Skills Hak Tags Over 4000 Copybot Capable Avatars
by Pixeleen Mistral on 23/03/10 at 12:09 pm
Skills Hak is claiming significant success for the Gemini Cybernetics CDS anti-copybot system, and recently told the Herald "we looked up the number of uniquely flagged avatars using malicious viewers, the number is 4424. There have been around 70 appeals of which we granted 11, none of them were false posities, but extenuating circumstances".
When we first covered this story Hak’s database of digital rights management agnostic avatars there were around 1200 avatars tagged as dangerous, so the claimed growth since the system was launched is impressive, suggesting large numbers of players who are armed and potentially dangerous to Linden Lab’s DRM controls.
The CDS system detects the Second Life viewers of avatars in the vicinity and forcibly ejects anyone who has ever been found with client software which has to potential to make unauthorized copies of Second Life content. With a zero-tolerance policy for naughty client use and a centralized database of suspicious avatars, the CDS system provides a convenient way for subscribers to pool their resources in the fight against content copying.
However, significant concerns remain about the transparency of the process and potential for abuse. Because the banned avatar database remains secret, there is little if any public oversight possible, and the possibility that those running the database might add enemies to the ban list is at least a theoretical concern. Skills Hak told the Herald that Linden Lab suggested that Hak keep the list of copyright capable avatars private saying, "believe me i’d love to publish the names, but people will read it as a list of known thieves which it isn’t".
Are the copybot client users running on throwaway accounts? Aparently not, although Skills has yet to run an in-depth demographic study of players in the CDS database.
In Skill’s words, "from what i see it’s totally random. some 2005 accounts who "tried" cryolife, mostly clubbers and people interested in sl party with alot of ascii in the profiles, lots of fashionistas. the hottest places are the clubs. i gave out a good bunch of free relays to club and sandbox owners and asked them to set them to message only/no ban. these places are like nests, especially the clubs"
Ted
Apr 11th, 2010
For the above, that is line 169.
The point being, Linden is doing a power grab. They have always maintained that they “own” your data, regardless of outright stating it.
They do so by stating that they themselves grant “license” on works they have no rights granting license on. They over ride prior license agreements between the person creating such content, and those using such content.
This needs to go to court. Linden needs sued for harboring data and creating terms that in no way reflect other license agreements, nor the accepted terms of most web hosting providers.
They end up in court, you will see a substantial change in their attitudes. Regardless of their illegal Terms of Service.
Ted
Apr 11th, 2010
Another statement. If you see anyone signing up for Linden’s tyrannical
scheme and accepting their Terms of Service by placing their client on the list, you indeed should not be using the client.
My guess is that Linden will help one of the major players get on the list. If they do, they are giving up their freedoms and rights. They are teaching others to do the same and deserve neither liberty, nor security.
Linden’s own open source client code licensed under the gnu/gpl doesn’t allow one to accept their tyranny and illegal Terms of Service in my view as their own open source code as written is in direct opposition to their terms.
Anyone getting on the list under the current terms will lose the respect of the community. You either believe in the freedom of open source, or you do not.
Linden’s own client code indeed states that they need honor full permission based items under fair use. Their Terms of Service indeed conflicts with their client code and licensing terms.
Gundel Gaukelei
Apr 12th, 2010
@Ted “Linden’s own open source client code licensed under the gnu/gpl doesn’t allow one to accept their tyranny and illegal Terms of Service in my view as their own open source code as written is in direct opposition to their terms.”
You’ve got to separate the rights regarding the source code (as granted by the various OSLs in question) from the right to use a service or use trademarks (and alike) owned by LL.
You are still allowed to view, modify and redistribute the code without signing the TOS or rather the 3rd party viewer requirements.
Ted
Apr 12th, 2010
“@Ted “Linden’s own open source client code licensed under the gnu/gpl doesn’t allow one to accept their tyranny and illegal Terms of Service in my view as their own open source code as written is in direct opposition to their terms.”
“You’ve got to separate the rights regarding the source code (as granted by the various OSLs in question) from the right to use a service or use trademarks (and alike) owned by LL.”
I understand the difference sir. My point is that Lindens terms are not valid or legal. To use such service as stated by the Terms of Service, you are agreeing and signing such terms of service.
“You are still allowed to view, modify and redistribute the code without signing the TOS or rather the 3rd party viewer requirements.”
This is correct, however, you cannot connect with such clients that do not adhere to their Terms of Service and related policies of the TPV unless such client adheres to policies that are in direct opposition to the code in which they claim open source.
I do understand the difference between open code, and open service or allowing their own software to be used to connect to such service. I stand by my stance that neither are compatible.
“Fair Use” is a legal term. Not just a coding practice.
Gundel Gaukelei
Apr 12th, 2010
@Ted
It can’t be in opposition, if its not related, because opposition is a relation. The comment from the source is about enforcing fair use in regard to setting object permissions in the code. You’ve got to pay attention to context.
I doubt some IANAL comment made by some random dev within a source code will have any legal binding effect. Im would furthermore be surprised, if said developer had the right to make such a statement in the name of LL.
But then, its US law where everything is possible, depending on how many stupid douchebags made it into the jury.
