[opensource-dev] Fwd: I'm back baby!
Got a "user not found" on the old list, shows how long i've been gone -- Forwarded message ------ From: Gareth Nelson Date: Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 6:06 PM Subject: I'm back baby! To: Second Life Developer Mailing List Kind of Been away from SL for quite a long time, is there a 64-bit binary build for linux lieing around somewhere? --- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Fwd: I'm back baby!
Thanks a lot :) On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Sat, 27 Oct 2012 18:11:45 +0100 > Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> Been away from SL for quite a long time, is there a 64-bit binary >> build for linux lieing around somewhere? > > https://github.com/downloads/singularity-viewer/SingularityViewer/Singularity-x86_64-1.7.2.2956.tar.bz2 > > is linux 64bit. > > -- > 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 ___ 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] Third party viewer policy
I have a strong urge to produce a viewer which violates this policy, relying solely on the rights granted by the existing GPL. I will never use this viewer myself to login to SL, and thus reject any of these terms. Any developers who object to this policy should follow suit. A few questions: If I distribute a viewer which violates this policy but refuses to login to any LL-owned grids, and one of my users modifies it to do so, would you attempt to hold me liable? If I was to close all my SL accounts today (probably won't actually, but it's a thought experiment) and distribute a viewer that breaks this policy, would you attempt to hold me liable? I say "attempt", because I see no way LL could do so without the TOS binding me (the only possible way this policy could be enforced - and even then some lawyer type may be able to make a case against it). Should be fine though, the policy states at the top that it essentially only matters for people using the viewer to connect. My question is if I develop a policy-breaking viewer for use on other grids and simply neglect to add an if(grid=='agni') refuse_connection() statement, will you be holding my users liable or me? Assuming I never use it myself to connect to an LL-owned grid On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > is the policy just a set of requisites for a client to be included in > the list LL will have on their site or to be allowed to connect to Agni > at all? > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkuEvRgACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmU1iwCfdWe7xzvnegSrZm1ApcPiR13C > 2CIAn2ho4G5QXImDU5R8aiYqp5g7U9vE > =7GmR > -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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy
Legally speaking, it's difficult to see how they could make you bound by it - only way I can see is with the TOS So. someone closes their SL account and makes a noncompliant viewer - what happens? On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Gigs wrote: > Lawson English wrote: >> For a real life use case, the realxtend developers are currently >> debating whether or not it is worth their while to continue to add more >> support to SL rather than just go with OpenSim-only. > > Unless Linden Lab is willing to provide an already-banned channel ID for > third party developers to use to prevent their software from connecting > to Second Life, it's going to be very hard to not be subject to this > "agreement". > > Even then they user could change the channel and potentially make the > developer liable under this agreement. > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] So what happens if....
And now we get griefers spoofing channels specifically to get viewers banned.. On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Imaze Rhiano wrote: > >> Now - one of following scenarios would happen - what I should do - and >> what would be LL's reaction... > > Long story short, it seems clear that as soon as somebody is suspected > of using a ToS-violating viewer, the channel that viewer is running > under will get blocked, and it will fall to the registered owner of > the channel (if any) to figure out what happened and who did it in > order to get their channel restored. Without being able to log on to > Second Life, since your accounts will be suspended. > > Meanwhile, griefers and content copiers will morph automatically to > unblocked channels. Sure, spoofing channels a ToS violation, but so is > greifing and content copying. Just as much a feel-good cop-out as > relying on a handgun ban to stop armed robbery. > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy
There's a warranty disclaimer in the GPL, while that doesn't protect developers from liability for active malice on their part, it does protect them from any harm caused by bugs. Personally, I wouldn't dream of releasing any code if I was required to warrant it against all possible damages, as the damages with freely distributable software can be effectively infinite. Of course, nothing stops anyone who wants it from contracting with a developer for a support contract or warranty, and the warranty disclaimer doesn't allow people to GPL a virus and disclaim criminal liability. For the record, anyone who wants to buy a support contract for any code I might release should feel free to contact me so we can talk. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 1:55 AM, Darmath wrote: > Marine Kelley wrote: >> Besides I don't see why on Earth any RL info should be disclosed to >> everyone in the open, it is nobody's business except LL's who is >> making and publishing third party viewers to connect to their grid. To >> me the average developer of a third party viewer should be allowed to >> remain anonymous, since the real griefers are never going to publish >> their data anyway. And since a viewer developer cannot be held >> responsible for the use of their viewer (despite what the policy >> implies), this is a moot point. > I disagree. It's actually the business of the user of the client who the > relevant developer is. However that said I agree a developer should be > able to remain anonymous should they choose. The reality is it's in the > users hands whether he, she or it, will use a client from an unknown > source or not. If they choose that they don't want to run a program on > their computer from an unknown source then that is a choice for them to > make. > > Additionally I seem to be reading a lot seeking to suggest that > developers in open source projects cannot be held liable with respect to > the damage that the software developed may do to a user of that > software. Whilst you can't judge each and every case in a vacuum I > believe that notion is somewhat misguided. In my opinion the only thing > that protects such persons from actually being sued is their ability to > remain anonymous. After all it is kind of hard to sue people that are > hiding in the shadows ;-). That doesn't mean that unknown individuals > aren't actually liable. Liability and the practical ability to sue > people are two different things. > > Kind regards > > Darren > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy
I wonder what the official LL response would be if you gave a randomly generated MAC in these situations, or some kind of hash from other aspects of the hardware -any lindens wish to comment? The other thing of course is defining what "this computer" means for those of us who like to fiddle with our hardware. Personally i'm often swapping components out of my desktop including harddrives and ethernet cards. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Henri Beauchamp wrote: > On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 05:49:01 -0600, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > >> On 2010-02-23, at 15:43, Robin Cornelius wrote: >> > Also any one using mono with libomv has an issue as that cannot get >> > the adaptor mac address and passes a NULL mac address, in the past LL >> > have allowed a null mac address as they knew of this problem, clearly >> > now though thats a breach of 2c part i. >> >> Not to mention that any device using SLIP or PPP, (and probably other >> point-to-point protocols that don't require an address at the physical >> layer) may not have a MAC address or ANY analogous hardware layer >> address (even a PSTN). TCP/IP does not imply Ethernet. >> >> Admittedly this is not likely to be a common scenario, but the whole >> idea that a MAC address is a unique identifier for a device is based >> on a deep-seated confusion about the network stack. > > And today, LL seems to have pulled the plug off already for clients not > prociding the MAC address on connection. Here is a copy of the ticket I > just opened (I propose that everyone on this list using a text client > opens the same kind of ticket): > > Summary: I cannot login any more using Mono-based, text only clients > > Details: > > Today I cannot connect any more when using text only "viewers" (clients) > which are written in C# (Mono), such as OMV-light and Radegast. > > I get the following error: > "Second Life cannot be accessed from this computer." > but I can still connect from the same computer using either an official > or full fledged third parties viewer. > > I therefore deduce, that you just disallowed the connection for clients > not transmitting the MAC address of the Ethernet card the viewers are > connected through (Mono/C# won't allow to retrieve such info). > While LL has the right to change their policy about which client can > connect or not to their service, I think it would be only normal to let > a reasonable amount of time for the developers of third parties > viewers/clients to adapt their software and make it compliant before such > a policy is enforced. > > Seeing how the TPV policy was published only a couple of days ago, I don't > see how OMV-light and Radegast developers could adapt fast enough ! > > Please note also that not all network interfaces got a MAC address (for > example, an USB ADSL MODEM could or could not have such an address, > depending entirely on its driver, and PPP links via MODEMs don't have a > MAC address either), so basically, you are denying connection to SL to > any resident not using a Ethernet card to connect to Internet !... > This is pretty unreasonable too... > > Please, allow again the connection via text only clients (the only way to > stay in contact all day long with your customers without having to run a > viewer which eats up half of your memory and CPU power !). > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy
I can confirm that my installation of libomv's TestClient still connects fine - version 0.6.3 On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > I wonder what the official LL response would be if you gave a randomly > generated MAC in these situations, or some kind of hash from other > aspects of the hardware -any lindens wish to comment? > > The other thing of course is defining what "this computer" means for > those of us who like to fiddle with our hardware. Personally i'm often > swapping components out of my desktop including harddrives and > ethernet cards. > > On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Henri Beauchamp wrote: >> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 05:49:01 -0600, Argent Stonecutter wrote: >> >>> On 2010-02-23, at 15:43, Robin Cornelius wrote: >>> > Also any one using mono with libomv has an issue as that cannot get >>> > the adaptor mac address and passes a NULL mac address, in the past LL >>> > have allowed a null mac address as they knew of this problem, clearly >>> > now though thats a breach of 2c part i. >>> >>> Not to mention that any device using SLIP or PPP, (and probably other >>> point-to-point protocols that don't require an address at the physical >>> layer) may not have a MAC address or ANY analogous hardware layer >>> address (even a PSTN). TCP/IP does not imply Ethernet. >>> >>> Admittedly this is not likely to be a common scenario, but the whole >>> idea that a MAC address is a unique identifier for a device is based >>> on a deep-seated confusion about the network stack. >> >> And today, LL seems to have pulled the plug off already for clients not >> prociding the MAC address on connection. Here is a copy of the ticket I >> just opened (I propose that everyone on this list using a text client >> opens the same kind of ticket): >> >> Summary: I cannot login any more using Mono-based, text only clients >> >> Details: >> >> Today I cannot connect any more when using text only "viewers" (clients) >> which are written in C# (Mono), such as OMV-light and Radegast. >> >> I get the following error: >> "Second Life cannot be accessed from this computer." >> but I can still connect from the same computer using either an official >> or full fledged third parties viewer. >> >> I therefore deduce, that you just disallowed the connection for clients >> not transmitting the MAC address of the Ethernet card the viewers are >> connected through (Mono/C# won't allow to retrieve such info). >> While LL has the right to change their policy about which client can >> connect or not to their service, I think it would be only normal to let >> a reasonable amount of time for the developers of third parties >> viewers/clients to adapt their software and make it compliant before such >> a policy is enforced. >> >> Seeing how the TPV policy was published only a couple of days ago, I don't >> see how OMV-light and Radegast developers could adapt fast enough ! >> >> Please note also that not all network interfaces got a MAC address (for >> example, an USB ADSL MODEM could or could not have such an address, >> depending entirely on its driver, and PPP links via MODEMs don't have a >> MAC address either), so basically, you are denying connection to SL to >> any resident not using a Ethernet card to connect to Internet !... >> This is pretty unreasonable too... >> >> Please, allow again the connection via text only clients (the only way to >> stay in contact all day long with your customers without having to run a >> viewer which eats up half of your memory and CPU power !). >> ___ >> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >> privileges >> > > > > -- > “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy
Let's try an experiment Proxying the login request and dropping the request results in: error executing RPC 'login_to_simulator' Died at /local/www/login.agni.lindenlab.com/cgi-bin/login.cgi line 1802 Looks like the login script can't handle not having a mac address On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Henri Beauchamp wrote: > On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 14:29:25 +, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> I can confirm that my installation of libomv's TestClient still >> connects fine - version 0.6.3 > > In fact, I just tried and yes, it's working again... In the mean > time i also got a reply from the support, here it is, just for > you to see how much LL cares about such matters: > > "Hello Henri, > > Thank you for contacting us regarding your issue. > > I am sorry but we can only offer support on issues with the official > SL viewer. > > We do not support any thrd party viewer as we are not responsible > for their software. > > If you experience the issue with the official viewer then we will > assist to the best of our ability. > > Please feel free to contact us again in the future if you have any > further problems/queries. > > Kind Regards," > > So, they apparently allowed again the connections but are denying any > support, even though I pointed out in my ticket how this could affect > their own viewer... Weird ! > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
A few queries I have: Sometimes I code random small scripts to do quick inworld tasks - do I have to have 100% compliance for these scripts? I have a bot which comes in 2 parts - SL interface and AI engine, the SL interface being a simple protocol handler - how does the policy affect my AI engine if at all? If only the SL interface need be compliant, isn't this a major loophole in that the AI engine could use it to perform various malicious deeds? If I code a viewer which is designed for use with other grids, does not comply with the policy and is not intended for use on SL, but one of my users connects to SL with it anyway , how does that reflect on me? In general, I have to agree with those who say that this will only burden legit developers - griefers will just ignore the policy and spoof the official viewer On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Marine Kelley wrote: > I don't know much about it, but what about the data that most of us already > entered when signing up to SL ? LL should have these data stored somewhere, > why do we have to enter them all again ? If the data to be entered to sign > in to the viewer directory is not linked to it, what gives LL the certainty > that they are accurate, where are they stored, and what is the privacy > policy ? The TPV says "may be published", but there is no way to be sure... > And moreso, the FAQ says that listing in the directory might become > mandatory. With such vague terms it is impossible to comply to these > requirements, which are way too intrusive for a hobbyist. > > Sorry about this, it seems that publishing a Frequently Asked Questions page > brings even more questions ! It is always like this. lol. > > > On 27 February 2010 10:32, Henri Beauchamp wrote: >> >> On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:14:52 -0600, Soft Linden wrote: >> >> > There's now a FAQ for the Linden Lab Policy on Third Party Viewers: >> > http://bit.ly/caedse >> >> Very good job, Soft, thank you ! :-) >> >> However, there are a couple of points that I think should be addressed >> or precised in this FAQ: >> >> 1. The trademarking rules as presented in the TPV are in contradiction >> with Linden Lab's own trademark policy. In particular: >> 5.b.i You must not have a Third-Party Viewer name that is >> “ Life” where “” is a term or series >> of terms. >> Is in contracdiction with: >> http://secondlife.com/corporate/brand/trademark/unauthorized.php >> in which we see that "[anything] Life" is not forbidden as long >> as [anything] does not contain "Second". >> I would call such a trademarking a "domain trademarking" (like >> a domain name for an Internet site address"), but I doubt very much >> such a rule would be legal, even in USA... >> >> 2. in the FAQ, to the question "I do not want a publicly available >> listing in the Viewer Directory to disclose my own name or contact >> information. Is it possible for the public listing page to show >> just the brand name of my third-party viewer?", the answer states >> that name and contact info must be provided to Linden Lab, however >> the type of "contact information" is not precised. An email from >> an ISP account (not an anonymous Yahoo/Hotmail/Google/whatnot >> account, of course) *is* a contact information that is sufficient >> to legally identify the developper in case of any action against >> them. But right now, the full snail mail address is required, >> which is in violation with some international laws protecting user >> privacy (notably the French law "Informatique et Liberté"). >> >> I hope to see these two points addressed. >> >> Many thanks in advance ! >> >> Henri. >> ___ >> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >> privileges > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Soft Linden wrote: > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Gareth Nelson > wrote: >> A few queries I have: >> >> Sometimes I code random small scripts to do quick inworld tasks - do I >> have to have 100% compliance for these scripts? >> I have a bot which comes in 2 parts - SL interface and AI engine, the >> SL interface being a simple protocol handler - how does the policy >> affect my AI engine if at all? If only the SL interface need be >> compliant, isn't this a major loophole in that the AI engine could use >> it to perform various malicious deeds? > > If the scripted bit was causing the viewer to do something in > violation of SL terms, I'm pretty sure it (and the author) would be > handled as with any other non ToS-compliant content. If the viewer has > legitimate use, it shouldn't be affected. > > >> If I code a viewer which is designed for use with other grids, does >> not comply with the policy and is not intended for use on SL, but one >> of my users connects to SL with it anyway , how does that reflect on >> me? > > The viewer wouldn't be eligible for inclusion in the Viewer Directory, > and only the people connecting with that viewer would be in violation. > Does this imply that using a viewer not in the directory is a liability for users? -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
For myself, I'd happily give my real name and an email address - but not a postal address for public access. Anyone who would consider doing that is lucky to never have had a stalker (trust me, it's not pleasant). If the reason for requiring this information is "in case we need to sue you" then it's in no developer's interests to give it. An email address is fine for contact info, and a real name is unneeded, but shouldn't be a massive concern - personally I only use a secret alias online if i'm trying to hide. People have mentioned "kinky stuff" in SL as being a reason to hide - well, i'm perfectly happy to show everyone videos and screenshots of myself in a sex club just to prove i'm serious about "nothing to hide". Hopefully that means you can also trust me not to put nasty trojans in my code. Of course whether you'll ever use my code is dependent on contacting me directly these days - no way am I signing the contributor agreement to get patches into the main viewer. On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Am Sonntag 28 Februar 2010 schrieb Henri Beauchamp: > >> > I know the identity requirement will remain, and I expect there >> > will be a form that's more explicit about what information is >> > required, if there isn't already. >> >> For now, email and full snail mail address are required in addition >> to the real name. >> >> > If you know of any law that makes it illegal to require email as >> > a condition of being listed in an optional directory, it would be >> > helpful to tell me where to find it so I can pass it on to legal. >> >> Real name and (ISP hosted) email address are both OK and adequate >> (they provide both a mean of communication and a mean of >> identification, the latter in the case a legal action would be >> taken by Linden Lab), the only thing which is not OK as the form >> is right now (beside the mention that private info may be >> published) is the snail mail address requirement (unneeded at all, >> thus it shall not be a required info). > > > Right now I'm working on porting henri's cool patches to snowglobe. > As it stands now, I'm not going to put it into the viewer directory, > unless the requirements for any other data than my SL name and a > valid, working email address are taken down. Real name is only > acceptable if not publicly shown anywhere. > > bye, > LC > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
The policy still refers to "distribution" in general, not just those
viewers in the directory.
