First off, unless you’re running OpenSim yourself, your inventory is already stored remotely: On the asset server of the grid or standalone your account is registered. I fail to see the difference between “my outfit is stored on the asset server of my grid and I can hypergrid to other grids” to “my outfit is stored on the asset server of the creator and I can access it from other grids”. Sure, some grids do not support hypergrid, but then they probably won’t “outsource” something as sensible (and fail-prone) as the asset server either.

Also, we’re getting to the same old problem again: As long as your data, your purchases, are stored remotely, you don’t really own them. They’re out of your hands, and can get lost for any reason or none at all, either because the content-service goes out of business, or because of some DMCA claim (validated or not), because the database became corrupted, because you got banned from the system, or whatever else you can think of. Centralized services are bad bad bad bad bad, and that’s one of the reasons the internet was explicitly not built around them.

And finally, there’s the cultural impact this has, as a “X as service” puts us back into the role of the mere consumer, where we were tame and quiet and just took what others made for us. The net changed all that, and that’s a good thing! Not wanting to go into details on the naive assumptions on piracy and DRM the article makes, I’d just like to state that the creativity of the masses, as apparent on flickr, youtube, et al., is an incredible gift we should not squander for any service in the world.

1. I’m writing this here mainly because I can’t be bothered to log into HGB every time I want to comment.

There was talk about having to “convince” content creators (a term I’m known to hate, by the way), talk about “protection”, about “trust”, about “central authorities” and, of course, about “thieves” and even “evil grid owners”. All of this might be somewhat interesting to businesspeople, but I’m doubtful it’s relevat to creators, and I’m certain it’s absolutely irrelevant to users. If there is anything to learn about users from the internet, then it is that we love to share what we have – especially if we just have to copy it. We love to share what we found, like, made, even bought. The biggest websites of the world revolve around amateurs sharing their stuff, be it their experiences, their knowledge, their creations, or just very mundane things like their friends and connections and whatever happened during their day.

No man is an island; it’s our nature to be public, to be visible, to show what we created, and share it with others. And most people do not create things for profit, they don’t need the money incentive to be creative, they’re doing it because they love what they do. So really, to anyone who likes to call themseves “content creators”: We might not need you as desparately as you need us, because there will always be other creators.

But another thing I’ve seen is that the image of the metaverse that’s being painted is very different from the metaverse that I know. The metaverse I know and experience every day is a place of hundreds – very possibly thousands – of little grids, hosted all over the world, by ordinary users, amateurs, people that just love to play with the software, and who love virtual worlds. It is a place where people are self-dependent, where anyone can, at the very least, host their own inventory and regions from home and still visit the marjority of all grids via the hypergrid. This is the world you want to regulate via a “central authority”? This is the world you want your “content” to be “protected” in? A world where every single user possibly has full control over all data in their database and can technically do whatever they want with it? Really, the metaverse is not just a conglomerate of a handful of grids with which you can form alliances and whose operators need to “convince” you or gain your “trust”. The metaverse is most of all a multitude of very adept, very powerful and very self-confident users.¹

This is why I started OpenSim Creations (OSC), as you might already have heard: To give the users a place to share their creations, to find new creations, and to form a community of the independent. Because I know there already is great stuff out there, I’ve seen it, and keep discovering new things every day. There is no lack, not of creativity, not of ability, and not of willingness to share. It’s just scattered all over the place.

So I just tweeted about it once and posted a little announcement in the HGAC google group, to have a few people take a look at it and tell me what they think. The response was overwhelming, and it helped me to adress some issues very early (thank you very much for everyone who pointed me to anything that’s confusing, broken or needs improvement). But most of all, it showed that there really is a lot of interest in that kind of system. So let me state here what it’s about.

Most of all, OSC is not my site. I maintain it, I keep it running, provide the software, and the webspace, but it’s your site for your creations as much as mine for mine. Anyone is invited to join, anyone can post any OpenSim related creation instantly (as long as they have the legal rights to do so), there’s no approval process and no loops to jump through. I would like to encourage people to use creative commons for their creations, but the site allows for any kind of license. Also, since the creations for OpenSim are so diverse, it allows for any kind of upload as well, from single textures to whole OAR files. How you post your creations, what kind of info you provide, how many pictures you post, everything is up to you. I don’t want to regulate something that doesn’t call for regulation, so I’d like to keep it as open as possible.

