Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Boy Lane]

Joe,

You probably did not read the terms I have to agree upon login yourself. 
Otherwise you'd have found a better answer to the concern raised.

It is not about time or any dates of policies to become effective. It is about 
acceptance of unacceptable terms.

I can not accept the new ToS without accepting TPV, and the latter was the one 
you said you would like to discuss? You don't create facts in the first place 
to eventually negotiate them later. TPV is unacceptaple and if you are really 
interested in an open and unhindered discussion you should find a discussion 
medium that allows for this. The beta grid would be such an option.

Boy
  
  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Linden 
  To: Boy Lane 
  Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 1:32 PM
  Subject: Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


  Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly states it becomes 
effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to use the service under the 
terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the TPV provisions.  If one has 
issues with the prior ToS agreement, and hasn't previously accepted those 
terms, then I agree, this meeting isn't for you.

  -- joe


  On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane  wrote:

Thanks Joe.

Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting
ToS/TPV in the first place.



  - Original Message - Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700
  From: Joe Linden 
  Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV
  next Tuesday (4/13)
  To: OpenSource-Dev 
  Message-ID:
  
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

  Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various
  blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party
  Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
  informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for
  those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the next
  couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, 
but
  the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like to
  address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the
  Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns 
that
  have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll be 
an
  informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:

  
http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29

  No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you 
think
  would benefit from open dialog around the subject.

  I hope to see many of you there next week.

  -- Joe





___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Morgaine]

Joe, nowhere do you say that you are going to feed the community response
back to the people who drafted the TPV, in order to seek change.  Was that
implied?  Nor do you say that you are going to champion the TPV community's
needs with the appropriate Lindens after your 3 meetings.  Was that implied?

Although I would like to think that both of the above were implied, your
paragraph does not actually say that.  It can also be read as intending
nothing more than a one-way process of explaining the intent to us, calming
the restless natives as it were.  Could you please quash this ungenerous
reading, and state that your intention is indeed to get the TPV document
improved, and that you will do what you can to make that happen?


Morgaine.





==

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Joe Linden  wrote:

> Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various
> blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party
> Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
> informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for
> those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the next
> couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but
> the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like to
> address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the
> Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that
> have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll be an
> informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:
>
> http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29
>
> No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think
> would benefit from open dialog around the subject.
>
> I hope to see many of you there next week.
>
> -- Joe
>
> ___
> 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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Opensource Obscure]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:37:00 +0200, Henri Beauchamp  wrote:

> Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand
> spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough
> to hold a conversation in voice.

+1 (being Italian)

I'm willing to participate and contribute in a constructive way
to this debate, but I can't do that via Voice.

opensource obscure
___
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: The status of the Viewer Community

[Robert Martin]

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Boy Lane  wrote:
> Viewers partly ceased/unsure:
> OMV, some code removed (full/text)
> Emerald, no statement (full)

The Emerald Developers have stated that they will have a complient
viewer out by the deadline.

-- 
Robert L Martin
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Robert Martin]

> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:37:00 +0200, Henri Beauchamp  wrote:
>
>> Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand
>> spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough
>> to hold a conversation in voice.
>
also unless im not mistaken holding it in Voice also guarantees that
there will not be a transcript of what was said. Unless there is now a
rock solid low lag real time way of transcribing the voice parts since
we are going to be discussing legal matters it needs to be recordable.
-- 
Robert L Martin
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Carlo Wood]

On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:28:14AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote:
> >> Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand
> >> spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough
> >> to hold a conversation in voice.
> >
> also unless im not mistaken holding it in Voice also guarantees that
> there will not be a transcript of what was said. Unless there is now a
> rock solid low lag real time way of transcribing the voice parts since
> we are going to be discussing legal matters it needs to be recordable.

That is probably exactly the reason why they want it to be in voice:
so that there is no transcript and nobody can use whatever is going
to be said in court at a later time.

It is meant to be "informational" only, which is probably not very
useful indeed, unless the information flows both ways and this will
lead to a change of the TPV policy.

-- 
Carlo Wood 
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Opensource Obscure]

On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:43:42 +0200, Carlo Wood  wrote:

> That is probably exactly the reason why they want it to be in voice:
> so that there is no transcript and nobody can use whatever is going
> to be said in court at a later time.

I want to make clear that I refuse this interpretation. 

This approach worries me even more than the policy itself. 
I think this is a non-costructive, negative and offensive 
approach, and it should be kept out of the debate.

opensource obscure
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

in theory it should be possible to record what is said in voice, though
coordinating voice with text for context would be a bit more complicated
(though a video of the meeting with a good resolution and as lossless as
possible codec/compression could do it in theory, a video would also
help to identify who is saying what in voice)

On 9/4/2010 08:43, Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:28:14AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote:
 Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand
 spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough
 to hold a conversation in voice.
>>>
>> also unless im not mistaken holding it in Voice also guarantees that
>> there will not be a transcript of what was said. Unless there is now a
>> rock solid low lag real time way of transcribing the voice parts since
>> we are going to be discussing legal matters it needs to be recordable.
> 
> That is probably exactly the reason why they want it to be in voice:
> so that there is no transcript and nobody can use whatever is going
> to be said in court at a later time.
> 
> It is meant to be "informational" only, which is probably not very
> useful indeed, unless the information flows both ways and this will
> lead to a change of the TPV policy.
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAku/HaYACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUrRgCfQjxNKKGbKAXBtelCXLdHtcSD
lIkAnjjtfbCmTDp8rpgXhqxo3LPHNehd
=U4iv
-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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Nicholaz Beresford]

Re ...

 > Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and
 > accepting ToS/TPV in the first place.

and

 > Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly states it
 > becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to use the
 > service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the
 > TPV provisions.


I won't go to the meeting, but I have to agree with  Joe's 
interpretation of the TOS.

The §1 of the TOS ("By continuing to access or use Second Life after the 
effective date of any such change, you agree to be bound by the modified 
Terms of Service.") makes this rather clear.  And §11.2 is worded in a 
similar way and IMO restates this intention.  Unlike other parts of the 
TOS/TPV, I find those two reasonable clear and fair.

I.e. the way I took it (although IANAL) is that by agreeing to the new 
TOS at login I merely agree I'm bound by it when accessing SL after the 
effective date.


Nicholaz.

___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Simon Disk]

Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag
meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP
become effective.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Boy Lane]

Certainly, that relates to ToS which has a commencement date
in itself of 30 April.

Unfortunately the linked TPV I have to agree upon login does
not have a commencement date. Not that it matters if I accept it
for its content or not, which I don't. Logging in and clickwrapping
ToS automatically means acceptance of TPV the time I click OK.

