Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Henri Beauchamp]

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 19:53:42 -0600, Soft Linden wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 3:32 AM, Henri Beauchamp  wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:14:52 -0600, Soft Linden wrote:
> >
> >> There's now a FAQ for the Linden Lab Policy on Third Party Viewers:
> >> http://bit.ly/caedse
> >
> > Very good job, Soft, thank you ! :-)
> 
> Ah, I didn't write it! I only pointed out that it exists.

But you played the role of the "negociator", and without your work,
this FAQ won't exist, so... :-)

> > However, there are a couple of points that I think should be addressed
> > or precised in this FAQ:
> >
> > 1. The trademarking rules as presented in the TPV are in contradiction
> >   with Linden Lab's own trademark policy. In particular:
> >      5.b.i You must not have a Third-Party Viewer name that is
> >            “ Life” where “” is a term or series
> >   of terms.
> >   Is in contracdiction with:
> >   http://secondlife.com/corporate/brand/trademark/unauthorized.php
> >   in which we see that "[anything] Life" is not forbidden as long
> >   as [anything] does not contain "Second".
> >   I would call such a trademarking a "domain trademarking" (like
> >   a domain name for an Internet site address"), but I doubt very much
> >   such a rule would be legal, even in USA...
> 
> It's not in contradiction. It's more explicit on what's "confusingly
> similar to a Linden Lab trademark" in point 1 or an "adaptation" in
> point 5. It didn't list these word substitution examples specifically,
> but the page also said it wasn't limited to the examples given. I
> think that page was written before they knew what adaptations people
> might use.

I still think this would stand as an abusive clause in a court (including
for a TOS clause for connecting to SL), but I'm no lawyer...

> > 2. in the FAQ, to the question "I do not want a publicly available
> >   listing in the Viewer Directory to disclose my own name or contact
> >   information.  Is it possible for the public listing page to show
> >   just the brand name of my third-party viewer?", the answer states
> >   that name and contact info must be provided to Linden Lab, however
> >   the type of "contact information" is not precised. An email from
> >   an ISP account (not an anonymous Yahoo/Hotmail/Google/whatnot
> >   account, of course) *is* a contact information that is sufficient
> >   to legally identify the developper in case of any action against
> >   them. But right now, the full snail mail address is required,
> >   which is in violation with some international laws protecting user
> >   privacy (notably the French law "Informatique et Liberté").
> >
> > I hope to see these two points addressed.
> 
> I know the identity requirement will remain, and I expect there will
> be a form that's more explicit about what information is required, if
> there isn't already.

For now, email and full snail mail address are required in addition to
the real name.

> If you know of any law that makes it illegal to require email as a
> condition of being listed in an optional directory, it would be
> helpful to tell me where to find it so I can pass it on to legal.

Real name and (ISP hosted) email address are both OK and adequate
(they provide both a mean of communication and a mean of identification,
the latter in the case a legal action would be taken by Linden Lab),
the only thing which is not OK as the form is right now (beside the
mention that private info may be published) is the snail mail address
requirement (unneeded at all, thus it shall not be a required info).

Best regards,

Henri.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Marine Kelley]

I had understood the same, but still am not reassured. To put it simply :

- Publishing my RL name and address is out of question. Ever.
- Listing the RLV in the Viewer Directory requires me to give my RL info to
LL, with the hopes it will stay private. Dare I say, the people maintaining
this list are NOT the people I trusted when I signed up to SL in the first
place. And dare I add, I had to sign up twice : once to go Premium, and
again to verify to Aristotle. Big issue number one here.
- The Viewer Directory "may" (which in my book means "eventually will")
require to publish the RL info of all participants on the page or be
dropped. Big issue number two here.
- Being listed in the Viewer Directory "may" (once again, same meaning to
me) become mandatory in order to connect to the Second Life grid. What makes
LL sure that a rogue viewer will not spoof the ID of a listed viewer in
order to be accepted upon connection ? Big issue number three here.

So, does that all mean that eventually the RLV will not be able to connect
to the Second Life grid at some point, unless it becomes a rogue viewer that
spoofs the identity of another listed one ? Or do I need to stop it all now
to avoid losing sleep ? Or do I need to pass the project on to someone who
accepts to have their data published ?

Besides, this Viewer Directory is meaningless. It does not stand for a list
of viewers that have been technically approved by LL, nor can it ever be.
Nothing keeps a viewer dev to go totally rogue and start stealing L$,
passwords and other info, and LL would have zilch to retaliate because the
RL data entered would have probably been false in the first place. And no,
LL does not have legally the right to officially verify someone's RL address
in some countries, for instance in France, where only legal institutions
have the right to do that, as Henri pointed out.

Sorry, but this Viewer Directory and all its implications have me greatly
worried. And the lack of assurance that it won't switch from "informational"
to "whitelist" at some point, with all the requirements going along with it,
is enough to make me want to drop it.

I vote for not using the Viewer Directory at all. It is useless because it
doesn't guarantee that its listed viewers are safe, and dangerous for the
future of Second Life because it is potentially going to breach privacy.

I'd like to remind people of my proposed solution, back when LL asked
everyone about how to set their third party viewer policy, a few months ago.
I had proposed to make it so that only viewers built on a LL-owned dedicated
machine would be accepted. Such binaries would be the result of the build of
committed sources, with the addition of a small code (unknown to the devs of
the viewer) that would transfer a hash to the grid upon connecting (and
possibly regularly afterward while online). The binaries would be hosted on
LL's website, along with the sources, and everyone would have been able to
consult the sources while being sure there would not be any difference
between these sources and the resulting binaries (with the exception of the
code I mentioned). Granted, this is an expensive solution, and potentially
difficult while testing (there has to be some temporary code for that
purpose, for instance a code that allows only 4 or 5 viewers using it at the
same time), but the only solution that formally guarantees that Build =
Source, and that the source can be reviewed, instead of testing every
viewer, which takes much longer.

No listing and no requirement is ever going to replace that.

Marine


On 28 February 2010 02:58, Soft Linden  wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Marine Kelley 
> wrote:
> > I don't know much about it, but what about the data that most of us
> already
> > entered when signing up to SL ? LL should have these data stored
> somewhere,
> > why do we have to enter them all again ? If the data to be entered to
> sign
> > in to the viewer directory is not linked to it, what gives LL the
> certainty
> > that they are accurate, where are they stored, and what is the privacy
> > policy ? The TPV says "may be published", but there is no way to be
> sure...
> > And moreso, the FAQ says that listing in the directory might become
> > mandatory. With such vague terms it is impossible to comply to these
> > requirements, which are way too intrusive for a hobbyist.
> >
> > Sorry about this, it seems that publishing a Frequently Asked Questions
> page
> > brings even more questions ! It is always like this. lol.
>
> I'll ask to be certain, but I expect that if the viewer changed from
> opt-in identity disclosure to mandatory identity disclosure, every
> participant would be given the option to be listed or be dropped.
> Without a response, we would drop the listing. It would be totally
> unreasonable for us to just add the names one day.
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/O

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Lance Corrimal]

Am Sonntag 28 Februar 2010 schrieb Henri Beauchamp:

> > I know the identity requirement will remain, and I expect there
> > will be a form that's more explicit about what information is
> > required, if there isn't already.
> 
> For now, email and full snail mail address are required in addition
>  to the real name.
> 
> > If you know of any law that makes it illegal to require email as
> > a condition of being listed in an optional directory, it would be
> > helpful to tell me where to find it so I can pass it on to legal.
> 
> Real name and (ISP hosted) email address are both OK and adequate
> (they provide both a mean of communication and a mean of
>  identification, the latter in the case a legal action would be
>  taken by Linden Lab), the only thing which is not OK as the form
>  is right now (beside the mention that private info may be
>  published) is the snail mail address requirement (unneeded at all,
>  thus it shall not be a required info).


Right now I'm working on porting henri's cool patches to snowglobe.
As it stands now, I'm not going to put it into the viewer directory, 
unless the requirements for any other data than my SL name and a 
valid, working email address are taken down. Real name is only 
acceptable if not publicly shown anywhere.

bye,
LC
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Henri Beauchamp]

On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 09:34:55 +0100, Marine Kelley wrote:

> I'd like to remind people of my proposed solution, back when LL asked
> everyone about how to set their third party viewer policy, a few months ago.
> I had proposed to make it so that only viewers built on a LL-owned dedicated
> machine would be accepted. Such binaries would be the result of the build of
> committed sources,

This might sound good, but in fact it would be close to impossible, and
would make TPV developpers unable to control the building envirnonment,
something crucial.
For example, I build my Linux viewers on a Mandriva 2007 distro, so that
the glibc libraries are compatible even with old distros. I also have to
make a lot of manual adjustements within VS2055 in order to build the Windows
version of the Cool SL Viewer v1.19.2 (which is based on v1.19.0.5 LL's
viewer and was originally coded to build with VS2003). This viewer also
can't be built automatically like v1.23 and cmake...
What also, about devs who provide PPC MacOS builds ?...

I'm sorry, but this can't work for the Cool SL Viewer...

> with the addition of a small code (unknown to the devs of
> the viewer) that would transfer a hash to the grid upon connecting (and
> possibly regularly afterward while online).

This is a BIG no-no... The GPL doesn't allow this in the first place
since the sources as made openly available must compile exactly to the
published binary on anyone's machine.

Sorry, Marine, but I vote against your proposal.

Henri.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Gareth Nelson]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Soft Linden  wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Gareth Nelson  
> wrote:
>> A few queries I have:
>>
>> Sometimes I code random small scripts to do quick inworld tasks - do I
>> have to have 100% compliance for these scripts?
>> I have a bot which comes in 2 parts - SL interface and AI engine, the
>> SL interface being a simple protocol handler - how does the policy
>> affect my AI engine if at all? If only the SL interface need be
>> compliant, isn't this a major loophole in that the AI engine could use
>> it to perform various malicious deeds?
>
> If the scripted bit was causing the viewer to do something in
> violation of SL terms, I'm pretty sure it (and the author) would be
> handled as with any other non ToS-compliant content. If the viewer has
> legitimate use, it shouldn't be affected.
>
>
>> If I code a viewer which is designed for use with other grids, does
>> not comply with the policy and is not intended for use on SL, but one
>> of my users connects to SL with it anyway , how does that reflect on
>> me?
>
> The viewer wouldn't be eligible for inclusion in the Viewer Directory,
> and only the people connecting with that viewer would be in violation.
>
Does this imply that using a viewer not in the directory is a
liability for users?


-- 
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
Printcrime by Cory Doctrow

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Gareth Nelson]

For myself, I'd happily give my real name and an email address - but
not a postal address for public access. Anyone who would consider
doing that is lucky to never have had a stalker (trust me, it's not
pleasant).

If the reason for requiring this information is "in case we need to
sue you" then it's in no developer's interests to give it. An email
address is fine for contact info, and a real name is unneeded, but
shouldn't be a massive concern - personally I only use a secret alias
online if i'm trying to hide.

