Op/Ed: Linden Lab’s Weasel Worded Quasi-Assurances
by Alphaville Herald on 30/08/07 at 11:05 pm
Concierge customers: boycott Linden Lab’s ‘test’ of the Age Verification system
by Inigo Chamerberlin
Linden Lab and Aristotle’s Integrity – trustworthy
Earlier today I received an eMail from Linden Lab – the text is reproduced below the fold. After reading the eMail all I could say was – excuse me? Am I missing something here? It seems to me that remaining anonymous is a much better method of ‘building trust-based relationships’ – as in ‘No, you can’t have my RL details, you’ll just have to trust me’.
‘Trust’ actually flies out the window when your RL details are revealed.
‘Trust’ is something that depends on not knowing for sure, and trusting the individual concerned regardless.
I have no idea what idiot wrote this eMail, but I can say with some confidence that logical argument is definitely not their forte. As for ‘We see this tool as critical to supporting Residents in shedding anonymity’! Oh yes! I’m sure we have all noted the relentless clamour of residents DEMANDING the ability to ‘shed anonymity’? Just begging for Linden support?
Like the residents are too dumb to figure out that they are perfectly at liberty to place any and all RL details about themselves in their profiles?
I note the eMail is also well larded with weasel worded quasi-assurances as to the (cough) ‘integrity’ of Integrity Aristotle – a company with a fine track record of disclosing information to anyone with the money, or political influence, to make it worth their while. And a company who’s sole previous attempt at providing effective age verification failed miserably…
Tell us Linden Lab, where is a copy of the contract, including the specific clauses relating to the inviolability of our personal data, available for download in PDF format?
No publically available contract to inspect? I see… Well then, what penalties will be paid to anyone foolish enough to give the requested information to Integrity Aristotle who then finds their personal data has been passed on to third parties?
Ahhh, I see… We have to take it on trust.
Trust a company that on a daily basis demonstrates their inability to run their business effectively? A company that moves the goalposts without warning? A company that repeatedly bans several of its more important customers without reason or warning? A company that is unable to provide a reliable product? A company that can’t even maintain that most basic of internet commerce tools – a reliable online billing system?
I also find it laughable that Linden Lab expect us, the Concierge customers, to test this wretched system for them. On the other hand, why not try? You probably won’t find a more gullible bunch than the Concierge customers.
People who cheerfully stump up sums of US$195, and upward a month for the current level of service – outages caused by single points of failure – network/asset cluster issues that make sales, building, teleporting, running events virtually impossible much of the time – griefers and penniless non-contributors who are only here because of the very policy that makes ‘Age verification’ necessary to try and prevent Linden Lab getting into hot water…
The ‘open sign-up’ policy that we warned Linden Lab repeatedly was both unsustainable and an obvious source of trouble. A policy that led many of us to move from the Mainland to private estates in the first place in order to obtain a measure of protection against the anarchy that swiftly followed ‘Open registration’.
So… who better to ‘prove’ this supposedly ‘trust’ enhancing system, run by one of the least trustworthy organisations in the business? Yes, of course, the mugs. Concierge customers.
What is the agenda is here?
Could it be to persuade the Concierge customers to sign up, then use them as an example to the rest of the teeming masses? Or is it just that they think we are the most likely to buckle under the pressure of implied threats regarding being held ‘liable’ for anything that goes on in our estates?
Another interesting question. In this fairest and most transparent of worlds, are the corporates going to be subject to exactly the same rules? If so, WHO is ultimately responsible for, say, Dell, or IBM’s estates? Will the CEO of IBM or Dell have to verify their ages?
Of course not! Linden Lab knows perfectly well that the individuals concerned are over the age of 18 – which is supposed to be what this is all about.
In which case, seeing that linden Lab know perfectly well that I am over the age of 18, why on earth do they expect me to ‘verify’ my age – incidentally placing personal information in the ‘care’ of the likes of Integrity-Aristotle?
Why indeed should ANY Concierge customer – someone who pays Linden Lab thousands of dollars a year for the privilege of occupying a sim remember – be expected to provide further, redundant, ‘proof’ of their age?
If Corporate money talks – why doesn’t Concierge customer’s talk too?
I urge all Concierge customers to boycott this supposed ‘test’ of the Age Verification system.
And before you dismiss this as scare-mongering, ask yourself this. What do you think your chances are of being removed from the records if either the scheme is abandoned, or you decide to leave SL, assuming you do sign up for Age Verification?
Ahhh… but you trust them. Don’t you…?
The Lab’s letter to its concierge customers
Hello, Inigo Chamerberlin.
As you may have heard, we’re implementing the first stage of an Identity Verification system beginning with age. Our ultimate goal is to give Second Life Residents the opportunity to reveal as much or as little real life information about themselves as they like, and to have that information verified. We see this tool as critical to supporting Residents in shedding anonymity and building trust-based relationships — but only to the extent that they’re comfortable.
