Just so everyone knows, I didn't miss the point of this message. I am
aching to clear this up about myself. My Avatar as well as myself are
both MALE. I noticed in this message that it is being confused. It
don't really matter. but I had to straighten it out. Seven years ago
when I joined SL, InuYasha was one of my favorite Anime series. It is a
Japanese name for the main character who happens to be a Half-Demon.
The name is like saying he is a half powered demon, half breed. It is
pronounced EEnuYasha, in Japanese I's are pronounced like EE's.
The anime don't really give a last name and I didn't want to steal it
anyways, so I used a time period. I thought back when I joined I would
be interested in the Meiji era. I didn't really think I would stay that
long in Secondlife and wasn't thinking I would carry this name so long.
After two years I settled on and fell in love with the ancient Okinawan
Culture. I have been studying it and learning techniques of that
culture for over 5 years now. I have way outgrown the character name and
became much more serious about it. MY problem is most people I know met
me under the InuYasha name. I wanted people in OSGrid to know who I was
from SL. In SL I use the display name Yuukyu. It is a name I choose,
sounds Okinawan, but it translates to the word meaning "Eternal",
because I feel like I been in virtual worlds forever now. lol.
Opensim is great to me. There are so many other important things going
on and fixes needed. I haven't officially made a request, but hoping at
some point opensim will support the renaming/display names that SL
does. Then I could use Yuukyu on my grid as well as Osgrid. I use
Firestorm and to change your display name open your profile and click
the wrench icon. It then ask you for a display name.
Yuukyu/(InuYasha Meiji)
On 11/16/2012 6:19 AM, Teravus Ovares wrote:
SnowCrash,
Firstly, Say what you mean to say.... and choose your words carefully
because a lot of people will base their opinions of your tool on
them. Be clear about what you're writing and what other people will
think it means when they read it. It's much harder to take back a
comment after the fact then it is to say the right thing the first time.
To address your comments:
1. As far as it being a gauntlet, you said that you were at the
installer stage and the code is ready for release and what you were
working on now is the 'documentation' and 'installer'.
* Ready for release means that it's done being worked on prior to
release. It also means that any changes that the community
suggests would then have to be implemented and tested/validated
delaying release.
* You also said that, assuming the grid owner contacted you, you'd
'attempt' to get it in _before releasing the source_, "Any grid
operator which would like to have backup governed by a more
restrictive policy are invited to notify me and I will attempt to
implement the policy prior to the first release of the source
code. or supply patches at a later time."
* You're_not_ saying that you'll get the policies in_before the
first product release,_ you're saying you'll get them in place
_before the /source/ is released._
* If this isn't the case and you're willing to put in extra effort
getting a solid permission framework in place before
product release(which, in my opinion, may take weeks or months to
properly set up), then please say so.
2._You developed this tool in a vacuum_ and did not involve anyone
from /this/ community in the process until it's already being released..
* You're not compromising on the permissions before product release,
just source release..
* it's definately going to be released.. "There is no if about
it" as a response to a perfectly valid argument (that I'll
elaborate on below)... I'd say that's throwing down the gauntlet.
* This, 'developed in a vacuum' fact is further evidenced by the
fact that you are not very familiar with the copybot
discussions... Had you even mentioned the project to the
community here and the fact that it was going to "download
anything that it could", they would/have immediately/ made
references to copybot and SecondInventory.
3. "I do however stand my statement that I am willing to listen
suggestions from the community as long as they do not in a significant
way deprive users of their legitimate rights.". Ok fair enough,
so/who's/ judging what's legitimate and not, You? How are you
qualified to judge what's right and not? Are you an appointed judge or
an IP/copyright attorney? Do you have years of experience dealing with
IP, copyright? You're a software developer /who _hasn't_ effectively
argued that your program has a legitimate use/ and by legitimate, I
mean doesn't violate someone's rights and/or breach a contract. The
reason that, at this moment, you cannot claim a valid use is there's
no technically respected way to declare that content is exportable,
and therefore the assumption is that it's not exportable. You may
not care who's rights the application that you created is violating...
but if that's the case, then don't claim to be an advocate for user's
rights.... it's designed to violate rights.
You saw dz's reaction, you saw Inu's reaction.