Also, I’ve been copying all my creations over there by now, and OSC will be the place where I will post new creations from now on (in fact, I’ve already done so); TGIB will still continue, of course, and I’ll still write about OpenSim and Second Life related things here, and post tutorials, but everyone who just visits this site for the creations will be better off at OSC. On top of that, I’ve found a lot of other people’s creations that are CC licensed, and will post them there as well, whenever I find the time, and of course, members have already started posting their own creations, so it’s working just the way I intended.

I don’t know if OSC will become the “central marketplace” for OpenSim; I very much doubt that. If all fails, it will still serve as a better organized place for my own creations, so there’s nothing to lose for me. But I believe we can make a difference to the Second Life mindset of protectionism and fear.

So, this might as well be my “official” announcement: Let’s come over to OSC, and share our amazing stuff. You’d be surprised how many of us there are.

V

1. Just like the internet as a whole. I really don’t know why the abilities and powers of the users are so severely underestimated all the times.

What they did not say, but could have similarly said, is what mothers everywhere tell their children when they go off to play with other kids they just know from school: ‘Don’t play with them. Don’t talk to them. You don’t know them. They’re probably bad. Now off to your room.’ It’s the same things with so-called ‘content creators’ and their peers. You don’t know them, you don’t know their agenda, you don’t know what they really want. Most of the ‘content creators’ in the Second Life universe have no provenance to speak of, much of it is overpriced, and the way it is hyped and praised creates some massive usability and community issues. Currently, these issues relate more to restricting content to the point of unusability and bullying consumers and users, but I can also foresee the day when some lobbyist group decides to create a secret surveillance system attached to some particularly attractive shops and release it on all their customers grid-wide to spy on the shopping habits and inventories of their customers. While I do already know of tech exploits that work in this way, I assume it is merely a matter of time before even worse alliances are being made and maintained, and when they are, I anticipate that these surveillances spread quickly given the dispersion rate of content in the Second Life grid.

I will repeat again: There are many good reasons not to buy from THEM. THEY are preying on us morally, legally and ethically. But even more specifically for the average consumer, and why they should care, is that there is a very real risk of DANGER to their personal Second Life inventories/accounts. I wouldn’t know the exact details of how a SEKRIT CONSPIRACY OF THEM will manipulate and torture you in unspeakable ways, but I know it is something that could be done, and if it will be, DON’T COME RUNNING TO ME YOU DERMESTID BEETLES ON THE FLESH OF THE INTERNET DISEASE VECTORS THAT SPREAD EPIDEMICS!

(This is a response to fashion research’s article “Content, Piracy, and OpenSim-based Grids“. No copyright violation is intended. Indeed, why would I?)

[Edit 4th December 2010: Since the FRI doesn't seem to be interested in approving my comment, I'll just repost it here:

There are just so many things wrong with this article that I don’t even know where to start. Let’s just number them for good measure:

1.) What on earth makes it your problem when someone has copyrighted material from someone else on their, or anothers, grid? Judging from what you wrote, you’re not the creator of the model.

2.) Are you really comparing consumers to kids, who need to be told by their “mothers” (i.e., in your metaphor, you) what to consume?

3.) Are you insinuating that people giving away freebies are in some way more likely to be malicious than those who sell them for money? Couldn’t a “trojan horsed pirated copy” be sold likewise?

4.) Are you aware that the internet is rather international, and that opensim users from other countries might even have a legal right to copy copyrighted material for personal reasons without the permission of the owner?

5.) How do you define “questionable provenance”? People use the freebies I offer without ever questioning me, without knowing me, without contacting me. Am I, to them, questionable? If yes, how can I become unquestionable?

6.) Tell me more about these “disease vectors” and how they spread epidemics. I have yet to see my first opensim epidemic, and this sounds like a whole bunch of bollocks, to be quite frank.

7.) Also, please tell me exactly what your fears are based upon that you need to warn the consumer community so very intensely. Are there trojan horse copies distributed? Do you have evidence? Could you give names? Or is it just a little conspiracy in your head? ]

Dwell On It – Piracy (Read it at: Dwell on it – Piracy is a real problem)

in connection with this, an older, quite famous piece about the musicians view on thie kind of piracy:

Albini – Music (Read it at: Steve Albini – The problem with music)

And finally, another blogpost about Second Life piracy:

Salome – Piracy (Read it at: Salome Says – Content Theft, Still…?)