We’ve engaged the services of a third party provider, Aristotle’s Integrity, who will match information that Residents provide with information available in public records. You will be asked to provide your name, geographic location, birthdate, and an ID that is specific to your country, for example the last four digits of your social security number if you’re American. We will not be storing any information except for a code that tells us there was a positive match. Integrity will not keep any identifying information about you.
Age verification will initially be used as a way to limit access to restricted content within Second Life. Therefore, in order to enter any parcel or region which has been flagged as containing restricted content, i.e. sexual activity or extreme violence, age verification will be required to ensure only adults, or people over the age of 18, gain access. Verifying age will be voluntary, except in this context.
Prior to launching age verification throughout Second Life, we’re hoping you, the concierge customers, will help us out by trying the process and letting us know about your experience — if you were able to accurately verify your age, if the process itself is clear and understandable, and what problems you encountered. Please visit the Age Verification link available from the Your Account section of our website in the right sidebar and enter the requested information. This link is currently only available to concierge customers. When you are finished, you will be asked to take a short survey to fill us in on your experience.
For more information on Age Verification in Second Life, please visit the Second Life Blog.
Thank you very much for your help, and your continued support.
Linden Lab
Creators of Second Life
Second Lulz Vigilante
Aug 30th, 2007
“The ‘open sign-up’ policy that we warned Linden Lab repeatedly was both unsustainable and an obvious source of trouble.”
That was the point where SL began to jump the shark. Shark-jumping is now officially completed.
I wonder if OS GRID will be a cure for this.
Kryss Wanweird
Aug 31st, 2007
Inigo, thank you.
This is by far the most lucid piece about the subject I have read.
Indeed this policy has little to do with protecting “naive” minors from sexual content. If so, equal measures would have been taken over the teen grid (pedophile paradise). My guess would be that LL is trying to “clean up sl” in order to make it more attractive to corporate business and investors.
Tenshi Vielle
Aug 31st, 2007
I find their signoff signature pompous. Is it just me?
humanoid
Aug 31st, 2007
I don’t know a single individual who plans to ID their account. What interests me is exactly how they plan to keep unpapered avatars from doing or building adult things. Maybe the United Arab Emirates can provide LL with some morality police training.
Kahni Poitier
Aug 31st, 2007
Do some research on Integrity, and you’ll find out they have none.
Trust? Yeah, right.
Ronin
Aug 31st, 2007
You might want to do some research on the current state of trust-based systems. They are an important development in the evolution of the social web (including virtual worlds). Contrary to your assertion, trust in this context has nothing to do with trusting someone because you DON’T know anything about them. In fact, it’s quite the opposite.
Obscure Doodad
Aug 31st, 2007
Participating in this is such a NEEDLESS risk to yourself that it is beyond imagining. Why take the risk? Why? Just don’t do it. Risk reduced. Effortlessly.
Promises and published assurances from LL employees mean NOTHING. Let’s see them stipulate financial responsibility in the TOS and lay out promises to reimburse residents for any RL money for legal expense, opportunity loss suffered or even inconvenience suffered by release of data by EITHER LL or Integrity. There is no way in hell they will lay out their own financial responsibility for such an event, and if they won’t take financial responsibility, ask yourself two things: 1) Where is their total confidence in the security they are claiming for the system? and 2) What possible value can their be in their assurances?
Reg Baxter
Aug 31st, 2007
I have to go with Tenshi’s take on the signature – they provided the platform but they are always saying that we the residents are the “Creators of Second Life” guess it was just a freudian slip on their part.
Jamie David
Aug 31st, 2007
Integrity has no integrity.
There is no way, no way, that they have the data to verify the entire planet. It is just not possible. Driving Licence number for a New Zealand citizen. No.
The system is easily fooled with a made up Name and licence number. Just like bud.tv there is no verification. I as one of the concierge users tested it with a made up name, my avitar’s, and got through. Told LindenLabs in a support ticket that I managed to do so. Yet I remain verified.
If the system is not 100% secure then it is of no use at all. They also mentioned after the start they will charge for this service.
Boycot or have fun and see if you can verify as Philip Linden.
Anonymous
Aug 31st, 2007
Time to pack up shop and move on. We have know approached Ludicrous Speed, everyone strap in!
mootykips
Aug 31st, 2007
We win.
Jenny Raymaker
Aug 31st, 2007
“Linden Lab
Creators of Second Life”
Funny but I thought that WE were the creators of Second Life? They simply provide some of the tools.
As for the other stuff, sorry but while I agree that having age controls is important to prevent abuses, this is simply another example of how SL is being taken away from us and sold to the corporates.
