User:Zero Linden/Office Hours/2008 September 25

• [8:30] Morgaine Dinova: Hiya Tree
• [8:30] Tree Kyomoon: Hi Morgaine!
• [8:31] Gareth Ellison: tree - your av really needs to be an actual tree
• [8:31] Morgaine Dinova: How goes? Bones all OK?
• [8:31] Tree Kyomoon: im still trying to figure out why people make non phantom walls and roofs here
• [8:31] Gareth Ellison: so, the appointed time is upon us
• [8:31] Gareth Ellison: where's the man of the hour?
• [8:31] Tree Kyomoon: I think my av is pretty sharp.
• [8:31] Tree Kyomoon: well...poky at least
• [8:31] Morgaine Dinova: Haha
• [8:31] Morgaine Dinova: Well certainly saves money on clothes
• [8:32] Tree Kyomoon: yes, its really tough to find things in size - 4
• [8:32] Morgaine Dinova: Hi Infi!
• [8:32] Infinity Linden: good morning everyone!
• [8:32] Rex Cronon: helo everybody
• [8:32] Tree Kyomoon: infinity +1
• [8:32] Infinity Linden: Zero's out of the office this morning
• [8:32] Infinity Linden: so
• [8:32] Mirt Tenk: greetings
• [8:32] Morgaine Dinova: Cool, you chairing Infi?
• [8:32] Infinity Linden: i'm going to be the MC this morning
• [8:32] Infinity Linden: yup
• [8:32] Morgaine Dinova: Gratz :-)
• [8:32] Infinity Linden: and as is our wont
• [8:33] Tree Kyomoon: murder carpet?
• [8:33] Infinity Linden: i was mildly late today
• [8:33] Gareth Ellison: we got an agenda?
• [8:33] Infinity Linden: let's work on the agenda thing
• [8:33] Morgaine Dinova: No agenda discussed since I arrived here
• [8:33] Infinity Linden: proposals for agendum / agenda
• [8:33] Infinity Linden:  ?
• [8:33] Gareth Ellison: i have one
• [8:33] Gareth Ellison: TOS 4.2
• [8:33] Gareth Ellison: i admit it's my own pet peeve
• [8:33] Morgaine Dinova: Infi, are you from Icehouse?
• [8:33] Mirt Tenk: hi Xugu!
• [8:34] Gareth Ellison: but can we have some guidance on how this afects interop development?
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: okay... i think we can talk about it, but it's out of the scope for me
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: ah
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: yes
• [8:34] Xugu Madison: heya!
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: we can probably talk about that aspect
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: and yes... i was in icehouse
• [8:34] Morgaine Dinova: kk, ta
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: but alas... icehouse is no more
• [8:34] Morgaine Dinova: Oh, past tense :-)
• [8:34] Gareth Ellison: icehouse is dead?
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: we're now the "open protocol group"
• [8:34] Morgaine Dinova: Really? What happened, did it melt? :P
• [8:34] Infinity Linden: or something like that
• [8:34] Gareth Ellison: ah
• [8:34] Tree Kyomoon: it was a hot summer
• [8:35] Infinity Linden: but we still say icehouse a lot internally
• [8:35] Gareth Ellison: seems a bit of a pointless thing.....
• [8:35] Infinity Linden: same people, same mission
• [8:35] Infinity Linden: mildly different organization
• [8:35] Morgaine Dinova: Still studio based though?
• [8:35] Gareth Ellison: so.... TOS 4.2 - server emulators and interaction with SL
• [8:35] Gareth Ellison: basically, what can people get away with in interacting with LL's systems?
• [8:35] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine... no comment
• [8:36] Morgaine Dinova: OK, no problem Infi :-)
• [8:36] Gareth Ellison: this is something fairly critical
• [8:36] Infinity Linden: Gareth... I don't know if it's fully defined at the moment
• [8:36] Gareth Ellison: and that would be the issue :)
• [8:36] Infinity Linden: i'm thinking that for a "real" answer, our lawyers would have to be involved
• [8:36] Infinity Linden: but
• [8:37] Infinity Linden: i think it's safe to say
• [8:37] Infinity Linden: there'll be a public interface to the syste
• [8:37] Infinity Linden: system
• [8:37] Morgaine Dinova: I think "get away with" is a very bad phrase
• [8:37] Infinity Linden: for use by remote agent domains
• [8:37] Gareth Ellison: here's the thing - your lawyers are involved, as i've already had a C&D for my TP experiments, and they won't clarify what part of my experiments were unapproved of and what parts are legit
• [8:37] Infinity Linden: and regions
• [8:37] Gareth Ellison: since many apps do actually break the TOS without action, it's rather confusing
• [8:38] Morgaine Dinova: Everything that can be done through the API needs to be permissible, and everything that is not permissible should be prevented by the API. In any other direction lie tears.
• [8:38] Infinity Linden: well... honestly Gareth.. that's a discussion you had with our lawyers.. i wasn't a party to those discussions
• [8:38] Infinity Linden: so i can't really comment intelligently about them
• [8:38] Gareth Ellison: i know - but the basic point (and this is one i've been pushing on since the past few several months) is that people have to just rely on lack of enforcement when doing anything that touches SL's servers
• [8:38] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine.. yup.
