Showing posts with label Socially F*ked-up. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Socially F*ked-up. Show all posts
/me groans.
Okay, fair warning here: anyone who really knows me knows I don't like to beat around the bush or soften things up for anyone. I actually do try hard to say what I mean and mean what I say and sometimes truth just plain hurts. So, I'm getting ready to offend a lot of people and you could be among them.
First I want to say I am sick and tired of the "you are intolerant' crowd because to use the very word is to proclaim yourself intolerant. The word itself is an oxymoron when used as an accusation. And only morons will ever throw it around that way.
With that said, I will boldly proclaim myself more tolerant than anyone else I know. I see something I don't agree with, I might whine and bitch about it but that's more or less the end of it. I won't demand you change whatever it is I think you are wrong about. For example: Linden Lab proclaiming the letters S and L as a trademark. I proclaimed that I will not recognize "SL" as a trademark of Linden Lab, but I haven't demanded they stop using it.
See? I'm "tolerant".
Homosexuality is another example: I have no problem with it. Whatever you do in your own home is your business and none of mine. What I actually do have a problem with is you always trying to rub it in my face by forcing a public discussion of it like I have a need to know.
Keep it to yourself, please and we'll all be just fine. See? I'm tolerant.
I also am sick and tired of the "media" agenda and biases. It's more than a month since the British Petroleum oil gusher under the ocean. Yet I don't see people lambasting and blaming Obama or his administration. If it happened only two years ago, impeachment proceedings would be in progress for Bush AND Cheney. I find many liberals to be two-faced hypocrites of the highest order. Unfortunately most of the established "media" is riddled with those versions.
For instance: how they seem to all be anti-semite, anti-christian and pro-muslim. (Yeah, lower-cased intentionally).
It seems the former two get all the apathy but we "must learn to understand and embrace" the muslims. In fact, that idea is running rampant through our schools. They are brain-washing our children beginning at the youngest ages. "Holiday Tree" instead of "Christmas Tree" for example. Remember students: "Christmas" means "Christ" which is bad, bad, bad! Holiday is a truncation of Holi (Holy) Day, and we can't have that, so we'll actually change our grammar rules for this one word that states a single vowel followed by a single consonant will be used in the long form and, instead we will pronounce it Hahl-ih-day from now on.
Look, I respect your right to practice and exercise whatever your choice of politics and religion. Really, I do. In fact, I wouldn't even mind you trying to convert me to your side of it all. But if you're going to do that, try an inclusive approach. Try doing it in a way that appeals to me. If you're convincing enough, you might even make some headway.
However, there is no constitutional or even "human" right to not be offended
So, if I offend you, tough nuts. Leave my presence and go somewhere happy-go-lucky for yourself and leave me be. The same is true with regard to anything Linden Lab does to piss you off: don't like it? Then GTFO. After all, it's one thing if I am the outsider who comes into your presense and offends you. Then - and only then - you are right to tell me to go away. But don't you dare come to my home and tell me I offend you. GTFO.
So when I get an offline (or any line) that looks like this, my hackles go up real fast (and please note, these thoughts of mine have always been thoughts of mine. This IM only gave me a reason to actually write about it):
[1:33] SALLY [redacted]: hello
[1:34] SALLY [redacted]: plz u made islamic texture in dragon
[1:35] SALLY [redacted]: iam moslem
[1:35] SALLY [redacted]: plz clear it it's bad for our religon
[1:35] SALLY [redacted]: we r about 20 person here
[1:36] SALLY [redacted]: we wont that
[1:36] SALLY [redacted]: plz
[1:36] SALLY [redacted]: clear it when u r online
[1:36] SALLY [redacted]: thx for your time
Thanks for my time? Do me a favor and go jump in a lake or something, because you can kiss me where I sit. "Moslim" is bad for "Christian" - you offend so how about you remove your religion? (One statement is just as bad as the other.)
Who the feck are you to tell me to change something of mine because it offends you? Why don't you, whom I have never met, just come into my house and tell me to change the paint because the color of my bathroom walls are "offensive" to you?