Ja. Ja, ich weiß.

Rosedale schreibt einen Blogpost, und natürlich wird kurz danach die ganze SL blogosphäre in Flammen stehen. Die Fanjungs werden darüber abgehen, wie toll alles jetzt sein wird¹ , die Pseudoanalytiker werden darauf hinweisen (und sich unvermeidbar irren), wie dies und das zu diesem und jenem führt und die Kritiker werden darauf hinweisen, wie er die gleichen Sachen sagt, die er (und Kingdon, und andere) bisher wieder und wieder und wieder gesagt haben (“schneller, leichter und spaßiger”; “den Markt verbessern und wachsen lassen”; “Pläne offen diskutieren”) während sie wahrscheinlich genau das Gegenteil tun werden. Ich denke, nicht nur Linden Labs’ Postings sind vorhersehbar, sonder auch die Antworten der Gemeinschaft. Und ich hasse es, eine weitere Stimme im Chor zu sein, besonders da mein Fokus auf OpenSim liegt, aber es gibt etwas, das mir merkwürdig erscheint.

Es ist die Wortwahl. Als Kingdon Geschäftsführer war, habe ich einen enormen Anstieg an “Marktsprech” bemerkt, als jeder nur noch Vermarktungs-Schlagworte verwendete und so tat als würden sie was bedeuten, oder als ob man etwas besser macht, indem man es anders nennt. Und es ist nicht so, dass LL das nicht schon vorher getan hätte, aber ich bin sicher, dass ich vor Kingdon noch nie den Ausdruck “geteilte Erfahrung” gehört hatte. Außerdem hat die Verwendung des Wortes “Inhalt” alle anderen Synonyme für in-world-Kreationen verdrängt. Ich bin überrascht, dass Rosedale diese Sprache beibehalten hat; nicht, weil ich glaube das dies weit von seiner Denkweise entfernt ist, sondern weil ich dachte, dass es “Erfindungen” seines Nachfolgers, und nun Vorgängers waren, und ich zumindest hoffte, dass er seine “eigene” Stimme hätte.

Ich mache Sachen. Ich mache Animationen, Tragbares, Objekte, Terrains; ich schreibe Geschichten, Artikel, Gedichte und Lieder; ich spiele Musik. Ich hasse es, dafür das Wort “Kunst” zu verwenden, weil es zu oft von zu vielen Leuten verwendet wird, deren Schöpfungen nichts besonderes sind, und weil ich auch glaube, dass es keine “Kunst” ist, was ich mache (was “Kunst” auch immer sein mag). Es war einfacher als ich nur Musik gemacht habe; Ich konnte mich dann Musiker nennen und jeder wusste, was es bedeutet. Jetzt kämpfe ich damit, die richtige Bezeichnung zu finden, aber ein Wort wie “Inhalt” dafür zu verwenden erwischt mich auf dem falschen Fuß. “Inhalt” ist ein Wort, welches ausschließlich die Perspektive des “Verlegers” zeigt.² Für diese ist das, was wir machen, einfach Inhalt, der ihre Regale füllt, ob sie nun virtuell oder real sind. Sie schätzen es nicht für das, was es ist, sondern nur für das, was es für sie ist: Füllung ihrer ansonsten leeren Dienste; ein Goldesel zum Melken. Aber das ist nicht, wie ich mich selbst sehe, es ist auf keinen Fall, was ich sein möchte, und ich bin sehr überrascht, wie die Bezeichnung “Inhaltsschöpfer” Fuß gefasst hat und von den “Inhaltsschöpfern” selbst, für sie selbst, verwendet wird.

Ich bin nicht nur wegen der Bezeichnung überrascht, sonder auch aufgrund der Tatsache, dass viele Schöpfer nicht zu merken scheinen, dass bei einem Handel, in dem sie von einem Verleger für ihren “Inhalt” abhängig sind, immer den Kürzeren ziehen werden. Schöpfer, Schriftsteller, Künstler, Musiker, sogar Programmierer, sind immer von den Leuten, die ihre Schöpfungen und Fähigkeiten vermarktet haben, über den Tisch gezogen worden. Das ist nicht neu. Und es ist auch nicht so, dass wir noch von ihnen abhängig wären. Ich meine, diese Seite hier zu erstellen hat etwa 10 Minuten gedauert, in denen ich WordPress installiert habe, und kostet mich etwa 8 € pro Monat. Und ich versuche noch nichtmal, Geld zu verdienen.

