Second Life Sued For Allowing Sale Of Impostor Virtual Goods

Well, people could still build/buy stuff, and put it out for friends to use/play with; just couldn't transfer / sell it.

Unfortunately, with the way SL is designed, it is an all-or-nothing kind of deal when it comes to transferring things. If you allow transfer of objects, but not money, then the market can still be flooded with infringing content, given away as freebies (which is a large part of the problem now). Also, you can't simply stop the "buy object" process, because most vendors don't use that function. They operate via the "Pay object/avatar" process. Blocking that would mean also stopping gifts, tipjars, charity donations, etc.

People are doing a lot of blue-sky speculation about what LL might do in response. Some of the speculations involve more red tape, some might even be plausible.

But let's wait until we see what actually results before we claim the sky is falling. It might boil down to adding staff, improving policies, and improving the training of the people enforcing the policies.

At least for now, or if you're willing to be Elvis. More banks seem to be listing Linden Lab as "High Risk" and won't process payments to them.

Thanks. I agree.

We can only hope that the scope of the suit is that narrowly and specifically defined, but it's not the impression that I get.This. I touched on that in my post. It's been a few years since the SexGen (TM) products came out, and today it is about as universal a term as Kleenex is in RL. So, what has he been doing these past few years to keep that in check? That was my main curiosity in this case.No argument there. If this is strictly about trademark infringement and LL's failure to act on it when petitioned, then that's one thing. However, if this becomes an issue of overreaching one's trademark in an attempt to squash innovation and evolution by competing creators, then that's something else entirely.

As I read over the article I can't help but think bad.... Sexgen is a 3rd rate product that was big years ago and now has been replaced with better, as is Nomine ... 3 years ago both were the thing to have.. .the must haves... now no one barely mentions them... they didn't keep up with trends and the market... as far as I'm concerned this whole lawsuit is just trying to force a boost in lacking sales since to actually do the work on something new that can compete is like a real job.

I really think you're picking nits here. I don't think there's any argument that open-source software has zero to do with content piracy in SL. Open-source software is partly involved. As are Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard (and other computer manufacturers), the local electric companies, the local ISPs, the people who manufactured the network cabling... ALL have a hand in the content theft in SL.

But is is reasonable to *implicate* any of the above in content theft in SL? Absolutely not.

The tools for copying stuff in SL were around long before the client ever went open source. I keep hearing people put the blame on open source, but lets face it, it happened before that, it would of kept happening again, and nothing would of stopped it.... Just ask every other major online game that's been reverse engineered to replicate the system and allow people to play for free.... can't think of a single one this hasn't happened to.

Understood. I make the mistake of associating the two from time to time. However, I was also referring to the actual alleged direct copies of his products. His suit seems to be pulling the two issues together.If he has indeed been actively trying to stop trademark and copyright infringement and LL has been turning a blind eye and deaf ear on him, then more power to him in this suit. I just can't help believe that there is more to this than that, and that this will not end well for the rest of us.

You know, I think removing so much copied-sexgen-related stuff from the grid that they also trashed open source scripts used by non-infringing users... is something other than "turning a blind eye". Plus, again, this suit is coming out shortly AFTER Linden Labs has changed the XSL rules in Stroker's favor.

So, yeh, there's definitely more to it than meets the eye.

How about a transfer limit (10 a day?) or a transfer only to friends list to still preserve for everyone the fun of sharing

Yeppers. I fully agree with you there.

I think the RL details before starting in business as in selling product is a good idea as it gives accountability. You cannot start an anonymous RL business and expect to sell things. There is a lack of accountability in SL which I personally would like to see change, the devil is in the details of course.

Just my personal opinion though

Easily circumvented by joining and leaving friends list and by using alt "friends" to bypass transfer limits.

Nice comment tho. It is good to know people are looking for solutions rather than just complaining about problems.

Linden Lab makes a big deal of how they can follow the money, so they can see who is cashing out the money from sales of the bogus goods. So all these "need an ID to sell" ideas seem silly to me: LL already has the information they need to act against bad actors.

If you are going to get money out of SL then yes, either LL or PayPal has your info already.

We can speculate till we are blue in the face about what LL might or might not do in response to this lawsuit in terms of protecting IP rights. The only thing I am certain of is that it cannot be business as usual. SL will change. With changes there are always those that are not happy and those that are happy. Everyone will have to make up their own minds on it.

I for one will continue to create as long as I enjoy doing it and as long as I have the option to do it in SL. I will defend my IP rights as best I can.

But when things become too big a pain in the patout I will become a spectator as opposed to a participant.

LL will not comment on this lawsuit. It could be argued they cannot comment. I would not be surprised if they did little in the way of changing IP protections until this lawsuit is settled (be it out of court or in) as that could be construed as an admission of the problems. Stroker and Munch also likely will not be talking about the suit on advice of thier legal team. We won't know anything till this thing is over and done and even then it will likely have non-disclosure orders attached to it.

In the end SL will be what it will be. We have very little if anything to say in what that will be.

The past court case (Volkov Catteneo) actually stemmed from infringed copies of his content, which were acquired via permissions snafus and/or copybot-type infringement.

I am sure he would love to have / keep a monopoly on sex beds, but it isn't remotely realistic, and I think he understands that there is nothing illegal or infringing about people making their own and selling them under their own brand. The only thing he knows he can do something about, legally, is people who are directly infringing his copyrights and trademarks.