And I'm not going to do this. Especially not to create facts that
are to be discussed with Joe later. If he is willing to do so.

If Linden wants to open the door again for Opensource developers
they should provide a medium to discuss this 3rd party viewer
policy without forcing these developers beforehand to accept
that exact policy in question.



- Original Message - 
From: "Nicholaz Beresford" 
To: ; "Boy Lane" 
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 8:38 PM
Subject: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


>
> Re ...
>
> > Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and
> > accepting ToS/TPV in the first place.
>
> and
>
> > Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly states it
> > becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to use the
> > service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the
> > TPV provisions.
>
>
> I won't go to the meeting, but I have to agree with  Joe's interpretation 
> of the TOS.
>
> The §1 of the TOS ("By continuing to access or use Second Life after the 
> effective date of any such change, you agree to be bound by the modified 
> Terms of Service.") makes this rather clear.  And §11.2 is worded in a 
> similar way and IMO restates this intention.  Unlike other parts of the 
> TOS/TPV, I find those two reasonable clear and fair.
>
> I.e. the way I took it (although IANAL) is that by agreeing to the new TOS 
> at login I merely agree I'm bound by it when accessing SL after the 
> effective date.
>
>
> Nicholaz.
> 


___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Boy Lane]

Why would I create an alt to jump stupidity on the side of LL? Not only can 
they track someone, but why would I let my principles of integrity and 
reputation go just to attend some set up meeting with a questionable agenda?
  - Original Message - 
  From: Simon Disk 
  To: Boy Lane 
  Cc: Joe Linden ; opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 8:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


  Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag 
meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP become 
effective.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Simon Disk]

§7.7 makes the TPVP effective with the ToS.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Simon Disk]

Why does creating an alt mean your jumping on LL's side? Why are there sides
anyway?

If it is an important enough issue to you, you should find a way.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Boy Lane]

I don't know what you don't understand here. If I use *any* account, aka 
avatar, 
to login to SL I have to accept their ToS and TPV and other policies altogether.
That is me, the RL person, not the avatar. So there is no difference in using an
alt or my normal AV.

Simple, isn't it :)
  - Original Message - 
  From: Simon Disk 
  To: Boy Lane 
  Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 9:07 PM
  Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


  Why does creating an alt mean your jumping on LL's side? Why are there sides 
anyway? 

  If it is an important enough issue to you, you should find a way.___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Simon Disk]

I understand it, the ToS and associated policies are by account, every alt
account you sign in with has to accept them individually.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[JB Hancroft]

Joe,

Thanks for doing this. There are obviously a LOT of concerns. I'm not sure
if Linden Lab is willing to do so, but sharing any additional insights about
why certain parts of the TPVP were drafted the way they are, might help.

My ask, of the community:  This has the potential to be a meeting with a lot
of emotions. We won't make any progress on this if emotions run too hot, or
the discussion becomes unprofessional... degrades into personal attacks on
character. And if it breaks down into a shouting match, then it's a waste of
time for all of us. So please, let's do this in a professional manner.

One way you can help me understand this issue, please, would be to be
willing to say what the impact is on you, on your business, on your
customers, etc.  I think being able to quantify the effects of a policy, a
decision, a direction... always help. My opinion:  Disagreeing in principle
because it's "wrong" is one thing; being able to relate what the impact on
your involvement in Second Life will mean a lot more.

Thanks,
- JB

P.S. To the list: Let's not try to make this a "legal" meeting, ok? Because
if you do, it won't happen.


On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Joe Linden  wrote:

> Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various
> blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party
> Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
> informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for
> those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the next
> couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but
> the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like to
> address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the
> Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that
> have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll be an
> informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:
>
> http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29
>
> No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think
> would benefit from open dialog around the subject.
>
> I hope to see many of you there next week.
>
> -- Joe
>
> ___
> 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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Boy Lane]

This does not make any difference for a viewer developer, regardless
if or if not a particular avatar is attached to a viewer.

But that's where it becomes intersting. Emerald is made by a group
of people. They may individually agree to ToS/TPV or not. What does
it say about the Emerald viewer and it's legal standing to TPV?

Nothing.

 
  - Original Message - 
  From: Simon Disk 
  To: Boy Lane 
  Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 9:19 PM
  Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


  I understand it, the ToS and associated policies are by account, every alt 
account you sign in with has to accept them individually. ___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Joe Miller]

Tateru,

You can continue down this road if you wish, but the facts are the
words in 13.3 do not become effective for Residents who had registered
before March 31, 2010 until April 30 2010.  (See the blog post here
with additional words to that effect.)  The updated TOS text was pushed
to everyone so they would have the benefit of a full 30 days to review
it before acknowledging formal acceptance of it by accessing the system
after April 30.  

So, please, do not add to the rhetoric here by telling me about
contract law, charges of fraud, coercion or whatever point you're
trying to make.  The TOS in force today was the agreement accepted by
all Residents of record prior to March 31.  After April 30, everything
you say about section 13.3 in the new TOS is reasonably accurate.

The purpose of my brown bag is to talk about the new TPV policy and the
concerns raised by several members of the open source community.  I
intend to listen to listen to all reasonable proposals to address those
concerns.  Those who do not wish to participate in that synchronous
event can email me instead if they so choose.   Again, I'm looking
forward to a productive exchange of specific ideas to address specific
shared concerns, whether at these meetings or via some other channel.

If you have nothing to offer, there is no reason to come.

-- Joe


Tateru Nino wrote:

  
That clear statement is inadmissible by the terms of the TOS §13.3, I'm
afraid, which disclaims such as not being a valid part of the
agreement. No part of the agreement that is made admissible by §13.3
suggests or implies any commencement date other than immediately.
  
Nor does it permit any explanation, FAQ, supplement, or discussion to
be considered relevant (except as provided, which none have been).
Boilerplate it may be, but it is binding boilerplate. It could say that
"This agreement grants you a lifetime supply of banana custard", but
that's not actually in there. It would be an assurance that is
disclaimed within the agreement. §10.3 absolves the Lab and its
representatives of charges of fraud if they say something about the
agreements that aren't strictly speaking true, in order to obtain
agreement.
  
As a general rule for contracts and agreements (leaving aside the TPVP,
the TOS, and Linden Lab for a moment), it's widely considered remiss to
act based on inadmissible representations or explanations of a contract
from the other party to the actual agreement. That's the sort
of thing lawyers warn you not to do.
  
  
On 9/04/2010 3:32 PM, Joe Linden wrote:
  Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly
states it becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to
use the service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain
the TPV provisions.  If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement,
and hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting
isn't for you.

-- joe

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane 
wrote:
Thanks
Joe.
  
Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting
ToS/TPV in the first place.
  