So, everyone on this list is about to violate it, sorry. This might
seem incredibly silly but shows how much you can break this policy
without having the viewer do anything other than merely connect.
# Remember, if you read this in a mailing list post, whomever owns the
listserver has distributed it
# You also just distributed it possibly by downloading the email
from common.libsl import *
client = SecondLife()
print 'You probably shouldn\'t actually login, but if you do the
author disclaims any and all liability'
print 'Here\'s some content that is unsuitable for a PG audience: fuck
shit cock cunt wanker'
print 'Remember, before you login, you have not broken the TPV policy
and the above profanity is just fine'
print 'By the way, this runtime environment has not got a clue on your
MAC address'
print 'Here\'s some encouragement to infringe upon "intellectual
property": go and infringe on intellectual property, go on, do it'
print 'Simplest method - view a texture, take a screenshot, download,
and reupload - that is "instruction"'
print 'I absolutely do NOT represent that this in full compliance with
the terms of the GPL, it is in fact under a simpler license as shown
below'
print 'I fully encourage women to walk around in public with uncovered
hair, in violation of muslim law, and I also encourage eating pork and
dancing on sundays - this is in v
iolation of section 7ci of the TPV policy'
print 'In the US, I believe distributing this is still a DMCA
violation, so by having this code you\'re exposed to legal liability:
09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 8
8 c0'
print """
GENERAL MOCKERY LICENSE V0.1
You are hereby permitted to use and distribute this software in order
to mock people. Such permission includes redistribution
and modification in source or binary form with exception of any
modifications requested by linden lab under section 8d of their third
party viewer policy. Should such modifications be requested, you are
compelled to implement a feature that would violate Second Life Terms
Of Service should it be used or lose your license to redistribute this
software.
The author disclaims any and all liability for any uses or
distribution of this software in whatever fashion.
Any modified versions of this software must carry a notice stating
that it has been modified.
"""
first = raw_input('First Name:').strip('\n')
last = raw_input('Last Name:').strip('\n')
pwd = raw_input('Password:').strip('\n')
print 'Your IP address, the fact you ran this viewer and your login
details are about to be sent to linden lab - and typing in your login
details wasn\'t in itself giving cons
ent, was it?'
print 'Being serious - if you really do want to violate the policy,
hit enter now, otherwise close this program'
raw_input('Hit enter to break the policy...')
client.Network.Login(first,last,pwd,'Violated Life','TPV policy
infringing edition')
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Morgaine
wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden wrote:
>>
>> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
>> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
>> it in a wide variety of ways.
>
> Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is
> "promotion" of Third Party Viewers. Since it's just promotion, TPV
> developers are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need
> promotion, and of course you will never make promotion mandatory.
>
> It's great that you clarified this, because people were mistakenly thinking
> that instead of promotion, what you were trying to do is to regulate 3rd
> party viewers and prevent them from gaining features that push the envelope
> and make your own viewers look poor in comparison.
>
> It's always useful when such misapprehensions are laid to rest.
>
> Have a good day, and many thanks! :-)
>
>
> Morgaine.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden wrote:
>>
>> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
>> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
>> it in a wide variety of ways. Since we'll be pointing to it often, it's a
>> great way for the largest possible audience of Residents to learn about
>> viewer alternatives that have been submitted by developers willing to
>> certify that the viewer complies with the policy for all 3rd party viewers
>> that connect to SL.
>>
>> And we haven't release Viewer 2.0 yet. It's in open beta now to take
>> constructive feedback from (new and longtime) Residents. If it also
>> stimulates great alternative viewers that comply with the policy, then we've
>> accomplished several of our goals.
>>
>> -- joe
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Mike Monkowski
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> So you've created this Third Party Viewer Direc
Re: [opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy
This is untested by the way, seriously - probably won't run in its
current state, and i'd advise people not to get it running
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote:
> The policy still refers to "distribution" in general, not just those
> viewers in the directory.
>
> So, everyone on this list is about to violate it, sorry. This might
> seem incredibly silly but shows how much you can break this policy
> without having the viewer do anything other than merely connect.
>
> # Remember, if you read this in a mailing list post, whomever owns the
> listserver has distributed it
> # You also just distributed it possibly by downloading the email
>
> from common.libsl import *
>
> client = SecondLife()
> print 'You probably shouldn\'t actually login, but if you do the
> author disclaims any and all liability'
> print 'Here\'s some content that is unsuitable for a PG audience: fuck
> shit cock cunt wanker'
> print 'Remember, before you login, you have not broken the TPV policy
> and the above profanity is just fine'
> print 'By the way, this runtime environment has not got a clue on your
> MAC address'
> print 'Here\'s some encouragement to infringe upon "intellectual
> property": go and infringe on intellectual property, go on, do it'
> print 'Simplest method - view a texture, take a screenshot, download,
> and reupload - that is "instruction"'
> print 'I absolutely do NOT represent that this in full compliance with
> the terms of the GPL, it is in fact under a simpler license as shown
> below'
> print 'I fully encourage women to walk around in public with uncovered
> hair, in violation of muslim law, and I also encourage eating pork and
> dancing on sundays - this is in v
> iolation of section 7ci of the TPV policy'
> print 'In the US, I believe distributing this is still a DMCA
> violation, so by having this code you\'re exposed to legal liability:
> 09 f9 11 02 9d 74 e3 5b d8 41 56 c5 63 56 8
> 8 c0'
> print """
>
> GENERAL MOCKERY LICENSE V0.1
> You are hereby permitted to use and distribute this software in order
> to mock people. Such permission includes redistribution
> and modification in source or binary form with exception of any
> modifications requested by linden lab under section 8d of their third
> party viewer policy. Should such modifications be requested, you are
> compelled to implement a feature that would violate Second Life Terms
> Of Service should it be used or lose your license to redistribute this
> software.
>
> The author disclaims any and all liability for any uses or
> distribution of this software in whatever fashion.
>
> Any modified versions of this software must carry a notice stating
> that it has been modified.
> """
> first = raw_input('First Name:').strip('\n')
> last = raw_input('Last Name:').strip('\n')
> pwd = raw_input('Password:').strip('\n')
>
> print 'Your IP address, the fact you ran this viewer and your login
> details are about to be sent to linden lab - and typing in your login
> details wasn\'t in itself giving cons
> ent, was it?'
>
> print 'Being serious - if you really do want to violate the policy,
> hit enter now, otherwise close this program'
>
> raw_input('Hit enter to break the policy...')
> client.Network.Login(first,last,pwd,'Violated Life','TPV policy
> infringing edition')
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:44 AM, Morgaine
> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Joe Linden wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, Mike, we created the Third Party Viewer Directory to promote a range
>>> of viewers that allow Residents to experience Second Life and everything in
>>> it in a wide variety of ways.
>>
>> Joe, thanks for clarifying that what you are doing with the Directory is
>> "promotion" of Third Party Viewers. Since it's just promotion, TPV
>> developers are free to ignore it when they excel on features and don't need
>> promotion, and of course you will never make promotion mandatory.
>>
>> It's great that you clarified this, because people were mistakenly thinking
>> that instead of promotion, what you were trying to do is to regulate 3rd
>> party viewers and prevent them from gaining features that push the envelope
>> and make your own viewers look poor in comparison.
>>
>> It's always useful when such misapprehensions are laid to rest.
>>
>> Have a good day, and many
[opensource-dev] Fwd: Fwd: Third party viewer policy - RMS's response
-- Forwarded message -- From: Richard Stallman Date: Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 3:02 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy To: Gareth Nelson Thought this might be of interest to yourself and the FSF in general, they're essentially claiming "if your viewer is capable of talking to our servers, then it's bound by this long list of conditions" IANAL, but I don't think they have any legal basis to impose any conditions on a program merely because it is capable of talking to their site. If its developers have no accounts on Second Life, they have not agreed to its terms of service. It would be interesting to see what a lawyer says about this. They talk about publishing a list of third-party viewers, and they could certainly insist on these conditions for listing a viewer in that list. Maybe that is all they are claiming to do. -- Forwarded message -- From: Richard Stallman Date: Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:07 PM Subject: Re: Fwd: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy To: Gareth Nelson It is ok to forward my message. They are now saying that they'll only hold developers responsible if a viewer is designed to connect to their servers It's nice of them to recognize that they can't make these demands about general-purpose programs. But their claim to have the power to impose any conditions on designing a program to talk to their server remains controversial. I suggest asking a lawyer about it. ___ 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] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
Read sections 4b,7a, 7c, 8c and 8d for a start - references to distributing viewers and how you must not do so under certain circumstances. All of these restrictions contradict the rights granted by the GPL. LL could argue that any releases after this policy constitute a release under a new license of "GPL+TPV modifications", but they can not retract the license of the earlier releases. For that reason, it would be wise not to make use of any official LL source in a viewer which may violate this policy. On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:23:33 -0600 > Argent Stonecutter wrote: > >> On 2010-03-09, at 14:12, Tayra Dagostino wrote: >> > I think yoiu've misreaded the TPV policy, no GPL violation, viewer >> > code is GPL, you can take a copy from svn, manipulate it, patch or >> > mood, rename it, all GPL let u do with it (and consequential charges >> > for a developer who work on a GPL code) >> > >> > TPV is like an addendum to TOS, if you want use Linden Lab grids you >> > should follow some rules... this is server side, no viewer code >> > involved... the Linden services aren't GPL... >> >> Doesn't matter. LL can't impose a restriction like "you have to stop >> distributing your ripper viewer" through any contract, license, or >> policy if they're going to use the GPL for the viewer. > > uhm... i read 'you cannot connect your modded viewer to our grid if > contain "word1" or "word2 or "etc."' > > all tpv is related to interconnectivity between Linden grid to other > viewers. and viewer complying will be listed, i don't see any > terroristic action against source code license... > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
Many of the requirements are in fact unreasonable unless they are rephrased to apply ONLY when connecting to LL's servers On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > > On 2010-03-09, at 14:38, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > >> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:23:33 -0600 >> Argent Stonecutter wrote: >> >>> On 2010-03-09, at 14:12, Tayra Dagostino wrote: I think yoiu've misreaded the TPV policy, no GPL violation, viewer code is GPL, you can take a copy from svn, manipulate it, patch or mood, rename it, all GPL let u do with it (and consequential charges for a developer who work on a GPL code) TPV is like an addendum to TOS, if you want use Linden Lab grids you should follow some rules... this is server side, no viewer code involved... the Linden services aren't GPL... >>> >>> Doesn't matter. LL can't impose a restriction like "you have to stop >>> distributing your ripper viewer" through any contract, license, or >>> policy if they're going to use the GPL for the viewer. >> >> uhm... i read 'you cannot connect your modded viewer to our grid if >> contain "word1" or "word2 or "etc."' > > To promote a positive and predictable experience for all Residents of > Second Life, we require users of Third-Party Viewers ***and those who > develop or distribute them*** (“Developers”) to comply with this > Policy and the Second Life Terms of Service. > > ***If you are a Developer who distributes Third-Party Viewers to > others***, you must also provide the following disclosures and > functionality > > You acknowledge and agree that we may require you to stop using ***or > distributing*** a Third-Party Viewer for accessing Second Life > > etc etc etc etc etc etc... > > I'm not arguing that these are not, perhaps, reasonable requirements. > > I am simply pointing out that they are NOT compatible 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
Don't new features get into snowglobe faster too? Thus more potential for bugs On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Morgaine wrote: > At any given point in time, one viewer is more stable than another, and at > another point in time, it's the other way around. This is perfectly normal, > and blanket statements about superior stability make no sense ... especially > when they share common code! :-) > > If anything, Snowglobe could well be more stable over time, since any bugs > probably won't last long because they tend to get patched rapidly and a new > tagged version released. In contrast the official LL viewer gets released > infrequently. > > One shouldn't read too much into PR or advocacy statements anyway. > > > Morgaine. > > > > > > = > > On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 11:11 PM, Thomas Grimshaw > wrote: >> >> It's the truth. Snowglobe is unstable. >> >> ~Tom >> >> Armin Weatherwax wrote: >> >> I am simply pointing out that they are NOT compatible with the GPL. >> >> >> > GPL compatible or not - the sentence "The Snowglobe Viewer [...] this >> > viewer may be somewhat less stable than the official Second Life >> > viewer"( http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/ at 2010/03/10 00:06 >> > GMT+1) is a slap into the face of anybody contributing bugfixes to the >> > secondlife codebase. >> > >> > 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 >> > >> >> ___ >> 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Standalone indra.y and indra.l
