Big Business Ads Blight Second Life
by prokofy on 17/03/07 at 11:30 pm
Prokofy Neva, Dept. of Virtual Estate and Inworld Business
Remember how Philip Linden used to tell us that big business would never put up billboards in Second Life? That these wealthy corporations coming into SL wouldn’t be *need* to put up billboards because they’d just stay on their own islands? Remember how he said in interview after interview that this would never happen?
Think again. In Shimmer, in Tuliptree, in sims all across SL, there are large, high, blindingly bright, ugly spinning signs advertising American Apparel, Adidas, Reebok, Toyota Scion, Ibranz, Dell, Sun Microsystems, Circuit City, IBM and even Reuters, CNET, and Linden Lab itself. How can this be?!
Remember the saga of the “Bush Guy,” who was able to spam up hundreds of sims with an “Impeach Bush” texture that generally found support as a political message but was hated for its owner Lazarus Divine’s spam, extortion, and blight? Each parcel was set to sale for outrageous sums like $50,000 or $250,000 Lindens for a tiny 16 m2 or 64 m2 — and if you didn’t enjoy starting at a huge, spinning, brightly-lit sign, you could move, sell out your land for a huge loss to a liquidator, or buy back your view for an extortionist’s sum.
Once the Lindens caved on permitting that kind of annoying sign blight and extortion on a 16 m2 or 64 m2, they enabled scores of greedy businesses to become notorious for using this tacky technique to get away with the spamming of sims where they don’t live or work. The cluster of ugly 16m2 to be found especially on high-traffic sims have until recently been cluttered with porn, club, bank, and store ads only from inworld businesses.
We didn’t think that big business would *bother* with billboards. Why try to reach a few hundred people a week walking across a sim at best, when they have many other ways of getting the same eyeballs in real life?
That was before they apparently decided to make use of the services of Metro owned by Alex Potato, an avatar who has already sparked protest and controversy for his buying up of land to chop it into tiny parcels, upon which he places large, bright, annoying spinning signs with textured ads. Nobody Fugazi, who found his sim uglified by the signs, asked the question a month ago, “Who Pays Alex Potato?” when he was surprised to find an ad — of all things — for Governor Linden’s Mansion. A texture for Radio Linden was also seen on the Tuliptree kiosk.
Among the companies featured on Metro seen by the Herald in Tuliptree and other sims are Adidas, Circuit City, IBM, Dell, Reebok, Ibranz, Toyota Scion, American Apparel — all big RL companies that have entered SL with such a splash, their rollouts getting enormous press coverage.
Some have sunk back into obscurity as finicky SL avatars flew away from their dull and empty fairgrounds, and headed to more fun venues. That may explain why they’re resorting to mainland networked resident ad networks.
Or are they? When I contacted Troy McLuhan of the International Space Museum, one of the textures shown on the spinning Metro kiosk, he was puzzled. He had no recollection of placing such an ad, and pointed out that he didn’t have a big budget for ads as a non-profit organization. Other than some friends who put up signs or notices, he didn’t appear to have the kind of ad campaign for which Chrischun Fassbinder’s Mr. Lee’s Hong Kong (for sale everywhere for $9435) and and Bart Heart’s Estates (for sale for his birth date, $12374) are infamous. Do any of these big companies featured on Metro realize that their ads are appearing in the way they are, on land set to sale at outrageous prices to extort purchases to buy back the view?
While the big corporations may have thought it was supportive of the inworld economy to use inworld networked advertising, they may not have realized how these ads are deployed — aggressively, defiantly, and without any mitigation despite outraged protests from those who own the bulk of the land on the sims. It’s the hallmark of the 16m microbarons, as they are called, that they don’t own any larger properties on sims that they’ve essentially devalued with their presence. While the old real estate adage tells you to buy the view if you are concerned what might appear in it, the realities of virtuality mean that there are no local government sign ordances, and people are able to deploy signs at whim.
The spinning ads appear anywhere, not just at high-traffic venues like clubs or hang-outs where people are expecting to see commercials; and not just at the roadside. They appear in the middle of water; on prime waterfront; on beautiful hillsides; on snowy mountains — all over Second Life, often in areas that all the other sim owners have made residential.
There’s no zoning in Second Life on the mainland, and anybody who manages to grab a small parcel, or chop up a bigger parcel and sell all but the 16m2, can make himself a supreme nuisance by putting up a sign even where only a few people will see it — but where they may be induced to pay anywhere from $500 to $50,000 to get rid of it.
Alex Potato’s sign in Tuliptree is set to sale for $49,500. As Nobody’s fairly-well covered blog and Flikr photos of these major corporate ads have been posted for a month without any change, and without any of these companies pulling their ads from Metro or issuing DMCA takedown notices for unauthorized use of their logos, we have to assume they’ve are following a conscious policy to allow unscrupulous microbarons to do their dirty work for them, deploying ugly spinning signs on sims where people don’t want to pay fantastic sums to buy back the view from their already-costly SL land.
Queries to some of the major businesses represented on Alex Potato’s signs have been sent, and as it’s the weekend, we are unlikely to hear for a few days, but we await some attention to come.
Maximilian Goldflake
Mar 18th, 2007
Looks like the same avatar in the majority of the snapshots he’s trying to pass off as ads. Perhaps his thinking is that he can fool someone into believing that these big companies are paying for his services and therefore it would be a good investment for them as well.