Sincerely yours
A. Paying-Customer
Roland
Aug 31st, 2007
Ok, I understand much of the worries expressed in your article. But I don’t see the error in logic when Linden Lab says that giving RL details helps building up trust. When I know the identity of someone in RL, that alone is not enough to trust that person (for instance, to accept that person as a business partner, to let him or her watch over my house etc). Of course, knowing that identity is not enough, but it is a good start for building up a trusting relationship.
The same thing is true on SL: knowing RL details is in itself not enough to trust someone, but it sure would help. So I think you can have questions about the technological implementation of the verification process, about the freedom of residents to protect their privacy etc, but asking and getting verified RL details in itself is not illogical if you want to trust someone.
Mercia McMahon
Aug 31st, 2007
I think that the original blog (prior to the e-mail) was that Estate owners would be asked to test the beta, and this was extended to Concierge later. Presumably, the idea is that no Estate Owner is going to turn on verification if they might not be able to get onto their own island!
I had verified by the time the e-mail arrived, if Aristotle want to reveal to the CIA my driving license number, they are welcome to it!
Mercia
Ugh.
Aug 31st, 2007
Quit whining like a bitch and give them your info if you want to keep playing. It’s their site/game, they can do whatever they want to enforce their rules.
I swear some of you bitches will complain about the most stupid things. Now, where’s that Tenshi when you need her. At least her stupidity makes you laugh at amazement.
ugh
Aug 31st, 2007
Why is it pompus? They *did* create Second life.
As usual, it is just you.
Victorria Paine
Aug 31st, 2007
I agree, it has little to do with trust. I don’t trust people because they hold a valid SSN. Plenty of crooks, criminals, fraudsters and the like all have their own cute little valid SSNs, and it doesn’t make me trust them more or less than their actions lead me to. Trust is based on actions, not SSNs.
When you step back and look at the broader picture, it’s easy to discern LL’s agenda here. The idea is to add an “optional” disclosure feature whereby residents can, “if they wish”, “shed anonymity” to the degree that they are “comfortable” — and the blog indicates that the “verified” paramaters will not just be age, but also sex, location and “name”. Of course, it’s all “voluntary”, but that’s like saying animation overriders are voluntary. Clearly LL’s hope is that many residents will use this system to become “verified”, and that therefore the number of “alternative reality” people (i.e., the sort of people who treat SL as an .. um .. *second* life, rather than as First Life ver. 1.1) will decrease in favor of “verified RL people”.
Why? Because by doing this the grid becomes MUCH more viable for corporates. Corporates are in the business of selling RL things to RL people in RL. They have no interest in marketing to furries, Goreans, dominatrices, steampunks, vampires, elves, etc. … they want to sell things to real people in the real world. In order to target that demographic in SL, they need to know what thath demographic looks like. If people “voluntarily” choose to disclose this information, you can bet that it will be available to corporates as well and .. shabam .. all of a sudden the grid becomes 100% more marketable for them, virtually overnight.
Don’t think this will happen? Think it willl all be summed up in a one-liner that says “identity verified”? Then why does the blog refer to age, sex, location and name? How does it make any sense to verify someone’s gender, for example, without talling someone what it is in relation to the AVs gender? How does that shed any anonymity? Same for location and name. No, friends, this is going in the direction of a voluntary self-disclosure program like MySpace and Facebook, and it seems likely to me at least that LL is rooting for the users to adopt self-disclosure as the norm so that the grid becomes much more attractive to the corporate marketeers that we all know LL has been bending over backwards to attract and retain.
Why are we pissed off? Why are we screaming “bitches”? Well, SL has a few rules known as the Big Six. One of them relates to disclosure, with the idea behind the rule being that people’s RL identity is to be kept very, very private, almost sacrosanct. Putting in an “optiona’, voluntary” feature that can only be used, by means of social pressure, to force users to disclose things about themselves in order to be considered “credible” or “trustworthy” to others utterly and completely vitiates the spirit of this rule and the tradition in SL of anonymity and non-disclosure. It’s a very sad day when LL is actively working to undermine the rules they themselves set in place at the outset, and abandoning their own vision to sell out to the likes of Coke and Nike.
The need for an OS grid is becoming more pressing by the day, to be honest.
shockwave yareach
Aug 31st, 2007
I’ll be happy to prove my age. I’ve no concern with that. There is some data I’ll reveal and some data that I will not. If this passes muster, cool. If not, then I guess I’ll be one of the unwashed masses of maybes who will occupy SL.
I think the issue for the island owners is complex. If, for example, you have an island chain where clothes are optional, but the islands are private and restricted to a closed list, what then? Some of our members are from Europe, making the age bit a thorny problem. Personally, I’m of the thought that we can keep our islands private and do what we like without worrying about setting an age bit on the land. We just have to be careful about who joins the group is all.