Contact Enki Hax inworld and ask him about the LSL compiler he worked on for litesim, if he's still got a copy of it then point him to this email and say he's clear to release it On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:08 PM, Brandon Husbands wrote: > Does anyone have a standalone version of the lexer and parser? > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 5:56 PM, New Hax wrote: > Soft Linden said: > > "Content theft, griefing and resource abuse have been > long-term problems." > > I've been a lurker here but are you KIDDING ME? When Linden Labs open > sourced Second Life, they were right along side us saying to > proprietary content developers YOU CANNOT PROTECT YOUR CONTENT. > > Has that changed now and Linden labs is protecting people who make > their binary blobs and think they should be protected??? > > Linden Labs says if we don't cooperate then o noes we'll get > throttled. If Linden Labs closes the source your going to have a lot > of angry coders on your hands and just to show it content "theft" and > "griefing" will skyrocket! > > Lindens should be staying with their promises, Open Source has > contributed more to Second Life than people who make shoes that they > want to keep proprietary and not share. I'll say it again you canot > protect content. Ever. DRM goes against the spirit of Open Source and > if content creators cant get with that then they should find a new > business and it shouldnt be on the INTERNET. > > I never get "griefed" in secondlife anymore. > > anyways if Linden Labs wants to fight against the Open Source > community they can TRY but they wont win. We can fork and we can make > a place where open freedoms are respected. > ___ > 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 > As much as I oppose copyright (seriously - i'm very open on this subject right down to being a member of the pirate party), I heavily disagree with the implication that being against "content theft" is any kind of attack on the open source community.. I agree it can't be protected against, but that does not mean it should be encouraged by LL either - I believe that so long as copyright law exists, LL should enforce it on their platform. But, I heavily disagree on open source contributing more to SL than content creators - what use is an empty virtual world, even one that has killer technology? Content creators are often whining at LL for not doing the mathematically impossible (preventing copying), but we should not start whining at them for not doing the legally impossible (encouraging copyright infringement on their platform). -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:28 PM, Soft Linden wrote: > We'd need to provide a way to move off of Havok while still remaining stable > with > insane physics content, No you wouldn't, if you wanted to release the server code with the aim of increasing compatibility at the protocol level, the simplest solution is to just dump all the code you can without including havok. Then let the community do the work of porting to ODE or some other engine. On SL itself, ODE may not be 100% compatible with existing content, but on other grids it should be fine. > deal with a lot of licensing issues I have a simple solution to this one: if you don't 100% own the copyright in (or have a suitable FLOSS license for) any one piece of code, don't release it - just leave a big hole marked "code replacement here" > rework the server protocol to deal with untrusted peers and survive wider > version differences, find a way to preserve the economy and creator > rights, on and on. releasing the code and opening the grid for external connections are 2 different things, though I suspect that for connecting untrusted servers there are solutions such as OGP or opensim's hypergrid - i'd even plug the litesim supergrid here if it still existed (one thing to note about VW hosting startups: don't underestimate the resources needed on your backend - got plenty of profit margin on individual regions, but was slaughtered by backend resource usage) > Even open sourcing the viewer was a huge time and > resource investment, done with the calculation that the time invested > would eventually pay off. and it did - I suspect that the real reason you don't want to release the server code is to maintain competitive advantage. That's fine, but I just wish LL would be more honest and not claim it's about licensing or other irrelevant matters. One thing to note is that opensim is rapidly becoming a real alternative to SL at least in terms of features and so the competitive advantage of having the server code secret may not last long. The danger to LL is that opensim et al will move more and more away from SL compatibility while offering more and more seductive features that draw away end users. I don't know if anyone has done it yet, but a P2P opensim (real P2P - where every client is also a server and they all sync the physics with each other) will absolutely crush LL for a lot of "social" uses. -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
736 iPhone apps on TPB to be precise - actually much lower than I would have thought, although some of the torrents are hack tools and packs of apps (one such torrent is 3.6GB and includes a few 100 separate apps). Perhaps the only platform right now that hasn't been cracked to enable piracy is the Sony PS3 due to the extensive hardware enforcement (right down to an isolated SPU inside the cell processor) - and that's coming apart as we speak. Yours truly even has been hard at work trying to get custom code to run in fear of my older fat PS3 breaking down and needing to be replaced with the slim (which lacks linux support). Oh, and when I say piracy hasn't happened on the PS3 yet, i'm only talking about retail bluray discs, lots of games from the playstation store have been downloaded without payment by various people. Something personally I object to since it does cost Sony money to provide the bandwidth, but there we go... Once the PS3 is broken, there'll be no current platform that is not "piracy enabled". And you have to consider as well that a PC (such as what SL runs on) running a general-purpose OS is designed to give the user vastly more control than any games console or mobile phone. DRM is an uphill struggle even where you can control the hardware. On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Anders Arnholm wrote: > Kevin Woolley wrote: >> c. Create an 'iPhone' like walled garden. There are numerous ways you could >> do this, for example required all connection to the grid to operate via a >> licensed closed-source version of libsl which uses some form of >> public/private key to identify itself. Or why not strip back the viewer so >> it's analogous to the iPhone hardware and licence 'applet' development for >> it? >> >> > For sure iPhone aint jail-breaked and there are no iPhone apps on the > piratebay some think the rates of copied content in iPhone is higher > that any other phone. Sure looks like a bright future. > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
The answer to that pic is to buy the movie and then rip it - still technically copyright infringement, yet you're supporting the makers without getting all the extra crap In other news, this thread has been massively derailed.. On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 09:48 +0100, Anders Arnholm wrote: >> >> There been a nice illustration floating arounf the internet, showing the >> problems with DRM protections today, mostly on video media. >> >> http://www.techxav.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/piratelegal.jpg > > I love the subtle :trollface: in the background. I don't know why it's > there, but it's still great. > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > The Gimp is free software but the pictures made with it aren't unless > that right is given by the creator. Same as in SL. And that's the major > point that brings the whole copyright / theft discussion back on topic > for the list. Seems a few lurkers are thinking that they own the hole > they've been digging themselves into. I'm all for free tools - the Mona > Lisa could have been painted with free brushes or magic special > Microsoft brushes - but that doesn't mean that because I gave DaVinci > the brush, canvas, and paints that I'm free to take the art out of the > Louvre. I'd be inclined to say that this is a bad analogy - what's closer is whether you can paint your own mona lisa, or otherwise copy it - you'll not find support for actual theft from me :) But back on topic - regardless of all our unique individual political views on copyright, it's definitely a bad bad idea for LL to encourage copyright infringement on their platform - or anything illegal for that matter - this is something we can agree on, yes? I'd hope another thing to be agreed on is that it's not good to implement strong DRM measures and cripple legit users while at most slowing down temporarily those who want to break the rules - yay or nay? -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
Not under the DMCA - perhaps outside of the US it might be On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > isn't that actually fair use? > > On 16/3/2010 09:04, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> The answer to that pic is to buy the movie and then rip it - still >> technically copyright infringement, yet you're supporting the makers >> without getting all the extra crap >> >> In other news, this thread has been massively derailed.. >> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Rob Nelson >> wrote: >>> On Tue, 2010-03-16 at 09:48 +0100, Anders Arnholm wrote: >>>> >>>> There been a nice illustration floating arounf the internet, showing the >>>> problems with DRM protections today, mostly on video media. >>>> >>>> http://www.techxav.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/piratelegal.jpg >>> >>> I love the subtle :trollface: in the background. I don't know why it's >>> there, but it's still great. >>> >>> ___ >>> 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/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkugCWkACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmW4AACfTedwiStaEa37XemDFLMz7Bj3 > JTUAnAil0sr0rkYMpk5HDnVtTHDZGMN/ > =FbdH > -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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
Or anyone who has an issue with it can close their account and blatantly violate this policy. This raises a question: has the TOS been updated to contain words to the effect of "you agree to be bound by the TPV"? If not, any developers may simply reject the policy On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 09:21:25AM -0700, Joe Linden wrote: >> The updated version of the Third Party Viewer Policy was posted here about a >> week ago: >> http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php > > That says that if a developer changes the code and distributes it, > you reserve the right to pursue any and all legal and equitable remedies: > > 3 a. If you are a [...] Developer of Third-Party Viewers, you must not: > [...] design Third-Party Viewers to [...] > > If we believe you are or have been associated with activities that violate > this paragraph, either within or outside of Second Life, we may take any > enforcement action we deem appropriate [...] and pursuit of all legal and > equitable remedies. > > 7 d. You (Developer of Third-Party Viewers) assume all risks, expenses, and > defects of any Third-Party Viewers that you [use,] develop, or(!) > distribute. > > This is not compatible with the GPL. > Therefore, anyone who contributed to the GPL-ed code has a case > if they want to retract their contribution. > > -- > 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
If that is so, can I happily distribute a violating viewer so long as I never connect to the grid myself? Would you be able to require me to cease distribution? You may be able to require me to cease use in connecting to your servers, but cease distribution? On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Soft Linden wrote: > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Tayra Dagostino > wrote: >> On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:01:02 +0800 >> "Boy Lane" wrote: >> >>> But worse than this, the updated TPV policy does not allow *anyone* >>> to comply with that policy.The policy is legally and technically >>> flawed. It's impossible to comply and not violate either LL's policy >>> itself or licensing terms (GPL). As a developer I can also not be >>> compliant as LL forces me to carry a legal burden LL themselves >>> disclaimed, and which the GPL explicitly excludes as "no warranty" >>> and "limited liability". You can read that in every source code file. >>> Just a couple of paragraphs that are in direct conflict with each >>> other: >> >> GPL is about source of viewer, and is accomplished >> >> TPV is a part of term of use for external developer, you can use source >> in GPL way without any restriction, but if you want connect your viewer >> to LL grid (LL isn't a software, is a real company) there are some >> rules, nobody disallow you to modify, patch or distribute a >> fork/modified viewer in GPL license. >> >> TPV is a restriction for LL grid and services, not about sources > > Tayra is correct. This is also point 2 on the TPV Policy FAQ: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Third_Party_Policy_and_Viewer_Directory_FAQ > > The GPL and the viewer policy are separate agreements for separate > purposes and do not need to be reconciled. > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Moving forward with open development
> - If you are going to contribute to Snowglobe, you will need to complete > the Second Life Viewer Contribution Agreement. While not everyone is > comfortable with it, we need to do it to protect our business interests. It > also protects you. I'll draft off of Sun's FAQ and this FSF page on the > topic. Bad example linking to the FSF page - the FSF don't produce proprietary forks (OnRez anyone?) and only ask for copyright assignment in order to aid enforcement of the license. As a registered charitable organisation, they would be forbidden legally from doing what LL did with OnRez. -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
You too eh? See my correspondence with RMS that I forwarded to the list a while back On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Am Sonntag, 21. März 2010 18:24:13 schrieb Kent Quirk (Q Linden): > >> If you have legal questions about the implication of >> documents, you should ask a lawyer, not a mailing list. > > the free software foundation has been notified. > > expect comms from their lawyers in the near future. > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/2010-March/000521.html On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > You too eh? > See my correspondence with RMS that I forwarded to the list a while back > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Lance Corrimal > wrote: >> Am Sonntag, 21. März 2010 18:24:13 schrieb Kent Quirk (Q Linden): >> >>> If you have legal questions about the implication of >>> documents, you should ask a lawyer, not a mailing list. >> >> the free software foundation has been notified. >> >> expect comms from their lawyers in the near future. >> >> ___ >> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >> privileges >> > > > > -- > “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