Ted
Apr 12th, 2010
@Gundel,
The comment in the source code is indeed about enforcing fair use in regards to object permissions. Which is my point. Thank you for clarifying the point once again. And that is correct, this is the US of A and there are laws that protect from Linden’s disgraceful business practices.
Set aside those issues, there are larger issues with Linden’s stance that they can over ride prior license agreements between content creators and users of such creations with their Terms of Service.
The Terms of Service that states that they alone grant license for such works residing within their domain. Thus, they are indeed stating that there is no fair use, that such items that are licensed under open terms are irrelevant, and that their Terms of Service can disallow the removal of data, software, and product residing on their servers despite the fact that the prior license agreements written for those works doesn’t allow Linden that authority.
No matter your continued argument, there is no argument. Lindens Terms of Service is illegal and wouldn’t stand up in a court of law under the jurisdiction they reside in. Nor any state within the U.S for that matter. Not in full, most likely not in part either. That is my opinion and I stand by it.
No matter if you agree with my opinion, you certainly must have your belief’s on what you see taking shape with Linden’s Terms of Service and the Third Party Viewer Agreements. No matter if you agree with my opinion, I find it hard to believe that you would find it acceptable in any way to limit others rights to license their works as they see fit, as they have for years, and not be trodden under foot by a dictatorship agreements that doesn’t reflect or uphold the original license agreements of those works. Those licenses doesn’t give Linden the opportunity, nor the right, to state that they have control over such works, or that they can over ride such prior agreements.
If it’s licensed as a BSD works in 2004. It’s still licensed as a BSD works in 2010. And Linden shouldn’t be making further stipulations on use. On, or off their servers.
That’s all I have to say about it, if you want to argue that you disagree, that is fine, I’ll post no more on the topic.
Darien Caldwell
Apr 12th, 2010
Wow, this Ted guy is on drugs. Trip on, dude.
required
Apr 13th, 2010
1. Use Imprudence
2. use –channel “Second Life Release”
3. get banned
4. claim there are no false positives
Terminus Est
Apr 15th, 2010
Skills Hak, Ash Qin, LukaStar Mattercaster, Cinndreia Messmer, GEMINIbot Inventor & Lonely Bluebird need to urgently review clauses 8.2(iv) and 8.3(iv) of the ToS and of the Community Standards 2, 3 and 6. Each AVI named above may shortly be reported to LL for abuses due to the method of operation of the GEMINI Industries CDS.
Muziekfreak1980 miles
Apr 15th, 2010
@ Teminus
Just to say to that one thing…
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHAH
LL condoned the system its approved goodluck! You will need it :S
Tux Winkler
Apr 15th, 2010
@ Muziekfreak1980
The system is not approved, LL never approve anything.
Ari Blackthorne
Apr 15th, 2010
LOL
It is “approved” by the fact that LL refuses to “ban” it. Therefor it is “condoned” and in being “condoned” it is therefor “approved” for use on the grid.
“Approval” does not mean “sanctioned” or “endorsed”.
I am still amazed at how many people need to sue their schools because they have zero understanding of the difference and meanings of one word versus another word versus another word, etcetera.
Either way, all those threats to Abuse Report Skills and the CDS and those people using it… well?
Well?
WELL?
Zero results from those efforts (that never occurred to begin with because those making such threats are all empty-suited-paper-tigers).
/me sits back, laughs even harder and stuffs his mouth with another fistful of popcorn enjoying the entertainment as provided by all the clowns in the room.
Tux Winkler
Apr 15th, 2010
@ Ari
“It is “approved” by the fact that LL refuses to “ban” it. Therefor it is “condoned” and in being “condoned” it is therefor “approved” for use on the grid.”
- No, I suggest you ask a linden. If skills put ‘Linden Lab approved for use on the grid’, the Lindens would remove it (I have personal experience of this for a charity which passed all the Linden checks).
- Approved means that a Linden has actually looked at it and said its Ok.
- It will not be banned because the code itself does nothing malicious. And the webserver is out of LL reach and therefore their authority too.
“Either way, all those threats to Abuse Report Skills and the CDS and those people using it… well?”
- The product does nothing wrong. It is a simple device. Why would LL do anything against Skills? Unless LL bans centralised ban lists then there is nothing that can be done.
“/me sits back, laughs even harder and stuffs his mouth with another fistful of popcorn enjoying the entertainment as provided by all the clowns in the room.”
- Be careful not to choke (and I am not talking about chickens)!
Gundel Gaukelei
Apr 15th, 2010
You can’t win by the rules against an opponent that makes the rules. In the end, there is only one rule: the lindens are always right. Get used to it or leave the grid.
Ted
Apr 15th, 2010
Good advice Gundel, and agreed. Closed my accounts last night. Last straw and never again.
Take care!
Terminus Est
Apr 15th, 2010
@ Tux
Things may get interesting for the GEMINI Industries team in the next week. This is not a threat, it is an observation and a careful reading of 8.2(iv) and 8.3(iv) in the ToS might be of benefit to all parties concerned.
Tux Winkler
Apr 15th, 2010
@ Terminus
“8.2.iv. Post, display or transmit Content that is harmful, threatening or harassing, defamatory, libelous, false, inaccurate, misleading, or invades another person’s privacy;”
- I think this is within the constraints of the SL servers. LL state that is the extent of their control. The CDS is just a collision detector. the client (all clients) do the actual work.