People have mentioned "kinky stuff" in SL as being a reason to hide -
well, i'm perfectly happy to show everyone videos and screenshots of
myself in a sex club just to prove i'm serious about "nothing to
hide". Hopefully that means you can also trust me not to put nasty
trojans in my code. Of course whether you'll ever use my code is
dependent on contacting me directly these days - no way am I signing
the contributor agreement to get patches into the main viewer.

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Lance Corrimal
 wrote:
> Am Sonntag 28 Februar 2010 schrieb Henri Beauchamp:
>
>> > I know the identity requirement will remain, and I expect there
>> > will be a form that's more explicit about what information is
>> > required, if there isn't already.
>>
>> For now, email and full snail mail address are required in addition
>>  to the real name.
>>
>> > If you know of any law that makes it illegal to require email as
>> > a condition of being listed in an optional directory, it would be
>> > helpful to tell me where to find it so I can pass it on to legal.
>>
>> Real name and (ISP hosted) email address are both OK and adequate
>> (they provide both a mean of communication and a mean of
>>  identification, the latter in the case a legal action would be
>>  taken by Linden Lab), the only thing which is not OK as the form
>>  is right now (beside the mention that private info may be
>>  published) is the snail mail address requirement (unneeded at all,
>>  thus it shall not be a required info).
>
>
> Right now I'm working on porting henri's cool patches to snowglobe.
> As it stands now, I'm not going to put it into the viewer directory,
> unless the requirements for any other data than my SL name and a
> valid, working email address are taken down. Real name is only
> acceptable if not publicly shown anywhere.
>
> bye,
> LC
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
>



-- 
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
Printcrime by Cory Doctrow

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Marine Kelley]

Some people have no problem with showing their private fetishes to the
world, other people like me do. I have a family, a job, and friends. I have
plenty things to hide, my private life is nobody's business, and anybody who
attempts to pry it open will only meet hostility.


On 28 February 2010 11:49, Gareth Nelson  wrote:

> For myself, I'd happily give my real name and an email address - but
> not a postal address for public access. Anyone who would consider
> doing that is lucky to never have had a stalker (trust me, it's not
> pleasant).
>
> If the reason for requiring this information is "in case we need to
> sue you" then it's in no developer's interests to give it. An email
> address is fine for contact info, and a real name is unneeded, but
> shouldn't be a massive concern - personally I only use a secret alias
> online if i'm trying to hide.
>
> People have mentioned "kinky stuff" in SL as being a reason to hide -
> well, i'm perfectly happy to show everyone videos and screenshots of
> myself in a sex club just to prove i'm serious about "nothing to
> hide". Hopefully that means you can also trust me not to put nasty
> trojans in my code. Of course whether you'll ever use my code is
> dependent on contacting me directly these days - no way am I signing
> the contributor agreement to get patches into the main viewer.
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Lance Corrimal
>  wrote:
> > Am Sonntag 28 Februar 2010 schrieb Henri Beauchamp:
> >
> >> > I know the identity requirement will remain, and I expect there
> >> > will be a form that's more explicit about what information is
> >> > required, if there isn't already.
> >>
> >> For now, email and full snail mail address are required in addition
> >>  to the real name.
> >>
> >> > If you know of any law that makes it illegal to require email as
> >> > a condition of being listed in an optional directory, it would be
> >> > helpful to tell me where to find it so I can pass it on to legal.
> >>
> >> Real name and (ISP hosted) email address are both OK and adequate
> >> (they provide both a mean of communication and a mean of
> >>  identification, the latter in the case a legal action would be
> >>  taken by Linden Lab), the only thing which is not OK as the form
> >>  is right now (beside the mention that private info may be
> >>  published) is the snail mail address requirement (unneeded at all,
> >>  thus it shall not be a required info).
> >
> >
> > Right now I'm working on porting henri's cool patches to snowglobe.
> > As it stands now, I'm not going to put it into the viewer directory,
> > unless the requirements for any other data than my SL name and a
> > valid, working email address are taken down. Real name is only
> > acceptable if not publicly shown anywhere.
> >
> > bye,
> > LC
> > ___
> > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
> >
>
>
>
> --
> “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
> everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow
>
> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Imaze Rhiano]

28.2.2010 10:34, Marine Kelley kirjoitti:
> I'd like to remind people of my proposed solution, back when LL asked 
> everyone about how to set their third party viewer policy, a few 
> months ago. I had proposed to make it so that only viewers built on a 
> LL-owned dedicated machine would be accepted. Such binaries would be 
> the result of the build of committed sources, with the addition of a 
> small code (unknown to the devs of the viewer) that would transfer a 
> hash to the grid upon connecting (and possibly regularly afterward 
> while online). The binaries would be hosted on LL's website, along 
> with the sources, and everyone would have been able to consult the 
> sources while being sure there would not be any difference between 
> these sources and the resulting binaries (with the exception of the 
> code I mentioned). Granted, this is an expensive solution, and 
> potentially difficult while testing (there has to be some temporary 
> code for that purpose, for instance a code that allows only 4 or 5 
> viewers using it at the same time), but the only solution that 
> formally guarantees that Build = Source, and that the source can be 
> reviewed, instead of testing every viewer, which takes much longer.
>
This approach wouldn't work - and LL's third party viewer policy is not 
going to work either. There is nothing to stop skillful coder to decode 
this "secret hashing component", skillful hacker to write proxy that 
will do it's ebil things between client and server or skillful user to 
install one certain program that allows to access OpenGL information and 
gather necessary information.

Moving security/DRM to client side - is not going to work. Big companies 
like EA have tried this approach through rootkits and such - result: 
total absolute failure and huge loss of PR (just google "DRM spore"). 
Microsoft tried to  support different DRM schemas with their multimedia 
player - result: player that is very slow to start, media format that 
requires internet access, works on single computer and complex 
encryption/verification/obfuscation schemas. Intel and media companies 
introduced HDCP - result: honest customers required to upgrade their 
working hardware and pirates who are still releasing movies to net 
before their official release day without annoying "you wouldn't steal 
car ads" and unskippable ads 
(http://www.makeuseof.com/tech-fun/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/pirateddvd1.png). 


Next year, 28 February 2011 - assuming world doesn't end and everything 
is following my grand plan,
1) Nyx Linden still doesn't have bear,
2) you still need to fake bake specular lighting for latex clothes,
3) content creators are going to whine how their content was copybotted 
and "LL doesn't do enough to stop copybotters" and
4) there are fewer SL compatible open source viewer developers and more 
non-SL compatible viewer developers

IMHO: Instead of wasting valuable bytes to lawyers (don't feed lawyers 
they are just getting bigger and more hungry) and trying to move 
security/DRM to client's responsibility LL should do following:
1) Organize "build Nyx's bear competition",
2) add support for clothing materials and custom avatar meshes that 
finally allow proper latex clothing,
3) create paranoid a server that is not hopelessly fallen love with the 
client and verifies client's requests and actions,
4) streamline process for posting copyright notices (it should be two 
click process),
5) allow content creators to post additional proof that they are 
creators of content (to avoid constant copyright griefing attacks),
- higher resolution textures
- non-watermarked textures
- high polycount models
- etc.
6) improve assets server so that it allows better track who 
uploaded/created asset, when and who are using it so that all copybotted 
material are instantly deleted from the server and avatars who are 
distributing it are banned,
7) change from passive - waiting for copyright notice - mode - to active 
mode, where you are actively seeking copyright violations through 
automatic processes and perhaps allowing other users to tip possible 
copyright violations,
8) make process more transparent - allow creators see inside process, 
give them feedback
9) make process more visible - publish reports how many you have banned, 
write random blogs about topic and offer rewards from copyright tips

Ultimately you could someday render scene in server - and thus avoid 
situation where you need to transfer assets of textures and objects to 
client, but I guess there no users currently who are ready to pay from 
high cost hardware, software and bandwidth that would be needed for 
server side rendering.

I think that third party viewer policy is great ethical guide for second 
life compatible viewer developers and directory gives good listing to 
respectable viewers and correct download addresses. But otherwise it is 
completely waste of time and money, going to drive some developers away 
from second

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Boroondas Gupte]

Soft Linden schrieb:
> As someone else pointed out in this thread, you're able to host your
> content outside of Second Life if you want to ensure people are able
> to import it again.
So, if the content is licensed under any "copyleft" license (popular
ones are GPL and the share-alike variants of Creative Commons), anyone
distributing derivative works would be required to also host that
outside of Second Life? While requiring this from the original creator
of the Second Life content *might* seem reasonable (as they have either
chosen the license in question themselves or have decided to use
pre-existing content that requires them to license their work like
that), also requiring this from residents who build upon this is
unreasonable and IMHO severely against the original spirit of Second Life.
> You're not restricted to using Second Life for
> content distribution, and with an external site you can present your
> full license, not just half a byte's worth of permission data.
It's been common and accepted practice to include distribution rules
that go beyond what's expressible with SL's permission systems in
Notecards in the content or packaged together with it or, for modifiable
scripts, in script comments. If it has to be client-enforceable (and
thus machine-readable), it's not like SVC-701
 and related requests are
particularly new.

Boroondas
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] TPV & opensim & physics prediction

[Argent Stonecutter]

On 2010-02-25, at 15:12, Dzonatas Sol wrote:
> [Usenet] worked. It is still free and open.

It used to be. It's getting harder and harder to get feeds these days.  
Everyone just reads through Google Groups rather than trying to find  
someone with a feed. SL and OpenSim started with the equivalent of  
"Google Groups" already live.

It wasn't even vaguely real-time. It was *OK* that the stanford- 
munnari link was a daily airmailed magtape, nobody cared if their  
newsfeed was a day behind.

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Ann Otoole]

OK I have read this and in plain English it is pretty clear. 

So I expect Linden Lab will be terminating the ability to save full permissions 
textures to disk unless the person saving them uploaded them right? 

And since Linden Lab's viewer cannot determine license state of builds in view 
then Linden Lab will be removing snapshot capabilities and informing residents 
they are not allowed to view content unless they own the region and all content 
in view right? No machinima nothing. After all if it can be seen it can be 
"illegally screenshot".

Or are these restrictions only applicable to third party viewers for the 
purpose of rendering them useless?






From: Soft Linden 
To: Morgaine 
Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Sent: Sat, February 27, 2010 8:31:40 PM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:47 AM, Morgaine
 wrote:
>
...

