troll :P
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:51 PM, John Hurliman wrote:
> 100th post
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 3:21 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote:
>
>> 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 SIGNE
100th post
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 3:21 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote:
> 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
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 an
This thread is approaching 100 emails in size after 3 days, and of
those hundred perhaps a dozen have been even vaguely on topic. I would
like to gently remind everyone that this mailing list is not an
appropriate venue to discuss the merits or nonmerits of DRM.
- Jacek
___
Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
> isn't that actually fair use?
>
>
Yes most copyright laws allow you to make a personel riped copy of a
movie. In the Us maybe the DMCA makes the tools for this illegal to make
and sell. I'm not 100% about all details of US copyright law. I know the
Swedish copyrig
Gareth Nelson wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:03 PM, Glen Canaday wrote:
>
> 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
> tha
-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
>
>
Lol, yes, I think everyone except hax and a couple of others would agree.
The analogy still works, though...
DaVinci should've been able to export / backup the Mona Lisa. I'm still
not allowed to take the original out of the museum though it's not mine
even though I gave him the brushes.
--GC
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 f
Yeah, that's it. I forgot the name. I expect that list to grow a bit,
but hopefully it won't grow much bigger than it already is.
On 03/16/2010 06:08 PM, Robert Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Glen Canaday wrote:
>
>> That's part the point I've been hesitant to make. It's on
That's part the point I've been hesitant to make. It's one thing to not
be able to stop IP violations, but it's quite another to deliberately
*enable* them and turn the other cheek when the theft is obvious. That's
where the TPV policy comes in, and it's where Emerald's "project opal"
(that wha
Lawson wrote:
Except ALL L$ transactions are monitored. Give someone $L 1,000,000 in
one chunk or in one million chunks, and it will still trigger alarms.
-
As a major Lindex trader I can verify there are such alarms, cause I have
tripped
them several times. Move too much money, in L$ or
Kevin Woolley wrote:
> Oh sure, *obviously* you'll never prevent copying completely. But that's a
> straw man - the difference here is between making life difficult for the
> thieves (as Apple does - sufficiently so that the jailbreak/piratebay applet
> market is no threat to iPhone developers) an
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
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:
holm [mailto:and...@arnholm.se]
Sent: 16 March 2010 09:06
To: Kevin Woolley
Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
Kevin Woolley wrote:
> c. Create an 'iPhone' like walled garden. There are numerous ways you
could
> do this, for example
Gareth Nelson wrote:
> 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).
>
I think the number is very low on tpb because the
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 th
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 simple
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
> proprietar
Maya Remblai wrote:
> New Hax wrote:
>
>> but on the internet as a content maker you can make INFINITE products
>> so you arent losing anything if i copy it and make no money off of it.
>>
>>
> Not true. See the following example that actually happened to me:
>
> Person A rips a large nu
Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Are the people selling illegal copies making that much money that fast?
>
>
If they do, the content makers are sure bad in marketing
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailSc
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 stri
Kevin Woolley wrote:
> I own three Sims in SL, that's ~$600 a month or so to the Lindens, and
> that's supported off DRM'ed content creation that I sell. If my income was
> to vanish because of widespread content theft then I'd be out of SL.
>
> I find Hax's attitude extremely concerning.
>
> In
Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Are the people selling illegal copies making that much money that fast?
>
>
>
>
I was thinking more in terms of drug laundering and the like, not
revenue from selling stolen prims. Jumped off-topic a tad, sorry.
Linux build of Snowglobe-2.0 svn doesn't like spaces in the build path.
find: `/home/glen/Programs/Second': No such file or directory
find:
`Life/Snowglobe-2.0-build/trunk/indra/viewer-linux-i686-relwithdebinfo/newview/packaged':
No such file or directory
Bright side - got thru my fist build!
And what about value of goods, something we learned in highschool
civics? The more stuff that is available, the less it's valued. If I
were to somehow make a system IRL that cloned pure gold by the
truckload, and set up enough plants to produce gold, would gold be worth
as much as it was before I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
there are important differences between actual theft and unauthorized
copying...
