If someone stole a car, would you ride around in the car?

Central Grid was a stolen and changed to LCO, this was the start of the greed and underhanded operations of LCO.

And I don’t care about the actual dispute between LaLa and Simone. Its “she said, she said” drama as far as I’m concerned.

Here’s where it gets interesting to me; we have persistance in virtual worlds, whether or not we’re are online. Our actions, buildings, creations, can have consequences whether or not we log in, or even if we continue to live. On Second Life, when you die, you can transfer your account to someone else through your will. But what about other grids? And more to this story, if a resident owes a bill, should the grid use the account to pay the money it is due? A mechanic can keep and sell a car she’s been given to repair if she has never been paid for those repairs. Should a grid company have the same benefit with intellectual property that has been uploaded to it? Its application might be debatable here, but there would be other situations in the future where this would come up.

Now Prok did raise a great point about whether or not receiving a freebie on a grid is the same thing as embedding a YouTube video on a website. I do not believe making a purchase on a grid is the same thing as embedding a video on your website because no matter how you look at currency, I’m giving up a limited license right for the right to access the inventory on the grid. I am not giving up something in order to embed a YouTube Video.

But in using YouTube, it could be said the primary purpose is to watch the video on the website, with options of embedding the video or sharing the link, and for the producer to have his video viewed. With Freebies, the primary purpose to the consumer is to obtain an item and possibly be sold other items. For the producer, its about getting potentially more sales. I think that distinction is important, but reasonable minds can disagree.

And the other difference in my mind involves transfering rights. If I get a no copy transfer item, I can give up my license and give it to someone else. I don’t lose a YouTube embedding by sharing the embedding. If it is copy, then I can create more licenses to view based on my own insistance. And this distinction may be too fine of a point, but I’m not creating more licenses to view by sharing the embedding code.

Actually, I’m not close friends with Simone; she’s a friend in SL, and that by itself tells you that she is not “close” because she’s not among my RL friends. I’ve met her once in RL. That time, I wasn’t hardly able to talk to her — she’s popular, and surrounded with other people. I rarely talk to her in SL, but occasionally we’ll chat, usually when she reaches out to her entire friendship list. I think I have perhaps a dozen free outfits from her, some of them I got years ago, and some more recently, the collegiate ones. I have more free stuff from people who aren’t even friends than I have from Simone, and that’s ok, why wouldn’t I just buy the stuff if I want, that’s what I normally do with all content creators.

Of course, what difference would it make if I were her bosom buddy? The principles are the same. What’s to gain from protecting Simone? Nothing special. In fact, I only get what I usually get for calling it correctly — miles of hate, threats, harassment, griefing, google bombs, etc. Only 2-3 weeks ago in fact I publicly disputed something Simone said about traffic, and I ranted at her for 2 days because she was wrong about dismissing the importance of traffic. Hardly the behaviour of a little sycophant ready to “gain something”. But of course, in your narrow and cynical mind, that’s how you view all of Second Life, a series of wretched favour banks.

Getting a few shirts and talking to somebody occasionally in SL doesn’t constitute some motivation to go and blast some fledgling world that in fact I was interested in supporting at first. I had no knowledge of these people before. I just thought it was wrong. If they did this to even an enemy like Cristiano or Hiro, I’d call it too — nobody should get burned on a deal like that and content creators shouldn’t be shafted by grid owners. This is an important precept to get right now, at the dawn of the outer Metaverse.

No, what you can’t deal with is my telling the truth as a I see it. You can’t face that truth, and can’t imagine that people would simply be motivated by morality to tell the truth about a bad situation.

Jessica self-discredits.

I’m not certain at all that in fact it *does* matter where the servers are. And I know that frankly, Philip Rosedale is committed to that idea and talked about it enthusiastically in an interview with BBC — he wants countries and grid owners to take over servers and make their own rules for SL. He loves that concept.

First of all thank you for pointing out the obvious. Yes I am an asshole. I am quite good at it evidently and if you think for half a second that I am changing sides you are sorely mistaken. I have my own side, no one elses. Now unlike Jess you are responding out of anger for my statements.

As for your pointing out so dilligently that you have nothing to gain? That is a lie and you stated it yourself. You and her are close friends and you stated that she gives you free content. So this is your way of kissing her crusted ass so you can keep that friendship. As for the rest… WOW I have never seen such a blatant disregard for common sense in my life. Did you even read back through your own post to see if you made any sense at all?