> And finally, FAQ.15 (in the context of licenses permitting free
> distribution):
>
> Q15: Do the limitations of section 2.b on content export apply to content
> that is full permissions?
> A15: Yes, they do.  Residents retain intellectual property rights in the
> content they create in Second Life and it is important for you to respect
> those rights.  By setting content to "full permissions" using the Second
> Life permissions system, a content creator merely indicates that the content
> may be copied, modified, and transferred within Second Life.  Setting
> content to "full permissions" does not provide any permission to use the
> content outside of Second Life.
>
> This is fine (surprise, surprise :P), but incomplete.  It doesn't address
> the quite common scenario of full-perm content created by Open Source or
> Creative Commons developers using 100% personal textures, and accompanied by
> a GPL, BSD, CC or other open source license which declares that the content
> may be freely copied, modified, and transferred anywhere, not only within
> Second Life.
>
> As is written in the answer A15, "Residents retain intellectual property
> rights in the content they create in Second Life and it is important for you
> to respect those rights."  Respecting their rights in this case requires you
> to to allow that content to be exported as its creator desires.  Therefore
> you either need to extend A15 with this additional case, or add another FAQ
> Q+A (preferably immediately after #15) to address it.

That might be material for the FAQ. But because there is no export
permission bit, it's not possible to add export capability for these
cases without enabling violation of others' content. At this point, I
couldn't see that affecting the TPV policy.


  ___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Soft Linden  wrote:

>
> It's important to understand that one can discontinue use of Second
> Life at any point. On doing so, there are no further obligations
> imposed by the TPV policy. The legal consults cleared this as a
> resolution to all free license issues.
>


It is not a resolution to all free license issues at all, not even close.
They're just not reading the words of the license.

GPLv2 clause 6 allows no "further restrictions" to be placed on the freedom
of developers to *"modify and distribute*" whatsoever, regardless of whether
the USAGE of that GPL software is constrained or not.  The GPL has no
interest is how software is used to connect to a service in the slightest.
You can constrain USAGE of code for service access as much as you like, you
can ban whomever or whatever you like, and it's completely immaterial to the
GPL.  The two things are entirely separate.  The GPL is not a usage license.

Such *usage* concerns are concerns for the *user* alone --- when a developer
connects to SL then she is no longer a developer at that point, but has the
role of a user.  If you place constraints, requirements or restrictions on
the DEVELOPER, such as a requirement for registration, self-identification
or code modification at your command, then you are adding "further
restrictions" to the developer's freedom to "modify and distribute" and
hence you are automatically GPL non-complaint.

This is unambiguous in the GPL.  Make them read it again.  Make them read
the GPLv2 FAQ too.

Restrictions on connection are perfectly acceptable!  But that's not what
you're doing, because your clauses directly target developers, not merely
permitted usage.  "A viewer may not do XYZ when it connects to the SL
service" is totally fine --- the GPL couldn't care less.  "A developer of
this GPL code must do ABC if it is distributed" is not fine --- it's in
direct conflict with the GPL's "modify and distribute" freedoms.



> This agreement makes no restrictions on what anyone can do with the
> source. The GPL makes no restrictions on connecting to Second Life.
> These are two separate agreements, and don't need to be reconciled in
> such a way that each permits everything allowed by the other.
>


That would be an excellent position to take, but you are not taking it.  You
persist in laying requirements on DEVELOPERS, in direct non-compliance with
GPLv2 clause 6.  And you keep mentioning "developers" when you mean "users",
in reference to connection to your service.  Your warning that developers
who distribute their modified viewers will have to register with you is an
utterly massive additional restriction on the freedom to modify and
distribute that is at the heart of the GPL (all versions), as are
requirements for self-identification and program modification at your
request.  The GPLv2 FAQ that I linked earlier gives an example of such an
"additional restriction" being non-compliant, despite being a tiny
restriction compared to any of yours.

I think your lawyers must have little experience with the GPL, so I'm glad
to hear that you're obtaining additional expert advice externally.  I hope
you're not going to Microsoft for that "expert advice on GPL". :P  I
recommend that you involve the FSF or the SFLC.

This is something that you have to resolve, and it can't be resolved if you
maintain your current position imposing restrictions on GPL developers.  All
that will happen is that your GPL non-compliance will escalate, until
eventually it hits the top and you are forced to either drop the GPL or
alter your restrictions to fall exclusively on users, not on GPL developers.


> That said, Linden Lab intends to keep the viewer platform under an
> open source license. If anyone ever received a request to alter the
> viewer in a way that would violate the GPL, point that out. Odds are
> the request isn't being communicated properly, or somebody didn't know
> of the implications. Again though - any request is just that. A change
> isn't required if the viewer author chooses to instead stop using it
> to connect to the service and withdraws it from the Viewer Directory.
>


You're still mixing up restrictions on usage with restrictions on
developers.  To not fall foul of this, you really need to separate the issue
into two categories:

   1. Restrictions on development and distribution:  none, as per the GPLv2.
   2. Restrictions on connection to SL and usage of SL:  anything you like.


You cannot impose any *further restrictions* on GPL developers *at all*.
>From GPLv2:


   - *6.* Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
   Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original
   licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms
   and conditions. *You may not impose any further restrictions on the
   recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.* You are not
   responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to 

[opensource-dev] Is there free images in second life

[Rustam Rakhimov]

Is there free images in second life ?

where I can take it.

Please someone who has some image please send me, I need it for experiment.
PLEASE

name: rusyasoft rubanis

Thanks in advance
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] "Second-Party" viewer policy (was: Third party viewer policy)

[Argent Stonecutter]

On 2010-02-26, at 05:27, David Simmons wrote:
> The common sense rules apply. If you are not connecting to the LL
> grid, Linden Lab can't make any policy regarding what you do. They
> don't need a policy saying that they can't make a policy telling you
> what to do on another grid.

Is that a legal opinion?

Words MEAN different things when lawyers are involved.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Is there free images in second life

[Boroondas Gupte]

Rustam Rakhimov schrieb:
> Is there free images in second life ?
>
> where I can take it.

   1. Open the inventory (Ctrl-i)
   2. Go to
  * *Library* > *Photo Album*
or
  * *Library* > *Textures*

Or get Torley's free textures here
.

I hope this helps.
cheers
Boroondas

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Argent Stonecutter]

On 2010-02-27, at 20:24, Soft Linden wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Fleep Tuque   
> wrote:
>>
>> The free content I create for education is intended to be fully  
>> free, fully
>> permissioned, and fully exportable to other grids.  Beyond the  
>> Second Life
>> permissions, I keep hoping for checkboxes on the Edit menu with  
>> common
>> licenses or a space to put a link to the user's specified license  
>> that is
>> kept with the object info just like creator name.
>> In any case, when I include Creative Commons licensing with my  
>> educational
>> tools, and explicitly say users have my permission to explore the  
>> content to
>> other grids, then I expect that to be respected by Linden Lab as  
>> well!

> As someone else pointed out in this thread, you're able to host your
> content outside of Second Life if you want to ensure people are able
> to import it again. You're not restricted to using Second Life for
> content distribution, and with an external site you can present your
> full license, not just half a byte's worth of permission data.

Regardless, http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-701
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)]

It seems to me that this incessant desire to use software licencing
and a "viewer whitelist" as a lever on downstream viewer developers is
an attempt to reduce the costs of managing the behavior of Linden
Research's customers.

Obviously Linden Research management believes that doing this
wholesale (by bullying developers into crippling functions in their
code) rather than retail (detecting and responding to individual
customer acts of ToS noncompliance) is a heck of a lot cheaper and
easier. The problem with this strategy is that the GPL is specifically
designed to prevent such bullying.

It further seems clear to me that these policies were announced at the
same time as the release of Viewer2 beta in order to distract
attention from the power grab. Guess that didn't work as well as
hoped.

"An entirely sufficient case for open-source development rests on its
engineering and economic outcomes—better quality, higher reliability,
lower costs, and increased choice." --ESR, in "The Magic Cauldron".

We should note that the first three benefits he cites are implicitly
not available without the fourth, from which they arise.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Jason Giglio]

Soft Linden wrote:
> It's important to understand that one can discontinue use of Second
> Life at any point. On doing so, there are no further obligations
> imposed by the TPV policy. The legal consults cleared this as a
> resolution to all free license issues.

Is that the case though?  The policy claims to cover "viewers for
logging into Second Life".  It doesn't say anything about whether the
developer themselves is logging into Second Life.

It seems to me that you are still covered by this policy, including its
requirements for making changes that LL requests, leaving out features,
etc... if you just make an SL compatible viewer regardless of whether
you use SL or not.

> Anyone can make a derivative viewer that doesn't comply with the
> policy. That version of the viewer would not be eligible for inclusion
> in the Viewer Directory. The situation here is similar. Nothing is
> prohibited in terms of use of the GPL licensed code. The restriction
> is strictly placed on participation in the Viewer Directory.

Well this is obviously not the case, most of the clauses apply whether
you want into the viewer directory or not.

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Thomas Shikami]

Morgaine schrieb:
> GPLv2 clause 6 allows no "further restrictions" to be placed on the 
> freedom of developers to /"modify and distribute/" whatsoever, 
> regardless of whether the USAGE of that GPL software is constrained or 
> not.  The GPL has no interest is how software is used to connect to a 
> service in the slightest.  You can constrain USAGE of code for service 
> access as much as you like, you can ban whomever or whatever you like, 
> and it's completely immaterial to the GPL.  The two things are 
> entirely separate.  The GPL is not a usage license.
>

Long story short, if you want to be registered in the third party viewer 
registry, you have to follow the TPV policies. The registration is 
optional. If you don't register in the TPV, almost all rules that apply 
to the developer have no meaning. If you want to use your viewer with 
SL, you become a user of your viewer. Then the TOS and the TPV applies 
to you as it restricts the usage of a user.

Registering with the viewer registry is voluntary and LL doesn't impose 
any "further restrictions" on you, because it isn't mandatory. Also you 
can redistribute the registered viewer according to GPLv2 without 
"further restrictions" on the receiver of that code. That party would 
have to register a derivate of that viewer as well to be restricted by 
the TPV as it applies on developer.

If you don't use that viewer with SL, and you aren't registering the 
viewer, then nothing of the TPV applies to you.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

[opensource-dev] Mailman for opensource-dev on pipermail is slicing posts

[Morgaine]

For the month of February, there are now 4 posts (from different people)
that have been sliced into pieces and their headers-less tail fragments
placed into the mailing list archive with a Subject line of "No subject".
See the top of the threaded
viewlisting.

Could someone please request the mail sysadmins to take a look at this bug?

Cheers,

Morgaine.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

You're talking commonsense, Thomas.  Unfortunately, what's written down is
not the commonsense interpretation that you are making of the words that are
on paper.

In a court of law, it is no defense to say "I was adhering to the
commonsense interpretation provided by Thomas Shikami in the mailing list"
(nor even quoting a Linden email).

All that matters is what is written down in LL's official documents, and
that is why we are taking great pains to get these words that Lindens are
writing so sloppily into a suitable unambiguous form.  They need to directly
reflect what we all know is commonsense for user access to the SL service,
and to be compliant with what is directly expressed in the GPLv2 license in
respect of guaranteed developer freedoms.

