I want to weigh in very briefly here, because I was voiciferously arguing with Morgaine in AWG the other night, but having considered the TPV policy as a whole (and not just believed what it says about itself), I think there is more of a problem here than I originally thought.
In theory, the GPLv2 is all and only about copying, distribution, and modification; whereas the TPV policy ought to be all and only about use. So the two *shouldn't* conflict. Unfortunately, as has been pointed out, the TPV policy's wording leaves something to be desired here and there. At the very top, the TPV policy says rather emphatically: "This Policy does not place any restriction on modification or use of our viewer source code that we make available under the GPL. Rather, the Policy sets out requirements for connecting to our Second Life service using a Third-Party Viewer, regardless of the viewer source code used, and for participating in our Viewer Directory." and relatedly: "If you do not agree, you are not allowed to use Second Life through a Third-Party Viewer." On the other hand, down below in the Tricky Bits, it says stuff like: "If you are a user or Developer of Third-Party Viewers, you agree to the following:" "If you are a Developer of Third-Party Viewers, you represent and warrant that:" "All use and distribution of Third-Party Viewers must comply with Linden Lab policies and applicable law and must not:" It's hard to interpret something that starts "All use and distribution" as not placing "any restriction on modification or use of our viewer source code"; similarly for "If you are a Developer of Third-Party Viewers". If I get the viewer source code, make a modified viewer, never use it to connect to SL at all, but distribute it freely for whatever use anyone might want to make of it, then the TPV policy says both that it is not placing any restriction on that, and that I must represent and warrant certain things, and must comply with various policies and laws and terms. Can't have it both ways! The language of the TPV policy seems to me to rather clearly contradict itself; up front it claims that what it does is set out requirements for connecting to SL via any third-party viewer, but in the body it sets out requirements on anyone who *develops* software that someone else might use to connect to SL. This should imho be fixed. It seems to me that the main things the Lab wants to accomplish here are: To make it clear that by providing viewer source code LL are not assuming legal liability for every use someone might make of it (unfortunately rather than just saying that, the current wording tries to explicitly tie that liability to various specific parties, who may or may not in fact be liable, and who are in general just as reluctant as LL is to take on responsibility for things they don't in fact control!), To make it clear that if either a developer or a user of a nonstandard viewer misbehaves (with a non-exhaustive list of sample misbehaviors provided), they may take any measure they deem appropriate, including banning, account termination, viewer blocking, and so on, to counter that misbehavior, and the target of those measures can't sue them (the ToS sort of already says they can do whatever they want in this area for any reason or no reason; this is presumably just extra caution), And to lay out what their expectations and standards are for viewers that they are happy about having connect to the Grid (which is, imho, the most useful part of the thing, which has unfortunately been rather obscured by the legalese). Note that I'm not by any means saying that if someone writes an evil viewer that contains obfuscated code that steals SL passwords, or that contains griefing or sim-crashing code, but never themselves uses it to connect to SL, that they shouldn't be held responsible. Certainly they should. And that may be all that the current TPV wording is trying to say. But the actual wording is much broader than that, and viewer developers are, imho quite understandably, not pleased. Essentially the wording says "we take no responsibility for the code that we make available, but if someone takes that code and changes a single line, they take full responsibility for the result". That is, the current wording seems to require viewer developers to take on responsibilities for their code that the Lab itself explicitly doesn't take on for theirs. I suggested somewhere that the bit about how the developer of a third-party viewer is responsible for anything bad that might ever happen anywhere in the world was typical lawyer over-reaching. Someone that I suspect is an actual lawyer replied that no lawyer would ever voluntarily sign off on wording that was that silly, and it must have been some ignorant business manager insisting on it. Whichever explanation is true :) it would be nice if this were fixed, so that the TPV policy really did talk only about the key things I've tried to summarize in those three bullets there, and didn't wander off into the weeds demanding legal representations and warrantees from every developer of a piece of software that someone else might use to connect to the grid. Just in case it's helpful (and to apologize to Morgaine :) ), Dave Chess / Dale Innis
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
