Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

ge by connecting to the�SL�grid. It is not. TPV in it's >>>>> current >>>>> form says "I'm responsible (read: guilty) for using, developing or >>>>> distributing any 3rd party viewer". >>>>> >>>>>

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

s GPL explicitly >>>> prohibits. >>>> >>>> Another point of concern, putting up the RL details (which is pointless >>>> as LL has them already and require them by ToS) is required for a listing >>>> in >>>> the viewer director

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

;> >>> In summary, the policy is legal-technical flawed and not acceptable by >>> any dev in their right mind. What it will achieve is the destruction of any >>> *legal* 3rd party viewer; which probably is the (by some welcomed) goal of >>> LL to close-source the vi

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

e welcomed) > >> goal of LL to close-source the viewer. It will not do anything to stop > >> malicious clients to flourish, the Neils give a shit on policies or > >> licenses. > >> > >> The consequence is that no 3rd party developer that uses LL's GPLed &g

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

@Darmath You wrote you are a law student and this is certainly a very interesting subject to explore, without getting really involved. Unless you make your own viewer. I think we agree here about the underlying common sense and the good intentions of everyone in this discussion. I believe we c

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 24/03/2010 4:35 PM, Tony Agudo wrote: that user can point to specifically that section of the TPV Policy and claim "By this, you *are* legally liable for my problems, I can actually sue you". And herein lies why the construction thats sought to be advanced by those who have made rumblings on

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

(Delurking here just to throw in my $L2; standard IANAL disclaimer) Joe, most of the TPV Policy *is* reasonable and nobody(except obviously malicious viewer creators) is disputing that requiring reasonable, common sense responsibilities to keep viewers honest is bad at all, it's simply that Sectio

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 24/03/2010 1:57 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > Let me take just one more crack at explaining the situation here, then > I'll let the TPV Policy document stand on it's own. > > First, the Linden Lab viewer source code is being made available to > all under the terms of the GPLv2 License. Nothing has

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > I've seen some very dramatic "exits" from the SL open source program here > in this thread by people who have never contributed. We're making a number > of changes to the practice and policy of what we will permit to connect to > our grid so

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Thanks Joe for just confirming our concerns. > If a developer of a TPV never uses it to connect to SL, there is nothing in > that > document that applies to them. Period. By the same token, if that viewer is > designed and intended to be used to access the Second Life grid(s) there are > respon

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Just some thoughts in passing Precedent has been set in cases that clickwrap agreements take precedence and supercede any conflicting statements in shrinkwrap agreements. Although it has not been stated, it is logical that Linden Labs will make the TPV pop up as a clickwrap agreem

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

t; sources (including already registered KLee or famed Emerald) can produce a >> legitimate viewer that is either compliant to GPL and/or violates TPV (which >> says it must be GPL compliant). Both are mutually exclusive and LL created a >> nice legal chicken and egg scenario. >

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

arty viewers > > Linden Lab already said they do not plan to update their > policy again. Therefore only option 3 remains. > > Luv, > Boy > > > - Original Message - >

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

e legal chicken and egg scenario. > > In my opinion there are only 3 possible solutions: > 1) use LL's code and violate TPV > 2) create a viewer from scratch using BSD or another license and comply to > TPV > 3) stop developing 3rd party viewers > > Linden Lab already

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

;>> distribute >>>>>>> a sourcewise identical "official" viewer, without changing a single >>>>>>> line of >>>>>>> code; but with all the bugs and vulnerabilities *made by LL*. Guilty by >>>>>>> TPV. >>>>>>>

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

;>> >>>>>> Another point of concern, putting up the RL details (which is pointless >>>>>> as >>>>>> LL has them already and require them by ToS) is required for a listing in >>>>>> the viewer directory. The details of the two

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

ht mind. What it will achieve is the destruction of any >>>> *legal* 3rd party viewer; which probably is the (by some welcomed) goal of >>>> LL to close-source the viewer. It will not do anything to stop malicious >>>> clients to flourish, the Neils give a

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

no 3rd party developer that uses LL's GPLed >>> sources (including already registered KLee or famed Emerald) can produce a >>> legitimate viewer that is either compliant to GPL and/or violates TPV (which >>> says it must be GPL compliant). Both are mutually exclusive

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

ed Emerald) can produce a >> legitimate viewer that is either compliant to GPL and/or violates TPV (which >> says it must be GPL compliant). Both are mutually exclusive and LL created a >> nice legal chicken and egg scenario. >> >> In my opinion there are only 3 possible sol

