Having read the TOS i'm comfortable in saying that it is reasonably clear that two exchanges don't take place, but that the agency situation, with LL existing as a mutual agent, would apply to SL. > Darmath wrote: > >> Gigs wrote: >> >>> Darmath wrote: >>> >>>> If I understand your comments in this regard correctly you appear to >>>> be trying to suggest that because a recipient of a work covered by >>>> the CC-SA or other like license has agreed with Linden Labs that >>>> they will not export a work that doesn't bare their name as a >>>> creator the person who initially uploaded the content and >>>> distributed it to the received is now in violation of the CC-SA. >>>> >>>> If the above is what you're trying to suggest then I must disagree >>>> with you. But I will wait to see that the above is what you're >>>> actually trying to assert before i respond as to why... >>>> >>>> >>> Person A creates content and releases it under CC-SA-By >>> Person B uploads this content to Second Life >>> Person B distributes the content to Person C >>> >>> Person C now has additional terms imposed on them that restrict their >>> exercise of the rights granted under CC-SA-By because of the TPV >>> agreement. Previously they could run any client with export >>> capability to download the work in order to modify it. Now they >>> can't do that. Their rights to redistribute and modify under the >>> CC-SA have been restricted which is a violation of the CC-SA license. >>> >> When I first came across this topic it was 3am and I was on my way to >> bed so you'll forgive me for not thinking my way entirely through the >> CC-SA. Having considered the issue this morning somewhat fresh I would >> agree that Person B may be in violation with that agreement but not >> for the reason Gigs (Jason) had initially stated. Initially the >> conclusion appeared to be based upon the following from the CC-SA:. >> >> "You may not offer or impose any terms on the Work that restrict the >> terms of this License or the ability of the recipient of the Work to >> exercise the rights granted to that recipient under the terms of the >> License." >> >> Putting aside for the moment that I believe that the paragraph is >> horribly drafted as a legal document and doesn't accord with its >> intent in its wording as far as I'm concerned I don't believe you can >> say that as between Person B and Person C, Person B offered or imposed >> any terms on the new recipient licensee that curtails Person's C's >> rights under the licence. The simple fact is that Person B didn't >> impose any terms on Person C or offer the Work to C on any terms that >> were more restrictive than what the license does. >> >> The fact is that Person C would fall subject to obligations to a >> fourth Person, Linden Labs (Person D) a result of C's own agreement >> with D that they won't export that content from SL unless their named >> as the creator. The fact that C's own agreement with a fourth party >> means that they now have obligations upon them that interfere with >> their rights under the license they entered into and acqured from B, >> doesn't mean that Person B imposed more restrictive terms upon C. The >> terms that restricted C were effectively imposed by Person D. >> >> I also think there is potentially a much more interesting analysis >> that is capable of following in the circumstances of SL, with regard >> to the exchange of the Work from B to C, and that is whether the >> exchange can actually be regarded as one exchange between Person B and >> C, mediated by a mutual agent in LL (Person D). Or alternatiely >> whether two exchanges take place both of which falling subjectable to >> the CC-SA or possibly other like agreements. In the latter scenario >> the first exchange would take place between Person B and Person D (LL) >> and Person C and Person D. One would however have to refer to the TOS >> for SL to canvass that possibility. >> >> Putting the above aside the reason why I agree that Person B falls >> into violation of the license from the following from the CC-SA. It >> states that: >> >> "You may not impose any effective technological measures on the Work >> that restrict the ability of a recipient of the Work from You to >> exercise the rights granted to that recipient under the terms of the >> License." >> >> By introducing the content into an environment where it can't be >> easily downloaded and shared with any person quite independently from >> SL may very well be considered to constitute the a person applying a >> technological measure to the Work that restricts the ability of the >> recipient from exercising their rights under the license. >> >> But that is a fundamentally different from the person imposing terms >> or offering the Work to the recipient on more restrictive terms which >> is what the initial quotation was referring to. >> >> Kind regards >> >> Darren >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2707 - Release Date: 02/24/10 > 18:34:00 > >
_______________________________________________ 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