Cocoanut Koala
Mar 18th, 2007
I don’t think the Lindens caved on that annoying blight at all. I think they loved it.
I think they enjoyed the Impeach Bush signs episode because it allowed them to send out the very clear signal that no matter what, they would NEVER remove these signs, just as they would never remove or restrict in any way the real advertising signs from rw businesses to come.
I figured at the time that making this statement was the entire purpose of the whole miserable exercise.
We lived through “Impeach Bush” so that Circuit City and others could have at SL when the time came. I guess it has come.
coco
Cocoanut Koala
Mar 18th, 2007
You’re right. It is the same guy.
coco
Prokofy Neva
Mar 18th, 2007
Looks like the same avatar in the majority of the snapshots he’s trying to pass off as ads. Perhaps his thinking is that he can fool someone into believing that these big companies are paying for his services and therefore it would be a good investment for them as well.
Yes, Maximilian, I got all that. Each and ever ad is identical; it’s a picture of a logo, not artwork that a real company would put together for an ad.
But a month or more has gone by with these ads all over SL, blighting the landscape, devaluing people’s land, sitting for sale for extortionist prices that some in fact do pay to get their view back, and these big companies featured in these “ads” aren’t reacting, noticing, doing anything. I think they need to become aware of it from press coverage.
I don’t believe that IBM and Circuit City wish to advertise this way. But because they don’t bother with looking at the mainland or getting down in the weeds with community issues like 16 m2 sign blight, they haven’t even become aware or done anything about the misuse of their logos in SL for weeks and weeks.
Tateru Nino
Mar 18th, 2007
I’ve spoken with most of the folks I’ve seen appearing on these adverts and nobody says they’re paying him for advertising. Linden Lab was one of them.
FFS!
Mar 18th, 2007
Do these big corporations realize that this is not a positive thing to the SL community? I have to wonder if the consultants that bring them in also give them the landmark to this guy for ad space? I bet so. Any real SLer will tell them if they want traffic they need to invest in camp chairs like the rest of us. ;0)
Allana Dion
Mar 18th, 2007
“But a month or more has gone by with these ads all over SL, blighting the landscape, devaluing people’s land, sitting for sale for extortionist prices that some in fact do pay to get their view back, and these big companies featured in these “ads” aren’t reacting, noticing, doing anything. I think they need to become aware of it from press coverage.”
Maybe if there is enough people talking about it and contacting the representatives of these companies, they will be pushed into doing to this guy the same thing they’d do to anyone who tried to use their corporation’s name without approval in the real world… shut his ass down.
FFS!
Mar 18th, 2007
((Maybe if there is enough people talking about it and contacting the representatives of these companies, they will be pushed into doing to this guy the same thing they’d do to anyone who tried to use their corporation’s name without approval in the real world… shut his ass down.)) -Alana Dion
Unless of course they are in fact fully aware of it and would rather play both sides of the fence.
If you do not see action take place we can likely assume they did pay and are fine with it. After all I do not see what the ad guy stands to gain from this. If I were going to advertise my business I would not go to him with the likes of addias, etc on his resume. That would have me assume he costs more then I am willing to afford.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 18th, 2007
Wow, Tateru, that's amazing how you could get 20 companies to answer you on a weekend in the middle of the night for most of them. I realize you are famous and connected and a big bloster and all that but gosh, that's very impressive.
Oh...If in fact you did this over time...was there a reason you didn't blog about it but just had the Blingsider talk only about poor Nobody Fugazi's battle on his sim?
And...if these companies are now all alerted to this blight by your queries then...why have they done nothing? Why are the ads still there? Do they *like* getting free advertising like this that is so obnoxious? Or do they just not care what goes on to devalue other people's land on the mainland, far, far away from their private islands?
I know you'd *very much* like to imply that I'm accusing big companies of blight when evidently from all accounts it's just some guy illegally using their textures. But...they need to take ownership of this issue precisely because they HAVE ownership of those logos! Starting with Linden Lab! Starting with weeks ago, when it was first brought to their attention (today I'm still seeing "Radio Linden" and "Governor Linden" among the flashing ads).
Tateru Nino
Mar 18th, 2007
Read whatever you please into it. I’m not going to tell you what to think.
Tateru Nino
Mar 18th, 2007
Oh, if it helps, I discussed it with Catherine Linden on February 18.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 18th, 2007
>Oh, if it helps, I discussed it with Catherine Linden on February 18.
OK…Now…why is this like pulling teeth? And she said…what? that they would do nothing? That it should be abuse reported? That…anything? Because that was a month ago. I just checked and “Radio Linden” is also in Shimmer
justin bovington
Mar 18th, 2007
I can say from Rivers Run Red perspective, the adverts being used here are without our consent or our clients. We’ve sent the people from Metro an IM, asking them to remove our clients work/images from their advertising.
Our clients include: adidas, reebok, heineken, talpa, BBC, BBH, Philips, vodafone etc.
This has been done without our knowledge. This is great example of someone passing off other peoples work, attempting to create their business model. Metro has no connection to our clients or Rivers Run Red.
We have a strict no mainland outdoor/poster advertising policy, something we’ve operated for over 4 years in Second Life.
Justin Bovington (aka Fizik)
urizenus
Mar 18th, 2007
Thanks for the info, Justin.