In other news, an email provider today produced a list of requirements for third party email client developers - I have an account with them, but their TOS doesn't mention this list of requirements and they never mentioned these requirements when I signed up for the account. Should I worry about them sueing me? IANAL, but it seems until the TOS is updated AND YOU ACCEPT THE NEW TOS, this policy is binding on nobody On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Dahlia Trimble wrote: > I have developed a BSD licensed viewer that is not derived from LL source > code. It is designed and intended for use with OpenSimulator, however since > it uses Linden Lab protocols it is capable of connecting to the Secondlife > grid, although functionality is impaired. I have no intention of making it > compliant with the TPV as *I never intended it to be used with SL*. However, > upon reading the TPV, it looks as though a possible interpretation may be > that my SL membership status may be at risk if someone (outside of my > control) uses the viewer to connect to SL and subsequently causes some > misfortune to another party, and that LL may wish to pursue legal remedies > against me as the developer of this viewer. As the viewer has been published > under a BSD style license long before the TPV came into existence. and I > have no control over already distributed copies and derivatives, and I have > no intention of stopping distribution, could my SL account be at risk, and > should I assume LL may attempt legal remedies against me for any unintended > use of this viewer? > > > On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Boy Lane wrote: >> >> I've put my summary about TVP on my blog >> http://my.opera.com/boylane/blog/linden-labs-final-3rd-party-viewer-policy-tpv >> >> >> Linden Lab's final 3rd Party Viewer Policy (TPV) >> TUESDAY, 23. MARCH 2010, 19:15:03 >> >> A lot of things are changing, I've voiced my opinion several times, and I >> want to summarize here what I think about Linden Lab's 3rd Party Viewer >> Policy (TVP) that can be found here: Policy on Third-Party Viewers | Second >> Life >> >> Under assumption of common sense LL produced guidelines that should >> regulate and control the way people can connect to their service, that is >> the SecondLife grid. Guidelines which would be correct under the aspect of >> common sense and I believe LL came from that perspective by initially >> creating that guidelines in form of the 3rd Party Viewer Policy. >> >> What went wrong? They gave it in the hands of JohnDoe Linden lawyers who >> obviously missed the subject completley and overstepped ridiculously. But >> let's get down to the roots. >> >> Basically there are 2 core things very wrong with it. Initially LL >> requires everyone to comply to the GPL licensing. Which is fine as that sets >> the context. The GPL clearly states a developer has no warranty or liability >> for the code whatsover, even if that means ones viewer starts a nuclear war >> against former Soviet Russia or China or both. That clause is included in >> every single file of sourcecode (not the part about the Russians or Chinese >> ). LL explicitely disclaims any liability themselves for the resulting world >> war but then puts exactly that liability back on the shoulders of anyone >> developing a viewer. >> >> Not only that, by complying to their TPV a developer would also accept >> universal responsibility for all and everything "viewer". To be exact, as a >> developer "You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any Third-Party >> Viewers that you use, develop, or distribute." A viewer does not even need >> to be able or connect to SL for that. >> >> In this regard it does not matter if a JohnDoe Linden comments on a >> mailing list or if a legally not binding FAQ tells us that this would be >> only for usage by connecting to the SL grid. It is not. TPV in it's current >> form says "I'm responsible (read: guilty) for using, developing or >> distributing any 3rd party viewer". >> >> Already by simply developing I'm assuming full responsibility for >> everything. I could take the official LL sources and compile and distribute >> a sourcewise identical "official" viewer, without changing a single line of >> code; but with all the bugs and vulnerabilities *made by LL*. Guilty by TPV. >> It's really ridiculous. >> >> This is a clear violation of the in the first place by LL required GPL >> licensing. It puts further restrictions on developers GPL explicitly >> prohibits. >> >> Another point of concern, putting up the RL details (which is pointless as >> LL has them already and require them by ToS) is required for a listing in >> the viewer directory. The details of the two guinea pigs who registered >> (Kirsten's, Metabolt) were promptly published for a day before someone in LL >> pressed the emergency button. But that was not the first time that LL >> distributed private details. >> >> In summary, the policy is legal-technical flawed and not acceptable by any >> dev in
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
Yes, they can - but they can't sue you and claim damages, which is quite a massive difference On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > The thing is, according to the TOS, LL can already deny you access to > all your account related data for any or no reason, and they can delete > anything they want in their own machines for any or no reason as well... > > On 23/3/2010 16:58, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> In other news, an email provider today produced a list of requirements >> for third party email client developers - I have an account with them, >> but their TOS doesn't mention this list of requirements and they never >> mentioned these requirements when I signed up for the account. >> >> Should I worry about them sueing me? >> >> IANAL, but it seems until the TOS is updated AND YOU ACCEPT THE NEW >> TOS, this policy is binding on nobody >> >> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Dahlia Trimble >> wrote: >>> I have developed a BSD licensed viewer that is not derived from LL source >>> code. It is designed and intended for use with OpenSimulator, however since >>> it uses Linden Lab protocols it is capable of connecting to the Secondlife >>> grid, although functionality is impaired. I have no intention of making it >>> compliant with the TPV as *I never intended it to be used with SL*. However, >>> upon reading the TPV, it looks as though a possible interpretation may be >>> that my SL membership status may be at risk if someone (outside of my >>> control) uses the viewer to connect to SL and subsequently causes some >>> misfortune to another party, and that LL may wish to pursue legal remedies >>> against me as the developer of this viewer. As the viewer has been published >>> under a BSD style license long before the TPV came into existence. and I >>> have no control over already distributed copies and derivatives, and I have >>> no intention of stopping distribution, could my SL account be at risk, and >>> should I assume LL may attempt legal remedies against me for any unintended >>> use of this viewer? >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Boy Lane wrote: >>>> >>>> I've put my summary about TVP on my blog >>>> http://my.opera.com/boylane/blog/linden-labs-final-3rd-party-viewer-policy-tpv >>>> >>>> >>>> Linden Lab's final 3rd Party Viewer Policy (TPV) >>>> TUESDAY, 23. MARCH 2010, 19:15:03 >>>> >>>> A lot of things are changing, I've voiced my opinion several times, and I >>>> want to summarize here what I think about Linden Lab's 3rd Party Viewer >>>> Policy (TVP) that can be found here: Policy on Third-Party Viewers | Second >>>> Life >>>> >>>> Under assumption of common sense LL produced guidelines that should >>>> regulate and control the way people can connect to their service, that is >>>> the SecondLife grid. Guidelines which would be correct under the aspect of >>>> common sense and I believe LL came from that perspective by initially >>>> creating that guidelines in form of the 3rd Party Viewer Policy. >>>> >>>> What went wrong? They gave it in the hands of JohnDoe Linden lawyers who >>>> obviously missed the subject completley and overstepped ridiculously. But >>>> let's get down to the roots. >>>> >>>> Basically there are 2 core things very wrong with it. Initially LL >>>> requires everyone to comply to the GPL licensing. Which is fine as that >>>> sets >>>> the context. The GPL clearly states a developer has no warranty or >>>> liability >>>> for the code whatsover, even if that means ones viewer starts a nuclear war >>>> against former Soviet Russia or China or both. That clause is included in >>>> every single file of sourcecode (not the part about the Russians or Chinese >>>> ). LL explicitely disclaims any liability themselves for the resulting >>>> world >>>> war but then puts exactly that liability back on the shoulders of anyone >>>> developing a viewer. >>>> >>>> Not only that, by complying to their TPV a developer would also accept >>>> universal responsibility for all and everything "viewer". To be exact, as a >>>> developer "You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any Third-Party >>>> Viewers that you use, develop, or
Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date
They always did have that ability, but they can't randomly invent a new policy and then sue you for it On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > i dunno about the legal part, but they already have the power (and > according to the TOS the right) to deprive you of your SL account, and > mangle your SL assets > > On 23/3/2010 17:38, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> Yes, they can - but they can't sue you and claim damages, which is >> quite a massive difference >> >> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Tigro Spottystripes >> wrote: >> The thing is, according to the TOS, LL can already deny you access to >> all your account related data for any or no reason, and they can delete >> anything they want in their own machines for any or no reason as well... >> >> On 23/3/2010 16:58, Gareth Nelson wrote: >>>>> In other news, an email provider today produced a list of requirements >>>>> for third party email client developers - I have an account with them, >>>>> but their TOS doesn't mention this list of requirements and they never >>>>> mentioned these requirements when I signed up for the account. >>>>> >>>>> Should I worry about them sueing me? >>>>> >>>>> IANAL, but it seems until the TOS is updated AND YOU ACCEPT THE NEW >>>>> TOS, this policy is binding on nobody >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Dahlia Trimble >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> I have developed a BSD licensed viewer that is not derived from LL source >>>>>> code. It is designed and intended for use with OpenSimulator, however >>>>>> since >>>>>> it uses Linden Lab protocols it is capable of connecting to the >>>>>> Secondlife >>>>>> grid, although functionality is impaired. I have no intention of making >>>>>> it >>>>>> compliant with the TPV as *I never intended it to be used with SL*. >>>>>> However, >>>>>> upon reading the TPV, it looks as though a possible interpretation may be >>>>>> that my SL membership status may be at risk if someone (outside of my >>>>>> control) uses the viewer to connect to SL and subsequently causes some >>>>>> misfortune to another party, and that LL may wish to pursue legal >>>>>> remedies >>>>>> against me as the developer of this viewer. As the viewer has been >>>>>> published >>>>>> under a BSD style license long before the TPV came into existence. and I >>>>>> have no control over already distributed copies and derivatives, and I >>>>>> have >>>>>> no intention of stopping distribution, could my SL account be at risk, >>>>>> and >>>>>> should I assume LL may attempt legal remedies against me for any >>>>>> unintended >>>>>> use of this viewer? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Boy Lane wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I've put my summary about TVP on my blog >>>>>>> http://my.opera.com/boylane/blog/linden-labs-final-3rd-party-viewer-policy-tpv >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Linden Lab's final 3rd Party Viewer Policy (TPV) >>>>>>> TUESDAY, 23. MARCH 2010, 19:15:03 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> A lot of things are changing, I've voiced my opinion several times, and >>>>>>> I >>>>>>> want to summarize here what I think about Linden Lab's 3rd Party Viewer >>>>>>> Policy (TVP) that can be found here: Policy on Third-Party Viewers | >>>>>>> Second >>>>>>> Life >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Under assumption of common sense LL produced guidelines that should >>>>>>> regulate and control the way people can connect to their service, that >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> the SecondLife grid. Guidelines which would be correct under the aspect >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> common sense and I believe LL came from that perspective by initially >>>>>>> creating that guidelines in form of the 3rd Party Viewer Policy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>
Re: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers
It would be wise to stay on the side of caution and presume anyone who distributes the viewer is liable, even if they are not the ones who introduced the original defects. Even with that being said though, personally I would never dream of giving away software free of charge if it includes a warranty - that's basically infinite liability with something GPLed, as every single person who obtains the software could in theory sue you. On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Marine Kelley wrote: > Thank you for the heads up Morgaine. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if > the "no warranty" clause vanishes from the source code, then does that > mean that LL guarantees that the code of the original viewer is bug- > free ? We can't guarantee it as open source programmers if the > original devs don't in the first place, and they can't expect us to > remove it ourselves afterwards, so who is liable for the original > defects if a law suit was started because of an exploit ? > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers
> It wouldn't stand in court anyway, to expect second hand code to be liable > when first hand code is not. Any precedent on that? Surely it's better to have the policy rewritten rather than rely on it not standing up in court ___ 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] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers
Again, the actual wording of the policy is what matters - not what you
say on a mailing list. It could be argued that all new source releases
from now on are under a new license of "GPL+TPV", and thus you
automatically agree by using any new source releases from LL.
LL as copyright holder (or joint holder) can change the GPL with extra
restrictions as much as they like - so long as they make it clear.
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Tayra Dagostino
wrote:
> Maybe is better read what TPV say, not what do you think LL mean with TPV
> (read and apply forensic laws on informatic is my job... maybe I can
> understand better some terms, but isn't anyway a reason to this poor
> victimistic show)
>
>
>
> GPL rights for developers aren't touched, GPL header is in each file, you as
> developer can mod, distribute and do all you want under GPL terms. This work
> for all uses you wantto do with the viewer code (limited by GPL), in the
> moment you say your viewer is for Second Life grid of Linden Labs Research
> the relationship isn't anymore from you and your software but from you and
> LL.
>
>
>
> You can write patch and mod the viewer with copybot features or other, and
> connect to JohnSmith Research LtD SuperLife grid, nobody say else, but if
> you want your viewer is listed in viewer Ll directory and allowed to connect
> to Second Life grid GPL is out of field, the "rules" are TPV (as for
> resident the rules are CS and TOS). All warranty listed in TPV are binded to
> developer modification, is obvious if a bug is pre-existent is out of
> developer range (a developer have responsibility only about what he/she
> write, is more than easy ask compensation if a developer is charged for a
> bug previously written by LL initial source code)
>
>
>
> Developer right are protected by GPL itself, nobody, neither LL, can touch
> it, TPV is a suite of rules between YOU and Linden. LL itself cannotmodify
> GPL license, TPV is only binded in relationship from LL and developers than
> distribute or patch or mod something called "viewer for LL second life grid"
> (no software neither GPL involvement).
>
>
>
> You can blame about TPV only if you are going to mod the code with bad
> features
>
>
>
> Is better for all stop this victim roleplay, if you think something isn't so
> clear you can ask to clarify, but TPV is totally stranger from GPL, merge
> with perosnal fantasy what not understanded isn't good for nobody.
>
>
>
> Sorry for typo but iPhone keypad isn’t easy to use for long email ;)
>
> --
> Sent by iPhone
> Il giorno 31/mar/2010, alle ore 16.46, Morgaine
> ha scritto:
>
> Tayra, I don't think you understand how law works.
>
> TPV developers cannot appear in a court of law and tell the judge, "Judge,
> I'm not liable to this plaintiff, because Tayra Dagostino's interpretation
> of the TPV says that it doesn't apply to me."
>
> That's not how law works.
>
> Instead, law operates by examining THE ACTUAL WORDS THAT ARE WRITTEN in a
> license or agreement. And the words that are written in the TPV are the
> unconscionable and out-of-control mess that has been detailed here
> extensively, as opposed to the blissful mirage of your wishful thinking.
>
>
> Morgaine.
>
>
>
>
>
> =
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:52 PM, Tayra Dagostino
> wrote:
>>
>> TPV is a license to login LL grid with a 3rd party viewer, not about
>> code itself
>>
>> --
>> Sent by iPhone
>>
>> Il giorno 30/mar/2010, alle ore 17.31, malachi ha
>> scritto:
>>
>> > just my 2 cents.
>> >
>> >
>> > * Second Life Viewer Source Code
>> > * The source code in this file ("Source Code") is provided by
>> > Linden Lab
>> > * to you under the terms of the GNU General Public License, version
>> > 2.0
>> > * ("GPL"), unless you have obtained a separate licensing agreement
>> > * ("Other License"), formally executed by you and Linden Lab.
>> > Terms of
>> > * the GPL can be found in doc/GPL-license.txt in this distribution,
>> > or
>> > * online at
>> > http://secondlifegrid.net/programs/open_source/licensing/gplv2
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > TPV policy is irrelevant. the license in which we were given the
>> > code clearly states as is seen at the web URL listed above that..
>> >
>> >
>> > Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain
>> > that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free
>> > software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on,
>> > we
>> > want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original,
>> > so
>> > that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the
>> > original
>> > authors' reputations.