While the Lindens screw up often, they don't screw up all the time or totally. I think you're misrepresenting the situation with rampant hyperbole.



First, you can't trademark a "boat", copyright its functionality, or even the idea of a boat. No one, not even Stroker, is going to be able to make that stick. You're reaching a bit far with this argument, and it simply isn't going to happen.



I agree; there's no doubt he's made mistakes, but so has LL. He's already on the hook for his own mistakes; it is time LL was put on the hook for theirs.

Possibly beating a dead horse, but: On what grounds could Eros target other menu-driven furniture that don't copy his scripts or animations and don't infringe on his copyright? Does he claim to have a patent?

Even if he did have a patent, I'd be surprised if there's anything non-obvious about the SexGen scripts beyond prior art, as Nika mentioned in her post.

But from a quick skim of the court filing, I see no references other than copyright and trademark law, which aren't infringed by MLP, XPOSE, nPose, etc.

I don't think Stroker is making any such claim.

Well, LL claims a lot of things. Since all cashing out has to go through Paypal now, they have to get Paypal to "follow the money" to a real person. Well, actually, they don't; they only have to provide that information to the complainant, if subpoenaed. Then it is up to the complainant to extract that information from Paypal, the process by which time has taken long enough for the person to have spent the money with other online companies that accept Paypal payments to receive RL goods to then turn around and fence on eBay.

Follow the money is the mantra, but I think LL is being a bit disingenuous with the extent of their capabilities to do so, with respect to stopping the criminals.

I don't think he is, either. The language of the court filing does a lot of hand-waving around the issue of knock-offs, but in the context of trademark infringement; i.e, someone made their own design that functioned similarly and called it a SexGen.

This was an issue last year when Stroker went after Corsi Mousehold for doing that very thing.

Accountability doesn't really come into it that much because precious few content creators actually feel like protecting their IP in the real world. IMO the main benefit would come from the ability to tie/ban (if only from being able to sell/transfer inventory) people based on their actual RL identity.

Payment information also wouldn't really be the right way to go if only because prepaid cards aren't tied to a RL name as far as I know (and all those people who keep on insisting they live in a country without credit cards).

When I had to file a US tax return I had to get a copy of my birth certificate certified for international use and then take it to the US embassy for an additional certification along with my national ID. It's something anyone can do, no matter where they live, as long as they're willing to make the effort.

I don't see why the ability to sell content (or cash out for that matter) couldn't be subject to a similar requirement (with the additional requirement that the payment info name match the name on the document snail mailed to LL).

I think that transfer limits might only shuffle the problem, we will wind up with people selling "build your own foo" kits, whether they be bots or scripts, on web sites. Animations are lightly protected from that kind of thing since call by name only means you can't avoid obtaining or uploading a copy, but the rest can be referenced by UUID or recreated from raw prims.

Honestly LL is already prepping the seller program that handles all these issues the way LL wants it done. It is just a matter of when will LL release it and will the people making the decisions about who gets to be a LL approved merchant be the same people in control of the solution providers program. If so it is fail out of the gate and people will be more likely to boycott "approved merchants". LL has some hard decisions to make around their bad habit of not rotating staff so no single person or group of persons creates a fiefdom.

Oh absolutely he knows he can't achieve anything like what he wants; I was just pointing out that it was what he wants. He considers it all his. His own lawsuit makes that clear when discussing the Capalini business. The way we understand the events, public use of the freebie script was re-enabled; in his lawsuit, he says the "infringing content" is what was re-enabled. He sees no difference.



Oh I don't think anything bad about the Lindens, personally - I don't think I've ever started a single thread criticizing them or any of their products. But is the rest of the forum like that? Heck no. Day in and day out, it's always complain, complain, complain. I'm not just talking about "this is working wrong, does somebody know how to fix it or work-around?" threads, I'm talking about blatant "LL are idiots and don't know anything about how to run a virtual world and everything about the client sucks"-type slam-fests. It is these people who are of the opinion that LL can do no right. Yet so many of LL's harshest critics, both here and at other forums, are just absolutely tickled over this lawsuit, lauding it as haralding a great coming change, based on absolutely nothing at all. It's such a role-reversal that I can't help but think they've slipped off their rockers. Perhaps the idea of LL having to pay some money for a lawsuit is so incredibly wonderous to them that none of the other possible consequences really matter. There Will Be Change, and of course it can only be a good thing. No possible way it can go wrong, no siree.



Chilling effects are extra-real; that is, they're psychological responses based not so much on the reality of the situation, but on how individuals perceive the situation. Stroker has in the past aggressively pursued sellers of products that are merely similar, with mixed success. The Capalini mess was an example of success - it resulted in the widespread breaking of all manner of uninvolved items. LL eventually reversed this, over Stroker's objections - objections which would in some peoples' eyes be legitimized by the winning of this lawsuit. I'm afraid that he and others would try to use a win as a bully pulpit from which to stifle competition - and even if he doesn't, the events and facts as they add up are more than enough to create a chilling effect.



It is this lack of discernment - this "I don't care who sticks it to LL or why, just as long as somebody does!" attitude - that leads people to regard the lawsuit uncritically. This guy is among the last people I can think of that I want LL "put on a hook" by. I hope that if any judgement for the plaintiff is found, it is strickly over the matter of people dishonestly using that particular trademark and pointedly nothing else.