I really don't care whether Linden Lab has written their TPV trainwreck
in good faith or not.
* I'm not going to develop a free, opensource viewer if I'm going to be
held liable for it. I don't have the money to hire a copyright lawyer
to tell a judge/jury that the TPV is complete BS.
* Linden Lab has no right, written or otherwise, to tell me what I
should add to or remove from my viewer. If they want to call the shots,
they can give me a job.
* I'm CERTAINLY not going to interpret their recent lawyering-up and
silence on the matter as good faith, especially when they pushed it out
to us a month early.
I don't even know why people are still arguing over this. The TPV goes
against my software's licensing, so users will not use it on SL, period.
Others should realize this too: LL wants a walled garden. It's time to
move on, develop our own viewers, and break compatibility with a company
that seems hellbent on destroying the very open-source project they have
created.
I'm working on making voxel-based terrain anyway, both to break
compatibility with SL and just to improve OpenSim instead of arguing
about it on some mailing list forever while LL steamrolls ahead. Don't
be one of the people they run over.
Rob Nelson ("Fred Rookstown")
Luna Viewer
http://luna.nexisonline.net
On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 23:40 +0200, Dirk Moerenhout wrote:
> I clearly quoted the TPVP and showed what is literally there including
> how cross-references support the interpretation. Your retort which
> doesn't address this in any way clearly shows you are not interested
> in really debating what is written there. Whatever they write in the
> TPVP you'll assume they do it out of bad faith. With such prejudice
> you'll always find something to rant about.
>
> Funny enough you apparently think the TPVP changes LL's legal position
> and I can assure you it does not. It rather simplifies than mystifies
> as this is about connecting to LL's grid which has been closed and
> theirs all along. If their grid is abused for example for copyright
> violations then they are free to assist in suing you as they please
> with or without the TPVP. I think your analogy of Novell vs SCO is far
> fetched. You're better off comparing this to The Pirate Bay or the
> recent Newzbin ruling.
>
> I don't ask people to rely on "good faith", I want them to see past
> the paranoia and use common sense. If LL is out to get TPV developers
> then creating the TPVP is a serious waste of time as there are far
> easier ways to do so.
>
> Dirk
>
>
> On 31 March 2010 22:14, Ryan McDougall <sempu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You're out of your mind if you recommend people spend their spare time
> > working on something under no more protection than "good faith". LL
> > has lawyered themselves up nicely; who's legal advice are you taking?
> >
> > SCO was unable to destroy linux because Novell got their rights
> > written down quite clearly and unambiguously. Even then, with the
> > weight of evidence so *clearly* in Novell's favor, the fight itself
> > has cost Novell millions and literally destroyed SCO.
> >
> > And that's the sort of liability you want individuals to bear? Get
> > bent. Seriously. I look forward to you establishing a legal defense
> > fund for TPV developers. Until then...
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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
