Content Theft #2: Outcomes

When alleging content theft it is imperative that clear evidence is provided to substantiate the claim. Content theft is a serious matter and allegations have may have a significant impact on a number of levels for the accused.

Without substantial evidence to back up such claim, the allegations become baseless, defamatory and could quite reasonably be regarded as a cynical attempt to create a widespread public perception to the detriment of a rival business so accused.

In a recent SL case involving posemakers/animators one levelled very public claims of copying against another. The accused, Essential Soul (ES), priding themselves on originality and specific key positioning in their poses and well as taking seriously the reputation of their business, naturally looked into these claims. They found that not only had ES's own poses apparently been copied by their accuser, but other elements of their business also. They responded in the proper manner and through the proper channels to restore their business reputation.

To this end, ES lodged a DMCA Complaint with Linden Labs (LL). Subsequent investigation by LL considered all considerable and compelling evidence provided by ES, including design, origin and upload and release dates found that ES's poses had apparently been copied by the 'accuser' and ordered the copied poses be removed.

Did the accuser deal with being caught out in a proper manner? Did they apologise for their behaviour? No. Astonishingly they [again] publicly put pictures up of the poses they were found to have copied on their Flickr with the heading:

'sniff sniff'
and the statement:
" Discontinued because the people at Essential Soul are a bunch of money-grubbing assholes".*

They further claim that only revealing r/l information to Linden Labs stops them from lodging a counter-claim against ES - yet LL already holds r/l information from the registration details required from all individuals prior to being granted access to the LL SL grid. It is difficult to see how revealing to LL what LL already holds, is a barrier to lodging a counter claim.

Astonishingly now, and in a complete turn-around to their public statements made against ES, the accuser now claims that poses cannot be copied or copywritten!

The petulant tirade finishes with a promise that people will 'see some shit'.

Charming.

So, to recap, these people actively, publicly and with no evidence defamed the reputation of a rival business. They were found to have copied the poses they have been ordered to remove. They sold and presumably enjoyed unjust enrichment and yet they accuse the business they copied as being the 'money-grubber' - and so continues their pattern of defamation, libel, and self-interest.

Lodging a DMCA with LL is only one step in the DMCA grievance process. That merely seeks investigation and remedy on the LL owned grid.

There are further remedies open to ES and other businesses that have been subjected to defamatory and baseless claims.