How They Sign Your Rights Away When You're Not There

If you create things in Second Life for sale and hope to keep intellectual property rights, if you just care about the integrity of the SL economy, read the following transcript of Zero Linden's office hour very carefully. It's about how people are willing to sign YOUR rights away so...they can make copies of their own stuff ostensibly only to "build on offline open sim without getting a million IMs" -- because "people who steal are going to steal anyway". It's about people concluding that because code *is not* law (oh, you Lindens are now recognizing this?!), there's no need to worry overly about permissions and deterrents to theft. It's about people saying that that it's "confusing" to have a mere two or three check offs added to the permissions systems on object menus (imperfect, but adequate for deterrence). It's about people *deciding this without you*. So get involved. Care about what's happening in your name, and show up at Zero Linden's office hours on Tuesdays.

It's hilarious to see that I'm invoked there as a kind of resident RIAA office -- people are so hilariously close-minded and stupid.

And it's annoying to see that the petty little vermin of Second Citizen, Joshua Nightshade, who got even that free-for-all shut down on the Internet, obnoxiously holding forth and interrupting to tell everyone why we can't have some permissions flags added now per Saijanai's JIRA -- because it's confusing, because it's Linden coding time, because this, because it's that. He even argues with his new boyfriend, Adam Zaius -- and of course, that's part of the explanation for Joshua's new-found puffing and strutting, he imagines he's Metaverse Royalty now attaching himself to the King of Open Sims, and he's fancying himself Mr. Content Creator, although he merely makes a few wacky avatars, and has freebies he doesn't put on transfer -- because he's concerned they will be stolen. Right. Instead of *really* helping newbies and letting them sell them or at least transfer them to other newbies, and not serve as loss leaders to your store, eh?

All throughout this meeting, Joshua interrupts to tell us why you *can't* do this simple idea, even though Zero Linden himself seems mainly sold on it. Rather than shutting up and at least getting the information and thinking from this Linden, and from Saijanai and Zha and others who know 100 times more than this little pipsqueak, he constantly thrusts himself into the debate with the droning point that "nobody needs this". Nobody needs *him* to be saying shit like that.

Has anyone been asked? Has anyone been informed? Have people been educated? Zero makes a glancing mention about "groups being in on the design," but hey, they'd have to have nerves of steel to a) brace the JIRA, where they will be heckled and harassed and accused of being RIAA agents or Prok sock puppets; b) have disposable time to sit around and also be jeered in office hours and try to interrupt obnoxious asstards like Nightshade.

Zero Linden claims in this office hour that there is nothing to invalidate permissions established in Second Life outside Second Life. A few of the coders, cheerleaded by Nightshade, say, oh, but all your rights have to exist in real life, go defend them there, get lost, information wants to be free otherwise.

And that's just the problem with these social Darwinists and anarcho-capitalists -- the great invention of Second Life is that it enabled people to protect copyright with code up to a point by having mechanical permission sets that more or less hold inside the virtual community, especially if coupled with DMCA takedowns and G-team actions, so that to invent things and make stuff and go into business doesn't require you bogging down in incorporation and trademarking and corporation and paying lawyers -- resources available only to the wealthy. Oh, sure, you might want to do that anyway. But the beauty of the synthetic economy of this virtual world and its micropayments is that the permissions system more or less holds, to more or less enable people to start making a living without this HUGE cost of IP protection in real life. That relies on coders not being thieving and destructive assholes, of course, and constantly telling us what you CANNOT do with these permissions, instead of stressing what you CAN do.

So Zero is actually wrong. There isn't any validation! The permissions simply don't exist in Adam's world; they don't exist in any of those open sim worlds, aren't planned, and don't figure into hippie-style utopianism, -- or rather Friedmanite anarcho-capitalism taking the form of less transparent and more rapacious behind-the-firewall PayPal transactions. So if those permissions don't exist in an interface in those worlds, how on earth can you say they are validated?! As a mere abstract philosophical principle? That's bullshit. Copyright holds in real life even if SL is a sieve, but God damn, the platform provider must make Good Faith efforts to indicate, validate, protect that IP with a permissions system, in this kind of world with enormous numbers of microtransactions. I'm sorry, but it was welded into the world to start with, it accounts for its success, and it simply must be upheld as a legacy going forward, everywhere, and not letting little creeps like Joshua Nightshade strip it out merely to make it easier for everybody to copy everything, but of course...never transfer his freebies lol!

Doesn't that sum it up?! Put everything on copy...but not transfer. Make only a tiny select guild of creators able to sell high-end content for lots of money, keep them in a frenzy changing and updating constantly, and having ranks of lawyers to defend them, and making sure that there is no wide variety and diversity of content makers. That's just what people like Chip Midnight and Cristiano Midnight, and Joshua, who of course is a later alt of someone earlier born, by his own admission, would love -- a world like the Ren Faire, where they sell to the masses, and not worry how the masses are to make a living.

It's a good thing that Saijanai's proposal was put on the JIRA to get this discussion a wider involvement, but it's not good if it leads to the same coding cabal having a vote - or rather a veto on progress made on this issue to protect IP. I marvel at how these fuckers can imagine that they can take a JIRA proposal, that all of us have contributed thinking on, and some people votes, but then vote on it inworld at a meeting, to close it or not. That extra-committee voting is absolutely unethical and it should be abolished. I'd like to understand more about this appalling system where issues are "discussed and decided to open or close by vote in office hours" -- overriding the people's votes on the JIRA itself. Anyone?

Joshua Nightshade and other copyleftists (always closing off transfer ROFL) are storming blogs and forums now with the idea that an entirely new business model must appear on the Internet, or is "inevitable" and "must be embraced". It largely features themselvse as creating um high-end content that they don't worry overly about being copied, as long as it isn't *sold*. Of course, copying erodes the very idea of copyright and makes the system more vulnerable to theft once you've desensitized people to the idea (and that's their point).

In their world, creators just keep making new stuff, or they customize, or they do consulting, and follow the Kevin Kelley "eight generatives" to Marxist glory along with the Linux users and opensource freetards. The main objective, as we've always seen on the forums: "no business but my business!". Don't have a universal system to protect all IP; make it impossible for only the most wealthy/connected/highest in demand to be able to protect *their* IP. The institutionalization of the FIC as a medieval guild. And frankly, I've heard some very jaded (at this point) creators discuss guildizing SL (which already has this to some extent) further as a solution to creator exploitation.