My knee-jerk reaction? "Kiss my ass, get the feck out, don't come back and I'll help you with a full-sim ban-hammer on all my sims and other properties". No, I didn't follow-through with my knee-jerk want. I might be stupid, but I'm not dumb. Rather I sent a simple IM back:
Sorry, I can't do that. I suggest you simply don't visit anymore.
That's it. Simple and pithy.
Of course I should have just sent a typical Steve Jobs email reply:
No.
----
Sent from my iPad.
And I said what I meant and meant what I said.
©2007-Present, Andr'Deco & Pixietale Studios, DBA Socially Mundane; Common Sensible
The problem with "shopping" on the Second Life grid is the lag - as vendor textures rez slower than molasses. And if you are a hunter like I am, trying to find what you're looking for is a nightmare as there is a sheer Matterhorn of stuff for sale all over the grid. So much so that it's a rare treat to go anywhere and not run into some prim blasting it's advertisement at you hoping you'll throw Linden Dollars at it.This is why I, like thousands of others will shop via XStreet SL (XSL) - it is still a major hit-and-miss frustrating experience. But it is less frustrating than going on the hunt in-world. You are able to compare likewise products side-by-side and then - if that creator/merchant actually has any smarts at all by providing a link to their in-world location - I'll go in-world to check the product first-hand.
Unfortunately, like in-world, XSL adverts are gamed to no end with "keyword spam" and often ridiculously inflated proclamations about the quality of the product that is up for review (a reason I never purchase anything from XSL that does not provide a SLURL to review it in-world).However, XSL has one major gaming flaw that does not exist in-world. Think of it as the counter-part to in-world traffic-gaming with traffic-bots: the all-to-common shill.
I went into XSL to check-up on one of my own listings. Then for some reason I went back to the "home" page, where there are "featured" listings. The one that caught my eyes was a "sex rug" for L$99. Zodiac House (go there and buy our stuff now, please - "ZHSL" SLURL link in the menu above!) also sells "cuddles" and "love" rugs, but certainly with the work we put into them we don't sell for that price. The headline is "Super Promo..." - so I figured it was some limited-time sale or something. I looked...and laughed.
Often in SL you will get exactly what you pay for. Sometimes you'll be shockingly surprised that you get a lot more than you pay for. But more often than that, you will get a lot less for what you pay for. In this case, your L$99 will get you an MLP script-set with a bunch of (currently) freebie animations. And that's okay.
But the shilling is rampant:
But the shilling is rampant:
Back before the XSL web site was redesigned it was pretty easy to give reviews of stuff you have purchased as every time you logged-in there they were in your face waiting for you to rate them. Most people, perhaps 999 of 1000 won't bother writing any review at all and very few will actually bother giving a star-rating.
However, the redesign of the XSL web site makes it ridiculously confusing to find a way to review items you have purchased from your "account" page, meaning you have to make an active effort to jump through the link-hoops to go back for the purpose of reviewing. Or, however, revisiting the item page will allow you to rate and review. So a question: how often after purchasing something from XSL do you return to that same item listing...just to post a review?
Certainly some people will. But the overwhelming majority will not.
A common practice of "traffic-gaming" creators on XSL is to login with all their alts, perhaps convince some friends to all go into their product pages and give 5-star ratings with often ridiculous over-the-top commentary.
"ZOMG! This thing is the best since sliced bread!!!! OMFG I LOVE THIS!"
Uh...yeah...riiiiight. For a L$99 Sex Rug with freebie animations?
How to spot shill ratings: check the dates and times of when the ratings were posted. This is why I always go to the "Item Discussion" thread to see what real people are saying.
So, as for brand-new just-listed low-cost items with more than one or two reviews where every one of them is a 5-star rating... fasten your seatbelt and rather than a grain, swallow a whole bag of salt with it.
As the traffic bot on the grid has made a complete mockery of traffic ratings on the grid, so too has the XSL shill of star-ratings and reviews.
True story.
Scenario: you discover Second Life, sign-up. The newbie experience is exhilarating and you discover things, explore, observe. Within a month or so you learn to build.
So you build.
Stuff.