>> >
>> >
>> > You may not impose any further
>> > restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
>> >
>> >
>> > so just my 2 cents but since i recieved the code under GPL there
>> > isnt a
>> > dang thing Linden Lab or anyone else can do to me legally for
>> > created a
>> > client that doesnt abide by the
[opensource-dev] Warning on latest TOS (was Re: A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers)
WARNING Don't login and accept the latest TOS: Any access to or use of the Service through a software client other than the Linden Software that logs into the Servers (referred to as a "Third-Party Viewer") is subject to these Terms of Service and the terms of the Policy on Third-Party Viewers. The Policy on Third-Party Viewers provides required and prohibited functionality for Third-Party Viewers as well as other terms for those who use, develop, or distribute Third-Party Viewers; however, Linden Lab offers and supports the Service only as offered by Linden Lab and is not obligated to allow access to or use of the Service by any software or means not provided by Linden Lab. You understand and agree that Linden Lab is not responsible or liable for any aspect of the Service that is accessed or experienced using software or other means not provided by Linden Lab. On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Ron Festa wrote: > Actually a TPV is GPL code. The core of the viewer and all additions to the > code are subject to the GPLv2. Your comment in that regards doesn't make > much sense. The TPV Policy is about what can and can't connect the the grids > owned and operated by Linden Lab, more so then in-world content as we can > all agree that the sections on Prohibited Features and IP Rights are No > Brainer clauses all of us for the most part respect. Also I don't understand > what you mean by uploading broken content. > The problem those of us who contribute to TPV's (I contributed to Meerkat > and now Imprudence if you wanted to dispute whether or not I actually > contribute anything) is basically what was summarized by the Imprudence > Viewer team: http://bit.ly/d2KxvI . If we agree with the TPVP we pretty much > have to alter our TPV at the Lindens' whims for whatever reason they can > find. Also if some black hat alters for example Imprudence's or Emerald's > Import/Export feature to ignore ownership the developer team can be held > legally responsible because even though the Import/Export feature was > altered, it was still their code at the core and by the TPVP agreed to take > on that liability. > Ron Festa > Virtual Worlds Admin > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY > Phone: 732-474-8583 > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: >> >> Since the updated TPV, there doesn't seem any indication that LL wants >> to restrict or take away rights granted by the GPL. In fact, it >> compliments the GPL to further narrow the difference in liabilities >> between content and software. >> >> LL doesn't seem to want to be liable for an obvious non-GPL written >> program that connects to the SL grid. A non-GPL program is obviously a >> TPV. >> >> Why should anybody want a TPV that uploads broken content to SL grid? >> So, to not connect to SL grid and only connect to other worlds is the >> answer some concluded on how to not upload broken content to SL grid. >> >> L. Christopher Bird wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Gareth Nelson >> > mailto:gar...@garethnelson.com>> wrote: >> > >> > >> > LL as copyright holder (or joint holder) can change the GPL with >> > extra >> > restrictions as much as they like - so long as they make it clear. >> > >> > >> > Sure they can, but they must call this license something OTHER than >> > GPL. If they want to restrict freedoms granted by the GPL, then it >> > ceases to be GPL and becomes a new beast. Licensing under GPL which LL >> > has done in the past gives developers certain rights in the use of >> > that code.� Some freedoms and rights that the TPV curtails. >> > >> > LL is free to license their code however they want. What they can't do >> > is gut the parts of GPL they disagree with and still call it GPL. >> > >> > By licensing the viewer under GPL and the preamble to the TPV seems to >> > indicate this is their desire to continue to do so, implies a certain >> > promise to allow certain things to be done with the software.� If LL >> > wants to restrict or take away rights granted by the GPL THEY MUST NOT >> > CALL THEIR LICENSE GPL OR USE THE GPL PREAMBLE IN THEIR LICENSE. >> > >> > http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#ModifyGPL >> > >> > �-- ZenMondo >> > >> > >> > >> > ___ >> > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> > http://
Re: [opensource-dev] new TOS - TPV "legally" binding. :/
You're always welcome to not accept the TOS and thus lose all your inworld assets On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Lawson English wrote: > Lance Corrimal wrote: >> just had a little popup shoving the new TOS under my nose, and behold, >> with accepting the TOS you also accept the TPV. >> ___ >> > I wonder if that's even legal... > > > Lawson > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions?
An interesting point: If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can actually consent to agree to it. Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine wrote: > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language > amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that > programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV > policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll > repeat his words here for clarity: > > > Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com > Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 > > I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: > > Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not > always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people > who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you > begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that > isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled > law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't > be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other > people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret > program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially > susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary > because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have > legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, > not a mailing list. > > Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any other > could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden > employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get > further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't > address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on this > list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden > Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to stand > up in court if they need it to. > > Q > > > I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to our > ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person could > agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be > required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law > works in this area? > > The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by > programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here > understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL > license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that GPLv2 > clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no > "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO > WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream > liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the > conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). > > Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no > longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and > lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no other > way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) > > That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when they > use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is > happy to agree. (Note that developers become users when they connect to SL, > and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do something > bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally they > are personally responsible for their actions. > > In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is the > best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible > conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. > > > Morgaine. > > > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Re: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers
Do you think griefers are going to care about the TPV, or any policy for that matter? On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > Linden Labs could care less about what you put in your viewer. They are > concerned about their product, which is Second Life. If YOUR viewer > connects to THEIR network, heck yeah you can be liable for it...maybe not in > the traditional sense, but you can agree you hold some responsibility for > your actions. All that "legalese" is to prevent us, the developers, from > shrugging our shoulders and saying "Oops, my bad." LL is covering their > backs. Regardless of how you phrase it, code it, compile it...without the > Second Life service. Your viewer is a brick. > > I don't know anyone's tenure here in SL, and I won't ask. But, I remember > "real" grid crashes. I remember before there was the grey goo fence and > people taking down the grid with the OFFICIAL SecondLife viewer. > > With Third-Party viewers coming into play and Linden Labs releasing more and > more bits of their service to the users, there has to be regulation and > restrictions in order to protect the business. There is infinitely more > chance for something to go wrong when you throw third-party viewers in the > mix. > > Jonathan Irvin > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 06:04, Carlo Wood wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 04:06:52PM +, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> > LL as copyright holder (or joint holder) can change the GPL with extra >> > restrictions as much as they like - so long as they make it clear. >> >> That would be EXTREMELY against the spirit of open source and the use >> of GPL. It would also make it impossible for any TPV to use their code >> anymore: TPV's added patches that are pure-GPL. LL does not have copyright >> on those patches, so those remain GPL. Therefore it is not possible >> to link code resulting from those patches with code that is GPL+TPVP, >> which would be non-GPL because it has extra restrictions. >> >> Thus, if this is true (or if they'd do that in the future) then it is >> EXTERMELY important to understand; because it DOES mean that all TPV's >> have to stop using any additional code released by LL after 30 April 2010. >> >> -- >> 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 > > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions?
Of course, the simple way to not be held liable for flaws in TPVs is to say to users "we do not support any viewer not developed by us, and you accept all liability for your use of any unsupported viewers". I don't think anyone is asking LL to accept liability for bugs in third party viewers, or asking for LL to tolerate obvious abuse such as sim crashers - but none of us here has perfect coding skills, so all of our code WILL be buggy at times. I've said before that personally, i'd only ever offer a warranty on my code if I was paid for it - offering a warranty on something infinitely reproducible is infinite liability otherwise.. and LL are surprised by third party devs not wanting to accept infinite liability? The other thing they could do is produce a set of guidelines for developers, which must be complied with to be listed in the directory, and a warning to users that if a TPV developer is not willing to comply to these guidelines, then the viewer may cause trouble for anyone who use it. Removing the requirement to list RL contact details would also make more developers willing to list themselves in the directory - as it is, I can picture very very few residents are going to be naive enough to think "if it's not in the directory, it's not good". Q - You are correct that you don't speak for legal, but surely you can see how any member of staff at LL (whether that be yourself, one of the legal team or even M) saying that we should not try to interpret the policies your company would like to hold us to could cause problems in enforcing those policies. As it is, I personally find legalese relating to copyright ,TOS and software licensing matters fairly simple to understand and often have had actual lawyers confirming my understanding as correct, and I find the TPV policy rather simple to understand. I have not yet taken the document to a lawyer to review though, as i'm not willing to pay just to get a "yes, you were right - it'd make you liable" and I would not want to bog down the few pro-bono attorneys i'm aware of with this rather pointless work either (even if they would be willing to accept it). On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Tammy Nowotny wrote: > Well, a truly incomprehensible contract WOULD be unenforceable, just like an > incomprehensible law. The new TOS agreement, however, is not > incomprehensible. It's just plain complicated. > > The Lindens are obviously trying to walk a fine line between allowing 3rd > Party Viewers and not being legally responsible for them. Anyone who is > shocked by that is either naive or obtuse--- or both. > > --Tammy Nowotny > > Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote: > > 1) The first line of my comment is that I don't speak for Linden legal. > 2) What I said was that if you want to understand legalese, you should talk > to a lawyer. That's it. > > Q > > > On Apr 1, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > > > > An interesting point: > If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can > comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can > actually consent to agree to it. > > Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine > wrote: > > > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language > amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that > programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV > policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll > repeat his words here for clarity: > > > Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com > Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 > > I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: > > Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not > always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people > who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you > begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that > isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled > law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't > be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other > people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret > program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially > susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary > because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have > legal questions about the implication of
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions
If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from contributing patches to opensim On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" opensim? > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 09:57:13PM -0600, Maya Remblai wrote: >> That all is true of pure OpenSim, but not necessarily true of >> OpenSim-compatible grids. ReactionGrid and InWorldz are >> OpenSim-compatible, meaning they use the same viewers and started >> with OpenSim code, but they've fixed many of the problems and are >> working to fix the others. Personally I favor InWorldz, and am now >> developing my avatars there before SL. >> >> Maya >> >> Carlo Wood wrote: >> >> >I would move to opensim immediately, but: >> > >> >1) It crashes non-stop >> >2) It can TOTALLY not deal with packetloss: >> > 2a) Avatar textures are extremely often corrupt. >> > 2b) Attachment won't attach/detach >> > 2c) I suffer from "rubber banding" >> > 2d) If I import stuff it literally ends up all over the sim. >> >3) Many other bugs have been there for years now >> > and seem not to be fixed or addressed. For example, >> > 3a) Try sitting on a prim >> > 3b) Try standing on a slope >> > 3c) Try writing a script >> > and so on. >> > >> >There simply is no alternative :( >> > >> >The opensim servers are very VERY buggy and bad quality, >> >so much so that I seriously doubt the competence of it's >> >developers to every deliver anything usable. >> > >> >What we need is to start over, write a new server from >> >the ground up (in C++ if I'm to participate). >> > >> > > -- > 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions
That's one possible reason, other possible reasons are simply lack of willingness to submit the patches On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > That is an 'if', what is the actual reason? > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:19:31PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >> contributing patches to opensim > > -- > Carlo Wood > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions
You perhaps misunderstood me - I was referring to submitting patches to opensim. Sadly, unless the current opensim team change their minds, I do not see tight cooperation between viewer developers and opensim developers happening, as for efficiency it would be best for people to be able to contribute to both viewer and sim. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > Makes sense if you ask me... why submit patches for SnowGlobe when you > already know other Third-Party viewers work with OpenSim...plus I image > these guys have enough on their plate as it is getting OpenSim out of alpha. > > Jonathan Irvin > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 09:21, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> >> That's one possible reason, other possible reasons are simply lack of >> willingness to submit the patches >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >> > That is an 'if', what is the actual reason? >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:19:31PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> >> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >> >> contributing patches to opensim >> > >> > -- >> > Carlo Wood >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >> ___ >> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >> privileges > > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions
It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. > > On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >> contributing patches to opensim >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >>> >>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>> opensim? > > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions
I know the reason they won't accept patches from viewer devs, but it's a nonsensical reason. Merely viewing the viewer source code does not mean any code you write later on must be GPLed - something which 3 different attorneys confirmed. This is something fairly basic in copyright law - it covers expression in fixed form, not ideas or abstract concepts. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > They won't accept viewer developers because the viewer is GPL and they > want to be absolutely sure that only BSD code gets in. If the viewer > code weren't virally licensed (as the GPL is), they'd probably be more > than happy to accept viewer-developer patches. Geeked as all get-out, > I'd imagine. It's the same reason why they will not accept patches from > anyone who is known to have seen the LL server code. They can't be sure > there's no LL-proprietary licensing stuff going on. See this: > http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Contributions_Policy > > ... all of which I can completely understand. > > It's a good thing I haven't had time to view the code itself so I'm > still open to choose a project. Though I *HAVE* decided that I will not > work on a TPV... it's Snowglobe if it's going to be anything viewer > related. I'm actually rather surprised no one's said anything about the > merges of GPL code into viewer-internal. That bugged me more than the > TPV stuff. > > I dunno about mono, though. I'm not too keen on learning yet another > language. My brain's kinda full as it is and I would LOVE to branch the > viewer into UI, rendering, network, and DB modules so that any one > module can be upgraded at any time without any significant impact on any > other. > > --GC > > On 04/02/2010 11:49 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to >> convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter >> wrote: >> >>> Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. >>> >>> On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: >>> >>> >>>> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >>>> contributing patches to opensim >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >>>> >>>>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>>>> opensim? >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions
It can, but only if the fork has enough developers working on it instead of the original - and that's the trickiest part On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > Starting a fork can light a fire under a parochial developer team. It worked > for GCC with EGCS. > > > On 2010-04-02, at 10:49, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to >> convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter >> wrote: >>> >>> Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. >>> >>> On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: >>> >>>> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >>>> contributing patches to opensim >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>>>> opensim? >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > > "Welcome back, Anonymous, we're glad to see you again!" > > > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid?
The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on disk..) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite connection in a stormy climate for all you know. For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of the box it can be very very buggy. On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. > > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* > into. > > --GC > > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, Dale Mahalko wrote: >> I just tried using the SL 1.x client with OS grid for the first time >> this weekend. Overall the experience was plain awful, on a 10 megabit >> internet connection and GTX 285 1024meg >> >> >> Oddly, when giving the SL client the OSgrid URL from the command line, >> the client login page tells me that the Second Life grid is up, and >> the number of concurrent users in SL, etc. Why is the client not >> telling me the status of the OSgrid instead? >> >> On first login, the sim textures took forever to load. Like, after 5 >> minutes I'm still standing in a sea of gray boxes. >> >> Simple physics only with the ground. All objects are phantom. I'd >> think the OSGrid default login would want to showcase the >> collision-resolving capabilities of the more advanced open physics >> engines, but oh well. >> >> When I search for sandboxes to try building stuff... odd, the search >> window shows me stuff from Second Life, not the OSGrid. Most teleports >> fail because it appears I'm getting links to SL sims that don't accept >> connections from OSGrid. Yep, I can find the Cordova Sandbox from the >> search page within OSGrid. (I don't think search should list sims that >> don't accept connections.) >> >> Searching for "osgrid" in the search window oddly turns up nothing. >> How am I to find sandbox sims in OSGrid? "Oh, just open the map and >> pick that way" someone tells me. Yeah that works well. the map shows >> about a 10x10 grid of sims nearby, but the rest of the map doesn't >> want to load. Timeout. >> >> I did actually manage to find another OSgrid sim to connect to, but on >> join it turned out to have a ping of 6000. (It would be useful for the >> search page to show a graph of the sim load for the last five minutes >> so we know if a sim is lagged out BEFORE we try teleporting.) >> >> And oh joy, I can't now "teleport home" to where I started. The OSgrid >> did something I've not seen happen on SL in a long time, where I seem >> to still be connected but all the traffic meters in the client debug >> (Ctrl-Shift-1) drop to 0 kbps. >> >> The inventory never loaded completely, even though as a new user it's empty. >> >> Relogin attempts attempting to login at the home location were just as >> slow and unresponsive. >> >> >> Yep, if you don't like the new SL client developer TOS, there is sure >> a great future to look forward to with the open source grid project. >> :-P >> ___ >> 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe info
Re: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid?