On 15/3/2010 20:27, Peter Swales wrote:
> As someone who uses a declawed copybot (limited to my own created items
> only) to copy from main grid to my openserver and back
Just to clarify, I only do stuff I create, just trying to say not all users
of copy programs do it to steal in any shape or form
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Peter Swales wrote:
> As someone who uses a declawed copybot (limited to my own created items
> only) to copy from main grid to my ope
As someone who uses a declawed copybot (limited to my own created items
only) to copy from main grid to my openserver and back I find what New Hax
is saying disgusting, People make valid real money off what they make, just
because it is in ones and zeroes makes no difference, an apple is just
proto
Hm, yes, I suppose that is true. My mind works mostly in absolutes, it's
easier to just count all the stolen freebies as lost sales. You're
right, however. My mistake. It was probably fueled by my general bad
feelings about the incident, because I DO use my earnings in the real
world, and I als
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 04:22:58PM -0600, Maya Remblai wrote:
> Not true. See the following example that actually happened to me:
>
> Person A rips a large number of products, including mine. He boxes them
> and gives them away, for free, claiming he has my permission (which he
> doesn't). Now,
Soft Linden wrote:
> Who? There's a non-participant who showed up to troll, and Carlos who
> says he wishes things were different so he could learn and experiment
> more.
>
> But - even if the list were swarming with looters itching to violate
> others' rights, how would the app store solution you
New Hax wrote:
> but on the internet as a content maker you can make INFINITE products
> so you arent losing anything if i copy it and make no money off of it.
>
Not true. See the following example that actually happened to me:
Person A rips a large number of products, including mine. He boxes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Are the people selling illegal copies making that much money that fast?
On 15/3/2010 17:40, Lawson English wrote:
> Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> People can still simply sell the L$ for a fractio
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Lawson English wrote:
> Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> People can still simply sell the L$ for a fraction of the market price
>> directly to other people, without ever going thru an exchange service,
>> that's h
Tigro Spottystripes wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> People can still simply sell the L$ for a fraction of the market price
> directly to other people, without ever going thru an exchange service,
> that's how i would do it if i wanted to cash out illegal money. Trying
>
Vex Streeter wrote:
> Soft Linden wrote:
>
>> Any additional ideas on squashing fraud are always appreciated, via
>> mail to secur...@lindenlab.com. Please don't hold those discussions on
>> this list.
>>
>>
> Understood - I know there is considerable effort in this area. Mainly I
> wa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
People can still simply sell the L$ for a fraction of the market price
directly to other people, without ever going thru an exchange service,
that's how i would do it if i wanted to cash out illegal money. Trying
to limit usage of exchange services onl
Soft Linden wrote:
> Any additional ideas on squashing fraud are always appreciated, via
> mail to secur...@lindenlab.com. Please don't hold those discussions on
> this list.
>
Understood - I know there is considerable effort in this area. Mainly I
wanted to opine that such limits are much mor
I agree. This really doesn't belong on this list.
___
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
Am Montag, 15. März 2010 15:31:14 schrieb Soft Linden:
> On Monday, March 15, 2010, Vex Streeter wrote:
> > Excellent discussion, Thomas - I think I concur on every point.
> >
> > I'd add, however, that I think LL could tweak the economic model to
> > discourage for-profit content theft. Perhaps
On Monday, March 15, 2010, Vex Streeter wrote:
> Excellent discussion, Thomas - I think I concur on every point.
>
> I'd add, however, that I think LL could tweak the economic model to
> discourage for-profit content theft. Perhaps requiring that account be
> verified in order to convert L$ to re
, 2010 10:47 PM
To: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a break
VERY well written Thomas - kudos!
And since I'm delurking briefly, kudos also to Soft for the patience he
has exhibited in the the recent discussion.
[goes back to lurking]
On 03/14/2
Excellent discussion, Thomas - I think I concur on every point.
I'd add, however, that I think LL could tweak the economic model to
discourage for-profit content theft. Perhaps requiring that account be
verified in order to convert L$ to real world currency or even a monthly
L$ transaction lim
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 01:29:16AM +, Thomas Grimshaw wrote:
> *I own and even have developed software that can copy any content from
> second life. Have I ever used this to violate copyright? Nope, I just
> didn't want to spend time building in content protection when the
> software was on
...and then there's the pesky little truth that even if the viewer were
completely closed source, unless the basic architecture of personal computer
graphics processing across the industry is changed, and all of the current
personal computer hardware is retired, it will be possible to rip content
a
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 15:09:37 -0400, "Kent Quirk (Q Linden)"
wrote:
> On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Marine Kelley wrote:
>
>> However it is true that LL has delivered a bad message recently, by
>> publishing the TPV and the closed-source SL 2.0 the SAME day. The TPV
>> burdens us developers while
Am Montag, 15. März 2010 13:27:35 schrieb Opensource Obscure:
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:36:33 -0400, Glen Canaday
>
> wrote:
> > Then what are you doing here?
