Do people care about Content Creator rights?

You are comparing apples to oranges. Might as well equate having to pay tax on thoughts, as being the same as paying tax on real estate or other inventory and using that to show how protecting your real estate would be the same as protecting thoughts.

Taxes are used by a community to maintain roads and have services for a community etc. How can this be the same as one's IP property? Even if there was a "creation tax" it still would not be the same as regular ownership tax, but why would one have to pay tax on what they create, unless a portion of that money was used to enforce IP. Either way it is not the same.


Your logic here is misplaced because you are using a deductive logic process to try to support a conclusion, based on an ideology you support. You are starting with the conclusion that is really just an ideology about property and then trying to support that conclusion. To do this you are forcing a comparison between apples to oranges, because they are both fruit.

If you do not believe in personal property at all, and that is an ideology you support, then just say so, but trying to equte regular ownership of property, as defined by laws, to IP ownership, as the same, is a flawed argument.

LL would have to be practical. It's their concept that Content Creators have these property rights.

Now if this means they have to learn that going Open Source is not the way to go, afterall, then they need to face that reality as soon as possible, or fail to ever be a serious place for people to expect to create content and not have it stolen......or LL would just have to change their mind and say there in no IP in SL. But they can't have it both ways and expect content creators to be happy when they make it easy for copybotters.

As far as scanning for bot software, It only helped Warcraft, and people ended up excepting it. If Sl wishes to cater to the minority who like copybots then they cannot expect to be taken seriously for content creation, and frankly those same pro copybot people are just as active stealing all of LL's creations and setting up their own grids etc, which themselves will be copied ad infinitum. and so on and so forth. It's some kind of selfcannabalism in the long run.








First make alts limited and linked to master accounts ...then use bans and suspensions. No more alts using fake identities.

I am at times hysterical...but this is not one of those times...

I suppose you can equate it to a layman having a conversation with a group of lawyers (myself being the layman)...it can get frustrating trying to sort through the verbiage to find the true meaning or intent of the meaning of the words spoken. I understand that not all words can be taken at face value, at least not the face value that a simple layman would take then for.
No offence intended in my question...and thank you Rebecca for clarifying it for me, my apologies Kitty (and Chris)

And I do think we are getting somewhere (slowly) in an understanding of the facts and the fiction of this subject.

This is a very serious conversation that I am VERY interested in.

________________________________________________________

Also to the socializers: I meant to say SOCIALIZERS but check spell corrected me and the only word it would accept was socialist...(not the same thing) again...my apologies.

Actually I think your Spellcheck made a marxian Slip.

Comparing rape and content theft is hysterical.

I do support personal property, I do not support the concept of intellectual property. I think it is insane to try and claim ownership of an idea once it has been placed in the public view. Intellectual property is not real property and should not be treated as such.

Before my hands quit working well, I would in my spare time build jewelry and sewing boxes. Very nice inlaid wood, the edges slightly charred to give the image a look of depth. Once I sold a piece it belonged to the person who bought it. If they wanted to try and make copies, fine. Hell, if they just picked one of my boxes up and decided to make copies after looking at it, fine. I placed the design out there, let it inspire others. I know the goods I provided and the service I gave were the best, I had no fear of someone copying me. The only way that they would have stolen from me is if they had taken one of my boxes and not paid for it.

As for ideas, once a person sees something it is burned into the neurons of their brain. They now own the idea just as much as anyone else. So it is simple, if you don't want to be copied, hide your light under a basket.

People ended up accepting it because WoW has a *lot* more "lock-in" for consumers than SL does.

In WoW, every player who wasn't cheating benefitted from the scan. In SL, innocent consumers will get practically nothing out of such a scanner, but they will still have to run it. It's a bad deal for them.

actually...that comparison was on purpose...cool, calculated, and planned. The true definition of rape does go well beyond the sexual connotation it implies...

1. The unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2. Any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
3. Statutory rape.
4. An act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.
5. Archaic. The act of seizing and carrying off by force.
–verb (used with object) 6. to force to have sexual intercourse.
7. To plunder (a place); despoil.
8. To seize, take, or carry off by force.
–verb (used without object) 9. to commit rape.

(dictionary.com)

Anyway... My personal view of content thievery, I do compare it to 'plundering and pillaging' ...and I compare it to rape. Just to clarify. And that is my own personal (hysterical) point of view, of which I am entitled to have, so I respectfully stick to my guns sir even if I am wrong.

You want to hear a story of something that actually happened to me? I am willing to tell it here if you do.

is there any sex in it?

Ummmm - I've had original ideas stolen, others taking credit for my hours of hard work and creativity.

It is still no where close to rape. Sorry, bad comparison.

No need to apologize... you weren't sure how to interpret something someone said so you asked for clarification. That's perfectly fine and normal .