Our generous interpretations don't count here, only LL's official words do.
And when making interpretations, you should always take the worst-case
scenario, because that is what lawyers will use to hang you.


Morgaine.





===

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 6:44 PM, Thomas Shikami wrote:

> Morgaine schrieb:
> > GPLv2 clause 6 allows no "further restrictions" to be placed on the
> > freedom of developers to /"modify and distribute/" whatsoever,
> > regardless of whether the USAGE of that GPL software is constrained or
> > not.  The GPL has no interest is how software is used to connect to a
> > service in the slightest.  You can constrain USAGE of code for service
> > access as much as you like, you can ban whomever or whatever you like,
> > and it's completely immaterial to the GPL.  The two things are
> > entirely separate.  The GPL is not a usage license.
> >
>
> Long story short, if you want to be registered in the third party viewer
> registry, you have to follow the TPV policies. The registration is
> optional. If you don't register in the TPV, almost all rules that apply
> to the developer have no meaning. If you want to use your viewer with
> SL, you become a user of your viewer. Then the TOS and the TPV applies
> to you as it restricts the usage of a user.
>
> Registering with the viewer registry is voluntary and LL doesn't impose
> any "further restrictions" on you, because it isn't mandatory. Also you
> can redistribute the registered viewer according to GPLv2 without
> "further restrictions" on the receiver of that code. That party would
> have to register a derivate of that viewer as well to be restricted by
> the TPV as it applies on developer.
>
> If you don't use that viewer with SL, and you aren't registering the
> viewer, then nothing of the TPV applies to you.
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

[opensource-dev] Fwd: Google Street View in Second Life

[Giulio Prisco]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Giulio Prisco 
Date: Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 8:37 PM
Subject: Google Street View in Second Life
To: "SL Educators (The SLED List)" ,
sl...@lists.secondlife.com


Any idea on how to convert this very simple example into a working
implementation of Street View in SL? Sounds doable.

http://giulioprisco.blogspot.com/2010/02/google-street-view-in-second-life.html

Google Street View in Second Life. A very preliminary experiment with
Second Life Viewer 2.0. Watch this video on blip.tv where my Second
Life avatar walks (well, sort of) in Street View's NYC.

Perhaps with some clever coding we can implement Street View as a
fully interactive multiuser metaverse within Second Life, by
converting avatar movement (walk, rotate, look around) to clicks and
drags on a surrounding Street View display. Sounds doable.

--
Giulio Prisco
g...@metafuturing.com (remove 1)
http://metafuturing.com/
(39)3387219799
giulioprisco @ skype



-- 
Giulio Prisco
g...@metafuturing.com (remove 1)
http://metafuturing.com/
(39)3387219799
giulioprisco @ skype
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] TPV & opensim & physics prediction

[Dzonatas Sol]

This is perfect then...

If you are scheduled to meet in a sim later in the week, then why worry 
if all the static objects take a day to download from that sim through 
archaic usenet means. You would already have all the object information 
needed for physics and to render in a local storage.

By the time everybody meets, there would be no lag to suddenly download 
all objects from a single host.

Times that by 10,000 people... just for scalability concerns.

Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> On 2010-02-25, at 15:12, Dzonatas Sol wrote:
>> [Usenet] worked. It is still free and open.
>
> It used to be. It's getting harder and harder to get feeds these days. 
> Everyone just reads through Google Groups rather than trying to find 
> someone with a feed. SL and OpenSim started with the equivalent of 
> "Google Groups" already live.
>
> It wasn't even vaguely real-time. It was *OK* that the 
> stanford-munnari link was a daily airmailed magtape, nobody cared if 
> their newsfeed was a day behind.
>
>

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

how much of the TPV is already covered by the TOS?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuK1CQACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmX1iwCeKRfnZIQVQZ0VXFqPuOhXRQJO
+18AniKNOHDHNKreFYzoQ7Hl4siRiOkp
=pXFN
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Mailman for opensource-dev on pipermail is slicing posts

[Erik Anderson]

I just was looking at the opensim-dev list last night and it looks like it's
been shredding gears for a week or so now.  Finally stopped logging any
messages at all until a single message came through yesterday.

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Morgaine
wrote:

> For the month of February, there are now 4 posts (from different people)
> that have been sliced into pieces and their headers-less tail fragments
> placed into the mailing list archive with a Subject line of "No subject".
> See the top of the threaded 
> viewlisting.
>
> Could someone please request the mail sysadmins to take a look at this bug?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Morgaine.
>
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Mailman for opensource-dev on pipermail is slicing posts

[Soft Linden]

I'm creating a ticket for ops

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Erik Anderson
 wrote:
> I just was looking at the opensim-dev list last night and it looks like it's
> been shredding gears for a week or so now.  Finally stopped logging any
> messages at all until a single message came through yesterday.
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Morgaine 
> wrote:
>>
>> For the month of February, there are now 4 posts (from different people)
>> that have been sliced into pieces and their headers-less tail fragments
>> placed into the mailing list archive with a Subject line of "No subject".
>> See the top of the threaded view listing.
>>
>> Could someone please request the mail sysadmins to take a look at this
>> bug?
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Is there free images in second life

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

or simply ask a friend to hand over a full perm snapshot they make :)



On 28/2/2010 13:19, Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> Rustam Rakhimov schrieb:
>> Is there free images in second life ?
>>
>> where I can take it.
> 
>1. Open the inventory (Ctrl-i)
>2. Go to
>   * *Library* > *Photo Album*
> or
>   * *Library* > *Textures*
> 
> Or get Torley's free textures here
> .
> 
> I hope this helps.
> cheers
> Boroondas
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuK4P0ACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmV9DACdFws5ik/MGbxBd7GcFVhVvveV
Xn8AoIfiP8Plj7MPOBjFahSR+ZrfKCDI
=zNXM
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] latest SG1.3.2

[Thickbrick Sleaford]

On Sunday 28 February 2010 01:23:21 Tayra Dagostino wrote:
> receiveMessage:943: GStreamer010 media instance failed to set up 
...
> (:24128): GStreamer-CRITICAL **: gst_element_set_state:
> assertion `GST_IS_ELEMENT (element)' failed
> 
> somebody else notice this on a lenny+backports?

Does your Audio Driver: line in Help -> About show "(noce)"? If so, I think 
this sounds similar to
http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-541

I think that normally when the sound device can't be opened, OpenAL will try 
to open first ALSA, then OSS, and only then PulseAudio. but it seems in 
SNOW-541 it first tried PulseAudio, even though it didn't exist, resulting in 
non-working sound and non-working gstreamer plugin. (This is just a guess, and 
I haven't seen this on my system.)

-- 
Thickbrick
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] latest SG1.3.2

[Tayra Dagostino]

On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 00:37:51 +0200
Thickbrick Sleaford  wrote:

> On Sunday 28 February 2010 01:23:21 Tayra Dagostino wrote:
> > receiveMessage:943: GStreamer010 media instance failed to set up 
> ...
> > (:24128): GStreamer-CRITICAL **: gst_element_set_state:
> > assertion `GST_IS_ELEMENT (element)' failed
> > 
> > somebody else notice this on a lenny+backports?
> 
> Does your Audio Driver: line in Help -> About show "(noce)"? If so, I
> think this sounds similar to
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-541
> 
> I think that normally when the sound device can't be opened, OpenAL
> will try to open first ALSA, then OSS, and only then PulseAudio. but
> it seems in SNOW-541 it first tried PulseAudio, even though it didn't
> exist, resulting in non-working sound and non-working gstreamer
> plugin. (This is just a guess, and I haven't seen this on my system.)

uhm i don't remember a gstream update from backport, but is like mine
and only now i've noticed (none) as audio engine (but i can hear sound
from gestures and voice), only audio stream is affected (multimedia
audio from youtube or something else like work)

anyway voted
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Mike Monkowski]

So you've created this Third Party Viewer Directory in order to 
*promote* third part viewers?  *That's* your "why"?  Well, you needn't 
have bothered.  You did much more to promote third party viewers by 
releasing Viewer 2.0.

Mike

Soft Linden wrote:
> I feel I should add too - this isn't all stick, as my below
> speculation about legal's intent might have suggested. Remember that
> we're creating the Viewer Directory to promote other viewer projects,
> so complying with the TPV terms offers up a pretty good carrot.
> However, I think legal also knows we'd be making trouble for ourselves
> if we gave even the whiff of an endorsement to a tool that hurt our
> resis or the Lab. So, legal needed to offer some objective rules
> before we could promote any projects.
> 
> I hope this is helping. I worried that one of the most frustrating
> parts of the TPV might be that it was landing with a big "what"
> without enough "why" behind it. Most people react pretty badly to
> anything that looks like control for control's own sake.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Joe Linden]

Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range of
viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in it
in a wide variety of ways.  Since we'll be pointing to it often, it's a
great way for the largest possible audience of Residents to learn about
viewer alternatives that have been submitted by developers willing to
certify that the viewer complies with the policy for all 3rd party viewers
that connect to SL.

And we haven't release Viewer 2.0 yet.  It's in open beta now to take
constructive feedback from (new and longtime) Residents.  If it also
stimulates great alternative viewers that comply with the policy, then we've
accomplished several of our goals.

-- joe


On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Mike Monkowski
wrote:

> So you've created this Third Party Viewer Directory in order to
> *promote* third part viewers?  *That's* your "why"?  Well, you needn't
> have bothered.  You did much more to promote third party viewers by
> releasing Viewer 2.0.
>
> Mike
>
> Soft Linden wrote:
> > I feel I should add too - this isn't all stick, as my below
> > speculation about legal's intent might have suggested. Remember that
> > we're creating the Viewer Directory to promote other viewer projects,
> > so complying with the TPV terms offers up a pretty good carrot.
> > However, I think legal also knows we'd be making trouble for ourselves
> > if we gave even the whiff of an endorsement to a tool that hurt our
> > resis or the Lab. So, legal needed to offer some objective rules
> > before we could promote any projects.
> >
> > I hope this is helping. I worried that one of the most frustrating
> > parts of the TPV might be that it was landing with a big "what"
> > without enough "why" behind it. Most people react pretty badly to
> > anything that looks like control for control's own sake.
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden  wrote:

> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
> it in a wide variety of ways.



Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is
"promotion" of Third Party Viewers.  Since it's just promotion, TPV
developers are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need
promotion, and of course you will never make promotion mandatory.

It's great that you clarified this, because people were mistakenly thinking
that instead of promotion, what you were trying to do is to regulate 3rd
party viewers and prevent them from gaining features that push the envelope
and make your own viewers look poor in comparison.

It's always useful when such misapprehensions are laid to rest.

Have a good day, and many thanks! :-)


Morgaine.