Tater, anything else you dig up (or have already dug up) on this please let us know.
Nacon
Mar 18th, 2007
Over 4 years? SL has not been more than 3 5/6th years in public. (yeah yeah, I’m just being an ass about it)
However, if he hasn’t or refused to remove them, use DMCA form to Linden Labs to get him removed since he is using copyrighted logos and names. It can’t be such a big deal anyhow.
As business person, I’m betting that he thinks if he has large companies advertising with him, would get him more “real” companies and stores in SL to use his advertising plan. To make his start look like a good start, in other words.
Rest of the crap about sim/land deal are just extras.
Diag Anzac
Mar 18th, 2007
I have worked for two of these corporates (no longer do) and knowing how protective they are of their brands, I think I can confidently say that these are not authorised advertisements. The guy is obviously trying to hijack the brands to try and give his own business some air of respectability. I mean really, he doesn’t even know how to take a screenshot without his av floating in the middle of it.
Ian Betteridge
Mar 18th, 2007
Once again, ace reporter Prokofy Neva doesn’t bother to do any real reporting, and instead decides to simply print lies. “Remember how Philip Linden used to tell us that big business would never put up billboards in Second Life?… Think again” clearly implies that these billboards were put up by the businesses concerned. In fact, Prokofy, you had no evidence that they were, and decided to post a story at a weekend when it’s harder to get a response out of the companies concerned. You couldn’t, of course, have waited until Monday and actually made a phone call, because that would have meant you found out that the story you wanted to print was false.
Boliver Oddfellow
Mar 18th, 2007
As the MDC who works with Dell, I can assure you we were not contacted about these signs nor would be ever condone them. In fact we have a policy at IVM not to engage in such blight producing drivel. Thank you Prok for making us aware of this mess. I will personally contact both Dell and the avatar in question, and work to get this misuse of our clients brand removed. Again let me state this is against everything IVM stands for, and completely contrary to Dell’s in world plans.
Drew Stein
CEO-Executive Producer
Infinite Vision Media, Inc
Inigo Chamerberlin
Mar 18th, 2007
I shall be very interested to see what happens IF the perpetrator refuses to remove the offending ‘ads’.
Assuming the ‘big names’ involved, or their authorised in world agents, contact LL concerning this, will LL make them jump through the same DMCA hoops they expect ‘ordinary’ residents to?
Or will they take direct action (remove all the perpetrators inworld objects and delete all their traceable accounts) ‘pour encourager les autres’?
I’m of two minds about this. On one hand, WHY shouldn’t Dell, Addidas, etc, be treated just like you or I?
On the other hand, simple business expediency would suggest a fast, aggressive and above all PUBLICLY VISIBLE response.
This has got to be interesting. Whichever way it goes, I’d lay money LL will find a way to screw it up though…
Avalon Paderborn
Mar 18th, 2007
I wonder how IBM feels about its ad being displayed next to one advertising an escort and drugs for sale.
This lovely image was one of the reasons a friend moved her rental properties to a nearby region.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 18th, 2007
Once again, ace reporter Prokofy Neva doesn’t bother to do any real reporting, and instead decides to simply print lies. “Remember how Philip Linden used to tell us that big business would never put up billboards in Second Life?… Think again” clearly implies that these billboards were put up by the businesses concerned. In fact, Prokofy, you had no evidence that they were, and decided to post a story at a weekend when it’s harder to get a response out of the companies concerned. You couldn’t, of course, have waited until Monday and actually made a phone call, because that would have meant you found out that the story you wanted to print was false.
Um, I didn’t print any false story. Every single word in it is true. I was very careful to point out that *apparently* the ads were ordered by these companies but in fact evidently, they could have been stolen and misused. In fact, I reached someone right away who was in one of the ads, the International Space Museum, and got them on the record. I sent queries to the rest.
Why are we all supposed to wait for Catherine Linden and Tateru Nino and Nobody Fugazi to take care of this situation? It’s been a month. I’ve watched it for weeks. And when it continues to grow and fester and the person continues to act with impunity, I think it’s very important to cover the story and demand some action.
I appreciate Justin Bovington and Drew Stein getting on the ball and putting up a disclaimer like this. I fully appreciate that they don’t pursue a policy like this. But in fact this story has been around and obvious inworld for anyone who actually has to live and work on the mainland, unlike all the island corporate-dwellers. It shouldn’t have to wait for a Herald story to get people on the record to say “We will not blight up the mainland with ugly signs or do business with those who do.”
I think in fact it would be great if some of these very deep-pocketed corporations would buy out some of the extortionists and put up trees, or at least more tasteful signs if they are roadside (not if they are on prime waterfront or mountain snowe). And while I don’t at all believe in feeding griefers and extortionists, I’m just sick and tired, like many are, about the aggressive impunity with which these extortionists operate. For these big corporations, the prices of $12374 Lindens are chump change. For inworld businesses, it’s a horror.
I personally wouldn’t mind a Dell or an IBM or an Adidas ad on my property even, because those companies could a) be relied on to have marketers who would make tasteful interesting signs that might even have something interesting and fun to click on b) wouldn’t set the 16m to sale for some extortionist price. It’s the ugliness of the bright and spinning signs and disgusting porn and cheap stuff on them, and the extortionist prices, that bother neighbourhoods; it’s not the concept of sign advertising itself.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 18th, 2007
>I shall be very interested to see what happens IF the perpetrator refuses to remove the offending ‘ads’.