Ich mache Sachen für Leute; nicht nur für Konsumenten, sondern auch für Mitschaffende, die vielleicht eine Inspiration daraus gewinnen (so wie ich Inspirationen von sehr vielen anderen gewonnen habe) oder ihre eigenen Dinge darauf aufbauend erschaffen können. Ich mache Dinge für jeden, der sie mag, und Spaß daran hat, sie zu verwenden. Ich mache Dinge, um einen Beitrag zur freien Zukunft des 3D-Netzes zu leisten. Ich mache keine Dinge für Linden Labs, oder für jeden anderen, der damit Geld verdient,  sie zu verbreiten und sie als Anreiz für ihre ansonsten leeren Dienste vorzuhalten.

So sehr ich das Wort “Inhalt” meide, so sehr bin ich vorsichtig mit dem Wort “Erfahrung”. Ich bin mir noch nicht sicher, was Linden Labs meint, wenn sie es verwenden; ich bin mir nur sicher, dass sie nicht dasselbe meinen wie ich, wenn ich es verwende. Offenbar haben “geteilte Erfahrungen” nicht mit Teilen zu tun, oder damit, irgendwas zu erfahren. Es bedeutet wahrscheinlich nur, dass da andere Leute sind, und man mit ihnen in Kontakt treten kann. Man teilt nichts, in dem Sinn, dass man etwas, was man hat (oder einen Teil davon), jemand anderem gibt, und man teilt sicherlich nichts mit Linden Labs (außer Geld, aber das ist eher einseitig).³ Indem man das Wort “Erfahrung” für alles, was in Second Life passiert, verwendet, übertreibt man so sehr wie es untertrieben ist, Ihre Schöpfungen als “Inhalt” zu bezeichnen, und ich glaube, da gibt es einen Zusammenhang. Denn die “Erfahrung” hängt mit dem zusammen, was Linden Labs macht, sie ist ein Resultat ihrer Dienste. Doch einfach nur fähig zu sein, sich innerhalb einer 3D-Umgebung zu bewegen und anderer Leute Avatare zu sehen und mit ihnen zu chatten ist, so aufregend es auch sein mag, keine Erfahrung.

Erfahrungen haben einen Wert, und sie geben diesen Wert weiter. Einen großen Wert. Sie machen uns schließlich erfahrener. Eine neue Sprache zu lernen ist eine Erfahrung, oder ein gutes Buch zu lesen. Und auch wenn es möglich ist, Erfahrungen durch etwas, das in Second Life angeboten ist, zu gewinnen, so ist es doch ebenso übertrieben, den gesamten Dienst eine Erfahrung zu nennen, wie es übertrieben wäre, zu sagen, Leinwand und Pinsel seien Kunst.

Ich bin nicht wichtig in Second Life, und meine Worte haben sicherlich dort kein Gewicht, aber wenn ich Linden Labs, oder Rosedale wäre, würde ich von dem hohen Ross absteigen, auf dem ich sitze, bevor ich runterfalle. Denn es ist nicht der Anbieter, der mächtig und wertvoll ist. Wir sind es. Die Kunden, die Schöpfer, die Nutzer. Wir sind gehalten. Wir sind erfahren. Wir verleihen ihnen Wert.

Wir können das auch wieder wegnehmen. Seien Sie nett zu uns.

1. Ohje, sie machen’s ja schon. Ich sollte wirklich aufhören, Blogkommentare zu lesen.
2. Ich verwende Verleger in einem sehr weiten Sinn. Jeder, der Geld damit verdient, indem er die Schöpfungen von anderen zu den Konsumenten bringt, ist ein Verleger, was Musiklabels in den gleichen Topf wie Buchhändler, und auch Linden Labs wirft.
3. Wann war das letzte Mal, dass Sie tatsächlich mit einen Linden eine Erfahrung geteilt haben? Ja, genau…

Yes. Yes, I know.

