1. First Comment here, ever.

I used the copybot myself when it first got released on libSL's SVN code repository, and its a bit overhyped.
Body Shape, Skins, Clothes, etc are all temporary copies, and are lost on relog. HUD attachments, and object contents (such as scripts) in attachments, are not copied.

Also, theres a number of bugs with it. If someone has unicode in their group title when the bot is around, the bot will crash. Also, IMing the bot the message "!quit" will log it off. However, this is for the original, libSL version. The modded version which Geforce Go is selling (and made by Prim Revolution, and that Baba (the original creator) is laughing about because he's responsible for destroying LL, etc) is barely any different from the version which was freely available.

However, now being closed source, and with an obvious username and password entry, theres fears (and rightly so) it could be stealing login info. This isn't confirmed, but might be happening.

Upon questioning GeForce on this matter, she replied that you should use an alt, and when I pointed out that alts are no longer free, she suggested lying on signup that you're a new user, to get a free alt. This is breaking TOS. Not to mention its been demoed on avatars therefore breaking DMCA (these avatars were not the creators of the original work).

Also, its based off libSL, which means selling it is breaking the open source license agreement.

Theres uproar over Robin Linden too for her post on the Linden blog, apparently OKing this, making it legal (Which its not).


Its all a big mess is what I'm trying to say. Its been responded too with far too much misinformation, but does potentially damage SL and its users BIGTIME. Its not (entirely) the fault of libSL, this was bound to be made one time or later, and WORSE versions could end up being made. However, selling the product and releasing it precompiled to the masses (whereas previously it took a little bit of work to make it, etc) is only going to cause havok. And with Robin Linden apparently saying it can't be fixed (ie, just giving up on the idea of even attempting to stop or break its use).... bah, the thing that annoys me most about all this is the general attitude of those involved.

Posted at 12:34PM on Nov 14th 2006 by Anonymous

2. >The geeks of libSL react with surprise that anyone could think that this might be used for evil purposes, and helpfully suggest that a DMCA takedown notice will solve the problems it creates.

The geeks at Linden Lab have also said this, Caliandris -- that's their only response, and always has been.

Meanwhile, the superior geeks, like Spin Martin, suggested that everyone should try both selling everything AND giving away everything for free. I guess his experience in the music and podcasting industries have led him to this positon.

http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2006/11/bots_back_in_th.html

I don't buy at all that this isn't the fault of libsl. They deliberately made the copybot; they joyfully, gleefully, maliciously spread it around inworld. Baba Yamamoto and other libbers have been going around the grid since November 7, Revolution Day, spreading this stuff around. It's for sale now on Slex, even though one libber, Jesse Malthus, says they have no yanked the code.

I'm unclear on what users of copybot actually get when they deploy it, whether the skins and shapes and such they get can be in fact kept in inventory permanently and resold -- there is discussion about how it is temporary.

They put notecarded disclaimer that supposedly asks permission of targeted avatars to be copied, but that's lame.

The real question isn't why Baba spread the copy bot or why he and others at libsl made the copy bot -- anything the Lindens can copy can eventually be copied by somebody else because everybody has to have access to the streaming world in order to see it, and that means the information about what is rezzed can be captured by those who know how to do it.

The real question to me is why the Lindens sanctioned libsl; while Cory blessed it; why Lindens remain in it to this say, though it has constantly filled up with w-hat griefers, and why given that they are in the group, they didn't instantly shut this down. I realize their default is always to reward script-kiddise, but this is a time when other departments might have persuaded the programming cliques to ratchet down their constant exhuberance for giving away the store.

Posted at 12:26PM on Nov 14th 2006 by Prokofy Neva

3. The folks in libSL aren't "evil": they are just naive and thoughtless. Many of them hold to the "information is free!" mindset, with themselves cast in the role of savior freeing the imprisoned data from it's vile captors. I find that people with this perspective generally have never had to make a living from their own work. They have never learned the actual effort involved in taking an idea and making it into something saleable. And of course, it is always easier to simply steal something than it is to create it.

So where does this leave us? Linden Labs has a huge gaping hole in their rights management code. Fixing it would likely mean making major changes to how the asset server works, adding some sort of private/public key system linking creator to legitimate user.

I don't see this happening any time soon for two reasons. Firstly, Linden Labs appears to have no extra resources to work on adding complex features to their code. Everyone on their team is struggling to keep their existing features working. Secondly, adding some sort of key based validation of usage rights would add processing load to the asset server and client. Adding extra delay/processing activity is not something they want to do to their already over-taxed infrastructure.

Netting it out, I suspect we will have to live with this problem for an extended period. During that time, object theft will likely begin to significantly eat into the revenues of developers. Developers will likely hold back on creating new items, hoping that fixes will be forth coming. So we'll see a reduction in new product releases, collapse/exit of a few developers, and probably a lot of protest.

