveness to DMCA and trademark complaints, it won't be a bad thing at all.

It's unfortunate that the open source viewer and theft of content issues are so commonly conflated. Both are legitimate issues, but their combination is a red herring. If the amount of effort that went into Cryolife, et al., instead went into cache- (or even RAM-) snooping, the same result would obtain with a closed source viewer. It happens all the time to other, completely proprietary applications. Yeah, maybe it's a little more work, but as long as there's even a small monetary incentive, there will be somebody who'll scrape the data somehow.

There's no effective technical *prevention* possible. There are, however, numerous technical measures that *could* effectively deter IP theft in SL, if combined with a will to aggressively pursue infringement. Those are long overdue, and if this lawsuit motivates Linden Research to finally spend some development effort on that, it will be worth Alderman's legal fees.

Actually if LL worked a little harder to make sure any content theft using third party clients forced the occurrence into the felony provisions of the DMCA then the person who wrote the client would also be subject to felony prosecution. People file civil lawsuits to seek relief and usually in financial form. I am more interested in the people currently writing the ripper clients being arrested and convicted and being sent to a real penitentiary than I am interested in getting a few hundred dollars in compensation. Were people to begin being arrested and have their lives destroyed permanently for this behavior they might not be so comfortable engaging in illegal activities.

The plaintiffs also complain that not only is their content being ripped, but despite informing LL, LL continue to condone and even, they argue, promote this illegal activity, by allowing the infringing content to be sold openly on XLStreet and advertised via the inworld Search functions.

Even if LL win this case, they lose, as content creators will simply see SL as a pirate's free-for-all, and turn to platforms such as Blue Mars who DO take content theft seriously and have measures in place to combat content theft.

If I was LL I would go for a negotiated settlement, take the suggestions put forward by creators for minimising content theft (there is no 100% fix), as either winning or losing this case will do them no good whatsoever.

Rock

How much money has this guy made in SL already? Tell you what, he has to be one of the top earners, not including the scammers/financial securities folks. Now he wants more?

Not sure whether it's ironic that it's a sexbed maker that's suing LL over lost profits.

Anyway, I'm totally boycotting this guy's stuff.

...

...well I WOULD be if I was buying adult stuff, anyway.

But the copybot, which had the same access to all assets including animations as the client, was not based on the open source client and came out before it.

And the open source client... that would be like suing NCSA for releasing the source to Mosaic because it let you download images from websites.

I've already come to expect a put-down of SL along with a blatant plug for Blue Mars whenever I see a post with your name on it, but the ways you word them to make it look like you're simply just another joe discussing the topic at hand can be entertaining, I'll give you that.

Copybots aren't based on the open source viewer.

Forbidding Open Source viewers AND LibSL-based clients would STILL not stop copying.

The only way to stop copying is to abandon the PC, sell Second Life as a console game only, using encrypted communications, with no user-created content.

Why is the amount of money this guy has made from his products relevant?

Are you saying that the more money people make from their creations the protection afforded them by copyright and IP laws should diminish accordingly?

And if anyone who has had their products ripped off in SL and have the temerity to complain about it, you will boycott their products?

Rock

I never really understood why everyone is always so focused on the copying aspect, since the distribution aspect is by far easier to control and regulate. If you can copy something but you can't (easily) sell it then that what's left amounts to "casual copying" which is likely too small to matter (you need access to the original for one).

Any technical measure amounts to an arms race, while simply restricting who can sell something can simply be automated while the administrative hassle of providing documentation to qualify can be handled by underpaid employees rather than costly developers.

For "big names" there's an additional perk: the stricter the rules on who can sell, the more of their competition will have to close up shop (and the bigger the barrier to entry for new competition) and the more sales they'll make as a result.

You are quite right to say that copying is very hard to prevent (but scripts and animations are still difficult to impossible to copy, judging by the zero number of tools out there that can).

However, there is still the subject of combatting copying. Copying can be diminished to acceptable limits if both detection of copying is beefed up and the punishments for copying are severe (as that housewife who was hit by a mulit-million dollar compensation order found out).

It is the anonymity of content thieves that is the achilles heel here.

Rock

Alicia made some good comments here on the new blogrums

https://blogs.secondlife.com/message/13836

I won't paste them here or I will be in trouble lol

I would think the TOSS will cover them,I do not think they had the intern wright it....
I have had alot of my products taken and copies made,resold and so on.
2 of my shop names used (with some very lil changes) and the products they sell are a knock off what i have had in my shops for a long time.
It happens,sucks but happens.
I think the cure all is no one can sell or cash out linden to RL money unless they have a account with peoples RL info on file.
you take the nameless faceless part out and it will make many think 2 twice about stealing.
There will always be lil copycats ,but to copy a idea and not the product scripting and prims them self falls under free market,that is like the maker of the first flexi skirt to say "every one stole my product and sell cheap knock offs of it" or "I made prim boots frist and every one that makes a prim boot copy me"
I agree all the venders will pay in the end for this,and I hope they do close their accounts and remove their products.
I think we can live with less sex beds and non mod clothing.......