Like most creators, you build for yourself. To sell your creations hasn't even really crossed your mind, maybe later. It's exiting if someone notices your creations, you give away copies freely to thank them for the compliment and besides, it feels good that someone is impressed enough with your creation that they'll actually tell you about it.
Then there are those hysterical idiots who really do not have a life (first or second) and have nothing better to do than scour the grid, inspecting every object and person they see and come across - because they are the paranoid and vitriolic copybot nazi'esque soldiers.
One of them "inspects" you.
She discovers that your shoes carry the creator name of -gasp!- you!She plasters the vigilante nazi'esque hysteria group with this news:
"One month newbie waering shoes that shows THEM as the creator! COPYBOT ALERT!!!!"
An angry storm like a swarm of bees-scorned ensues throughout the group. In the ridiculous hearsay the words spread like a California wildfire, consuming all hysterically paranoid idiots across the grid in a wave akin of the final, terrible Biblical Egyptian plague known as the night of Passover - except you are the "first-born".
Suddenly you are banned here and there and that place way over there. The view on the map looks like someone sprinkling pepper all over it as each dark spot is a new banning of you.
All because you have decided to create something for your self and - gasp- actually wear it in public.
How dare you!
***
Fortunately I'm in the home furnishing business. That can't possibly be classified as fashion as we all know the hysteria and paranoia in the SL (and FL) fashion industries is constantly on the verge of the end-of-the-world mindsets.
You dear friend have been "fashionista'd". Unfortunately, that hysterical paranoia idiocy exists in more or less all other prim or texture-based creation industries as well. Just not as rampantly as the dreaded fashionista camps.
Good thing most reasonably minded people look upon those nazi'esque wackos as...well, wackos.
Good thing most reasonably minded people look upon those nazi'esque wackos as...well, wackos.
Unfortunately, mental help is only useful when they recognize they really do need mental help. But it means they'd have to actually get a life, even a "Second" one.
Driving in to work this morning listening to the radio as most people do and I heard an ad from the "Advertising Council" (Ad Council), a massively influential not-for-profit organization and leader of PSA (Public Service Announcements) production in the United States. The advertisement is part of a campaign called "think before you speak" - good advice to be sure, and is running on radio and print.
The specific advert I heard was called "Gay". Here is the exact quote1:
I know a lot of gay people. The good ones have come out of the closet but keep all the rest behind closed doors like they should. The loud-mouthed minority make me and everyone else (including the good gays) sick and tired of their bitching and whining. Stop trying to push your twisted agenda on the rest of the world already. And of course it's about language. What the hell is the difference between "marriage" and "civil union"? The word and nothing more.
"What is your gender" is an improper sentence. "What is your sex" is the correct way to ask it. But no, you people have worked so hard to change (read: bastardize and eff-up) our language before our very eyes, no one even thinks twice about it. And how about the so-called word "aint" - it was never a word until the Webster's dictionary decided to throw it in there because it is used so much.
Even "common" statements are bastardized. Take this for example: "if you think this, then you have another thing coming!" Umm, another what, idiot? The proper phrase is "if you think this, you have another think coming" - meaning your mind will be forcibly changed in a flat hurry. All you liberal, politically correct bastards have been trying so hard to eff-up our language that's it's starting to get out of your control.
If you have a problem with "that's so gay" as a statement and it "offends" gay people (not the happy ones" as you say,) then calling a homosexual person "gay" is an offense to gay people (the happy ones!)
What? You want to have your cake and eat it, too?
That is so effing gay.
Audio
The specific advert I heard was called "Gay". Here is the exact quote1:
"there once was a time when "gay" meant happy. then it meant "homosexual." now people are saying "that's so gay" to mean dumb and stupid. which is pretty insulting to gay people (and we don't mean the "happy" people). 2. so please knock it off. 3. go to [redacted because I don't want to advertise for them].com"Wow. Talking about a massive partisan agenda. You know what? Feck those gay people who are offended. And feck you Ad Council for this dumb-ass advertisement. There is no "right", Constitutional or otherwise to "not be offended". Talk about hypocritical on a biblical proportion! You are so effing gay. Our language evolves. Word definitions change constantly.