I suppose in this instance your definition of the word rape, and my definition may be a bit different...please read the full definition as stated in the dictionary.
Nope...just plunder and violence.

So in other words, if a pieceof music is written or a film, or piece of software, or digital object or artwork is created, then in your view, the creator has no rights.

I do not understand how you can arrive at this attitude i can only think it is influenced by the Open Source as a "relgion' people which itself does have other ideological basis.






I don't know Chris.....I think this "burned into the brain," ideology is a bit overboard on you part.

Untill some future geniuses come along to set up a better way of doing things, and we all become ONE in some cosmic bleep that would make Ayn Rand roll over in her grave, and we somehow transcend and evolve away from these primitive polarized views as seen from Capitalist, Socialist and Anarchist perspectives, we have to work with what we have. The ideology or system behind things is more dependent on how people are, rather then what system or ideology is right. It people are better then it doesnt matter what system is used. Since that is not going to change soon then we have to work with what we have and ownership is a very real thing in terms of IP.

This is all good stuff...

I must say, if I am fully equipped to combat content theft against my creations with useful information, then I can at least be prepared for when it happens, instead of going fetal.
I for one will not take it lying down...

More information please!

Based upon your usage/meaning, I'll give you the similarities. Unfortunately. even thought the word rape has all of those meanings, it has a tendency to really only have one meaning to many women and even a few men. Because of that, when I really mean pillage and/or plunder, I usually go ahead and use those words so as not to accidently minimize the meaning of the word in the eyes of those that have been raped sexually.

And I meant nothing sexual about it...My apologies for being misunderstood this time around. I will use the words Pillaged or Plundered from here on out when describing what happens to a content creator when ruthlessly violated by thieves.

I wouldn’t back down to Chris on this as I know myself well enough to know I am not hysterical, but out of respect for women, I will defer to you LittleMe...thanks for your POV.

Now let us continue the discussion...

Well it appears that SL & LL in particular have skewed (in the minds of many who dwell in the 'open source' mentality of Second Life) the reality of Intellectual Property Rights as set forth in international, as well as various national laws.

Here is an overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_property

There are REAL laws concerning Intellectual Property Rights, of which I DO support the concept...and the reality of their existence. They were never swept away in the advent of SL. SL came into being much later than these laws. SL is not (should not be) above the law, nor should it have its own laws that supersede Intellectual Property Rights laws.

Rebecca has a very valid point...and to poo poo her point smacks of ignorance of the law...
Earlier I was comparing myself to a layman having a conversation with lawyers. I think I need to withdraw that comparison until those who so eloquently brushed aside Intellectual Property Rights finally read for themselves the laws that actually exist.

The argument that Intellectual Property Rights are not enforceable is balderdash and poppycock. They are exactly the same laws for the large corporations as they are for the small time creator.

I think the "burned into your brain" issue is a bit overstated - it seems similar to what open source people call the "clean room problem". Namely, if they want to develop a piece of software to release as open source, but that's similar to an existing piece of commercial software, they have to effectively walk around with blinkers on making absolutely sure they don't even SEE anything that's related to their project because if they do, if they were charged with copyright infringiment they'd find it impossible to prove that "yes, I saw it, but I didn't copy it".

If copyright accusations became extremely draconian on SL I can see this being a problem, but not at the moment. It's certainly not an issue against copybot, really.

I think the concept of SL can have a huge draw, even more then WOW, were it to be stable and if land was on our own local machines and part of the software instead of on high priced, external server farms, where land is so expensive it leaves out the vast majority of users. I think ultimatly that land and object "ownership" can't really be called 'ownership" until what we make and our own land, is on our local harddrives, even if SL went bankrupt and the common areas/grid, connecting it all went poof.

I don't think scanning for bots would even be noticed by consumers and then if there were heavy consequences if caught botting---I would think that it would reduce these kinds of issues to almost nothing.

For SL, content creation has to be considered far more important then pleasing the handfuls of people who want to use Bots, even for non- invasive reasons or because there are very vocal, Open Source idealogues.

I even think that the concept of SL, (especially that people could make a living at it in many different, non-scammer, ways) could blow Myspace, WOW, Facebook, Youtube and just about all social networking and content creation/display websites out of the water, were it to be done in such a way that people didn't join it, just to find it so problematic to use. I think SL should forget 'free accounts"---period, especially since people use free accounts and expendable alts for the nefarious activity, with no fear of consequences.

You're missing one small detail: LL has no obligation to go out of its way to protect *your* content other than to respond to DMCAs as they are filed.

The core of your standpoint seems to be "I don't want to protect my IP, it's much easier if someone else just does that for me". It doesn't work that way: it's your IP, you're responsible for seeing to it that people respect that and take (legal) action when they don't.