Probably, but there may again be the whole paranoia over "tainting", and some of the instability may be normal developmental issues - stuff that crops up in ongoing development of new features. Note that in my experience, even a description (without an actual patch or any actual code) of how to fix bugs is not accepted - though I have a "colourful" history with opensim. I'm not up to date on how opensim does QA/testing these days (due probably in part to the above mentioned "colourful history"), but i'd imagine that in any project a decent set of tests will catch most issues, if not all. On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Joel Foner wrote: > This could be a not so bright question, but shouldn't all those patches to > fix up OpenSim bugs be ending up back in the trunk and end up with the > default downloads working better? > Joel > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Gareth Nelson > wrote: >> >> The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a >> public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be >> hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on >> disk..) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite >> connection in a stormy climate for all you know. >> >> For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which >> have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or >> one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find >> who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server >> development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of >> the box it can be very very buggy. >> >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: >> > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of >> > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and >> > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client >> > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. >> > >> > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very >> > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping >> > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines >> > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The >> > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware >> > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that >> > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more >> > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good >> > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* >> > into. >> > >> > --GC >> > >> > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, Dale Mahalko wrote: >> >> I just tried using the SL 1.x client with OS grid for the first time >> >> this weekend. Overall the experience was plain awful, on a 10 megabit >> >> internet connection and GTX 285 1024meg >> >> >> >> >> >> Oddly, when giving the SL client the OSgrid URL from the command line, >> >> the client login page tells me that the Second Life grid is up, and >> >> the number of concurrent users in SL, etc. Why is the client not >> >> telling me the status of the OSgrid instead? >> >> >> >> On first login, the sim textures took forever to load. Like, after 5 >> >> minutes I'm still standing in a sea of gray boxes. >> >> >> >> Simple physics only with the ground. All objects are phantom. I'd >> >> think the OSGrid default login would want to showcase the >> >> collision-resolving capabilities of the more advanced open physics >> >> engines, but oh well. >> >> >> >> When I search for sandboxes to try building stuff... odd, the search >> >> window shows me stuff from Second Life, not the OSGrid. Most teleports >> >> fail because it appears I'm getting links to SL sims that don't accept >> >> connections from OSGrid. Yep, I can find the Cordova Sandbox from the >> >> search page within OSGrid. (I don't think search should list sims that >> >> don't accept connections.) >> >> >> >> Searching for "osgrid" in the search window oddly turns up nothing. >> >> How am I to find sandbox sims in OSGrid? "Oh, just open the map and >> >> pick that way" someone tells me. Yeah that works well. the map shows >>
Re: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid?
I think I may have been the one to author those PHP scripts - it was a bet made on IRC late at night that I could have a grid up and running (opensim was at the time single regions only) "by breakfast tomorrow" - I did, but it was one messy pile of hacks On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > Ha. > > Speaking of colorful, I remember my very first patch ever was a SQL > injection fix for OpenSim's grid services (back when OSG when run from > PHP scripts) that contained a bunch of cursewords I accidentally left in > the comments. > > On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 22:46 +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> Probably, but there may again be the whole paranoia over "tainting", >> and some of the instability may be normal developmental issues - stuff >> that crops up in ongoing development of new features. Note that in my >> experience, even a description (without an actual patch or any actual >> code) of how to fix bugs is not accepted - though I have a "colourful" >> history with opensim. >> >> I'm not up to date on how opensim does QA/testing these days (due >> probably in part to the above mentioned "colourful history"), but i'd >> imagine that in any project a decent set of tests will catch most >> issues, if not all. >> >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Joel Foner wrote: >> > This could be a not so bright question, but shouldn't all those patches to >> > fix up OpenSim bugs be ending up back in the trunk and end up with the >> > default downloads working better? >> > Joel >> > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Gareth Nelson >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a >> >> public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be >> >> hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on >> >> disk..) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite >> >> connection in a stormy climate for all you know. >> >> >> >> For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which >> >> have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or >> >> one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find >> >> who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server >> >> development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of >> >> the box it can be very very buggy. >> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: >> >> > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of >> >> > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and >> >> > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client >> >> > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. >> >> > >> >> > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very >> >> > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping >> >> > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines >> >> > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The >> >> > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware >> >> > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that >> >> > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more >> >> > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good >> >> > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* >> >> > into. >> >> > >> >> > --GC >> >> > >> >> > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, Dale Mahalko wrote: >> >> >> I just tried using the SL 1.x client with OS grid for the first time >> >> >> this weekend. Overall the experience was plain awful, on a 10 megabit >> >> >> internet connection and GTX 285 1024meg >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Oddly, when giving the SL client the OSgrid URL from the command line, >> >> >> the client login page tells me that the Second Life grid is up, and >> >> >> the number of concurrent users in SL, etc. Why is the client not >> >> >> telling me the status of the OSgrid instead? >> >> >> >> >> >> On first login, the sim textures took forever to load. Like,
Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions
It's doable if you never merge upstream patches in, but even then you've got quite a mess to clean up. I did the fork thing for a while and found it was very tricky to clean up, my own from-scratch simulator (litesim.py) was way way more stable but lagged behind massively with features. On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Aidan Thornton wrote: > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to >> convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. > > Yep - people seem to end up writing their own simulator from scratch > instead as a result. I know that I did[1], and I recall that both you > and John Hurliman had your own projects too (litesim and Simian > respectively). > > [1] http://www.makomk.com/gitweb/?p=cajeput.git;a=summary > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag
> Not that the Lab actually needs anything resembling the TPVP to successfully > take legal action against someone making pernicious viewers available or > creating them for their own use. I can use telnet to break into various TCP-based servers, does that make the authors of my telnet client liable for my actions? I can also (and have done so as part of a few penetration tests) use the metasploit framework to break into various machines - are the authors of metasploit liable for my actions? Unless there's some precedent to the contrary, it would seem that the user remains liable and not the developer of the tools ___ 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] impending lawsuit?
I think the point was that SL has a lot of users with trigger-happy lawyers On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ambrosia wrote: >> and what henri has is the same feature in a different implementation (100% >> viewer internally), so it's not as if you could use emerald and something >> sold >> or given away for free by henri INSTEAD of this guys script. > >> THIS IS NOT WORTH ANY KIND OF MONEY (since its sort of the whole point >> of the command in question) > > I was just clarifying that he's not going after Emerald, in regards to > the comment about the viewer TPV/TOS. :3 That is all. Aside of that, I > won't make a comment about the product or steps being taken. > > --Chalice Yao > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list
A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the start was missing On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:08 AM, VR Hacks wrote: > Michael wrote in part: > >> Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not >> attend? > > I see someone has already posted a link to the full chat text transcript on > the wiki. > > Gareth Nelson was kind enough to provide the voice recording of the meeting, > which can be found here: > > http://bit.ly/TPVPbrownBag1 > > You can also access it via our vrhacks channel on iTunes. Hth! > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list
The problem with that is a contract requires assent on both sides On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Discrete Dreamscape wrote: > It's possible to willingly agree to liability and wave whatever protections > you wish that are normally under the GPL, which seems to be what the TPV > asks you to do. The issue most people seem to have is that it's not explicit > in this regard and it also doesn't make it clear that it is a contract > between you and LL. > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tigro Spottystripes > wrote: >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of >> GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or >> distribute >> >> On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson >> > wrote: >> >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the >> >> start was missing >> >> >> > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY. >> > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links >> > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client >> > crashing or ... >> > >> > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not >> > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing >> > bugs in said code so >> > >> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* >> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** >> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to >> > either LLC or TP code) >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- >> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ >> >> iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV >> jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm >> =t1M5 >> -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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list
Don't go giving LL's lawyers ideas Seriously, I would not be surprised to find the "IANALP" come out next, complete with Joe talking about it inworld on voice only "So, we're here to see how to move forward with people who want to read any of our policies and dare interpret them - this should not be allowed, so from now on only registered lawyers can have an SL account" No offence Joe - you're a cool guy doing a hard job :) On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Brent Tubbs wrote: > Good idea! We could even have a directory of people qualified to talk about > it who give their RL info so that people show up front which commenters are > trustworthy. Any votes for writing this up as the Commenting on the Third > Party Viewer Policy Policy, or COTTPVPP? > /snark :) > Brent > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Dahlia Trimble > wrote: >> >> I also would be interested in seeing those freely offering their legal >> advice on this list also describing their qualifications to do so and in >> which jurisdictions they are licensed to practice law. If not, then please >> add a "IANAL" or other suitable disclaimer, or mention to what level you >> would be willing to be responsible for the misfortunes that may happen from >> others who may take your advice. >> >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Joel Foner wrote: >>> >>> I wonder if anyone has an easy way to calculate the actual signal (os-dev >>> posts) to noise (legal posts) ratio on this list over, let's say the last 30 >>> days. It's getting hard to recall when the last actual os-dev discussion >>> happened. Maybe I'm just missing it. >>> Back to my regularly scheduled programming, as it were. >>> Joel >>> ___ >>> 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list
The warranty disclaimer protects from liability for mistakes, not maliciousness On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200 > Carlo Wood wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: >> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* >> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** >> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done >> > to either LLC or TP code) >> >> That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden >> of being legally liable for ANYTHING. > > so if i create a software and with few printf i broadcast a lot of > harassment, injuries, falsity about you and i sign my software as GPL > you cannot take me in front of a judges? > > or i write and distribute a software like worm, something written to > nuke remote systems or ddos networks, i append GPL license to it and > nobody can tell something to me? > > your fantastic world is very nice > > GPL protect the software, not developers, "as is" and "no warranty" is > about the requirement a user can ask to the developer, not about > developer liability in front of him software... > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again)
There have been numerous times since the new TOS came out that i've wanted to go inworld and have refused to do so for fear of liability under this policy. Thank you for fixing it, now I might be able to play with the new plugins API without fear. With those changes, this is a policy that personally I am much more comfortable accepting. On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > Boy, > > There was nothing quiet, or "in the background" about it, believe me. This > update is the topic of conversation at the noon PDT brown bag I'm hosting > today. The changes were pushed live ahead of the meeting, so there would be > no question they are incorporated in to the TPV and TOS, both of which are > effective on 4/30. > > I'll see those of you still interested in the subject at noon here: > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > -- joe > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Boy Lane wrote: >> >> As this did not make it into the mailing list yet but is rather important, >> LL changed the TPV policy again, quiet, in the background. >> >> I don't know how this affects the legal validity of that document >> people agreed by clickwrapping since the new ToS popup, I just >> want to make you aware of that. >> >> Robin ran a diff and the actual changes can be found here: >> http://pastebin.com/Yd1j1EdE >> >> Major changes as I see them, the terms "...you develop and distribute" >> are gone, and one new paragraph was introduced. >> "Nothing in this Policy is intended to modify the terms of the GPL." >> >> Someone in LL seems to have woken up, but damage is done >> nevertheless. >> >> Boy >> >> ___ >> 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict
I think gigs meant it's not a ruling in the sense of something legally binding like a court ruling would be, it's not even really legal advice. Anyway, the current amended policy seems much more reasonable and i'd think the FSF would agree. On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Robert Martin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Gigs wrote: >> Ron Festa wrote: >>> Not really. If you're a user basically that means you have to stop using >>> that viewer if you want to continue access. If you are a developer it >>> means you have to remove the ability to connect to SL. Again as per the >>> FSF ruling on this, they're restricting the service not the software. >> >> It's not a "ruling". >> >> It's the personal opinion of a non-lawyer that works for the FSF. > > no i think that somebody with the title > "Licensing Compliance Engineer, Free Software Foundation" could be > said to speak for the FSF. > -- > 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] (no subject)
S3 should not be deleting anything unless requested to - does the buildbot do this deletion? On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 10:15 PM, Robin Cornelius wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 2:57 PM, Malachi wrote: >> ok my mistake its all of the snowglobe links on the downloads >> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 10:54:54 -0300, Malachi wrote: >> >>> >>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Source_downloads version Snowglobe 1.3.2 >>> download links are broken... when clicked an xml pops up saying access >>> denied? >>> > > Known issue, the amazon S3 storage was removing the files from the > autobuilder after 3 months, so some of these links are currently dead. > Merov is working very hard to fix the 1.X branch of snowglobe so that > we can build that once more and has also been directly effected by > this issue. For the source code your best bet is SVN still, but if you > need libs bundles or artwork you may have to try to get specific > versions from someone who has them. > > Regards > > Robin > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Thank you for updating the Viewer Directory requirements
Anyone who has ever had a stalker (and I unfortunately have, so I can speak with some authority on the subject) will appreciate why it's important not to disclose your real name and address in public. Where it comes to trust, Henri has a point here - do you have the address of every single developer who worked on every piece of software you use on a daily basis? I certainly don't, I don't even have their full names for some programs - just online aliases. The reason I trust these people is because of online reputation and because if I want to I can read the code myself and audit it. On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Bryon Ruxton wrote: > Henri, >> So, registering to the directory is clearly not a requirement to be > considered > as TPV-policy compliant, but on the other hand LL suggests that > the viewers > which are not in the directory are "dangerous" ones... > This is both unfair and > very close to pure diffamation. > The viewer is required to comply, just make your viewer comply and don't > register in the directory. If they are to prevent any viewer that does not > comply with the TPV to connect to the grid I am glad for it. > > And I agree with you in substance with your privacy claims, but you have to > live in the real world and you have to abide by California law here. You own > interpretation of French law is irrelevant. Yes LL has a wishy-washy policy > designed not to accept any responsibility for anything. Guess what! So does > Google and every hosting company on the planet, I have the same type of > clauses as a business and doing otherwise would stupid and putting my > company and myself at risk. > > If you are not willing to trust anyone with your basic information, you may > want to start building your own personal datacenter Henri. > You ARE trusting free.fr and Paypal with even more sensitive data btw... > > What should I or anyone trust using your viewer if there is so much to hide > and unwillingness to provide a real name and a simple physical address. > > If I applied your own standards of trust, I am afraid I see no way for me to > even consider using your viewer for my own protection. Just think about it. > > On 4/28/10 2:57 PM, "Henri Beauchamp" wrote: > >> Sorry, but as far as I'm concerned, I won't take the risk and won't trust > LL >> (or any other company on Internet, even French ones) about being able > to keep >> my data safe from prying eyes... > > > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] TPV and the self compiler
If you don't make any changes do you still need to change the name? I commonly update by doing an svn update and recompile, and believed I was being 100% complaint - is this incorrect? On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: > Hi Johnnie, > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Johnnie Carling > wrote: >> >> Well it's probably a bit late to ask this but >> >> I would never call myself a developer, but I do compile the source code >> quite >> a bit... playing with compiler flags, trying patches from the JIRA and >> etc... >> >> After a quick read, its looking like I have to give any viewer I compile a >> name and version. correct? (section 1.b. of the Policy on Third-Party >> Viewers) >> > > If you're using the Snowglobe svn repo, the channel will be set to > "Snowglobe Test Build" and this is good enough under the policy considering > the changes you're making (thanks for testing patches BTW... :) ). > > If you distribute your build to friends though (you don't mention doing this > but, just saying...) you may want to modify that name (see > llcommon/llversionviewer.h). > > Cheers, > - Merov > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Please - enough about the CA
None of those projects have an agreement that allows proprietary versions On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 4:12 AM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote: > On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Henri Beauchamp wrote: > > SL is the ONLY so-called (but actually still not, obviously: a Canada-Dry > LGPL, perhaps ?) LGPL Open Source project requiring a License agreement > from its contributors !!! This makes strictly no sense and is a clear > impairement. > > Axiom, OpenOffice, NetBeans, Joomla!, Alfresco, ... > > > and all projects under the Apache Foundation. > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas > > and the Perl Foundation > > http://www.perlfoundation.org/contributor_license_agreement > > and the Python Foundation > > http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form-python/ > > none of which are in any way commercial, and all of whom embody the ideals > to which other open source projects aspire. > > I know that some of you won't sign an agreement, and that you have reasons > you think are good. I accept that whether I agree with those reasons or > not, while deeply regreting not being able to share in your work. > > If any of you are unsure what the implications of the agreement are, I am > happy to provide what assistance I can if you contact me _off_ of the list > (but I am not a lawyer, and crucially I am not _your_ lawyer). > > There may come a time when Linden Lab will revisit the requirement for or > the terms of the CA. If I'm still here, I'll let the community know when > that is happening. > > For the time being, changing the CA is not on the table - we've got other > things to spend our time and energy on at the moment - like making Second > Life Fast, Easy, and Fun. > > If you feel the need to continue to rail against the CA, please take it > somewhere else and leave this list to people who are trying to do the things > that are possible now. > > > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] display names = the end of 1.x viewers?
