Designer’s EULA
Posted on 28. Oct, 2009 by Tenshi Vielle in Gossip
This is something we’ve been – or at least I’ve been – beginning to talk about in the Artist’s Voice crew… promoting the idea that designers in SL should include an EULA to further protect themselves from content theft. Zhao’s EULA is a good idea, but executed poorly, as it’s included in the item vendor and therefore is not readable until AFTER you purchase the product.
ZHAO SHOES END-USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
This End-User License Agreement (EULA) applies to any and all materials, including but not limited to, items, objects, and folders, created by or on behalf of Zhao Shoes (“Content.”) This Agreement includes, but is not limited to, the Content that Melanie Zhao or Zhao Shoes has available for sale through any other third-party retailers or websites, and boxed products available in various retail outlets.
By downloading, installing, copying, or otherwise accessing or using the Content, you agree to be bound by the terms of this EULA. If you do not agree to these terms, do not use or access the Content
License
The Content is protected by copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as well as other intellectual property laws and treaties. The Content is licensed by Zhao Shoes for limited use in Second Life®, by the avatar that purchased or otherwise obtained the Content. Ownership in or rights to the Content is not sold or given away.You will NOT modify, decompile, disassemble, or otherwise reverse engineer any part or component of the Content. You will NOT distribute the Content for sale or profit, or make the Content public, without the express, written permission of Melanie Zhao. You MAY make ONE copy of the Content for archival purposes.
The Content and any related documentation is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. In no event shall Melanie Zhao or Zhao Shoes be liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of the use of or inability to use the Content.All rights not expressly granted in this EULA are reserved by Melanie Zhao. All copyrights, and other intellectual property rights to the Content are exclusively owned by Melanie Zhao.
Read more over at the Herald: http://foo.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2009/10/brown-suede-boots-with-an-eula.html
Man_In_A_Skirt
Oct 28th, 2009
doh!
Blahblahblahwhatever
Oct 28th, 2009
wow. This person didn’t know to put the license somewhere accessable to people before they buy ?? Lmao!!
Anyway, it’s sad people even have to do this type of thing. It should be a no brained that ripping stuff and getting copies via exploits is wrong
Thing is, when you start putting up licenses peoples panties get in a bunch and they cry and bitch about it. Some even goes as far as to grief the persons shop
I think it’s ridiculous too when people bitch and start huffing and puffing about how they ” can do whatever the he’ll they want!!” with content. If a creator sells things with mid rights then go ahead and mid it, within it’s limits- eg, no using illegal methods. No content creator should enable mid rights and then try and tell people not to disassemble or add to the item. But any reasonable request is within their rights and if you don’t like of then don’t but it
Blahblahblahwhatever
Oct 28th, 2009
That should say MOD rights, not “mid” rights.
Beulah
Oct 28th, 2009
how would you feel if something you worked hard to design got stole and sold on with others making money of it.
Its something to think about before slating this person.
If it needs set up in a better way contact them on it and offer ideas to help them and shoppers.
CyclicGearz
Oct 28th, 2009
This isn't about the creator, it's about having an EULA that you can't agree to until you've bought the object – which is probably against the law – as a License Agreement must be agreed to BEFORE a purchase is made or before you play a game if there's on on a game.
Man_In_A_Skirt
Oct 28th, 2009
Is this Melanie person famous or something?
Trickett
Oct 28th, 2009
I think I've seen this in a couple of stores. Can't recall any right now but I always just delete it. I figure it basically just says 'DON'T STEAL MY WORK (copyright, copyright, intellectual rights, etc.)', which is common sense to me.
And I think Zhao was probably a bigger brand before sculpties. Can we not use the 'who is this person/are they famous' insult unless they're trying to claim e-fame or something?
Baily
Oct 28th, 2009
EULA doesn’t actually apply to anyone who hasnt bought that product, therefore there is zero control over any derivative or partial copying by Joe shopper who like the look of it and thought he’d make his own version.
Some creators are just idiots when it comes to this stuff, they really think they’re are far more important than they actually are. they try to bamboozle the end user with scary sounding legal crap, that prolly has no weight in the end.
End of the day, it’s a bunch of words that mean jack shit!
3blahs1whatever
Oct 29th, 2009
I disagree.
This is why in everyday life people are scared to stand up for righteous things because when they do people throw comments out to them like yours. "They think theyre more important than they are"
umm Sorry but have you not noticed things have gotten COMPLETELY out of hand????????
Some people rip very innocently because someone told them "They were allowed and it was within their buyer rights". Which isnt always the case.
First of all, not only is it against LLs TOS to extract, but many content creators do not want that being done to their items.
This has nothing to do with people thinking they are super grand and awesome. It has to do with the blatant disrespect consumers have when obtaining the creators problems.
Go ahead and put up license agreements. If people dont like what it has to say, then they can TP out and go shop somewhere else.
3blahs1whatever
Oct 29th, 2009
Ok you guys, when I replied to this earlier, I did not read her entire agreement because I was on a mobile device. But I just saw this part:
"You will NOT modify, decompile, disassemble, or otherwise reverse engineer any part or component of the Content"
Ok, if her shoes are NO MOD, then that is a perfectly fine and legal request. (As they are no mod to prevent that. I had someone bot a no mod item I sell to figure out how I did it and release their own.).
HOWEVER, if her shoes are MOD and she is trying to say no one can take it apart and see how it was done. Thats foolish and laughable. And quite sad actually.
Reverse engineering is how the world grows.
Then she says,
"You MAY make ONE copy of the Content for archival purposes."