• [8:39] Infinity Linden: and this is why we have OGP
• [8:39] Gareth Ellison: i don't even know if for example the OGP testing is technically allowed without using opensim
• [8:39] Infinity Linden: is to provide an official protocol with which to access our servers
• [8:39] Gareth Ellison: since the instructions on the wiki can easily be called a license
• [8:39] Gareth Ellison: but it says "go download opensim"
• [8:39] Morgaine Dinova: Gareth --- I think you need to bring that to a head. I would not accept a C&D for doing something that is allowed by a public interface. Full stop.
• [8:39] Infinity Linden: Gareth... did you bring this question up with Whump? he's managing the beta
• [8:39] Zha Ewry: I don't think there is a sinle thing inth spec that says OpenSim
• [8:39] Gareth Ellison: i have, and with zero
• [8:40] Infinity Linden: what did they say?
• [8:40] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine... yup
• [8:40] Gareth Ellison: i've been pushing for several months to get an answer - it's always been delayed by awaiting a response from legal - and the one response which has came back from legal has been a blanket "stop what you're doing" - thus not clarifying which part of what i'm doing is disliked
• [8:40] Infinity Linden: but there is another aspect to the discussion
• [8:40] Tree Kyomoon: I would accept Cash & Donuts for almost anything
• [8:41] Infinity Linden: we have a user constituency that is frightened that opening hte grid means they will lose control of their digital assets
• [8:41] Gareth Ellison: for example, is it ok to implement OGP in "weird" ways?
• [8:41] Infinity Linden: define "weird"
• [8:41] Zha Ewry: As long as you present conforming packets on the interface, I can't see how anyone cancomplain
• [8:41] Gareth Ellison: any way that is technically compatible, but may not precisely match the intended purpose or specs, while not actually abusing it
• [8:42] Morgaine Dinova: Gareth: that response from legal is unacceptable. I know there are a lot of dickhead lawyers in other places, but we don't expect them in LL.
• [8:42] Rex Cronon: i don't think that gareth knows what"weird" really means until he tries it:)
• [8:42] Infinity Linden: that doesn't sound like the definition of "weird" but sure... we can use it as a working definition
• [8:42] Zha Ewry: Now, if Linden wants to require a certificate or PW and won't give it out, without an agreemment, that's fine
• [8:42] Gareth Ellison: for example, my experiments involved a viewer logging in with the legacy_login response and the agent domain at the same time
• [8:42] Zha Ewry: But, the spec doesn't dictate code
• [8:42] Zha Ewry: it dictates messages
• [8:42] Infinity Linden: there are several "agreements" that cover "acceptable use" for the system
• [8:42] Infinity Linden: the first is the spec
• [8:42] Gareth Ellison: and the legacy_login was hacked with a proxy
• [8:42] Infinity Linden: umm... legacy_login isn't in the spce
• [8:43] Gareth Ellison: infinity - the TOS would seem authorative, since it's the actual formal legal document
• [8:43] Gareth Ellison: yet it contradicts the specs
• [8:43] Gareth Ellison: (this is the older spec)
• [8:43] Infinity Linden: but the other is a ToS and a peer agreement
• [8:43] Infinity Linden: the ToS also doesn not define legacy_login
• [8:43] Gareth Ellison: the specs don't give you "explicit written consent"
• [8:43] Infinity Linden: also keep in mind that we're running a beta for OGP right now
• [8:44] Infinity Linden: the service definition may be different when deployed to the main grid
• [8:44] Infinity Linden: but
• [8:44] Infinity Linden: the liklihood that the spec will change radically between the final beta and oru "go live" is pretty unlikely
• [8:44] Rex Cronon: does it mean that all those bots are using the grid iligally?
• [8:45] Gareth Ellison: rex - they function like the viewer
• [8:45] Infinity Linden: but the likelihood that ToS willl change? less unlikely
• [8:45] Gareth Ellison: where it gets tricker is in anything that isn't in itself a viewer
• [8:45] Gareth Ellison: 4.2 definately needs to be changed
• [8:45] Gareth Ellison: it creates un-needed doubt
• [8:45] Infinity Linden: okay... i'll note that. but recommend you also talk to Whump
• [8:45] Tara5 Oh: sorry all have to run or I will miss yoga (essential to online health!)
• [8:45] Morgaine Dinova: That's all totally broken, FFS. We're developing new systems, there is no way in hell that LL's legals docs can be specific about these things, as they're evolving. This doesn't need a statement from legal, it needs a statement from the CEO outlining the general intentions and guidelines for developers.
• [8:46] Morgaine Dinova: And no flaming C&D letters.
• [8:46] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine... yes and no
• [8:46] Gareth Ellison: morgaine - C&D letters are only valid in cases of actual abuse, otherwise if LL is encouraging interop, it should not also send C&D notices out
• [8:47] Morgaine Dinova: Indeed
• [8:47] Infinity Linden: i would think that a peering agreement would define technical requirements, organizational requirements and remedies
• [8:47] Infinity Linden: so for instance...
• [8:47] Infinity Linden: and i'm not saying i'm writing this peering arrangement
• [8:48] Infinity Linden: i would imagine that a section of a peering arrangement would say something like "I as a region domain operator do promise to maintain the integrity of SL's content creator's digital assets."
