|
Copybot the word of all fantasies in Second Life, a word for any justification. But in fact, what is Copybot? Originally, Copybot was a tool created to facilitate the transfer of technical information between the grids. It was written when the Second Life client was not "open", meaning that we had no access to source code. Nowadays, the word Copybot is generically used for any process to illegally acquire a further right not provided by the original owner of the item (and intellectual property rights in certain cases).
Why Copybot exists? There is not a technical protection?
Really everything begins from a conceptual misunderstanding. We speak about "viewer", a program that allows us to see. But therein lies the fundamental problem. The "viewer" is not a program to see, as one that allows you to watch TV on your computer, but a program that reconstructs the world at every person home. Therefore each person, each customer, each viewer receives ALL INFORMATION necessary to recreate all the objects that are visible. Why is this necessary? Errr ... Imagine that you tell a mason, "Build all the walls of the house I have imagined but I'll provide no plan, just that there are 5 walls, roof, 4 windows, 1 door." Could you say tht the mason will build the home you imagined? Does that mean that everything is copiable? Theorically yes, in practice some things can be much harder to copy. The purpose of this document is not to help copybotters but to explain calmly and quietly, so I will not go into details. Does that means any viewer (client SL) is potentially a copy bot? Yes. What is different is that in a correct client, there is a safety who says: "Hey my dear, no, you're not allowed to copy this object or to transfer or modify it etc". So, regular clients have an integrated Jiminy Cricket® who made some things are possible or not because they are rules we must all apply to live together. Does Linden Lab can "detect" a Copybot user or other modified programs? Without going into details, yes and no. In some cases it is conceivable but the problem with this kind of thing is that a client (viewer) needs to rebuild everything, as we have explained above. Apparently, from the server side (that is to say the Linden Lab side) the standard client and the Copybot ask the same thing using the same way (or almost, I'm simplifying). It's in the "almost" there cares. Because "almost" never is "I am sure", that limits the operational capabilities but does not prohibit them; however, the TOS (SL rules) open many opportunities to Linden Lab doing what they want. Quite simple, let's say automating this kind of thing would take the risk of banning people who have done nothing but be suspected because of the so called "false positives" (see an example below). Why Linden Lab does not introduce active securities (offensive watch) in the source code of viewers?Linden Lab already gets a lot of information (almost to the limit of what is tolerable). But be aware that your computer is a PRIVATE area. If they execute functions without your consent (for example, which would go looking for info or explore your system) is a reprehensible act that can claim in trouble or at best be simply banned from use in business, academia, associations etc.. Just where you have to find your customers. The example of risk may be illustrated by a telephony system Peer2Peer which has become only marginally and only to the general public, simply because their system could not guarantee confidentiality towards external persons. For that it is banned in many network acting as a pro or semi pro or educational. And DRM (Digital Right Management), would solve?No, the DRM do not solve anything. The DRM is a system that does not aim to make things safer (all DRM has always been circumvented in a few days) but to generate "trust" for the holders of rights. And this trust has a financial cost that is far from negligible (in addition to a technical cost) which must be borne by the user AND BY THE HOLDER OF RIGHTS. When we see the same people who complain that LL does nothing against Copybots and the same people who cry at the thought of investing 10L$ per item sold on Xstreet-SL... That's why the DRM always end up disappearing. Cf Apple, for example, with its iTunes even though it was virtually a monopoly, but oh so many others. Closing the code, would it clear up?Neither. Remember, the first Copybot was written while the Client source code was not Open Sourced and was not harder to use than a simple bot for group invitation. And "anti copybot" protection scripts, the "black lists", the files of all kinds?Already, as a reminder, the creation of personal files (including avatar name files) is subject to many restrictions in different countries! Sanctions may even be extremely heavy. Let's recall that a French bank has suffered on this subject in Bretagne and in the east of the country. Then, for blacklists, they suffer what is called "false positives". That is to say that any black list contains a false positive rate (for example persons who have been introduced in the list by mistake or intentionally to harm). Former honey friend, labor relations, competitor, and some do not hesitate to laugh (including in public) having introduced X or Y who refused his advances or rendering a service or simply provided a better competing product; what makes, on principle, the blacklists totally useless or even dangerous (who would render service to those bastards? You? No, not me anyway). As for the "LSL scripts" and other "bots" supposed to detect "copybots and others", I'd tell an anecdote dating from a few weeks. A merchant complained "there is more than copybots, home," "I sell nothing", "There are x weeks that it lasts longer I can, I have any more regular customer!" This idiot equipped himself with one of scripts that worked on a stupid principle. Why stupid? Just