“a big, virtual, less-than-clothed man with tattoos and a mullet. Odd.”

Not quite so odd actually, if one is aware that this is the avatar for the first person to file a real life lawsuit as a result of Second Life “content theft”. You might recall the “sex bed” stories from a few months back. One and the same.

Of greater interest to me is how the “free-as-in-entitled” thinking will play out as the Real and the Virtual converge. Most recent entry into the mix: ZapFab, an online, 3D fab-on-demand service. Not new in that regard as there are already such services (both large bureaus and smaller, niche-serving ones such as Fabjectory), but in this regard (from the ZapFab site):”Share your customized design on the site.”

Considering I can “rip” any 3D file I see on my monitor and turn it into manufacturable data, ZapFab is effectively entering the same arena as video uploading sites such as YouTube. And with a low-cost, home-made 3D scanner I can even grab the stuff I buy at the store.

In other words, the problem is migrating from the RIAA and MPAA to the manufacturing sector.

-

“It’s quite an interesting to compare reactions when “user generated” content gets stolen, versus (say) content for a mega-corp.”

A point I made to the Second Life community a few years ago when they were busy ripping RL trademarks (among other things) and using them inside the simulation. The shift in attitude by many individuals since then has been remarkable.

csven,

thanks for the comments – I find myself learning a lot from you. Would you be able to pinpoint when when the shift in attitude happened, or was it more of a gradual thing?

First off let me say that the shift to which I’m referring is among the more dedicated users of SL; many of whom are fairly vocal (blogs, Twitter, etc). Casual users have probably also started to (re)consider their positions on IP, but I’m not sufficiently immersed in SL to comment on them; not sure many people are, as it’s grown so large.

Even among those to whom I’m referring, I’m unsure I can pinpoint a time or single event. It seems to me to have been a mostly uneven and relatively gradual change in attitude.

I suppose the first significant increment of change* occurred when people in SL first became aware of the OGLE “video ripper” (Jan ’06), which could locally save the 3D geometry in SL but also the textures which wrapped around that geometry… including avatar “skins”. And skins are relatively big business in SL (some… few… people were reportedly earning over US$60k/yr).

One of the better discussions I recall, outside the official forums, is here: LL Taking the USPTO Approach (includes comments from OGLE’s coder and a major seller of skins).

After that came CopyBot (Nov ’06), which received a fair amount of press (and which has resurfaced as a low-level news item in the last few weeks). If I recall correctly, CopyBot was the tool that prompted a grid-wide closing of virtual stores, so it’s fair to say it’s appearance probably marked another significant shift in attitude. I collected quite a few links together on this post: Hints of the Coming Replication Age.

A factor in all this is Linden Lab opening up the grid to unverified registration. This occurred in June ’06, after OGLE and prior to CopyBot. This is significant because a large group of people who’d never heard of OGLE became aware of CopyBot… and believed they could duplicate and sell content anonymously (since proven to be a mistaken assumption).

On top of all this is the press coverage regarding such things as American Apparel opening up in SL, and the BusinessWeek cover with the Anshe Chung avatar. There was a significant influx of people looking to make “easy money” (most of them learning the hard lesson that being successful at *any* business takes more than an idea). What all this amounted to, I believe, was a changing perception of the value of content in SL, both for those legitimately involved in generating it for themselves or corporate clients, and for those who sought to “share” other people’s efforts (using OGLE or CopyBot) for real profit… even if they claimed publicly “it’s just a game”.

So if I had to give an answer for when the shift occurred, I’d venture it happened over the course of 2006. And again, this is among the more dedicated and vocal members of the SL community.

-

* As I wasn’t around when SL first developed its economy, I can’t qualify the early days when virtual goods acquired real world value. However, I can say that when I did join SL in March ’05, the attitude didn’t seem to be what one might expect given that set of economic circumstances. I suppose mostly because some of the more vocal “pirates” were successfully selling virtual goods bearing the trademarks of real life companies (Nissan, Toyota, Apple, etc). It was Linden Lab that put an end to this when they provided guidance regarding their advertising policy (SL Advertising Clarified) which included a takedown policy for trademark infringement since trademarks aren’t covered by the DMCA upon which they rely for other IP infringements.