Letting out the viewer is something of a SOP.  I think the server-side is
possibly more important given that there are any number of open source
viewers out there for 3D platforms that are just as good or better.  It is
the management of the server farm that makes the difference, that and a big
budget for marketing.

Yes, I think they are looking at migrating the building market, but the only
thing that brings in the bigCos is the site traffic.  Otherwise, to Sears,
there is no advantage to being there.   IBM can talk a lot about boardroom
VR but they are a services company in this market and without other
companies willing to host on private farms, there is no market.

There is a lot of puff in the online worlds market.  Of what value is it to
own content that you can't move because it only works on that platform?  So
like a Macintosh or a Mall, without a big membership that is actually going
there often, having a presence there is largely a decorative bauble, a loss
leader for being 'in the know'.  This market is relying on the naivete of
the IT groups of the companies hosting there.

The in-world economy is a fascinating experiment in waiting to see when the
Feds will begin to look at it the same way they look at church bingo.  They
tend to wait until the value is high enough that they can safely take their
cut without killing the game.


-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Or Botton
Sent: Monday, January 08, 2007 10:06 AM
To: VOS Discussion
Subject: Re: [vos-d] SecondLife client goes Open Source

Granted, it was expected, but there is one major issue thats a big  
bad omen: And thats content copy protection.

SecondLife has been largely tauted as a place where you can make a  
"quick buck" by creating and selling copies of content. This is  
mostly an artificial market created by placing DRM on objects - being  
able to flag a texture, model, script or an entire package as non  
copyable, modifyable or transferable.

Personally, I am all for an opensource platform with no DRM involved.  
I believe that a VR platform can only become mainstream and  
widespread if it is open and free. But SecondLife's act is more self  
destructive because by nature they are not open and free.

With the source out, it would be a rather easy task to duplicate  
models and textures of objects, pretty much "breaking the DRM" with a  
very casual effort from the programmer. This could be very damaging  
to their internal economy. Again, I do not support the concept of  
having virtual economies, but doing what they just did is more like  
shooting their own foot.

Perhaps this signs that LindenLab now views the big gamers -  
companies and such as the real customers now? These people will have  
much less of an issue to "enforce their copyrights" then the regular  

vos-d mailing list

Reply via email to