I know a lot of gay people. The good ones have come out of the closet but keep all the rest behind closed doors like they should. The loud-mouthed minority make me and everyone else (including the good gays) sick and tired of their bitching and whining. Stop trying to push your twisted agenda on the rest of the world already. And of course it's about language. What the hell is the difference between "marriage" and "civil union"? The word and nothing more.
"What is your gender" is an improper sentence. "What is your sex" is the correct way to ask it. But no, you people have worked so hard to change (read: bastardize and eff-up) our language before our very eyes, no one even thinks twice about it. And how about the so-called word "aint" - it was never a word until the Webster's dictionary decided to throw it in there because it is used so much.
Even "common" statements are bastardized. Take this for example: "if you think this, then you have another thing coming!" Umm, another what, idiot? The proper phrase is "if you think this, you have another think coming" - meaning your mind will be forcibly changed in a flat hurry. All you liberal, politically correct bastards have been trying so hard to eff-up our language that's it's starting to get out of your control.
If you have a problem with "that's so gay" as a statement and it "offends" gay people (not the happy ones" as you say,) then calling a homosexual person "gay" is an offense to gay people (the happy ones!)
What? You want to have your cake and eat it, too?
That is so effing gay.
1. Ad Council. Gay. Radi: Ad Council, 2010. Radio.
http://adcouncil.org
Copybot.
It's a loaded word the very mention of tends to generate some serious paranoia if used in the context of being applied against someone.
In the Second Life vernacular the word "copybot" conjures utter fear among creators - and perhaps it gives a little insight to how musicians and book authors and movie producers feel with regard to the whole file-sharing of their works.
However, it is a statistical fact that the anything that has been "copybotted" - an umbrella term to represent copybot proper along with all other methods of "ripping" prims and textures to create full-permission copies (it doesn't work with scripts) - is most often not resold or given away, but rather users "stealing" for themselves.
It also is a statistical fact that all copybot activity across the grid amounts to a fraction of a fraction of overall grid business activity to begin with. I am not trying to minimize the effect and devastating circumstances the use of copybot against a creator can have. I am only saying that Second Life and its economy is so large that copybot activity is barely a noticeable drop of water in a swimming pool when viewed in context of the "big picture" - though it really is a terrible tool that can wreak havoc on a creator's business. But that's not what I am really writing about here.
What I am writing about here has been going on ever since copybot first existed back in 2006. It simply is a lot more prevalent now and is a way that the very word "copybot" is misused and abused in a far more insidious way. As a competition-killer and nothing more than that.
To accuse another creator of "copybotting" something is like me accusing you of murder just because I saw you in the same room with the victim. At least it looked like you, but I haven't bothered to take a close look, and it doesn't matter that you were actually out of the country at the time.
Simply inspecting a prim build to see that all the prims have the same object name and time-stamp does not a copybotted item make. Linden Lab has already proclaimed "prim-replicators" to be a legal, useful tool.1
It is only "external tools" that are a violation of the Linden lab Terms of Service.2 This would include viewers themselves, such as the Niellife viewer.
Linden Lab clearly states that copying does not "necessarily mean stealing"3. "There are many useful purposes and tools for copying" and as with any powerful tool, it can be abused. However the usefulness outweighs the risk - hence the "Hollywood vs. Sony Betamax" decision, paving the way for VCRs.
The simple fact is that it is easy to determine if an actual copying infringement has occurred. But it takes a little effort on your part: firstly, the alleged copied item must be an exact duplicate of the "original". An inspection must show every single prim as having an identical time-stamp of creation and the creators must be different, and the "previous owner" (available as of this writing in Snowglobe viewer) must be either blank or the same name as the current owner.
These are the methods of determining if a genuine theft has actually occurred and not a creator using a completely legal prim-replicator for their own purposes (and the Lindens can easily check thier system logs as well).
However, the word "copybot" has become a drama-bomb that piss-poor or otherwise paranoid creators now throw around as a weapon against their competition. And that is where the true rub lies. You can only legally copyright a work, not a visual. I can legally repaint from scratch the Mona Lisa and sell it as a replica as long as I don't actually title it "Mona Lisa" or try to misrepresent it as an original. Perfectly legal. You cannot copyright a "visual". Only the actual work to create it.