• [8:48] Infinity Linden: and... i am not a lawyer... so such a thing would be written in nice legaleze
• [8:48] Morgaine Dinova: And vice versa
• [8:48] Gareth Ellison: infinity - such a thing would be a great idea
• [8:48] Morgaine Dinova: Peering is not one way
• [8:48] Gareth Ellison: but we need one setup for the beta period too
• [8:49] Infinity Linden: this is a very important point, but very difficult to define from a technical perspective
• [8:49] Infinity Linden: in the protocol
• [8:50] Infinity Linden: but from a technical perspective, it means you look at teh metadata of objects coming into your region
• [8:50] Infinity Linden: and you don't let your residents make copies of things that are marked "no copy"
• [8:51] Infinity Linden: it's very hard for us to define that concept exclusively in technical terms unless we did something like what Gareth was talking about earlier... and REQUIRE people to use only a particular version of OpenSim
• [8:51] Infinity Linden: on a particular version of Linux / WinTel / whatever
• [8:51] Infinity Linden: and that is not our intention
• [8:51] Gareth Ellison: infinity - as it stands, you might as well require a particular version of opensim
• [8:51] Rex Cronon: a "region domain operator" has no way of enforcing that if somebody is using an hacked viedwer:(
• [8:51] Morgaine Dinova: Frankly, I think LL lawyers totally lost the thread on this one. In the USA (and many other places), copyright is assigned automatically to the creators of works, so all SL objects automatically carry copright along with them. This means that ordinary laws apply, so no extra advice from LL legal is even necessary.
• [8:51] Rex Cronon: viewer*
• [8:52] Gareth Ellison: because the only thing that could be interpreted as a license to violate 4.2 is the wiki instructions
• [8:52] Infinity Linden: we're hoping to provide a "legit" interface so we don't have to do that (define a particular legal version of opensim)
• [8:52] Infinity Linden: Gareth.. if the wiki and the ToS are not in accord, i would guess that the ToS wins
• [8:53] Gareth Ellison: but at this exact moment - there's no legal way to TP in or out of SL other than using the wiki instructions, since you can show "an LL employee wrote this"
• [8:53] Gareth Ellison: i'd argue the wiki instructions are that "written consent"
• [8:53] Morgaine Dinova: Infi: that goes totally against the grain of interop, which is about adhering to a standard protocol, not running a validated system.
• [8:53] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine... for better or for worse.. .in the US we have the DMCA
• [8:53] Infinity Linden: which does obligate us to behave in a particular manner when a copyright holder implies infringement
• [8:54] Infinity Linden: @Gareth... i'm not the one you need to make this argument too
• [8:54] Infinity Linden: i can't stop you frmo doing anything you're going to do
• [8:54] Infinity Linden: but
• [8:54] Gareth Ellison: i'm just wondering if we can get a public license to implement OGP simply, rather than the implied license to use OGP with opensim
• [8:54] Infinity Linden: i can't stop other people inside LL from taking a dim view of it
• [8:55] Infinity Linden: @Gareth... in what way?
• [8:55] Infinity Linden: the protocol is published
• [8:55] Infinity Linden: you create software to implement the protocol
• [8:55] Infinity Linden: you then apply to be in the beta program
• [8:55] Infinity Linden: (as described in the wiki)
• [8:55] Gareth Ellison: technical specs != license to implement those specs working with your systems
• [8:55] Infinity Linden: yes
• [8:55] Gareth Ellison: the beta program talks purely about opensim
• [8:55] Morgaine Dinova: Yep, I know about the DMCA and how takedowns and responses work in USA, and even though it's a daft system and open to major abuse by content creators, still, it can apply to VW object transfers just as easily ... so again, no extra meddling from LL lawyers is required.
• [8:55] Infinity Linden: that is why you need to apply to participate in the beta program
• [8:55] Gareth Ellison: thus, you can safely say opensim is "sorta" licensed
• [8:55] Gareth Ellison: but you can't extend it to anything beyond opensim
• [8:56] Infinity Linden: Gareth... no
• [8:56] Morgaine Dinova: In fact, if LL lawyers meddle with this, they're in danger of not being able to hide behind the DMCA, which provides a kind of safe harbor.
• [8:56] Infinity Linden: i've tried to explain to you that the proper person to chat with for this discussion is Whump
• [8:56] Morgaine Dinova: WTB Whump :P
• [8:56] Infinity Linden: i cannot say whether or not OpenSim is "licensed" in any way
• [8:57] Gareth Ellison: i'll drop it for now then - though it's something that should be of concern to all involved
• [8:57] Infinity Linden: it is my understanding that since OpenSim and PyOGP are both being used in conjunction with the beta
• [8:57] Morgaine Dinova: OpenSim is damn well not licensed by LL. It's an open system, and it has its own license
• [8:57] Infinity Linden: that OpenSim is not a REQUIREMENT
• [8:57] Infinity Linden: +1 Morgaine
• [8:57] Infinity Linden: yes... OpenSim is not our code
• [8:58] Gareth Ellison: morgaine - that's a license for the opensim code, not a license to connect to SL
• [8:58] Infinity Linden: you do not need a license from us to use OpenSim
• [8:58] Zha Ewry: The spec doesn't say a single thing about OpenSim
• [8:58] Zha Ewry: It says "Here are the messages"
• [8:58] Infinity Linden: you do need to participate in the beta program in order to connect your opensim to our servers
• [8:58] Infinity Linden: +1 Zha
• [8:58] Gareth Ellison: you do need a license to connect to SL with anything other than the viewer or something that closely simulates the functionality of the viewer
• [8:59] Zha Ewry: You accept a TOS, I'm not sure thats a license, actually
• [8:59] Infinity Linden: @Gareth... once more... i am not a lawyer
• [8:59] Gareth Ellison: "You agree not to create or provide any server emulators or other software or other means that provide access to or use of the Servers without the express written authorization of Linden Lab"
• [8:59] Zha Ewry: I spent my universitry years studing recursion, not contract law
• [8:59] Gareth Ellison: i know, i'm simply explaining that this is an issue which should be of concern
• [8:59] Wrapp Seiling: lol
• [8:59] Morgaine Dinova: Indeed, it's a protocol spec. And what's more, OGP is going to be used only in star-shaped systems where everyone connects to SL, but in between themselves too. So licensing from LL fits very badly into this.
