Avoid having to sell your scripts full perms to builder

For those who make scripts and would like to be able to sell them for bundling into products by "value-added resellers" or "OEMs", please consider voting for

http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-1654

Basically, this would give you a checkbox so you could sell an item full-perms, but the person you sold it to would have to set either no-copy of no-xfer before transferring.

This would avoid fiascos like the recent E. Capalini issue.

Please consider and vote if you agree!

Thanks
Lear

Yeah, this is something I tend to have a problem with...however, take into consideration that if the script is, in fact, full perms, it takes nothing at all to copy the info from your script into another script.

An idea I can think of that could work to fix this would be a second script that would be required and is no mod/no copy. It would search the object it's in for a script under a specific name (the one you give it because it is, in fact, your script) and would maybe do a call and respond between the full perm script. That way they cannot change the name of the script to their own name, or copy the info out of your script and into their own.

Was just a thought. Maybe someone can try it out, let me know if it works.

You can sell a script set as no-mod/copy/transfer and it can be copied and resold but you can not access the code itself. This works if there is no need to modify the code by the reseller.

This can already be done with a script. I bought a commercial lamp script which requires the object it is in to be set to NO COPY for it to work. There is also a version that requires the object be set to NO TRANSFER for it to work.

LL does not need to waste time coding this when it already exists in LSL for coders who want to do it.

Selling the script "no mod/copy/transfer" - is not entirely safe.

Nothing ever is.

I'm talking about selling scripts, not objects containing scripts.

If you are a scripter and want to sell your scripts to a builder for them to use in their products, you currently have to sell them copy/xfer and trust the builder not to release it into the wild. There is no simple scripting solution for this problem -- at least, not one that doesn't involve very complex schemes involving content delivery systems and crypto stuff.

This disincentivises scripters. Let's try to fix it.

BTW, the JIRA entry above also works for animations, sound files, and textures. Admittedly, there is no foolproof solution for textures, and animations can be copied if you're clever enough, but raising the bar is a good thing.

Current LSL supports this. You can have the script check for the creator of the object against who you sold it to. If they don't match, the script can kill itself. Along with check copy permissions etc. Scripters are just being to lazy IMHO and what a magic bullet that will cripple the servers and clients when they already have the solution at hand.

Im talking about selling scripts.

I mentioned objects because that is where the scripts go ultimately. Inside objects.

If a builder is creating something for sale - then my script solution works. A change to the SL code is not needed.

Any script can be made to work ONLY if certain permissions are checked. Therefore you can give a builder a No Mod/Copy/Transfer script because the scipt is set to work in the object ONLY if that object is set to either NO COPY or NO TRANSFER - which means you can sell the item or not and the builder has to sell her objects in accordance with the way the script will function or else it ceases to exist.

It's not safe from being copied and transferred, obviously. It's generally safe from being modified, or the text being copied in clear, to the extent that the grid can be trusted. So far, that's a pretty high hurdle for someone trying to steal scripts.

Or do you have more specific information to share?

What keeps the builder from distributing your script feely, other than their scruples? Then anyone can drop the script in any object that doesn't have full permissions. This isn't much protection.

If you sold the script to them don't they have to right to set the resell price for their creation? even free?

Oh, so I'm lazy. Well, IMHO, those who fear improvements are timid.

The SL permissions system should support value-added resellers. It doesn't. If it did, it would improve things for scripters, animators, texture makers, sound file makers, and everyone who makes products with these, and everyone who buys products made with these.

Interesting point. They would have that ability. However, they couldn't make their product completely xfer/copy. This would drastically reduce the spread of your material, and if the only purpose of their product was to distribute your product freely, it could be stopped far more easily than if your product is copy/xfer.

However, it is a good point that's worthy of consideration. Perhaps it would be better to have a true value-added model. When you create an item, you can put a distribution cost on it, per transfer or per copy. Whenever the object is transferred or copied, it debits the owner's account by the amount specified by the creator, into the creator's account.

Yeah, I doubt that would ever fly! I suspect it would be too big a burden technically. But it really would incentivize creating good content, and the creators of the most popular content would finally be appropriately rewarded. (No doubt the UI aspects alone would prevent it, unless someone could come up with a good model whereby *most* transactions avoid the need to query the owner, without creating yet another new opportunity for grief.)

Practically speaking, though, do you see someone likely to set up shops selling items whose only purpose is to give away things they'd paid for? The typical case is BIAB, which wouldn't work with the suggested change.

Keep in mind that copy/xfer items spread exponentially. Items that can only come from one source spread linearly. The proposal would have avoided the E. Capalini fiasco.

Set the script to work only if the prims of the object or linked objects belong to the creator the script was sold to.

You can set this so that a master prim is checked or so that all prims in a linkset are checked.