[13:04] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: wus that yer driking, Zero
[13:04] Zero Linden: coffee - always coffee...
[13:04] You: hello everybody
[13:04] Zero Linden: though tomorrow it'll be gin-and-tonics
[13:04] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: hehe
[13:04] Alliez Mysterio: Hi Rex
[13:04] You: hiii. we have zero. what do u know:)
[13:05] Zero Linden: ?
[13:05] Zero Linden: so - agenda topics....
[13:05] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: first time here
[13:05] You: i thought u were on vacation zero
[13:06] Zero Linden: Well - welcome to my office hours - we are here to discuss the architecture of SL, present and future
[13:06] Zero Linden: We talk on the record - as the transcript is published up to the wiki
[13:06] Zero Linden: Welcome!
[13:06] Zero Linden: I'm not quite on vacation - but just 4 hours from it....
[13:06] You: hi zero
[13:06] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: thanx
[13:06] Jillian Callahan waves hi
[13:06] Zero Linden: So, execuse me if I'm inching out the door..... :-)
[13:07] You: that is called dedication to your work:)
[13:07] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: well, just as long as that coffee cup stays a coffee cup, yer good
[13:08] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: ah, since I'm new all around, can I get an idiot's overview as to the meaning of archituecture is
[13:08] Saijanai Kuhn: I'm causing headaches for everyone with https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-1277 Request for policy clarification concerning cross-grid copying of assets
[13:09] Zero Linden: yes, saijanai, I think you are
[13:09] Zero Linden: let's put that at the top of the aagenda
[13:09] Squirrel Wood: I think I still need to vote on that one...
[13:09] j3rry Paine: argent's comments this morning are to the point
[13:10] Saijanai Kuhn: but limited
[13:10] Zha Ewry chuckles at headaches
[13:10] Dahlia Trimble wants to be able to attach metadata to assets
[13:10] Joshua Nightshade: hi everyone.
[13:10] j3rry Paine: sai and argent are pointing fingers at each other, each saying 'not enought! not enough!"
[13:10] You: hi
[13:10] You: it might have been interesting to see what would have happned if people could vote no on jira:)
[13:10] Saijanai Kuhn: well, he' not thinking in terms of overlapping trust and the other oddities we in the AWG have batted around fo r awhile
[13:11] j3rry Paine: see? lol
[13:11] Zero Linden: oy vey
[13:11] Zero Linden: okay
[13:11] j3rry Paine: that's why we love you, sai
[13:11] Zero Linden: let's get going and try to put some perspective on this
[13:12] Extreme Heslop: goodbye folks i´m going leave
[13:12] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: Bye Extreme
[13:12] You: bye extreme
[13:12] Zero Linden: So, Saijanai proposes a change that primarily signals to content creators that inspite of what this crazy AWG group is doing, the content they create today (and have created in the past)
[13:13] Dahlia Trimble: bye :)
[13:13] Zero Linden: will be limited to "Creation Grid Only [Second Life Grid]"
[13:13] Adam Zaius: Seems sane to me.
[13:13] Adam Zaius: Unless you explicitly want it transferred, default deny is the least problematic option.
[13:13] Joshua Nightshade: I have to say that Sai's proposal seems pointless to me.
[13:13] Joshua Nightshade: and is guaranteed to inspire confusion.
[13:13] Zero Linden: The change is primarily cosmetic for now because you wouldn't be able to deselect it....
[13:13] j3rry Paine: a flag is not a substitute for an unambiguous license
[13:14] Joshua Nightshade: content creators already understand that content only exists in SL and can't be transfered right now.
[13:14] Zero Linden: hold that thought j3rry
[13:14] Joshua Nightshade: why does time need to be spent configuring a flag that is meaningless when it can be spent around an actual revamp of the permissions system?
[13:14] Teravus Ousley: notecard with CC, or BSD, or GPL, or whatever 1st life license that you want... :D
[13:14] Adam Zaius: Because it's not the same amount of time required, for one.
[13:14] Adam Zaius: Adding the UI option would probably take only a few minutes.
[13:14] Saijanai Kuhn: one linter in xml file
[13:14] JB Kraft: forgive me but, is this a legal thing or tech/protocol thing we are looking toward?
[13:15] Saijanai Kuhn: maybe two-liner (well, 3)
[13:15] Zero Linden: RL - hold a sec
[13:15] Joshua Nightshade: But how many hours will be spent with screaming masses clamboring to understand why LL is suddenly allowing off-grid transportation of content?
[13:15] You: content can be transffered, with second inventory
[13:15] Adam Zaius: Well, the point is they wont.
[13:15] Squirrel Wood: A possible option that I could see being implemented is one where you can either select "this grid only" or "trusted grids" or "license based" where you operate either on a pre-defined license or make up your own.
[13:15] Joshua Nightshade: But without any education behind this people are going to be totally confused.
[13:15] Zero Linden: sorry - back
[13:15] Adam Zaius: Zero just said it LL-grid-only would be the only option.
[13:15] Dahlia Trimble: second inventory users would have know way of seeing the flag anyway
[13:15] Saijanai Kuhn: This issue is to simply clarify what *I* think is already the case: can't copy assets off-grid without explicit permissions
[13:16] Zero Linden: wait
[13:16] Dahlia Trimble: *no
[13:16] Joshua Nightshade: Second Inventory only copies content that you've created or have full permissions for.
[13:16] Saijanai Kuhn: so they would know to contact the creator directly until an active flag was put in place
[13:16] Zero Linden: So - the proposal itself is primarily cosmetic - as even if we did put in a database field to hold it - there *are* no other options for this value at present
[13:16] Joshua Nightshade: which is why it strikes me as irrelevant.
[13:16] Saijanai Kuhn: the point is, that many of us believe that you don't have permissions
[13:16] Adam Zaius: Personally, having the flag WOULD be handy to me.
[13:16] Zero Linden: If we *did* allow you to uncleck this (assuming that we did implement saving in the database)
[13:17] Zero Linden: That would be basically a signal about the shape of the permissions system in the future
[13:17] Adam Zaius: Being able to know which content I could transfer offgrid myself later when the option becomes availible.
[13:17] Saijanai Kuhn: could just be a line of text to remind people
[13:17] Dahlia Trimble thinks adding asset metadata would appease all camps
[13:17] Joshua Nightshade: Sai, my copyright to my content supercedes anything else. I have not relinquished that copyright to anyone, including LL.
[13:17] Saijanai Kuhn: Dahlia, yeah, but WHICH asset meta data and how does the asset server evaluate anything past a simple set of flags?
[13:17] Zero Linden: which, I'm pretty sure we don't want to declare without this, and other groups getting some involvement in that design
[13:17] Zero Linden: NOW
[13:17] Joshua Nightshade: I believe argent's proposal is significantly better.
[13:17] Joshua Nightshade: and isn't cosmetic.
[13:18] Adam Zaius: What's the JIRA for Argents?
[13:18] Joshua Nightshade: one second.
[13:18] Saijanai Kuhn: thin kits at the top "related to" section
[13:18] Teravus Ousley wonders how the caching mechansim will handle perms on assets directly
[13:18] j3rry Paine: and encourages *more* educaton about the relevant issue
[13:18] Joshua Nightshade: http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-701
[13:18] Dahlia Trimble: Metadata wold be specified by the creator, similar to the metadata they can add to many image file formats