• [8:59] Infinity Linden: but if you can figure out a way to attach to LL using a non-LL viewer that does not violate the ToS, then bueo!
• [9:00] Gareth Ellison: i'm more concerned about none-LL simulators
• [9:00] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine.. there is no requirement in OGP that LL be involved
• [9:00] Morgaine Dinova: Oooh, you have an n~ key :-)
• [9:00] Zha Ewry: and, if you use OGP peerwise, it's totally not Linden's concerned
• [9:00] Zha Ewry: Again
• [9:00] Zha Ewry: Wire spec
• [9:00] Infinity Linden: +1 Zha
• [9:00] Infinity Linden: OGP is NOT a service level agreement
• [9:00] Gareth Ellison: infinity - it's a requirement that you ask LL for consent if you use OGP or any other protocol to produce "means that provide access to or use of the servers"
• [9:00] Infinity Linden: it is a protocol specification that will likely be referenced in a service level agreement
• [9:01] Infinity Linden: @Gareth... did you talk to Whump about participating in the beta?
• [9:01] Gareth Ellison: i did
• [9:01] Infinity Linden: and he said?
• [9:01] Morgaine Dinova: I agree, which is why (i) there should be no talk of "licensed versions of OpenSim", and (ii) there should be no reference to licensing in OGP (and there isn't).
• [9:01] Gareth Ellison: at first he did not want to invite me to the beta as i'm not using stock opensim
• [9:01] Infinity Linden: +1 Morgaine
• [9:01] Gareth Ellison: i talked him into it
• [9:01] Infinity Linden: @Gareth. what is your complaint?
• [9:01] Morgaine Dinova: LOL, Infi's doing a lot of incrementing :-)
• [9:02] Infinity Linden: and Morgaine has another good point
• [9:02] Infinity Linden: OGP carries a LL copyright
• [9:02] Infinity Linden: but when it becomes an "open" protocol
• [9:03] Infinity Linden: copyright will likely be transferred to a third party
• [9:03] Infinity Linden: but
• [9:03] Gareth Ellison: infinity - my complaint is that by the TOS we've got no right to connect to SL using our own servers without written consent, and the only thing that i can see which would form written consent is the wiki instructions which actually imply consent in telling you "download opensim to use with SL"
• [9:03] Infinity Linden: copyright and license to use are distinct
• [9:03] Infinity Linden: @Gareth... this is a conversation you need to be having with Whump
• [9:04] Infinity Linden: OGP defines mechanism, not policy
• [9:04] Rex Cronon: OGP is copyrighted?
• [9:04] Infinity Linden: (you can tell i've done X11 coding)
• [9:04] Infinity Linden: @Rex... i'm pretty sure it is...
• [9:04] Infinity Linden: now that i said that... i should probably double check
• [9:04] Zha Ewry: OGP is on creative commons
• [9:04] Zha Ewry: Ahmm.
• [9:04] Infinity Linden: and also check to see if it's possible to release the drafts as CC
• [9:05] Zha Ewry: looks
• [9:05] Gareth Ellison: infinity - i know the legal issues are distinct from the tech specs, but of course we need to be able to safely implement the tech specs
• [9:05] Infinity Linden: Gareth... are you participating in the beta?
• [9:05] Morgaine Dinova: Well LL can't restrict "license to use OGP" since owning the copyright on a protocol spec doesn't convey any such control. You can't copyright a protocol, only a copyrightable work of authorship, ie. the document specifying the protocol. It doesn't give you any rights over its use.
• [9:05] Gareth Ellison: as far as i can see, the only safe way to implement the specs without using opensim is to do so without involving SL
• [9:05] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine... yup.
• [9:05] Gareth Ellison: infinity - i am, but not using the wiki instructions
• [9:06] Gareth Ellison: since they wouldn't work for my systems
• [9:06] Infinity Linden: @Gareth... did you have this conversation with Whump?
• [9:06] Zha Ewry: Its on the wiki on CC 3.0 share alike
• [9:06] Infinity Linden: and we would be shooting ourselves in our collective feet if we tried to assert such control
• [9:06] Morgaine Dinova: Hi Sai
• [9:06] Gareth Ellison: i've went through these issues with various lindens
• [9:06] Infinity Linden: okay... cool
• [9:06] Infinity Linden: CC is differetn frmo copyright though
• [9:07] Infinity Linden: CC is a license, copyright is... well.. copyright
• [9:07] Infinity Linden: <copyright diff="chg">

• Copyright 2008, Linden Lab. All rights reserved.