Linden Labs needs to respond to this, and do so forcefully. But I agree with Anonymous above- the responses thus far are extremely unsatisfying.

Posted at 1:09PM on Nov 14th 2006 by Tomas_Hausdorff

4. I didn't actually say that libSL people were evil, just that they seemed surprised that someone would use this for evil purposes. I fyou read the forums stuff GeForce Go hasn't come up with one legitimate use for the CopyBot, just a lot of flannel about people being about to issue a takedown if their stuff is ripped off.

Posted at 1:12PM on Nov 14th 2006 by Caliandris

5. I sympatize with the philanthropic(sp?) and curious hacker way to see things (note I'm using the word "hacker" in the original sense, and not int he media distorted "bad guy" sense), but I understand that the consequences of that kind of atitude when inside a capitalist system often harm people that depend mainlly on the capitalism

Posted at 3:21PM on Nov 14th 2006 by TigroSpottystripes Katsu

6. This sort of technology will appear whether we like it or not. At least the guys who created this one appear willing to share the tech behind it. This should give the rest of the SL community a way to figure out how to close the gaps.

If the gaps can not be closed then people will have to change the way that they make money in SL.

Posted at 4:04PM on Nov 14th 2006 by Tad McConachie

7. I believe it *is* evil to knowingly, deliberately, gleefully, cause harm to your fellow residents. And the smug, arrogant crap we've been hearing from the libsl people for quite some time, with their Linden backers, lets us know, that not only do they want "information to be free" they want themselves to be free in the sense of having dominion over others.

They seem to take great pride in merely endlessly extending their knowledge and explorations, no matter what harm they cause to others, and they demand that people merely accept their eminent domain to always explore and always destroy. Why is that valid? Science has always been restrained by civilians and layment who bring to bear the other interests every society has to have at heart -- in SL there are sandboxers, and there are settlers, and the interests of both can and should be balanced.

The Linden set-up has done a lot to foster this environment of entitlement-happy script-kiddies. Free accounts, subsidies for development, subsidies for education (now removed of course). A programmer who has made use of all the Linden subsidies and been "crowdsourced" by them for the last 3 years has his *knowledge* to take away with him which is portable -- and sellable -- on any market with any game company or 3-d world company in the metaverse.

Meanwhile, those who made objects only for use inworld, or those who developed land and maintained communities are royally screwed over -- they merely provided the tier money and the eye candy to keep the server load tests going while the software engineers developed their software and enhanced their own portable knowledge.

It's a brutal and hideous racket, and there should be more and more people who expose and condemn this nasty system.

Posted at 5:34PM on Nov 14th 2006 by Prokofy Neva

8. Since this afternoon there is an object being given named CopyBot Defeater.
Is it something we can trust? Or is it a bot itself?

I'm no scripter so I have no idea what's in the object.

Posted at 5:44PM on Nov 14th 2006 by Pompo Bombacci

9. Pompo: as far as I can tell, CopyBot Defeater just IMs "!quit" to everybody in sight repeatedly. Alas, it's a trivial mod to edit the check for "!quit" out of CopyBot, and word is that said mod has already taken place.

Posted at 7:58AM on Nov 15th 2006 by Melissa Yeuxdoux

10.
Think of this as a drill; secondlifers get to work out the challenge universal replicators bring to the concept of property now, and beat the rush.

We'll be doing this in the real world during our lifetimes anyway.

Posted at 10:26AM on Nov 15th 2006 by Dick Davies

11. Someone said that selling something based on open source is against the open source licensing, and that is totally not correct. Just because something is open sourced does not mean that that something can be freely distributed to everyone everywhere. My gf is having trouble coming to grips that open source software can be sold, and apparently that author has missed that point to.

Now, I don't pretend to know the exact license, but I am just referring to the comment, that seems to indicate that the author of said comment believes that since something is open source it cannot be sold, nor can derivatives of it be sold, and that is entirely NOT the case.

Posted at 7:26PM on Nov 15th 2006 by Eric

12. I've been fuming about this all day, but at this time, the point I wish to make softly is best this:

"See!? You don't like it either!"
- Recording Industry Association of America

I recognize the desire to make money from your efforts. And I recognize the gravity of going from a cost-to-copy to free-for-all.

But in reading through this, I am afraid that the backlash that supports the wicked legislation of the DMCA (which has done more harm to innovation, free speech, and creativity than any amount of digital copying) AND the venom directed towards the reverse engineers who cooked up this controversial tool --- will result in a dangerous slide into accepting what amounts to "authoritarian-sanctioned creativity." That we should only create what we are "allowed" to create and only if it doesn't threaten someone's business model.