I’d rather see land owners refuse to set their adult bit unless they are in a sex business. Any spec of land CAN become adult in nature just by setting down a poseball set. So trying to make SL 100% pure and safe for little Johnny (who isn’t supposed to be here in the first f’ing place) is impossible, particularly since cameras can see quite far. Unless your land has a sex oriented business on it, leave the adult bit off the land and tell the Lindens that it is not your job to police the game (and it IS still a game). I’m not going to make my lair Adult just because I have a bed in my room.
GreenLantern Excelsior
Aug 31st, 2007
“Don’t think this will happen? Think it willl all be summed up in a one-liner that says “identity verified”? Then why does the blog refer to age, sex, location and name?”
It doesn’t. It refers to name, date of birth, address, and specific ID information like a driver’s license number. They don’t care what sex you are.
“We will not be storing any information except for a code that tells us there was a positive match. Integrity will not keep any identifying information about you.”
It would be interesting to know why these two sentences have people so confused.
Jenny Raymaker
Aug 31st, 2007
I wonder how long before someone makes the point that disclosure of RL details in SL is all about helping us fight those pesky terrorists? Disclosing RL info is patriotic son! You haven’t got anything to hide now have you?
I agree with Victorria Paine when she stressed the pressing need for an OS grid. The Lindens need to start realising that people will soon be voting with their feet. Does anyone know if they actually read this stuff?
Second Lulz Vigilante
Aug 31st, 2007
@mootykips
Not really. This was going to happen anyway. The PN were ultimately just one of the many side-effect of open registration. LL are the experts in self-pwnage.
Inigo Chamerberlin
Aug 31st, 2007
”
“Don’t think this will happen? Think it willl all be summed up in a one-liner that says “identity verified”? Then why does the blog refer to age, sex, location and name?”
It doesn’t. It refers to name, date of birth, address, and specific ID information like a driver’s license number. They don’t care what sex you are.
“We will not be storing any information except for a code that tells us there was a positive match. Integrity will not keep any identifying information about you.”
It would be interesting to know why these two sentences have people so confused.”
says Greenlantern…
Because bloody Robin Linden is saying that NO data will be retained – and Integrity-Aristotle are saying the data WILL be retained ‘in case of queries’!
Basically, knowing Integrity-Aristotle’s track record, and Linden Lab’s too for that matter, I suspect Integrity-Aristotle’s version is correct (well, retaining and reselling data IS their business after all), and Robin Linden is being less that truthful with us (well, THAT seems to be Linden Lab’s line of business these days after all).
Victorria Paine
Aug 31st, 2007
“”Don’t think this will happen? Think it willl all be summed up in a one-liner that says “identity verified”? Then why does the blog refer to age, sex, location and name?”
It doesn’t. It refers to name, date of birth, address, and specific ID information like a driver’s license number. They don’t care what sex you are.”
Umm .. from the blog:
“The IDV system aims to deliver two things. First, for Residents, it gives them the chance to independently verify certain aspects of their identity (their name, age, location and sex for instance) if they choose to. This will help establish trust by removing a layer of anonymity for those they interact with. It’s much easier to trust someone who puts their name behind their words and actions.”
The age verification process that is now open to concierge users is just the beginning of a much larger scheme to be rolled out in the future, as this indicates. This dovetails with the information in the letter sent to Inigo and the others who sent querying emails about this, to wit:
“As you may have heard, we’re implementing the first stage of an Identity Verification system beginning with age. Our ultimate goal is to give Second Life Residents the opportunity to reveal as much or as little real life information about themselves as they like, and to have that information verified. We see this tool as critical to supporting Residents in shedding anonymity and building trust-based relationships — but only to the extent that they’re comfortable.”
It’s clear enough for anyone who can read that the age verification process is the first step of a much larger project, one that will include A/S/L/name verification, and allow users to reveal this to “shed their anonymity” if they wish. It’s all there in plain text in what LL has said about this over the past few days. Denying that makes no sense. At least we are being warned about what is to come.
Nacon
Aug 31st, 2007
“…not your job to police the game (and it IS still a game).”
Actually no, it’s not a game. It’s a platform, thus is why they have to police it.
It’s only a game in some RPG sim area.
All the people who complains/against about personal info… ARE minors.
As a adult, we had to use our personal info for everything. Bank, Driving License, Health Insurance, Lease, Job, Rental, Gun Ownership, SSN, Online Ordering, etc. etc. The list goes on and on. And you’re worrying your ass off about LL using our personal info? You’re an idiot (and a minor).
Pretty soon some of those minors won’t be an minor anymore. So you’ll have to give your life up for everything to take care of yourself. Parents can LEGALLY kick you out of their home for being an idiot when you turn 18+.
So quit fucking around.