Here’s what I beleive. I think you are just pissy cause I backed a few things that Jessica said. And because she is firing at you, you have to come back at me to give your e-penis a nice fat erection to make yourself feel better.

Am I a lawyer? No. Have I stated I am? No. Do I know a bit about the law? Hell yes.

My advice is simple. The two of you need to stop this little pissing contest that is doing nothing more than to waste away your keyboards. Move on. There’s new things to make fun of now. I know I will.

Oh … One last thing. No it does not matter where the servers are. Only where the company is that is paying for them.

Again:

1. I have no investment in Simone, and never had any investment in Simone. Her being my cheap rentals tenant 3 years ago isn’t “an investment”. I have no business dealings with Simone and have had none since she was a tenant; she left long ago. Your insinuation of this purported interest is laughingly one-sided, as you never track the obvious vested interest that Jessica and Pixeleen have in covering this story: they take paid ads from LCO right here on the Herald site, duh. I imagine in your benighted peabrain, no one can undertake a story and a blog for any reasons of public interest and civic good, they could only be using the press to grind an axe. As the Herald incessantly grinds its axes and pampers those paying its ads and helping to sell its newspapers, the bar has been set rather low.

2. Please show me a court ruling with a judicial decision that tells us that issues like two-party or one-party consent for voicing in virtual worlds hinge on the location of the company, and not the location of the servers or the location of the user’s connection. Also, keep in mind that the Lindens have a variety of other companies and sub-contractors for their localizations. There are companies in UK, Singapore, China, etc. Soooooo let’s here your argumentation *there* “counsellor”. The notorious Vryl, for example, whose perfidies have been much ventilated on these pages, is in France, where it is a crime to tape private telephone conversations without two party consent, and so she’s invoking the fact of her access from France to these servers in California for saying “she has a case”. I don’t *think* she has a case, but I don’t know. Let her try her case.

3. Stick your nose all you like in any business you like, you are merely proviing yourself to be a tendentious asshole.

I have absolutely no stake in the world of LCO, and absolutely no stake in Simone Stern or her dealings with any party. Something like 3 years ago, Simone once rented I believe it was 2 stores from me back when there were telehubs or right after the telehubs — ages ago. It was one of many stores in one of several of my malls. Rent was something cheap like $150 a month and $250 a month in Lindens. There was another location she considered taking — but she never got the store in and somebody else took the spot. She was there in my stores for a few months or something, she made sales, but then she decided to consolidate herself on a new private island which she got after she moved her main store out of that old telehub sim which Forseti built. Since then, I haven’t had any business dealings with Simone. There are literally thousands and thousands of people who have been my tenants. I have so many newbie rentals, large residential areas, cheap stores, stalls, etc. all around that sooner or later, many people pass through, in one way or another. It means nothing.

Simone is merely a friend, not anyone I know especially well or even talk to very often — I met her once in RL at SLCC 2 years ago. I hear from her now and then; she sent me some suits recently as I guess I’m notorious for never shopping and never dressing and people get tired of seeing the same outfit on me. I don’t really “move in her circles” as I don’t follow fashion and don’t shop except for gadgets.

She sent a message through her friendship card list about how wonderful LCO was — this would be about 6 weeks ago or so. I didn’t have a good enough computer or the time, but when I did, I began going there and saw that it was a much better set up — seemingly — than the commerce-hating copyleftism freetard republic of OpenSim, and I considered buying there. But I merely made a free newbie account and didn’t buy any land or sims or make any relationships or business dealings whatsoever. Simone hyped it up quite a bit — I visited her freebie newbie store, picked up some outfits from her and Asri, and explored around. But the world crashed so much I just couldn’t “stay put” and moved on.

Simone contacted me about the deal going wrong about a week ago, when she was locked out. I went to investigate the status of her content and wrote a story. How can I know about her phone calls from LCO? Because, um, I interviewed her? Duh? I fail to see anything “damning” or “vested interest” in that. She told me she had had phones calls with LaLa; that LaLa pursued her even at home at her RL number, etc.