Rosedale’s writing a blog post, and sure enough soon thereafter all the SL blogosphere will be ablaze. The fanbois will go on about how great everything will be now¹ , the pseudo-analytics will point out how this and that will influence thither and yonder (and will inevitably be wrong again) and the critics will point out how he is saying the same things he (and Kingdon, and others) have said over and over and over again (“faster, easier, and more fun”; “improve and grow (the) market”; “discuss plans in the open”) while they will probably do the exact opposite. I guess, not only Linden Lab’s postings are predictable, but the communities’ responses as well. And I hate becoming one more voice in that choir, especially as my focus is on OpenSim, but there’s something that struck me as curious.

It’s the use of words. When Kingdon was CEO, I saw an enormous increase in “Corpspeak”, when everyone was just using marketing buzzwords and acted like they meant something or like wording something different would make it better. It’s not that LL had not done that before, but I’m certain I had not heard the term “shared experience” before Kingdon. Also, the use of the word “content” replaced all other synonyms for in-world creations. I am surprised at Rosedale continuing that speak; not because I would think it being far from his thinking, but because I had thought they were ‘inventions’ of his suc- and now predecessor, and at least would’ve hoped him to have his “own” voice.

I create things. I make animations, wearables, objects, terrains; I write stories, articles, poems and songs; I play music. I hate using the word “art” for all that, because it’s being used too much by too many people whose creations are really nothing special, and also because I don’t think it is “art” what I’m doing (whatever “art” is). It was easier when I was just making music; I could call myself a musician then and everyone would know what that means. Now, I’m struggling with finding the right word, but using a term like “content” for it, somehow gets me on the wrong foot. “Content” is a word which exclusively shows the perspective of the “publisher”.² To them, what we make is simply content to fill up their shelves, be they virtual or real. They do not appreciate it for what it is, just for what it is to them: Filling to their otherwise empty services; a cash-cow to milk. But that’s not how I see myself, it’s not what I want to be at all, and I’m very surprised at how the wording “content creator” caught on and is being used by the “content creators” themselves, for themselves.

I’m surprised, not only because of the wording, but because of the fact that many creators don’t seem to realize that they will always be on the short end in a bargain where they depend on a publisher for their “content”. Creators, writers, artists, musicians, even coders, have always been screwed over by the people who marketed their skills and creations. It’s nothing new. And also, it’s not like we would actually depend on them anymore. I mean, making this site took me about 10 minutes to install WordPress, and costs me about 10 $ per month. And I’m not even trying to make money.

I create things for people; not just for consumers, but for fellow creators who might get an inspiration from them (just as I got inspirations from a great many others myself) or make their own things based on what I did. I create things for anyone who likes what I make and has fun using it. I create things to contribute to the free future of the 3D web. I do not create things for Linden Labs, or anyone making money by simply publishing them, and keeping them as an incentive to their empty services.

As much as I loathe the word “content”, I am also wary of the word “experience”. I am not yet sure what Linden Labs means when they use it; I’m just certain they do not mean the same as I do when I use it. Clearly, “shared experience” has nothing to do with sharing, or experiencing anything. It probably just means there are other people and you can get in contact with them. You don’t share anything, in the way that you give something (or part of something) you have away to someone else, and you certainly don’t share anything with Linden Labs (other than your money, of course, but that’s rather one-sided).³ Using the word “experience” for everything happening to you in Second Life is as overrated as calling your creations “content” is an understatement, and I think there’s a correlation there. Because the “experience” is contributive to what Linden Labs made, it’s a result of their service. But simply being able to move around in a 3D-environment and see and chat with other people’s avatars, as exciting as it is, is no experience.

Experiences have value, and they transfer value. Great value. They make you, eventually, more experienced. Learning a new language is an experience, or reading a good book. While it is possible to gain experience through things offered in Second Life, calling the service itself an experience is as overrated as calling a brush and canvas art.

I’m not important to Second Life, and my words certainly don’t have any weight to them, but if I was Linden Labs, or Rosedale, I would get off that high horse I’m sitting on, before I fall off. Because it’s not the provider who’s powerful and valuable. It’s us. The customers, the creators, the users. We are content. We are experienced. We give you value.

We can take it away again. You better be nice.