• This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license. See

• <loc href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"/> for details.

• All contributions to this document must be contributed under the Second Life Project

• Contribution Agreement. See <loc
• href="http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Project:Contribution_Agreement"/> for details

• </copyright>
• [9:07] Zha Ewry: Mark Lentczner (Zero Linden) Linden Lab zero.linden@secondlife.com
• Copyright 2008, Linden Lab. All rights reserved.
• This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/for details.
• [9:07] Gareth Ellison: the fact legal have got me guessing at what part of my experiments is not allowed is VERY concerning
• [9:07] Rex Cronon: since when can technical documents be copyrighted?
• [9:07] Gareth Ellison: this has nothing to do with the copyright on the specs document btw
• [9:07] Zha Ewry: Res, nearly every single spec is
• [9:07] Morgaine Dinova: I agree Gareth, I'd be livid in your shoes.
• [9:07] Zha Ewry: *rex
• [9:07] Gareth Ellison: it's to do with the permission to talk to SL's servers
• [9:07] Infinity Linden: @Gareth... did you discuss this with Whump?
• [9:08] Gareth Ellison: [9:06
• [9:08] Morgaine Dinova: Gareth, you'd better answer Infi's question, hehe :PPP
• [9:08] Infinity Linden: personally... i would be discussing this with Whump
• [9:08] Zha Ewry: Generally copyright is held, and the license is open, but its almosyt always copyrighted
• [9:08] Infinity Linden: there is nothing I personally can do for you Gareth
• [9:08] Morgaine Dinova: What position of role does Whump hold?
• [9:09] Morgaine Dinova: or* role
• [9:09] Infinity Linden: Whump on the other hand, as manager of the beta program, is in a position to answer your questions
• [9:09] Gareth Ellison: you can of course raise this problem with your lawyers
• [9:09] Infinity Linden: can you define the problem
• [9:09] Tree Kyomoon: wonders if there is something else we can talk about that isnt all lawyer-y
• [9:09] Infinity Linden: +10 Tree
• [9:09] Gareth Ellison: the only decent advice i've had from my own counsel is to find some staff there at LL who can overrule legal's objections - but that's difficult if i don't know the full nature of the objections
• [9:09] Gareth Ellison: and i'll go with tree
• [9:09] Infinity Linden: Tree has moved we close discussion on ToS issues
• [9:09] Infinity Linden: second?
• [9:09] Gareth Ellison: i'll second :)
• [9:09] Morgaine Dinova: I would absolutely not talk to LL's lawyers. They don't understand this, I can guarantee.
• [9:09] Infinity Linden: all in favor?
• [9:10] Tree Kyomoon: eye
• [9:10] Infinity Linden: (um... we'll need more ayes than that if we want to close the discussion.)
• [9:10] Mirt Tenk: aye
• [9:10] Zha Ewry: Closed
• [9:10] Morgaine Dinova: Aye, agreed with Tree. But we MUST have this discussion --- suggest that it be scheduled formally, with Whump, Zero, and maybe board member.
• [9:10] Xugu Madison: aye, I think we're stuck for now
• [9:10] Tree Kyomoon: Im still curious about the standard island build tools allowing content developers to set viewing limits so we can build more compelling games
• [9:10] Zha Ewry: votes for closed
• [9:11] Infinity Linden: a board member?
• [9:11] Gareth Ellison: morgaine +1000
• [9:11] Gareth Ellison:  ;)
• [9:11] Zha Ewry: And.. on the copyrigfht issue, note that all the Oasis specs are (c) Oasis
• [9:11] Infinity Linden: like a LL board of directors member?
• [9:11] Morgaine Dinova: Infi: Someone who, even if not technical, will listen to what's said and not need it repeated from Zero or Whump :-)
• [9:11] Morgaine Dinova: Yes
• [9:12] Infinity Linden: yup. there are a number of organizations that traditionally hold copyright for specs... IETF Trust, OASIS, W3C (i think) and my much beloved OMG
• [9:12] Infinity Linden: (OMG RIP)
• [9:12] Morgaine Dinova: Hehe
• [9:12] Zha Ewry: I don't think the RFCs are all (c) marked, but some are
• [9:13] Morgaine Dinova: CORBA's time will come ... hopefully it won't look anything like the last one though :-)
• [9:13] Infinity Linden: Zha... really? i thought the new ones were all explicitly marked.
• [9:13] Infinity Linden: in the office where i work, there is a general agreement that if i mention CORBA, i have to pitch a dollar in the swear jar
• [9:13] Morgaine Dinova: Hahahaha
• [9:13] Gareth Ellison: LOL
• [9:13] Infinity Linden: but alas... DSOM has come and gone
• [9:14] Zha Ewry: The news ones, yeah
• [9:14] Gareth Ellison: so... with apologies for dragging out the TOS issue - what's the next issue?