  
  -
Original Message - Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700
From: Joe Linden 
Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV
next Tuesday (4/13)
To: OpenSource-Dev 
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various
blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third
Party
Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous
for
those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the next
couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than
others, but
the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like to
address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using
the
Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns
that
have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll
be an
informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:

http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29

No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you
think
would benefit from open dialog around the subject.

I hope to see many of you there next week.

-- Joe
  
  
  




___
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/
  
  

___
Polic

Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Joe Miller]

Henri,

Sorry you can't participate.

-- Joe

Henri Beauchamp wrote:

  On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700, Joe Linden wrote:

  
  
It'll be an informal Q&A session,

  
  
What's the point if problems are not actually *addessed* and if
it's just about trying to reassure people without any written
warrantee given on LL's side ?

  
  
held in voice, at this location:

  
  
Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand
spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough
to hold a conversation in voice.

Henri Beauchamp.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Joe Miller]

Boy,

So it's sounds like you won't be able to join me.  Sorry to hear that.

-- joe

Boy Lane wrote:

  
  
  
  Joe,
   
  You probably did not read the terms
I have to agree upon login yourself. Otherwise you'd have found a
better answer to the concern raised.
   
  It is not about time or any dates of
policies to become effective. It is about acceptance of unacceptable
terms.
   
  I can not accept the new ToS without
accepting TPV, and the latter was the one you said you would like to
discuss? You don't create facts in the first place to eventually
negotiate them later. TPV is unacceptaple and if you are really
interested in an open and unhindered discussion you should find a
discussion medium that allows for this. The beta grid would be such an
option.
   
  Boy
    
  
-
Original Message - 
From:
Joe Linden 
To:
Boy Lane 
Cc:
opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com

Sent:
Friday, April 09, 2010 1:32 PM
Subject:
Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly states it
becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to use the
service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the TPV
provisions.  If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement, and hasn't
previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting isn't for
you.

-- joe

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane 
wrote:
Thanks
Joe.
  
Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting
ToS/TPV in the first place.
  
  
  -
Original Message - Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700
From: Joe Linden 
Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV
next Tuesday (4/13)
To: OpenSource-Dev 
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various
blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third
Party
Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous
for
those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the next
couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than
others, but
the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like to
address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using
the
Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns
that
have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll
be an
informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:

http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29

No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you
think
would benefit from open dialog around the subject.

I hope to see many of you there next week.

-- Joe
  
  
  



  



___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Ron Festa]

I'm afraid that won't work. The ToS is an agreement between you (the user)
and Linden Lab, not your avatar and LL.

Personally I think a meeting such as this where many won't be involved due
to the wording of the ToS and TPVP are preventing major TPV devs from
entering this discussion would be better suited on a non-LL controlled grid.
Maybe one of the other opensim grids would be a better choice.

Ron Festa
Virtual Worlds Admin
Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University
PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY
Phone: 732-474-8583


On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Simon Disk  wrote:

> Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag
> meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP
> become effective.
>
> ___
> 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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Tateru Nino]

My apologies, Joe - I'll email you directly.

On 10/04/2010 1:28 AM, Joe Miller wrote:
> Tateru,
>
> You can continue down this road if you wish, but the facts are the
> words in 13.3 do not become effective for Residents who had registered
> before March 31, 2010 until April 30 2010.  (See the blog post here
> 
> with additional words to that effect.)  The updated TOS text was
> pushed to everyone so they would have the benefit of a full 30 days to
> review it before acknowledging formal acceptance of it by accessing
> the system after April 30. 
>
> So, please, do not add to the rhetoric here by telling me about
> contract law, charges of fraud, coercion or whatever point you're
> trying to make.  The TOS in force today was the agreement accepted by
> all Residents of record prior to March 31.  After April 30, everything
> you say about section 13.3 in the new TOS is reasonably accurate.
>
> The purpose of my brown bag is to talk about the new TPV policy and
> the concerns raised by several members of the open source community. 
> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable proposals to address
> those concerns.  Those who do not wish to participate in that
> synchronous event can email me instead if they so choose.   Again, I'm
> looking forward to a productive exchange of specific ideas to address
> specific shared concerns, whether at these meetings or via some other
> channel.
>
> If you have nothing to offer, there is no reason to come.
>
> -- Joe
>
>
> Tateru Nino wrote:
>> That clear statement is inadmissible by the terms of the TOS §13.3,
>> I'm afraid, which disclaims such as not being a valid part of the
>> agreement. No part of the agreement that is made admissible by §13.3
>> suggests or implies any commencement date other than immediately.
>>
>> Nor does it permit any explanation, FAQ, supplement, or discussion to
>> be considered relevant (except as provided, which none have been).
>> Boilerplate it may be, but it is binding boilerplate. It could say
>> that "This agreement grants you a lifetime supply of banana custard",
>> but that's not actually in there. It would be an assurance that is
>> disclaimed within the agreement. §10.3 absolves the Lab and its
>> representatives of charges of fraud if they say something about the
>> agreements that aren't strictly speaking true, in order to obtain
>> agreement.
>>
>> As a general rule for contracts and agreements (leaving aside the
>> TPVP, the TOS, and Linden Lab for a moment), it's widely considered
>> remiss to act based on inadmissible representations or explanations
>> of a contract from /the other party to the actual agreement/. That's
>> the sort of thing lawyers warn you not to do.
>>
>>
>> On 9/04/2010 3:32 PM, Joe Linden wrote:
>>> Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly states it
>>> becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to use the
>>> service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the
>>> TPV provisions.  If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement, and
>>> hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting
>>> isn't for you.
>>>
>>> -- joe
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Joe.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting
>>> ToS/TPV in the first place.
>>>
>>>
>>> - Original Message - Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57
>>> -0700
>>> From: Joe Linden mailto:j...@lindenlab.com>>
>>> Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue
>>> dialog on TVPV
>>> next Tuesday (4/13)
>>> To: OpenSource-Dev >> >
>>> Message-ID:
>>> >> 
>>> >
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>>
>>> Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here,
>>> on various
>>> blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently
>>> introduced Third Party
>>> Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office
>>> hour" or
>>> informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more
>>> synchronous for
>>> those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these
>>> over the next
>>> couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some
>>> than others, but
>>> the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.
>>>  I'd like to
>>> address questions about the intent of the policy, how we
>>> will be using the
>>> Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the
>>> specific concerns that
>>> have been raised by the community over the past several
>>> weeks.  It'l

Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Erik Anderson]

Would Skype be an option?

--piping up from the peanut gallery...