[13:18] You: where can more info about argent proposal?
[13:18] Joshua Nightshade: j3rry, exactly.
[13:18] Zero Linden: If the goal is one of signaling some preservation the current permissions - let me make it clear: the open grid protocol will not invalidate or override content permissions
[13:18] Joshua Nightshade: without further information and education this is a clusterfuck waiting to explode.
[13:19] Joshua Nightshade: that's the link to argent's proposal.
[13:19] Adam Zaius: Hrrm.
[13:19] Zero Linden: If the goal is signaling - there are far better ways than adding this checkbox, functional or not
[13:19] ColonelKernel Biegeleisen: Zero, I offer you the chair
[13:19] You: ok, thank u
[13:19] Joshua Nightshade: which is to establish a field for a license.
[13:19] Saijanai Kuhn: ure, was a "for example" not the endall of possibilities
[13:19] Adam Zaius: Zero: I think we definetely need a machine-readably field where we can determine if something can be transfered off-grid, but having the ability to put in a license URL or similar would be very invaluable too.
[13:19] Adam Zaius: machine-readable(
[13:19] Adam Zaius: *
[13:19] j3rry Paine: argent's edited comment of this morning is most enlightenging
[13:19] Zero Linden: Argent's proposal is essential a click-through EULA, yes?
[13:19] Zha Ewry: I think there are a lot of long term issues lurking here, but..
[13:19] Joshua Nightshade: Zero: yes.
[13:20] Adam Zaius: Zero: looks like extra fields for copyright information.
[13:20] Zha Ewry: We clearly need to do something before we let assetsstart moving
[13:20] Joshua Nightshade: and I think adding to that an additional three checkboxes of "Second Life only" "Transfer to trusted grids" and "transfer everywhere" is the way to go.
[13:20] Saijanai Kuhn: but they already are. Had a nice chat with the Second INventory author yesterday. He's positive he's allowed to let full perms stuff move offworld
[13:20] Adam Zaius: Checkboxes are too limited.
[13:20] Zero Linden: So - I'm not going to comment on Argent's because again, I don't want to signal a direction or imply in any way that there has been a choice at LL on this BEFORE groups have had the
[13:20] Adam Zaius: They dont allow you to say "This grid, but NOT this grid".
[13:20] Zero Linden: ability to be involved in it's design
[13:21] j3rry Paine: there has been concern about the "official" stance of LL about alternative grids
[13:21] Adam Zaius: The LL grid I dont think is the be-all and end-all of grids, so doesnt deserve special protocol treatment.
[13:21] Zero Linden: I've asked Xen Linden, who has done a fair bit of content forensics in SL in the past, to join me here the first week of July for two sessions to kick off
[13:21] j3rry Paine: requests have been made to memorialize LL's attitude.
[13:21] Joshua Nightshade: Well I think as content is coming out of SL they're well within their rights to assume the responsibility of deciding who they want to give "trusted" status.
[13:21] Zero Linden: some substantive discussion on permissions in the open grid protocol
[13:21] j3rry Paine: in writing per section 4 of the TOS
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: short of a hundred checkboxes with names to "bob's grid" you're not going to satisfy everyone.
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: an umbrella catchall is better than nothing.
[13:22] Saijanai Kuhn: right, which is why I said it was a 3-stage process: cosmetic rminder, either/or copy bit, and full-blown thingie
[13:22] Zero Linden: mmmmmmm Bob's Grid..........
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: why not just a blog entry then?
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: if it's simply cosmetic?
[13:23] Zero Linden: A blog entry, I think would be better
[13:23] Joshua Nightshade: a blog entry of "Hey, don't take stuff out of SL, k?" will be just as effective.
[13:23] Zero Linden: oh
[13:23] Tree Kyomoon: /wow everyone is a cloud of steam...this is cool
[13:23] j3rry Paine: a blog entry is not a license
[13:23] Adam Zaius: Actually
[13:23] Dahlia Trimble: a blog entry would probably get alot moe exposure
[13:23] Adam Zaius: A blog entry clarifying if we can take our own stuff out of SL would be handy too.
[13:23] Zero Linden: Oh- I meant a blog entry from me about "Ground Rules for an future permission system"
[13:23] Saijanai Kuhn: I think a bit of text in the general area of hte permissions bits as a reminder wold be good too. That's why I suggested the non-editable flag
[13:23] You: why can't we have both what aregent and what sai propossed?
[13:23] Adam Zaius: There's still lingering copyright concerns over things built with prims and not brought in from outside.
[13:23] Teravus Ousley: well, ultimately, it means 'this grid or any grid'..... or 'a grid listed in a white list' or 'any grid'
[13:23] JayR Cela: hi Tree / hi Rwx / hi Zero / hi Zha :_)
[13:23] You: hi jayr
[13:24] Adam Zaius: Teravus: agreed.
[13:24] Joshua Nightshade: I just think a field right next to the permissions is going to confuse people.
[13:24] Teravus Ousley: :D
[13:24] Joshua Nightshade: both those new to SL who think that means there is a way to get content out of SL and into a new grid.
[13:24] Zero Linden: Well - the big problem with Sai's proposal is that it involves quite a burden on LL support: as it will place this front and center infront of everybody
[13:24] Zero Linden: So -
[13:24] Zero Linden: Let's consider some ground rules
[13:24] You: would a drop down box with multipple selections be better?
[13:24] Joshua Nightshade: chat lag!
[13:24] Zero Linden: 1) We cannot break the expectations of existing content
[13:25] Zero Linden: 2) But two, this new universe may make those expectations less clear than they were.....
[13:25] Alliez Mysterio: bye all
[13:26] Zero Linden: 3) Any system that OGP uses will need to support a range of approaches to digital content
[13:26] Joshua Nightshade: that's why I think greater education is key. there are people who legitimately believe that LL can stop things like glintercept and copybot and choose not to.
[13:26] Teravus Ousley: AppleDRM [13:26] Teravus Ousley: >
[13:26] Joshua Nightshade: I don't see a cosmetic field next to the permissions system as being further educational personally.
[13:26] Teravus Ousley: (sorry, had to just for amusement sake)
[13:26] Zero Linden: 4) We should not expect that code will be the "law" --- code and systems will be an assist to what people and law actually agree to
[13:27] Zero Linden: That is correct - we (AWG & LL) will not undertake to produce a system that attempts to do more than is reasonable --
[13:27] Zero Linden: for example - there is no reliable or clear way to stop things like glIntercept
[13:27] j3rry Paine: there are those who think thehy have reserved *all* their intellectual property rights in sl, when the TOS mandates that some of those rights be licensed to LL and others
[13:28] Joshua Nightshade: j3rry, exactly.
[13:28] Zero Linden: we shouldn't attempt to build systems that are broken out-the-door
[13:28] Saijanai Kuhn: the only reason to have a flag or text note is to serve as a constant reminder. If you think that unwise for some reason...
[13:28] j3rry Paine: no offense, josh
[13:28] Joshua Nightshade: well none taken, I've never thought that. :P
[13:28] Zero Linden: Sai - it is just that at present I think that would generate such a high confusion factor and high support factor that it would overwhelm any clarity it was imparting to some
[13:29] Saijanai Kuhn: OK. I see what yo umean.
[13:29] Zero Linden: That is, until we have a full story
[13:29] Zero Linden: that we can clearly point to and explain