LMAO! Please tell me her shoes are NO copy?? If they are copy, what right does she think she has to tell someone to only make one back up copy? I think I might be misunderstanding something.. I hope shes not talking about inworld copy tools if her shoes are "Copy OK"
Her license is sketchy assuming her shoes are "No mod, Yes Copy". Very sketchy. But I think its still wrong to call her names. Its kind of comical, sure. But shes the one who spent her time making them and if you dont want to respect her license then do not buy it. But i think she needs to reassess this license and realize it is asking people to be very restricted.
I can understand licenses that basically tell you in plain english what the TOS says. But hers seems to ask people to NOT do things that the basic permission system is allowing- Eg. "let me make my shoes copyable. but tell people they can only make one copy". Now, if her shoes are NO copy, then I change my stance.
Tweets that mention Designer’s EULA | Shopping Cart Disco -- Topsy.com
Oct 28th, 2009
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mal Burns, InQConnections.com. InQConnections.com said: Designer’s EULA: This is something we’ve been – or at least I’ve been – beginning to ta.. http://bit.ly/4v7GvF [...]
Ann Otoole
Oct 29th, 2009
What if it was given as a blanket license in a notecard giver at the landing point? What if it was a system that gave you 120 seconds to read it and agree or if you disagree ejects you from the region? (if you don't own a region you can't really stop a camming buy)
Yes such TOS systems do exist in SL.
How do all you armchair lawyers that would likely never buy anything anyway feel about that?
Baily
Oct 28th, 2009
It’s the creators that are the armchair lawyers not the consumers. A lot of it is scare tactics and further more some go way to far with it and get all preachy.
All they need to say is a polite paragraph, not an entire notecard full of legal crap they copied off the internet and tailored for themselves.
I couldn’t care less if they want to throw cards at me with there EULA. They could have a sign saying if you’re going to purchase please read our EULA before doing so and give the option to take a card.
Ann Otoole
Oct 29th, 2009
Scare tactics? Saying people are not licensed to take intellectual property out of Second Life? (stating for use in Second Life only) Saying the customer is not licensed to rip it off? See what it is all about is the necessary addendum to the SL TOS and inadequate permissions system. Now LL promised enhanced license metadata capabilities but they never delivered on it. So IP owners simply have to take matters into their own hands and put the necessary legalese in with the products since LL doesn't appear to be doing what they said they would ages ago. Maybe they are. I hear tales of lots of so-called "sekret projekts" around LL.
I don't see it as "scare tactics" at all. Not to mention people creating unlicensed copies are not going to read it or care anyway. Probably rather difficult to read a notecard in the inventory of the person you are copybotting shoes off of right? I.e.; it isn't what all that stuff you guys are trying to say at all.
BTW I think you may have meant "their EULA". "There" is an adverb that refers to a place. "Their" is an adjective relating to a possessor. Word power and all.
Oh and you may have just committed libel with the accusation the EULA was copied off of the internet. Can you attest to that as fact in court? And a non legal "paragraph" has no legal value whatsoever so that is pretty poor legal advice IMHO.
Amazing how almost everything people buy for use on a computer has a EULA the person didn't get to read before buying yet Microsoft can legally disable an unlicensed installation of Windows remotely if they want. Yep. All legal and no recourse for the person violating the license. Well I bet if you dug around you might find Microsoft could disable an OS for the user pirating other people's stuff. Like music. Probably buried deep in that EULA. Better switch to ubuntu eh? Oh did you completely read the Second Life TOS before you agreed to create your account? Really? I have studied it several times myself.
Oh and I always love to say this… Got a consumer complaint about a merchant? File it at ftc.gov.
Could your personal time have been better spent than reading to this point?
Man_In_A_Skirt
Oct 29th, 2009
Hahaha you go tell them Ann!
Ann Otoole
Oct 29th, 2009
Oh and one more critical point. The day interop between grids is implemented the whole "SL Only" part will change quickly. Just watch and see lol.
Man_In_A_Skirt
Oct 29th, 2009
This is bad reporting, the journalist should interview Melanie and ask her point of view about it.
Lizzie Lexington
Oct 29th, 2009
I think she needs a readers digest version for ADD types like me.
Man_In_A_Skirt
Oct 29th, 2009
Everything in the EULA makes perfect sense, except Melanie Zhao does not exist in RL since she is only a fictional character in SL.
Mimika Oh
Nov 4th, 2009
Melanie Zhao is not a fictional character but an alias or trading name of a real person.
Desidelia
Oct 29th, 2009
Just want to make some points.
Not warning the customers about ur EULA before buy your product can make the EULA useless cos they can claim things to make the EULA useless, but is better than put nothing.
Whatever you have write in your EULA, you are always under Linden Lab EULA, that means if something contradicts Linden Lab EULA, LL EULA will have preference cos you are under their program. The good thing is that they protect some points of copyright, so when you put something to sell you are not completly naked and unpreotected, but there are things that linden lab dont cover, its the reason why is good make your own EULA, in the end Linden Lab protects it self.
Copying another EULA from intenet is not illegal but it can make your EULA useless cos that euala has been wrote for a specific prodcut that maybe is not according with yours, so its probably that it will have flaws if you dont redact it well. In the end is what you pay a lawyer, to redact a EULA with less flaws possible to protect your product. And lot of lawyers has preset texts.
Customers have also rights that varies from country to country, so somethings you have write to ur EULA may not apply to everbody, or can be against customers rights.
In conclusion an EULA is not a ultimate defense but is something that doesnt hurt and can help you in some cases. So better protect you as much as you can for if the worst happens.