>Assuming the ‘big names’ involved, or their authorised in world agents, contact LL concerning this, will LL make them jump through the same DMCA hoops they expect ‘ordinary’ residents to?
>Or will they take direct action (remove all the perpetrators inworld objects and delete all their traceable accounts) ‘pour encourager les autres’?
>I’m of two minds about this. On one hand, WHY shouldn’t Dell, Addidas, etc, be treated just like you or I?
>On the other hand, simple business expediency would suggest a fast, aggressive and above all PUBLICLY VISIBLE response.
>This has got to be interesting. Whichever way it goes, I’d lay money LL will find a way to screw it up though…
Inigo, you never posted a truer word.
And that’s EXACTLY what’s going on here. LL knows these signs are up here from this idiot Alex Potato — they know full well as Nobody and others have been abuse-reporting him for ages; even the companies must know they are up there. But they don’t want to “go there” and are sitting on their hands and not doing anything.
LL is hoping nobody will do anything or care, and that they can rely on mainland dwellers to just keep moving away, like this woman who moved to get away from a porn sign, or just keep taking it up the ass and life with ugly griefing extortionist signs, even the most outrageous, that steal logos like this one to create a fake business model.
Hell, no.
So…They aren’t taking down the signs, because it would be a precedent, unilaterally taking down an alleged copyrighted logo sign without a DMCA takedown notice. They want to go slow and laisser faire on that type of thing here so they can “encourage creativity” and “mash-ups” and “Creative Commons” and blah blah blah. Information wants to be free, you know.
On the other hand, if they respond to one of these companies themselves to their indignation about having their logo misused in a money-making griefing and extortion caper, and even a RL DMCA notice properly files — which is what this situation requires — then they have also put themselves in an awkward position — if they do it for one, they need to be prepared to do it for everybody, and they could face a deluge — Coke, who has been silent about the use of its logo everywhere, and not present in SL, could show up.
Really, the Lindens would have to *invent* these metaversal sherpa companies if they didn’t exist. Whoops, that’s just about what they *did* do. They exist to perform these nasty bag-men type jobs of dealing with just this situation…delicately. I have no doubt that these sherpas will find a way to “take care” of this Alex now. They will find a way to get their Lindens quietly to deal, one way or another, in such a way that removes the logos but doesn’t create any headaches for the Lindens or precedents that nobody will want to live with.
I don’t know what they will do. Buy out the offensive properties and tell the guy that if he puts one more like that out he will face serious RL legal action? Or just threaten the legal action first?
It will be fascinating to see. You are absolutely right. What is needed is fast and aggressive — but they will tread very lightly so as not to be seen as overreaching on behalf of corporate clients that they secretly woo and encourage behind the scenes but wish to make it appear as if they are indifferent and for “a level playing field for everyone”.
Some girl with a dress copied is screaming on the forums and to her friends; the Lindens won’t do squat for her, and tell her to go register a trademark and pay for a fancy RL lawyer for her virtual problems.
They will do any less…more??? what??? for RL big companies?
Kanker Greenacre
Mar 18th, 2007
I’m trying to follow the logic here. The ads in question all look like snapshots taken in front of the builds with some text superimposed on them. Troy, one of the directors for the Spaceflight Museum, which is being advertised, told you he knows nothing about these ads, which most likely means they were created without the Museum’s permission. None of your queries that were sent who knows when have been answered, maybe because it’s the weekend. So far no one has admitted to sponsoring these ads. Therefore you conclude that big business is advertising through Metro? But wait, you’re covering your bets with a bunch of “apparently’s” and “may seem’s” and “may explain’s” so the article is 100% true!
Cocoanut Koala
Mar 18th, 2007
Well, that’s how you write things. If you aren’t sure, you SAY you aren’t sure.
The idea is always that the article SHOULD be 100% true, to the best of one’s ability.
So . . . what’s your point?
coco
Prokofy Neva
Mar 18th, 2007
>Therefore you conclude that big business is advertising through Metro? But wait, you’re covering your bets with a bunch of “apparently’s” and “may seem’s” and “may explain’s” so the article is 100% true!
Big Business ads *are* blighting SL. They have been for more than a month now, despite the Blingsider writing about them; despite Nobody blogging about them furiously. So I picked up the story, which I’ve been following ever since I first spotted this Alex Potato putting up extortionist signs myself.
This is a muck-raking tabloid.
It’s always fairly unbalanced.
Kanker Greenacre
Mar 18th, 2007
Prokofy – you can muck-rake all you like, but i’m hereby revoking your license to use the word “sophistry” in any of your future articles or replies to comments.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 18th, 2007
You’re a sophist, Kanker.
Roo Reynolds
Mar 19th, 2007
I have no knowledge of IBM endorsing this, or anything remotely like it. I’m annoyed to see my the logos of my company and its clients have apparently been used in this rather tasteless campaign, which actually feels more like extortion of the billboards’ neighbours than advertising.
I’m even more sad that might give people the wrong impression about corporations who actually try to do the right thing and add value with interesting builds and would never resort to ugly billboards such as these. I can only hope that most people will have the common sense to realise what this is, rather than misinterpret it as anything these companies have endorsed or supported. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, Prok. I normally follow KnowProwSE, but apparently missed http://www.knowprose.com/node/17474 the first time around.