>
> Trolling. This is an effective place where to do that.
> I'm sure he's having more fun than me.
thats what spamassassin blacklisting
I hope that because your post was a reaction to mine,
people will NOT think that I share your ideals in the
same anarchistic way. I feel the need to state that I don't.
First of all, I have a good friend in-world that makes
his living in-world. And I'd do anything to help him,
because he is a very
On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:36:33 -0400, Glen Canaday
wrote:
> Then what are you doing here?
Trolling. This is an effective place where to do that.
I'm sure he's having more fun than me.
opensource obscure
>
> On 03/14/2010 06:32 PM, New Hax wrote:
>> I know better than to try to get rich off of
On Monday, March 15, 2010, Kevin Woolley wrote:
> @Soft Linden - apparently it's not just the 'one guy' - it looks like this
> list is full of people who only want the viewer open sourced so they can
> 'free' intellectual property.
Who? There's a non-participant who showed up to troll, and Carlos
On 2010-03-15, at 03:42, Kevin Woolley wrote:
> A. Have the guts to stop apologising for Linden Lab's decisions. You
> own the
> ballpark. Apple has a great developer program but that doesn't mean
> that it
> squirmed to its users because XCode 3.2 beta (iPad capable) wasn't
> available
> the
Your as funny as hax, kevin. Where do these delusional extremists come from?
The loud minority eh?
Great write-up Thomas! Those are well defined points, and it is really true,
stolen content doesn't really have any noticeable effect and if it's sold
can be quickly wiped away with a DMCA takedown n
@Soft Linden - apparently it's not just the 'one guy' - it looks like this
list is full of people who only want the viewer open sourced so they can
'free' intellectual property.
I emphasise that it's your salary that is being paid by the likes of me
owning Sims, not ideological 'copyright is thef
Are you outright saying on the sldev mailing list, in the face of LL,
that you are wanting to work at stealing enough content to "force"
them to open the whole system ?
And you still wonder why your ideas are met with hostility ?
You should stop leeching other people's stuff and start your ow
Wow! well some people really don't give a dump about intellectual
properties.
What if your prim inSL contain a script with user / password to your twitter
account?
What if your prim inSL contain a script with user / password to your online
database?
you don't believe in sharing that as well d
VERY well written Thomas - kudos!
And since I'm delurking briefly, kudos also to Soft for the patience he
has exhibited in the the recent discussion.
[goes back to lurking]
On 03/14/2010 09:29 PM, Thomas Grimshaw wrote:
> This post is likely to incur some feelings of emotions in a lot of you;
>
You're very, very delusional.
Fred Rookstown
On Sun, 2010-03-14 at 21:01 -0600, New Hax wrote:
> On 3/14/10, Carlo Wood wrote:
> >
> > Imho, SL would have have had better products if everything
> > had been free and open (no permission system). Then one could
> > learn from others and improve th
Thank God for those who have the luxury of a steady paycheck and the ability
to pontificate.
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
Please read the policies before posting to keep unmodera
On 3/14/10, Carlo Wood wrote:
>
> Imho, SL would have have had better products if everything
> had been free and open (no permission system). Then one could
> learn from others and improve things, build upon the experience
> and work of others, and nobody would make money of it or have
> to be afr
Now you mention it...
Yes, a few people are making thousands of dollars per month
and are having their RL day job in SL... so, now they would
kill to protect that income, but...
Imho, SL would have have had better products if everything
had been free and open (no permission system). Then one coul
Le 15 mars 2010 à 02:29, Thomas Grimshaw a écrit :
> - Don't intimidate your customers. For goodness sake, shut off those
> stupid "copybot protection" scripts (they don't even work), and take
> down those copyright notices. If these people are in YOUR store, it
> means they're not in a store
This post is likely to incur some feelings of emotions in a lot of you;
I ask that you bear with me and be open minded towards these words. I
recognise that many of you won't agree with me; it is but an attempt to
try and shine a searchlight into the hysteria.