I hardly think that someone who had had the kind of conversation with LaLa that was clearly retained as a chatlog would fear telling this story, and fear any chatlogs coming out, because she felt that she was absolutely in the clear on this. And as far as I can tell, she is.

There’s several levels of misunderstanding here and assumption on your part — which is framed from Jessica’s false framing of the issue from the start, which merely naturally flows from the inherent bias and tendentiousness here at the Herald (no surprise there).

It’s one thing to look at a system like this, with its regular rules, which are “you register for free, you buy a sim, you set up a recurring maintenance payment, you sign a TOS to enter the world” and it’s another to look at the rules for that world’s FIC, which are those special partners, and special deals with people you want to provide content or services for the world itself, as third-party consultans or contractors. LL has paved the wide road for how you make FIC here; others copy it.

LCO was no different; they knowingly, openly, in chatlogs, made a deal to have a comped sim, outside the system, that had no payment on file and no automatic billing set up (as this chatlog from LaLa in fact inadvertently tells you in spades). They had an arrangement, which we’ve now seen in loads of other comments from other divas — that upload fees, which are considerable for a content maker, were compensated, and that sim initial purchase costs were comped. Simone understood the deal to be one where she would continue to get tier waived; she also appears to have understood the deal that if/when the business seemed to generate
enough for tier, payment of tier may be appropriate, but clearly she wasn’t there yet; that fact was referenced in the chatlog.

So why all this Fisking and literalizing about the TOS when this is a documented, validated extra-TOS, extra billing system deal? Duh? A, the TOS is unconscionable, “counsellors,” as you well know; we even have a RL ruling on the Linden TOS about that, thanks to Bragg. It’s a contract of adhesion — and worse, with worse wording, and in a worse context where there is no track record or good business practices, with a history of complaints. B, it’s a documented extra-TOS agreement outside the system.

The promise in the deal, written in chatlogs, verbal on Skype, or up your ass, it doesn’t matter, is glaringly indicated in the fact that LaLa had to manually send a dunning notice telling Simone to go put payment on file and start paying for the sim. Simone initially decided to jolly her along on that, but pointed out that business wasn’t happening. And you know why? Because the world sucks. I made repeated visits, as did others. One attempt to TP to Simone’s store not only crashed the LCO client, it crashed my computer. Repeated, repeated attempts for days of logging on and visiting always ended, sooner or later, in lock-ups, crashes, TPs going nowhere, stuff not being able to be selected — the usual menu of woes. Also, the currency system, which was very new and very creaky, wasn’t in position quite yet, and not full of trust. So it had a long way to go.

Jessica — like some very vested interests on the forums like “Paperdoll,” an alt who has an interest in LCO — is working for the Herald, which takes LCO ad money. No firewall there. So Jessica is trying to frame this issue as “customer signs TOS; customer waives IP over to grid owner on TOS signing; customer doesn’t pay tier and gets locked out; customer waits 30 days to be deleted and should shut up”.

But that’s all literalist Fisking bullshit. Simone made a deal to provide her content to help promote this new world! As did others, some of whom, we are told, are only paying now $25 tier a month, not $100, or no tier at all — in keeping with the terms of the insiders’ FIC deal for this world. TOS need not apply. And Lala herself gives credence for the existence of the deal by telling Simone that she doesn’t have to worry about the lag in putting money on her PayPal; that if she is automatically locked out as a routine manner, all she has to do is contact LaLa or Live Help *and it will be overriden*.

It will be overridden! There it is, in LaLa’s improperly released but authentic chatlog! So you all you fiskers and fucktards have to “get it” here: it’s a FIC deal, it’s an extra-TOS deal of the likes the Lindens would create; and it’s a deal that went WRONG.

Instead of overriding, LaLa, for whatever reason, possibly because she needed to accommodate other designers and hustle Simone’s content out of the newbie store and put in other people’s (that’s what it looks like, judging from her rotation plans mentioned on the forums), decided to dump Simone. She figured she could get away with it. She estimated that she could dun Simone for tier, and Simone, eager to keep a store there, would just go along with it. She estimated incorrectly.