[13:29] Joshua Nightshade: sai, I seriously am not understanding why it's necessary though. I'm trying to figure it out and I don't. I think with all the confusion about what you can and can't do, a blog entry is significantly better.
[13:29] Zero Linden: (or at least most of a story)
[13:29] Zero Linden: Another ground rule, I think, I
[13:29] Saijanai Kuhn: Joshua, I was not thinking in terms of support, but the 6x18 months rule in advertsing mention somethin 6 times in 18 months and people remember it
[13:30] Zero Linden: is 5) Do not expect code or meta data to encode fully what the agreement is - only an approximation
[13:30] Saijanai Kuhn: o if its only in one blog entry, most people won't know abou tit, even if they read the blog
[13:30] Adam Zaius: Zero: that's why we have XML -- for when we cant actually solve a problem. ;)
[13:30] Joshua Nightshade: well let's give everyone a link six times in 18 months.
[13:30] Adam Zaius ducks.
[13:30] You: i think that what sai is propossing could be used as an intermediate step to argent proposal
[13:31] Tree Kyomoon: heh heh
[13:31] Dahlia Trimble: metadata could hold a reference to a notecard or a license agreement, or even a synopsis
[13:31] Zero Linden: Sees XML meta data about digital rights that exceeds the length of the digital object under concern
[13:31] Tree Kyomoon: some problems are not for solving
[13:31] Joshua Nightshade: haha.
[13:31] Zero Linden: !
[13:31] Dahlia Trimble: many modern image formats have implemented metadata
[13:31] Zero Linden: Ultimately - total flexibility is both good and bad ----
[13:32] Tree Kyomoon: exactly...you want to write a tune? fill out form 37b, 43a and 56b in triplicate and file the metadata with the RIAA
[13:32] Zero Linden: Personally, the state of click-through-EULAs is so bad (they are all different and long and legal-ese) that I can't read them ....
[13:32] Zero Linden: I just click away and assume some normal social convention
[13:32] Joshua Nightshade: I actually include a simple notecard with my products that establishes my intended EULA.
[13:33] Zero Linden: Open Source understood this starting about 10 years ago
[13:33] Zero Linden: and has coallesced around a small number of licenses
[13:33] Zero Linden: and even there, mostly just two
[13:33] You: the existing TOS has a similar problem:)
[13:33] Joshua Nightshade: <3
[13:33] Jamest Barnett: :)
[13:33] Zero Linden: CC understood this and has, over time, reduced it's license set to something small, clear, understandable
[13:33] Zero Linden: SO
[13:33] j3rry Paine: many comments in jira 1277 suggest clarification of the tos
[13:34] Saijanai Kuhn: don't even look at 1272
[13:34] Saijanai Kuhn: or you can, just for a giggle
[13:34] Joshua Nightshade: heh.
[13:34] Zero Linden: I think LL recognizes that once there is a design for a permission system that handles OGP, there will need to be a TOS change
[13:34] Dahlia Trimble: most modern content creation software packages have chosen the metadata route
[13:34] Saijanai Kuhn: this was meant to handle the external application copying, which is happening now
[13:36] Joshua Nightshade: I use Second Inventory to copy my products into an offline opensim where I can build without getting a million IMs. and quite frankly I'm going to continue to do that regardless of what LL's ToS tells me. the people who are stealing stuff will continue to steal stuff irrespective of a constant reminder.
[13:36] Zero Linden: Dahlia - actually, I'd say only modern content creation software intended for creating large works with a history of complex arrangements
[13:36] Saijanai Kuhn: stage 1 and 2 are meant for external applications that is
[13:36] Saijanai Kuhn: stage three is OGP territory
[13:36] Zero Linden: for example, my text editor, my image editor don't have such
[13:36] Dahlia Trimble: or differing license requiremnts
[13:36] Dahlia Trimble: photoshop has it
[13:36] j3rry Paine: by "this" do you mean 1277 suggesting a flag to address theambiguity of the TOS?
[13:36] Teravus Ousley: I dunno if the urgency is necessary.. given the state of affairs have not changed..
[13:36] Saijanai Kuhn: Joshua, I dobut anyone is going to ojbect about an OPenSIm that only you know about
[13:37] Zero Linden: really - only software has such a mess
[13:37] Joshua Nightshade: if the creator of SI feels that full perm objects are free to take out of SL I think that's an issue that merits clarification on the intended points by LL.
[13:37] Joshua Nightshade: another checkbox that's just dropped into the UI doesn't clarify anything for me.
[13:37] Saijanai Kuhn: its republishing assets in a publicly available sim that is the issue, for me
[13:38] Joshua Nightshade: and further as it will apply to content I've created, that checkbox suddenly seems to purport that if I take my content out of SL I'm violating the ToS.
[13:38] Zero Linden: So - here's an example of point number 2:
[13:38] Joshua Nightshade: that's why I have a problem with it.
[13:38] Zero Linden: Will it be reasonable to assume that objects marked full perm *can* be taken out of SL's regions and rez'd in other region domains?
[13:38] Zero Linden: "Full perms" was concieved in a world with only LL servers
[13:38] Dahlia Trimble: I've heard some arguments against it
[13:39] You: joshua, nobody can stop u from taking the things u made to whatever grid u like
[13:39] Joshua Nightshade: I think most content creators realize when they make something full perm it's going to end up in a business in a box within the hour.
[13:39] Saijanai Kuhn: I've run into several content creators who insist not
[13:39] Zero Linden: I think if you polled the intent of creators that used "Full Perms" you'd get a variety of responses
[13:39] Joshua Nightshade: I think so as well.
[13:39] Zero Linden: Ultimately, with the guidance of the community as a whole, we're going to have to make a call on that - it *is* going to not match some people's ideas
[13:40] Teravus Ousley: yes, you would.. I've always considered that when I set my builds full perms.. I don't really care what people do with it.
[13:40] Joshua Nightshade: I don't have a problem with it either personally.
[13:40] Joshua Nightshade: but I wouldn't object to a checkbox stipulating that something can be full perm but can't come out of SL.
[13:40] Dahlia Trimble: texture creators feel compelled to use full perms
[13:40] Zero Linden: So - I'm under no illusion that this is going to be easy - even such cases will cause concern
[13:41] Teravus Ousley: Yes, that is the sticky one Dahlia
[13:41] Saijanai Kuhn: some content crators consider "full perms" to be loss leaders for advertising purposes.
[13:41] Zero Linden: Exactly - which brings me to another point
[13:41] Joshua Nightshade: well even my freebies are sold only copy, because otherwise the content will be stolen.
[13:41] Zero Linden: A problem with thinking about the permission bits as an embodyiment of the "law of agreement" or "license" is that they are tied up with
[13:42] Joshua Nightshade: yes I mentioned that in sai's jira issue, that as far as copyright law is concerned "full perm" is meaningless.
[13:42] Zero Linden: how the mechanics of the software work - they are there to help the software abide by the intent - but they can't always get it right
[13:42] Joshua Nightshade: and everyone has a different idea of what it means.
[13:42] JayR Cela: transfering things from one grid to anothe / will have to be not only seamless / but we should not have to worry about mindless DCMA issues as well
[13:42] Zero Linden: and as such, sometimes things have permissions set on them due to how the system interacts with them, not by what the creator intended
[13:42] Joshua Nightshade: the lack of clarification on that is why people justify freebie reselling.