If you want another entity to proactively chase down infringers and sue them for you so you don't have to worry about it then group other content creators together to form an organization similar to what the RIAA does for music although that will need to be funded.

The thing is, just because they aren't "obligated," doesn't mean that it's not to their advantage to do so from the standpoint of making SL all that it could be and to live up to their concept of IP rights for content creators.

He, like many other content creators in SL , is simply asking for stricter enforcement against content theft. You, as well as all of the other content theft apologists, continue to drive home the point that copying is impossible to stop, so therefore quit trying and just throw away the baby with the bathwater.

Why do you, and so many others, continue with the ardent and protective defense of the immoral act perpetrated by these low-life thieves, who victimize content creators by stealing their property, with your refusal to accept that there are alternate measures that can, and should be taken, to at least deter the act with stricter enforcement and a no tolerance policy against it?

The point is to look at the glass as half full, as opposed to half empty, and instead of adopting an attitude of throwing up your arms, giving up, and saying there is nothing that can be done about it, to instead be a participant in an inclusive cooperative that will put forward ideas of enforcement to minimize the act of content theft and thereby supporting the content creators of Second Life.

Or perhaps you, and the other appeasers of content thieves, can explain what you have to gain by adopting this pro-content theft disposition, instead of adopting a more proactive. pro-IP rights, disposition by forwarding ideas that would serve to minimize the problem, Ie. stricter enforcement measures, not encourage it through your lackadaisical dismissal of the act.

No one wants to hear this nothing can be done about it argument. Its a defeatist disposition.

Let's talk about solutions.

I often wonder if this would be real solution myself but who gets to decide who gets that spot?
Who runs it? Will anyone be able to do this?
And often sadly there is a lot of copying....sometimes the copying is done for educational which most Artist learn in that way, they learn from the masters.
Yet often it seems to show up in a lot of stores, often reasons in hopes of few L.
Seems like when LL talked about protections it only seemed geared towards those working with prims, which means clothing artist, texture artist and sculpty creators don't have exactly same protections where the theft is most rampant it seems.
Perhaps I am wrong but it seem like that from their last copybot post.
We don't need copybot for copying to happen.
Yet for many SL wouldn't be as fun without shopping or content creators. Less money would be spent if everyone made their own things which personally I have no problem with but a lot would have problem with that..
I make things for my friends and myself, I have pretty much given up idea of making money here but it has effected few of my friends who were stolen from and I care about them.

Accepting the fact that it's impossible to prevent doesn't mean give up, it just means that you should adjust your goal away from something unrealistic to something realistic.

If you take a measure designed to combat copying, it'll be effective for a day/week/month until someone figures out a way around it and nothing really changed at that point. Then you think of something else, a day/week/month later it's defeated again. Nothing truly changes into this scenario, you merely introduced some pauses but did nothing to ultimately prevent or even reduce copying.

I'd really love for you to show me where I defend content theft, without taking anything out of context obviously . Equating "it's impossible to prevent" with "it's alright for people to infringe" is your own paranoia talking, noone here is defending the practice.

Countering things like "LL must ban bots" also isn't advocating the practice, it's being realistic. It's not something they will ever do and you can scream and shout that they should until the end of the world, it will never happen. Your time and effort will be much better spent pushing for something that *is* realistic and that you know is within the realm of what LL will do. You have a far better chance of at least accomplishing *something* that way, even if it's only a small part of what you want.

Enforcement is also something that is a lot easier than it sounds. What should LL do when someone files a DMCA and someone counter-files? Someone just committed perjury, it's possible they both did. How would they know who to punish other than to defer both to court?

Suggesting that you need to take the real life route also isn't dismissing or defending anything, it's what every other content creator in the world has to do. Whether you like it or not, every single last digital content creator has to deal with the exact same copying concerns that content creators on SL face, but only on SL do people try to pin their own responsability onto someone else.

Once again, please show where I'm advocating content theft or stop with the childish accusations.

Constructive criticsm or providing information isn't even remotely "pro-content theft", it's actually aimed to help. A practical example of that would be the belief that "no mod" will deter copying while the practical outcome is that it frustrates customers more than it provides any real kind of protection.

Another practical example would be the often asked for "blacklist copied items and remove them from the asset server" which is a measure that only hurts consumers, not content thieves since they still have their ill-gotten L$. (I have another point here, but it can wait until someone tries to defend the suggestion as being a good one)

Anyone who is "pro-theft" is really just going to bite their tongue and not participate in this kind of discussion, because you wasting your time calling for measures or solutions that will prove to be ineffective or unrealistic benefits them.

Like what? They are already following the law AS IT IS WRITTEN. They are a service provider. By law, they have to take action when someone takes the LEGAL and BINDING steps to protect their content on said service. What else can they do that is legal for them to do?