Is RegAPI still going to be available with last names or is that being updated too? On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Baloo Uriza wrote: > On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:04:19 -0700, Kelly Linden wrote: > >> 'Resident' is just the final last name, and is treated specially on new >> viewers to be hidden from view when displayed. > > So new users won't have the choice of picking a last name anymore? Isn't > that going to severely limit the number of names possible now? > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
That's the bit that stands out - this may have been one former team member's bad idea, and it could be forgiven on the basis that it was just one former team member who has now been kicked out - except of course that the rest of the team are trying to say "it's not so bad". Surely it'd be better to say "one former member of our team had a stupid and illegal idea, we apologise for this and have taken measures to ensure our resources are not abused in the same manner again". Denying wrongdoing is never a good way to make an apology, neither is censoring comments on your blog by the way. For the record, here's my comment that didn't get through moderation: “This was not a DDoS” Yes, it was – and your “apology” means nothing if you deny doing wrong and try to make it look like something merely “silly” instead of a criminal action. Yes, it was a stupid idea – but it was also a criminal idea. Why the hell was someone able to modify your login page to add the malicious HTML without oversight, and why are you not apologising properly? On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Latif Khalifa wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 1:48 AM, Phox wrote: >> I feel I need to take a moment here to address some of this: >> >> First of all, the issue with the login screen was NOT an attempt at >> DDOS, Fractured was looking at traffic graphs for the website in >> question and thought it would be funny to mess with them by making the >> traffic go from ~150 hits a day to several hundred thousand. He was >> simply messing with page views on the site, it was a stupid thing to do >> no doubt, but it was not a DDOS attack. >> >> The website in question suffered no ill effects, and to imply that >> loading a .php and a few images is an attempt at DDOS is just >> ridiculous, our login page consists of a .php script a hi-res picture, >> and our website doesn't go down as a result. > > Engineering an attack where several million requests a day were sent > from all over the world to the affected web site most certainly > qualified as DDoS. In some jurisdictions such attacks are considered > criminal activity. The fact that attack was not successful is > irrelevant. Motivation for such activity also makes no difference. > > What is relevant is that Emerald login page in effect turned every > Emerald user into a part of a botnet. What is disturbing here are > attempts to downplay the incident which does nothing to restore the > confidence in the leadership of Modular Systems which is very > unfortunate. > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party, viewers: is the policy worth anything?
I've reported emerald for violating this clause of the TPV policy: "You must not launch Denial of Service (“DoS”) attacks, engage in griefing, or distribute other functionality that Linden Lab considers harmful or disruptive to Second Life or the Second Life community." So, hopefully that'll be the end of it, hopefully.. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Michael Daniel wrote: > Since I am a student on summer break until next week, I have way too > much time on my hands, and I like numbers (famous last words) so I did > some analysis of modular systems attack on iheartanime.com. > > I think the amount of data involved has been understated in many > discussions I've seen so far, so I'll show my work, but long story > short: 4.2 terrabytes of data transfer are involved with this attack > (2.1 tb up and 2.1 tb down). > > I used the screen cap from the following URL to find exactly what was > downloaded every time somebody logged in with the emerald viewer during > this attack: > http://alphavilleherald.com/images/2010/08/modular-bing.jpg > > I used Google Chrome's inspect element feature to find the sizes of the > files downloaded (right click, inspect element - resources - size). > > This is what I came up with: > > http://iheartanime.com/griffblog.php?article=omnomnomnomnom 163.20k > times 20 loads is 3264k > http://iheartanime.com/images/emerald-explore-sounds.png > 50.03k > http://iheartanime.com/images/emerald-windows-disclosure.png 55.09kb > http://iheartanime.com/images/emerald-mac-disclosure.png > 66.90kb > http://iheartanime.com/images/emerald-linux-disclosure.png > 67.32kb > http://iheartanime.com/images/imgsearch-v0.0.2.png > 152.37k > http://iheartanime.com/images/FRIENDLY%20GREETINGS.jpg 77.32k > http://iheartanime.com/images/inertia-test.jpg > 113.51k > http://iheartanime.com/images/inertia-login.jpg ` > 25.78k > http://iheartanime.com/images/inuyertia.jpg > 153.68k > http://iheartanime.com/images/neillife.jpg > 102.22k > http://iheartanime.com/images/background-v2.png > 130.64k > http://iheartanime.com/images/background.png > 77.40k > > Total size: 4336.26kb, or 4.33626mb per emerald login. > > According to the alphaville herald article, "Gazov told the Herald he > saw 16,541,673 page hits referred by the Emerald login pages over three > days". I'm sure he has the server logs to back him up, so lets see what > happens if we take him at his word (which I would do, as he seems pretty > honest to me). > link: > http://alphavilleherald.com/2010/08/emerald-viewer-login-screen-sneak-ddos-attack.html > > I count 32 page hits per login, so we divide 16541673 by 32 to get the > number of emerald logins during the attack. > 16541673 hits / 32 page loads = 516927.28125 logins from emerald > > Since it's not an even number, Hazim's numbers must be off a bit. That > is no surprise, since his server was under such strain. Lets round it > up to 516928 logins from emerald during the attack. > > 510678 logins during the attack * 4.33626mb requested per login = > 2214432.58428mb requested from iheartanime.com > > I used an online calculator at the following link to translate that into > terrabytes: > http://www.matisse.net/bitcalc/ > > It works out to 2.11184748104095 Terrabytes of bandwidth stolen from > Hazim in 3 days! > > As we all know, this bandwidth was not just stolen from Hazim. It was > also stolen from Emerald users, so if we multiply that by two we get a > grand total of 4.22369496154786 terrabyts stolen in three days. To make > this more concrete, that's over 4.2 tb of transfer. If you'll pardon > the archaic reference, the library of congress, if compressed, could fit > into 4.2 tb almost two times. That's a lot of data. > Citation for LOC measurement: http://bit.ly/9TRWUX > > The crazy part is that modular systems shows absolutely no remorse at > all for stealing Hazim's bandwidth. Most hosts give unlimited > bandwidth, but some do not. If, for example, his hosting was at > nextpoint.net, their hosting plans all come with 2000gb of transfer, so > he would have gone over by 162.53182058594gb. They charge $4.50 per gb > for overage, so that would have worked out to $731.39 in damages to > Hazim, not counting his regular traffic. Aren't there laws against this > kind of thing? > > Nextpoint.net reference: > http://www.nexpoint.net/support/policies/billing.cfm > > Video of the emerald team talking about how ridiculous it would be to > apologize to Hazim, among other things: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwmVj9u7C3U > > Somebody in the video (I'm assuming the person is Arabella Steadham) > said, "I'm not going to apologize to Hazim, I mean, why would I?," as > others agree that they could care less about him. They also said that > their users take their account names and passwords too seriously. > > I don't see how the third party directory can retain any respectability > at all if they don't
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
"You must not launch Denial of Service (“DoS”) attacks, engage in griefing, or distribute other functionality that Linden Lab considers harmful or disruptive to Second Life or the Second Life community" would have prevented this incident too, if it was obeyed and enforced. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Ann Otoole wrote: > I hate replying to a policy thread here but will make this one time > exception for my humble input for LL's consideration: > > What I think LL should consider is something in the TPV policy that > prohibits any tpv from connecting to any non LL server for any reason when a > LL grid is selected for login. This simple policy, if correctly followed, > would have prevented the incident. It would also eliminate a tpv team from > monitoring logins and usage but then where exactly did they get to do that > in the first place? It is a missed policy bullet. There is no reason a > client should connect to anything except an LL server when an LL grid is > selected. LL needs to be totally security conscious about the login process > and what rigid requirements must be met for connecting to the LL grids. > > I.e.; I watch my port activity. Everyone should. But not everyone would know > what they are looking at. But had they been watching I bet they would have > been wanting to know what all those connections to that host were all about > right away. Had I been using Emerald and saw thirty something connections to > iheartanime dot com appear I would have been raising hell immediately. What > you connect to on the internet can be and is monitored sometimes and being > open to forced connections to something really bad would be extremely > unfortunate for many that have tom be squeaky clean. > > I use Kirstens and I don't even care much for it's connection for motd. > However it does tell me when the latest release is available and that is > very useful information. Maybe there is a way for LL to provide motd bullets > for tpvs so they can get the word out about updates or something. > > There has to be a better way. > > Regards > > Ann Otoole InSL > > > From: Brian McGroarty > To: Thomas Grimshaw > Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com > Sent: Sat, August 21, 2010 10:33:52 AM > Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is > the policy worth anything? > > On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 7:04 AM, Thomas Grimshaw > wrote: >> Loading 1mb of content per user is hardly a denial of service attack. >> Crosslinking occurs everywhere on the web, this is simply nothing but >> paranoid bull. > > "Crosslinking" drops the context of hiding gibberish requests to a > critic's website in a hidden frame that will never be revealed to the > user. This isn't a mere hyperlink to another page or naively stealing > someone else's image hosting. > > My read (but I'm no lawyer) is that this looks like 2.d.iii of > http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php and we're already having that > discussion. If anyone can come up with specific reasons why this might > have had legitimate reason to be there, or how this one could be yet > another oversight or mistake, that would be helpful. I sure haven't > heard any to date. > > -- > Brian McGroarty | Linden Lab > Sent from my Newton MP2100 via acoustic coupler > ___ > 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
[opensource-dev] SVN dead at LL?
In the subject really - is subversion just dead now? -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] SVN dead at LL?
