Comments on: Op/Ed: What Does Winning Look Like for Eros?

By: Jumpman Lane

Jumpman Lane — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:39:18 +0000

@Debi here! here!
@IMHO there’s a day of reckoning coming for one Stroker Serpentine

By: IMHO

IMHO — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 23:59:23 +0000

@jumpman Lane

Not to mention he also libeled Corsi by accusing the person of things,which i feel that corsi should be able to sue Stroker for.

By: Debi Dastardly

Debi Dastardly — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 21:32:54 +0000

Here is a thought why doesn’t LL just get rid of the whiners and be done with it already. Just because a few have had their toes stepped on (who hasn’t). Why should a few over sensitive cry baby’s ruin it for everyone? Oh an BTW anything I create in sl I could care less about making anything from, I do it because its fun…..Hello FUN do we still remember what that is here …gosh I feel like I’m in a room with a bunch of Business butts from rl and now they have their criminals..ooops I meant lawyers with them want to look into theft start with Lawyers are a good place to start looking, they are pros at theft.
I WISH THESE PEOPLE WOULD GO BACK TO BEING PLUMBERS !! and leave my game alone.

By: Jumpman Lane

Jumpman Lane — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 20:44:39 +0000

There is no winning for Eros.
1. Eros’s ‘corporate culture’ is one of rapine, they aint nothing but a pack of content theives, exposing themselves as such to an ever-widening audience

a. from Cheergirl Allen teaching Chelsea Malibu to use the gl intercept to steal Emilia Redgraves skins,

b.to Stroker himself being the biggest content thief in the history of Second Life:
1) reselling Linden freebies back in the day
2) tradmarking the name Sexgen(tm) coined by Briggi Bard
3) removing the split profits scripts in beds made with Briggi Bard scripts and Corsi Mousehold animations (and continuing to sell the same scripts and anims to this day
4) threatening to sue Corsi Mousehold and Briggi Bard for continuing to use the SexGen(tm) name effectively preventing the two former partners from selling works they created collectively
5) shitting Briggi Bard out of any of the proceeds of the sale of the Amsterdam sim (at least half of which she built)

2. Eros cant compete (with J&G or Akeasha for example) because Briggi Bard and Corsi Mousehold were the CREATIVE spark behind the SexGen(tm) brand. Ol Stroke is left running scared on the grid, hardly logging in, NOT creating new works, new sims new nothing, hoping it’ll all die down is NOT playin sl and having fun (OH WE KNOW, Jumpy got spies everywhere goddamnit!)

3. WILL LL let someone they have to pay PENNY one use their service when they can revoke that priveledge at will. Would garnering strenthen intellectual property rights be a coup for the most notorious content thief in all the history of second life?

4. well eroswins only if publicity was all them tards was after.

By: Senban Babii

Senban Babii — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 04:54:28 +0000

@Froukje Hoorenbeek

“There is another solution and that is simply to prevent unvalidated avatars to put content for sale, as Gwyneth Llewelyn suggests here: ”

How would that prevent someone from creating a copy of an object and then either passing it freely or simply selling it privately?

Is it also worth pondering just how much copybotting activity is actually done by the content creators themselves? How many of them have copybotted the competition’s goods and given them away free just to put the other guy out of business? ZOMGAWSH THEY WOULDN’T, WOULD THEY? Umm, actually yes, they would.

By: LittleLostLinden

LittleLostLinden — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:15:06 +0000

Holy Triple Moly!

First Blue Mars and now this.

Is this the end of SL as we know it?

Nope.

By: Hiro Pendragon

Hiro Pendragon — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 01:58:58 +0000

@Jessica – it’s a good question to what “validation” means. That wasn’t something Gwyn and I discussed, and I suppose it’s up for debate. I think that’s a secondary issue and I don’t foresee the choice of that affecting the overall points of the suggestion.

Validation could mean:
1. Payment
2. Real ID
3. Either 1 or 2
4. Both 1 and 2
5. Facebook account or OpenID? (this one has some serious pros and cons)

By: Jessica Holyoke

Jessica Holyoke — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:54:38 +0000

I read over Gwyn’s article and thinking on what “validation” means. The thing is, I can have payment information on file and still layer it out without giving my real information but not do anything illegal. I have done and continue to do things on SL that I don’t want associated with my real identity, but I’m not breaking any laws.

I was also thinking about the payment confirmation idea for unvalidated avatars. My first thought are the strippers who might be adult verified, but whose information would not be kept through the av process. Would the tip jars work with that confirmation of payment scheme?

A problem with copyright registration in Second Life is that the grid is really really big. Its possible to have independent creation of items. So when two people say they created something that looks the same, it doesn’t necessarily follow that one copied the other.

But I like that idea better than what I have seen so far.

By: LittleLostLinden

LittleLostLinden — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 20:31:18 +0000

Holy Double Fried Linden Moly!

The end is near.

As Borf from Space Ace used to say: “You can not win!”

Perhaps the same applies here to the Lindens.

Or, as Dr. Somebody used to say from Airplane:

“Surely you can’t be serious!”

I am serious, and please, don’t call me Surely.

By: Gwyneth Llewelyn

Gwyneth Llewelyn — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:26:54 +0000

There is an intriguing suggestion which I’ve read somewhere to allow content creators to watermark their creations. This would be a special upload to a LL-held “repository”, where content creators could tag them as being their own (I’m assuming that it would also automatically watermark all textures/sculpties used). Some optimists have even suggested that LL should run an automatic procedure on all content rezzed in SL, match it to the repository’s database, and immediately delete it if the content creator’s tag differs from the one on the repository.

I wonder if this is computationally possible at all. Sure, I understand one fear of the content creators. Sometimes, when filing a DMCA claim, LL blocks access to *all* avatars, both the complainer and the accused ones, and might remove *all* content until they figure out who is the creator and who is the thief. Needless to say, this is a behaviour that content creators are not keen to accept, and the “repository” would be a way to at least “prove” that you’re the author, and the other party is the thief.

Besides the computational intensity of the procedure, I wonder how it would prevent a pirate to upload content to the repository *before* the author does…