They have already stated that use of copyright infringement tools to INFRINGE is a violation of the ToS and they will ban for it. That includes Copybots and any other piece of software used in conjunction with Second Life to do so.

What else do you want that they legally CAN provide? Hardcore DRM isn't the answer. Mainly because there is no way they CAN provide effective DRM. They would spend a great deal of time and man-hours, and for little to no net effect.



Oh, come on. Do we really have to drop to insults now? By the way, IT IS NOT "THEFT". NOWHERE in Copyright Law will you find the act of infringement referred to as "THEFT", because it isn't. Use the right term, if you're gonna try taking the righteous high road.

Copying IS impossible to stop from a technical standpoint. There is no mechanism known to prevent infringement in any significant way. Companies many times the size and revenue of Linden Lab have spent BILLIONs trying to, and have failed EVERY SINGLE TIME. Those of you who keep asking for Draconian copyright enforcement measures don't know what you are asking for. You REALLY don't.



Please... NO ONE is defending immorality or unethical behavior here by saying that there is no feasible technical prevention mechanism for infringement. I hate infringers as much as anyone here, as I am a content creator too, and have been for a long damn time. However, I realize and accept the reality of the situation. It isn't a defeatist position. I actually accept that there is a balance that has to be maintained, and that the laws, as they are today, are WAY tipped in favor of IP owners. It is a sad state of affairs when millions of dollars annually has to be spent to defend fair use. It should also be afforded the same protections as IP owners, but more often than not, those rights of the commons are constantly being encroached upon, and have to be fought for. This particular issue is tangential to the issue of content protection, but it is important for everyone on all sides of the argument to realize that there is a very delicate balance at play, and continually demanding more and more protection will eventually lead to a disastrous result.

Again, I ask, what measures should be taken that are a) feasible, and b) more than marginally effective? They already deter the act with ToS enforcement, according to the policy they set out 18 months ago when the CopyBot debacle broke. They also educate and support people filing the proper legal paperwork against infringers. Check out the recent blog entry on the subject sometime. It's pretty good.



As I have already argued in another (now deleted) thread, we ARE looking at it half-full. We're not giving up, we're using the tools that are given us to their best effect, and moving on with our lives, knowing it is the best we have, and it is good enough for us. Content creators who quit making content because they are too afraid to face the reality are the ones who are looking at it as half-empty.

It's like crime. You know it happens. You know it will always continue to happen. The best you can do is to do everything you can to avoid becoming a victim. However, if you do, you use the tools that are available to get the perpetrators punished to the fullest extent of the law, and to get just compensation for your damages. What is NOT a reasonable option is "quitting life"; running away and hiding in the basement, hiding from the perps who may never come for you. Such a waste.

I AM a content creator in Second Life. Damn, how many times do I have to say that? The Lindens are already doing as much as they reasonably can and, most importantly, they are FOLLOWING THE LAW. If you want more, you can ask, but they are under ZERO obligation to give you anything more, even if there were something effective and feasible to give!

I support ALL content creators of every kind, not just in SL. I don't download songs, movies, software, art, etc, and use it without permission or paying for it. How many people out there can claim that? Can you? That said, I am all for fair and balanced IP protections, but at the same time, I am a pragmatist when it comes to enforcement and prevention. I know what can be done; I know what works and what also has epically failed to work. I don't expect LL to go down the road to more epic fail. Why does everyone else continue to insist it beyond wanton naivety and/or ignorance of the scope of the issues?



I don't appease infringers, nor do I induce them. I report them and pursue them as appropriate, just like any good citizen should. What do I have to gain from my posture (which is not, as your monotone brush colors it, in support of infringement in ANY way, shape, or form)? Peace of mind, freedom from unreasonable worry as well as FUD. My life is lived happy that the vast majority of the people out there are not infringers, and for the few who are, they will get their tails kicked righteously if I have anything to say about it.

In your parlance, you want "proactive" to be "prevention". It just isn't going to happen. I'm sorry, but there it is. Accept it or not. Believe it or not. At the very minimum, you should really educate yourself on the topic.

I tell you what, though, if you come up with a feasible and effective means of copyright infringement prevention, PATENT THAT SUCKER! There are multi-billion dollar industries who would pay you an Ancient Dragon's hoard in return for it. I'm NOT kidding, either!



The truth often is hard for many people to accept. Doesn't make it any less the truth. It only becomes defeatist when people constantly tilt at it like a windmill and give up when they can't conquer it. It's a hard defeat, too. Ask Don Quixote.



OK. Let's... please feel free to elaborate on any feasible and effective solutions that LL (or any service provider) can implement to "prevent" copyright infringement.

I am listening. Seriously.