Dispelling the Primjacker Myth, But Reinforcing It.
The Second Life Herald's Primjackers Trash LL's Digital Rights Management caught my eye. The title was supposed to, of course, but I've seen prim copying scripts work more than once and have never truly seen them as a threat. All they actually do is copy prims by infesting themselves in a modifiable object and copying the dimensions and relative locations of the prims - then rezzing the copies of the prims a distance away.
Lets dispel a myth. It works only on modifiable objects. Therefore, it does not break the de facto DRM of Second Life, the permissions system. People can - and have - done the same thing manually for years. And to modify something that is modifiable, guess what? You have to own it.
That, you see, is not rocket science. In fact, I'd been considering the same thing in the context of backing up builds offline and transferring them between grids - for my own builds.
Take a look at the video.
Where this could pose a problem for people is when they make things that are modifiable. I make most of my work modifiable, though my builds these days are done mainly as custom work for specific clients (who get full permissions on my builds, scripts, etc). Some people have different reasons for allowing things to be modifiable. I can't speak to every reason why people would allow their creations to be modifiable - but there it is.
The texture aspect does interest me, though the person would seem to have permissions to the textures to make an exact replica. The motorcycle in the demo, a well known freebie, doesn't really have custom textures. If the script can take actually bypass the textures permission system, then we have a true bypass of the permissions system. The same, of course, would apply to scripts.
And when it is all said and done, there is the DMCA system coupled with abuse reports - something which hasn't been demonstrated effectively, but perhaps this is because they haven't been visibly used.
So is the prim copier bad? Only if you sensationalize one aspect of it. It has legitimate uses for builders, and it has a down side for creators that allow their content to be modifiable. And 'fixing' this is definitely problematic - but the comments on the Second Life Herald article are all sensible about it. If you sell items and are worried about them being copied like this, simply do not allow them to be modified.
Business as usual. Next.
Technorati Tags: Business Linden Scripting Language Metaverse Second Life Building SecondLife Technical DRM permissions llGetPrimParameters virtual world synthetic world prim copying piracy
Delicious
Digg
Technorati
Okay - I tested the best I could find
I'm a creator, so of course this brought concern to me.
So, I went and searched last night for the 'naughtiest, baddest, wickedest' version of a prim duplicator I could find. Because of my testing, I'll even say publicly it's the KDF "black" version.
I have tested it extensively.
It's incredibly easy to use and very effective.
There are two versions: "White" and "Black". Only the "White version is available online through SL Exchange and OnRez.
The difference is the "White" version allows you to copy only prims where you are the creator. The "Black version allows you to copy any prims.
HOWEVER, the Linden Lab permissions system works flawlessly.
I won't go into a long-winded diatribe and step-by-steps of my test. So I'll simply qualify it this way:
I used my main and two alt accounts to create prim furniture (not just 'boxes', but actual, albeit quick and sloppy furniture with shapes, flexie, textures and so on.)
The product worked flawlessly on all full permissions 'products' among all three persons - including a third generation.
However, in the short of it (and the creator/developer of this product does state these facts in the information notecard available before sale):
ALL prims in the linked set *must* be modifiable. I did not test whether a no-copy version could be duplicated as I was short on time. any prim in the set that is not modifiable will not be duplicated.
Textures: i found that textures did duplicate well, though I did not check on no copy textures. I suspect those also will copy as any prim only refers to the UUID anyway. So, technically, there is not suck thing as a no-copy texture (except in the case of the "file" in your inventory - once on a prim, that doesn't have any effect anyway - except that it changes the permissions on that prim.)
Contents: Landmarks and notecards copied smoothly.
Scripts and animations were a different story. it was not successful in a bed I made that had 150 items inside - the animations and scripts did not copy (MLP scripts) - my own permissions for next owner on all those items were no-mod/no-copy. And even though I was the owner, they still did not copy.
Other scripts and animations DID copy - I duplicated a toilet with a sit animation. The script and animation duplicated fine, but the script failed to work in the copy. it refused to reset and simply would NOT function. I was not the creator of the script, but I do have a full-permissions license, except modify.