1. Oh well, they already are. I really should stop reading blog comments.
2. I use publisher in a broad sense. Anyone who makes money from bringing the creations of others to consumers is a publisher, putting record labels into the same pot as booksellers and, also, Linden Labs.
3. When was the last time you actually shared an experience with a Linden? Yeah…  

Die meisten Leute werden jetzt denken, dass OSGrid, oder jeder andere Open-Simulator-betriebene Grid einfach eine quelloffene und billigere Version von Second Life ist, und oberflächlich betrachtet ist es auch schwer, Unterschiede zwischen den beiden festzustellen. Die Welten sehen gleich aus, werden ähnlich gerendert, man (kann) die gleichen Viewer verwenden und den Avatar auf die gleiche Weise steuern, die gleichen Werkzeuge verwenden und viele andere Merkmale sind ebenfalls so, wie man sie von Second Life gewöhnt ist.

Darunter jedoch sind die beiden nur schwer vergleichbar. Ich rede hier nicht von dem Code – auch wenn es scheint, dass dieser ebenfalls komplett anders ist – sondern von einer komplett anderen Herangehensweise an Virtuelle Realität. Second Life und OpenSim haben beide ihre eigenen Vorteile, und Grenzen. Ein Vergleich, der mich überhaupt erst zum OSGrid gebracht hat, war Marcus Llewellyn’s Artikel ‘What is a Grid?‘. Grundsätzlich ermöglicht es Open Simulator jedem, den eigenen server (selbst wenn man hierzu nur den eigenen Heim-PC verwendet) mit einem bestehenden Grid zu verbinden, und somit kann jeder seine eigenen Regionen zu sehr geringen Kosten von zuhause aus betreiben, während in Second Life alles was man tut von Linden Labs gesteuert und festgehalten wird, und es fast keine (genehmigte) Möglichkeit gibt, die eigenen Werke zu speichern. (Das ist es, was überhaupt erst zu meinem Ban führte.)¹

Es gibt also mehrere Dinge, die man im Hinterkopf behalten sollte, wenn ein Second Life Bewohner nach OSGrid, oder einem anderen OpenSim Grid wechselt.² Viele davon wurden bereits von Zonja Capalini in ihrem Artikel “The Openspace fiasco: six months later” besprochen.

Zunächst: Ihr Inventar wird weg sein. Technisch ist es nicht möglich, Gegenstände von Ihrem Second Life Konto zu exportieren, außer den Dingen, die Sie selbst erstellt haben. Mehrere alternative Viewer bieten eine Exportfunktion für Werke, mit unterschiedlichen Graden dessen, was exportiert werden kann. Die meisten davon exportieren nur Gegenstände, deren einziger Schöpfer Sie selbst sind, und mehrere ‘copybot’ Viewer machen den Export von vielen anderen Dingen ebenfalls möglich. Diskussionen zur Legalität des Exports virtueller Güter sind häufig im OSGrid und ich habe darauf keine richtige Antwort. Persönlich habe ich für mich entschieden, dass es am sichersten ist, auf meine eigenen Kreationen zu vertrauen und ich versuche daher alles, was ich brauche, selbst herzustellen, was soweit ganz gut funktioniert.

Dies bringt uns zum nächsten Punkt: Sicherheit. Dinge im OSGrid (oder anderen Open Simulator Welten) zu erstellen ist nicht so ‘sicher’, was die Beschränkungen angeht, wie es in Second Life ist. Grundsätuzlich kann jeder, der eine OpenSim region betreibt, alle Beschränkungen jedes dort befindlichen Gegenstandes aufheben. Das ist jedoch einfach das gleiche Problem, welchem kreative Menschen auf dem ganzen Planeten gegenüberstehen, seit ihre Schöpfungen ‘digitalisiert’ werden können (und wenn diese Schöpfungen sowieso nur digital existieren, ist es ein Problem, dem man sich stellen muss); und ein restriktives System ist keine Lösung. Man muss wahrscheinlich eher die Tatsache akzeptieren, dass es unehrliche Leute gibt, die Ihre Werke kopieren werden, egal was ist. Und diese Leute sind keine Kunden, und werden auch nie welche werden. Sie werden Ihre Werke nicht monetär schätzen, aber eine Kopie ist noch immer das ehrlichste Kompliment.³ Und es gibt RL Gesetze um Urheberrechtsverletzungen zu begegnen. Es mag schwer verständlich sein, aber die “Sicherheit” in Second Life ist nicht einmal viel sicherer als gar keinen Kopierschutz zu haben. Man vertraut sein Inventar, sein Guthaben, seinen Serverplatz (Land) einem einzigen Unternehmen an, und dieses Unternehmen kann einen jederzeit verbannen, aus irgendeinem Grund, ohne eine Entschädigung.⁴