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Ron Festa wrote:

> I'm afraid that won't work. The ToS is an agreement between you (the user)
> and Linden Lab, not your avatar and LL.
>
> Personally I think a meeting such as this where many won't be involved due
> to the wording of the ToS and TPVP are preventing major TPV devs from
> entering this discussion would be better suited on a non-LL controlled grid.
> Maybe one of the other opensim grids would be a better choice.
>
> Ron Festa
> Virtual Worlds Admin
> Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University
> PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY
> Phone: 732-474-8583
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Simon Disk  wrote:
>
>> Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag
>> meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP
>> become effective.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Joe Miller]

No apology necessary.  I just wanted to restate that if TPV authors are
staying away from this meeting because of some perceived "catch-22" on
acceptance of the updated TOS, that shouldn't be an issue as they are
governed by the TOS in effect prior to 3/31.

Tateru Nino wrote:

  
My apologies, Joe - I'll email you directly.
  
On 10/04/2010 1:28 AM, Joe Miller wrote:
  

Tateru,

You can continue down this road if you wish, but the facts are the
words in 13.3 do not become effective for Residents who had registered
before March 31, 2010 until April 30 2010.  (See the blog post here
with additional words to that effect.)  The updated TOS text was pushed
to everyone so they would have the benefit of a full 30 days to review
it before acknowledging formal acceptance of it by accessing the system
after April 30.  

So, please, do not add to the rhetoric here by telling me about
contract law, charges of fraud, coercion or whatever point you're
trying to make.  The TOS in force today was the agreement accepted by
all Residents of record prior to March 31.  After April 30, everything
you say about section 13.3 in the new TOS is reasonably accurate.

The purpose of my brown bag is to talk about the new TPV policy and the
concerns raised by several members of the open source community.  I
intend to listen to listen to all reasonable proposals to address those
concerns.  Those who do not wish to participate in that synchronous
event can email me instead if they so choose.   Again, I'm looking
forward to a productive exchange of specific ideas to address specific
shared concerns, whether at these meetings or via some other channel.

If you have nothing to offer, there is no reason to come.

-- Joe


Tateru Nino wrote:

  
That clear statement is inadmissible by the terms of the TOS §13.3, I'm
afraid, which disclaims such as not being a valid part of the
agreement. No part of the agreement that is made admissible by §13.3
suggests or implies any commencement date other than immediately.
  
Nor does it permit any explanation, FAQ, supplement, or discussion to
be considered relevant (except as provided, which none have been).
Boilerplate it may be, but it is binding boilerplate. It could say that
"This agreement grants you a lifetime supply of banana custard", but
that's not actually in there. It would be an assurance that is
disclaimed within the agreement. §10.3 absolves the Lab and its
representatives of charges of fraud if they say something about the
agreements that aren't strictly speaking true, in order to obtain
agreement.
  
As a general rule for contracts and agreements (leaving aside the TPVP,
the TOS, and Linden Lab for a moment), it's widely considered remiss to
act based on inadmissible representations or explanations of a contract
from the other party to the actual agreement. That's the sort
of thing lawyers warn you not to do.
  
  
On 9/04/2010 3:32 PM, Joe Linden wrote:
  Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly
states it becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to
use the service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain
the TPV provisions.  If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement,
and hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting
isn't for you.

-- joe

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy
Lane 
wrote:
Thanks
Joe.
  
Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting
ToS/TPV in the first place.
  
  
  -
Original
Message - Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700
From: Joe Linden 
Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV
next Tuesday (4/13)
To: OpenSource-Dev 
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various
blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third
Party
Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous
for
those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the next
couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than
others, but
the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like to
address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using
the
Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns
that
have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll
be an
informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:

http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29

No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you
think
would benefit from open

Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Robert Martin]

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Erik Anderson
 wrote:
> Would Skype be an option?
> --piping up from the peanut gallery...
>
1 not every stake holder even has skype
2 still has the not recordable problem
3 would it even scale to the needed level??
-- 
Robert L Martin
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Erik Anderson]

Issues understood.  I've just been remembering previous in-world meetings
that were simulcast on skype, although I also remembered that they couldn't
get it working...

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Robert Martin  wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Erik Anderson
>  wrote:
> > Would Skype be an option?
> > --piping up from the peanut gallery...
> >
> 1 not every stake holder even has skype
> 2 still has the not recordable problem
> 3 would it even scale to the needed level??
> --
> Robert L Martin
> ___
> 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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Zai Lynch]

@transcript/recording concerns:
Some might remember the Adult content transition and the related brown-bag
meetings. Audio recordings were uploaded and transcripts of those were
published, like in
https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Adult_Oriented_content_controls:_merchant_meeting_transcript

Maybe something like that is possible for these meetings here as well.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Boy Lane]

As I and others wrote, you may want to change to a neutral platform that does
not require one to clickwrap a policy that is to be discussed.
The Betagrid would be such an option, and I assume all involved developers
have accounts old enough to be in the database.

Please also move away from that voice plan. Many people are not fluent in
English but can read and write.

Thanks! 
  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Miller 
  To: Boy Lane 
  Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 11:30 PM
  Subject: Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


  Boy,

  So it's sounds like you won't be able to join me.  Sorry to hear that.

  -- joe

  Boy Lane wrote: 
Joe,

You probably did not read the terms I have to agree upon login yourself. 
Otherwise you'd have found a better answer to the concern raised.

It is not about time or any dates of policies to become effective. It is 
about acceptance of unacceptable terms.

I can not accept the new ToS without accepting TPV, and the latter was the 
one you said you would like to discuss? You don't create facts in the first 
place to eventually negotiate them later. TPV is unacceptaple and if you are 
really interested in an open and unhindered discussion you should find a 
discussion medium that allows for this. The beta grid would be such an option.

Boy
  
  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Linden 
  To: Boy Lane 
  Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com 
  Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 1:32 PM
  Subject: Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV


  Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly states it becomes 
effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to use the service under the 
terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the TPV provisions.  If one has 
issues with the prior ToS agreement, and hasn't previously accepted those 
terms, then I agree, this meeting isn't for you.

  -- joe


  On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane  wrote:

Thanks Joe.

Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting
ToS/TPV in the first place.



  - Original Message - Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700
  From: Joe Linden 
  Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV
  next Tuesday (4/13)
  To: OpenSource-Dev 
  Message-ID:
  
  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

  Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various
  blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third 
Party
  Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
  informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous 
for
  those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the next
  couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than 
others, but
  the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like to
  address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be 
using the
  Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific 
concerns that
  have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll 
be an
  informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:

  
http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29

  No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you 
think
  would benefit from open dialog around the subject.

  I hope to see many of you there next week.