So basically, server is still up but no updates, that pretty much answers my question On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Boroondas Gupte wrote: > On 08/22/2010 02:32 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > > In the subject really - is subversion just dead now? > > Define "dead". The server is still up and running and I guess it'll stay > like that for the foreseeable future. About the code hosted there, and the > projects behind that: > > I assume there will be no further source drops of official viewer code on > SVN, as there are now public hg repositories for that purpose, first of all > http://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/viewer-development > I assume the community committers still have write access, so Snowglobe 1 > might (and probably will, if necessary) still receive security fixes. There > will probably not be any new features developed for Snowglobe 1. I don't > know whether some Viewer 2 features will be backported. > Features of Snowglobe 2 will be cherry picked into Snowstorm > (lindenlab/viewer-development) if LL thinks they should be in the mainline > viewer. It's unclear what happens with features that the community wants but > LL doesn't. (For implemented ones, you'll probably be able to get them from > the individual dev's repo. We aren't yet sure whether we also want to > establish a common community repo for that purpose.) > > cheers > Boroondas > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
Being listed in the directory is a sign that viewer devs have self-certified compliance, but it's also an unconcious sign to users that the viewer is legit, even if not intended. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 3:56 PM, JB Hancroft wrote: > Hi Ann, > > You suggested: "What I think LL should consider is something in the TPV > policy that prohibits any tpv from connecting to any non LL server for any > reason when a LL grid is selected for login." > > I'd change that to require that any TPV disclose the specifics of any and > all non-LL servers that they are connecting to, and the details of why they > are doing so. Otherwise, some of the possible value-added functionality > gets crippled. > > The real issue here is the TPVP is just legal CYA for LL, it's not something > they actually monitor or enforce. > There is no assurance being provided by LL or by the TPV developer, that > they have any sense of reasonable security, including processes that limit > rogue devs from pulling the kind of stunts that the Emerald team seem to > favor. > > If the TPVP really matters, we'll see Emerald shut down from the TPVP > program, because of this accumulated nonsense. > If not, then it confirms that it's all just a paper chase. > > Regards, > - JB > > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:22 AM, Ann Otoole wrote: >> >> I hate replying to a policy thread here but will make this one time >> exception for my humble input for LL's consideration: >> >> What I think LL should consider is something in the TPV policy that >> prohibits any tpv from connecting to any non LL server for any reason when a >> LL grid is selected for login. This simple policy, if correctly followed, >> would have prevented the incident. It would also eliminate a tpv team from >> monitoring logins and usage but then where exactly did they get to do that >> in the first place? It is a missed policy bullet. There is no reason a >> client should connect to anything except an LL server when an LL grid is >> selected. LL needs to be totally security conscious about the login process >> and what rigid requirements must be met for connecting to the LL grids. >> >> I.e.; I watch my port activity. Everyone should. But not everyone would >> know what they are looking at. But had they been watching I bet they would >> have been wanting to know what all those connections to that host were all >> about right away. Had I been using Emerald and saw thirty something >> connections to iheartanime dot com appear I would have been raising hell >> immediately. What you connect to on the internet can be and is monitored >> sometimes and being open to forced connections to something really bad would >> be extremely unfortunate for many that have tom be squeaky clean. >> >> I use Kirstens and I don't even care much for it's connection for motd. >> However it does tell me when the latest release is available and that is >> very useful information. Maybe there is a way for LL to provide motd bullets >> for tpvs so they can get the word out about updates or something. >> >> There has to be a better way. >> >> Regards >> >> Ann Otoole InSL >> >> >> From: Brian McGroarty >> To: Thomas Grimshaw >> Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com >> Sent: Sat, August 21, 2010 10:33:52 AM >> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: >> is the policy worth anything? >> >> On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 7:04 AM, Thomas Grimshaw >> wrote: >> > Loading 1mb of content per user is hardly a denial of service attack. >> > Crosslinking occurs everywhere on the web, this is simply nothing but >> > paranoid bull. >> >> "Crosslinking" drops the context of hiding gibberish requests to a >> critic's website in a hidden frame that will never be revealed to the >> user. This isn't a mere hyperlink to another page or naively stealing >> someone else's image hosting. >> >> My read (but I'm no lawyer) is that this looks like 2.d.iii of >> http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php and we're already having that >> discussion. If anyone can come up with specific reasons why this might >> have had legitimate reason to be there, or how this one could be yet >> another oversight or mistake, that would be helpful. I sure haven't >> heard any to date. >> >> -- >> Brian McGroarty | Linden Lab >> Sent from my Newton MP2100 via acoustic coupler >> ___ >> 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/OpenSo
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
Tell me, what's the default install path on linux, if there even is an installer? I know personally when I use a new viewer I do this: wget http://whatever gunzip whatever.tar.gz tar xvf whatever.tar cd ~/whatever ./whatever or: svn co http://whatever cd whatever cd indra python develop.py build cd viewer-linux-i686-relwithdebinfo/newview/packaged ./whatever So that the full path will be /home/gareth/whatever or /home/gareth/whatever/viewer-linux-i686-relwithdebinfo/newview/packaged If I wanted to be anonymous in-world (and usually I don't, i'm quite open even when i'm doing all kinds of sexy fetish stuff - but some people do value keeping their real name private), leaking the "/home/gareth" part would be a huge problem. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Robert Martin wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 10:56 AM, JB Hancroft wrote: >> If the TPVP really matters, we'll see Emerald shut down from the TPVP >> program, because of this accumulated nonsense. >> If not, then it confirms that it's all just a paper chase. > > actually lets see whats going on here > 1 the whole texture thing was due to the viewers install folder being > baked into textures > IF THIS IS LEFT AS DEFAULT then very little info is actually given the > problem is some folks were doing installs into their own home folder > (somebody did not account for that) > > 2 the whole login screen edit was mostly the person in question err > being "drunk" at the time and not going back to fix/revert his editing > (btw he is in fact stepping down and surrendering the domain) > > I would say that since 1 the problems are being fixed 2 former lindens > (from the recent "Night of Glass" set of layoffs) are now being hired > as part of the E-Team this is a closed issue > > -- > Robert L Martin > Phox whenish is the next beta coming out and is 2439 being blocked?? > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
As they shouldn't be! Although one does wonder whether users are now at risk of being banned if they keep using it On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Am Sunday 22 August 2010 schrieb L. Christopher Bird: >> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Jesse Barnett > wrote: >> > Ignoring this and giving the all clear with no other action taken >> > on the part of Linden Lab will instead demonstrate that the TPV >> > is a worthless scrap of paper. >> >> Correction, it only exist on paper if printed. The proper phrase is >> "a worthless configuration of pixels" >> >> The TPVP makes it clear what the consequences are for breaking the >> policy. 8c says: >> >> "If a Third-Party Viewer or your use or distribution of it violates >> this Policy or any Linden Lab policy, your permission to access >> Second Life using the Third-Party Viewer shall terminate >> automatically. You acknowledge and agree that we may require you >> to stop using or distributing a Third-Party Viewer for accessing >> Second Life if we determine that there is a violation." >> >> So either the lab will enforce this, or they will say "Well you are >> so popular you can screw around all you want". Is Emerald the >> viewer "too big to fail"? >> >> -- ZenMondo > > I just looked and emerald's not in the tpv directory anymore. > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
As I understand it, you don't need to be in the list, just comply with the policy. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Will wrote: > They may be waiting to make a formal announcement before they pull the plug > on the viewer- didn't they make a policy of not allowing any viewer to > connect that wasn't on the list? I think so- > > ---------- > From: "Gareth Nelson" > Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2010 2:50 PM > To: "Lance Corrimal" > Cc: > Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is > the policy worth anything? > >> As they shouldn't be! >> Although one does wonder whether users are now at risk of being banned >> if they keep using it >> >> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Lance Corrimal >> wrote: >>> >>> Am Sunday 22 August 2010 schrieb L. Christopher Bird: >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Jesse Barnett >>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> > Ignoring this and giving the all clear with no other action taken >>>> > on the part of Linden Lab will instead demonstrate that the TPV >>>> > is a worthless scrap of paper. >>>> >>>> Correction, it only exist on paper if printed. The proper phrase is >>>> "a worthless configuration of pixels" >>>> >>>> The TPVP makes it clear what the consequences are for breaking the >>>> policy. 8c says: >>>> >>>> "If a Third-Party Viewer or your use or distribution of it violates >>>> this Policy or any Linden Lab policy, your permission to access >>>> Second Life using the Third-Party Viewer shall terminate >>>> automatically. You acknowledge and agree that we may require you >>>> to stop using or distributing a Third-Party Viewer for accessing >>>> Second Life if we determine that there is a violation." >>>> >>>> So either the lab will enforce this, or they will say "Well you are >>>> so popular you can screw around all you want". Is Emerald the >>>> viewer "too big to fail"? >>>> >>>> -- ZenMondo >>> >>> I just looked and emerald's not in the tpv directory anymore. >>> ___ >>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >>> privileges >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >> ___ >> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >> privileges > > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
There isn't anything in the policy itself which says you must be listed, there is however a note on the directory page warning users to be wary of unlisted viewers. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Will wrote: > hmm ok I may be wrong but remember a rush to update viewers from the > approved list, didn't look over my shoulder and just for good housekeeping I > don't venture from approved viewers. Seriously hope you are wrong or there > will be little to no control over who gets to connect. > > ---------- > From: "Gareth Nelson" > Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2010 3:25 PM > To: "Will" > Cc: "Lance Corrimal" ; > > Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is > the policy worth anything? > >> As I understand it, you don't need to be in the list, just comply with >> the policy. >> >> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Will wrote: >>> >>> They may be waiting to make a formal announcement before they pull the >>> plug >>> on the viewer- didn't they make a policy of not allowing any viewer to >>> connect that wasn't on the list? I think so- >>> >>> -- >>> From: "Gareth Nelson" >>> Sent: Sunday, August 22, 2010 2:50 PM >>> To: "Lance Corrimal" >>> Cc: >>> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: >>> is >>> the policy worth anything? >>> >>>> As they shouldn't be! >>>> Although one does wonder whether users are now at risk of being banned >>>> if they keep using it >>>> >>>> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Lance Corrimal >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Am Sunday 22 August 2010 schrieb L. Christopher Bird: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 11:32 AM, Jesse Barnett >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> > Ignoring this and giving the all clear with no other action taken >>>>>> > on the part of Linden Lab will instead demonstrate that the TPV >>>>>> > is a worthless scrap of paper. >>>>>> >>>>>> Correction, it only exist on paper if printed. The proper phrase is >>>>>> "a worthless configuration of pixels" >>>>>> >>>>>> The TPVP makes it clear what the consequences are for breaking the >>>>>> policy. 8c says: >>>>>> >>>>>> "If a Third-Party Viewer or your use or distribution of it violates >>>>>> this Policy or any Linden Lab policy, your permission to access >>>>>> Second Life using the Third-Party Viewer shall terminate >>>>>> automatically. You acknowledge and agree that we may require you >>>>>> to stop using or distributing a Third-Party Viewer for accessing >>>>>> Second Life if we determine that there is a violation." >>>>>> >>>>>> So either the lab will enforce this, or they will say "Well you are >>>>>> so popular you can screw around all you want". Is Emerald the >>>>>> viewer "too big to fail"? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- ZenMondo >>>>> >>>>> I just looked and emerald's not in the tpv directory anymore. >>>>> ___ >>>>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >>>>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >>>>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >>>>> privileges >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >>>> everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - >>>> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >>>> >>>> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >>>> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >>>> ___ >>>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >>>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >>>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >>>> privileges >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
Users are not allowed to connect with a viewer that does not comply, but a viewer does not need to be in the directory in order to comply. On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:36 PM, Altair Sythos wrote: > On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 22:30:20 +0200 > Henri Beauchamp wrote: > >> On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 21:10:00 +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> >> > There isn't anything in the policy itself which says you must be >> > listed, there is however a note on the directory page warning users >> > to be wary of unlisted viewers. >> >> Which is a non-sence. > > sorry cannot see the no-sense, terms are both for developers and > resident > > a developer CAN listen a viewer in TPV (and succesfully listed if > viewer is TPV compliant) > > a resident MUST use a TPV viewer to use Linden services > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] Malicious payloads in third-party viewers: is the policy worth anything?
Yes, but most viewers have decent legit developers who won't put that stuff on the login page. On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Harold Brown wrote: > What I find interesting is that people are neglecting to realize that > ANY viewer, even a LL viewer could have been used to do the same thing > by changing the WEBPAGE the login screen pointed to. Or for that > matter distributing a object using the new Media functions to load a > webpage with the exact same iframe set. > > > > On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 8:03 AM, David M Chess wrote: >> >> Could we move all this stuff to a new "emeraldgate" list, or something? >> >> That I could then carefully not subscribe to? >> >> __ >> ___ >> 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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] This is how Linden Lab treats it's customers...
One way to fix this "problem" is for LL to enable tenants of rented-out sims to directly take over payment of tier. But of course, if any one tenant quits paying, there's still the risk that the sim tier won't be paid, and I doubt anyone thinks LL should offer the sim for free. I did already reply offlist to this pointing out how offtopic it is though, and pointing out that LL have no contract with tenants of rental regions - tenants of such regions are thus not customers. On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Stickman wrote: >> It makes >> no sense whatsoever. > > It makes some sense. It promotes a reseller market, creating an > economy that otherwise wouldn't exist by requiring a middleman. > > I won't say I agree with it, but I don't really consider it something > I need to make a strong decision on. > >> Aleric's gripe is that if LL didnt have the policy in place she/he would >> have paid their money happily directly to LL with the consequence that >> he/she would still be on the land that they had "occupied" for over a >> yr, had much invested in and had some sentimental value to them. > > Aleric is not the first person to have suffered land being swept out > from under them. I've had more than one set of friends that almost had > it happen to them. > >> That you feel that this doesn't actually disrespect users or customers >> of LL's is a sad indictment on your logical abilities. > > This is a problem that LL should have addressed already, yes. One way > it can be addressed by providing resellers, or those that purchase > land from resellers, with more information. Suggesting a contract > template between renter and reseller to protect each with some level > of protection might also be a good idea. A legal recourse to follow > when someone breaks their contract, either landlord or renter, is > better than impotence. > > I don't know why LL doesn't sell Homesteads to the average resident. > It might be intentional, it might be a legacy policy that hasn't been > reevaluated and cleared up yet. But it's still possible to work within > the system and not get screwed over. There just needs to be more > education about the existing system. > > My heart goes out to Aleric, and I hope this can be resolved > positively. It won't be resolved on this list, though. > > Jack Linden's office hours might be the best place to bring it up (I'm > not sure). Thursdays at 11am. > http://slurl.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/213/107/49 > > Submitting a ticket asking for a deferral on the actual deletion of > the sim ASAP is a good place to start. > > Finding a new "Homestead holder" and talking with the old reseller to > get the sim transferred over is your best bet to salvage it. There's a > US$100 or L$28000 fee to transfer, but it's better than losing it. > > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Private_Region_Transfer_FAQ > > Good luck. > > -Stickman > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] This is how Linden Lab treats it's customers...
That's a serious bug in LL's business model - your account is safer as a basic, since a premium account that quits paying means the account is deleted (rather than merely downgraded). On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 5:35 PM, Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > btw, if you're considering changing your account from premium to basic, > be sure to pay any money you own to LL and then downgrade your account > thru the site, do not just stop paying, if you stop paying them while > still being a premium they will wipe out all your account's data, > inventory L$ balance etc (i've seen some people that had the > misconception that to downgrade all you had to do was stop sending money > to LL, the ones that didn't got set straight in time lost everything) > > On 28/8/2010 13:01, mysticaldem...@xrgrid.com wrote: >> I don’t think anyone disagrees with. The problem is you can’t get a >> homestead unless you have a full sim already and so you need to rent >> from someone and this puts you dependent on someone else which is >> frustrating for people. So to log in one day and see all your hard work >> returned to your lost and found isn’t a pleasant experience and seems SL >> if they are serious about the user experience would have some better >> ways to handle this. >> >> >> >> I don’t know if you rent from someone else if you can do a restore of >> your region to the new location. But seems like there are ways to make >> this better if not just let people rent homesteads which to me I believe >> would be a huge market. >> >> >> >> Anyway this whole subject is off topic for this mailing list and >> probably should be on the SL forums. >> >> >> >> M. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com >> [mailto:opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com] *On Behalf Of *Joel >> Foner >> *Sent:* Saturday, August 28, 2010 11:49 AM >> *To:* Aleric Inglewood >> *Cc:* opensource-dev >> *Subject:* Re: [opensource-dev] This is how Linden Lab treats it's >> customers... >> >> >> >> >> After being a paying customer for more than a year, renting a homestead, >> and thus paying Linden Lab ~ USD$ 1000 or so ... they just take the sim >> offline, with no opening to even discuss the matter. >> >> Why? Because of something I did? No. The reason is that Linden >> Lab isn't interested in the "little people". Unless you have a FULL >> sim of USD$ 300 per month, you don't count. >> >> >> >> There is a simple answer for this. You are the customer of your landlord >> in this case, not Linden Lab. Yes, you have a Second Life account, but >> you are not renting your land from Linden Lab. You are renting your land >> from another avatar in Second Life. Linden Lab is not a party to your >> decision to rent... so why are they accountable if some other avatar >> bails out and decides to "level their city block"? If the landlord >> decided to stop renting, boot everyone off and re-terraform the region >> for some completely different use, would you think Linden Lab would have >> any responsibility for stopping that or somehow compensating you? It's >> the landlord's land, and they can do anything with it they choose to, >> including shut it down, leave, take it over from the renters, or shut it >> down and let no one else in at all. >> >> >> >> Joel >> >> >> >> ___ >> 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 v2.0.14 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEAREKAAYFAkx5Os0ACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWNbQCeL35cNo4MkluDPXFx2+ZGb3z3 > G/UAn31zdQ2HEKMoRzbp+3CYV/C+O5CM > =pGVm > -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 > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
Re: [opensource-dev] This is how Linden Lab treats it's customers...
Oddly I myself tend to only post when there's some kind of drama, as I don't do a lot of viewer development these days (only the odd patch when needed if I bother to login at all). On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Sodovan Torok wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 4:14 PM, Altair Sythos wrote: >> >> On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 20:32:22 +0200 >> Laurent Bechir wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > Argent Stonecutter a écrit : >> > > On 2010-08-29, at 09:37, Laurent Bechir wrote: > > [snip] > As a (mostly read-only) user of opensource-dev, I'd like to see more > on-topic posts. Maybe the moderator(s) could prune this branch... > > > ___ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -- “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