because many actions could be taken as a sign of copybot which caused the automatic ban of customers outside the store! Some people have also got wind of this story; in fact its own customers (who were in his group) have almost all been offered a wonderful gift very well done. Which included a little script nothing apparently quite innocent as legitimate but it immediately raised the ban by the famous script protective anti-copybot. We do not again speak of people who use copybot as an argument to protect you, it falls in this case the good old principle of "mafia" used by some people: they come in your to copy your products and after they sell to you their "protection "(sic). Proof of that Second Life is real, we find there addiction, stupidity, the mafia... ultimate proof that Second Life is a real world ... and modern. And the sincere customer? The sincere purchaser is the one who has acquired an object (say a sculpty dress), object sold at a fair price (around 400 L$), he does nothing to arouse suspicion and, in fact, he is actually owner of an object that is the fruit of an illegal copy. For example you buy from Mr X the beautiful dress sculpted without knowing that it is a model created by Y that X copyboted. (To help you, read Appendix 1: 10 Tips to fight through education against copybot.) Theoretically, and ultimately, LL must destroy copyboted items. They have already tried to do that (with varying degrees of success). But this poses a real problem for people who bought in good faith. We can read about this case, the misadventures of Kindle®, virtual reader from Amazonian©. Some users had their inventory destroyed by reading books purchased legally just because they bought in good faith a version from someone who does not have rights to sell it. It is difficult, as is, to say how this will end because the case is too recent and it seems that we go to an arrangement between Amazon© and purchasers deprived of their book; arrangement will obviously be financial. Unfortunately we will not have in this case a legal intervention to enlighten us about the position of the real world in such cases. In the case of Second Life, we have the same problem. Let's forget the dress and say now you have purchased animations (or other item) to be integrated into your buildings. If Linden Lab estimates on the basis of a simple DMCA (which is not a court decision but an application of justice) to destroy the items you've made sincerely from a copyboted element, that could open a wide perspective to lawyers and legal experts, budding or not. Even more if Linden Lab would come to have a presence on the european countries which have different laws on the subject. Not to mention that any merchant who does not think his image in a highly competitive sector such as SL, might to have his game's up! Does LL can take sanctions against the buyer of copyboted product? It is very hard to answer this question. But we must see that, in the state, contracts for access to Second Life give considerable rights to Linden Lab. There was little response from the real world justice to give a decision (most cases have ended up by an arrangement which we don't know precisely all terms). The case StrockerI will not go into detail about the case "Stroker". But it was impossible to not address it briefly in this document. For more details, I recommend reading the summary article made by Garmin for le Canard Virtuel (in french). Basically, Mr. Stroker is a vendor of erotic beds. He believes that Linden Lab, publisher of the Metaverse Second Life takes advantage of a slow action in the fight against illegal copying and does not therefore meet all its obligations. He then filed, with others, a "class action" against Linden Lab. I'll let you make your opinion based on Garmin's article and the references indicated therein. The creators, what they think?The position of creators is obviously multiple. For some, the concern is that the violation of IP Right (the Right to Intellectual Property) would be too simple. If by their concept, the objects are copy-sensitive because it is what allows the object to exist and to be seen, there is no doubt that the access to this fragility is actually simpler than in 2005. They believe that evolution by simplifying access is bad then it must be remembered that this is a constant of humanity as well as Pi. In a technological society, it is always aimed to simplify and all is simplifying even if it means to provoke revolution after revolution. If some see a reason to be afraid, we still note several things. Humanity, from its origins, was inclined to simplify. This has always been afraid, that even is the foundations of Luddite, I mean one of the bases, the Luddite having also social reasons that have no place here. Humanity has survived and thrived although this simplification would be done also in its ability to destroy still more and still less time. Our security, facing this, was to make a progression that has not so much gone through technical solutions but through education and law. The whole history of mankind is technical because it is required to be technician (the allegorical figure of 2001 Space Odyssey, which was long a symbol familiar to residents, is a good illustration). And it is based on the principle "make it easier to raise the Mankind." Periods of technical and scientific obscurantism are also a pretty grim story. 
For them, the fault lays with Linden Lab. This position, if it can be understood, however, is very simplistic in the sense that Linden Lab almighty editor has also a very simple reasons. Technical constraints and the way people behave in society are equally applicable to them than anyone in the first or second lives. Linden Lab can not rewrite the way people live in harmony or attacking others across their property, their ideas, their body or their creations.