• [9:14] Infinity Linden: and we migth be able to draw some lessons from this
• [9:14] Zha Ewry: But things like 822? Not so much
• [9:14] Infinity Linden: @ gareth... yeah... i'll get with Whump and let him know the discussino should be happening
• [9:14] Infinity Linden: probably a public discussion @ his ofice hours
• [9:14] Zha Ewry: Current story: [1]
• [9:15] Infinity Linden: anything more than that... i'm not sure I would be the one to ask
• [9:15] Tree Kyomoon: well if you cant beat em....©®@
• [9:15] Gareth Ellison: fair enough for me...... next issue?
• [9:15] Infinity Linden: what else is on the agenda?
• [9:16] Tree Kyomoon: I asked a question
• [9:16] Infinity Linden: 'cause if you have only one item, it's an agendum
• [9:16] Zha Ewry: There was somein teresting discussion on UDP/Http and measurement
• [9:16] Infinity Linden: Tree...
• [9:16] Tree Kyomoon: about setting limits on the viewer for game developers
• [9:16] Morgaine Dinova: Nothing, back to legal ..... (j/k)
• [9:16] Infinity Linden: what kind of limits?
• [9:16] Tree Kyomoon: see IMHO, the big thing that is missing from SL is pro content
• [9:16] Gareth Ellison: FPS camera etc?
• [9:16] Zha Ewry: (and how would you enforece them?)
• [9:16] Morgaine Dinova: What;s this mythical "the viewer"? ;-)
• [9:17] Tree Kyomoon: limits like camera yes
• [9:17] Mirt Tenk: draw distance?
• [9:17] Tree Kyomoon: that could be set by an island
• [9:17] Tree Kyomoon: yes
• [9:17] Gareth Ellison: do such limits need strict enforcement?
• [9:17] Tree Kyomoon: stuff like that
• [9:17] Infinity Linden: oh oh
• [9:17] Gareth Ellison: camera angle for example wouldn't affect the rules of the game (or would it)?
• [9:17] Rex Cronon: how would that be enforced on a "moded" viewer?
• [9:17] Gareth Ellison: an FPS you need to track frags and ammo, that can all be server-side
• [9:18] Infinity Linden: so yeah.. right now you can disable camera constraints on teh viewer
• [9:18] Tree Kyomoon: to an extent yes. Anyone here every play online games like half life?
• [9:18] Gareth Ellison: a standard way to say "you should go into FPS mode" would be good
• [9:18] Infinity Linden: it's not hard to do
• [9:18] Zha Ewry: At the spec level, tho
• [9:18] Zha Ewry: any client can ignore the reuqest
• [9:18] Infinity Linden: why would you need that in the spec?
• [9:18] Zha Ewry: So, if you're in an open source client world
• [9:18] Gareth Ellison: zha - of course, which is why you'd put game logic on the server side
• [9:18] Zha Ewry: You'll never be sure tha the client is following
• [9:18] Infinity Linden: are you worried that players would cheat and disable camera constraints?
• [9:19] Tree Kyomoon: yes
• [9:19] Morgaine Dinova: There's no possibility of enforcement in the viewer, except as a nice request. Therefore, any limits you need imposed are going to have to come from server-side, eg. by asking the server not to send info on specific objects or areas. That's a perfectly good thing to discuss, and it falls well into scalability issues too (less downloaded, more scaling).
• [9:19] Infinity Linden: okay... hmm..
• [9:19] Gareth Ellison: asking the viewer to go into a different UI mode is sane
• [9:19] Zha Ewry: Right, any desire to enforce client side behavior is advisory
• [9:19] Zha Ewry: You can ask
• [9:19] Gareth Ellison: not even just for games but perhaps things like building demos etc
• [9:19] Tree Kyomoon: seems to me if people come to my island, which I own, I should be able to limit their viewers in any way I see fit while they are there
• [9:19] Zha Ewry: but you can 't be sure
• [9:19] Morgaine Dinova: Gareth: you can certainly "ask", yes :-)
• [9:19] Gareth Ellison: Tree - but you can't
• [9:19] Zha Ewry: Tree, you can ask
• [9:20] Gareth Ellison: the question is the best way to ask
• [9:20] Zha Ewry: but unless you go visit them with a gun?
• [9:20] Morgaine Dinova: Tree: wrong approach, you have no say on the viewer.
• [9:20] Rex Cronon: isn
• [9:20] Infinity Linden: maybe you could have a server that understands that the camera can only be concurrent with the agent's position?
• [9:20] Gareth Ellison: and how we implement the UI definition
• [9:20] Zha Ewry: Their viewer is going to do what it wants
• [9:20] Rex Cronon: isn't there a viewer called restricted life for something like that?
• [9:20] Tree Kyomoon: Right I realize that is the way it is now, which is why CYAN and other huge game development companies arent here
• [9:20] Infinity Linden: maybe as a standard option for future simulators?
• [9:20] Tree Kyomoon: IMHO of course
• [9:20] Zha Ewry: Tree, there is no basic way to force a client to do something from the server side
• [9:21] Zha Ewry: You can ask
• [9:21] Gareth Ellison: rex - restricted life is a BDSM viewer which stops you dismounting a poseball or leaving the sim
• [9:21] Morgaine Dinova: If you own the sim, you can restrict the information it sends to viewers. That's the only way you can guarantee anything.