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

and egg scenario. > > In my opinion there are only 3 possible solutions: > 1) use LL's code and violate TPV > 2) create a viewer from scratch using BSD or another license and comply to > TPV > 3) stop developing 3rd party viewers > > Linden Lab already said they do

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

dy said they do not plan to update their policy again. Therefore only option 3 remains. Luv, Boy - Original Message - From: Joe Linden To: Ryan McDougall Cc: Argent Stonecutter ; Boy Lane ; opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 3:53 AM Subject: Re: [openso

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

+1 Mike Jesse Barnett wrote: > Jeez I fail to understand why in the heck LL can not understand this > simple concept. > > Linden devs have introduced bugs before that have allowed content to be > stolen, no mod scripts to be readable, and inventories worth several > hundred dollars to vanish

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote: > I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: > > * Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's > not always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as > peop

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Policy and license (or else) change aren't retroactive, never -- Sent by iPhone Il giorno 22/mar/2010, alle ore 16.51, Carlo Wood ha scritto: > Um yes... I cannot agree with this TPV (I explicitely don't). > What we need is it to be either changed, or have a real > lawyer look at it and

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Um yes... I cannot agree with this TPV (I explicitely don't). What we need is it to be either changed, or have a real lawyer look at it and explain the ramifications. What it says now is pretty clear to me: if I contribute to some GPL-ed third party viewer and later someone else uses it to connect

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/2010-March/000521.html On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > You too eh? > See my correspondence with RMS that I forwarded to the list a while back > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Lance Corrimal > wrote: >> Am Sonntag,

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

You too eh? See my correspondence with RMS that I forwarded to the list a while back On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Am Sonntag, 21. März 2010 18:24:13 schrieb Kent Quirk (Q Linden): > >> If you have legal questions about the implication of >> documents, you should ask a

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Although the text of the TPV policy doesn't mention this, to protect developers who don't want their viewer to be subject to the unnamed penalties of said policy, Joe himself has said the following: "[The TPV policy] only governs viewers that actually do connect to the SL grid, not those that are

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Am Montag, 22. März 2010 12:44:57 schrieb Carlo Wood: > I'd like to see this question answered, too. > > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 06:08:58PM +0200, Ryan McDougall wrote: > > The policy deeply confuses users and developers together, making it > > appear to me that "users" can place "developers" in v

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Am Sonntag, 21. März 2010 18:24:13 schrieb Kent Quirk (Q Linden): > If you have legal questions about the implication of > documents, you should ask a lawyer, not a mailing list. the free software foundation has been notified. expect comms from their lawyers in the near future.

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

I'd like to see this question answered, too. On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 06:08:58PM +0200, Ryan McDougall wrote: > The policy deeply confuses users and developers together, making it > appear to me that "users" can place "developers" in violation of your > policy against their will. > > Let me explai

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 6:47 AM, Latif Khalifa wrote: > Now contrast that to TPV policy section 7, specifically 1.a and 1.d. There is a type in that line, I meant 7.a and 7.d. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.second

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

While I understand the motivation behind the TPV policy, there are still issues with it that go beyond it's the stated goals. The problems range from silly micromanagement (section 1.g mandates where to put your viewer version numbers), to far more serious issues in section 7. Again, I do understa

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Because of these ongoing problems, I have disabled the Luna Viewer's ability to log into Second Life's grids (ADITI and AGNI), and encourage other Open Source viewers to do the same. As an opensource developer, I feel betrayed. Many of us have tried to help your company with bug reports, patche

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Jeez I fail to understand why in the heck LL can not understand this simple concept. Linden devs have introduced bugs before that have allowed content to be stolen, no mod scripts to be readable, and inventories worth several hundred dollars to vanish overnight. Yet, none of you, under the terms o

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > As I've stated repeatedly, the TPV policy governs viewers that connect to Law cannot govern viewers, only humans; in this case developers and users. Mashing them up together and repeating the same thing doesn't make you any more clear. > the S

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

As I've stated repeatedly, the TPV policy governs viewers that connect to the SL grid. The policy document as worded is explicit about the requirements for developers and for users of TPVs that connect to the SL grid. That probably sums up what I have to say about it today, so I'm only admitting

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

So for any malicious viewer developer, all he needs to do to avoid sanction under the TPV policy is claim his viewer has no intention of connecting to SL? Or are you admitting that you cannot create a terms of use/service policy that somehow obligates viewer developers to jump though your hoops?