  -- Joe





___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Joe Miller]

Morgaine,

Thanks for asking.  My interest is to listen to specific concerns
voiced by the majority of the community and (more importantly)
take proposed solutions to those concerns under
advisement before the policy becomes effective on April 30.  It won't
be very productive for anyone if it's just a grousing session about
legal theory or hypothetical situations that may or may not occur in
the future.  Yes, I will take all serious proposals back into the
company for serious consideration.  But, make no mistake, I'm not
asking for a change set that makes one person happier at a time.  I'm
looking for the minimum change set that represents the broadest
possible consensus among the community of TPV authors.

So, yours are good questions, and I do intend to champion the TPV
community's collective voice in this process.  I hope we emerge with
something actionable out of these meetings.

-- Joe

Morgaine wrote:
Joe, nowhere do you say that you are going to feed the
community response back to the people who drafted the TPV, in order to
seek change.  Was that implied?  Nor do you say that you are going to
champion the TPV community's needs with the appropriate Lindens after
your 3 meetings.  Was that implied?
  
Although I would like to think that both of the above were implied,
your paragraph does not actually say that.  It can also be read as
intending nothing more than a one-way process of explaining the intent
to us, calming the restless natives as it were.  Could you please quash
this ungenerous reading, and state that your intention is indeed to get
the TPV document improved, and that you will do what you can to make
that happen?
  
  
Morgaine.
  
  
  
  
  
==
  
  On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Joe Linden 
wrote:
  Hello,
all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various blogs,
irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party
Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or
informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous
for those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the
next couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than
others, but the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. 
I'd like to address questions about the intent of the policy, how we
will be using the Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the
specific concerns that have been raised by the community over the past
several weeks.  It'll be an informal Q&A session, held in voice, at
this location: 

http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29

No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you
think would benefit from open dialog around the subject.

I hope to see many of you there next week.

-- Joe

___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Joel Foner]

All of these are recordable, actually, and there is always the option of a
voice conference call that is recorded. The technology really shouldn't be a
limiting factor in having a discussion on any of these platforms if creating
a record is a primary concern. (Including Second Life with video, voice and
text chat - takes a few computers and some media production understanding,
but that's a configuration I've been running for a long time for various
projects.

IIRC Skype is limited to either 10 or 20 people on a call, but again there
are any number of conference call services using regular phones that can
either in the service record, or be recorded by a connected computer.

Joel

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Robert Martin  wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Erik Anderson
>  wrote:
> > Would Skype be an option?
> > --piping up from the peanut gallery...
> >
> 1 not every stake holder even has skype
> 2 still has the not recordable problem
> 3 would it even scale to the needed level??
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Boroondas Gupte]

On 04/09/2010 05:29 PM, Joe Miller wrote:
> Henri,
>
> Sorry you can't participate.
Joe,

Is there a compelling reason why the meeting cannot be hold in text? It
looks like that'd accommodate more developers of both, Snowgobe and
Third Party Viewers. A lot of us aren't native speakers and are much
more fluent in writing than speaking. Also, the chat history allows
everyone to catch up at their own pace while when one has missed
something said in voice, the next chance to get it is when the record is
published (if any). Some few even still have technical issues with voice
and can't use it reliably (or sometimes at all) even if they'd want to.

> Henri Beauchamp wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700, Joe Linden wrote:
>> 
>>> It'll be an informal Q&A session,
>> What's the point if problems are not actually *addessed* and if
>> it's just about trying to reassure people without any written
>> warrantee given on LL's side ?
>> 
Q&A might help to see what needs to be addressed, and how. I'm looking
at these meetings as one of the first steps, not the last.

Looking forward to some more cooperation
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Argent Stonecutter]

Holding the meeting in voice already excludes people. The last time I  
tried to enable voice for a meeting with a Linden I couldn't actually  
get it to work. The dot came up, and my computer was receiving data  
because his dot was showing activity, but I couldn't hear anything.
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Robert Martin]

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Argent Stonecutter
 wrote:
> Holding the meeting in voice already excludes people. The last time I
> tried to enable voice for a meeting with a Linden I couldn't actually
> get it to work. The dot came up, and my computer was receiving data
> because his dot was showing activity, but I couldn't hear anything.
> ___
> 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
>

this may sound a bit crazy but how many stakeholders have Google Wave accounts??

-- 
Robert L Martin
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Moriz Gupte]

 i do

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Robert Martin  wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Argent Stonecutter
>  wrote:
> > Holding the meeting in voice already excludes people. The last time I
> > tried to enable voice for a meeting with a Linden I couldn't actually
> > get it to work. The dot came up, and my computer was receiving data
> > because his dot was showing activity, but I couldn't hear anything.
> > ___
> > 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
> >
>
> this may sound a bit crazy but how many stakeholders have Google Wave
> accounts??
>
> --
> Robert L Martin
> ___
> 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
>



-- 
'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.'
Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State
University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333
More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll
___
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] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604

[Nicky Perian]

http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-604?ticket=ST-1291-Du2hp64P1FjUKtaRa4G1hKGawJEXOEadOKW-20

Could a Linden please take a look?

Thanks
Nicky



  ___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Lance Corrimal]

Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller:

> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable
> proposals to address those concerns.  Those who do not wish to
> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if they
> so choose. 

My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it is 
worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects at the 
feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in the original 
linden labs sourcecode.

My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS):

7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party Viewers. 
If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all CHANGED OR ADDED 
features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers THAT 
YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE.

7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and 
defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you develop, 
or distribute.
IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS SOFTWARE 
SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK.
Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party 
Viewers.


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

[opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag

[Nicholaz Beresford]

I won't attend the meeting, but here are a few pennies worth of 
suggestions (they would be too detailed and complex to convey in a 
meeting anyway).

First of all, I believe the current TPV is broken beyond repair.  The 
main reason is that responsibilities for users, developers and viewer 
dictionary are mixed into a mess and that many burdens/agreements which 
IMO belong in the category of preferred partners (viewer directory) are 
mushed into other sections.   I'm sure it's confusing to the users and 
it's obvious (by previous discussion here) that it's confusing for 
developers. 

Below is a way to structure the TPV which I would have found acceptable 
(fleshed out details nonwithstanding):

1) Explain what an acceptable TPV is and keep it to the core concerns:
- protection of copyright (blatant violations of permissions)
- protection of user accounts (passwords, etc.)
- protection of the service in general (viewer crashing, server load, etc.)