As far as rights... Inu freebied items that she sells on Agni for
use on her own grid.. but because there's a user friendly tool to take
'freebee' items from grid to grid, doing so actually risks her ability
to sell it. She freebied the items for the very same reason that
you're writing this program.. because there's a content gap. Does
Inu have rights when it comes to that? Are you seriously going to
argue that Inu shouldn't have freebied the item for use on inu's grid?
To be clear, I don't have a problem with content transfer in
general... just content transfer that violates a previously agreed
upon contract. If there's a mechanism that detects a 'Creative Commons
or other permissive copyright notecard in the object', then I'm all
for that. The problem is that there are assumptions and agreements
that people make about the state of things that, when the state
suddenly changes, rights are violated. So what has changed? You're
providing an /easy/ way for non technical users to transfer their
content... that you want this program to be accepted in the community
and not shunned like many others.
If your ultimate dream is inventory stores be decentralized,
then you should be working on that and not intermediary hacks like
this. And, we should be open and transparent with the content
creators when their content is going outside a walled garden so that
they can make an informed decision about the actions that they
take. Anything less, is probably going to panic content creators
who are just starting to feel comfortable with OpenSimulator.
Just a note, I'm not a grid operator. I don't own a grid. I don't
operate one. On Agni, I created 6 products that, the proceeds of the
product licensing were immediately donated to the local community
events. I'm not a major content creator and the earnings from content
that I did create were donated to the community. I'm not someone
making a killing from content creation... or world hosting... I'm
not entirely an independent party though, I'm a software developer
and I feel very strongly about content licenses. I paid microsoft
for windows for each of my computers (I have 6 computers in
operation(two are macs with Parallels)). My music comes from the
iTunes Store, not bittorrent... etc. On the other hand, I
still hold a grudge against Sony for Michael Lynton's comments about
the internet ( http://news.cnet.com/8301-13846_3-10242526-62.html )
because he brands internet users as content theives... which was
famously misquoted as him saying, "I'm a guy who doesn't see anything
good having come from the Internet". I don't think that internet
users are naturally theives and..... history has shown again and
again that when the technology is easily accessible and capable of
acquiring content illegally and the technology is easy to use, the
prevalence of license infringement goes up. I think it's more of an
'easy to forget' thing that I'm supposed to pay to use that... and not
a willfull infringement. It's the license infringement triangle..
like the fire triangle... Fire needs oxygen, a fuel source, and an
ignition, but I digress....
If you're really interested in working with the community, then listen
to them. My suggestion, at this point, is to work on implementing
the means where a grid transfer license can be checked and respected
technically and open source most of your app but leave the part that
actually does the 'taking' of things and respecting of permissions
closed source as a dll.
The issue with open sourcing that part is... even if you choose to
work with the community, the source is out there and someone can use
the source and run a parallel project /not/ respecting permissions and
distribute it in the guise of your legitimate program. I know
security through obscurity isn't security... and are you OK with
proving a complete license infringement triangle enabling thoughtless
wide scale license infringement? I wouldn't be.
Teravus
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:56 AM, Snowcrash Short
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:51 AM, Teravus Ovares <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
SnowCrash says:
"There is no if about it, the code is ready for release,
currently I'm working on a windows installer and
documentation. Initially the code will be released under AGPL,
once the code base is more mature I intend to change the
licence to BSD. I have decided to wait for two weeks after my
initial announcement, because I wanted to give grid operators
a heads up before releasing the code."
Sorry fleep, That's a gauntlet, that's not a 'working with the
community' statement. That's 'I'm releasing it whether you
like it or not'.
The truth is, there are many options that would make something
like this legitimate if done correctly... but as the 'code
is ready for release' and he's just working on installers and
documentation now, 'the pool is closed'... so naturally, the
reactions are not going to be good after that statement.
Terravus, the topic is hot enough to handle already, there really
isn't any need to quote out of context, that cannot bring anything
good with it. The statement was made in reply to Melanies
suggestion not to release or atleast not release as open source.
I am sorry if you consider insisting on releasing the application
in some form or other as casting a gauntlet, so be it. I do
however stand my statement that I am willing to listen suggestions
from the community as long as they do not in a significant way
deprive users of their legitimate rights.