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Color me old-fashioned, but if that is the case, then the policy agreement shouldn't actually overstep to that software... but it does by a simple, reasonable reading. On 22/03/2010 6:19 AM, Joe Linden wrote: > No, it only governs viewers that actually do connect to the SL grid, > not those that a

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Thats the real issue IMO. Much of the confusion seems to me to be due to a separate document that describes "new" requirements. If this is simply designed to protect and define access to the servers then it should have simply been an addition to the TOS, which defines the conditions under which

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

It is not a hard concession to make and we have already made it. (As noted in the FAQ here: "...although you must provide your name and contact information to Linden Lab to be included in the Viewer Directory, you do not need to make that information publicly available in your listing page. You m

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

No, it only governs viewers that actually do connect to the SL grid, not those that are capable of doing so (but don't.) On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Ryan McDougall wrote: > > If so, in effect, the TPV policy governs all SL protocols? > > ___ Poli

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

So any software that implements SLUDP is a TPV, and subject to you policy? Because if it *can* log into SL, and someone *does* one day log into SL, then it's "any third-party software client on any device that logs into our servers"? If so, in effect, the TPV policy governs all SL protocols? Chee

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 2010-03-21, at 12:24, Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote: > * Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or > any other could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also > goes for Linden employees, especially those with any seniority. So > you're unlikely to get furthe

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

I'll have a longer reply for several responses here tomorrow, but please note the definition of a Third Party Viewer in the policy document states "By “Third-Party Viewer,” we mean any third-party software client on any device that *logs into our servers* that support Second Life." There is no re

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

So you understand how LL employing such specialists, working a language the community "can't even understand", so admittedly protect their own self-interest (because it's a business), might create a a skewed balance of power that might cause the disadvantaged party to be mistrustful... right? Peop

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 2010-03-21, at 11:04, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > > maybe we cannot sync this isn't a restriction against development > based on GPL, is a restriction against ability to connect LL grid with > a 3rd party viewer... Then it should say "you can not connect to the grid with a viewer that does

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

To help understand this: If we use the analogy sense of "eye for an eye" but only as in 'GPL for a GPL,' then contributors should be able to submit GPL based patches to the GPL source. However, that is not the case when a GPL for a GPL also require a Contribution Agreement. Sure, there are othe

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: * Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, a

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 05:04:58PM +0100, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > maybe we cannot sync this isn't a restriction against development > based on GPL, is a restriction against ability to connect LL grid with > a 3rd party viewer... No it's not. If that were the case it would say "User", not "Dev

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

While i agree that this maybe could have been phrased better if you look the GPL Violation due to liability concerns may not actually be valid #include standardIANAL.h the liability tree goes LL is liable for the servers being fit for purpose and is also liable for Gross Negligence for as distribu

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 04:05:01PM +0100, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > all LL are doing is same already done by a lot of other company than > release their software under GPL, but have restriction to use server > side services/software (netscape, vmware, novel, etc.etc.) > why their opensource develope

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 10:40:54PM +0800, Boy Lane wrote: > As I wrote that would mean the end of *ALL* current 3rd party SL viewers > other than Naali or from scratched progammed text clients. Those cannot take responsibility for what others do with their code either. -- Carlo Wood __

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 03:15:32PM +0100, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > > GPL is about source of viewer, and is accomplished > > TPV is a part of term of use for external developer, you can use source > in GPL way without any restriction, but if you want connect your viewer > to LL grid (LL isn't a so

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

--- From: "Tayra Dagostino" To: "Boy Lane" Cc: Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 11:28 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date > On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:05:29 +0800 > "Boy Lane" wrote: >

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

If that is so, can I happily distribute a violating viewer so long as I never connect to the grid myself? Would you be able to require me to cease distribution? You may be able to require me to cease use in connecting to your servers, but cease distribution? On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Soft

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

gostino" To: "Boy Lane" Cc: Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 12:04 AM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date > On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:29:57 +0800 > "Boy Lane" wrote: > >> Tayra, in all respect, but you need to read the po

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

- > From: "Tayra Dagostino" > To: "Boy Lane" > Cc: > Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 11:28 PM > Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date > > > > On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:05:29 +0800 > > "Boy Lane"

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Tayra Dagostino wrote: > maybe we cannot sync this isn't a restriction against development > based on GPL, is a restriction against ability to connect LL grid with > a 3rd party viewer... > > Then why ain't it written like that? And i i like to use my viewer to connect to LL world DO i hav

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

The policy deeply confuses users and developers together, making it appear to me that "users" can place "developers" in violation of your policy against their will. Let me explain: Let's say I develop a client expressly designed to log into OpenSim for example. Because of protocol compatibility,