Because he specifically mentions it in his filing as one of the principle reasons for the lawsuit maybe?




Complain? No.

I rather suspect some of the features of SL that he's complaining about were instrumental in his ability to make that money. Not because he was using the ability to upload content without having it approved by Linden Lab or the sim owner to upload other people's content, of course, but I doubt he'd have been able to get his start in There or ActiveWorlds where more effective restrictions exist.

I guess I don't understand that, Kitty. There are means of detecting copies with reasonably high accuracy. I'm not sure what measures you have in mind to "control and regulate" distribution. I could imagine that stuff being set for sale would trigger a check of provenance and copy-detection--that might make the problem more tractable. But I may be fixating on copy detection and missing your intent here.
Right, but this is both impractically leaky and hampers innovation to the point of shrinking the SL economy, changing it from an accessible content platform to just another virtual world. (On the other hand, just requiring registration of traceable RL identity for content creators does have some appeal, if it can be made practical.)
Very true, and this may be a motivation, especially for "fading stars" who are seeing their sales fall off. Of course, restricting innovation means a smaller economy as a whole: they may be able to preserve market share, but a falling tide sinks all boats.
Even that wouldn't do it. Well, it would, but not because the content was "protected"--those measures aren't sufficient to protect valuable content; it would work because the content would no longer have any value--and not because it couldn't be used in that console version of SL: it could be ported elsewhere. It would have no value because the content itself would suck.

You know, that's a really odd example, because the RIAA's policy of extraordinary punishments for trivial violations has proven almost completely ineffective in actually deterring copyright violation, because it's tremendously expensive to actually get these kinds of uncollectable judgements. Even the RIAA has admitted that.

This is not to say that I disagree with your general point, mind, but I don't think we ought to recommend LL follow the RIAA down that rathole.

I also think they could do more on the detection side, like providing support for watermarking tools.

The article says;
"Alderman has taken in more than $1 million for selling products like his virtual beds, which go for around $20 to $40, according to his lawyer, Michael Aschenbrener of KamberEdelson."
Poor thing doesn't get to swim in money, just bathe in it. How sad.

That's one of the big reasons I don't think his lawsuit has merit - it seems like bad faith to me. SL was "set up" a certain way when he joined it, and he used that setup just fine to make jillions of lindens and who knows how many real dollars off the SL platform all this time, certainly far more than the average proprietor can brag about. Now he wants to sue for money because if the setup were changed the way he wants it to be changed he'd be making even more, and he insists that LL owes him that change. Further, his lawsuit is worded such that it seems like he's claiming LL is intentionally allowing the violation of his trademark in particular because they themselves want to make money off of it, which just sounds ridiculous.

LOL Sully, I don't blame you for not posting them.. I do agree with what she said.

And regardless of how much money Stroker has made for himself. he has also made a great deal of money and exposure for SL. LL should be thankful for all he has done. His Protection should be greater if anything.

Until LL becomes "a service provider", they are going to continue to battle this tired old issue. By becoming a service provider, they will no longer be responsible for the content in the world of SL.

But LL believes that more money is to be made by trying to provide a "semi-controlled" environment.

This is one of those moments that LL really makes me scratch my head in wonder and realize that the "success" of SL has had nothing to do with LL, but everything to do with those who frequent it.

QFT and I am in total agreement here

It's been a long time coming! They've run roughshod over it's customer base for far too long! This will be a reality check for the Lab!

I foresee changes though...some good.. some bad.!





.

/me looks at the thread in the bloggums.
/me looks for reading glasses.
/me is already wearing them.



AUGH!

tl;dr

Stroker is not just saying things are copybot duplicates, but also anything made with MLP like scripts and sex animations is a "knockoff" of his product. This is going to be hard to prove. He will have beter luck going for trademark infriengement for all the places that use the term "SexGen" but he has been wailing for a year or more about how anyone can use free scripts and free animations put into free furniture and sell the product.

It is not just the pirated copies he wants taken down. He seems to want all menu driven sex beds declaired his intelectual property.

LL was an ISP. then they decided to enter the economy as a direct competitor marketing regions with content as well as a direct commission based marketplace as well.