Linden Lab is like everyone else, and do with finding a balance. In security, we apply a very simple reason: security is proportioned to the value of the property to protect. Just as you don't use a military encryption algorithm to keep the recipe for your favorite dish because it would be too expensive for something that have not in itself sufficient value. If, on the other hand, you are keeping the secret of immortality, it is likely that you will apply a maximum security to that thing. See Appendix 2: 10 Rumors on copybot and particularly the section on economics of scarcity.
For other designers, it is the preferred choice of another form of exchange and trade, to put the human in the center and to produce what the customer expects assuming that a cribber has no imagination and we can always adapt our products and develop our business plan taking into account the fragility regarding copying.
They then base their trade on the factual production of goods (which leaves no time for the copybotter to do anything), products adapted to the seasons but mostly they reflect a fact which, I think, escapes to a lot, this is, contrary to popular belief, the technical capabilities of Second Life are changing very very very quickly. The impossible of yesterday has often become the possible of this morning.
I would give two simple examples and, in my opinion, talking by themselves. If you are creating, you know the following dogma:
"Nothing can be put in after a flexy who would follow the movements of the flexy". This is a dogma that many builders say to you. However, we can see with the arrival of navi avatars navi the multiplication of a technique, playing on several flexies with the same flex parameters and linked between them. By cleverly placing the different textures, it gives the impression that a "feather duster" of fur is at the end of the tail and follows the tail. The effect is not 100% perfect but this simple solution that only a real creator could find is more than enough to give the illusion and spreads quickly when it was rare or very rare, no very long ago!
Another example: who as a clothing creator did not yell at SL skirts; yet from Coco Design to Edelweiss or to late Monaca (which has left SL for other reasons than copybot, I immediately said that) we have seen original techniques to make interesting that horrible shape skirt!
In both cases above, we have the example of technical options that can be made only by creatives. Ideas that are likely to be taken up by many builders without the use of copybot for each one reinterpreting such solution into a personal vision and totally original, creating a little more real wealth in Second Life.
No copybotter would had this opportunity, or to find it or to reuse this technique because, quite simply, there is not enough work for it from them.
I would not say I am delighted in the copybotter because he should do to me and to you less competition than we imagine, but it is a bit of that. Because, to find new solutions, techniques to push a little more the possibilities, there is only one solution: create and test but certainly not the laziness of the copy. And who does not work to understand how to create by himself or with others (and not against others) in SL is doomed to neither move nor offer items that may attract customers. In short, the copybotter condemns himself without knowing that he cannot keep up with the times but just to peck or to deceive "Mr. and Mrs. Sucker". If we remember that those who actually are buying in large, are residents with experience and a past ... we know who will work in selling or not.
In any case, it must be understood and I hope, if not succeeded, at least you have been sharing my idea that the problem of copybot has nothing to do with a technical question. It must be refused "in itself" and solutions, if there is one at least, can only come from our perception as a designer or creator. The use of copybot is an insult to what you're really in refusing to give you the opportunity for what you come into SL, that is to say create, meet, learn and share.
So? Nothing can be done?
If you can spend on education. On condition to explain. Provided that each designer being aware of the limitations of the virtuality from the shortage economy starts to work ... instead of complaining (Appendix 2: 10 Rumors on copybot.)
The other hypothesis is the introduction, as in some RL communities, of "mediator of peace." This concept aims to introduce people to whom it provides a "special status" ; for them to hear the parties and render a proposed agreement after hearing of objections and contradictory response. But note that this kind of conflict resolution, if it works well in small communities, if it is very fast, can be difficult to implement for several reasons. We must find people "recognized" and admitted or people who agree to carry a load (symbolic but meaningful) that the common resident has not.
For example, for a Metaverse like SL, it could be people who voluntarily give their true identity in public so verified and unequivocal. In this kind of concept, we must see if people who have submitted the case (the plaintiff or the suspect) reject the final compromise of the conciliator, who refuses is a flawed and the case can then be actually committed by a legal authority totally independent.
The second concern, for this kind of solution in an Metaverse environment such as Second Life, is that it is culturally very broad. The perception of law varies enormously between cultures. It is therefore very difficult to find people having a compatible profile at the cultural, technical and social level. Difficult, but after all it is our world, our imagination and this principle in use from the last few tens of thousands of years have yet happy days ahead and not only in the primary cultures. In all cases a solution of this type can be established only by Linden Lab.