Users have right too, you know?
-Teravus
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Fleep Tuque
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I would encourage everyone to try to keep the conversation
civil and respectful. Heated rhetoric generally helps no
one and can quickly derail honest efforts to communicate
about difficult topics.
I interpreted Snowcrash's communications as an effort to
dialogue with the community. He asked for feedback, he
stated repeatedly that his intention is not to aid content
theft, and he said he was open to suggestions for
protecting grid operators' and content creators' rights.
Nothing has been released yet, so I'm assuming good faith
on Snowcrash's part, and hope we can continue to have that
conversation in a polite way.
I'd also point out again that there are many kinds of
content creators with many kinds of intents for our
content. My desire to widely share and openly license the
content I create is as important to me as another
creator's desire to control access to their content is to
them. As I said before, I often feel that those of us who
prefer to open source our content are in some ways held
hostage by the concerns of the latter group, which I
happen to agree with Snowcrash, is to the detriment of the
Opensim community as a whole.
IMO, the goal should be to design systems and tools that
give ALL creators the ability to clearly communicate and
attach their intentions/license terms to assets in a way
that is respected and enforced as much as possible by the
Opensim code and through policies and configuration
settings available to grid operators.
I would love to see a tool that aids the portability of
_legitimately licensed_ assets between grids, but
unfortunately we're still stuck with the problem that
content creators' intentions and license terms are NOT
attached to existing objects. If there's no license, I
don't see a way to safely, legally allow the portability
of assets from one grid to another en masse through a tool
like this :(
Respectfully,
- Chris/Fleep
Chris M. Collins (SL/OS: Fleep Tuque)
Center for Simulations & Virtual Environments Research (UCSIM)
UCIT Instructional & Research Computing
University of Cincinnati
406A Zimmer Hall
315 College Drive
PO BOX 210088
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0088
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
(513) 556-3018 <tel:%28513%29%20556-3018>
http://ucsim.uc.edu
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:54 PM, dz <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
"It took me 2 days to copy stuff to a new grid" is not
justification for the harm this tool will do to the
OpenSim content creation community.
There is only one proper response to this "declaration
of disregard" for the policies and efforts of this
community to prevent the distribution of tools
designed to subvert the rights of content
creators.... Otherwise, those IAR files you want to
load will never have the quantity and quality of legal
assets you desire.
There are a multitude of ways to resolve these asset
sharing/transfer issues, and a LOT of good work has
been done.
Yes, we need an easier way to load IAR files....
Why don't you implement this as a
first step and start the process of working WITH the
community?
(Instead of proclaiming your
intent to implement something that requires us to
react in a publicly negative way)
Yes, we probably need to implement some kind of
license tagging to assets to properly identify those
place in the PD BY the creator.
Even so, I lend my voice to the
chorus of "IANAL BUT.... I hope you confer with proper
legal counsel before you jump off the liability cliff
" ....
I hope my response to your request for grid operators
to participate in this discussion is clear....
I will disconnect and ban anyone who attempts to
connect to any of the grids I administer using this tool.
I will publicly identify those users and share
all the information I am able to collect with all of
the operators of any other grid I can communicate with .
Those of us who have been here a while have seen this
all before, and I'm sure we will see it again.
The response can only be "We do NOT want your tool as
designed, we WILL NOT tolerate its use."
NO, there are NO valid reasons to welcome a tool that
incorporates a disregard for an important part of the
Opensim community (creators)
Public pressure was enough to thwart the public
release of the last "OpenSource sim copy utility".
I continue to hope that the vocal opposition we
expressed as a community to that effort is brought to
bear here as well..
d
_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
--
____________________________________________________________________
Opensim User: In Gridmode on Version 0.7.4. Nine Instances with 56 Regions.
on Windows 7, 64-bit. Phenom 9500 2.2 GHz Quad Core, Terabyte Hard
Drive, 8gig DDR2 RAM. Used XAMPP to load PHP Version 5.3.0, Apache
and MySQL 5.1.41-community edition. Groups, Profiles, Vivox Voice and
Offline Messages all working. (Not yet Public, 6 users allowed Now).
____________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Opensim-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