What will a judge rule, if he even agrees to take this case? I have no idea; there aren’t very good precedents for judicial rulings on content and its problems in virtual worlds; in fact, there aren’t rulings *at all* because they always are decided in *settlements*. He may say Simone has no case, but meanwhile, the wheels of the DMCA procedure grind forward. Rather than treating this as some “ISP” with a “TOS”, Simone and her counsel are going up a level, and going to the *real* ISP here, which is the host of the LCO grid, and asking for a takedown of content, as it is being distributed without the creator’s consent, and is selling as well, into an account to which only the grid owner has access. So, we may see this resolved in 24 hours as it is merely taken down to comply with the ISP directive, or we may see it take some time to resolve — but we’re seeing this dealt with a far, far simpler manner than all you Internet Lawyers imagine.

LCO’s claims of a voice contract or a text up your ass, Prof. C, do not matter. All that matters is whether the host of LCO decides that they need to remove that content. That’s all. And likely they will ensure that it is removed. That’s my guess. I could be wrong. We’ll see.

Ultimately, you don’t lose the right to your copyright just because a TOS is unconscionable. Or because it is given away for free. Please find me a case of user-generated content in an online world where that is the case, and where this notion of yours is confirmed not by your lawbooks, which you can study out your ass, but by *judicial review and judicial decision*. From a court RULING. Not a settlement. And not what you imagine the law to be, and how you hypothesize how it will apply.

And you won’t find them.

There’s no bow that goes to Jessica here, who as usual has flied a tendentious and hateful story based merely on his hate of me, because I keep calling his stupid bluff. He keeps cooking up concoctions and tendentious, deliberately misreadings, like this foolish one: “For instance on the Herald, he accuses me of suggesting that Simone should have tape recorded LaLa’s conversations”.

Huh? Where did I do that? I didn’t. It’s some deliberate misreading. Again, the story was thus: IF Simone had taped the conversation or if LaLa had taped the RL phone call AND they lived in states where they needed two-party consent THEN they might face a challenge or a prosecution. That’s all. I merely referenced that. I have no idea what states they live in; that’s their business. It’s immaterial to this story, as LaLa published chatlogs from her Live Help customer service. I simply don’t know if that is “the same thing as” a RL telephone call, and I simply don’t know which state’s laws would apply, especially if the host of these servers is in Germany, I believe.

So far from having what you ennumerate as the facts, here’s what we have:

o Chatlogs from the Live Help service of LCO that the original grid host may be able to confirm if needed, which appear authentic
o Acknowledgement in that chatlog that a) there was no billing info on file, and a comped sim outside the normal purchase/tier system and b) acknowledgement of a special arrangement, and willingness to override the normal billing/lockout procedures on LaLa’s part
o A filing of a DMCA notice to the host of LCO, and their prompt response that they have asked *their customer*, LCO, to remove the content within 24 hours
o A TOS agreement that is unconscionable
o Simone’s content still there, and available for sale to her closed account — I checked again last night

It’s about time someone responded to my posts with forethought and intellect. Taking the time to breathe and relax and not just posting some random message about hating who I am or what I do. For that Jessica you have earned even my respect. You need to take the same attitude in dealing with Prok as you do with me and relax. I can sense the anger in your tone with every post to him. Let that go.

But enough about that. Back to the subject shall we?

The location of the servers is irrelevant when it comes to Second Life. As Prok politely pointed out in that other blog post, California has a two party consent law. The fact that Texas has a one party does not matter as Linden Labs is based out of California and not Texas. The laws do not care about where the server itself is only the company the server belongs to. End Result. You cannot record. Prok’s logic is flawed. And he is grasping at straws to defend his investment in Simone. Forgive me for not having more information on exactly what he is gaining out of this. It is early and I have not started sticking my nose in their business.

As for yourself, if you think she can have a case on this based on a contract that, for all intents and purposes, does not exist then so be it. You are correct in your last statement. And in fact Most of your argument. But the fact remains that if there is no proof the contract was made she is going to have a hell of a time fighting this. And all the evidence she is going to have over this is virtual and in most cases, correct me if I am wrong, circumstantial. She can show upload fees, any text documents but if they are Text files they can be discarded with a simple ‘I didn’t say that’ by Legend City. And from what I am seeing this conversation happened on Skype. No witnesses to see the contract. Again laying this down we have the following:

A voiced agreement (Contract) where there is no proof detailing exactly what was said.
Printed text documents that are alterable very quickly.
The TOS Agreement
Uploaded Items to the Legend City Servers.
Simones account shut down and content still there and being sold.