I talk to a lot of people (IBMers, business partners, clients, students, conferences, …) about getting started in virtual worlds. One of the things I always tell anyone wondering how to engage in Second Life is not to throw up a billboard. For someone to apparently have done so on our behalf is frustrating in the extreme.
Talking to people about getting these dealt with appropriately.
Roo Reynolds (aka Algernon)
Metaverse Evangelist, IBM
MannyM
Mar 19th, 2007
Other annoying habits are cutting the edge out of a block or really illogical sub-divsion.
But as for the annoying signs – if people are silly enough to suffer that extortion then more the fool them.
When I got my First Land (remember that – 117 prims for $512) I soon worked out that even without Chrischun and his bordering on racially offensive campaign that living on the ground was silly – laggy, not at all private and ugly.
I learned a few building skills and knocked to gether a 13 prim Sky Box (Thanks Kitty Rich where ever you may be for showing me this style) and since then I have been oblivious to the cheap and nasty side of Second Life.
People – in every garden there will be pests – and people like the view blockers are what we call in Australia total Maggots.
The Maggots will now have names like Nokia (well I already have a cell phone and buy on price not handset) IBM (I buy backyard built and tweak it myself) Toyota (I kind of do not like getting laughed at for the car I drive) and the rest of the companies being dragged into an inefficient medium by employees who have found a great way to support their habit.
The good thing about maggots is that as soon as the air warms up they turn into flies and buzz off.
But hey – from such maggots I learned new skills and have a neat, clean low lag partment that is just sunsets and sunrises and untinterrupted views.
Prokofy _ agree with you totally – every word and there are very few words you write that I do not see the point to.
I am not in any way disagreeing with what you have written – just in my own optimistic way suggesting a way of getting around it.
Well thats my 2 cents worth (lin$5.32)
Simondo Nebestanka
Mar 19th, 2007
Sorry if this is a little off-topic, as the issue here seems to be about the larger drama of corporate presence in SL, however I think a good response to the practice of *any* obnoxious advertising signs is to render them invisible (or at least ‘non-visible’
.
Treating ‘landscape griefers’ as extortionists, then paying them off through buying their land will just encourage them to keep doing it.
Distant neighbors of mine at Arah took a novel approach to some large scale, ugly advertising: they grouped together, sacrificed some prims, and built a huge wall covering the entirety of the offending signs. They had effectively boxed-in the ads, such that you could tell something was being covered up, but it took a little trouble to find what was being hidden.
There’s nothing stopping any group of land owners, surrounding an ugly spinning ‘For Sale’ sign, from doing the same thing: just remove it from view. The hard thing is picking some nice texture to cover it up with.. maybe a scan of a cool skyscraper, or nice blue sky or something. I’d be happy to hand out notecards and textures to neighbors of view-offenders, letting them know how they can kill the impact of the signs.
Update: I just visited the nasty space at Arah and I see one side of the wall is missing.. the land on that side is advertised as “Nice view, easy to build on”..lol! Plus the landscape griefer has scaled his/her signs to go way up to about 750m. Bugger.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 19th, 2007
>I can only hope that most people will have the common sense to realise what this is, rather than misinterpret it as anything these companies have endorsed or supported.
Dear Roo,
Thanks for implying that I don’t have “common sense” — but surely you didn’t mean to do that. I do have common sense, however. And when you see a slick ad presentation spring up all over the world, and the Lindens do nothing, and the Second Life Insider writes about it, and Nobody blogs about it, and it persists and grows for more than a month, and nobody does anything, well, *common sense* dictates that something is up. Either in fact the companies did put in the ads, or in fact LL or the companies are somehow reluctant to act, for reasons indicated — that they don’t want to set precedents or have the burden or removing copyrighted items without DMCA takedown notices.
Is it likely that your company put these ads on there? No, not from the face of it, where, as I noted, the one institution depicted on the ads I did reach immediately said that they had no knowledge of it, and no, not when Nobody has explained that it seemed odd when he was the first to post about it and no, not in the comments here, where we all note that it’s funny the same avatar is in the picture in all of them.
But then…*why is it still there*? I’m sorry, but these questions have to be asked. You don’t have a policy posted up somewhere, on a website, on your island, saying “Our Good Neighbour Policy: We Pledge Never to Use Billboards”. How can we know this is the case, especially if we aren’t in your inner circle? It’s good you’ve published a policy we can all see now, but it will go below the fold…and then what?
Companies so far, since this article, are taking only the most timid of actions. They are writing queries, or mild warnings. They are not proceeding forward with actions. Meanwhile, those of us who live and work on the mainland and see this crap day after day have to stare at it — your company still got the advertising, and the impressions, and the clicks, and the eyeballs even if you didn’t endorse this advertising, and your company has this association, not because I’ve written this article, or because others blogged about it, but because Alex Potato got away with this heinous act, and you didn’t notice.
You can’t expect the broad public, or even those of us who are on some kind of circuit where we can reach you, to understands the specifics of this kind of situation.