Andrea
Aug 31st, 2007
We went through the verification process only to find out that Canadians residents will not be approved. It appears from what I have found out is that the Canadian Government does not support the release of our personal information for these purposes. So does this mean that Canadians will only be allowed in PG area’s.
Linden Labs, congratulations on stumbling again, at least you are consistent in continuing to screw these up…
Spankubux
Aug 31st, 2007
“It would be interesting to know why these two sentences have people so confused”
It confuses them because they are easily confused assholes.
Spankubux
Aug 31st, 2007
“well, retaining and reselling data IS their business after all”
No, fuckstick, that is Aristotle’s business.
Integrity has a different business model.
As does the Herald, which seems to exist simply to provide a platform to fucksticks like yourself.
Asshole.
SqueezeOne Pow
Aug 31st, 2007
All I can say is I can’t wait for all the sad and angry SL sex havers and whatnot that will actually be affected by this thing to leave to free up some server space!
Now if only they could coordinate this with deleting unused accounts and inventories the rest of us would be SET!
Cocoanut Koala
Aug 31st, 2007
1. “Why indeed should ANY Concierge customer – someone who pays Linden Lab thousands of dollars a year for the privilege of occupying a sim remember – be expected to provide further, redundant, ‘proof’ of their age?”
You got me. I dunno.
2. I find their sign-off signature rather pompous, too. I thought we had something to do with creating Second Life, too.
3. I don’t need to “research the current state of trust-based systems” to know this is preposterous. Probably someone came up with the idea of “trust-based systems” (a snow-job buzzword and misnomer if I ever heard one), in order to sell something of their own.
4. I agree with Victorria about this working against LL’s own TOS.
5. And tell ya what – it’s much easier for people to trust me in SL than it is to trust some stranger who is verified.
coco
coco
Obscure Doodad
Aug 31st, 2007
“Because bloody Robin Linden is saying that NO data will be retained – and Integrity-Aristotle are saying the data WILL be retained ‘in case of queries’”
This Means Nothing. Nothing whatsoever. A Linden Lab employee can say things all day long and Linden Lab does not have to back it up with RL money. They can say a wide variety of things after a future divorce attorney subpoenas the records, LL complies with the subpoena, and provides information showing you explicitly asked for access to adult material in that den of child porn known as SL. A good attorney will show the court all the news reports of what goes on in SL and you will see quite an adjustment to your divorce settlement.
You Must Not Cooperate in this insanity if you have any care at all about your future risk UNLESS . . . UNLESS the obvious thing happens. LL has to stipulate their own financial responsibility in the TOS that THEY will repay you all financial losses incurred by your information being revealed by either LL or Integrity via any means at all, subpoena or otherwise.
If they won’t take on this monetary responsibility, then their claims of security mean nothing.
infocyde
Aug 31st, 2007
Waaa, Waaa, Waaa, your gorean slave girl avatars will now be ID’ed as dudes for all to see, and you are upset. Awwwwwww…
Alazarin
Aug 31st, 2007
Meh….. everyone’s in SL for different things. Some want to RP and/or do a bit of gender tourism without their employer / SO / best friends finding out. Fine… anonymity is just what they need. For them the age / ID verification thing could be extremely problematic.
As for myself one of the things I do in SL is promote my music. That’s something I do in RL and I use SL as another medium through which to reach an audience. So in my case anonymity would be totally self-defeating. I want people to be able to connect my in-world avatar and music performances with my RL work. For me the age / ID verification thing is pretty much a non-issue. My only concern is what this somewhat shady Aristotle-Integrity company is likely to do with my personal info once they’ve got their greasy paws on it. I guess we’ll know who to blame if we find our mailboxes stuffed with yet more direct-marketing spam courtesy of Aristotle-Integrity.
BTW, what is this ‘OS Grid’ some people have referred to?
Inigo Chamerberlin
Aug 31st, 2007
“All I can say is I can’t wait for all the sad and angry SL sex havers and whatnot that will actually be affected by this thing to leave to free up some server space!
Now if only they could coordinate this with deleting unused accounts and inventories the rest of us would be SET!”
And Linden Lab would be BANKRUPT!
Inigo Chamerberlin
Aug 31st, 2007
Nacon – get real please.
Linden Lab HAS proof of my age. They have had it since I first signed up, back when you had to provide CC details to get on board.
My objection, BESIDES the dubious ‘partner’ they have chosen for this idiocy, is that I really don’t see why I should have to provide any further evidence of my age (over 18) and my ID (RL name, address and banking details) than I have already provided, together with thousands of dollars of payments.