On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden  wrote:

> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
> it in a wide variety of ways.  Since we'll be pointing to it often, it's a
> great way for the largest possible audience of Residents to learn about
> viewer alternatives that have been submitted by developers willing to
> certify that the viewer complies with the policy for all 3rd party viewers
> that connect to SL.
>
> And we haven't release Viewer 2.0 yet.  It's in open beta now to take
> constructive feedback from (new and longtime) Residents.  If it also
> stimulates great alternative viewers that comply with the policy, then we've
> accomplished several of our goals.
>
> -- joe
>
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Mike Monkowski  > wrote:
>
>> So you've created this Third Party Viewer Directory in order to
>> *promote* third part viewers?  *That's* your "why"?  Well, you needn't
>> have bothered.  You did much more to promote third party viewers by
>> releasing Viewer 2.0.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> Soft Linden wrote:
>> > I feel I should add too - this isn't all stick, as my below
>> > speculation about legal's intent might have suggested. Remember that
>> > we're creating the Viewer Directory to promote other viewer projects,
>> > so complying with the TPV terms offers up a pretty good carrot.
>> > However, I think legal also knows we'd be making trouble for ourselves
>> > if we gave even the whiff of an endorsement to a tool that hurt our
>> > resis or the Lab. So, legal needed to offer some objective rules
>> > before we could promote any projects.
>> >
>> > I hope this is helping. I worried that one of the most frustrating
>> > parts of the TPV might be that it was landing with a big "what"
>> > without enough "why" behind it. Most people react pretty badly to
>> > anything that looks like control for control's own sake.
>> ___
>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
>> privileges
>>
>
>
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Gareth Nelson]

The policy still refers to "distribution" in general, not just those
viewers in the directory.

So, everyone on this list is about to violate it, sorry. This might
seem incredibly silly but shows how much you can break this policy
without having the viewer do anything other than merely connect.

# Remember, if you read this in a mailing list post, whomever owns the
listserver has distributed it
# You also just distributed it possibly by downloading the email

from common.libsl import *

client = SecondLife()
print 'You probably shouldn\'t actually login, but if you do the
author disclaims any and all liability'
print 'Here\'s some content that is unsuitable for a PG audience: fuck
shit cock cunt wanker'
print 'Remember, before you login, you have not broken the TPV policy
and the above profanity is just fine'
print 'By the way, this runtime environment has not got a clue on your
MAC address'
print 'Here\'s some encouragement to infringe upon "intellectual
property": go and infringe on intellectual property, go on, do it'
print 'Simplest method - view a texture, take a screenshot, download,
and reupload - that is "instruction"'
print 'I absolutely do NOT represent that this in full compliance with
the terms of the GPL, it is in fact under a simpler license as shown
below'
print 'I fully encourage women to walk around in public with uncovered
hair, in violation of muslim law, and I also encourage eating pork and
dancing on sundays - this is in v
iolation of section 7ci of the TPV policy'
print 'In the US, I believe distributing this is still a DMCA
violation, so by having this code you\'re exposed to legal liability:
09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 8
8 c0'
print """

GENERAL MOCKERY LICENSE V0.1
You are hereby permitted to use and distribute this software in order
to mock people. Such permission includes redistribution
and modification in source or binary form with exception of any
modifications requested by linden lab under section 8d of their third
party viewer policy. Should such modifications be requested, you are
compelled to implement a feature that would violate Second Life Terms
Of Service should it be used or lose your license to redistribute this
software.

The author disclaims any and all liability for any uses or
distribution of this software in whatever fashion.

Any modified versions of this software must carry a notice stating
that it has been modified.
"""
first = raw_input('First Name:').strip('\n')
last  = raw_input('Last Name:').strip('\n')
pwd   = raw_input('Password:').strip('\n')

print 'Your IP address, the fact you ran this viewer and your login
details are about to be sent to linden lab - and typing in your login
details wasn\'t in itself giving cons
ent, was it?'

print 'Being serious - if you really do want to violate the policy,
hit enter now, otherwise close this program'

raw_input('Hit enter to break the policy...')
client.Network.Login(first,last,pwd,'Violated Life','TPV policy
infringing edition')



On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Morgaine
 wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
>> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
>> it in a wide variety of ways.
>
> Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is
> "promotion" of Third Party Viewers.  Since it's just promotion, TPV
> developers are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need
> promotion, and of course you will never make promotion mandatory.
>
> It's great that you clarified this, because people were mistakenly thinking
> that instead of promotion, what you were trying to do is to regulate 3rd
> party viewers and prevent them from gaining features that push the envelope
> and make your own viewers look poor in comparison.
>
> It's always useful when such misapprehensions are laid to rest.
>
> Have a good day, and many thanks! :-)
>
>
> Morgaine.
>
>
>
>
> 
>
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden  wrote:
>>
>> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
>> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
>> it in a wide variety of ways.  Since we'll be pointing to it often, it's a
>> great way for the largest possible audience of Residents to learn about
>> viewer alternatives that have been submitted by developers willing to
>> certify that the viewer complies with the policy for all 3rd party viewers
>> that connect to SL.
>>
>> And we haven't release Viewer 2.0 yet.  It's in open beta now to take
>> constructive feedback from (new and longtime) Residents.  If it also
>> stimulates great alternative viewers that comply with the policy, then we've
>> accomplished several of our goals.
>>
>> -- joe
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Mike Monkowski
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> So you've created this Third Party Viewer Direc

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Gareth Nelson]

This is untested by the way, seriously - probably won't run in its
current state, and i'd advise people not to get it running

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Gareth Nelson  wrote:
> The policy still refers to "distribution" in general, not just those
> viewers in the directory.
>
> So, everyone on this list is about to violate it, sorry. This might
> seem incredibly silly but shows how much you can break this policy
> without having the viewer do anything other than merely connect.
>
> # Remember, if you read this in a mailing list post, whomever owns the
> listserver has distributed it
> # You also just distributed it possibly by downloading the email
>
> from common.libsl import *
>
> client = SecondLife()
> print 'You probably shouldn\'t actually login, but if you do the
> author disclaims any and all liability'
> print 'Here\'s some content that is unsuitable for a PG audience: fuck
> shit cock cunt wanker'
> print 'Remember, before you login, you have not broken the TPV policy
> and the above profanity is just fine'
> print 'By the way, this runtime environment has not got a clue on your
> MAC address'
> print 'Here\'s some encouragement to infringe upon "intellectual
> property": go and infringe on intellectual property, go on, do it'
> print 'Simplest method - view a texture, take a screenshot, download,
> and reupload - that is "instruction"'
> print 'I absolutely do NOT represent that this in full compliance with
> the terms of the GPL, it is in fact under a simpler license as shown
> below'
> print 'I fully encourage women to walk around in public with uncovered
> hair, in violation of muslim law, and I also encourage eating pork and
> dancing on sundays - this is in v
> iolation of section 7ci of the TPV policy'
> print 'In the US, I believe distributing this is still a DMCA
> violation, so by having this code you\'re exposed to legal liability:
> 09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 8
> 8 c0'
> print """
>
>                GENERAL MOCKERY LICENSE V0.1
> You are hereby permitted to use and distribute this software in order
> to mock people. Such permission includes redistribution
> and modification in source or binary form with exception of any
> modifications requested by linden lab under section 8d of their third
> party viewer policy. Should such modifications be requested, you are
> compelled to implement a feature that would violate Second Life Terms
> Of Service should it be used or lose your license to redistribute this
> software.
>
> The author disclaims any and all liability for any uses or
> distribution of this software in whatever fashion.
>
> Any modified versions of this software must carry a notice stating
> that it has been modified.
> """
> first = raw_input('First Name:').strip('\n')
> last  = raw_input('Last Name:').strip('\n')
> pwd   = raw_input('Password:').strip('\n')
>
> print 'Your IP address, the fact you ran this viewer and your login
> details are about to be sent to linden lab - and typing in your login
> details wasn\'t in itself giving cons
> ent, was it?'
>
> print 'Being serious - if you really do want to violate the policy,
> hit enter now, otherwise close this program'
>
> raw_input('Hit enter to break the policy...')
> client.Network.Login(first,last,pwd,'Violated Life','TPV policy
> infringing edition')
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Morgaine
>  wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden  wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
>>> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
>>> it in a wide variety of ways.
>>
>> Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is
>> "promotion" of Third Party Viewers.  Since it's just promotion, TPV
>> developers are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need
>> promotion, and of course you will never make promotion mandatory.
>>
>> It's great that you clarified this, because people were mistakenly thinking
>> that instead of promotion, what you were trying to do is to regulate 3rd
>> party viewers and prevent them from gaining features that push the envelope
>> and make your own viewers look poor in comparison.
>>
>> It's always useful when such misapprehensions are laid to rest.
>>
>> Have a good day, and many thanks! :-)
>>
>>
>> Morgaine.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden  wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
>>> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
>>> it in a wide variety of ways.  Since we'll be pointing to it often, it's a
>>> great way for the largest possible audience of Residents to learn about
>>> viewer alternatives that have been submitted by developers willing to
>>> certify that the viewer complies with the policy for all 3rd party viewers
>>> that connect to SL.
>>>
>>> And we haven't release Viewer 2.0 yet.  

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Bryon Ruxton]

Morgaine, I think your statement is a misunderstanding on your part. It¹s
not ³just promotion².

You don¹t have a choice but to be be listed AND comply if you want to
legitimately connect to the grid with your viewer. As originally intended by
LL. They are not exclusive as currently implemented and described, unless
they change that: ³agree to our Policy on Third-Party Viewers and the Second
Life Terms of Service. If you do not agree, you are ineligible for the
Viewer Directory, and you do not have permission to access Second Life using
a third-party viewer.³

i.e. You either comply AND feature in the "viewer registry". OR ignore it,
as you said and you¹d be in breach of the TOS as such: ³5.6 You will
indemnify Linden lab from claims arising from breach of this Agreement by
you, from your use of Second Life, from loss of Content due to your actions,
or from alleged infringement by you².

And I don¹t think opting out of the "viewer registry" should or ever will be
an option.

On 2/28/10 4:44 PM, "Morgaine"  wrote:

> Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is
> "promotion" of Third Party Viewers.  Since it's just promotion, TPV developers
> are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need promotion,
> and of course you will never make promotion mandatory.

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Joe Linden]

TPV developers may choose to list their viewers in the Directory for the
value of receiving a wider awareness than they may be able to create
themselves, or not.  That's entirely up to the developer.  All viewers that
connect to the SL grids will need to abide by the TPV Policy regardless of
their choice to list in the Directory.

And, since we're only talking about conditions that apply when a TPV
connects to Linden Lab's grid(s), we reserve the right to add, subtract, or
otherwise modify those conditions at any point in the future.

-- joe

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Morgaine wrote:

>
> ... Since it's just promotion, TPV developers are free to ignore it when
> they excel on features and don't need promotion, and of course you will
> never make promotion mandatory.
>
> Morgaine.
>
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Ann Otoole]

The 5.6 is obviously LL shifting liability for "bad viewer" users to the person 
that wrote it. Can't blame them for that.