[13:43] JayR Cela: who is running this fricking show / anyways the RIAA ?
[13:43] Dahlia Trimble: lol
[13:43] Zero Linden: For example - I'm pretty sure that most clothese are set copy-no-transfer because of the way people like to organize outfits and the system requirement that to be in more than outfit you need copy
[13:43] Teravus Ousley: Prok
[13:43] Jamest Barnett: Good point- SL permissions are closer to file permissions than any license
[13:43] JayR Cela: look at what a mess they maid of the music industry
[13:44] Zero Linden: yet - I"m pretty sure that people would prefer to sell clothes no-copy-transfer, if users could put them in several outfits
[13:44] Teravus Ousley shrugs and thinks this is a great and important discussion though.
[13:44] Zero Linden: Right -and I hold that any protocol and standardize data is going to be closer to the system mechacnics than the inteded license...
[13:44] Jamest Barnett: Probably
[13:45] Zha Ewry: The balance act, is to make the basics to happen in markup
[13:45] Zero Linden: we should endevour to make such close to the classes of intended license we expect -
[13:45] Zero Linden: but recongize the limits of what we can do
[13:45] You: the problem is that people are not only making multiple copies of things, but they also sell those copies
[13:46] JayR Cela: Rex does have a valid point
[13:46] Zero Linden: Imagine a software distribution system who's business logic understood that software has of three kinds of license: GNUish / BSDish / Proprietary
[13:46] Saijanai Kuhn: the second stage was meant to be a simple either/or simply for the copying programs to deal with since I would expect LL to have a permissions system in place before the meta-grid went live
[13:46] Teravus Ousley: I don't know.. if i set something full perms, I really didn't care if they sold it after they got it for free or not.
[13:46] Zero Linden: the system could handle the software according to those general classes of license -- but really, in the end, each may have their own varient
[13:47] Zero Linden: there is a balance between making the system be comprehendable and workable in a practical way for most users, and having as much detailed expression as creators can think of
[13:47] Tree Kyomoon is anti copyright...he thinks DRM and copyright will die anyway though because evolution doesnt support that mentality
[13:47] JB Kraft: should the clarification then not be in the hands of the creator rather then the grid? i can choose the licence for my code with a single line of text for instance but the internet does not police that for me.
[13:47] Saijanai Kuhn: not to mention automatable for the asset server
[13:48] Saijanai Kuhn: only the most simple cases will be handled by the austomatic distributions system inherent in teh Agent Domain permissions
[13:48] Teravus Ousley gave you Hatching Egg 29 Prim Final - Big SUPER BETA.
[13:48] Zero Linden: well - yes and no, JB - to recast the ballance (the tension) --- if the system is open ended- "here's the one-line ref to the license you are agreeing to"
[13:49] Zero Linden: then real people won't read them, and there will be little adherence to the specifics
[13:49] JayR Cela: look / folks / WAKE UP !! / you never going to be able to keep people from copyimg things / OR CRACKING Software
[13:49] JayR Cela: is not going to happen
[13:49] Saijanai Kuhn: JayR, this is meant for pople who enjoy playing by the rules
[13:50] Saijanai Kuhn: you gotta be clar what the rules actually are
[13:50] Zero Linden: But - if the system embodies too restrictive a set of options, we shut the system out from classes of content creators
[13:50] Zero Linden: SO
[13:50] Zero Linden: the key is to find the balance between these, and create a system which mostly helps people do the right thing - and allows a wide-enough variation in approach
[13:51] JayR Cela: SAI / I allways play by the rules / but there is a segment of the population that does not / GET THAT THRU YOUR HEAD !!!
[13:51] JB Kraft: i tend to agree jayr, therefore the ability to clarify (meta) leaves one with some legal recourse, which is where this lies really, imho and marking an object 666 or 777 is reasonable
[13:51] Saijanai Kuhn: I know JayR, but at least we can post the rules so they can't claim ignorance
[13:51] Zero Linden: To the edge-case views I say that the protocol needs to enable all kinds of domains
[13:52] Zero Linden: I'm neither going to "side" with the "all digital rights are a sham" group or the "the system must enforce my license desires 100%"
[13:52] Zero Linden: side
[13:52] Jamest Barnett: I think that's the balance Zero's talking about JayR- guide most people to do the right thing without getting in the way
[13:53] JayR Cela: there will allways be someone out there that will crack the code
[13:53] Zero Linden: When goods, digital or otherwise, change hands, there are legal and social licenses that govern the transfer
[13:53] Joshua Nightshade: I don't really know if this is quite the place for that discussion.
[13:54] JB Kraft: jayr, that does not mean you should leave the locks off however
[13:54] Jamest Barnett: Yep, and there will always be people who break the law (and sometimes that's the right thing to do) but we still have them
[13:54] Tree Kyomoon: You cant fight nature
[13:54] Zero Linden: digitally, our goal is to help oil that transaction so it goes smoothly for both parties
[13:54] Jamest Barnett: Think of all the lawyers out of work otherwise :)
[13:54] Dahlia Trimble: lol
[13:54] JayR Cela: it is a fact of our digital life and living here within a Virtual World
[13:54] Tree Kyomoon: as long as theres an option to make your stuff freely distributable and copyable, then Im all for it
[13:55] Zero Linden suspects that quote is going to escpae this limited venue.... :-)
[13:55] You: talking about locks, why aren't things encrypted? even if it possible to crack it, still it will act as a detterent
[13:55] Dahlia Trimble doesnt see many free information advocates posting their credit card details for the general public to see
[13:55] JayR Cela: some folks are crooks
[13:55] JayR Cela: how do you track them down ?????
[13:55] JayR Cela: answer that
[13:55] Tree Kyomoon: the lars ulrichs of the world can lock their stuff down while the radio heads give it away and we'll see which one ends up winning in the end
[13:56] Zero Linden: again - not really our (AWG) provence to guess
[13:56] Joshua Nightshade: JayR seriously I think that's dilluting/confusing this talk.
[13:56] JayR Cela: or punnish them ????
[13:56] JayR Cela: ok i shut up
[13:56] Zero Linden: okay -
[13:56] You: it depends on many things tree
[13:57] Zero Linden: I'll be gone all next week
[13:57] Zero Linden: THAT was a good prelude
[13:57] Teravus Ousley: hehe
[13:57] Zero Linden: the the week after, hopefully back with Xan for a first round of technical discussion of possible designs
[13:57] Zero Linden: thanks all for coming
[13:57] Dahlia Trimble: the mice will have free reign in Zero's absence ;)
[13:57] JB Kraft: enjoy your g&t's zero ;)
[13:57] You: have fun zero.
[13:57] Jamest Barnett: Have a good break
[13:57] Saijanai Kuhn: Thanks Zero
[13:57] Teravus Ousley: yes, have fun
[13:57] Joshua Nightshade: so did we come to a decision on sai's jira proposal? heh.
[13:57] JayR Cela: byee Zero :_)
[13:57] Zero Linden: Tree - thanks for posting the transcript
[13:57] Zero Linden: (s)
[13:57] Dahlia Trimble: have a great vacation Zero :)
[13:58] Zero Linden: later all
[13:58] Tree Kyomoon: can someone pass me the log if you were here for the entire time?
[13:58] Saijanai Kuhn: taken internall for consideration, I would think?
[13:58] Whump Linden: Tree, I'll paste to a notecard and drop it on you.
[13:58] Tree Kyomoon: thanks!