Money talks – if they can’t hear it, then maybe the wrong person’s in charge…
Inigo Chamerberlin
Aug 31st, 2007
Spankubux, you certainly have a highly appropriate sig
Now – IF you’d done just a little research about Integrity-Aristotle, as I did for THIS ARTICLE back in May
http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/05/oped_philip_lin.html#more
you’d have some faint idea what you were talking about – which you clearly don’t, as you are only here to score cheap points by insulting others about issues about which they know far more than you ever will.
Under-age, unverified – YOU are the problem Linden Lab caused and is now trying to make the rest of us compromise ourselves so they don’t have to carry the can for.
Onder Skall
Aug 31st, 2007
Nice one Inigo.
Game or Platform? or need a new word?
Aug 31st, 2007
Does it matter if it’s a game or platform?
At one point it was a “game” (2003 to June 2007)…. when for some reason it became a “platform” (June 2007).
Does one require identify / age verification and the other doesn’t? I don’t get it….
I guess if it’s a platform, a computer operating system, then there must be a need for identity / age verification to support the platform. If it’s a game, then who cares because there’s no platform to support, just something to play.
Websters defines “game” as the primary definition, “1 a (1) : activity engaged in for diversion or amusement :”, and “platform”, well that’s curious, it’s the very last most least used meaning applicable here perhaps maybe we wanna be… “5 a : a vehicle (as a satellite or aircraft) used for a particular purpose or to carry a usually specified kind of equipment b : OPERATING SYSTEM; also : the computer architecture and equipment using a particular operating system”.
Well, linux and dos and java and windows, etc., they’re platforms arent’ they? Doesn’t SL use some one else’s or some open source “platform”? to run it’s code or what?…
so, Webster may soon be adding a final definition “5c”… like
“c : OTHER PLATFORM; second life grid computer entertainment system selling T-Shirts, issuing credit cards, so requiring identity / age verification”.
Here’s some more definitions from the trademark office easy search thing, http://uspto.gov
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=n9efuc.3.17
“Second Life
Serial Number 77256291
IC 036. US 100 101 102. G & S: Online financial services, namely offering a fictional-dollar-denominated credit card to charge online purchases. FIRST USE: 20051031. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20051031
Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
Serial Number 77256291
Filing Date August 15, 2007
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Owner (APPLICANT) Linden Research, Inc. CORPORATION DELAWARE 945 Battery Street San Francisco CALIFORNIA 94111″
This is a new definition too… seems this information about you might be important to offer you these “fictional-dollar-denominated credit card services”, if you’re going to have to repay the fiction… hmmm, to borrow fiction you have to be real, otherwise your repayment promise is what… a fiction?
Maybe identity / age does not have any connection to game or platform; seems if its’ just a game, then identity / age verification makes more sense, because with a game you need more rules… with a platform, well, what rules are there to age use when using linux, dos, windows, java, or whatever operating system you use…. hmmm do you have to be 18 to buy Vista now too, and give them information to shed your anonymity….. hmm anonymity,….
webster says anonymity means:
“the quality or state of being anonymous ok, … ”
and anonymous?
“not named or identified”
Ah, what’s in a name or definition anyway?
Maybe someone can explain the need for identity verification and why just a couple weeks ago this game/platform filing trademarks related to clothing, jewelry, creations, “fictional-dollar-denominated”… (I love that phrase.. is a “dollar” fictional, or, if it’ fictional, shouldn’t it be something other than a dollar?)…. etc…..
Maybe identity verificaiton is important to a retail platform, and it’s important to be sure that we all know whos stuff belongs to who…. and who uses it that it doesn’t belong to?
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=n9efuc.3.14
Here’s a link showing a whole bunch of new descriptions for what this is… can someone explain?
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=toc&state=n9efuc.1.1&p_search=searchss&p_L=50&BackReference=&p_plural=yes&p_s_PARA1=&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA1%24LD&expr=PARA1+AND+PARA2&p_s_PARA2=second+life&p_tagrepl%7E%3A=PARA2%24COMB&p_op_ALL=AND&a_default=search&a_search=Submit+Query&a_search=Submit+Query
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=n9efuc.3.7
SECOND LIFE
Goods and Services IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Entertainment software, namely, software that is used for providing multi-player access to an on-line game environment; computer game software; video game software; virtual reality game software; interactive video games comprised of computer hardware and software; computer graphics software. FIRST USE: 20021025. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20021025
IC 041. US 100 101 107. G & S: Entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game by means of communications networks; entertainment services in the nature of providing an on-line multi-player electronic computer game; entertainment services, namely, providing an on-line computer game that may be accessed by means of communications networks; multimedia entertainment software production services. FIRST USE: 20021025. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20021025
_____________________
IC 025. US 022 039. G & S: CLOTHING, NAMELY T-SHIRTS AND HATS. FIRST USE: 20030606. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20030606
Mark Drawing Code (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS
Design Search Code 02.11.02 – Eyes, human; Human eyes; Iris (eye)
02.11.07 – Arms; Fingers; Hands; Human hands, fingers, arms
Serial Number 78223162
Filing Date March 7, 2003
Current Filing Basis 1B
Original Filing Basis 1B
Published for Opposition May 11, 2004
Owner (APPLICANT) Linden Research, Inc. CORPORATION DELAWARE 945 Battery Street San Francisco CALIFORNIA 94111
_________________________________________——-
Word Mark SECOND LIFE
Goods and Services IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: Jewelry, namely earrings, pendants, bracelets, pins, and rings. FIRST USE: 20021025. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20021025
Mark Drawing Code (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS
Design Search Code 02.11.02 – Eyes, human; Human eyes; Iris (eye)
02.11.07 – Arms; Fingers; Hands; Human hands, fingers, arms
Serial Number 77256772
Filing Date August 16, 2007
Current Filing Basis 1A
Original Filing Basis 1A
Owner (APPLICANT) Linden Research, Inc. CORPORATION DELAWARE 945 Battery Street San Francisco CALIFORNIA 94111
Description of Mark Color is not claimed as a feature of the mark. The mark consists of a stylized drawing of an eye-in-hand design.