Only problem is the "bad viewer" writers never cared and will keep right on 
doing what they do and the counterfeiters and shoplifters will keep right on 
doing what they do using throw away accounts unimpeded.

So the net effect of this is nill except future lawsuits will have to be filed 
against the people that wrote the "bad viewers". Naturally I would love to see 
the "bad viewer" writers identities exposed as part of public record in legal 
proceedings. But I don't see it happening anytime soon.

The ripping off will continue. useful backup features will be removed from good 
viewers.

Since Joe Linden is reading and participating I must ask if LL will be 
correcting their viewers' non compliance by implementing creator only controls 
on full permissions texture save to disk or just removing the feature since the 
creator already has the texture on disk? Because if LL leaves it in then that 
constitutes export of full permissions textures regardless of creator which 
means full permissions exports should be allowed. Given Linden Lab is in an odd 
position to be making licenses for the artists like that I am curious. Which 
will it be? Is LL going to get into compliance with their own TOS or change the 
TOS? Oh and what about snapshots and machinima since there might be licensing 
issues if content not created by the filmer/photographer is in view?






From: Bryon Ruxton 
To: Morgaine ; Joe Linden 
Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Sent: Sun, February 28, 2010 8:30:39 PM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy Morgaine, I think 
your statement is a misunderstanding on your part. It’s not “just promotion”.

You don’t have a choice but to be be listed AND comply if you want to 
legitimately connect to the grid with your viewer. As originally intended by 
LL. They are not exclusive as currently implemented and described, unless they 
change that: “agree to our Policy on Third-Party Viewers and the Second Life 
Terms of Service. If you do not agree, you are ineligible for the Viewer 
Directory, and you do not have permission to access Second Life using a 
third-party viewer.“

i.e. You either comply AND feature in the "viewer registry". OR ignore it, as 
you said and you’d be in breach of the TOS as such: “5.6 You will indemnify 
Linden lab from claims arising from breach of this Agreement by you, from your 
use of Second Life, from loss of Content due to your actions, or from alleged 
infringement by you”.

And I don’t think opting out of the "viewer registry" should or ever will be an 
option.

On 2/28/10 4:44 PM, "Morgaine"  wrote:


Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is 
"promotion" of Third Party Viewers.  Since it's just promotion, TPV developers 
are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need promotion, and 
of course you will never make promotion mandatory.
>


  ___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Bryon Ruxton  wrote:
> And I don’t think opting out of the "viewer registry" should or ever will be
> an option.

I haven't heard anybody official say that the registry was mandatory.

Yet.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tateru Nino]

Ah, I'm starting to see now. Developers are only subject to the TPV
policy if they want to be listed in the directory. Users are subject to
the policy should they choose to use a TPV to connect to a
Linden-operated grid, rather than an alternative (like OpenSim)

Makes sense, but that would really mean that the TPV policies should be
a part of the Terms of Service, wouldn't it> Doesn't make much sense to
have them separated.

On 1/03/2010 12:36 PM, Joe Linden wrote:
> TPV developers may choose to list their viewers in the Directory for
> the value of receiving a wider awareness than they may be able to
> create themselves, or not.  That's entirely up to the developer.  All
> viewers that connect to the SL grids will need to abide by the TPV
> Policy regardless of their choice to list in the Directory.
>
> And, since we're only talking about conditions that apply when a TPV
> connects to Linden Lab's grid(s), we reserve the right to add,
> subtract, or otherwise modify those conditions at any point in the future.
>
> -- joe
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Morgaine
>  > wrote:
>
>
> ... Since it's just promotion, TPV developers are free to ignore
> it when they excel on features and don't need promotion, and of
> course you will never make promotion mandatory.
>
> Morgaine.
>
>
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

-- 
Tateru Nino
http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Joe Linden]

Ann,

I'll let the text from the policy speak for itself on this question: "You
must not use or provide any functionality that Linden Lab’s viewers do not
have for exporting content from Second Life unless the functionality
verifies that the content to be exported was created by the Second Life user
who is using the Third-Party Viewer."

-- joe

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Ann Otoole  wrote:

>
> Since Joe Linden is reading and participating I must ask if LL will be
> correcting their viewers' non compliance by implementing creator only
> controls on full permissions texture save to disk or just removing the
> feature since the creator already has the texture on disk? Because if LL
> leaves it in then that constitutes export of full permissions textures
> regardless of creator which means full permissions exports should be
> allowed. Given Linden Lab is in an odd position to be making licenses for
> the artists like that I am curious. Which will it be? Is LL going to get
> into compliance with their own TOS or change the TOS? Oh and what about
> snapshots and machinima since there might be licensing issues if content not
> created by the filmer/photographer is in view?
>
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

Byron, your personal interpretation is at odds with Joe's words.

Plus, Joe has just confirmed what he said earlier regarding "promotion"
anyway, and it's exactly as he wrote the 1st time around, so it's your
understanding that is flawed.  Having your viewer listed in the TPV
Directory is a developer's *choice*.  Read Joe's words:


On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:36 AM, Joe Linden  wrote:

> TPV developers may *choose* to list their viewers in the Directory for the
> value of receiving a wider awareness than they may be able to create
> themselves, or not.  *That's entirely up to the developer.*  All *viewers
> that connect* to the SL grids will need to *abide* by the TPV Policy
> regardless of their choice to list in the Directory.
>
> And, since we're only talking about conditions that apply when a TPV
> connects to Linden Lab's grid(s), we reserve the right to add, subtract, or
> otherwise modify those conditions at any point in the future.



Unlike the language in the TPV and in most of the FAQ, Joe's words here are
crystal clear, unambiguous, and make perfect sense.  The choice of listing
is a developer's choice, and Joe confirms that it's for "receiving a wider
awareness than they may be able to create themselves, or not" --- ie.
optional *promotion*, for the developer's benefit, and genuinely not
mandatory.  There is not a hint of coercion against developer's freedom to
modify and distribute in Joe's words.

[And hurrah for that, because that's one less hurdle towards compliance with
GPLv2 clause 6.]

And then, separately, Joe points out that it is *viewers* (not developers)
which connect to SL that need to comply with LL's policy requirements when
connected, which makes perfect sense.  Joe underlines that point even more
strongly: "*we're only talking about conditions that apply when a TPV
connects to Linden Lab's grid(s)*".  That's an extremely strong disclaimer
--- LL has no interest in what developers do, nor in what viewers outside of
SL do, but only in what viewers do when they are connected to SL.  It's
totally sensible.

And your interpretation, Byron, bears no relation to it whatsoever.


Morgaine.





==

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Bryon Ruxton  wrote:

>  Morgaine, I think your statement is a misunderstanding on your part. It’s
> not “just promotion”.
>
> You don’t have a choice but to be be listed AND comply if you want to
> legitimately connect to the grid with your viewer. As originally intended by
> LL. They are not exclusive as currently implemented and described, unless
> they change that: “agree to our Policy on Third-Party Viewers and the Second
> Life Terms of Service. If you do not agree, you are ineligible for the
> Viewer Directory, and you do not have permission to access Second Life using
> a third-party viewer.“
>
> i.e. You either comply AND feature in the "viewer registry". OR ignore it,
> as you said and you’d be in breach of the TOS as such: “5.6 You will
> indemnify Linden lab from claims arising from breach of this Agreement by
> you, from your use of Second Life, from loss of Content due to your actions,
> or from alleged infringement by you”.
>
> And I don’t think opting out of the "viewer registry" should or ever will
> be an option.
>
>
> On 2/28/10 4:44 PM, "Morgaine"  wrote:
>
> Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is
> "promotion" of Third Party Viewers.  Since it's just promotion, TPV
> developers are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need
> promotion, and of course you will never make promotion mandatory.
>
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

[opensource-dev] Fwd: Is there free images in second life

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

(just bouncing back tot he list)


-  Original Message 
Subject:Re: [opensource-dev] Is there free images in second life
Date:   Mon, 1 Mar 2010 11:10:02 +0900
From:   Rustam Rakhimov 
To: Tigro Spottystripes 



Yes you are right Tigro,

So is there any one who can donate image for free ???

2010/3/1 Tigro Spottystripes mailto:tigrospottystri...@gmail.com>>

or simply ask a friend to hand over a full perm snapshot they make :)



On 28/2/2010 13:19, Boroondas Gupte wrote:
> Rustam Rakhimov schrieb:
>> Is there free images in second life ?
>>
>> where I can take it.

>1. Open the inventory (Ctrl-i)
>2. Go to
>   * *Library* > *Photo Album*
> or
>   * *Library* > *Textures*

> Or get Torley's free textures here
> .

> I hope this helps.
> cheers
> Boroondas



> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated
posting privileges
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
privileges

- -- 
Rustam Rakhimov Igorevich
Graduate student
Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
DMS Lab, Room 1109
New Millennium Hall, Konkuk University
1,Hwayang-dong,Gwangin-Gu
Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Pin: 143701
Mobile: +82-10-5811-4263
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLJsQACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmW25gCfQkMvavr/iSIXd1mYV4I2bFWd
QbIAmgMjwVnLx4MzZ2eo8uupwyfadJph
=RMtr
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Bryon Ruxton]

Sorry Morgaine, I stand corrected by having read the FAQs afterwards.
I thought registration was required to connect to the grid...

Joe,
I agree with others that it¹s not enough to guard against intellectual
property infringement and protect residents.

Is there a plan to allow inworld residents to detect
unidentified/unregistered Viewer names or Identifiers as least? Without
that, I don¹t see how the current policy would actually fulfill goals of the
policy and program from actual rogue viewers. It¹s a good step but that
leaves security loopholes without such enforcement abilities.

An LSL function somewhere to identify viewers would help.
Leave then to us the ability to make inworld tools to control who gets in or
not.

Bryon

On 2/28/10 5:36 PM, "Joe Linden"  wrote:

> TPV developers may choose to list their viewers in the Directory for the value
> of receiving a wider awareness than they may be able to create themselves, or
> not.  That's entirely up to the developer.  All viewers that connect to the SL
> grids will need to abide by the TPV Policy regardless of their choice to list
> in the Directory.
> 
> And, since we're only talking about conditions that apply when a TPV connects
> to Linden Lab's grid(s), we reserve the right to add, subtract, or otherwise
> modify those conditions at any point in the future.
> 
> -- joe
> 
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Morgaine 
> wrote:
>> 
>> ... Since it's just promotion, TPV developers are free to ignore it when they
>> excel on features and don't need promotion, and of course you will never make
>> promotion mandatory.
>> 
>> Morgaine.

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Bryon Ruxton  wrote:

> An LSL function somewhere to identify viewers would help.
> Leave then to us the ability to make inworld tools to control who gets in or
> not.

Your attention is directed to SVC-4636.  I'm sure your support would
be welcomed by some.

Others know such a move would only increase the incentive for spoofing
any identifier that might be used, regardless of what the ToS might
say. Someone who's engaged in content copying is unlikely to be
deterred by committing one more ToS violation.