Comments

[Prokofy Neva]

Now Saijanai has moved his JIRA to a new proposal, not sure why:

https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/MISC-1277

[Maklin Deckard]

Put me down as a small-time content creator that does NOT want his items taken to other grids. Why?

1) I dislike open source and its lack of creativity...create a NEW virtual world / client -naw, that's work coming up with ideas...lets reverse engineer SL!

2) I see no advantage to selling multi-grid items, unlike what some OS fanatic say. I sell an open-grid item, it gets taken over, loses permissions, then ported back...great, a one time (and I mean one time) sale of that item.

3) I am not going to make it easier for thieves, and the geek mindset that drives open-grid has an overabundance of 'Information wants to be free' thieves.

4) The only types I see greatly supporting opengrid are Corps seeking free labor for the next big thing (cough, IBM, cough), types best gone from SL (financial schemers, ageplayers, etc), and content thieves (the out to make a quick buck reselling and the Info wants to be free types).

So I won't be making grid-enabled versions of anything and if forced to do so (aka, instead of a checkbox and permissions, we get a wimpy pop up nag like some geeks on the JIRA want) I stop making things. I want customers (AKA, SL residents) not parasitical leeches (IBM and OpenGrid).

[Gareth Nelson]

on point 1:
http://metaverse.sourceforge.net/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croquet_project

on point 2:
if you trust a third-party (none-SL) grid and it rips you off, sue them - just the same as SL

on point 3:
thanks for tarring everyone with one brush

on point 4:
you forgot people who want to drive the technology forward and people who want cheaper prices, and people who quite simply want to compete in this industry

If you are forced to release your stuff to other grids which already exists, then sue LL. You haven't given your consent for existing content to be distributed anywhere except within SL.

[John Lopez]

Good googly mooogly, you become more wrong with every passing day.

How does '[13:20] Joshua Nightshade: and I think adding to that an additional three checkboxes of "Second Life only" "Transfer to trusted grids" and "transfer everywhere" is the way to go.' equal the concept of copy everywhere by default.

Yes, he points out that things can be currently moved and that he moves *his own content* at will already. Neither negate the fact that his recommendation is in line with what needs to be done.

The Argus JIRA simply points out that flags are not as flexible as a tag that could be attached to objects spelling out how they could be used legally.

Your credibility has always been stretched, but have you run out of real complaints lately? Your ability to take away from that transcript that the majority view is that everything is open and free hippy land is delusional at the least. Trolling requires at least a germ of truth.

[Prokofy Neva]

John, googly-moogly right back at you.

Read everything that the duplicitous little vermin wrote in that office meeting, and on the JIRA, all the way through. I've cut out the intervening remarks so you can really see what is going on here -- Joshua snottily opposes a checkbox permissions system on the interface, until his boyfriend brings him in line. Zero Linden then begins to talk about complexities. They all go from actually discussing that it takes no time to code to saying, oh, let's have a blog entry, because otherwise it is confusing.

Yeah, right. Other people's property rights are always "confusing" aren't they?!

So you are completely wrong and tendentious yourself, and not surprising given how you view the world through the geek keyhole:

1. Joshua repeatedly calls for this action NOT to be done -- repeat he speaks out AGAINST IT BEING DONE over and OVER. Duh?

2. He repeatedly claims it is "confusing," or "will take up dev time" or whatever, and speaks AGAINST IT, referring to another proposal that basically involves a license, and ultimately speaking in favour of just a blog or a link to a website with policy terms, not code or interface.