- Off topic, I thought libelous was spelt libellous (a typo in the TOS)?
“8.3.iv. Engage in malicious or disruptive conduct that impedes or interferes with other users’ normal use of the Service;”
- Again, I think this falls onto the land owner for using the system (unless Skills adds people to the list out of spite).
Of course I may be totally wrong, but that is how I read it. In fact their are other systems now which extend the CDS and actually ban you for your IP. This is of course stoopid because not everyone has a static IP!
Terminus Est
Apr 15th, 2010
@ Tux
Yes, see also…
COMMUNITY STANDARDS
…The Community Standards sets out six behaviors, the ‘Big Six’, that will result in suspension or, with repeated violations, expulsion from the Second Life Community.
All Second Life Community Standards apply to all areas of Second Life, the Second Life Forums, and the Second Life Website….
2. Harassment
Given the myriad capabilities of Second Life, harassment can take many forms. Communicating or behaving in a manner which is offensively coarse, intimidating or threatening, constitutes unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors, or is otherwise likely to cause annoyance or alarm is Harassment.
3. Assault
Most areas in Second Life are identified as Safe. Assault in Second Life means: shooting, pushing, or shoving another Resident in a Safe Area (see Global Standards below); creating or using scripted objects which singularly or persistently target another Resident in a manner which prevents their enjoyment of Second Life.
6. Disturbing the Peace
Every Resident has a right to live their Second Life. Disrupting scheduled events, repeated transmission of undesired advertising content, the use of repetitive sounds, following or self-spawning items, or other objects that intentionally slow server performance or inhibit another Resident’s ability to enjoy Second Life are examples of Disturbing the Peace.”
What is the advantage of a database that blacklists AVIs when it is the presence of a griefing/copybot Viewer that is the issue, not the name attached to the person entering a protected sim? As you rightly point out ref the banning of IP addresses (when many are dynamic), this is a clumsy approach that goes beyond reasonable defensive action. Providing the means to autoban and sharing an unappealable database might cause questions about the integrity of Skills Hak and the other names mentioned above. ToS violations can work both ways…
Tux Winkler
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Terminus
Don’t get me wrong, I am just pointing out what the Lab says. It says of course “All the CDS is outside of SL and beyond our jurisdiction, if a land owner decides to subscribe to a central banlist, that is their choice.”
I have asked the question – XD.
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
And your question is a good one. It is indeed the choice of a land owner to subscribe or not to a central banlist, and rightly so. It is perhaps not so clear that the providers of the means to utilise the central banlist are beyond the jurisdiction of SL. There may be a valid argument that Skills et al have breached ToS 8.2.iv & 8.3.iv and by their actions have contravened Community Standards 2, 3 & 6, through the promotion and provision of the banlist and by the autoban facility available within CDS.
There is also a wider issue of “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes” in respect of their non-transparent appeals system.
Calif
Apr 16th, 2010
“Approved means that a Linden has actually looked at it and said its
Ok.”
Um – they are actually having meetings with LL… as far as i am concerned the Lindens have access to their database and are going to use the information to enforce the TPV Policy
We
Apr 16th, 2010
Anyways, I gotta give it to Skills, she tried Copybotting and selling her stolen items to make easy money, and found that it was too easy to get caught and the repercussions were pretty nasty.
So she went with this scam, and not only is she managing to separate idiots from their money, she’s having those same idiots defend her (a known copybotter) while she rips them off. Pretty brilliant scheme.
The only question is how long she can keep this going, it won’t be long before the smugness wears off and even her most ardent defenders will be critically looking at their 700 L$ per month CDS systems and going “Is this actually doing anything?”. Unfortunately by the time they uncover the truth, Skills will have ran off with their money, laughing at them all the way to the bank.
Ah! If only I had less of a conscience, I would be rich as well.
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Calif
“Um – they are actually having meetings with LL… as far as i am concerned the Lindens have access to their database and are going to use the information to enforce the TPV Policy”
- Would you share your source for this information? Are you saying that LL has become a party to the database held in Germany? That would be a most interesting development and might place SL on this issue within the jurisdictions of the German and European courts.
Interesting.
Tux Winkler
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Calif
What a complete load of rubbish.
Why would LL use an unverified external source to enforce a policy, which open them to all sorts of legal issues, when they capture the data anyway?
If you check the viewer policy you will see LL puts in so many get out clauses to avoid blame or repercussions it is unreal. They don’t actually need to enforce it, because if anyone complains they will avoid blame in policies.
And If they have so much faith in Skills and her remote servers, why then is Emerald not on the Third Party Viewer Directory?
http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Tux
“And If they have so much faith in Skills and her remote servers, why then is Emerald not on the Third Party Viewer Directory?
http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/”
Exactly so, Tux, and it presents an interesting conundrum. If CDS detects and ejects/bans on the presence of malicious viewers, why is Emerald immune when there is clearly a problem preventing LL from endorsing it. Would it be something to do with the presence of Skills Hak and others from Gemini also being involved in the Emerald viewer?