What is our end result? All Legend City has to say is that the text documents are incorrect and that the voiced agreement did not happen in the way Simone portrays. So what evidence is there now? Simple. Zero at least in Simone’s favor. She now is left to convince a jury of her peers that the agreement was made. What will be the end result? Honestly I don’t even think this is worth pursuing in court. Not the least bit. Unless … you know something that I do not? Would you care to share the things you may or may not have told the others in the class?

Now I will end this with a bow to you Jessica. Perhaps you have a good head on your shoulders after all.

For instance on the Herald, he accuses me of suggesting that Simone should have tape recorded LaLa’s conversations. And then told me how that breaks RL laws and I should go back to bagging groceries. Then he posts this http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/second_thoughts/2008/12/voice-of-consent.html#more which lists how many locations allow for one party consent on recording conversations. Meaning how many states allow for doing what Prokofy insinuated I said Simone should do then proudly stated how wrong I was for suggesting it.

And you are right that Simone would have to be the one to enforce the contract in court. However, it is only to a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond reasonable doubt. Meaning that it is more likely than not that a contract that she said was formed was created. And the thing is that bothers me about this is that if LaLa was making these same deals with everyone, offering free sims for content, then where are the other people saying either “yes, she offered us free sims for life and what she is doing is wrong” or “no, she only offered us free sims for a month.” Either way, that’s your proof in court with these people. There are issues of proof, don’t get me wrong. It would be vastly greater if the agreement was in writing, but people have won court cases when a contract has been made with a nod of the head.

Well everyone here can argue amongst eachother like school children,but the bottom line here is this article,and all the comments here are just he said, she said and will have no bearing on any decision made by anyone in this disagreement.
So what’s the point other than to get people to read this…..
wich is what is happeneng really nothing more,ok maybe a smear campaign against someone…one or the other,or both.

@Wiseguy….Don’t you have anything better to do ???

I have to find it amusing that you think I hate everyone. Honestly I could care less. But if you notice when and where I post it is usually at those that are trying to toot their own horn (The Cheerleaders & Steve01) yet have secrets they do not want exposed.

For instance the Cheerleaders went on a random tangent talking about how good and pure they are. But if you go in and look the ranch is a brothel and they are selling stolen content. Something their biggest supporter Stroker is dead set against. Perhaps he did not know that or perhaps he does and he is turning a blind eye. Which makes you wonder if he is doing the same and just getting away with it. And tell me honestly, if your local charity organization was really a whore house in duisguise would you want them in your neighborhood? Or representing you at all? Thought not.

After that there really wasn’t anything … wrong going about. Not even on this thread until….

I came on and saw these two having it out. But what was going past the average user were the statements that Prok said to the tune of knowing about phone calls. Well that means he knows Simone personally. Which raises the question of Does he have something to gain in all of this and is that why he is suddenly fighting tooth and nail? And for that matter why is Jessica defending her article so passionately? There is something more to this that you and I are not being told. I already pointed out Prok’s reason for posting. He has a vested interest in the content. Prok DID give a hint to why Jessica is being so nuts over this. And that is cause Prok beat her to the punch on another newspaper. Jessica got scooped so you have a journalist fight. In fact if you look my first post was taking a crack at Jessica because she is trying to state that a verbal contract is still a contract. Yes it is but it won’t stand up in court which is where this is going. Her logic is faulty.

Now here is logic that is not very faulty. You sir made this statement:

“Cyber stalkers and trolls like you is the reason I canceled my Second Life account and got on with my real life career and relationships.”

I corrected the typo for you. But if you really left and canceled your account wanting nothing more to do with Second Life, why do you care? Or perhaps you are lying as well to give yourself a bit of self worth by taking a pot shot at me? Is that why you are listing yourself as ‘Former SL Resident’ instead of your old SL name? It’s because you never deleted your account. You are a cog in the machine that is Second Life. Just like I am.

I have to say that out of all the trolls and griefers that are going on with these forums, I am proud that I am the one singled out to have shots taken back at me. You know what that tells me? That I am hitting the mark. My digging and researching of these little Golden Children and showing their flaws to the public is pissing them off.

I have been lurking these pages for years and gathering information. Time for the truth to come out. Truth always comes out.