3. He points out that he gets his own stuff out with SL Inventory and could care less about the implications.

4. He says this "adding the three checkboxes" only when it appears HIS BOYFRIEND ADAM is bringing him inline, evidently, or SOMETHING is happening where he concedes the technical point that on THAT MERE DESIGN matter for that moment in the discussion, those three checkboxes are "the way to go" but he ABOSLUTELY BELIEVES AND SPOKE REPEATEDLY that it was not necessary, confusing, and he opposed it. In the end, he agrees with Zero and Adam that they should offload the entire thing to a website policy, not a permissions system inworld. GO READ THE FUCKING THING.

Duh? I mean, are you on crack?!

I haven't at all taking away any delusions. I can read, thank you very much. And here's what the vicious little piece of shit has written in this transcript you have claimed to read, too:

[13:13] Joshua Nightshade: I have to say that Sai's proposal seems pointless to me.
[13:13] Joshua Nightshade: and is guaranteed to inspire confusion.
[13:14] Joshua Nightshade: content creators already understand that content only exists in SL and can't be transfered right now.
13:14] Joshua Nightshade: why does time need to be spent configuring a flag that is meaningless when it can be spent around an actual revamp of the permissions system?
[13:14] Adam Zaius: Because it's not the same amount of time required, for one.
[13:14] Adam Zaius: Adding the UI option would probably take only a few minutes.
[13:15] Joshua Nightshade: But how many hours will be spent with screaming masses clamboring to understand why LL is suddenly allowing off-grid transportation of content?
[13:15] Joshua Nightshade: But without any education behind this people are going to be totally confused.
[13:15] Adam Zaius: Zero just said it LL-grid-only would be the only option.
[13:16] Joshua Nightshade: Second Inventory only copies content that you've created or have full permissions for.
[13:16] Joshua Nightshade: which is why it strikes me as irrelevant.
[13:16] Adam Zaius: Personally, having the flag WOULD be handy to me.
[13:17] Adam Zaius: Being able to know which content I could transfer offgrid myself later when the option becomes availible.
[13:17] Joshua Nightshade: Sai, my copyright to my content supercedes anything else. I have not relinquished that copyright to anyone, including LL
[13:17] Joshua Nightshade: I believe argent's proposal is significantly better.
[13:17] Joshua Nightshade: and isn't cosmetic.
[13:18] Adam Zaius: What's the JIRA for Argents?
[13:18] Joshua Nightshade: one second.
[13:18] Joshua Nightshade: http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-701
[13:18] Joshua Nightshade: without further information and education this is a clusterfuck waiting to explode.
[13:19] Joshua Nightshade: that's the link to argent's proposal.
[13:19] Adam Zaius: Hrrm.
[13:19] Zero Linden: If the goal is signaling - there are far better ways than adding this checkbox, functional or not
[13:19] Joshua Nightshade: which is to establish a field for a license.
[13:19] Adam Zaius: Zero: I think we definetely need a machine-readably field where we can determine if something can be transfered off-grid, but having the ability to put in a license URL or similar would be very invaluable too.
[13:19] Adam Zaius: machine-readable(
[13:19] Adam Zaius: *
[13:19] j3rry Paine: argent's edited comment of this morning is most enlightenging
[13:19] Zero Linden: Argent's proposal is essential a click-through EULA, yes?
[13:19] Zha Ewry: I think there are a lot of long term issues lurking here, but..
[13:19] Joshua Nightshade: Zero: yes.
[13:20] Adam Zaius: Zero: looks like extra fields for copyright information.
[13:20] Zha Ewry: We clearly need to do something before we let assetsstart moving
[13:20] Joshua Nightshade: and I think adding to that an additional three checkboxes of "Second Life only" "Transfer to trusted grids" and "transfer everywhere" is the way to go.
[13:20] Adam Zaius: Checkboxes are too limited.
[13:20] Zero Linden: So - I'm not going to comment on Argent's because again, I don't want to signal a direction or imply in any way that there has been a choice at LL on this BEFORE groups have had the
[13:20] Adam Zaius: They dont allow you to say "This grid, but NOT this grid".
[13:20] Zero Linden: ability to be involved in it's design
[13:21] Adam Zaius: The LL grid I dont think is the be-all and end-all of grids, so doesnt deserve special protocol treatment.
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: short of a hundred checkboxes with names to "bob's grid" you're not going to satisfy everyone.
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: an umbrella catchall is better than nothing.
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: why not just a blog entry then?
[13:22] Joshua Nightshade: if it's simply cosmetic?
[13:23] Zero Linden: A blog entry, I think would be better
[13:23] Joshua Nightshade: a blog entry of "Hey, don't take stuff out of SL, k?" will be just as effective.
[13:23] Zero Linden: oh
[13:23] Adam Zaius: A blog entry clarifying if we can take our own stuff out of SL would be handy too.
[13:23] Zero Linden: Oh- I meant a blog entry from me about "Ground Rules for an future permission system"
[13:23] Adam Zaius: There's still lingering copyright concerns over things built with prims and not brought in from outside.
[13:24] Joshua Nightshade: I just think a field right next to the permissions is going to confuse people.
[13:26] Joshua Nightshade: that's why I think greater education is key. there are people who legitimately believe that LL can stop things like glintercept and copybot and choose not to.
[13:30] Zero Linden: is 5) Do not expect code or meta data to encode fully what the agreement is - only an approximation
[13:30] Adam Zaius: Zero: that's why we have XML -- for when we cant actually solve a problem. ;)
[13:30] Joshua Nightshade: well let's give everyone a link six times in 18 months.
[13:30] Adam Zaius ducks.

[John Lopez]

You can keep running on about irrelevancies ("boyfriend") and not allowing people to hold a complex viewpoint (the argument against a single checkbox is against one *without* other mechanisms or tools that help people understand why it is there and how it operates and what the larger context is). Fancy that, wanting not only to have controls, but usable, understood controls that don't inspire waves of unintended and backlash due to misunderstandings.

But that doesn't fit the black and white universe where you are right and everyone else is wrong, now does it.

[Prokofy Neva]

John, you're absolutely hopeless, linear, literalist, and narrow-minded. You simply cannot see the obvious facts before you: that Joshua ranted against this; that he took cues from his boyfriend and Lindens, sucking up to power, and did a 180 degree turn, and then all of them bagged it anyway, and said it should just be a blog: they do not support the check boxes, and discussing the design momentarily did not constitute consent to it. Read what they say, and stop being an asshole.