The problem is where similar items are created by different authors. The hysterically paranoid creators spot these similar items and immediately throw the "copybot bomb" out there - often spamming groups with vitriolic hysterical diatribe and the sad thing is a lot of the people in these groups are gullible and emotionally stupid enough to just fall for it, taking everything said at face value. How sad is that? I speak on this because the round-robin of this ridiculousness has been going around for years and it is finally my turn to be on the receiving end of it.
So, for all you creators out there, I have a fair and very serious warning for you, I strongly recommend you take heed or your ass will burn because I will pull all the stops out. In other words: don't tread on me without absolutely irrefutable proof or face my wrath.
Knowledge is power and I can assure you I have the knowledge.
Firstly, Linden Lab has the full details of my real life identity on file. Therefore, I have nothing to hide and in that is all the armament I need to defend myself and turn any defense into a seriously devastating offense. I know because I have done it before. I am a successful business person in SL. Why the hell would I risk all I have worked for by breaking the Terms of Service? As for "Community Standards", well that's a matter of perspective, so I will grief the hell out of you if you give me trouble on my sims. However, if you think I have "copybotted" or otherwise stolen your creation, the very first thing I do is invite you to rezz your "original" work right next to the alleged copy. This way, anyone and everyone can compare for themselves as it is far too easy to prove when something is or is not copied via illegal means.
If you refuse, I will name names, file an abuse report with Linden Lab against you for harrassment (which is against ToS, and CS) and I will embarrass you painfully by ensuring all visitors to my lands (real traffic by the way, no traffic bots) are made clearly aware of what a paranoid scumbag you truly are.
If you genuinely feel I have stolen your stuff, you'll file a DMCA against me or at least take my offer to rez yours next to mine. However, if you go the DMCA route I will file a counter-claim against you and obtain all your real life information, file abuse reports against you and file a claim with the Federal Trade Commission as it is a $10,000 fine for filing a false DMCA claim against anyone and I am fully prepared to do that (done it once before in real life - it was nicely effective.)
And if you don't file a DMCA while accusing me of stealing your stuff I will make sure as many people on the grid know your stuff is utter crap, quality-wise because the only reason you are making such a claim, and refusing to rezz your so-called original next to mine is because your garbage is just that: crap. Otherwise you'd have the wherewithal to actually put your money where your mouth is (or at least your prims.)
So to all my readers: the next time you see or hear of someone proclaiming to have been "copybotted" - ask for the resident name. Then I dare you to ask that accused resident if they have offered the accuser the opportunity to rez their original next to the alleged copy for comparison. If they say they have, then ask the accuser why they have not taken that offer.
Then, you, dear reader are the informed, wise, knowledgeable resident who won't fall for the vitriolic weapon of creators who simply cannot compete in the real market of SL business. Which should send up red flags about that person as a whole if they stoop to such a level lower than dog-shit as to throw the "I've been copybotted!-drama-bomb".
What brought all this about? Zodiac House (of which I am the co-founder) is accused of copybotting a dragon statue from a creator who also has created a similar-looking version (which both were copied from reference photos of a real life version - so go figure.) But the accuser refuses to rez their so-called original next to the alleged copy. So I looked at the so-called original and... uh... no wonder he refuses. It is plainly obvious there is no copybot at play here! Thus the accusation is malicious in nature and intended to specifically create drama for Zodiac House. How could anyone see it differently?
So to put my money where my mouth is: Kimo Junot: how about you put your money where your mouth is and accept the offer to rez your so-called "original" dragon statue next to the Zodiac House alleged "copybotted" dragon statue and allow the public at-large to judge for themselves? Or are you not so confident in your own product and do not wish to risk looking bad, or even worse: coming off as an unscrupulous and dishonest creator who throws the "copybot-drama-bomb" for no reason other than to attack a competitor because you don't like that tey create something even similar?