Schließlich ist die Community noch sehr klein im Vergleich zur großen Userbasis in Second Life, und die Software ist noch in Entwicklung und experimentell. Es liegt bei jedem selbst zu entscheiden, ob dies eine Herausforderung, oder ein Hindernis ist. Für mich ist es eine aufregenden Chance, die Grenzen der Virtuellen Welten zu erforschen und neue Wege zu schlagen.

(english version)

1. Ein Artikel auf rezzable vergleicht die Merkmale von OpenSim mit Second Life.
2. Ich verwende OSGrid als Beispiel eines Open Simulator betriebenen Grids. Mir ist klar, dass er bei weitem nicht der einzige ist. Jedoch ist er der größte und ‘offenste’ (was Beschränkungen und Regeln angeht) den ich kenne.
3. Um eine unbekannte asiatische Quelle zu zitieren.
4. Es ist verführerisch zu glauben, dass jemand mit so viel Macht und Verantwortung vorsichtig damit umgeht, ich musste allerdings eine andere Erfahrung machen.

Yesterday, Winch Gate Property Limited released their MMORPG Ryzom as open source, and they really mean it. In contrast to SL, all the code is released under AGPL 3.0, whereas the textures and 3d models are released under CC-BY-SA 3.0, making this, according to the Free Software Foundation, “probably the single-biggest contribution to free software games yet”. Especially the textures might be of interest for SL creators, as they can be easily used in SL builds and / or with a bit of tweaking in clothes and skins.

Also, today, the good people at Imprudence released the 3rd beta of Imprudence 1.3.0, their best release yet, introducing viewer side AO, advanced build options, IM autoresponse and, as one of the very few viewers, optimized Opensim support, allowing for some Opensim features (100 groups and megaprims, to name a few), which, in addition to the already existing features makes this the best viewer for both worlds.

But Emerald ruined my day. To be fair, it’s not the whole Emerald team, but the ‘Onyx’ Project which several of their developers are working on and which is housed under a common ‘roof’ (the Emerald website) and thus I can’t see any clear distinction between the two. Obviously, they (the Onyx people) make use of bots, scanning all avatars for ‘stolen’ content by inspecting avatar attachments, checking them on a centralized database and, when having found a ‘stolen’ attachment – i.e. an attachment that matches one created by someone else, but listed with the owner as the creator – will send a report to the original creator.

No, I don’t want that. I don’t want to be randomly scanned for ‘stolen’ content. Not only, because copyright laws vary from country to country, not only because ‘stolen’ doesn’t have to be stolen, not only because this puts every single user under the suspicion of being a potential ‘thief’, not only because it is also not clear under whose authority these bots do these scans in the first place (I certainly don’t log into SL to get scanned), but also because the road here is all too clear.

Take two developers of copybot/griefer clients – Fractured Crystal (alias Jcool410 Wildcat), who developed vLife, and Phox ModularSystems (a.k.a. Lonely Bluebird, alias PattehPh0x) developer of PhoxSL, both are listed in the viewer reference on the Onyx page itself. Combine them with Skills Hak (alias Skills Hax), who develops the Gemini Cybernetics CDS system, which allegedly can detect copybot users and automatically ban them, making this a hot asset for paranoid virtual store owners to have. Now add to this that all of the three people have been banned on previous accounts from SL, due to copyright infringement, and you’ve got the most bigoted and untrustworthy group of third party developers in SL. And these people run a surveillance program on everyone? Why?

All that got me thinking, even prior to reading Massively, Nicholaz’ post or Prok’s usual rant. I am living in a country that states in its own constitution that “ownership commits. Its use should at the same time serve the common good.”¹ Also, our copyright law allows explicitly for copies of any work for private, non-commercial use. And I think what upset me is that all these rights are being counterfeited by ‘terms of service’ that got pressed upon the users without any prior communications or discussion.

Therefor, I had, somewhat in a haste and without taking time to voice my concerns properly, written an email to Mitch Kapor, both one of the presidents of Linden Labs and co-founder of the Electronics Frontier Foundation (whose member I am). The email is quoted here in its entirety.

