[opensource-dev] FAQ posted for Third Party Viewer Policy

[Morgaine]

Reposting part of last response to Soft, which the list's Mailman/pipermail
sliced off.

================

>> As is written in the answer A15, "Residents retain intellectual property
>> rights in the content they create in Second Life and it is important for
you
>> to respect those rights."  Respecting their rights in this case requires
you
>> to to allow that content to be exported as its creator desires.
Therefore
>> you either need to extend A15 with this additional case, or add another
FAQ
>> Q+A (preferably immediately after #15) to address it.
>>

> > That might be material for the FAQ. But because there is no export
> > permission bit, it's not possible to add export capability for these
> > cases without enabling violation of others' content. At this point, I
> > couldn't see that affecting the TPV policy.
>


An export permission bit is not required before export of open-licensed
content can be done.  We don't have an export permission bit in RL, and yet
open licensing works just fine.  As Fleep pointed out
earlier<https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/2010-February/000405.html>,
SL creators are already open-licensing their products right now, since it is
so important for Education.

As in RL, the responsibility for applying open licenses properly rests with
the licensor, since nobody else can be expected to check what the licensor
is licensing.  That is no different here.  Nobody expects you to do any
checking, and your assertion that this leads to "violation of others'
content" is patently wrong when the licensor uses only her own and other
people's open-licensed content.  Indeed, if you did do checking then you
would not be able to disclaim liability for infringements.

The core of the matter though is whether you believe in your own words in
FAQ.15: "Residents retain intellectual property rights in the content they
create in Second Life and it is important for you to respect those rights".
Are you going to respect the rights of those creators who use open-licensing
of their content?

Or, ungenerously, are you only going to respect the rights of those creators
who shore up the walls of your walled garden?  I would prefer to believe
that your support is for all content creators' rights and wishes.

How you respond will reveal the truth of the matter.  If you make it clear
that building upon the openly and legally-licensed content of others is a
ToS or TPV violation, then you are not respecting the rights and wishes of
open creators, and it may not even be legal.  My suggested new FAQ.16 or
similar would let you "do the right thing" and be a good citizen of the open
license community.


Morgaine.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100301/57e8750f/attachment-0001.htm