[opensource-dev] TPV - Nope
Hi All! Since the TPV and new TOS seems to be in effect now, I'd like to finally comment on it too. For those of you who don't know me, I'm the person who started the first thrird party viewer (in fact I made the original Wiki page http://wiki.secondlife.com/w/index.php?title=Alternate_viewers&redirect=no) and as it appears I'm still the person with the most accepted patches to the viewer (except maybe SnowGlobe commits, I'm not sure if or how they are counted) and the winner of the year 2007 Linden OpenSource Award. I have not made viewers in quite some time and have basically resigned over gripes about how the Lindens handle open source and the OS community in general, so I'm not sure if my words still have any weight (not that any resident's words have any weight with the Lindens, except Stroker Serpentine's maybe, when they are voiced through a lawyer or court). So just take my words as coming from the elder statesman armchair. However, I still had my account and a couple of alts, but this new TOS/TPV, now that's it's out of the box about to be in effect soon, puts the final nail into the coffin. I'm not going to try to dissect what's written there or what the practical legal impact is. Living in Germany with strong customer protection laws, legal impact in fact is most likely zilch, but what the TOS and the TPV does, is to show the Linden's view of their relationship beween themselves and their residents and OS developers. While it's not a secret that I have been less than thrilled by their views and actions in the past, I find the TPV taking it to a new level. It is their servers, their assets, their business. But trying to use their power in a way like this, dictating the terms, making far reaching demands and lightly brushing off concerns is unacceptable. Of course a viewer maker needs comply with the law, no TOS is needed for that. But making demands like the branding (as if the word "Life" was their invention) or demanding disclosure like section 8d which goes far beyond any legal obligations is just way over the top for me. I took their sources based on GPL once and at that time alternate viewers seemed to be welcome and later I even jumped through a few hoops to meet their new whims (e.g. complying with their trademark policies). In the recent past, I have still used SL on occasion as a regular user and now, trying to use SL as a user, I'm finding myself being presented with new demands because my past viewers are still out there for download. Am I going to agree to that? No frigging way. I certainly do not want to have any relationship with a company who is trying to use their position of power in a way like that, no matter if it's legally valid or not. The new TOS/TPV defines who LL thinks they are and who they think their users are and what kinds of demands and claims LL thinks they can make or what they think is acceptable and fair. I can only recommend to every viewer maker and contributor to have a look at this broader picture and evaluate if their contributions in time and efforts are worthwhile. Mine where fun when LL was a different company, but there I no way I would have made contributions under the current terms. In fact I won't even log in again under the new terms and have canceled my accounts today. Nicholaz. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
[opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available
+1 You made my day > That sounds pretty interesting, Dzonatas. > > What is your viewer called, this TPV derived from Snowglobe > with an extra patch? > > 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
[opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV
Re ...
> Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and
> accepting ToS/TPV in the first place.
and
> Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it
> becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the
> service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the
> TPV provisions.
I won't go to the meeting, but I have to agree with Joe's
interpretation of the TOS.
The §1 of the TOS ("By continuing to access or use Second Life after the
effective date of any such change, you agree to be bound by the modified
Terms of Service.") makes this rather clear. And §11.2 is worded in a
similar way and IMO restates this intention. Unlike other parts of the
TOS/TPV, I find those two reasonable clear and fair.
I.e. the way I took it (although IANAL) is that by agreeing to the new
TOS at login I merely agree I'm bound by it when accessing SL after the
effective date.
Nicholaz.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
[opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag
I won't attend the meeting, but here are a few pennies worth of suggestions (they would be too detailed and complex to convey in a meeting anyway). First of all, I believe the current TPV is broken beyond repair. The main reason is that responsibilities for users, developers and viewer dictionary are mixed into a mess and that many burdens/agreements which IMO belong in the category of preferred partners (viewer directory) are mushed into other sections. I'm sure it's confusing to the users and it's obvious (by previous discussion here) that it's confusing for developers. Below is a way to structure the TPV which I would have found acceptable (fleshed out details nonwithstanding): 1) Explain what an acceptable TPV is and keep it to the core concerns: - protection of copyright (blatant violations of permissions) - protection of user accounts (passwords, etc.) - protection of the service in general (viewer crashing, server load, etc.) 2) Make a section which applies to users (anyone who uses a TPV to connect to SL) and leverage your main goals through that: - prohibit use of viewers which violate the concerns under 1) - reserve the right to block access by such viewers - reserve the right to request stopping use of those and eventually to ban accounts using such viewers - instruct that there is no end user support for problems arising when using a TPV - instruct users that is their responsibility to do their DD when choosing a TPV and that they have to deal with the outcome - instruct users how to look for acceptable viewers (points listed below under 3) and recommend usage of viewers from 4) 3) Make a section for other viewer developers in general and keep requests/agreements to a bare minimum and easy to comply with - explain that if developer uses his/her viewer to connect to SL, he/she is also a user under 2) - in addition request the following - visible disclaimer about non affiliation with LL - visible notice to end users that usage being governed by the TPV policy - visible notice about account and privacy protection - visible notice about support (i.e. non-support by LL) - make it plain and simple and refrain from requesting a card blanche for broad and/or future demands (the whole TOS is transferable, and even if a developer would trust LL's good intentions, a potential buyer of LL may not be seen to have those). (See the middle part of the blog post from the Imprudence folks, these were mainly my concerns too: http://imprudenceviewer.org/2010/03/26/an-important-announcement-regarding-the-third-party-viewer-policy/) 4) Make a section for the viewer directory. Put the more far reaching requests into that for those who want to be listed there in order to gain exposure - naming conventions beyond the existing trademark policies - promise of adjustment/removal of features and other nice (for LL) to have cooperation - whatever else beyond 3) may be on LL's wishlist These are just from the top of my head and obviously I'm merely speaking for myself only and from the armchair in the off even. Nicholaz. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