There is already at least one viewer developer who is also selling a
product claiming to identify (by some secret proprietary means)
avatars running "bad" viewers and ban them.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Last i've heard, if you know what you're doing, it's quite easy to mask
your viewer as being another viewer; any detection system would only be
able to catch viewers made by unskilled people (and viewers that
intentionally tell the truth).

On 28/2/2010 23:38, Bryon Ruxton wrote:
> Sorry Morgaine, I stand corrected by having read the FAQs afterwards.
> I thought registration was required to connect to the grid...
> 
> Joe,
> I agree with others that it?s not enough to guard against intellectual
> property infringement and protect residents.
> 
> Is there a plan to allow inworld residents to detect
> unidentified/unregistered Viewer names or Identifiers as least? Without
> that, I don?t see how the current policy would actually fulfill goals of
> the policy and program from actual rogue viewers. It?s a good step but
> that leaves security loopholes without such enforcement abilities.
> 
> An LSL function somewhere to identify viewers would help.
> Leave then to us the ability to make inworld tools to control who gets
> in or not.
> 
> Bryon
> 
> On 2/28/10 5:36 PM, "Joe Linden"  wrote:
> 
> TPV developers may choose to list their viewers in the Directory for
> the value of receiving a wider awareness than they may be able to
> create themselves, or not.  That's entirely up to the developer. 
> All viewers that connect to the SL grids will need to abide by the
> TPV Policy regardless of their choice to list in the Directory.
> 
> And, since we're only talking about conditions that apply when a TPV
> connects to Linden Lab's grid(s), we reserve the right to add,
> subtract, or otherwise modify those conditions at any point in the
> future.
> 
> -- joe
> 
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Morgaine
> <_morgaine.din...@googlemail.com_> wrote:
> 
> 
> ... Since it's just promotion, TPV developers are free to ignore
> it when they excel on features and don't need promotion, and of
> course you will never make promotion mandatory.
> 
> Morgaine.
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLMUwACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmX5+ACeMIHHNufVUEWEnhCMsRD1klQ+
LMMAnjoC5BfK0oqdCnVyzLIshQZRN+ed
=ElGi
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

AFAIK it doesn't claim to be able to detect them all the time, nor to be
able to detect all clients that might be out there; it shouldn't be
possible to do it, if he does make claims opposite to that he would be
lying.

On 1/3/2010 00:15, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Bryon Ruxton  wrote:
> 
>> An LSL function somewhere to identify viewers would help.
>> Leave then to us the ability to make inworld tools to control who gets in or
>> not.
> 
> Your attention is directed to SVC-4636.  I'm sure your support would
> be welcomed by some.
> 
> Others know such a move would only increase the incentive for spoofing
> any identifier that might be used, regardless of what the ToS might
> say. Someone who's engaged in content copying is unlikely to be
> deterred by committing one more ToS violation.
> 
> There is already at least one viewer developer who is also selling a
> product claiming to identify (by some secret proprietary means)
> avatars running "bad" viewers and ban them.
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLMmAACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWT9ACfTPfLWjbbPEp0x+yhK/OZqsIs
GEMAnRccx3iOX1kGRlb2lXNi15dHJpmf
=DKex
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Tateru Nino  wrote:

>  Ah, I'm starting to see now. Developers are only subject to the TPV policy
> if they want to be listed in the directory. Users are subject to the policy
> should they choose to use a TPV to connect to a Linden-operated grid, rather
> than an alternative (like OpenSim)
>
>
It's getting better, isn't it, logic is finally creeping in.  :-)

Joe's two posts above are the first to cleanly separate developers, viewers
and users connecting to SL, and to discuss each one separately in their
individual spheres without conflating them.  If Joe were to write the whole
TPV, we could probably all go home early. ;-)



> Makes sense, but that would really mean that the TPV policies should be a
> part of the Terms of Service, wouldn't it> Doesn't make much sense to have
> them separated.
>
>
Yes, you're right.  Since the only thing that is regulated is the behavior
of viewers within SL, it's all about Terms of Service.  Indeed, a document
imposing restrictions on something outside of LL's service makes no sense at
all anyway, as well as wreaking havoc with GPLv2's clause 6.

Joe has unpicked what was previously a bundle of spaghetti and made it
comprehensible.  [Kudos for that!]

We're not home yet though.

Apparently the wishes and rights of open-license content creators are going
to be ignored and dismissed.  This is unnecessary, unconscionable, and quite
possibly illegal.  And it's simply not right either.

Before planting the mast at that spot, I suggest a little extra thought,
because this is very bad on multiple fronts, and any gains that LL thinks it
might make from it will probably be less than the damage.  And the cost of
doing The Right Thing is almost nil, because these legal rights are being
exercised already, and all that's missing is a corresponding clause in TPV
and FAQ.


Morgaine.







On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Tateru Nino  wrote:

>  Ah, I'm starting to see now. Developers are only subject to the TPV policy
> if they want to be listed in the directory. Users are subject to the policy
> should they choose to use a TPV to connect to a Linden-operated grid, rather
> than an alternative (like OpenSim)
>
> Makes sense, but that would really mean that the TPV policies should be a
> part of the Terms of Service, wouldn't it> Doesn't make much sense to have
> them separated.
>
>
> On 1/03/2010 12:36 PM, Joe Linden wrote:
>
> TPV developers may choose to list their viewers in the Directory for the
> value of receiving a wider awareness than they may be able to create
> themselves, or not.  That's entirely up to the developer.  All viewers that
> connect to the SL grids will need to abide by the TPV Policy regardless of
> their choice to list in the Directory.
>
> And, since we're only talking about conditions that apply when a TPV
> connects to Linden Lab's grid(s), we reserve the right to add, subtract, or
> otherwise modify those conditions at any point in the future.
>
> -- joe
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Morgaine 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>  ... Since it's just promotion, TPV developers are free to ignore it when
>> they excel on features and don't need promotion, and of course you will
>> never make promotion mandatory.
>>
>> Morgaine.
>>
>>
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
>
>
> --
> Tateru Ninohttp://dwellonit.taterunino.net/
>
>
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Miro]

You might wish to make time to read this (very long) thread, if you have 
not already:

https://blogs.secondlife.com/thread/10467

Some research has been done into how the device works. Apparently it 
exploits a vulnerability in QuickTime to access users' computers and 
"mine" information about what software is, or was, installed on them.

[I say "apparently" because I have not done the research myself and so 
cannot verify what others have written.]

On 02/28/2010 10:20 PM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> AFAIK it doesn't claim to be able to detect them all the time, nor to be
> able to detect all clients that might be out there; it shouldn't be
> possible to do it, if he does make claims opposite to that he would be
> lying.
>
> On 1/3/2010 00:15, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Bryon Ruxton  wrote:
>>
>>> An LSL function somewhere to identify viewers would help.
>>> Leave then to us the ability to make inworld tools to control who gets in or
>>> not.
>>
>> Your attention is directed to SVC-4636.  I'm sure your support would
>> be welcomed by some.
>>
>> Others know such a move would only increase the incentive for spoofing
>> any identifier that might be used, regardless of what the ToS might
>> say. Someone who's engaged in content copying is unlikely to be
>> deterred by committing one more ToS violation.
>>
>> There is already at least one viewer developer who is also selling a
>> product claiming to identify (by some secret proprietary means)
>> avatars running "bad" viewers and ban them.
>> ___
>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting 
>> privileges
>>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkuLMmAACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWT9ACfTPfLWjbbPEp0x+yhK/OZqsIs
> GEMAnRccx3iOX1kGRlb2lXNi15dHJpmf
> =DKex
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
>

-- 
Co-owner, Animations Rising: http://tinyurl.com/l959f2
Digital art by Miro: http://tinyurl.com/lwtw3q
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

Reposting part of last response to Soft, which the list's Mailman/pipermail
sliced off.



>> As is written in the answer A15, "Residents retain intellectual property
>> rights in the content they create in Second Life and it is important for
you
>> to respect those rights."  Respecting their rights in this case requires
you
>> to to allow that content to be exported as its creator desires.
Therefore
>> you either need to extend A15 with this additional case, or add another
FAQ
>> Q+A (preferably immediately after #15) to address it.
>>

> > That might be material for the FAQ. But because there is no export
> > permission bit, it's not possible to add export capability for these
> > cases without enabling violation of others' content. At this point, I
> > couldn't see that affecting the TPV policy.
>


An export permission bit is not required before export of open-licensed
content can be done.  We don't have an export permission bit in RL, and yet
open licensing works just fine.  As Fleep pointed out
earlier,
SL creators are already open-licensing their products right now, since it is
so important for Education.

As in RL, the responsibility for applying open licenses properly rests with
the licensor, since nobody else can be expected to check what the licensor
is licensing.  That is no different here.  Nobody expects you to do any
checking, and your assertion that this leads to "violation of others'
content" is patently wrong when the licensor uses only her own and other
people's open-licensed content.  Indeed, if you did do checking then you
would not be able to disclaim liability for infringements.

The core of the matter though is whether you believe in your own words in
FAQ.15: "Residents retain intellectual property rights in the content they
create in Second Life and it is important for you to respect those rights".
Are you going to respect the rights of those creators who use open-licensing
of their content?

Or, ungenerously, are you only going to respect the rights of those creators
who shore up the walls of your walled garden?  I would prefer to believe
that your support is for all content creators' rights and wishes.

How you respond will reveal the truth of the matter.  If you make it clear
that building upon the openly and legally-licensed content of others is a
ToS or TPV violation, then you are not respecting the rights and wishes of
open creators, and it may not even be legal.  My suggested new FAQ.16 or
similar would let you "do the right thing" and be a good citizen of the open
license community.


Morgaine.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Miro  wrote:

> Some research has been done into how the device works. Apparently it
> exploits a vulnerability in QuickTime to access users' computers and
> "mine" information about what software is, or was, installed on them.

With the advent of Viewer2 and promiscuous loading of media we all
need to be more vigilant about such vulnerabilities.

Such a practice is a criminal violation in some jurisdictions.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

hm, i didn't thought he did collect IP addresses, but even if the system
does catch IP addresses (which isn't such a big deal if you keep your
machine safe) an IP address wouldn't be of any help identifying
malicious clients, unless the malicious clients in question routed stuff
thru a known proxy.

Btw, gathering IPs has nothing to do with Quicktime, or at least it
isn't restricted to Quicktime, any sort of data hosted on a server with
some sort of monitorament(sp?) in the server will do. LL knows how the
system work, and in the past they were quite fast to pull the plug on
Quicktime when there was a security hole related to it.