It would be nice to believe that a poacher can become a gamekeeper and mend the error of his or her former ways but there is always the nagging doubt that rehabilitation is not complete. One has to take on trust that Emerald is not abusing the privacy of its users. Until it achieves formal recognition by LL, this browser remains an unknown risk, despite the best assurances and protests of the developers.
The safest course, it seems, is to only use the orthodox viewers or those listed by LL.
Alyx Stoklitsky
Apr 16th, 2010
>why then is Emerald not on the Third Party Viewer Directory?
Probably because they haven’t applied to be.
There’s also the matter than Emerald’s exporter (ie: copybot with artificial restrictions) allows the export of full perm items, while LL’s tpv states that exporters should only allow the export of an object if every prim is created by that individual user.
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Alyx
Yes, that does seem to present a significant problem. If LL considers the exporting powers of Emerald exceed their restrictions, it may not join the TPV Directory in its current form. If LL chooses to restrict SL access to their own viewers and those in the Directory, Emerald could grind to a complete stop. And CDS would then be redundant too…
Ted
Apr 16th, 2010
You build and build and build some more,
They build a tool and copy your store,
Someone copies your linksets and call you a fool,
You blame the tool and write DMCA’s to the spool,
You buy a script to protect your things,
They laugh and collect your ” L”, Ching A Ling,
You go shopping to find your own product for sale,
How could that be done, did my script again fail?
You purchase again much more “L” to protect,
They sell you new scripts and claim your all set,
You build and build and build more with the tools,
Now they copy your house, all your cows, and the mules.
You blame copybot, whine and cry with despair,
Yet they write a new script as you pull out your hair,
You do once again pay all that you should,
to have the comfort of sleeping real good,
More “L” will I pay again for the fix,
that will now end all the issues, with your theft and your tricks,
The new script does appear to do all that it should,
as it sees all the clients, and will ban from my hood,
It’s Emerald, it’s Imprudence, It’s Meekat I do say,
that poses me issues, and my grief every day.
Yet you dream such bad dreams and still ponder the theft,
as you have spent all you “L” not having much left.
Buying script after script that do promise to secure,
the items that you make, so no more loss to endure.
You login believing new terms will prevail,
yet having the sensation that it’s all heading to hell.
As Linden now prances with huge changes they do make,
and Emerald will code all the scripts you forsake,
Now client and protector they are both just the same,
So how can you trust what has been always to blame?
You login to find that it’s all so much worse,
They just copied your whole sim and exported of course,
Linden sends to the lawyers new policy to write,
It appears many coders will not put up a fight.
To the terms that will faulter and will never protect,
your products, your sims, from the rippers concepts.
But Emerald does stand, as the GPL just don’t matter,
to those that want bewbies, and all those that blather.
It’s all for our gain, it’s all for our good,
If we do what we will, to protect what we should.
You spent all your “L” to protect what you could,
buying the scripts advertising such good,
Oh who truly prospers, from the many years of bad deeds?
If you really don’t know, starts with an L ends with a B.
You moan, you groan, and continue on with your plan,
to moan and groan and do it all over again.
There is just one answer to resolve your true need,
Alter your habits, start giving, put an end to your greed.
But greed just won’t go as it’s the goal for so many,
to pocket the “L”, and never losing a penny.
So as it is, so shall it remain,
let your greed lead you on, while being copied again.
Overlooking the true price, by the terms you agree,
one day you will understand, one day you shall see.
Tux Winkler
Apr 16th, 2010
Certainly any current Emerald (or emerald based) viewer cannot comply to the TPV. But lets not forget it may not have been submitted for another reason:
6.a.ii. You must provide true and correct information in the Viewer Directory Application Form, and you agree that the information you provide in the fields that are marked by a cross (†) may be published in the publicly available Viewer Directory;
6.a.iii. Your Second Life accounts must be in good standing, must not be suspended, and must not have been permanently banned or terminated;
So each of the devs must supply RL info (for liability under DMCA etc) and they must have never been banned – XD.
But this is still different from the CDS which doesn’t have to comply with the 3PVP. Only the TOS and CS, and which I fail to see any wrong doing (I have stripped the CDS down and watched its actions). It may be morally wrong, but it does comply (IMO) to the Linden Law!
Ted
Apr 16th, 2010
“Certainly any current Emerald (or emerald based) viewer cannot comply to the TPV”
Neither does Linden’s trunk code base. Nor will it.
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Tux
“But this is still different from the CDS which doesn’t have to comply with the 3PVP. Only the TOS and CS, and which I fail to see any wrong doing (I have stripped the CDS down and watched its actions). It may be morally wrong, but it does comply (IMO) to the Linden Law!”
This is where it gets interesting. Tux. While the existence of this device or its use by land owners may not constitute a breach of the ToS and CS, the database and autoban facility, together with the non-transparent appeal process may render those responsible for its creation, development and management vulnerable to charges of abuse. The system of tracking which viewer is in use by an AV entering a sim and ejecting said AV is not in question. It is the recording of the AV name in a database and the autoban feature which may contravene LL’s rules.
Consider if person “X” has been detected using a malicious viewer and is (rightly) ejected from a private sim, as this viewer is capable of griefing and.or copybot. So far, no complaint. The land owner exercised fair and reasonable rights, and perhaps even a “duty of care” towards people using his sim.