2) Make a section which applies to users (anyone who uses a TPV to 
connect to SL) and leverage your main goals through that:
- prohibit use of viewers which violate the concerns under 1)
- reserve the right to block access by such viewers
- reserve the right to request stopping use of those and eventually to 
ban accounts using such viewers
- instruct that there is no end user support for problems arising when 
using a TPV
- instruct users that is their responsibility to do their DD when 
choosing a TPV and that they have to deal with the outcome
- instruct users how to look for acceptable viewers (points listed below 
under 3) and recommend usage of viewers from 4)

3) Make a section for other viewer developers in general and keep 
requests/agreements to a bare minimum and easy to comply with
- explain that if developer uses his/her viewer to connect to SL, he/she 
is also  a user under 2)
- in addition request the following
 - visible disclaimer about non affiliation with LL
 - visible notice to end users that usage being governed by the TPV policy
 - visible notice about account and privacy protection
 - visible notice about support (i.e. non-support  by LL)
- make it plain and simple and refrain from requesting a card blanche 
for broad and/or future demands (the whole TOS is transferable, and even 
if a developer would trust LL's good intentions, a potential buyer of LL 
may not be seen to have those).  (See the middle part of the blog post 
from the Imprudence folks, these were mainly my concerns too: 
http://imprudenceviewer.org/2010/03/26/an-important-announcement-regarding-the-third-party-viewer-policy/)

4) Make a section for the viewer directory.  Put the more far reaching 
requests into that for those who want to be listed there in order to 
gain exposure
- naming conventions beyond the existing trademark policies
- promise of adjustment/removal of features and other nice  (for LL) to 
have cooperation
- whatever else beyond 3) may be on LL's wishlist


These are just from the top of my head and obviously I'm merely speaking 
for myself only and from the armchair in the off even.


Nicholaz.




___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers
legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of the
code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their own assets?

On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller:
> 
>> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable
>> proposals to address those concerns.  Those who do not wish to
>> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if they
>> so choose. 
> 
> My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it is 
> worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects at the 
> feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in the original 
> linden labs sourcecode.
> 
> My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS):
> 
> 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party Viewers. 
> If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all CHANGED OR ADDED 
> features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers THAT 
> YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE.
> 
> 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and 
> defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you develop, 
> or distribute.
> IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS SOFTWARE 
> SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK.
> Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party 
> Viewers.
> 
> 
> 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
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAku/gLEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXFEgCdE+zAwPPwaD8v8FpXPfHGUzRE
cksAn0oVmNG2CdhLIkX+BjAQwoIWzq8a
=ju4j
-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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Lance Corrimal]

Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Tigro Spottystripes:
> isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers
> legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of
> the code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their
> own assets?

that's exactly my point.
why would i have to be responsible for a bug in original LL code just 
because i happened to recompile the source, when LL themselves doesn't 
take any responsibility at all for the same bug?


> 
> On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> > Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller:
> >> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable
> >> proposals to address those concerns.  Those who do not wish to
> >> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if
> >> they so choose.
> > 
> > My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it
> > is worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects
> > at the feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in
> > the original linden labs sourcecode.
> > 
> > My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS):
> > 
> > 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party
> > Viewers. If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all
> > CHANGED OR ADDED features, functionality, code, and content of
> > Third-Party Viewers THAT YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE.
> > 
> > 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and
> > defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you
> > develop, or distribute.
> > IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS
> > SOFTWARE SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK.
> > Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party
> > Viewers.
> > 
> > 
> > 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
> 
> ___
> 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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TPVP

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

ah, ok, sorry, i thought you meant the parts in all caps were stuff you
changed and since i haven't memorized the exact wording of the latest
version of the TPVP i assumed you just had changed the wording somehow

On 9/4/2010 17:13, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Tigro Spottystripes:
>> isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers
>> legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of
>> the code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their
>> own assets?
> 
> that's exactly my point.
> why would i have to be responsible for a bug in original LL code just 
> because i happened to recompile the source, when LL themselves doesn't 
> take any responsibility at all for the same bug?
> 
> 
>>
>> On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote:
>>> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller:
 I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable
 proposals to address those concerns.  Those who do not wish to
 participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if
 they so choose.
>>>
>>> My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it
>>> is worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects
>>> at the feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in
>>> the original linden labs sourcecode.
>>>
>>> My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS):
>>>
>>> 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party
>>> Viewers. If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all
>>> CHANGED OR ADDED features, functionality, code, and content of
>>> Third-Party Viewers THAT YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE.
>>>
>>> 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and
>>> defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you
>>> develop, or distribute.
>>> IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS
>>> SOFTWARE SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK.
>>> Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party
>>> Viewers.
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>
>> ___
>> 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/

iEYEARECAAYFAku/j9sACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWk5QCcD6M81uC4nP8xryHGAftCvzBM
cG4Ani9pSlxcerMCr7sLHdTA7+UmpOBE
=dEHr
-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] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604

[Thickbrick Sleaford]

On Friday 09 April 2010 20:45:41 Nicky Perian wrote:
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-604?ticket=ST-1291-Du2hp64P1FjUKtaRa
> 4G1hKGawJEXOEadOKW-20
> 
> Could a Linden please take a look?
> 
> Thanks
> Nicky

The S3 urls in doc/asset_urls.txt give a 403 error ("Access Denied"):
http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/browser/projects/2009/snowglobe/trunk/doc/asset_urls.txt

This looks like it's the same problem as with build log urls from sldev-commit 
messages, which we discussed yesterday at the open source meeting. Merov said 
he will be looking into it, IIRC.

-- 
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Dirk Moerenhout]

No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give
TPV developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and not
facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything about
legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples personal
interpretation of the TPVP. I wish Joe good luck but I can imagine
this may end up being a serious waste of his time.

Dirk


On 9 April 2010 21:32, Tigro Spottystripes  wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers
> legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of the
> code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their own assets?
>
> On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote:
>> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller:
>>
>>> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable
>>> proposals to address those concerns.  Those who do not wish to
>>> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if they
>>> so choose.
>>
>> My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it is
>> worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects at the
>> feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in the original
>> linden labs sourcecode.
>>
>> My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS):
>>
>> 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party Viewers.
>> If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all CHANGED OR ADDED
>> features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers THAT
>> YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE.
>>
>> 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and
>> defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you develop,
>> or distribute.
>> IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS SOFTWARE
>> SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK.
>> Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party
>> Viewers.
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAku/gLEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXFEgCdE+zAwPPwaD8v8FpXPfHGUzRE
> cksAn0oVmNG2CdhLIkX+BjAQwoIWzq8a
> =ju4j
> -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
>
___
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] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604

[Nicky Perian]

Thickbrick,
Thanks
Nicky
Couldn't make the meeting yesterday.