• [9:21] Infinity Linden: yeah... but the camera is a client - server thing
• [9:21] Tree Kyomoon: right now now, but I am proposing we change that
• [9:21] Gareth Ellison: it's all by user choice though
• [9:21] Zha Ewry: but.. unless you have a totaly closed system
• [9:21] Zha Ewry: You can't. Tree
• [9:21] Infinity Linden: the client requests thtat hte camera be moved
• [9:21] Gareth Ellison: you can't actually get raped on SL ;)
• [9:21] Zha Ewry: The nature of a wire prorocol
• [9:21] Zha Ewry: and an open client
• [9:21] Infinity Linden: umm... discussion of rape in SL is not this's groups charter
• [9:21] Zha Ewry: ties your hands
• [9:21] Xugu Madison: saw some people talking about Restrained Life for limiting students during tests...
• [9:21] Gareth Ellison: infinity - rex mentioned the restricted life viewer
• [9:22] Xugu Madison: (which mostly felt like they've got a bad idea and are then hammering around the flaws)
• [9:22] Tree Kyomoon: you have to be able to limit people's viewers in order to present them with a story, or a game, or a teaching simulation
• [9:22] Gareth Ellison: i was making the point that you can only be "raped" if you willingly download and run that viewer
• [9:22] Zha Ewry: But, tree, there is no technical way to enforce those, with an open client
• [9:22] Infinity Linden: okay
• [9:22] Morgaine Dinova: These are VOLUNTARY lifestyles ... their participants choose to implement and obey such restrictions, which is very different.
• [9:22] Zha Ewry: Even Wow, which owns the client
• [9:22] Zha Ewry: has people hack the client saide
• [9:22] Infinity Linden: this meeting is over.
• [9:22] Infinity Linden: Gareth.
• [9:22] Infinity Linden: a word please?
• [9:23] Gareth Ellison: i answered your IM
• [9:23] Rex Cronon: unless LL closes the viewer code, and the OGP:)
• [9:23] Saijanai Kuhn: .ne kinda wishes he'd slept through the rest of the alarm today
• [9:23] Zha Ewry: Even then Rex, its not going to stop someone from hack ng it
• [9:23] Rex Cronon: is not going to be easy
• [9:23] Zha Ewry: Sure, if you close it all
• [9:23] Zha Ewry: you raise the bar a lot
• [9:23] Zha Ewry: but people will examine packets
• [9:23] Zha Ewry: and hack away at will
• [9:24] Rex Cronon: AFK...............................
• [9:24] Rex Cronon: afk
• [9:24] Morgaine Dinova: It's academic, because LL doesn't want to get into such an arms race, they said so plainly.
• [9:24] Zha Ewry: Blizzard has a steady battle going on
• [9:24] Zha Ewry: They patch things
• [9:24] Zha Ewry: hackers bypass
• [9:24] Zha Ewry: they update the servers
• [9:24] Zha Ewry: Hakers bypass
• [9:24] Infinity Linden: yup. we're not going to close the source
• [9:25] Tree Kyomoon: anyway I just think SL needs to do all it can to encourage high end content developers from all sectors to build stuff and make use of this platform...and they wont if theres no business model, no way to control the experience
• [9:25] Tree Kyomoon: at least no easy way
• [9:25] Infinity Linden: even if we tried, the source we released under an open license is still "out there"
• [9:25] Gareth Ellison: long story short - different UI modes are a good thing
• [9:25] Infinity Linden: @Tree.. yeah... i see what you're talking about
• [9:25] Gareth Ellison: but they should not be relied on for client-side security of any kind
• [9:25] Zha Ewry: Tree, if they want to provide a client, they can, but they have to assume that they will be dealing with people who use the stock one
• [9:25] Zha Ewry: CSI ran into that
• [9:25] Infinity Linden: specifically
• [9:25] Gareth Ellison: whether that's cheating in games or something more important
• [9:26] Gareth Ellison: the question is what the best way to specify the new UI mode
• [9:26] Infinity Linden: with respect to camera and agent movement
• [9:26] Tree Kyomoon: if you have to build a client, then theres little advantage to using the platform...I mean, I think anyway
• [9:26] Morgaine Dinova: Tree: I think we (and LL) are trying to build an open world, rather than a business platform. The business will come when people come, guaranteed.
• [9:26] Gareth Ellison: a better HUD and camera overrides may be good enough for most use cases
• [9:26] Infinity Linden: these are things that the client and the server cooperate on
• [9:26] Saijanai Kuhn: seems to me that the only way to do that is to limit access and what people are wearing when the ARE allowed access...
• [9:26] Morgaine Dinova: wearing?
• [9:26] Tree Kyomoon: but if the in world tools for island owners were more powerful, more able to set limits to visitors, then I think we could see new business models created
• [9:26] Infinity Linden: it's the server that maintains the list of objects that are being viewed by the client
• [9:27] Saijanai Kuhn: because 20 decked out avatars can lag a sim worse than most sim builds
• [9:27] Tree Kyomoon: Morgaine...I think the business came and left
• [9:27] Tree Kyomoon: sorry to say
• [9:27] Infinity Linden: it should be possible for the server to disallow camera and av movement
• [9:27] Gareth Ellison: camera movement - no
• [9:27] Zha Ewry: You can prevent that, yes, what gets sent down
• [9:27] Infinity Linden: even thought you can create a client application that tells you to move one way or another
• [9:27] Morgaine Dinova: Since the client is open source, it's pretty much guaranteed that in some people's viewers, nobody is wearing anything. That's people for you ;-)))
• [9:27] Gareth Ellison: only thing the server can do is not send the prims
• [9:27] Zha Ewry: But, the client, is still able to do what it wants with the data
• [9:27] Infinity Linden: right
• [9:28] Infinity Linden: the objects you've already downloaded
• [9:28] Infinity Linden: there's no way to prevent someone from looking behind such objects
• [9:28] Infinity Linden: changing the perspectiev
• [9:28] Gareth Ellison: i'm wondering what other usecases we have for these "viewer restrictions/changes"
• [9:28] Gareth Ellison: obvious entertainment/games use cases
• [9:28] Infinity Linden: unless you changed the space model
• [9:28] Gareth Ellison: what else?
