[Opensim-dev] WG: Legal Issues was RFC Profiles
Kyle Hamilton
aerowolf at gmail.com
Wed Apr 1 15:08:29 UTC 2009
If you push the framework aspect too far to the fore, you lose the
benefit of the implementation.
Yes, it's a framework.
But, yes, it also needs to have a low barrier-to-entry. It's not
anywhere near the point where it should be viewed as a completely
segregated framework -- that should happen around 0.9, I think. Even
then it should have a "default supported installer" -- a basic
installation which can be reverted to in order to figure out what
add-on component is screwing up the user's sim. (Let's try to make
things easier for the support guys, eh?)
A single svn checkout should be enough to get a basic, functional
system up and running. I wouldn't mind the hypergrid stuff being
moved into forge, but the fact that it's currently in core means two
things: First, it means that OpenSim is committed to an open,
flexible, and easily-accessible architecture. Second, it means that
it's a lot easier to see why certain changes are being made in the
core (rather than having to check out two entirely separate trees and
hope you've got your mono or VS environment set up properly).
-Kyle H
On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson at hp.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 14:05 +0000, James Stallings II wrote:
>> Actually Mike,
>>
>>
>> I am going to have to agree with you 100% on this. I think that from a
>> purely architectural standpoint, the ideal is to have as much of all
>> functionality in modules as possible :D
>>
>>
>> That said, I think it will be next to impossible not to keep the
>> source for some of these modules in the source tree if we hope to be
>> able to deliver a base set of features via a single invocation of
>> svn/tortoise.
>
> Again, this is an ideal to me and the real implementation is somewhere
> in the middle. But I see it kinda like a Linux distro. Various things
> packaged togethor to make an OpenSim "flavor". There's been some work to
> do an installer recently, maybe that's the place to pull togethor core +
> modules to get to a useable install. It's completely understandable why
> it is what it is now. Just normal evolution of the project.
>
>>
>> So while architecturally it makes all the sense in the world to keep
>> such functionality out of core in the strict sense, such discussions
>> (and their potential implementations) are IMHO, definitely appropriate
>> fodder for discussion here.
>
> I'm not at all against the conversations on the features and their use
> cases. That's high value also and important. I was (possibly over)
> reacting to the notion that changes were required in core to support
> this. OpenSim is already a nice extensible framework but I think if the
> framework aspect was pushed more to the forefront it could be even
> better.
>
>> Cheers!
>> James
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Mike Dickson <mike.dickson at hp.com>
>> wrote:
>> Wnat I'm actually trying to say is that core should be the
>> framework it
>> was intended to be. So rather than put something to support
>> communicating license models for content in core I'd prefer to
>> see it as
>> an add on in forge. Heck, I'd really honestly prefer
>> hypergrid was the
>> same way. In short I'm advocating putting less in core as
>> opposed to any
>> specific way to handle licensing. I'm fine if someone wants to
>> develop
>> add-on functionality in forge to do that and if others want to
>> download
>> it and enable it on their grid. IMO, thats the right model for
>> functionality of this sort.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 2009-04-01 at 06:22 +0000, Ralf Haifisch wrote:
>> > Exactly, this and means to identify the creator - even using
>> hypergrid.
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> > Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:48:57 -0700
>> > From: Dahlia Trimble <dahliatrimble at gmail.com>
>> > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] WG: Legal Issues was RFC Profiles
>> > To: mike.dickson at hp.com, opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> > Message-ID:
>> >
>> <ab84ceb10903311548o2146dc26r357bfb928fa1b927 at mail.gmail.com>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>> >
>> > I don't think anyone is suggesting that OpenSim core should
>> mandate any
>> > licensing scenario, but rather should OpenSim provide any
>> hooks necessary
>> > for content creators to specify asset-specific licenses
>> beyond
>> > Copy/Mod/Transfer. Whether those hooks are functional and
>> whatever defaults
>> > are in place would likely be an installation specific
>> configuration.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Mike Dickson
>> <mike.dickson at hp.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > If as a creator I want to add a notecard to my object
>> indicating the
>> > > licensing terms I want to apply when someone has a copy of
>> or rez's my
>> > > object I'm free to do so. Heck I could even get fancy and
>> script it
>> > > asking for a click-through menu response or something.
>> I'm not against
>> > > licensing of objects. Just don't pollute what is IMO an
>> already a tad
>> > > over-complex OpenSim core with it.
>> > >
>> > > Content licensing is a matter for the grid TOS and
>> individual content
>> > > providers on that grid. Not, IMO something that OpenSIM
>> core needs to
>> > > worry about or address.
>> > >
>> > > Mike
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, 2009-03-31 at 21:08 +0000, Ralf Haifisch wrote:
>> > > > Dear all,
>> > > >
>> > > > i while ago i went over the legal side of many aspects
>> with 2 lawyer.
>> > > >
>> > > > Since this is a multinational question and in many cases
>> has not
>> > exampels
>> > > > (e.g. no judgments by court) it tends to be a discussion
>> based on
>> > > personal
>> > > > flavor, but not legal facts.
>> > > >
>> > > > And yes, maybe there is enough mud for the whole 3D web.
>> > > >
>> > > > But to come to the point:
>> > > >
>> > > > - I don?t know any country, where having the ability to
>> add a
>> > > > hypergrid-aware note about the creator and a license
>> (hint, url,
>> > > notecard)
>> > > > would have negative impact
>> > > >
>> > > > - I know a few countrys where it would realy help from
>> legal side
>> > > >
>> > > > - it would be a clear sign, that the opensim crew takes
>> care about
>> > > content
>> > > > rights and ownership
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > And yes, this only is another brick in the wall of
>> copyright protection.
>> > > We
>> > > > still have RL laws, we still need secure technical
>> system, rights
>> > > management
>> > > > etc etc...
>> > > >
>> > > > And spoken in sex beds, I am more afraid about the pure
>> mass von
>> > > animations
>> > > > etc - a few more notecards don?t worry me to much. :-)
>> > > >
>> > > > So - if it is possible somehow, please add it.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Just my 2 cent...
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Cheers,
>> > > > Ralf
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Opensim-dev mailing list
>> > > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> > > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>> > >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Opensim-dev mailing list
>> > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>> --
>> Mike Dickson <mike.dickson at hp.com>
>>
>> BladeSystem infrastructure R&D
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ===================================
>> http://osgrid.org
>> http://del.icio.us/SPQR
>> http://twitter.com/jstallings2
>> http://www.linkedin.com/pub/5/770/a49
>>
> --
> Mike Dickson <mike.dickson at hp.com>
> BladeSystem infrastructure R&D
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
More information about the Opensim-dev
mailing list