Type of Mark TRADEMARK
Register PRINCIPAL
Live/Dead Indicator LIVE
janeforyou Barbara
Aug 31st, 2007
I can understand all the worring here,,It will be NO info on RL ID in your profiles!!
“We’ve engaged the services of a third party provider, Aristotle’s Integrity, who will match information that Residents provide with information available in public records. You will be asked to provide your name, geographic location, birthdate, and an ID that is specific to your country, for example the last four digits of your social security number if you’re American. We will not be storing any information except for a code that tells us there was a positive match. Integrity will not keep any identifying information about you.”
If LL or anyone put your RL Name-Gender-Age in your profile thay brake the law and thay will be gone as a company from law suing from ALL the members lol
All that that got and can se or show are a CODE.
corona
Aug 31st, 2007
All that ‘verification’ can ever prove is that you have access to documents owned by someone over 18
all someone under 18 has to do is have access to an older persons details
does not even have to be a parent
there surely exist families in which persons under 18 have siblings slightly older than that who are willing to assist in their younger relatives being verified
Some adults after all would have no problem with the idea of helping children gain access to ‘adult’ material
The main problem with verification is that it wont work – if LL are unable to police SL now – why should it be any different under verification
corona
Aug 31st, 2007
re
‘Maybe the United Arab Emirates can provide LL with some morality police training.’
the policing of that nature in Arabia and the emirates is Islamic based – it has nothing to do with Morality
driving 15 schoolgirls back into a burning school so that they burn to death merely because they lack veils has fuck all to do with morality but rather only a sick perversion of it
joe
Aug 31st, 2007
Yawn. Verified. Sky is still up there. Enjoy your drama.
DaveOner
Aug 31st, 2007
That would be cool if a new feature was to result from this where your av aged like you based on your birthday.
shockwave yareach
Aug 31st, 2007
@nacon
No, it’s a game. It is an entertainment program similar to WoW or Everquest, but allowing user content.
It is not a platform – my computers are platforms. It does not function on its own nor enable other software to be run upon it, unless you count scripting. It is not personal property. It is not hardware. So no, it is not a platform. With some stretching of the imagination, one can invision it becoming a future GUI, making ones computer and the world wide web easily navigated and shared. Interface, perhaps. Platform, no. And that’s the future; for today, it serves no purpose but to entertain and bolster communications. It’s an interactive movie with an IM welded on.
Which gets right down to the heart of the matter, I think. SL has gotten confused about what it wants to be. Now that they want to be squeaky clean and corporate, their SL1.0 past haunts them. I think the best solution is to create a new mainland and force it to PG max for all newcomers, and leave the existing SL and its members alone. New arrivals have to verify and only those over 18 may teleport to the “old world”. This leaves the existing characters and their areas alone while shielding the “next generation webbrowser kiddy” from anything even vaguely naughty.
Make SL have two worlds, old and new, so those of us who think it’s a game and those who think it’s the nextgen B2B tool can share the same servers and codebase.
Victorria Paine
Aug 31st, 2007
“I can understand all the worring here,,It will be NO info on RL ID in your profiles!!
“We’ve engaged the services of a third party provider, Aristotle’s Integrity, who will match information that Residents provide with information available in public records. You will be asked to provide your name, geographic location, birthdate, and an ID that is specific to your country, for example the last four digits of your social security number if you’re American. We will not be storing any information except for a code that tells us there was a positive match. Integrity will not keep any identifying information about you.”
If LL or anyone put your RL Name-Gender-Age in your profile thay brake the law and thay will be gone as a company from law suing from ALL the members lol
All that that got and can se or show are a CODE.”