No one needs any special mechanic's manual and legal volumes to understand copy/mod/transfer -- it's understood instantly and universally, and that's its beauty. Adding "this grid only/other grids" is not rocket science. Copyleftists like yourself who oppose permissions and robust protecting of copyright (except for their own programming, most likely!) make up complexities and cry "confusion" where it doesn't exist, as a ploy to erode support for the idea.

It's usable, it's clear, and only people who are ambigious about theft and morally challenged want to pretend it's complicated. Things like TOS and instructions in the knowledge base are a given anyway for every single feature of SL; you don't have to have a committee write a manual and plot by committe and JIRA how to make a manual. That's been done already, and could be updated. That's just a cop-out.

The black and white universe is the one you live in, where something is "confusing" if it is simple lol. And on this, you are wrong, and I will go on explaining that.

[John Lopez]

You are attributing other peoples arguments to me. Not that I really expect you to keep who's who straight, but I have said previously that I have never seen any serious discussions that *don't* include the this-grid lock. Nor do *I* find the idea confusing (not do I expect anyone in the discussion did either).

What I have seen are attempts to make it so people don't do the "ahhh, they are giving all our content away with this flag" nonsense that so many of the blog posters are prone to when the latch onto something. If it isn't made painstakingly clear that the default is to keep everything on SL and only on SL, the firestorm of stupid people will be amazing, as it always it.

An example is Ann, who keeps insinuating that simply making it an option to move content violates the TOS, US law and who knows what more and keeps making "someone will sue you" comments on the main blog.

With people like that deliberately blowing a checkbox out of proportion, I'm all for education first.

[Saijanai]

Prokofy, if you haven't heard yet, Xan Linden will be hosting Zero's Office hours on Tuesday, JUly 1st, at 1PM. The topic will basically be the issues raised in
the jiras I submitted.

I'm going to suggest that they change the venu to a larger arena/ampitheatre since I would expect far more than 40 avatars to show.

I've also started a discussion page on the wiki. Not sure how to add a nice link, so:

http://tinyurl.com/6a78aj

[Prokofy Neva]

Under the guise of "moderating" this discussion and "making it accessible," Saijani, you are merely taking it over to introduce your viewpoint in it which is a barely modified version of the basic copyleftism we face in the Lab and their pets.

A meeting like this where various coders are trying to "create ground rules" and where my name is invoked as some sort of evil other camp is rigged from the start. It's the sort of thing possibly best boycotted as trying to protest at it will likely lead to kicking or whiney, neuralgic disparagement of the sort I personally got from Zero Linden the last time I went to his office hour, and he decided to get personally insulted, and incite all his little fanboys to huff and puff at me, merely because I pointed out the rather OBVIOUS fact of his stunning lack of inclusion of these issues in his design documents.

That sort of petulance, irritability, blocking, inciting is what you can expect in these Linden hours.

What really has to happen is what I've said about the Lindens making an equally prestigious and important group of businesses and land developers to address their concerns reasonably, or as Jimmy Dell put it, meeting with business to establish business requirements.

Given that they aren't willing to do this, going to some dev-dominated meeting where all the little script-kiddies will be bobbing up and down with all their libsl w-hat crap strikes me as empowering the other side in this debate needlessly.

Making it seem like texture theft or IP protection in general is a function of something that Zero Linden's office hour or the JIRA can decide is part of the fundamental rigging and skewing of this issue to one side.

It's how the tool themselves and the structure of Linden interaction with residents now itself operates such as to put one point of view in power every time now. It's not an authentic debate -- even the old town halls were better than this.

I don't really see any reason to give up my notion to boycott Linden office hours as illegitimate, and merely to continue on my blog freely where people can't threaten me and issue disciplinary actions against me when I speak the truth about their illegitimate actions.

I felt I had to come to Zero's hour with a pitchfork as a kind of dire national emergency. Since then, I do NOT see the Lindens getting any better on this.

A wiki! Jesus Christ on a crutch. They should open up the old forums, not drive everybody into stupid wikis.

[Saijanai]

I'm sorry. I didn't intend for my reference to your blog entry to be " invoked as some sort of evil other camp is rigged from the start".

It is true that I make fun of what I perceive as your emotional extremism at times, but I have also said that if you look past the emotional content, that you often make good points.

[Prokofy Neva]

I don't have any "emotional extremism". You fail to hear the "emotional extremism" in yourself, with your faux-panicked JIRA, and the emotional extremism in all the asstards surrounding you in AWG, and how bluntly pointing that out can only seem like "emotional extremism" to people who themselves are neuralgics and hysterics lol.

[Saijanai]

I've started a SL forum thread about the issue. Please vote if you plan on attending:

http://forums.secondlife.com/showthread.php?t=267473

[Prokofy Neva]

Saijanai,

I view this again, as fake. It enables you and others to say, oh, we posted it and no one answered it. No one cares, so we can just do what we want. It also puts down a false version of history claiming you "debated this for a year" when you in fact didn't, it wasn't in the design documents, nobody raised it, and it was only sporadically referenced and frankly never really came to an issue until I pushed it in conjunction with Zha's "giant leap," and frankly, I'm nobody, I'm not a content creator, I merely intervened *on principle* regarding the process (which sucks and isn't fair or remotely democratic) and the lack of notification/participatio and absence of Linden clarity.

You won't get Linden clarity; this is lawsuit material and they know it.

You yourself gloated at that one meeting that you got to run this issue merely by showing up and if others don't show up, too bad. I find that totally high-handed and it discredits the whole AWG cause.

You also continue to put me up there as a target, painting a huge bull's eye on me, as if this is "my" issue (it's a generic issue) and that only encourages griefing against me inworld.

I don't *care* if you reference me or my blog, but I view what you're doing as disingenuous in spiking this discussion before it even takes place.

You are not an honest broker.

Who is an honest broker? Well, in this horribly unjust and flawed world we have, there's only one honest broker, and that's the Lindens.

There. See what I mean?

[Saijanai]

Well, 80 folks showed up and at the next Zero OFfice Hours, Zero cut and paste my requests for clarification and sent them off to the LL lawyer. He also committed to more meetings (as they ahve said on today's blog about SL => TP) including a metanomics interview. Make of that what you will

[Prokofy Neva]

Saijanai, how many of those people were creators and designers and business people, not coders? How many of them were just hangers on with the coding gang, supporting their copyleftism? Where is the transcript at?

A Metanomics interview is no subsitute for putting protection of IP in the design document and listening to the kind of business requirements that are needed by customers.

So I make of it so far: unimpressed.