Once again, the issue isn’t billboards per se. Indeed, the allergy to billboards that LL, the FIC and some companies trying to appease the FIC have, is what *actually* has brought this situation about. Because the Lindens have felt no pressure whatsoever to clean up the billboard menace, which rages unzoned everywhere, and claims that big business just stays on their islands, it leaves the sign field to unscrupulous business and petty and vulgar little inworld business which can crap up sim after sim with impunity.
If billboards were accepted, and not scorned, there would be better billboards, in zoned areas, by the roadside, and without spinning, brightness, porn, largenss, etc. but just a lot easier on the eyes. But the Lindens — and big business — refuse to consider how to grapple with this situation. Instead, they hide behind this “0 billboard” stance and close their eyes to what is happening on the mainland where they don’t go.
Corporations could be supporting inworld businesses and property owners by in fact having signs, signs that are more tasteful than the ugly signs we see now (billboards isn’t really the way to describe much of anything in SL, because the 16 m2 or 64 m2 plot doesn’t allow for a wideboard, only for a spinning narrow sign).
If you want to place an ad or product on my property, you just pay the normal rent anyone else pays. I’m sure many mall owners would feel the same way. I have rules about spinning signs and particles, etc. as most landlords do. The problem with 16 m2 parcels comes first with greedy microbarons parceling the land to sell to the extortionists, then the extortionists trying to make a quick buck. It would be a simple matter to code land so that it doesn’t sell except for $0 on amounts under 512 m2.
Prokofy
Assman Holder
Mar 19th, 2007
What would we do without ya, Prok? Did anybody say “good job” yet? Okay, I’ll say it…
Good job, Prok!
Prokofy Neva
Mar 19th, 2007
>There’s nothing stopping any group of land owners, surrounding an ugly spinning ‘For Sale’ sign, from doing the same thing: just remove it from view.
The problem with this concept is that one of the 4 sides is often a no-show who never logs in for ages; one of the other 4 sides is someone who is in fact guilty of selling land to the 16m2 extorters and won’t play ball, and doesn’t live on the sim, and either has their land for sale, too, or doesn’t care and leaves it.
I’ve seen the boxing technique work well on some new sims, there’s one in the East there where someone has a beautiful build, a kind of village taking up most of the sim, and somehow, these asswipe extorters got ahold of a tiny chunk of it, so the majority owner has the offending ugly porn signs walled off, and got the cooperation also of people on the next sim to wall the whole thing off. That’s ideal.
What would be even more ideal, however, is if the Lindens grasped that they cannot allow people’s expensive mainland purchases to be devalued like this, forcing them to buy more expensive islands. It’s a real racket. If they offer mainland, they have to put in place the support structure to keep it from being devalued.
That means some simple things like physically making it impossible to sell anything less than 512 for anything but $0 (not sure if this would only displace the problem, but I’m thinking about it), develop some spine and enforce their TOS/CS about not spamming and not interfering with the enjoyment of Second Life. Seriously, a dozen arrests, a demonstrative policy issued on a notecard, and we’d be well on our way.
Mark
Mar 19th, 2007
I see Prokbat managed to channel it into an FIC “issue”. Oh glory. Oh how unexpected. What Prok doesn’t realize is that there were and are plenty of “FIC” who have been griping that there is no zoning, forever. Many have pushed for it and indeed drafted propositions to that end. Most of those he calls “FIC” did not like Lazarus Divine’s assholish use of the world, but we’ll just forget all that, and/or not research it, so we can pummel some people we hate again. See, Prok thinks that because a cross section of SL’s player base didn’t or still don’t like Anshe, they’re “allergic to commerce”. What Prok ignores, or doesn’t want you to know, is that there were and are people from all sectors that did or don’t like her. It’s the way it is, people don’t like the “gazillionaires”. It’s human nature. In fact, most of the “immoral” behavior Prok bitches about incessantly is human nature. People of all political alignments and classes do not like Bill Gates simply because of his hold on the OS market, and that, once again, is human nature. Prok chooses to always be rabidly contrary to anything he believes to be FIC related, while many time speaking in terms of “we”, as if he speaks for the majority. Which is any issue he can divert to that end. He tries to ramrod his brand of morality, which he doesn’t even adhere to himself when it suits his current argument. So, Roo, and other corporate contact points, you’re basically listening to the musings of a hypocritical control freak.
Prok, the only people that give any credence to your B.S. are people like you, who also think they’re more “moral” and more intelligent than everyone else. You are the boss of exactly yourself, and no one else, but I doubt you’ll ever accept that, because you’re a busybody extraordinaire. You make Mrs. Kravitz look like an archangel. Hot air and vapid conspiracy theories are all you have most of the time, and any actual decent insights, of which there are a few, just get lost in all the noise and the very basest of personal attacks. You claim to “fight fire with fire”. Guess what? That makes you as immoral as those you claim to be immoral, for rolling in the gutter with them, and indeed using the same tactics you scream about them using, up to and including real life gender speculation and “internet psychologist” type diagnoses.
Cry that I didn’t give my SL last name, that’s ok, because you and others will read my comment. So I get what I want. Now spew some more hatred. I wont be reading it, so enjoy ranting to the walls.
Tengo Alas
Mar 19th, 2007
I’ve been sending snapshots of the ads – in context next to the oh-so-lovely bukkake twins – to the corporations, and to one of my tech media contacts
This could get interesting for the sign installers.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 20th, 2007
>but we’ll just forget all that, and/or not research it, so we can pummel some people we hate again.
