CopyBot Question

just out of intrest of the ones posted here, would they agree that is a viable use for something like copybot?

is it ok to copy someones products if they have left SL, closed up shop etc etc and never plan to come back, so long as the original copyright remained thiers?

No it's still stealing, Mr Rolls, Mr Royce and Mr Woolworths are dead, but you wouldn't just take a Rolls Royce or anything from Woolworths for that reason. It's a moral decision to make, if you can't make a fundamental moral decision in SL about what is right and what is wrong, I feel sorry for the life your having or going to have in the Real World.

Please don't turn this into another Copybot argument. That horse has been beaten to death many times over. Some people do not respect the work that others have done while the majority do. Arguments presented will not change the opinions held by anyone else. If they did then this would not be the jillionth Copybot thread in the forums.

And I might add that this is entirely the wrong forum for the discussion anyways. Scripting Tips is a place for people to help others learn how to script and we take considerable pride in our contributions in that regard. Copybot is not a script.

There is a good use of copybot, or more precise, the mechanism behind copybot and that is to backup your own created objects to local drive, and be independent of LL for the security of items you created, or have the possibility to upload them onto different grids.

There are nowadays (commercially) available tools, based on the copybot mechanism (but with built in restrictions to not blatantly copy anybody elses stuff) that do just that.

Fact is, copybot is open source. Any restrictions built into it, can also simply be removed again by simply editing the source and recompiling. Should the copybot mechanism only be available for those that sell this thing (with built in restrictions) closed source? Should we nerf the possibility to make backups at all, or take your own content off the grid?

Although the 'beaten horse' argument would be valid if circumstances were the same. But with the emergence of more and more open grids, and the fact that LL still has had no intention to build a viable way to get a backup of your OWN objects in years, it's not valid anymore.

Then take the argument elsewhere. As pointed out, this is inappropriate for Scripting Tips. Now does anyone have a scripting question here?

EDIT: I guess I should qualify my remarks. I believe there are valid uses for libsl and use it myself. The latest that comes to mind are the reports of user created content that include no outside textures or scripts that have changed permissions to no-mod and the creator can not fix it. Unfortunately, no matter how logical the arguments, the subject itself will always be highly contentious with no hope of changing opinions. If someone wants to post a thread to RA then I will be glad to jump in and share my opinions also. At least until the thread has been locked because it once again had devolved to a flame war.

It would still be a violation of TOS and DCMA.

Regarding Dekka's argument, Rolls Royce and Woolworth are still companies making products. In the case of someone who left SL without passing their rights on to anyone, her analogy doesn't fit. But copying their objects would still be a violation. Furthermore, in practical terms, there's usually no foolproof way to tell that someone has left SL forever and did not pass their property on to anyone else.