But person “X” then abandons the malicious viewer and, using a bona fide viewer, enters another sim protected by CDS. The presence of person “X” on the database triggers their immediate autobanning from this second sim despite there being no threat of griefing or copybotting. The owner is exercising his rights to this power, afforded by Gemini through CDS.
But…has person “X” (who is now acting in a manner compliant with ToS and CS) subsequently been Assaulted by the “creating or using scripted objects (CDS) which singularly or persistently target another Resident in a manner which prevents their enjoyment of Second Life”? And are they being Harassed because communicating the database holding their details is “likely to cause annoyance or alarm”? And does the CDS database and autoban facility “inhibit another Resident’s ability to enjoy Second Life” which constitutes Disturbing the Peace?
Furthermore, is the transmission of the database itself a breach of 8.2.iv., i.e. “harmful, threatening or harassing, defamatory, libelous, false, inaccurate, misleading, or invades another person’s privacy”?
Finally, if person “X” is now using a standard viewer such as LL’s own or one from their TPV Directory (which does not include Emerald), does the database and autoban feature of CDS breach 8.3.iv. by impeding or interfering with “other users’ normal use of the Service;”?
If the answer to any of the above questions is Yes, then who is at fault – Skills Hak alone, as the creator? Skills Hak and her colleages (Ash Qin, LukaStar Mattercaster, Cinndreia Messmer, GEMINIbot Inventor & Lonely Bluebird)? All of these and the land owner who exercised autoban without just cause?
All of this can be simply and swiftly remedied if Gemini abandons the database and removes the autoban feature from CDS. This in no way will dilute the effectiveness of their product, whose aim is to detect the presence of malicious browsers and giving the land owner a means to protect against griefing and copybotting. Auto ejecting without the shared database is all that is required to achieve the desired result. Anything beyond this is excessive and disproportionate.
However, if Gemini neglects to amend CDS after fair warning, they leave themselves liable to abuse complaints on the above grounds.
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
I forgot to add that the Appeals process against CDS would also be redundant as Auto ejection is easily avoided by the AV using a LL-compliant viewer.
Ari Blackthorne
Apr 16th, 2010
@Terminus Est
Yours is the first and only reasonable rebuttal to the CDS “System” (as a whole) I have seen to date.
Kudos to you.
The only thing I would change regarding your entire description is the “removal of autoban” – I would say leave that. However, the eject/autoban feature only function if a known malicious viewer is in use.
If person X comes to my sim using a malicious viewer, I want then banned permanently (my choice for myself). However, the CDS leaves the land owner the choice to log only, eject only or eject + ban.
Thus, the choice whether to “perma-ban” person X from parcel is up to the owner. The option is there for people like me. Then if the offender wants to appeal directly to me to be unbanned, they can make their case to me.
And if I agree, then I’ll allow them in. The issue is that the system is only “80%” effective. It takes only one copybotter to ruin a business. Thus, that database helps the grid of CDS owners because some who might fall into that remaining 20% are automatically caught.
I am not saying any of all this is right or wrong. I am saying that I don’t care how it works as long as it works.
I have used Neil Life before myself. BUT, I don;t go grid-hopping with it (never have). I stayed in my own little garden where I have all the control (and this was all before CDS existed).
Anyone who goes grid-hopping with one of these viewers (in my own opinion) either had malicious intent OR is ridiculously careless – and is breaking ToS themselves anyway. For *me* – I don;t want them in my shops, now or ever. I don;t need their business that badly.
The scripts I use have very high security and they “phone home” whenever someone tries to circumvent. So even if you don’t actually copybot my stuff, you could always buy a copy and find a way to copy all the scripts and such, then using a prim replicator: recreate the prims.
I already have several reports from my scripts catching people red-handed trying to do this. And those account names are also banned hence-forth from all my parcels.
There are many here who proclaim “I use those viewers but I’m not a copybotter! I like the tools as tools!”
Okay, fair enough. I might have nuclear bombs in my basement, but I’m not a conqueror!
The problem is the lowest common denominator. if you aren’t a copybotter but using that viewer, then I’m sorry. You are “collateral damage” because it’s the bonehead who teleports in right behind you using the same viewer who IS wanting to copybot me.
Unfortunately, the system can’t read your mind, so in order to catch that other idiot, it will catch you, too. I suppose the answer to that then is to use a “non-infringing” viewer with you hop the grid, and use your “awesome tolls naughty viewer” in your own backyard and only in your own back yard.
Otherwise (as I reiterate plus one): you are either a copybotter, careless or just plain stupid.
Holger Gilruth
Apr 16th, 2010
Amazing that here is still a user who think the system will prevent only 1 Copybotter to do what he want.
LoL the poeple are so sadly ignorant
Tux Winkler
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Terminus
I understand what your saying and think a well thought out and presented piece. Certainly your point/s is/are much clearer.
However (sorry) I think the lab will look at individual pieces and not the whole.
Muziekfreak1980 miles
Apr 16th, 2010
As CDS user, let say for argument sake here that your right. Its against TOS, violation section blabla has been broken of that TOS.
Thus a valid reason to put the CDS system to bed.
Then why did this not happen?
Then why do the CONDONE (not saying offcially APPROVE ) the system?
