[Opensim-users] Announcement of inventory tool (MyInventory), mostly of interest to grid operators/grid nauts

Teravus Ovares teravus at gmail.com
Fri Nov 16 11:19:29 UTC 2012 

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 <snowcrash.short at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:51 AM, Teravus Ovares <teravus at gmail.com> 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 <fleep513 at gmail.com> 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
>>> chris.collins at uc.edu
>>> (513) 556-3018
>>>
>>> http://ucsim.uc.edu
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:54 PM, dz <dz at bitzend.net> 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
>>>> Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
>>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Opensim-users mailing list
>>> Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
>>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensim-users mailing list
>> Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
>> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-users mailing list
> Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-users/attachments/20121116/a8dbc0cb/attachment.html>

More information about the Opensim-users mailing list