Ultimately all that is nice, but copybot is this good or bad?
The issue is not a moral issue. This is not a question of good or evil; such a presentation is equivalent to weight value judgments. But just a question of ... (second) life.
Living in society requires that we accept the other. And that other is not us and can have dreams, hopes, choices that are not ours. Some want to trade, it is imperative to respect them not because of the TOS, not because of morality but simply because nobody has the right to tell them they should not live as they wish as long as they respect the rules of common life. And using copybot to acquire a copy of their creation is a waste of time and a complete lack of imagination that is detrimental not to businesses but to the person.
If you want items full perms you can give, remember that there is a strong market for legal full perms objects that you can texture (or get to texture), fit your needs legally, often single subject not to redistribute them in full perms. And often at prices not higher than things done by certain brands, see far less expensive and with a quality which is far from being poor.
You will also find many objects, textures, animations, scripts that are available under CC or GPL or BSD licenses most often free or with a contribution entirely symbolic.
These are items that are made by people who want to have fun (without imposing any market work). They are freely distributed, copied, modified and even sellable (exceptions for some items under CC license which may restrict certain rights). Their quality is very often much better than the pure products "commercial" because they benefit immediate improvements from tens and even thousands of people!
No need to bother with copybot, you have there everything to legally explore!
In conclusion, to me, to you, to us to live in society. We have a "second" chance to learn to live together. It did not ask so much effort into eliminating from the equation of life a number of parameters that we face in the RL, the physical pain, hunger, cold, need to find a roof etc..
This should convince us to at least make an effort on our ability to live in community while respecting each resident.
naofan Teardrop
Thanks to Samia, Gwen, the meta Japanese community, Dop Kidd, Nathou for navi-tail (no, I did not watch tail other than in a technical eye) and OSGrid friends for reading correction/advice.
Appendix 1: 10 Tips to fight through education against copybot. - Check the seller when it is a place with many items at prices that are not necessarily those of the market. For example, check he is Payment Info Used or at least on file if he has a shop with tens of items that required hours of work, it is unlikely he has ever had to buy ... or to sell L$.
- Check if there is a license more or less restrictive justifying the price (very expensive or cheap) where there are full perm objects.
- Check if he is promoting his store via ads in his profile.
- See if there is coordination in his creations. ALL DESIGNERS HAVE THEIR GOOD AND BAD HABITS. This subtly is reflected in the creations and their style. Very rare are those who pass by dozens of different styles (however it happens among those who seek artistic performance or change community often and even in those who are not a person but a 3D Studio with X designers behind the brand).
- Do not hesitate to contact the author to ask for details. Example: "You sell this no mod with lots of scripts by prim, should I have the version without a script because I do not like lag.
- Check the presence of a support group where the chat is active. Someone who invests time in the support has nothing to do but to copybot!!
- The presence of an identifiable and accessible Mainstore with "storefront".
- You must know around you who are the designers you love! Give them visibility. Information sharing will increasingly powerful a true creator than a vendor of copybotted items since the latter needs the discretion to act.
- Beware of the killer good bargains made in the vicinity of the sandbox!
- Use and promote products under open license to offer an alternative.
Appendix 2: 10 Rumors on copybot
- Copybot exists because of Open Source.
Wrong. Copybot was a tool written while the client was not opensourced. The OpenSource (you will often see the acronym FOSS) has nothing to do with Copybot. By accessing the sources of Second Life does not make easier the copybot. Anyone who is capable of reading the sources is capable of making a copybot without reading a single line of Second Life client. - If someone on my friend list says that X is copyboting, quickly banning X and send to everyone the info since we must fight by any means against copybot.
This is certainly the worst thing to do. You never have the means to make sure of the person of your FL is not mistaken, did not want revenge or X is not naive as to peddle a rumor. The answer to this kind of case is and must remain "if there is a problem, post an AR (Abuse Report ...) and contact Linden Lab, because only they can manage this situation by checking the information." NEVER trust someone who says "Don't worry, I know a Linden, it will fix this, or I know a Linden who ...." - A new viewer will help make it impossible to copybot.
Wrong. The technology used by Linden Lab requires that ALL information that allow to see an object is transmitted to the client (the viewer so poorly called with that name). This means that any program accessing SL should have all the information to "duplicate" the object. If such information are modified or altered, the object cannot be reconstructed, therefore we can not see it properly. Moreover, any further treatment would result in overtime for the client which would slow the process and would show our friend "The Bad Big Lag". The fight against copybot through education and not the technique as it is in Second Life. - It is impossible to trade because of Copybot.
It's true and false. Not true if you think; it's true if you understand the trade of virtual objects on the same basis as trade of real objects. Which is stupid because both have a fundamental difference. The production of a real object has many costs of production, one of which is the "manufacture" or "duplication". People or robots who sew clothing, the employee which verifies that your new car is clean before you receive it, the miners extracting the metal required for your computer, the price of the said metal etc.. This is called (in very simplistic) an economy of scarcity.
That is to say that the production of good X has a cost but the production of goods X1 X2 X3 X4 ... has also one for each copy. In a virtual world X2 X3 X4 X5 have cost very near to zero so that your product has what is called a cost tending to zero in production, we have only design cost (or even care if the product requires a medium).
For that all trade should be aware that his goods are a commodity that goes very quickly (much faster than in RL) to have a value tending infinitely to zero without NEVER GO UP. This why to design a business by thinking to detail. We cannot hope to sell in SL for 1000 years the same crap or the same sublime creation without as its mere existence, the value of said good decreases rapidly to zero. Finally, consider your business and how you will handle it with this principle and copybot will become probably the least of your worries to one side of which consists to always do better. - Copybot allow to steal in the legal sense of the word.
Not true, because the theft on a legal level requires to lose the use and possession of property. If I steal your car, the morning after you'll go to work by foot, bus or on horseback, a copybot of your car does not prevent you to go to work. The copybot violates the laws on intellectual property that is different. - Emerald is a copybot or make easier to use copybot.
Wrong. Emerald is a client like any other. It does nothing to promote the copybot. Specifically it does not facilitate it more than the official client, or Snowglobe or Opensim tools (the counterpart of OpenSource SL). On the other hands, clients (programs) in which we removed the moral securities may pose as Emerald or Snowglobe etc.. But this does not mean that designers of Emerald or Snowglobe or Imprudence are responsible for anything. Unless you think that youu, yes yourself, would be responsible for what anyone does because she he as the same surname as you. - Copybot and rape of intellectual property is not the same.
This is False. Any reproduction in Second Life of a protected item is a violation of the law of the real world in many countries and must be as SERIOUS as Copybot. Consider an example: a RL brand of shoe make a design with specific colors etc.; to copy it in SL even without using the brand name is identical to using a Copybot on a legal level. Ditto for the use of libraries spreading licensed products sold in SL without complying with the original license. Example, you download an animation found on a 3D program database in SL, it's ALWAYS the original license that applies unless specific contraindication! Same for 3D objects designed with 3Ds (widely used at present) and converted to SL, same for skins (often imported illegally from Daz for example). - I can safely post an AR as soon as I see someone I think he is copyboting; anyway Linden Lab knows what to do.
Not true, the false accusation is included in the penal code in most of the western states. An AR must be thoughtful, reasoned and not a mail to your girlfriend (or your boyfriend) for fun! Linden Lab does not use anonymization to protect you in case of dispute of this kind. - Not serious Copybot, I can make a DMCA for anything, I run no risk. Wrong.
The DMCA is a LEGAL ACT IN THE REAL WORLD, by which you declare to hold the rights! Consider an example of a creator of sculpties selling a reproduction of a sculpted head Hello Kitty® (without the use of the name). But he deposits DMCA. In fact if it fell on a damned annoying guy that has time and money to lose (or to invest), he will condemned with certainty except to prove that it has acquired a license to use Hello Kitty® (which is highly unlikely in that case, as he would be forced to use the brand Hello Kitty® on its product). - I saw a copybotter he had in front of him a cube that generates cubes they took shapes...!
It is a possibility. But this is not necessarily reality. For two reasons. Firstly, it uses techniques such as PHPA, which are import techniques. With it you design an entire Outworld build in a product such as 3ds, Maya or Blender and you "rebuild inworld" directly by assembly. For those who understand that lookks like the functions of import/export of Emerald, Imprudence or Meerkat - 3 viewers perfectly legal and aimed at specific uses.
Except that this generation is via a cube rezzed contrary to the use from the import function of Emerald ... That the object resembles another object proves indeed even whether a copybot since some people use libraries of 3D objects converted to SL. The only way to ensure this is to compare how the sculpty has been formed and/or changes in shading texture (shading or other effects) which is a hard work and far from the reach of everyone's eye.
|
- -
