[sldev] Re: Permissions - A content creator's view (michi@luskwood.org)

[Argent Stonecutter]

I think Michi's position is completely reasonable (though I suspect  
that what he posted may be something of a form letter, at least I  
haven't seen some of the arguments he's opposing on this list...  
certainly nothing about 'no transfer' being evil), but I would like  
to make one comment on a tiny point, because there's a huge can of  
worms that I don't think that any content creator should open.

> 2) I think an extension of permissions to give the ability to  
> comply with
> copyright as well as copyleft should exist. In addition to "no  
> copy", "no
> transfer", "no modify"; we could indeed have "may not set nomod" or  
> "may
> not set no transfer". And the eternally asked-for "may not charge  
> money
> for trasfer".

"May not set no-mod/copy/transfer" are all interesting options.  
Applied recursively, they would be enough to implement a copyleft  
model. And that would by itself remove a lot of the incentive for  
people to "rip off freebies", because they wouldn't be able to turn  
them into something that people couldn't pass on.

And that may have to be enought, because "May not charge money for  
transfer" is not implementable without tearing huge holes in LSL and  
existing content. Implementing that would require getting rid of  
llGiveInventory() and possibly llRezObject() as well. Otherwise any  
scripted vendor would bypass it automatically.

> 3) Grid level permissions, i.e., "May rez/attach on a trusted grid" vs
> "May rez/attach only on SL grid" or , "May rez/attach anywhere".

This is what I was getting at with my certificate idea. Let people  
choose what grids they want to trust with their content. Possibly  
charge more for a version that can be taken to less trusted grids.