• [9:28] Tree Kyomoon: thats another one...setting preload/download order would be good
• [9:29] Infinity Linden: @Tree... that's an interesting idea
• [9:29] Tree Kyomoon: so the server could not let folks see stuff in the wrong order
• [9:29] Zha Ewry: So...
• [9:29] Tree Kyomoon: thats how flash (ducks) works
• [9:29] Morgaine Dinova: No Infi, the only thing the server can do is stop objects being downloaded. Viewer cameras will will be able to move anywhere in 3D, but there won't be anything to see.
• [9:29] Zha Ewry: The sim, can certainly keep your client's dat a stream very limited
• [9:29] Infinity Linden: @Morgaine.. yup
• [9:29] Zha Ewry: It can't tell your client how to render it
• [9:29] Infinity Linden: i think we're saying the same thing
• [9:30] Zha Ewry: It may say "This prim should be solid"
• [9:30] Zha Ewry: but if the client decides to render it wireframe?
• [9:30] Tree Kyomoon: and IMHO, the in world building tools need a lot of work, they need a company that specializes in content development like ADOBE to give them a more professional feel
• [9:30] Zha Ewry: Nothing you can do about it
• [9:30] Tree Kyomoon: then ADOBE could sell a special developer client
• [9:30] Infinity Linden: @Tree... no comment
• [9:30] Gareth Ellison: tree - that's an implementation issue
• [9:31] Gareth Ellison: though the issue of meshes has come up many times
• [9:31] Gareth Ellison: what i'd like to see is a fuller implementation of procedural geometry
• [9:31] Tree Kyomoon: well some of it has to do with protocols I think
• [9:31] Infinity Linden: as has the issue of build tools
• [9:31] Gareth Ellison: anyone here read the description of llvolume.cpp by the original author?
• [9:31] Infinity Linden: lol Gareth...
• [9:31] Zha Ewry: Not very much, of the build tools is restricted by prptocl. A small amount of the roundtrip, is
• [9:31] Infinity Linden: careful reading comments in our code
• [9:32] Morgaine Dinova: Hehe
• [9:32] Zha Ewry: That some things go into the sim, and back
• [9:32] Gareth Ellison: infinity - lol?
• [9:32] Infinity Linden: it is unfortunately the case that many changes were introduced into the code, but iwthout changing the documentation
• [9:32] Zha Ewry: (Which is how people can share objects turnign while editing)
• [9:32] Zha Ewry: but.. 90% of the build tool issues are probably client side
• [9:33] Morgaine Dinova: There's a long tradition of funny/crude comments in code, I remember them in Unix V7 kernel, and maybe in V6 which shared a lot of source.
• [9:33] Rex Cronon: bye everybody, i have to leave a little earlier. rl calling:)
• [9:33] Infinity Linden: it's a lol 'cause i've run into the problem of comments not matching code too many times
• [9:33] Saijanai Kuhn: No, that was a blog article about llvolume.cpp by the programmer
• [9:33] Gareth Ellison: ah
• [9:33] Tree Kyomoon: well Ive been bringing that stuff up for a couple years now...so I'll keep doing it I suppose :)
• [9:33] Morgaine Dinova: KK, cya Rex
• [9:33] Infinity Linden: @Zha... yup. i'm really interested to see what Adam's doing / going to do with build issues in his web based viewer
• [9:33] Zha Ewry: Someone should remind Zero that getting the prim low level .cpp files out under BSD was on his plate
• [9:33] Gareth Ellison: # screw it, directly edit the DB
• [9:34] Saijanai Kuhn: Tree can you post the transcript on this one? I was, well, a tad late
• [9:34] Morgaine Dinova: Good point Zha
• [9:34] Tree Kyomoon: I am working on it
• [9:34] Infinity Linden: okay Zha.. i'll list it as an action item
• [9:34] Infinity Linden: i'm going to be doing a lot of pinging people internally this morning
• [9:35] Saijanai Kuhn: so, since gareth mentioned it, did everyone read the blog entry about llvolume.cpp that the origianl programmer wrote a few months ago?
• [9:35] Gareth Ellison: sai +1
• [9:35] Zha Ewry: Got a lnk, Saij?
• [9:35] Tree Kyomoon: Id love to see a meeting between like 2kgames, CYAN, Adobe and SL to talk about what could change in the viewer to make them all take us more seriously
• [9:35] Saijanai Kuhn: gareth?
• [9:35] Infinity Linden: which one?
• [9:36] Gareth Ellison: sai - +1 for the blog reference, since we're incrementing people
• [9:36] Infinity Linden: ++Tree