It is hard to believe that there not awake over at LL, i mean the system has been operational in a (pardon my french) shitload of regions/sims by now.
So the certainly approve (in a way) the whole system the CDS is based on.
Now you can make perfect sense arguments WHY it should be off the grid. Why is it so hard for you to get that done then? I mean for the ppl that are so keen on getting rid of it. You would say if the system is such a “wrong” doing system for any reason or what-so-ever.
Then it whould been gone by now. I do not see that happening, and that skill hak makes cash of it (read here somewere ) that someone said
“She gets rich over this bullshit”
Well scuse me, there even FREEBEE RESELLERS that dare to ask 125USD for a scriptpack in SLX. So lets face it, as a merchant the all want to make a buck. And offcourse your free to choose for that system.
Im just curious if it does breach TOS, why it is still active.
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Ari Blackthorne
Thank you for your kind compliment about my post – much appreciated. You raised very fair points in your reply and I would like to address some below…
“If person X comes to my sim using a malicious viewer, I want then banned permanently (my choice for myself). However, the CDS leaves the land owner the choice to log only, eject only or eject + ban.”
- Exactly so, and you as a land owner are exercising your right to protect your property and the wellbeing of others in your land against griefing, copybotting, and any other malicious activity. Now, if person X did NOT come to your sim using a malicious viewer, and you have never encountered him or her before, and arrives using a bona fide viewer supplied by LL or one on their list, what potential or actual harm can person X commit while in this condition to give you any reason to eject and ban? While he or she is using a bona fide viewer, their ability to cause you or others injury as described above is non-existent. No matter what you might think of a person who uses a non-listed viewer, that he or she is malevolent or simply foolish, they are no different in real terms to person Y who has never been listed by CDS.
“I have used Neil Life before myself. BUT, I don;t go grid-hopping with it (never have). I stayed in my own little garden where I have all the control (and this was all before CDS existed).”
- By your own admission, you have previously contravened the ToS of LL in using Neil Life, which under any circumstances exposes the user to severe penalties if caught. If Skills Hak reads this and decides to add your name to the CDS database, as you are to all effects no different from person X, would you feel aggrieved, harassed or abused on finding yourself ejected and banned automatically when you attempt to visit other CDS-protected property while using a bona fide viewer? It would certainly be unfortunate if you discovered you were also ejected and banned from your own sim (is this even possible?).
The material case against the CDS database and auto banning of people who had used a malicious viewer on a previous occasion in another sim remains unaltered. Ari, you do not need to know who has been previously detected in order to protect your land. However you DO need to know who enters your property using an unorthodox viewer. CDS can do this without referring to the database. CDS can eject such a person every time he or she arrives using a viewer that does not meet the ToS. There is simply no need to eject the same person if they return using an orthodox viewer. (Interestingly, Gemini has omitted Emerald as a reason to blacklist an AV. In this it can be argued they are partial, possibly due to Skills Hak being one of Emerald’s development team.)
Your comments about those who have used or do use malicious viewers and get “caught” must be acknowledged. I do not share your views but I respect them. Thank you for taking the trouble to respond to my previous submissions.
T.E.
Terminus Est
Apr 16th, 2010
@ Muziekfreak1980 miles
Perhaps it is still active because it has not been formally challenged at this point, using the principles I have laid out. LL needs to have a specific case brought forward by an individual who has been added to the CDS database and feels this constitutes Abuse under the ToS.
This is about to change as I understand such an aggrieved individual is about to report Skills Hak et al to LL, pending the outcome of an appeal against being on the database.
This whole affair would be easily resolved to the satisfaction of all parties if Gemini abandons the database and automatic banning facility in CDS, leaving it to run as a detector of invalid viewers, and quite properly ejecting those who use them. Gemini would not be under such criticism for potential ToS violations, they would need no appeals system of any kind as this would be redundant, and you as a land owner would have exactly the same level of protection by ejecting people using unorthodox viewers de facto. Gemini would not have to reduce the price of CDS as it would perform the same level of duty.
Perhaps someone would kindly bring these matters to the attention of Skills and her colleagues before the Sword of Damocles begins to fall.
T.E.
Ted
Apr 17th, 2010
So what exactly is a malicious viewer? I use all of the below, I don’t see anything at all malicious about them.
Meerkat? No
Imprudence? No
Emerald? No
Hippo Viewer? No
Second Inventory? No
Please don’t use the argument that it’s against the TPVP. That doesn’t make any of the above “malicious viewers”.
There need be some dialog about the difference(s) malicious terms from corporate entities and malicious software. Copybot client itself isn’t malicious software either.
But if you want to pay for a client detector script, have at it. Web servers collect that information all day long, on every page you go to. Is Mozilla Firefox malicious? No.