The same with Outy's fire scripts in another piece. The script simple failed to work, even though it copied over nicely. I was not the creator and it is no-modify, but I otherwise have full perms.
HENCE: ALL OBJECTS MUST BE MODIFY.
if ANY object (prim or contents) are no modify, it either will not be duplicated or it will 'break'.
Hence, it's a GREAT tool as a builder. I fell in love with it in the short time I've had to test it. However, any doubts or fears should be put completely to rest about these prim duplicators.
The Linden Lab permissions system seems to work just fine and it does it's job. As for hollow prims to be stolen, such as hair... my asnwer would be to use the resizing scripts and/or make it partially no-mod... underlying prims, for example.
Anyway, there's some hands-on, tried to cheat but failed feedback on it all.
Ari Blackthorne
Thanks for checking, Ari!
I've been so busy I couldn't even think of taking the time to do it yet... very glad to see the permissions system working as it is supposed to. :-)
Second Life Consultant
More Detailed Permissions Needed
In the end the big problem here is that the permissions are much to simple. A layered permissions system is whats needed, and it doesn't need to be that complicated, just more options. Just a quick example, is in reference to transfer, I might want my thing transferable, but not resealable. So there is another box, All Resale ... or even setting a price for resale. People are much smarter than LL gives them credit for, and if you have logical defaults that covers the average person.
Yes, we already give classes on permissions now, and there are 3 options, but we could give the class on 6 options it doesn't mater :) Hopefully my SL and RL will slow down and I can talk about this in more detail.
Arthur Fermi
Fermi Sandbox & University
www.fermidesigns.com
Creative Commons type Licensing...
Was something that was discussed a while back, and does give more granular control. I don't know why Linden Lab didn't pursue it at the time, but it may be time to reawaken that discussion.
It isn't just a technical issue. It has to comply with Law as well...
Second Life Consultant
Vint Falken's piece is here:
http://www.vintfalken.com/beware-of-modify-theft-in-the-lift-or-resident...
Second Life Consultant
One big point of that
One big point of that article was about hair. Most wearable items like hair, prim skirts, etc. really need to be resizable. Some designers have been including a small and large version or a scripted resizer, both of which are hassles for the designer. LL could certainly fix this with another checkbox for perms that strictly handle resizing/scaling rights of the entire linkset.
But which is the lesser hassle?
" Some designers have been including a small and large version or a scripted resizer, both of which are hassles for the designer."
This is true.
And I can see the need for hair and skirts, et al to be resizable.
I would recommend the creator invest in a resizing script. They are inexpensive and simple to use. Now, if (as you say) it is such a hassle, then which is the lesser hassle?
Dealing with the script, yet having your product comfortable (from a peace-of-mind angle) locked down, or the worry that someone will primcopy your creations and sell them?
I am fortunately that my products don't require resizing. I have used products with resizing scripts - both text-chat versions and menu versions. It wasn't that big a deal.
Then again, with some of the not-too-bright customers I have to deal with over really simple things (you must be on land that allows scripts for the product to work) - I can also see the support headaches that could arise.
Wow.
So which *IS* the lesser of all hassles?
Heh, for me, it would be to just go on business as usual. Of the thousands upon thousands of residents in-world, I find it pretty unlikely that a customer of mine will have one of these tools (yes, it's just a tool) *AND want to rip my stuff AND want to sell it on their own.
Easier to just drive on with what I'm doing now and realize that if someone really want's it that badly, they'll find a way to get it anyway.
Ari Blackthorne
hmm. Resizable.
That is a good point. I suppose I demonstrated my gender with the lack of consideration of hair. Of course, I'm typically a penguin...
Making something resizable, though, without any other type of modify permission might work - but think of all the stuff that would have to be grandfathered in. The obvious choice would be to do no grandfathering.
Hmm. Very good point. But still, one has to wonder if the cure might kill the patient.
Second Life Consultant