Actually, “Mark” if you read the forums carefully, you’ll see that all the FIC regulars strenuously defend the concept of “I can do WTF I want on my own land,” and have a great deal of hate and venom for landlords and land barons, whom they view as uncreative, grasping, and crass. They believe themselves to be the best judge of what should be done with land, and they’ve always constituted a cabal that used to be quite difficult to get around, although today it is eroded considerably (like Lydnar Lehane’s and Cristiano’s hysterical campaign against having island deeds advertised in the land-for-sale list).
Start with the thread in the archives called “I Don’t Get it And They Sure Don’t” by Pahoa Jade in April 2005, where the term “FIC” was first used by me, to see exactly the roster of names — and continue down the line. You couldn’t be more wrong. The FIC has hatred for any use of land that they didn’t cook up with tie own fetid and exclusive communities of the core sims. They loathe what they view as mass culture in something like Dreamland. They constantly scorn the people who buy land and put up prefabs and don’t have customized stone boxes by Lordfly.
None of the leaders of the FIC, like Aimee or Flipper, ever spoke out or took any leadership position on the Bush Guy; if anything, they justified it under the “creativity knows no bounds” concept of “the Platformists”. If they didn’t take this position due to their slavish loyalty and justification for anything the Lab does, they took it out of a belief that anybody can put up anything they want on their land. They could be smug like that because they had no danger of sign griefing on their old core sims where they and their pals owned all the land — as did Governor Linden, unlike the new sims with no Linden land.
If you can find them on the record condemning the Bush Guy, please do, I could be wrong about some little half-hearted comment they made somewhere, but that’s my best recollection.
In fact, I would challenge you to find one bona-fide FIC member who condemned the Bush Guy. Their mouthpiece Hamlet Linden defended him tacitly by completely disparaging the protest movement against it and writing a sneering article about it.
I get a lot of fan letters. And I see that the opinion that defends the concept of freedom of creativity for landowners but NOT at the expense of reducing freedom and land value for others by not encroaching on the public commons is one that never had any traction with the major FIC. They simply don’t buy it as a concept because they refuse to accept any restraint on themselves, first and formost. Meanwhile, there was definitely a majority of land owners who opposed the inaction of LL on the Bush Guy.
As for the Alex Potato Metro sign, from what I can tell — I couldn’t stay to watch every single thing cycle — he has pulled some of the corporate ads but not all. Perhaps the ones he heard from. I still see some of them. And I also see inworld things like Academy of Second Learning. I doubt the Academy gave permission to be advertised either.
Ian Betteridge
Mar 20th, 2007
Prokofy says:
“Um, I didn’t print any false story. Every single word in it is true. I was very careful to point out that *apparently* the ads were ordered by these companies”
Lies upon lies, Prok. Your first line is “Remember how Philip Linden used to tell us that big business would never put up billboards in Second Life?” Followed by “think again”. Clearly, you’re implying that big businesses have put up billboards – something that you knew was probably false when you wrote the story, and definitely know now.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 21st, 2007
“Remember how Philip Linden used to tell us that big business would never put up billboards in Second Life?” Followed by “think again”.
Philip used to tell us this; he *still* tells us this. But it’s a very clever ruse. Because he lets *small tacky extortionist business* put up signs, and one of the things they have done is hijack the signs of big business.
There is nothing “false” about the fact that big business signs were — and are — blighting up the landscape. THEY ARE.
Does big business do this deliberately? When it is left to fester for a month after publicity in blogs and the news, when they make little timid queries and not takedown notices, it’s a problem of responsibility for negligence. That’s just as much an issue as intent.
We can’t know their intent; we can’t know it is false. We have the ugly signs, and their failure to act.
Try to see if you can understand these subtleties, Ian, I know it’s a stretch, your literalist tekkie mind working as it does overtime.
There’s absolutely nothing fake in this story. A resident was able to plaster big company logos all over SL, on hundreds of sims, in the view, everywhere. Thousands of avatars are left with the impression that big corporations advertise in this way in Second Life.
Linden Lab and these big corporations failed to act to change this situation. They could have on day one; but they don’t go on the mainland to see it, or, if they do know about it (and Linden Lab knew about it back in February, as we learn from the incident with Nobody Fugazi struggling with Alex Potato) they do nothing, and fail to act, because they fear precedents.
I see this as a case of the Lindens and the big companies getting hoisted by their own petard — and you, too.
Ian Betteridge
Mar 21st, 2007
“Philip used to tell us this; he *still* tells us this. But it’s a very clever ruse.”
No Prokofy, it is in fact true. Big business, no matter how you word salad it, has never put up the kind of billboards you’re describing. You can try and twist and turn all you like, Prok, but you simply flat-out lied in the first two paragraphs of your post, and now you’re trying to wriggle out of it.
Yes, I’m a literalist, if by that you mean I think that when someone clearly says that big business is posting billboards around SL, they actually mean what they say. But then, all I have to do is look at yoru history of lies, half-truths, fake non-stories and general abuse of people in order to know that nothing is as simple from you.
Prokofy Neva
Mar 23rd, 2007
>No Prokofy, it is in fact true. Big business, no matter how you word salad it, has never put up the kind of billboards you’re describing. You can try and twist and turn all you like, Prok, but you simply flat-out lied in the first two paragraphs of your post, and now you’re trying to wriggle out of it.