Dear Mr. Kapor,

I write as a resident of Second Life, which I have been for more than 3 years now. During that time, and especially during the last few months I have witnessed several changes which have been conflicting with my beliefs in digital rights, and as I understand you’re both a director of Linden Labs, and a co-founder of the ECC, I’d like to hear your opinion on them, if possible.

From its onset, Second Life had several technical restrictions in place that made it difficult to share content in-world, and served as strong copyright tools for creators. Also, it lacked the ability to backup anything that was stored under each Second Life account. Now it is my personal impression, that this stance has become worse with time.

It seems to me that Linden Labs has been, and is increasingly catering to inworld businesses, whose interests are – just as any other person or organization profiting from selling copyrighted material – to restrict the use and distribution of that material as much as they can. For example, it is not possible to have several accounts in Second Life and share assets between them, as these are either non-transferable, or non-copyable. Or, it is not possible to make a backup or export of creations released under a Creative Commons license, such as the famous art exhibit ‘The Far Away’ by resident AM Radio.

While this issue has been around for long and was certainly discussed more thoroughly before, I am worried that with the recently updated Terms Of Service, things might go even further into the direction of a strictly copyright controlled environment. The way I understand the updated TOS, all we ‘own’ in Second Life are licenses. Either licenses granted to exchange services in return for others (like the inworld ‘currency’) or licenses to use certain content created by others, or even ourselves. We, the residents, no longer ‘own’ the world, and maybe we never did. But then, Linden Labs has been misleading us in the past by claiming that the world was not only created, but also ‘owned’ by us.

And while this direction does not only contradict Linden Labs original claims, it must certainly contradict what the EFF stands for. The way Second Life is managed now, it
1. only caters to the interests of copyright holders, not users
2. strips residents of any ownership rights, replacing them with ‘licenses’ which are revocable at any time
3. prohibits them from backing up any of the content they have acquired legally, or even made themselves.

Dear Mr. Kapor, I highly respect your work and dedication to digital rights, and therefor would be most happy if you could give the matter some consideration and maybe tell me about your take on this situation.

With kind regards,
V

I believe this, most of all, sums my personal frustration with Linden Labs and the Second Life TOS up: They are way too restrictive in regards to a fair use of copyrighted material, and cater way too much to the constant demands of ‘creators’, especially those who thrive on in-world businesses. The technical restrictions of Second Life do never allow you to make legal copies of works for yourself, unless you are the creator of these works. This especially conflicts with works that the creators themselves have set free. Many of my own creations are published under Creative Commons, and I am not the only one; the popular exhibition ‘the far away’ by AM Radio, for example, is published under Creative Commons, too. Consequently, this means that the work itself, including all parts of it, may be copied by anyone and used, at least privately, for anything. I personally distribute a notecard along with my creations, stating the allowance of these uses explicitly. Still, the copying, and more importantly, the saving and exporting of someone elses work requires the use of a copybot client, which can very well result in a ban from the Second Life service.

Now, we’ve got a Snapshot and Machinima Policy, which was hailed by the EFF, but all in all unneccessary from my (but not only my) very personal point of view, as it regulates things that fall under a fair use doctrine anyway. It would be ridiculous to ask each and every creator of anything visible on a snapshot for their permission, just as ridiculous as it would be to ask every creator of everything appearing on a photograph in RL (starting with clothes, hair dresses, buildings, furniture, you name it).

I repeat: I believe, in adherence to the constitution of this country I am living in, that ownership commits. It is not only a right, but also a duty to further the common good along with it. So far, there’s been a lot of talk about rights. I wonder when we will start talking about our duties.

1. Translation by myself.

And while the very core of it, which looked incredibly promising in their Flickr stream, was down, I wandered the perimeters of it, taking some of the wonderful builds I could find and copy with me, and eventually stumble upon their botanic garden. To be honest, I can’t write any long-winded wordful praises. But I have been in SL for more than two and a half years. I have travelled it. Travelled it a lot, in fact. And I have nowhere seen anything just remotely like this. It is so much like I had wanted my own place in SL to be like. And I’m happy it exists.

This post will start a new category ‘the missing image’, displaying great places in virtual worlds to visit. I couldn’t help it. I had to write about it.