<div>SnowCrash, </div><div> </div><div>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.</div>
<div> </div><div>To address your comments:</div><div> </div><div>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'. </div>
<ul><li>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. </li>
<li>You also said that, assuming the grid owner contacted you, you'd 'attempt' to get it in <u>before releasing the source</u>, "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." </li>
<li>You're<u> not</u> saying that you'll get the policies in<u> before the first product release,</u> you're saying you'll get them in place <u>before the <em>source</em> is released.</u> </li><li>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.</li>
</ul><div> </div><div>2.<u> You developed this tool in a vacuum</u> and did not involve anyone from /this/ community in the process until it's already being released.. </div><ul><li>You're not compromising on the permissions before product release, just source release.. </li>
<li>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. </li>
<li>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<em> have immediately</em> made references to copybot and SecondInventory.</li>
</ul><div>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<em> who's</em> 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 <em>who <u>hasn't</u> effectively argued that your program has a legitimate use</em> 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.</div>
<div> </div><div>You saw dz's reaction, you saw Inu's reaction. </div><div> </div><div>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?</div>
<div> </div><div><div>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.</div>
</div><div> </div><div>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. </div>
<div> </div><div>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 ( <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13846_3-10242526-62.html">http://news.cnet.com/8301-13846_3-10242526-62.html</a> ) 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....</div>
<div> </div><div>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. </div>
<div>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. </div>
<div> </div><div>Teravus</div><div> </div><div><br><br> </div><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 12:56 AM, Snowcrash Short <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:snowcrash.short@gmail.com" target="_blank">snowcrash.short@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 1:51 AM, Teravus Ovares <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:teravus@gmail.com" target="_blank">teravus@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
</div><div class="im"><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>SnowCrash says:</div><div><div><div>"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."</div>
<div> </div></div><div>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'.</div><div> </div><div>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.</div>
<span><font color="#888888">
<div> </div></font></span></div></blockquote></div><div>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.</div>
<div><br></div><div>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.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Users have right too, you know? </div><div><div class="h5"><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div><span><font color="#888888"><div>-Teravus</div>
<div> </div><div><br> </div></font></span></div><div><div><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Fleep Tuque <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fleep513@gmail.com" target="_blank">fleep513@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div>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. </div>
<div><br></div>
<div>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. </div>
<div><br></div><div>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. </div>
<div><br></div><div>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. </div>
<div><br></div><div>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 :( </div>
<div><br></div><div>Respectfully,</div><div><br></div><div>- Chris/Fleep</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Chris M. Collins (SL/OS: Fleep Tuque)</div><div>Center for Simulations & Virtual Environments Research (UCSIM)</div>
<div>UCIT Instructional & Research Computing</div><div>University of Cincinnati</div><div>406A Zimmer Hall</div><div>315 College Drive</div><div>PO BOX 210088</div><div>Cincinnati, OH 45221-0088</div><div><a href="mailto:chris.collins@uc.edu" target="_blank">chris.collins@uc.edu</a></div>
<div><a href="tel:%28513%29%20556-3018" target="_blank" value="+15135563018">(513) 556-3018</a></div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://ucsim.uc.edu" target="_blank">http://ucsim.uc.edu</a></div><div><br></div><div> </div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div>On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:54 PM, dz <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dz@bitzend.net" target="_blank">dz@bitzend.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
</div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote"><div><div>"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.<br><br>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.<br><br>There are a multitude of ways to resolve these asset sharing/transfer issues, and a LOT of good work has been done.<br>
Yes, we need an easier way to load IAR files.... <br> Why don't you implement this as a first step and start the process of working WITH the community?<br>
(Instead of proclaiming your intent to implement something that
requires us to react in a publicly negative way)<br><br> Yes, we
probably need to implement some kind of license tagging to assets to
properly identify those place in the PD BY the creator.<br> 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 " ....<br>
<br>I hope my response to your request for grid operators to participate in this discussion is clear.... <br> I will disconnect and ban anyone who attempts to connect to any of the grids I administer using this tool.<br>
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 .<br><br>Those of us who have been here a while have seen this all before, and I'm sure we will see it again. <br>The response can only be "We do NOT want your tool as designed, we WILL NOT tolerate its use."<br>
<br>NO, there are NO valid reasons to welcome a tool that incorporates a
disregard for an important part of the Opensim community (creators)<br>Public pressure was enough to thwart the public release of the last "OpenSource sim copy utility". <br>I continue to hope that the vocal opposition we expressed as a community to that effort is brought to bear here as well..<span><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>d<br>
</font></span><br></div></div><div>_______________________________________________<br>
Opensim-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de" target="_blank">Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users" target="_blank">https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users</a><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Opensim-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de" target="_blank">Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users" target="_blank">https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users</a><br></blockquote></div><br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Opensim-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de" target="_blank">Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users" target="_blank">https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users</a><br></blockquote></div></div></div><br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Opensim-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de">Opensim-users@lists.berlios.de</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users" target="_blank">https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-users</a><br></blockquote></div><br>