Any big business — and there are many, many more to come! can appear not to be putting up billboards and big ads…and let these unscrupulous inworld sign-griefers and extortionists do it for them. While these particular big-name companies had ads used against their will (only in SL! advertising for a big company without their knowledge!), they failed to do anything until a real clamour went up. That’s telling.
And Philip *is* engaging in a ruse. Because he tells us, oh, don’t worry, big business will stay on their islands, we will never sell them Linden land to advertise on roadside on the mainland. But then he turns around and lets inworld small business, tacky little flipping operations, to completely blight and devalue the world. It’s extraordinary!
>Yes, I’m a literalist, if by that you mean I think that when someone clearly says that big business is posting billboards around SL, they actually mean what they say.
My headlines says BIG BUSINESS ADS BLIGHT SECOND LIFE. The ads indeed blight second life. It does not say that the companies deliberately posted the ads. It explains that they may not know. It gives an example and cites one that says they were blindsided by it.
This is a tabloid, and this is how you do it. You make people feel ownership for the issue — ownership, due to their negligence. That’s what muck-raking journalism is about. You know, like in your favourite Guardian or whatever it is you read.
>But then, all I have to do is look at yoru history of lies, half-truths, fake non-stories and general abuse of people in order to know that nothing is as simple from you.
I think you simply mean my history of besting you in arguments on Clickable Culture, where you adopted a completely pig-headed and obdurate concept of me being hypocritical over your effort to someone trap me in some admission that you could use in some previous fight with Uri. It was really hilarious. You are lame.
Ian Betteridge
Mar 23rd, 2007
“”Any big business — and there are many, many more to come! can appear not to be putting up billboards and big ads…and let these unscrupulous inworld sign-griefers and extortionists do it for them. While these particular big-name companies had ads used against their will (only in SL! advertising for a big company without their knowledge!), they failed to do anything until a real clamour went up. That’s telling.”
So now you’re implying that big business is using third parties to put up billboards while denying it publicly? That’s a serious accusation – I hope you have some actual evidence to back it up. If you have, I suggest you present it.
“And Philip *is* engaging in a ruse. Because he tells us, oh, don’t worry, big business will stay on their islands, we will never sell them Linden land to advertise on roadside on the mainland.”
No, this is not what Philip has said. Read your own quotes in the piece above.
“This is a tabloid, and this is how you do it. You make people feel ownership for the issue — ownership, due to their negligence. That’s what muck-raking journalism is about.”
LOL Prokofy. Given that I spent years doing news, I know exactly how it works.
“My headlines says BIG BUSINESS ADS BLIGHT SECOND LIFE. The ads indeed blight second life. It does not say that the companies deliberately posted the ads.”
Which is why I never said anything about your headline, but instead concentrate on your first two paragraphs where you do indeed claim that Philip’s claim about big business never putting up billboards is false. Stop trying to wriggle out of the issue.
“I think you simply mean my history of besting you in arguments on Clickable Culture, where you adopted a completely pig-headed and obdurate concept of me being hypocritical over your effort to someone trap me in some admission…”
Actually, the first time we engaged on CC I simply tried to get you to clarify what you were saying. You took this as an attack and promptly started insulting me – which is your standard approach to anyone who dares ask you even the simplest question.
“…that you could use in some previous fight with Uri. It was really hilarious. You are lame.”
I have no idea what you’re talking about – I’ve never had any kind of fight with Uri. You, on the othere hand, had your posting privs here revoked because you posted something that was potentially libelous, something that you STILL refuse to admit.
Nobody Fugazi
Mar 23rd, 2007
The Lindens have disclaimed the use of their trademarks. I haven’t contacted anyone else, mainly because their trademark dilution is not really my problem. The ad spam is.
Perhaps it is something that should be brought up to corporate offices. But then, the escort ads next to some of these larger companies may be appropriate in some ways. It’s difficult to judge sometimes.
Alex Potato/Ayam Drake is still doing this, says it is within the Terms of Service, etc. Many other ad spammers say the same. I’ve had some try to abuse report me because I blocked their ads, rendering them ineffective – but they don’t care. Through the Clocktower Network, some advertisers of SL businesses say that they paid for advertising but not like this – and that they really don’t like their companies being used like this.
I don’t know. What I do know is that it has to stop. The large corporations outside of SL didn’t do this. It’s a few twits (19 at last count on the Clocktower Network) who are doing it. For the most part, I think that the corporations are staying on their islands (though everywhere I go, I seem to find a Pickle).
Time will tell.
Spontaneous Radio
Mar 31st, 2007
Bart Heart’s Estates (for sale for his birth date, $12374) are infamous.
First thing I would like to say is there are 147 total 16m sqs on mainland and estate land owned by BARTHEART.com with BART HEART ESTATES in the name. As far as I can tell, not one has a sign on it. And they are all set to autoreturn for 1 minute. Over 50% of them are set to allow you to edit the land so you can let them blend with the land next to it. So i don’t under stand what the problem is. You need to be talking about the land bots that buy land up cheap and then sell high, main land prices over 10L$ per meter, Sims going for $3000 USD in auction to the same people over and over to keep land prices high. But it is The Second Life Herald “Always Fairy Unbalanced” so I’ll be surprised if this even makes the blog.
Spontaneous Radio
BHE Head Security