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:29:57 +0800 "Boy Lane" wrote: > Tayra, in all respect, but you need to read the policy before posting > a comment about it. > > There are at least 2 major violations against GPL in TPV, independent > if I want to develop or use any 3rd party viewer to connect to > SecondLi

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

quot;Tayra Dagostino" To: "Boy Lane" Cc: Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 11:28 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date > On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:05:29 +0800 > "Boy Lane" wrote: > >> Again, I completely agree with you. I

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 2010-03-21, at 09:15, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > GPL is about source of viewer, and is accomplished > > TPV is a part of term of use for external developer, you can use > source > in GPL way without any restriction, but if you want connect your > viewer > to LL grid (LL isn't a software, is a

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:05:29 +0800 "Boy Lane" wrote: > Again, I completely agree with you. I can develop any viewer based on > the Linden sources and be GPL compliant. > > But, what I can not do it is to be compliant to GPL and TPV the same > time. As such the otherwise legitimate GPL > viewer w

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

11:05 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date > On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:40:54 +0800 > "Boy Lane" wrote: > >> Thanks Tayra. You said it in other words but that is exactly what I >> wrote. I can not make a 3rd party viewer that is not v

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:40:54 +0800 "Boy Lane" wrote: > Thanks Tayra. You said it in other words but that is exactly what I > wrote. I can not make a 3rd party viewer that is not violating either > TPV or GPL and the same time can *legally* connect to the SecondLife > grid.. > > That leaves 2 opt

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

LL* current 3rd party SL viewers other than Naali or from scratched progammed text clients. Boy - Original Message - From: "Tayra Dagostino" To: "Boy Lane" Cc: "Joe Linden" ; Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 10:15 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third part

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 09:21:25AM -0700, Joe Linden wrote: >> The updated version of the Third Party Viewer Policy was posted here about a >> week ago: >> http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php > > That says that if a developer changes the cod

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:01:02 +0800 > "Boy Lane" wrote: > >> But worse than this, the updated TPV policy does not allow *anyone* >> to comply with that policy.The policy is legally and technically >> flawed. It's impossible to comply and no

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:01:02 +0800 "Boy Lane" wrote: > But worse than this, the updated TPV policy does not allow *anyone* > to comply with that policy.The policy is legally and technically > flawed. It's impossible to comply and not violate either LL's policy > itself or licensing terms (GPL). A

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Darmath wrote: On 21/03/2010 9:01 PM, Boy Lane wrote: Just a couple of paragraphs that are in direct conflict with each other: "You [the developer] are in full compliance with the terms of the GNU General Public License ("GPL"), if your application uses the source code of the official Second

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 21/03/2010 9:01 PM, Boy Lane wrote: Just a couple of paragraphs that are in direct conflict with each other: "You [the developer] are in full compliance with the terms of the GNU General Public License ("GPL"), if your application uses the source code of the official Second Life viewer, whi

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Original Message - From: Joe Linden To: Boy Lane Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 12:21 AM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date The updated version of the Third Party Viewer Policy was posted here abou

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Or anyone who has an issue with it can close their account and blatantly violate this policy. This raises a question: has the TOS been updated to contain words to the effect of "you agree to be bound by the TPV"? If not, any developers may simply reject the policy On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:45 AM,

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 09:21:25AM -0700, Joe Linden wrote: > The updated version of the Third Party Viewer Policy was posted here about a > week ago: > http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php That says that if a developer changes the code and distributes it, you reserve the right to pursue any an

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

r already > > > *From:* Jesse Barnett > *Sent:* Saturday, March 20, 2010 1:30 PM > *To:* Joe Linden > *Cc:* Boy Lane ; opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com > *Subject:* Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement > date > > GRRR! > > So yo

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

are your customer already From: Jesse Barnett Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 1:30 PM To: Joe Linden Cc: Boy Lane ; opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date GRRR! So you left in the requirements that you may publish

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Just as a note here: In Germany for example even if you 'just' publish a simple webpage/blog, you are required (by law) to state your real life name and address (Impressum) This may not be a requirement when you publish content outside of Germany (it is in many other countries too as I think)

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Timothy Horrigan wrote: > Jesse: How does it endanger your daughter's life to have your business > address listed? You can always rent a PO Box for a few bucks a month if you > feel sensitive about divulging your street address, which many > businesspeople choose

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

GRRR! So you left in the requirements that you may publish the real life name and address of the developers in the 3rd party Viewer Directory? This is absolutely nuts and extremely dangerous and whoever thought it was a good idea needs to publish thier own name and address in reply here. Woul

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

The updated version of the Third Party Viewer Policy was posted here about a week ago: http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php As stated in the FAQ, the policy will be in full force and effect on April