*The Stark Truth*
Firstly, a remi
Agreed. Lack of a basic working knowledge of economics is a sad thing
when combined with uninformed ideology. I was in the same boat as him
about 15 years ago after reading The Cathedral and the Bazaar and not
understanding what was really up.
Anyway, back to business. I'm actually glad for the
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 7:45 PM, k\o\w wrote:
> .. OpenSim will never be a replacement for what the Linden grid
> provides, and is a wonderful tool that I hope a lot of client devs are
> using to enhance their development process. ...
And of course since OpenSim is dirt cheap a company that is th
I think the majority of viewer and server developers are on Lindens side
with this. OpenSim will never be a replacement for what the Linden grid
provides, and is a wonderful tool that I hope a lot of client devs are
using to enhance their development process. The fact still remains that
the bul
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Kevin Woolley wrote:
> I own three Sims in SL, that's ~$600 a month or so to the Lindens, and
> that's supported off DRM'ed content creation that I sell. If my income was
> to vanish because of widespread content theft then I'd be out of SL.
>
> I find Hax's attitu
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:41 PM, New Hax wrote:
> anyways im done here, Linden Labs is going to close the code and
> become big brother. Just watch. I thought i'd come out of lurking but
> i guess that was the wrong idea. have a good time while SL swirls
> around the drain when it could be taking
tly.
Kevin
-Original Message-
From: opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com
[mailto:opensource-dev-boun...@lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of New Hax
Sent: 14 March 2010 22:19
To: Marine Kelley
Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] oh give me a b
You can find grids exactly like you want already, but they have online
concurrencies that can be counted on one hand and are slow as molasses, plus
no one makes any content there for exactly the reasons you would like to use
them.
It would be narrow-minded to think that open source is the only bus
New Hax wrote:
> No im not kidding, whats going to stop people from taking your
> scripts, when you can hop from one grid to another? Interoperability?
> The sim owner can take your scripts. For now scripts are protected
> because Linden Labs owns the code.
>
THere are plenty of ways in which
Don't forget to reply to all, everyone is getting only part of the
conversation when you reply to me only.
We're not talking about the same thing at all anyway. We were talking about
content theft issues, which has nothing to do with the viewer. It has
nothing to do with this mailing list even. Th
anyways im done here, Linden Labs is going to close the code and
become big brother. Just watch. I thought i'd come out of lurking but
i guess that was the wrong idea. have a good time while SL swirls
around the drain when it could be taking the world over, used
everywhere like the web, if it were
agree to disagree yea but then your days are numbered in SL. If the
project forks then there will be a VW without all these restrictions
and lindens threatening people for asking them to keep their promises?
On 3/14/10, New Hax wrote:
> I want a grid where people can have the freedom to develop w
I want a grid where people can have the freedom to develop what they
want and do what they want, without being told whats allowed, and
without being watched because you might move the wrong bits from one
place to another. and without lindens threatening if we dont "play
nice" with draconinan DRM. T
Then what are you doing here?
On 03/14/2010 06:32 PM, New Hax wrote:
> I know better than to try to get rich off of selling ones and zeroes.
>
> On 3/14/10, Glen Canaday wrote:
>
>> Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can assure you.
>>
>> Nor are you putting food on the tab
That's what I do for a living. And I earn my living well with it. You should
try it.
On 14 March 2010 23:32, New Hax wrote:
> I know better than to try to get rich off of selling ones and zeroes.
>
> On 3/14/10, Glen Canaday wrote:
> > Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can
Simply the facts that my scripts are NOT to be ported to other grids unless
I am certain the source code, which would be uploaded by me only, is
protected. Any other way of porting my scripts to other grids and to use it
there is theft.
On 14 March 2010 23:29, New Hax wrote:
> No im not kidding
I know better than to try to get rich off of selling ones and zeroes.
On 3/14/10, Glen Canaday wrote:
> Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can assure you.
>
> Nor are you putting food on the table RL except perhaps by manual labor,
> which cannot be copied. Ex: Ditches need to
Then what are you doing in SL? Not making a living, I can assure you.