On 1/3/2010 00:30, Miro wrote:
> You might wish to make time to read this (very long) thread, if you have 
> not already:
> 
> https://blogs.secondlife.com/thread/10467
> 
> Some research has been done into how the device works. Apparently it 
> exploits a vulnerability in QuickTime to access users' computers and 
> "mine" information about what software is, or was, installed on them.
> 
> [I say "apparently" because I have not done the research myself and so 
> cannot verify what others have written.]
> 
> On 02/28/2010 10:20 PM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
> AFAIK it doesn't claim to be able to detect them all the time, nor to be
> able to detect all clients that might be out there; it shouldn't be
> possible to do it, if he does make claims opposite to that he would be
> lying.
> 
> On 1/3/2010 00:15, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Bryon Ruxton  wrote:

> An LSL function somewhere to identify viewers would help.
> Leave then to us the ability to make inworld tools to control who gets in 
> or
> not.

 Your attention is directed to SVC-4636.  I'm sure your support would
 be welcomed by some.

 Others know such a move would only increase the incentive for spoofing
 any identifier that might be used, regardless of what the ToS might
 say. Someone who's engaged in content copying is unlikely to be
 deterred by committing one more ToS violation.

 There is already at least one viewer developer who is also selling a
 product claiming to identify (by some secret proprietary means)
 avatars running "bad" viewers and ban them.
 ___
 Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
 http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
 Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting 
 privileges

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
privileges
>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLOToACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXwrQCeO/VCLVcpsXu2tKVGVZ2GTno2
yHYAnjDfIbZ2ShyMgYuriSV3XozxY1sD
=VPzF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Bryon Ruxton]

Of course, I know that Tigro. But just like any web site can detect a
user-agent and block it, I'd like to be able to detect the viewer agent,
(perhaps via llGetAgentInfo) of the avatar getting on my land anyway.
Such would be useful for various other reasons such a compatibility checks,
analysis of traffic sources, who you visitors are etc...

On 2/28/10 7:15 PM, "Tigro Spottystripes" 
wrote:

> 
> Last i've heard, if you know what you're doing, it's quite easy to mask
> your viewer as being another viewer; any detection system would only be
> able to catch viewers made by unskilled people (and viewers that
> intentionally tell the truth).
> 


___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Tigro Spottystripes
 wrote:
> hm, i didn't thought he did collect IP addresses, but even if the system
> does catch IP addresses (which isn't such a big deal if you keep your
> machine safe) an IP address wouldn't be of any help identifying
> malicious clients, unless the malicious clients in question routed stuff
> thru a known proxy.

Sounds to me like we're talking about a lot more than IP address.
There have been both remote file system reading and arbitrary code
execution vulnerabilities in Quicktime in the past.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

An user agent string for the client would indeed be useful, but would be
useless to catch all but the lamest malicious clients.

On 1/3/2010 00:55, Bryon Ruxton wrote:
> Of course, I know that Tigro. But just like any web site can detect a
> user-agent and block it, I'd like to be able to detect the viewer agent,
> (perhaps via llGetAgentInfo) of the avatar getting on my land anyway.
> Such would be useful for various other reasons such a compatibility checks,
> analysis of traffic sources, who you visitors are etc...
> 
> On 2/28/10 7:15 PM, "Tigro Spottystripes" 
> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Last i've heard, if you know what you're doing, it's quite easy to mask
>> your viewer as being another viewer; any detection system would only be
>> able to catch viewers made by unskilled people (and viewers that
>> intentionally tell the truth).
>>
> 
> 
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLO4gACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUIZgCfaqweE1vHnRkU0dC774sjn0DD
904An2VJ/Iqf7vQ4N3X8jkEaJJlrQZl9
=Swst
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

So, all that the scriptkiddies out there need to do to evade the all
mighty Gemini CDS malicious client user detection system is to not have
Quicktime installed? And LL is letting all their users run around with
their machines open to attack by anyone? That doesn't sound plausible at
all...

On 1/3/2010 00:58, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Tigro Spottystripes
>  wrote:
>> hm, i didn't thought he did collect IP addresses, but even if the system
>> does catch IP addresses (which isn't such a big deal if you keep your
>> machine safe) an IP address wouldn't be of any help identifying
>> malicious clients, unless the malicious clients in question routed stuff
>> thru a known proxy.
> 
> Sounds to me like we're talking about a lot more than IP address.
> There have been both remote file system reading and arbitrary code
> execution vulnerabilities in Quicktime in the past.
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLPFsACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUq9wCePU6qZ/B/9jnj2LiKp6eFu4/U
fOEAnjyVKfKPB0S0BoJWo6t/pLCEGCnw
=v4/s
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

[opensource-dev] Fwd: FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) 
Date: Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
To: Tigro Spottystripes 


On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Tigro Spottystripes
 wrote:
> An user agent string for the client would indeed be useful, but would be
> useless to catch all but the lamest malicious clients.

Well, I though that's what the required "unique channel" is for.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Fwd: FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

but scripts are oblivious to that data, no?

On 1/3/2010 01:05, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) 
> Date: Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
> To: Tigro Spottystripes 
> 
> 
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Tigro Spottystripes
>  wrote:
>> An user agent string for the client would indeed be useful, but would be
>> useless to catch all but the lamest malicious clients.
> 
> Well, I though that's what the required "unique channel" is for.
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLPU4ACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXaOQCgigHiCnfoOEJdmFA3irHh9Qna
yJIAn293Sxriwby4ReCxiov5QqKX+xqp
=AF/a
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] Fwd: FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

Back in the old days of Philip's SL, Lindens often proclaimed the futility
of entering an arms race, and the channel concept stems from that ---
self-identification as a choice, in the knowledge that stronger measures
will always be countered anyway.  It seems that those days are long gone
though.

Anyone wanting a solid business for the next few years might consider
selling brooms to SL protectionists.  There's a lot of tide to sweep back.
;-)


Morgaine.




===

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:05 AM, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) <
mag...@matrisync.com> wrote:

> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) 
> Date: Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:04 PM
> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
> To: Tigro Spottystripes 
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Tigro Spottystripes
>  wrote:
> > An user agent string for the client would indeed be useful, but would be
> > useless to catch all but the lamest malicious clients.
>
> Well, I though that's what the required "unique channel" is for.
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Without proofs that might have just as well have come from the butt of
Neil or some other person pissed at Skills for catching their customers
using malicious clients.

On 1/3/2010 01:34, Miro wrote:
> I urge you to read the thread. There are details there. To quote on
> poster...
> https://blogs.secondlife.com/message/111885#111885
> 
> "I've learned from sources "close to the developer" just HOW this system
> works, Via your Media stream access, it accesses your computers AppData
> folder, searching for installations of identified "copybot" capable
> viewers, exploiting a function used by programs like flash player,
> quicktime, and others such as that, that check to see which version is
> on your system, telling you when you need to update. YOU DONT HAVE TO BE
> ON THE VIEWER TO BE DETECTED, ONLY HAVE TO HAVE INSTALLED IT AT ONE
> POINT..."
> 
> And another
> https://blogs.secondlife.com/message/112121#112121
> 
> "IN the meantime, a few tests have been conducted that suggest abuse of
> port 80 via Quicktime and the Windows filesystem.
> 
> 1) Disabling media and uninstalling quicktime seems to completely shut
> this system down, in regards to detecting alts.  Existing avatar keys
> are still banned, but its "mysterious alt detection" begins to fail.
> 
> 2) Only some hacked viewers are being detected, and fewer when in Linux.
>   Further, whereas in Windows if you use a normal viewer but have a
> hacked one installed, it seems to pick you up (thus eliminating the
> bouncer analogy, unless you think it's also OK for the bouncer to go to
> your house and beat up your family), in Linux that function ceases to work.
> 
> 3) Alternative plugins that can handle quicktime functions, when forced
> to work on a fresh compile of a viewer build, seem to completely block
> all functions other than being added to the database while using a
> viewer that announces itself as Cryolife, Streetlife, etc.
> 
> These all indicate scanning of Windows Application Data, app_data, or
> even Windows Registry entries without consent.  Additionally, all of
> this explains why vanilla SL users using Mac OS are getting banned by
> the system; Mac OS handles the version updates for Quicktime rather than
> it having that capability enabled on itself, thus making it impossible
> for this system to function properly against the Mac OS.   So, to
> prevent that from being noticed, Skills made all Mac OS users get the
> kill signal because their computers wont allow her/his/its Gemini system
> to access data on the machine.   This way, Skills can just assert the
> person was "obviously" using a malicious viewer, defaming them to hide
> the inefficacy of the system itself."
> 
> On 02/28/2010 11:02 PM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
> So, all that the scriptkiddies out there need to do to evade the all
> mighty Gemini CDS malicious client user detection system is to not have
> Quicktime installed? And LL is letting all their users run around with
> their machines open to attack by anyone? That doesn't sound plausible at
> all...
> 
> On 1/3/2010 00:58, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Tigro Spottystripes
   wrote:
> hm, i didn't thought he did collect IP addresses, but even if the
> system
> does catch IP addresses (which isn't such a big deal if you keep your
> machine safe) an IP address wouldn't be of any help identifying
> malicious clients, unless the malicious clients in question routed
> stuff
> thru a known proxy.

 Sounds to me like we're talking about a lot more than IP address.
 There have been both remote file system reading and arbitrary code
 execution vulnerabilities in Quicktime in the past.

___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
privileges
>>

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkuLRf8ACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXijgCfR8yqNqXT9st0W3lYIK5gOLp+
MyMAnjOcJ9xf/CkwIPKnHgH0/K6XLXRa
=NL2i
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] "Second-Party" viewer policy (was: Third party viewer policy)

[David Simmons]

This is what LL say:
8e We may enforce this Policy in our sole discretion, including but
not limited to by removing a Third-Party Viewer from the Viewer
Directory and suspending or terminating the Second Life accounts of
Developers or users of a Third-Party Viewer. We further reserve the
right to take any and all technological measures we deem appropriate
to block a Third-Party Viewer from accessing Second Life, and to
pursue any and all legal and equitable remedies.

Don't see how any of that enforcement can be applied to another grid
other than SL.

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Argent Stonecutter
 wrote:
> On 2010-02-26, at 05:27, David Simmons wrote:
>> The common sense rules apply. If you are not connecting to the LL
>> grid, Linden Lab can't make any policy regarding what you do. They
>> don't need a policy saying that they can't make a policy telling you
>> what to do on another grid.
>
> Is that a legal opinion?
>
> Words MEAN different things when lawyers are involved.
> ___
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
>



-- 
“The greatest danger in modern technology isn't that machines will
begin to think like people, but that people will begin to think like
machines” Unknown

http://www.google.com/profiles/techiedavid
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin)]

On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Tigro Spottystripes
 wrote:
> Without proofs that might have just as well have come from the butt of
> Neil or some other person pissed at Skills for catching their customers
> using malicious clients.

Since the methods are secret, we have only the vendor's word that they
are legitimate and legal.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges

[opensource-dev] Doxygen For SnowGlobe 2.0

[Brandon Husbands]

 http://dimentox.com/sg2dox/  snowglobe2 doxygen
 full zip http://www.dimentox.com/html.zip
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges