September 22, 2009

The theft nobody talks about

SL gets rocked by two incidents these days: Stroker Serpentine et. al. sues Linden Lab on not acting hard enough on content theft, and Rebel Hope et. al. got copybotted on large scale. I am not going to talk about this, because people who are much more elaborate than me did already in more eloquent words.

I am talking about the everyday content theft and IP infringement happening in SL on a daily basis, and where nobody talks about.

For example, Live DJ's who play music on shop and sim openings, or at clubs, and accept payment or tips for it. I know some SL-DJ's personally, and this is not a personal attack against them. I don't know the respective laws in their countries, but in my country this would be seen as commercial use of IP work and would require a fee being paid based on the number of listeners (and not on revenue). I can only assume it is similar in most countries.

For example artwork, photos and images donwloaded from Google Image Search and uploaded to become wall decorations, carpets, building components. And I am not even talking about designers doing this and selling the creations, I am talking about home owners, club owners, office owners - resulting in hundreds if not thousand incidents each day.

For example recreation of buildings found on websites, furniture found in catalogs and clothing seen in magazines. While this gets discussed when done on a high profile level (Prad Prathivi showed an interesting comparison between RL clothing made by Diesel and SL clothing made by Armidi) it goes largely unnoticed on a more obscure level.

I am sure there are countless other examples where IP rights get infringed on a daily basis. But this is not a purely SL problem! The same examples also apply in RL, where all this happens as well, daily, countless times. Every case on a small scale, but amassed.

The problem we have is a society problem. And only because virtual worlds are very small and relatively new and - by their very nature - digital, we perceive it as a big problem. SL has the size of a medium sized town, and with an economy based on bits and bytes it IS a problem. But it is a problem on a larger scale, and not a problem Linden Lab can solve. It is a problem the society as a whole - on the doorstep to a fully digital age - needs to solve.

The internet gives the impression that everything is for free. And things taken for free and granted lose value in people's perception. Just because I find a picture of any place on earth easily in Google Image Search, it does not mean it has no value and I am free to use it for whatever purpose. What we need to learn as a society is that even in the digital age, work made by others has a value, and requires fair compensation (where "fair compensation" is not necessarily money, but can be credit or exchange for other goods/services as well). Creative Commons is one step into that direction. Global, reliable and accepted micropayment services will be another.

The current problems and issues we find in SL are toothing pains. Devastating for the involved individuals for sure, but necessary until society at large adjusts to the new reality of the digital age, and respects work done by others as a value.

18 comments:

Eloise said...

I agree broadly with quite a lot of what you're saying. Particularly about the DJs and the images uploaded as wall decorations without modification.

Some of the others are not as clear cut. Derivative work isn't covered by copyright law, although the lawyers get rich on arguing the fine details of what is derivative and what isn't. But taking a picture and description of a building or a bed or similar from a website and modelling it in SL pretty clearly includes a fair amount of creative work from the builder and my best guess (IANAL so it is a guess and worth what you paid for it) is that this would count as derivative work and not be an IP infringement. Creating a sculpture inspired by a RL painting or book that is in copyright doesn't infringe the IP rights of the original creator for example.

But you're right. It's a complete mess at the moment and it really needs to be sorted out. The law in this area is pretty old, and technology has really outstripped it. Am I legally allowed to rip a CD into my computer, convert to mp3 and play on my iPod? I know what the answer is in the UK but I believe it's different in other countries, even other countries within in the EU. Building virtual buildings inspired by pictures of another virtual building on a website... you can bet a penny or two that the law doesn't cover that, not clearly.

Balp said...

When it come to my DJing I hope it counts as a web-radio based in the US. Web radio of this size in the US are for the time being, if i read the rules right, allowed to stream music, as long as below a number higher than the possible people in a SIM.

The current fee's for sending web-radio direct form sweden gives to high fee's for it to work the smallest possible size is up too 500 concurrent listeners and 50 euro a month. Puls VAT.

Peter Stindberg said...

Thank you, Balp, for that interesting information. I just checked and a similar license would cost a minimum of about 35 EUR / month in my country, with some limitations that might not work at all for SL (for example no request of songs).

Balp said...

Clubs, Webradio's and second life make a legal mess. With LindenLabs and the club owner in either US or Russia as DJ it will argue that the radio transmission is based in either of these two countries and I'm pretty sure both these allow webradio with few listeners to send with out a fee.

As IANAL i hope my analysis is correct enough, and for a while more it doesn't draw to much attention form big company lawyers. I try to follow most copyright laws, even if i not fully agree on them.

Kesseret Steeplechase said...

http://www.rightsforartists.com/

A good read. (not related to DJing but images off the webs)

Great post, as always Peter. I am glad someone said it.

Shye Kidd said...

These issues rub up against and cross the boundary with issues of fair use. Fair Use, by it's definition in U.S. copyright law, is broad, and content owners always have the right to take someone to court to exercise their copy rights over possible fair use.

Seeing how the RIAA and MPAA can be, someone playing the radio too loud in their real life apartment could be performing it, and be subject to legal action.

I believe copyright infringement is a problem, but I also believe content owners, seeing how rampant infringement is, act with a heavy hand.

Peter Stindberg said...

Absolutely, Shye, and I fear it is not a question IF but WHEN someone will get sued for "illegal public performance" who plays the radio too loud. There is hysteria on both sides, and valid arguments on both sides. In fact the US law of "fair use" is far superior to everything we have in my country (excpet maybe that we have a federal RIGHT to make copies for personal use - but then again pay for it as well). Fair use and the webradio definition Balp mentioned are definitely steps into the right direction.

Chestnut Rau said...

Well said Peter.

I often wonder how many SL designers screaming about IP theft are using pirated copies of Photoshop to create.

Too many people think "something for nothing" is just fine -- until it is their "something" that someone else takes for "nothing." Then, suddenly, it is content theft.

Anonymous said...

Bravo Peter! And to responders! It's just another aspect of people not accepting responsibility for how their actions impact the community. The glib response to "What if everybody did that?" "Then, I'd be a fool not to!" is a sad portrait of a self-centered, self-satisfied society. No laws will bring the kind of change needed here because the change has to happen within each of us. It's starts with this kind of recognition you have expressed.

Anonymous said...

Making a virtual copy of for example Diesel clothing is not theft. It would only be theft if you made real physical jeans exactly mathing a pair of Diesel jeans and then putting a fake disel logo on it. But as there are NO copyright on ideas, making a virtual look-alike without the logo, would not be considered theft at all. If it was, nobody after Lewis could ever have made a pair of blue jeans. Too many people in SL haven't got a clue about the most basic copyright laws. So chill a bit eh?

Peter Stindberg said...

Well, the sample Prad showed was - as far as I could tell - an exact copy only without the Diesel logo. In my country this would be considered a counterfeit, the legislation in your country, dear anonymous, might vary.

Quaintly Tuqiri said...

This issue of content theft & IP infringement is an internet-wide issue not restricted to SL. It happens every day with bloggers and webmasters uploading & using images from Google Image Search without crediting the source, among other things. Writing is also often plagiarised from online sources for other online pages.

As you say, the whole issue is a reality of the digital age. Somehow there is the general perception that as long as it is out there on the Internet, it is free to use and I can do anything I want with it. You would be shocked -- many people I speak to do not even realise that images appearing in Google Image Search could be copyrighted.

Anonymous said...

I'm particularly bothered by SL creators who argue for IP rights, then coo over, say, a Hello Kitty belly jewel. Even if it's well-made with original textures, it's still illegal, unethical, and unoriginal. We don't get to pick and choose here -- either you support IP rights or you don't.

Anonymous said...

Hi again :)

Listen Peter. You are misinforming about copyright when you say that a pair of diesel jeans was made in a virtual world, and call that theft. 1st you cannot copyright clothing design. SO if you made a RL copy of diesel jeans youd only violate anything IF you put the trademarked logo on it too. Theres a link that explains this here: http://www.expertbusinesssource.com/blog/720000272/post/700011870.html.

2nd: a virtual representation of a real pair of jeans is not theft. It is 2 different representations. So once again, if Armidi had used the diessel logo, that would be considered a theft.

But if im wrong please point me to the facts tyvm.

Ari Blackthorne™ said...

"The problem we have is a society [sic] problem."

I concur. You have hit the proverbial nail on the head. And because of this, Intellectual Property infringement will go on forever.

Long after we all stop caring about it. (No, not intended to be a snarky remark!)

It *is* a societal problem and a big one. In first life it has actually created a "world war" between I.P. Owners and the very consumers who keep them alive (to wit: large media companies including music labels, Hollywood, and all the rest trying very, *very* hard to add Digital Rights Management to all their content even where that content already is paid for or licensed - such as music as part of the sountrack of a movie oe television show.)

Good article here, Peter. It needs to be said louder and more often.

London Spengler said...

How strange, my comment grown too much and became a post :-p

Anyway, great post, and I really dig about micropayments being a solution, at least for digital contents.

In fact, SL is the best example that they can work: a global, digital market, based on micropayments.

Earth Primbee said...

If you were to DJ at a club in real life or your own house party you are not typically required to pay per listener fees.

As far as I am concerned the use of a music stream in SL to DJ live is the same as playing for your friends at your house or at a "rave" or club in rl.

The DJ is being paid for his skill at putting songs together and playing the right song for the right person. It is not the same to me as a person who sets up a 24 hour 7 days a week music streaming server that people can listen from anywhere at any time.

I think the laws for this type of music playing need to be reviewed and re-written as playing music for people in a virtual world location is not the same as streaming music to the whole of the internet for profit.

Peter Stindberg said...

In fact in my country you would be required to do exactly this: disclose the number of listeners and even turn in a track listing so the royalties can be distributed accordingly. However I believe there are blanket contracts for clubs and other venues who host music events regularly.

However I agree with the rest of your comment: the current regulations simply do not ocver the reality we experience in SL. a new system, now guidelines need to be developed.