I'll save everyone here the work. Here are the two items in question, the alleged "original" above and the alleged "stolen copy" below. "Twisted Thorn Slurl" - "Zodiac House Slurl" (So you can compare and determine the "copybot" status for yourself in-world.)
Can't speak to the "Twisted" version, but the Zodiac House version is based on a real life painting artwork - available publicly to anyone who happens across it.
[UPDATE 01.06.10; 0812: I have been sent the original artwork links the Zodiac Dragon is based-off of. Which cause me to wonder where Mr. Kimo based his from - which leads me to wonder if I or anyone else should accuse him of "copybotting" his dragon statue from another source? What goes around, comes around! Image One; Image two and I am told the in-world color of the Zodiac statue is to match the decor of the store meme.]
It simply is amazing what some creators will do and to what level they will stoop when they can't compete in the market at large. In the old days, we used to call people who do these kind of things a "cheat". I have more accurate, but harsher words of description, but there are many ladies who read this blog so I will not diverge from my gentlemanly manner for their sake.
Now go show your support for the downtrodden and victimized! Go to Zodiac House and buy-up their entire inventory. Well, at the very least: BUY THAT DRAGON STATUE!
**********
References
1. Linden, Cory. "Use of Copybot and Similar Tools a ToS Violation." Official Second Life Blog (14, November 2006). Web Site. January 5, 2010.
"As we've said before, copying tools do have legitimate uses. For example, intellectual property owners may wish to back up their own content or copy it from our hosted Second Life virtual world to a stand-alone, behind-the-firewall Second Life solution. However, copying tools can also facilitate infringement, and the devil is in the details."
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/community/blog/2009/08/04/our-content-management-roadmap
2. Linden, Cyn. "Our Content Management Roadmap." Official Second Life Blog (4, August 2009). Web Site. January 5, 2010.
"Second Life needs features to provide more information about assets and the results of copying them. Unfortunately, these are not yet in place. Until they are, the use of CopyBot or any other external application to make unauthorized duplicates within Second Life will be treated as a violation of Section 4.2 of the Second Life Terms of Service and may result in your account(s) being banned from Second Life. If you feel that someone has used CopyBot to make an infringing copy of your content, please file an abuse report. Note that this is completely separate from any copyright infringement claim you may wish to pursue via the DMCA."
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/features/blog/2006/11/15/use-of-copybot-and-similar-tools-a-tos-violation
3. Linden, Torley. "Protecting Your Copyrighted Content." Official Second Life Blog (11, April 2008). Web Site. January 5, 2010.
"We’re sometimes asked why Residents are allowed to have or sell copying devices. The answer is that there are legitimate uses of a copying mechanism. It’s the infringement that we don’t allow and won’t tolerate."
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/features/blog/2008/04/11/protecting-your-copyrighted-content
It's a loaded word the very mention of tends to generate some serious paranoia if used in the context of being applied against someone.
In the Second Life vernacular the word "copybot" conjures utter fear among creators - and perhaps it gives a little insight to how musicians and book authors and movie producers feel with regard to the whole file-sharing of their works.
However, it is a statistical fact that the anything that has been "copybotted" - an umbrella term to represent copybot proper along with all other methods of "ripping" prims and textures to create full-permission copies (it doesn't work with scripts) - is most often not resold or given away, but rather users "stealing" for themselves.
It also is a statistical fact that all copybot activity across the grid amounts to a fraction of a fraction of overall grid business activity to begin with. I am not trying to minimize the effect and devastating circumstances the use of copybot against a creator can have. I am only saying that Second Life and its economy is so large that copybot activity is barely a noticeable drop of water in a swimming pool when viewed in context of the "big picture" - though it really is a terrible tool that can wreak havoc on a creator's business. But that's not what I am really writing about here.
What I am writing about here has been going on ever since copybot first existed back in 2006. It simply is a lot more prevalent now and is a way that the very word "copybot" is misused and abused in a far more insidious way. As a competition-killer and nothing more than that.
To accuse another creator of "copybotting" something is like me accusing you of murder just because I saw you in the same room with the victim. At least it looked like you, but I haven't bothered to take a close look, and it doesn't matter that you were actually out of the country at the time.