Nor are you putting food on the table RL except perhaps by manual labor,
which cannot be copied. Ex: Ditches need to be dug. The ditch-digger can
be changed out, but that doesn't change the fact that even if you get a
new dig
No im not kidding, whats going to stop people from taking your
scripts, when you can hop from one grid to another? Interoperability?
The sim owner can take your scripts. For now scripts are protected
because Linden Labs owns the code.
On 3/14/10, Marine Kelley wrote:
> You are kidding here, righ
You are kidding here, right ?
On 14 March 2010 23:27, New Hax wrote:
> there shouldn't be. if SL is to be open, and really open source, then
> the scripts on it should be GPL as well. But it's different because
> scripts CAN be protected FOR NOW but blobs of binary and graphics ,
> textures, and
there shouldn't be. if SL is to be open, and really open source, then
the scripts on it should be GPL as well. But it's different because
scripts CAN be protected FOR NOW but blobs of binary and graphics ,
textures, and blobs of prims cannot.
If i take a sphere prim and put a happy face texture on
New Hax wrote:
> then what are you doing on an opensource list if you want your content
> wrapped in DRM.
>
> sl will die if its not open. and you can't compare rl doors to the
> internet. if you dont lock your rl door I can come in and take
> something of yours that isnt replaceable.
>
> but on th
then what are you doing on an opensource list if you want your content
wrapped in DRM.
sl will die if its not open. and you can't compare rl doors to the
internet. if you dont lock your rl door I can come in and take
something of yours that isnt replaceable.
but on the internet as a content maker
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Lawson English wrote:
> Lance Corrimal wrote:
>>
>> Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
>>> wrote:
>>>
Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>
> Lindens should be staying with
Lance Corrimal wrote:
> Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>>>
>>>
Lindens should be staying with their promises
>>> related
Tori C. wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden)
> wrote:
>
>
>> We actually believed we were doing something the community would really
>> appreciate -- getting the source out there the same day as beta. And yet
>> somehow that became something bad. People keep repeat
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Lance Corrimal
wrote:
> Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
>> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>>>
Lindens should be staying with their promises
>>> related question, where's t
On 2010-03-14, at 14:09, Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote:
> What's frustrating about this for many of the Lindens is that we as
> an organization pushed hard -- and Merov in particular worked nights
> and weekends -- to get the Snowglobe source out on the same day that
> beta was released, rather
Am 14.03.2010 20:37, schrieb Soft Linden:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
> wrote:
>
>> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>>
>>> Lindens should be staying with their promises
>>>
>> related question, where's the svn repo to check out the server code?
>>
>
I'm sorry Kent, I didn't want to upset you. Yes you are getting a lot of
flak, and you are not alone in this case. This TPV does add heavy
requirements upon us developers, and I'm not even talking about the Viewer
Directory which requires us to publish our RL names out to the open. Which
is not goi
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Carlo Wood wrote:
> What worries me is that before, correctly, it was stated: copybot
> is not illegal, copying something and then SELLING it is.
No. Copying non-permissive content has been against the ToS since 2006
or so, regardless of what one did with the cont
What worries me is that before, correctly, it was stated: copybot
is not illegal, copying something and then SELLING it is.
If some really good hacker does exactly that what everyone says:
get content that simply can't be protected, then that doesn't mean
he will start a business with it and make
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden)
wrote:
> We actually believed we were doing something the community would really
> appreciate -- getting the source out there the same day as beta. And yet
> somehow that became something bad. People keep repeating that "it's closed
> sou
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 12:23 PM, Lance Corrimal
wrote:
> Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
>> Lindens should be staying with their promises
>
> related question, where's the svn repo to check out the server code?
How is that in any way related?
We're closer on some of the tech, but don't ye
Am 14.03.2010 18:56, schrieb New Hax:
> Lindens should be staying with their promises
>
related question, where's the svn repo to check out the server code?
___
Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Op
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:09 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden)
wrote:
>
> On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Marine Kelley wrote:
>
>> However it is true that LL has delivered a bad message recently, by
>> publishing the TPV and the closed-source SL 2.0 the SAME day. The TPV
>> burdens us developers while fr
On Mar 14, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Marine Kelley wrote:
> However it is true that LL has delivered a bad message recently, by
> publishing the TPV and the closed-source SL 2.0 the SAME day. The TPV burdens
> us developers while freeing LL's hands, and the viewer 2.0 is going to be
> adopted by newco
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