Again, Jane, that’s the “now” part of this. If you read the blog, this is *just* the initial phase. More “verifications” will be coming relating to more than age, and the blog refers to A/S/L and name, and the desire of LL to give the users the ability to “shed anonymity” as a result of verifying some or all of these in a way that other users can, in some way or fashion, see — whether it includes the details or not (frankly, I can’t see what good it does to say that someone’s gender is verified and not tell you what it is in relation to their AV, but then again LL is known for doing things in a loopy manner at times). Ager verification is one thing, and it’s by far the easiest sell in this agenda, and so it comes first to sweeten the medicine. If you read the blog, this is just the initial part of a larger project, and at the end of the day, we’re going to be kissing non-disclosure goodbye in everything but the letter of the rule because there will likely be tremendous social pressure in world to be fully “verified” in order to be considerde trustworthy and legitimate. It’s easy to agree about age verification being a good thing … it’s far harder to swallow the rest of this agenda, at least for me.
Obscure Doodad
Aug 31st, 2007
Look, people. It does not matter if their chosen partner is good or not. It does not matter if the system “works” or not or if underaged people still get in. It does not matter if there are holes or flaws in what they do because THAT IS NOT THEIR GOAL.
The purpose of verification is to keep LL officers out of jail. Period and full stop. They were TOLD to do SOMETHING about underaged users. Much like they were TOLD to do SOMETHING to get rid of online gambling.
The problem with this is NOT whether or not it works or can be evaded. They don’t care about that. The problem WE face is that their solution is to translate their risk of jail into risk of future exposure and shift all that risk onto you.
It is completely incomprehensible why they did not fund a small study and declare that they are going to do what Yahoo does, or MSN does for their adult areas — or any other manifestation of what might be thought of as “an industry standard” and simply restrict access behind three layers of YES clicks to the question “are you over 18?” If they already do something like that, and they do, then all they had to do was add a few more layers of Yes clicks and declare to the authorities
“. . . we are now in compliance with what is the industry norm or ‘standard’ for such things. If those standards are inadequate, we encourage law enforcement to contact Yahoo and MSN and prosecute them as desired and we, LL, will comply with whatever new standards evolve from that . . . discussion.” Presto. LL no longer pays legal fees for the battle. Let MSN or Yahoo do so.
THAT is the problem here. Why is a tiny fringe internet enterprise like LL trying to establish a new norm for adult declaration and creating risks for their customers in so doing?
The Todd
Aug 31st, 2007
Oh jeez. I think the complainers are going to verify anyway if you have to — you should know by now that whining about it won’t change anything. There are so many companies that have you personal information already, you should be more concerned about some of them.
GreenLantern Excelsior
Aug 31st, 2007
“As a adult, we had to use our personal info for everything. Bank, Driving License, Health Insurance, Lease, Job, Rental, Gun Ownership, SSN, Online Ordering, etc. etc. The list goes on and on. And you’re worrying your ass off about LL using our personal info?”
Nacon is right. This is yet another Tempest In A Teacup.
Obscure Doodad
Aug 31st, 2007
Useful to point out that those offering forth a profound shrug and saying to go ahead and verify, that it doesn’t matter because Big Brother already has all — or any other reason they can manufacture, likely own stores or rental land in areas they know will be adult. People with adult shops or rental land are about to watch their customer base collapse maybe 50-75% and they will do or say anything to reduce that number and get people to verify — keep their traffic and rental revenue up.
This is why LL is in such a desperate situation. They have been ordered to do this. They KNOW adult land tier is going to be gutted by this as adult designated land owners owners find themselves with a sharp reduction in customers and are forced to sell for nothing, or abandon. Layoffs at LL will soon follow.
It didn’t have to be this way. They could have maneuvered this differently with some other approach that lived with multiple assertions of YES to the over 18 question rather than trying to abuse their customer base with risk.
janeforyou Barbara
Aug 31st, 2007
@Victorria
I ONLY agreed on this “We’ve engaged the services of a third party provider, Aristotle’s Integrity, who will match information that Residents provide with information available in public records. You will be asked to provide your name, geographic location, birthdate, and an ID that is specific to your country, for example the last four digits of your social security number if you’re American. We will not be storing any information except for a code that tells us there was a positive match. Integrity will not keep any identifying information about you.”
I agreed with LL To give them my info based on what thay ask me to do and what thay tell me on just useing a code..IF thay use this in ANY other way NO matter why or for what ever reason thay brake the law.If thay want to use ANY of this info in ANY other way then what i agreed on thay need to make a NEW agreement with me, anf then i will deside if thay can use it.
humanoid
Aug 31st, 2007
A Tempest in a teacup? They’re asking for information (and copies of it!) my ISP didn’t ask for when I signed up for internet service itself. And what do they want it for? A game. No thanks.