Simply inspecting a prim build to see that all the prims have the same object name and time-stamp does not a copybotted item make. Linden Lab has already proclaimed "prim-replicators" to be a legal, useful tool.1
It is only "external tools" that are a violation of the Linden lab Terms of Service.2 This would include viewers themselves, such as the Niellife viewer.
Linden Lab clearly states that copying does not "necessarily mean stealing"3. "There are many useful purposes and tools for copying" and as with any powerful tool, it can be abused. However the usefulness outweighs the risk - hence the "Hollywood vs. Sony Betamax" decision, paving the way for VCRs.
The simple fact is that it is easy to determine if an actual copying infringement has occurred. But it takes a little effort on your part: firstly, the alleged copied item must be an exact duplicate of the "original". An inspection must show every single prim as having an identical time-stamp of creation and the creators must be different, and the "previous owner" (available as of this writing in Snowglobe viewer) must be either blank or the same name as the current owner.
These are the methods of determining if a genuine theft has actually occurred and not a creator using a completely legal prim-replicator for their own purposes (and the Lindens can easily check thier system logs as well).
However, the word "copybot" has become a drama-bomb that piss-poor or otherwise paranoid creators now throw around as a weapon against their competition. And that is where the true rub lies. You can only legally copyright a work, not a visual. I can legally repaint from scratch the Mona Lisa and sell it as a replica as long as I don't actually title it "Mona Lisa" or try to misrepresent it as an original. Perfectly legal. You cannot copyright a "visual". Only the actual work to create it.
The problem is where similar items are created by different authors. The hysterically paranoid creators spot these similar items and immediately throw the "copybot bomb" out there - often spamming groups with vitriolic hysterical diatribe and the sad thing is a lot of the people in these groups are gullible and emotionally stupid enough to just fall for it, taking everything said at face value. How sad is that? I speak on this because the round-robin of this ridiculousness has been going around for years and it is finally my turn to be on the receiving end of it.
So, for all you creators out there, I have a fair and very serious warning for you, I strongly recommend you take heed or your ass will burn because I will pull all the stops out. In other words: don't tread on me without absolutely irrefutable proof or face my wrath.
Knowledge is power and I can assure you I have the knowledge.
Firstly, Linden Lab has the full details of my real life identity on file. Therefore, I have nothing to hide and in that is all the armament I need to defend myself and turn any defense into a seriously devastating offense. I know because I have done it before. I am a successful business person in SL. Why the hell would I risk all I have worked for by breaking the Terms of Service? As for "Community Standards", well that's a matter of perspective, so I will grief the hell out of you if you give me trouble on my sims. However, if you think I have "copybotted" or otherwise stolen your creation, the very first thing I do is invite you to rezz your "original" work right next to the alleged copy. This way, anyone and everyone can compare for themselves as it is far too easy to prove when something is or is not copied via illegal means.
If you refuse, I will name names, file an abuse report with Linden Lab against you for harrassment (which is against ToS, and CS) and I will embarrass you painfully by ensuring all visitors to my lands (real traffic by the way, no traffic bots) are made clearly aware of what a paranoid scumbag you truly are.
If you genuinely feel I have stolen your stuff, you'll file a DMCA against me or at least take my offer to rez yours next to mine. However, if you go the DMCA route I will file a counter-claim against you and obtain all your real life information, file abuse reports against you and file a claim with the Federal Trade Commission as it is a $10,000 fine for filing a false DMCA claim against anyone and I am fully prepared to do that (done it once before in real life - it was nicely effective.)
And if you don't file a DMCA while accusing me of stealing your stuff I will make sure as many people on the grid know your stuff is utter crap, quality-wise because the only reason you are making such a claim, and refusing to rezz your so-called original next to mine is because your garbage is just that: crap. Otherwise you'd have the wherewithal to actually put your money where your mouth is (or at least your prims.)
So to all my readers: the next time you see or hear of someone proclaiming to have been "copybotted" - ask for the resident name. Then I dare you to ask that accused resident if they have offered the accuser the opportunity to rez their original next to the alleged copy for comparison. If they say they have, then ask the accuser why they have not taken that offer.