Take a step back from this specific incident and look over digital "property" as a whole. Look at patent law, copyright law (which has been extended far beyond the life of the creator,) and laws like the DMCA which have been retrofitted to curtail fair-use. And please take some time to fathom how we can rationally react to this design challenge for Linden and ensure that we continue to support our creative SL friends and ultimately restore a vibrant economy.

It's not about "communists" versus "capitalists" and I don't believe it ever has been. I think there is a deep divide between those who value intellectual property and those who see it as an unwanted custom. More importantly, how do we build systems that will survive the constant onslaught of the curious? If not LibSL, then someone else will eventually circumvent the system because it has value to them. And finally, we need to be certain that we absolutely WANT to build such fences?

I don't have the answers to those questions, but I would ask that we - as intelligent citizens of a new world - take a more measured approach to this problem than simply calling for the heads of programmers. And we can also now appreciate the point of view of the RIAA.

:)
- Williem

Posted at 7:17PM on Nov 15th 2006 by William Leandros

13. I think you're lame if you waste your real human breathing life wasting it away at some MMO, and if you're making money off of it you're like the freaking Chinese farmers in WoW.

Please, stop playing your lame game, stand up and walk outside. You're losing real money over fake items in a fake electronic world.

Posted at 11:56AM on Nov 16th 2006 by Ben

14. Umm, so you people are in a 'furor' over something that makes it easy to copy something else that's NOT REAL? You do realize that SL is just a game, right? Nobody's selling digital trees and making a living at it, you all just wish you could, so that way Linden can keep selling you their propaganda and sucking in your hard earned real money thanks to the market for L$. What kind of game has no real gameplay, anyway? They don't make plotlines, dialogue, conflict, heroes, or villians, they just give you something that lets you run away from your RL, but it's the users who actually do the developing of things inside the game. You'd be better off sitting on your floor building model cars as in a real hobby.

Posted at 12:00AM on Nov 16th 2006 by Vic Sage

15. Ben and Vic,

You can sell just about anything that has value to people. People are making a living selling virtual goods because people buy those goods. Simple as that. Until the value of those goods drops, people will try to make money at it.

I see little difference from building model cars, or playing with building blocks and building in Second Life. It is less expensive and provides more freedom than most models or block sets. If you can sell your designs all the better for you.

As for the game part, in case you missed it, new games are being made every day in Second Life. These games can allow the players to take an active role in the creation process, making them potentially more valuable to the players.

It's a new frontier in a world that is quickly losing places that are accessible and unexplored. We are explorers - some of us cannot travel in the real world - for various reasons - so we venture out, even if it is virtual. Just like every frontier there will be Davy Crockets and Amelia Earhart's - not everyone need be an adventurer - you are welcome to stay in the comfort of your current reality; however, the rest of us will blaze the trail with simple glee.

-Gando

Posted at 4:20PM on Dec 13th 2006 by Gando Thurston

16. You folks do realize that this is a game that's being talked about right? A GAME!! A fake existence in a fake world. Therefore, it has a fake economy and a fake reality. GO OUTSIDE and LEAVE YOUR PARENTS' BASEMENT!!!

Posted at 2:58PM on Nov 16th 2006 by will

17. There are people who will argue the point of whether it is a game or not. I don't think it is a game but I won't argue with you -- if you think it is a game that's your right.

What is undeniable is that people are making their real life income from it. A real income. So whether it is a game or not, if you wish to make your income by working inside it, I see no difference between building structures or objects in Second Life and building webpages. It's a virtual product, worth real dollars.

Posted at 3:02PM on Nov 16th 2006 by Caliandris

18. I'm new to all this and don't understand the whole picture, but reading the above I cannot help but be angry.
Second Life is one of the most extraordinary things I've come across in a very long time. It is not a 'game', it is a very interesting experiment in finding out what human beings are really interested in and really want.
The level of creativity inside it is astounding.
The fact that real money can be made from selling items
created inside it is simply a just reward for the great ideas, skills and time expended by those who create them.
I'm an artist myself, and if I found that somone was making a fortune by selling stolen copies of a painting I had just spent months of my life creating I would want to break their legs. My guess is that The linden people do not consider such things because they are completely absorbed in this fascinating project. It's naive, but VERY CLEVER people are often a little naive when it comes to the nasty business world and it's 'screw the other guy' attitude.
And another thing. the record industry guy above who says "see how you like it?" is part of an industry that has been systematically ROBBING artists of most of their money, and foisting some atrocious crap upon the public for the simple reason of greed for GENERATIONS. He's not interested in exploring new ideas, he's just pissed because he might have to sell his rotten little Porsche.
He should shut his mouth and learn to play an instrument.
Tha's how I feel anyway.

Posted at 3:55AM on Nov 23rd 2006 by Toby Brace