[Opensim-users] Announcement of inventory tool (MyInventory), mostly of interest to grid operators/grid nauts
InuYasha Meiji
inuyasha.meiji at gmail.com
Fri Nov 16 13:42:20 UTC 2012
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
> <snowcrash.short at gmail.com <mailto:snowcrash.short at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:51 AM, Teravus Ovares <teravus at gmail.com
> <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:chris.collins at uc.edu>
> (513) 556-3018 <tel:%28513%29%20556-3018>
>
> http://ucsim.uc.edu
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:54 PM, dz <dz at bitzend.net
> <mailto: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
> <mailto:Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-users mailing list
> Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
> <mailto:Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-users mailing list
> Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de
> <mailto:Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de>
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-users mailing list
> Opensim-users at lists.berlios.de <mailto: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 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).
____________________________________________________________________
More information about the Opensim-users
mailing list