Then, you, dear reader are the informed, wise, knowledgeable resident who won't fall for the vitriolic weapon of creators who simply cannot compete in the real market of SL business. Which should send up red flags about that person as a whole if they stoop to such a level lower than dog-shit as to throw the "I've been copybotted!-drama-bomb".
What brought all this about? Zodiac House (of which I am the co-founder) is accused of copybotting a dragon statue from a creator who also has created a similar-looking version (which both were copied from reference photos of a real life version - so go figure.) But the accuser refuses to rez their so-called original next to the alleged copy. So I looked at the so-called original and... uh... no wonder he refuses. It is plainly obvious there is no copybot at play here! Thus the accusation is malicious in nature and intended to specifically create drama for Zodiac House. How could anyone see it differently?
So to put my money where my mouth is: Kimo Junot: how about you put your money where your mouth is and accept the offer to rez your so-called "original" dragon statue next to the Zodiac House alleged "copybotted" dragon statue and allow the public at-large to judge for themselves? Or are you not so confident in your own product and do not wish to risk looking bad, or even worse: coming off as an unscrupulous and dishonest creator who throws the "copybot-drama-bomb" for no reason other than to attack a competitor because you don't like that tey create something even similar?
I'll save everyone here the work. Here are the two items in question, the alleged "original" above and the alleged "stolen copy" below. "Twisted Thorn Slurl" - "Zodiac House Slurl" (So you can compare and determine the "copybot" status for yourself in-world.)
Can't speak to the "Twisted" version, but the Zodiac House version is based on a real life painting artwork - available publicly to anyone who happens across it.
[UPDATE 01.06.10; 0812: I have been sent the original artwork links the Zodiac Dragon is based-off of. Which cause me to wonder where Mr. Kimo based his from - which leads me to wonder if I or anyone else should accuse him of "copybotting" his dragon statue from another source? What goes around, comes around! Image One; Image two and I am told the in-world color of the Zodiac statue is to match the decor of the store meme.]
It simply is amazing what some creators will do and to what level they will stoop when they can't compete in the market at large. In the old days, we used to call people who do these kind of things a "cheat". I have more accurate, but harsher words of description, but there are many ladies who read this blog so I will not diverge from my gentlemanly manner for their sake.
Now go show your support for the downtrodden and victimized! Go to Zodiac House and buy-up their entire inventory. Well, at the very least: BUY THAT DRAGON STATUE!
**********
References
1. Linden, Cory. "Use of Copybot and Similar Tools a ToS Violation." Official Second Life Blog (14, November 2006). Web Site. January 5, 2010.
"As we've said before, copying tools do have legitimate uses. For example, intellectual property owners may wish to back up their own content or copy it from our hosted Second Life virtual world to a stand-alone, behind-the-firewall Second Life solution. However, copying tools can also facilitate infringement, and the devil is in the details."
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/community/blog/2009/08/04/our-content-management-roadmap
2. Linden, Cyn. "Our Content Management Roadmap." Official Second Life Blog (4, August 2009). Web Site. January 5, 2010.
"Second Life needs features to provide more information about assets and the results of copying them. Unfortunately, these are not yet in place. Until they are, the use of CopyBot or any other external application to make unauthorized duplicates within Second Life will be treated as a violation of Section 4.2 of the Second Life Terms of Service and may result in your account(s) being banned from Second Life. If you feel that someone has used CopyBot to make an infringing copy of your content, please file an abuse report. Note that this is completely separate from any copyright infringement claim you may wish to pursue via the DMCA."
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/features/blog/2006/11/15/use-of-copybot-and-similar-tools-a-tos-violation
3. Linden, Torley. "Protecting Your Copyrighted Content." Official Second Life Blog (11, April 2008). Web Site. January 5, 2010.
"We’re sometimes asked why Residents are allowed to have or sell copying devices. The answer is that there are legitimate uses of a copying mechanism. It’s the infringement that we don’t allow and won’t tolerate."
https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/features/blog/2008/04/11/protecting-your-copyrighted-content
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)