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

We are approacing one month after the initial 3rd party viewer policy has been announced. Nobody from Linden Lab has answered the question I've raised 2 weeks ago. So let me repeat it one more time: What is the status of the Third Party Viewer Policy? Do we have to assume that the current versi

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Am Mittwoch 10 März 2010 schrieb Morgaine: > *If only* new features got into Snowglobe faster. :-) The only > things that seem to get in fast are bug fixes. And of course > IBM-sponsored code. > > Admittedly, the rate is somewhat faster than into LL's main viewer > ... but then, it could hardly

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Tayra, the GPL is about a lot more than merely providing modifiable sources. GPL licenses specifically provide the freedom to modify and distribute GPL sources *without "further restrictions"* being placed on developers beyond the restrictions declared in the license itself. This is completely di

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

*If only* new features got into Snowglobe faster. :-) The only things that seem to get in fast are bug fixes. And of course IBM-sponsored code. Admittedly, the rate is somewhat faster than into LL's main viewer ... but then, it could hardly be slower! :-) Talking about "LL's main viewer" ... w

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 10/03/2010 10:09 AM, Armin Weatherwax wrote: > >> I am simply pointing out that they are NOT compatible with the GPL. >> > GPL compatible or not - the sentence "The Snowglobe Viewer [...] this > viewer may be somewhat less stable than the official Second Life > viewer"( http://viewerd

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Don't new features get into snowglobe faster too? Thus more potential for bugs On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Morgaine wrote: > At any given point in time, one viewer is more stable than another, and at > another point in time, it's the other way around.  This is perfectly normal, > and blanke

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

At any given point in time, one viewer is more stable than another, and at another point in time, it's the other way around. This is perfectly normal, and blanket statements about superior stability make no sense ... especially when they share common code! :-) If anything, Snowglobe could well be

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

It's the truth. Snowglobe is unstable. ~Tom Armin Weatherwax wrote: >> I am simply pointing out that they are NOT compatible with the GPL. >> > GPL compatible or not - the sentence "The Snowglobe Viewer [...] this > viewer may be somewhat less stable than the official Second Life > viewer"

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

> I am simply pointing out that they are NOT compatible with the GPL. GPL compatible or not - the sentence "The Snowglobe Viewer [...] this viewer may be somewhat less stable than the official Second Life viewer"( http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/ at 2010/03/10 00:06 GMT+1) is a slap into

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Many of the requirements are in fact unreasonable unless they are rephrased to apply ONLY when connecting to LL's servers On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:54 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > > On 2010-03-09, at 14:38, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > >> On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:23:33 -0600 >> Argent Stonecutter wro

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 2010-03-09, at 14:38, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:23:33 -0600 > Argent Stonecutter wrote: > >> On 2010-03-09, at 14:12, Tayra Dagostino wrote: >>> I think yoiu've misreaded the TPV policy, no GPL violation, viewer >>> code is GPL, you can take a copy from svn, manipulate it

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

Read sections 4b,7a, 7c, 8c and 8d for a start - references to distributing viewers and how you must not do so under certain circumstances. All of these restrictions contradict the rights granted by the GPL. LL could argue that any releases after this policy constitute a release under a new licens

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:23:33 -0600 Argent Stonecutter wrote: > On 2010-03-09, at 14:12, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > > I think yoiu've misreaded the TPV policy, no GPL violation, viewer > > code is GPL, you can take a copy from svn, manipulate it, patch or > > mood, rename it, all GPL let u do with it

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On 2010-03-09, at 14:12, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > I think yoiu've misreaded the TPV policy, no GPL violation, viewer > code is GPL, you can take a copy from svn, manipulate it, patch or > mood, rename it, all GPL let u do with it (and consequential charges > for a developer who work on a GPL code)

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 14:47:35 + Morgaine wrote: > I believe that they're seeking better-informed legal counsel on GPL > compliance first, before redrafting the TPV. The first version > conflated users, viewers and developers so terribly that GPLv2 clause > 6 was left in tatters. Joe's phrasi

[opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

It has been 14 days since the initial draft of the 3PVP was published and we were told it will be reworked to include comments, concerns and suggestions. Two weeks have passed since and besides a FAQ that also says the policy is being worked on there have been no news. As this is a mission crit

Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

I believe that they're seeking better-informed legal counsel on GPL compliance first, before redrafting the TPV. The first version conflated users, viewers and developers so terribly that GPLv2 clause 6 was left in tatters. Joe's phrasing is the only one that makes the necessary separation so fa