No Transfer/Copy/Mod/Sell work-around
|
|
Suzi Sohmers
Registered User
Join date: 4 Oct 2006
Posts: 292
|
01-17-2007 16:36
Ziyi, this happens if you create a C/NT object and put an NC object inside it. The most restrictive permissions accumulate.
|
|
AWM Mars
Scarey Dude :¬)
Join date: 10 Apr 2004
Posts: 3,398
|
01-18-2007 07:29
<sigh> I think some are off target.. just because it is.. dosen't mean it's right!
I have been suggesting that in issolation, the trans fuction isn't always a good thing.. whether its linked or not, that can be a matter for change.. a change many may welcome.... (Puts up hand) any Lindens listening... ??
_____________________
*** Politeness is priceless when received, cost nothing to own or give, yet many cannot afford -
Why do you only see typo's AFTER you have clicked submit? **
http://www.wba-advertising.com
http://www.nex-core-mm.com
http://www.eml-entertainments.com
http://www.v-innovate.com
|
|
Learjeff Innis
musician & coder
Join date: 27 Nov 2006
Posts: 817
|
01-18-2007 07:42
To answer the original question (as it has already been answered by Eddy above):
Even if the object has no-copy/no-trans, you should be able to transfer it. Try it; have someone pay you and give it to them. If you can't give it to them, give the money back and Eddy was wrong (or my interpretation of Eddy's comment was wrong).
But based on what Eddy says, if it's no-copy/no-trans, you can still transfer it.
Jeff
|
|
Desmond Shang
Guvnah of Caledon
Join date: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 5,250
|
01-18-2007 08:03
From: Eddy Stryker Now that the client source code is released we can peer a little deeper in to the permissions issue. It seems there is a notion of fair use built in to the client, and one of the fair use clauses allows you to always transfer (but maybe not sell) an object that you only have one copy of. llpermissions.h:
// It is considered a fair use right to move or delete any object you
// own. Another fair use right is the ability to give away anything
// which you cannot copy. One way to look at that is that if you have
// a unique item, you can always give that one copy you have to
// someone else.
...
// Correct for fair use - you can never take away the right to
// move stuff you own, and you can never take away the right to
// transfer something you cannot otherwise copy.
void fixFairUse();
Interesting. This has some fairly profound implications. On the other hand, consider something like a real tattoo on your arm. Would 'fair use' imply that you could give it to a friend? (though my point has little to do with the lawfulness of trafficking in human skin) I would say that there are instances where 'no transfer' should be fair use, depending on what the item is.
_____________________
 Steampunk Victorian, Well-Mannered Caledon!
|
|
bilbo99 Emu
Garrett's No.1 fan
Join date: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 3,468
|
01-18-2007 08:35
From: Suzi Sohmers No Michi, I was suggesting the opposite. You would sell the object to the first user as NC/T so he or she could give it as a gift. It would then switch to C/NT so the recipient could use and copy it, but not sell it. I think Bilbo got it the wrong way round too. You're right Suzi, wrong way round. I must have been having a blonde moment. Thanks for the explanation Michi, I put my hand up to being guilty of stepping into a thread before truly digesting it. Surely Suzi's suggestion of a one-way conversion from NC/T to C/NT would save vendors having to differentiate? |
|
Elgyfu Wishbringer
The Pootler
Join date: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 659
|
01-18-2007 08:41
I can think of one instance where no transfer is a must - as I have found out to my cost. I have a lucky chair in my prefab store. I put it there when a friend asked me to - she and her group love going around and finding them and I thought that people winning some of my products might be a good promotion for the stores. Well, trying to be a nice person, I put the items in the chair as transfer/no copy - on the theory that if someone won something that was of no use to them, they could pass it on to a friend. Prizes range from $50 to $500 retail value. A couple of weeks ago I observered someone using a large number (26 I presume) of alts to 'milk' the lucky chair. Each alt logged on for just a few minutes, long enough to sit in the chair and get the prize, then logged out - LOGGED OUT, not just left. Each person had a 'birthdate' within a week or two of each other, was unverified and had no other information on their profile at all - except that they were all members of the same single group. Now, I know their are lots of legitimate lucky chair groups - but what are the odds of this being such a group? This is one person, I am sure of it. When I (politely) spoke to them and asked them if they were a group of alts, they said no, I asked them to tell me any other member of their group currently online then, they logged out. I removed the chair at this point, it was on the letter M - as this letter had come up a few minutes earlier too, I knew which alt to expect. Looking in search revealed that they were not online - then BINGO, they logged on and arrived in my store. Fancy that, heh. Anyway, this person now has a batch of my products, totally free, which they can resell. Luckily I caught them fairly early on (happened to check my email and spot it). I feel stupid that I had transfer items in there. Until I fill it with COPYABLE only items, my chair will remain in my inventory. So much for trying to offer a little bit of fun for folks  |
|
Learjeff Innis
musician & coder
Join date: 27 Nov 2006
Posts: 817
|
01-18-2007 08:55
For clothing or other things that a person generally uses only one of at a time, being able to convert from NC/T to C/NT would be great. In particular, I'd like to be able to buy clothing and try it, and if I don't care for it, sell it. But if I decide to keep it, copy it to make outfit folders with the same item in several folders.
For many other things, for example doors, many vendors would rather charge per item than per customer, so the guy building a mansion with 20 doors pays more than the newbie who only wants one or two.
So, I don't see a fair way of implementing Suzy's cool suggestion without making things MORE complicated.
The SL system has the merits that it allows very common kinds of license / ownership arrangements and is also really very simple. It seems complex when we try to apply it, but trust me an even simpler one would drive us totally nuts with the things it couldn't do.
If someone can come up with a simpler and more capable (flexible) system, I'd be impressed. And remember there's more than just the object involved here, this also includes prims within the object and contents of prims in the object.
|
|
Virrginia Tombola
Equestrienne
Join date: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 938
|
01-18-2007 09:09
It seems to me that the chief problem one has is the inability to give no-transfer items as gifts. Some items, such as jewelry, are so frequently given as gifts that they simply must transferable, and for the reasons discussed here, the makers then have to make them no-copy to prevent theft. This means one has to be VEEEEERRRRRYY careful when modifying said necklace to fit, which can be daunting for newbies, or just someone who is perhaps not adept at editing.
Perhaps things could be given a one time toggle? In other words, sell as trans/no-copy, no-mod. Then it can be toggled but once to become copy/mod/no-trans. I admit I have NO idea how difficult this would be--to my ears it sounds quite tricky, but I am no programmer (despite my insistence on tinkering with LSL....)
|