There is no reason for Linden to ban a harmless script that tags client headers and uses llAddToLandBanList(), or llEjectFromLand(). None at all. They make a buck off your goofy purchase.
content creator
Apr 17th, 2010
@ Ted
Web servers collect that information all day long, on every page you go to. Is Mozilla Firefox malicious? No.
agreed BUT the viewer is not a browser and when i login with the viewer i agree to LL to get my info and i NEVER gave skills or anyone elso permission to acces my info, so he gather my info without my opermissions and that is against the tos
There is no reason for Linden to ban a harmless script that tags client headers and uses llAddToLandBanList(), or llEjectFromLand(). None at all. They make a buck off your goofy purchase.
and so YES there is a reason to ban the script because of gathering my info without my permissions
btw im using LL viewer 1.23
Ari Blackthorne
Apr 17th, 2010
@Terminus
Oh, I concur… I am not all that great at communicating. LOL
I *agree* – even if person X was “caught” on another sim, then came to my sim with a regular viewer – I’m okay with that (the only way then is to buy my stuff and go about as I described, which is why my scripts are set up that way – so we are moot here – I agree with you.)
Yes, I tried the Neil Life viewer back when the hoopla was pretty big about it because I wanted to know how it worked, and I admit – in honest hands those can be some very powerful and useful tools. Unfortunately – we come back to the lowest common denominator.
And I will point out that using Neil Life and the rest (at the time I tried it) was not yet against the ToS – only the using of it to “rip” content I didn’t have a right to. The new changes in the ToS as of now: yes, correct. Even using that viewer innocently is a breaking of the ToS.
Yes, Skills and company could ad me to the database by my own admission… however, just by using Second Life proper, there is a level of “trust” we all must give; to Linden lab and each other. I don;t know Skills personally – we’ve chatted just often enough that I remember our conversation and she (he) does not. Such is life, Second or otherwise.
In a nutshell, I agree the real “issue” with the CDS system regarding “fair play” etc. is the database issue. The in-world tool is ToS legal.
But as for the ethical nature and how it currently functions (the database side of it) I will say now I am not qualified nor inclined to really take a side on it.
I admit – I like the way it works. But at the same time, I can clearly see and understand both sides of that fence and even if the system were reengineered to work the way you describe it: I wouldn’t have any complaints.
Ted
Apr 17th, 2010
content creator.
A viewer, a browser are all clients. Bottom line. You connect to apache on port 80 with a “web client”, you connect to SL on their ports using their client. There is no difference.
What exact personal information does this system take?
Credit card information? No. Social Security information? No. Does it take my Dunn and Bradstreet company account information? No.
Your avatar UUID, anything you can gain with lsl through Second Life is mostly limited to just information pulled from the Linden account website, or the profile information itself. There is NOTHING personal about this information.
Sorry, if you think avatar information or UUID’s are private information, you are sadly mistaken. Everything within SL is mapped by UUID. Your avatar name? Sorry, not personal information.
Gundel Gaukelei
Apr 17th, 2010
@Muziekfreak
Im just curious if it does breach TOS, why it is still active.
Because there are unwritten rules and noone is watching the watchers anyways.
Terminus Est
Apr 17th, 2010
@ Ted
You can see these at http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/
Currently, these are the Official Second Life Viewer and the Snowglobe Viewer. There are 4 compliant viewers – Pocket Metaverse, METAbolt, Mobile Grid Client, and Kirstens Viewer.
To quote LL, “To be listed in the Viewer Directory, a software developer must self-certify that it complies with Linden Lab policies. Beware of third-party viewers that are not in the Viewer Directory – they have either declined to self-certify or been refused for noncompliance with our policies.”
Thus, Emerald and the others you mention are currently non-compliant. You are quite right to seek a distinction between what is and is not “malicious” – unfortunately, non-compliant viewers might be seen as potential or actual ToS violators, whether or not this is indeed true. For example, there are some allegations that Emerald invades users’ privacy by gathering data from their computers beyond what is needed for standard viewer functionality. This may or may not be true, but full compliance with LL’s conditions is the only way you can have any assurance that it is safe and non-abusive.
@ content creator
An interesting side-issue in support of your argument – If Gemini’s CDS stores the blacklist database in a server in Germany (as has been suggested), under Data Protection legislation those maintaining AND accessing this information may also be subject to the laws of Germany and The European Union. The limited scope of Californian and US Federal legislation may not offer any protection against litigation proceedings and if it was deemed that a criminal offense may have been committed, those responsible could be subject to warrants and prosecution. This could include the creators, developers and managers of the database and might even include those who gain access or benefit, i.e. the landowners that use CDS and even LL itself.
Ted
Apr 17th, 2010
“You can see these at http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/
Currently, these are the Official Second Life Viewer and the Snowglobe Viewer. There are 4 compliant viewers – Pocket Metaverse, METAbolt, Mobile Grid Client, and Kirstens Viewer. ”
No. The developers of those clients have stated that they comply with Lindens TPVP. That does not mean that the viewers are compliant in any way. Linden plainly states that they will only do code audit(s) at their discretion. This does not in any way insinuate that the listed clients are indeed “compliant”. Not that they could be anyhow. Because in my view, they cannot.
Muziekfreak1980 miles
Apr 17th, 2010
@Muziekfreak
Because there are unwritten rules and noone is watching the watchers anyways.
But is this not all saying what you say now? I mean it breaches TOS. And yet you say (or im mistaken here now) There are UNWRITTEN rules.
So in effect there is no such regulation that is solid enough to ban/forfeit the CDS system. So what i get now is that ppl are digging up the entire TOS to find a “fitting” regulation that MIGHT apply to this system to get it of the grid.