From: Thickbrick Sleaford 
To: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Cc: Nicky Perian 
Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 3:53:54 PM
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604

On Friday 09 April 2010 20:45:41 Nicky Perian wrote:
> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-604?ticket=ST-1291-Du2hp64P1FjUKtaRa
> 4G1hKGawJEXOEadOKW-20
> 
> Could a Linden please take a look?
> 
> Thanks
> Nicky

The S3 urls in doc/asset_urls.txt give a 403 error ("Access Denied"):
http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/browser/projects/2009/snowglobe/trunk/doc/asset_urls.txt

This looks like it's the same problem as with build log urls from sldev-commit 
messages, which we discussed yesterday at the open source meeting. Merov said 
he will be looking into it, IIRC.

-- 
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] Login response request/processing in 1.23 vsSnowglobe / 2.0

[Kitty]

Found a likely cause...

Viewer 2.0 (and Snowglobe) isn't requesting a gzipped response from the
login server which causes the login reply to take much, much longer to
download than it does with 1.23.

Is there any chance someone forget to build libcurl with zlib?

Kitty

___
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] Stuff from my Lunch Bag

[Argent Stonecutter]

On 2010-04-09, at 14:17, Nicholaz Beresford wrote:
> I won't attend the meeting, but here are a few pennies worth of
> suggestions (they would be too detailed and complex to convey in a
> meeting anyway).

[...]

I can't attend, because scheduling, firewalls, and voice are too great  
a hurdle, but what Nicholaz wrote is pretty much what I'd want to have  
said. :)
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Lance Corrimal]

Fact is that the TPV policy, point 7, is open to interpretation.
as long as the wording is not unambiguous, people will continue to 
interpret it in different ways.
and as long as it is not rewritten, anything along the lines of "but 
we mean it like this" being said by anyone is not going to matter at 
all.


bye,
LC

Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Dirk Moerenhout:
> No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give
> TPV developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and
> not facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything
> about legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples
> personal interpretation of the TPVP. I wish Joe good luck but I
> can imagine this may end up being a serious waste of his time.
> 
> Dirk
> 
> On 9 April 2010 21:32, Tigro Spottystripes 
 wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> > 
> > isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV
> > developers legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with
> > the license of the code they use to create TPVs) instead of just
> > covering their own assets?
> > 
> > On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> >> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller:
> >>> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable
> >>> proposals to address those concerns.  Those who do not wish to
> >>> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if
> >>> they so choose.
> >> 
> >> My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it
> >> is worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects
> >> at the feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in
> >> the original linden labs sourcecode.
> >> 
> >> My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS):
> >> 
> >> 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party
> >> Viewers. If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all
> >> CHANGED OR ADDED features, functionality, code, and content of
> >> Third-Party Viewers THAT YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE.
> >> 
> >> 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and
> >> defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you
> >> develop, or distribute.
> >> IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS
> >> SOFTWARE SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK.
> >> Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any
> >> Third-Party Viewers.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 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
> > 
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> > 
> > iEYEARECAAYFAku/gLEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXFEgCdE+zAwPPwaD8v8FpXPfHGUzRE
> > cksAn0oVmNG2CdhLIkX+BjAQwoIWzq8a
> > =ju4j
> > -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
> 
> ___
> 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] Stuff from my Lunch Bag

[Maya Remblai]

I agree with this outline, it makes far more sense. However I did want 
to point out this one minor detail:

Nicholaz Beresford wrote:
> - instruct that there is no end user support for problems arising when 
> using a TPV
>   
I assume you meant problems arising *because* of using a TPV. A user has 
every right to expect help when their sim crashes, or a greifer shows up 
on mainland, regardless of what viewer they're using. Saying "end-user" 
implies that, but I'd prefer more black and white wording. It's entirely 
possible for a Linden to say "Oh, I can't help you because you're on a 
TPV" if it's not completely clear.

Maya
___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[lists . secondlife . com]

On Friday 09 April 2010 11:49:48 am Joe Miller wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   
>   
> 
> 
> No apology necessary.  I just wanted to restate that if TPV authors
> are staying away from this meeting because of some perceived "catch-22" on
> acceptance of the updated TOS, that shouldn't be an issue as they are
> governed by the TOS in effect prior to 3/31.
> 
> Tateru Nino wrote:
> 
> http-equiv="Content-Type">
> My apologies, Joe - I'll email you directly.
>   
> On 10/04/2010 1:28 AM, Joe Miller wrote:
>   
>   http-equiv="Content-Type">
> Tateru,
> 
> You can continue down this road if you wish, but the facts are the
> words in 13.3 do not become effective for Residents who had registered
> before March 31, 2010 until April 30 2010.  (See the blog post   moz-do-not-send="true"
>  href="https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/community/blog/2010/03/31/upd
> ated-second-life-terms-of-service">here with additional words to that
> effect.)  The updated TOS text was pushed to everyone so they would
> have the benefit of a full 30 days to review it before acknowledging
> formal acceptance of it by accessing the system after April 30.  
> 
> So, please, do not add to the rhetoric here by telling me about
> contract law, charges of fraud, coercion or whatever point you're
> trying to make.  The TOS in force today was the agreement accepted by
> all Residents of record prior to March 31.  After April 30, everything
> you say about section 13.3 in the new TOS is reasonably accurate.
> 
> The purpose of my brown bag is to talk about the new TPV policy and the
> concerns raised by several members of the open source community.  I
> intend to listen to listen to all reasonable proposals to address those
> concerns.  Those who do not wish to participate in that synchronous
> event can email me instead if they so choose.   Again, I'm
> looking forward to a productive exchange of specific ideas to address
> specific shared concerns, whether at these meetings or via some other
> channel. 
> If you have nothing to offer, there is no reason to come.
> 
> -- Joe
> 
> 
> Tateru Nino wrote:
> 
> http-equiv="Content-Type">
> That clear statement is inadmissible by the terms of the TOS §13.3,
> I'm afraid, which disclaims such as not being a valid part of the
> agreement. No part of the agreement that is made admissible by §13.3
> suggests or implies any commencement date other than immediately.
>   
> Nor does it permit any explanation, FAQ, supplement, or discussion to
> be considered relevant (except as provided, which none have been).
> Boilerplate it may be, but it is binding boilerplate. It could say that
> "This agreement grants you a lifetime supply of banana custard", but
> that's not actually in there. It would be an assurance that is
> disclaimed within the agreement. §10.3 absolves the Lab and its
> representatives of charges of fraud if they say something about the
> agreements that aren't strictly speaking true, in order to obtain
> agreement.
>   
> As a general rule for contracts and agreements (leaving aside the TPVP,
> the TOS, and Linden Lab for a moment), it's widely considered remiss to
> act based on inadmissible representations or explanations of a contract
> from the other party to the actual agreement. That's the sort
> of thing lawyers warn you not to do.
>   
>   
> On 9/04/2010 3:32 PM, Joe Linden wrote:
> cite="mid:i2m6b9495c41004082232mc2320c1by1c03619be336f...@mail.gmail.com"
>  type="cite">Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly
> states it becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to
> use the service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain
> the TPV provisions.  If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement,
> and hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting
> isn't for you.
> 
> -- joe
> 
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy
> Lane <  href="mailto:boy.l...@yahoo.com";>boy.l...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>   style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
> 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Thanks Joe.
>   
> Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting
> ToS/TPV in the first place.
>   
>   
> style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
> 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">- Original
> Message - Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700
> From: Joe Linden <  href="mailto:j...@lindenlab.com";
> target="_blank">j...@lindenlab.com> Subject: [opensource-dev]
> Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)
> To: OpenSource-Dev <  href="mailto:opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com";
> target="_blank">opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com>
> Message-ID:
> <  href="mailto:v2k6b9495c41004081324ibd5ec762zb8d098a09c7f0...@mail.gmail.co
> m"
> target="_blank">v2k6b9495c41004081324ibd5ec762zb8d098a09c7f0...@mail.gmail
> .com> Content-Type: text/plai

Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13)

[Jay Reynolds Freeman]

CeeJay Tigerpaw squeaks up:

I think there is rather a meta issue here which should be articulated again 
clearly, before the meeting, that has to do with the interaction between 
substantial established businesses and the open-source/third-party-developer 
community.   Let me see if I can describe it.

It is common for substantial established businesses -- such as Linden 
Laboratories -- to use legal agreements of various kinds to attempt to protect 
themselves from one another:  When a lot of businesses do that, the result 
sometimes looks rather like threat display among elephants; everybody spreads 
out their ears and wiggles them in an intimidating manner, and if everybody is 
sufficiently intimidated there probably won't be any actual fighting.  Avoiding 
fighting is all to the good -- after all, that is what threat displays are for. 
 Lawyers are part of a grand tradition of intimidation among animals.

Unfortunately, there is a problem when using the same tactic with the 
open-source/third-party-developer community:  Most of the individual members of 
that community surely do not retain lawyers to assist in development and 
distribution of code.  To that extent, we have very small ears, and we are 
easily intimidated.  We are mice, and when elephants wiggle their ears, 
sensible mice run away and hide.  Evolution exerts great pressure for mice to 
be very sensible.

Therefore, *if* a substantial established business should happen to make a 
business decision, to the effect that open-source/third-party developers are 
valuable resources, *then* it follows that said business should make efforts 
not to scare off the mice.  In particular, any legal agreements which that 
business expects open-source/third-party developers to agree with, should not 
only (1) protect those developers, but also (2) make clear just what protection 
is afforded, in language that is both (a) legally binding and (b) easily 
understandable without the aid of a lawyer (since developers probably do not 
retain lawyers).

I am not a lawyer and do not play one on the Internet, but I believe I 
understand that goals (2a) and (2b) above may be difficult to achieve at the 
same time; yet if they are not achieved then the mice will all run away and the 
business will lose valuable resources:  The business's lawyers will 
inadvertently have acted contrary to the business's own interests.

I believe the essence of the problem here is that depending on just what LL 
actually thinks of the open-source/third-party-developer community, we may have 
an instance of this issue; if so, LL needs to think carefully how to make its 
legal position best further its business interests.

Now excuse me while I scamper off; I think I have a piece of cheese in my 
mousehole ...

CeeJay Tigerpaw
-
jay_reynolds_free...@mac.com
http://web.mac.com/jay_reynolds_freeman (personal web site)

___
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] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV

[Frans]

That's odd. But you can browse the list here.
https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/2010-April/thread.html

Scroll
to the bottom.

-- 
Jeroen Frans
Virtual World Technology Specialist.
VesuviusGroup.com
SL: Frans Charming
___
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] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40

[Daniel]

Dirk Moerenhout wrote:

No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give TPV 
developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and not 
facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything about 
legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples personal 
interpretation of the TPVP.

--

If it is badly enough written that people get that idea from reading it, 
it should be made clearer.  I have read it, and the following sections 
can plausibly be read as imposing liability on a developer:

" If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all features, 
functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers that you develop 
or distribute."
" You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any Third-Party Viewers 
that you use, develop, or distribute"

If the first one was re-written to say "you are responsible for all NEW 
features etc that you ADDED to make a Third-Party Viewer, etc" it would 
be more clear.
The second one should simply drop "develop or distribute".  The GNU GPL 
license on LL own page states "6. ...You may not impose any further
restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." 
(in this case, "you" being Linden Research), and further includes the No 
Warranty
paragraphs 11 and 12.  Therefore any attempt to impose responsibility, 
risks, expenses, etc on a developer appear to conflict with the GPL.
___
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] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40

[Armin Weatherwax]

Daniel wrote:
> No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give
> TPV developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and
> not facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything
> about legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples personal
> interpretation of the TPVP.

this is, in fact, also an  interpretation and not facts. Not favouring 
one of those  interpretations over the other, just being descriptive.

Armin
___
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] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40

[Dirk Moerenhout]

> If the first one was re-written to say "you are responsible for all NEW
> features etc that you ADDED to make a Third-Party Viewer, etc" it would
> be more clear.

That will create a false sense of safety. When LL removes code from
the source tree for legal reasons you'd make a TPV developer believe
that he's not liable for that code if he keeps on distributing it (as
you just made him believe he's only responsible for what
developed/added himself). Yet when he has been informed that the code
can not be legally distributed willful continued distribution is an
issue and may see him ending up in court. Off course he should know
this if he reads and understands the GPL. The GPL clearly demonstrates
responsibility for distribution in section 7.

> The second one should simply drop "develop or distribute".  The GNU GPL
> license on LL own page states "6. ...You may not impose any further
> restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein."
> (in this case, "you" being Linden Research), and further includes the No
> Warranty
> paragraphs 11 and 12.  Therefore any attempt to impose responsibility,
> risks, expenses, etc on a developer appear to conflict with the GPL.

No it should not. For starters you do not quote it in full. It
actually says "You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any
Third-Party Viewers that you use, develop, or distribute. Linden Lab
shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party Viewers."
Punctuation is used for readability but doesn't remove the second
sentence from the context. This is LL waving responsibility more than
it is about who it transfers to. If you consider section 11 and 12 of
the GPL this is a reiteration of "THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY
AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE
DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR
CORRECTION.". Note that LL did not restrict you from passing the risks
on to the users of your TPV (they actually imply it transfers to them
already).

Granted. In the TPVP, like most similar legal documents, they have
reiterated quite a few points that are covered already for example by
the GPL or the TOS. But as I stated before I still need to see the
first sensible example of how this affects somebody beyond what they
should expect regardless of the TPVP.

Dirk
___
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