I do agree here do not get me wrong, if that system collects all my data i would not be happy. I mean SL is open source how safe are we really? With or without that system active on the grid.
It is intressting to see how this will end. Don’t forget this system is what used at few thousand sims now? With succes and as far as i can tell from inworld fellow and reading a bit content creators there happy with the system as it is (im one of them)
So my crucial question at the moment is, let’s say the CDS will be history soon. What would be a good LEGAL way to fight against copybotters according to you guys?
*intressting topic, finally without ranting ^^*
Terminus Est
Apr 17th, 2010
@ Ted
I respect your views but in my opinion they are not supported by the facts. See also http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php, particularly the scope of section 2e, as it might have a bearing on why Emerald in particular has yet to be added to the Third Party Directory. It is indeed correct to assert that this directory does not explicitly endorse or validate the listed browsers as compliant in a way that LL would admit or assume any liability for their use. However, there is an implicit validation de facto as LL has created such a directory and named 4 viewers therein. LL did not need to display this directory, and the fact that each name therein is hyperlinked to URLs where they can be found does imply that each has attained some form of bona fide standing as suitable viewers for use with Second Life. True, this does not amount to a formal endorsement of the 4 named. But by the mere fact that such a directory exists, there is an implication that viewers NOT listed are not able to or have no wish to satisfy the qualifications to be added.
In effect, you use any viewer other than the Official Second Life Viewer or Snowglobe Viewer at your own risk and any penalties you incur for so doing are solely your responsibility. But LL has, by publishing a Policy on Third-Party Viewers, and by creating an Application Form to certify compliance implied that those on the Directory may be less risky than others.
Terminus Est
Apr 17th, 2010
@ Muziekfreak1980 miles
“So my crucial question at the moment is, let’s say the CDS will be history soon. What would be a good LEGAL way to fight against copybotters according to you guys?”
Fair question.
In my view, CDS is not illegal per se. Land owners are exercising their rights to filter who is allowed in their property, and refusing access to people using viewers that can grief, copybot or cause other damage. In this regard, Skills Hak and her team have created an excellent means to make SL a fairer and peaceful virtual experience. They should rightly be lauded for their endeavours up to this point.
The illegality in terms of LL’s ToS and CS may come from two features – the gathering in a database of AV names detected using what Gemini deems to be malicious viewers and the dissemination and use of same; the provision of a permanent automatic ban conditional on the database, NOT on the detection of a malicious viewer being used at the time. As stated earlier, Gemini CDS does not need to use a database to be effective, nor does it need to provide a banning facility in its product. The principal protection is to eject an AV entering private land when he or she is using a viewer that in Gemini’s view is a potentially or actual threat to other AVs and/or property.
Now, this also raises a further interesting point that CDS users should very carefully consider. By employing CDS in their land, they may be complicit in adding to this potentially illegal database. If LL found that the Skills Hak and her colleagues have indeed violated the ToS and CS, as outlined in previous posts above, does this violation extend to and implicate the users of CDS too? In other words, if person “X” arrives in your land using a conventional viewer such as Second Life 2, and you have set CDS to automatically eject/time-limit ban any AV that is on the database, and person “X” is listed on the Gemini CDS database, have you as the land owner also abused his or her rights and may be liable to penalties for so doing? Furthermore, even if you have set CDS to detect only, by contributing to the database in ANY way, are you at risk of being reported to LL for violating the rights of AVs that came in your land using a proscribed viewer?
Ted
Apr 17th, 2010
For one thing, it doesn’t collect your information if you don’t go to their sim. No different than if you don’t connect to a web site, then as I’ve stated it doesn’t collect anything you cannot easily get in-world.
If you don’t like the sims terms, don’t go to the sim. This won’t last long because they will lose sales. People in general don’t like these scripts.
And if someone believes they are on the list, most likely they will get their whole sim copied and placed in freebie boxes throughout SL. All this does is say “COPY ME” I want everything copied because I don’t understand or get it.
I wouldn’t worry about it, but I would advise not to use it.
Ted
Apr 17th, 2010
“But LL has, by publishing a Policy on Third-Party Viewers, and by creating an Application Form to certify compliance implied that those on the Directory may be less risky than others.”
The only thing “risky” at all is Lindens Terms of Service and the TPVP policies. You won’t stop thieves, the sooner you get used to it, the better off you will be. It’s the whole attitude of people in SL, That their prims are of such value that spark much of the copying in the first place. And all the while people are praising Linden for the new terms, they are having their rights taken away. Now, you cannot even backup your data. And you still want to support Linden? You still want to support the script makers that write client detectors?
The same mentality of the gullible sheep who believe in protectionism.
By using that client detector script, if it’s not completely silent, you are just opening yourself up to being copied. It’s a real joke to anyone that understands how all this works.
I don’t take others works. But if I did, I would be looking for idiots that believe a script protects them. Or that their prims are of such value that they have to constantly be on the lookout for mr. copy machine.
If you don’t worry about it, you most likely won’t get copied.
If you don’t continue accepting Linden’s pathetic terms, you most likely will have the freedom of using decent clients. But people complain until all the real advancement ceases to exist.
You keep mentioning Emerald. Sorry, but Emerald wouldn’t be able to comply to the terms either unless Linden is behind Emerald.