The Emperor Is In Fact, Naked

Art covers a wide range of expression. Some may regard artistic expression as the ultimate form of self-indulgence. When I paint or dance I cannot escape that I enjoy expressing myself in these ways. However, I don't impose my expression on others. I don't shove my paintings on the wall of another artist's exhibition. I do not get up and perform my dance on someone else's stage. I do not go to an exhibition and make a point of denigrating the artist. I look, I absorb. I consider. It either appeals to me subjectively, or it does not. It may appeal to me as an investment or I may acknowledge the artistic expression offered as something that although not appealing to me, may appeal to others. Either way, the artist is treated with respect.

Recently I have been to some events organised to recognise different artists. One was the MachinimUWA awards. The entries were excellent, each different in their own way. The sheer work in developing a machinima has to be recognised.. from original storyboard, to sourcing visuals, filming, editing and music score.

Another event was the M Linden art exhibition. Here the artist's work was shipped for exhibit at the UWA real life University Campus, as well as shown in SL in the Lawrence Wilson Art Gallery on the UWA SL Campus. At the RL event, the works were considered by a broad range of people, from artists, to curators and art critics. In Sl they were offered to a broader range of people.

At both events in SL a self-proclaimed 'performance artist' placed his/her 'art' over the art being exhibited, imposing a totally self-indulgent need for attention and 'look at ME' on the clearly disinterested. It is my belief that the self-proclaimed 'performance artist' would be better employed staging their own exhibition which will then either stand or fall on its merits. Given the yawn-worthy nature of what has been seen so far, I predict an ass bruising fall.

Having witnessed first hand some of the 'Marsha Marsha Marsha' bleatings of this particular attention-seeker at events honoring artists I conclude that labelling 'middle child syndrome as 'performance art' is not fooling anyone other than the self-proclaimed 'performance artist'. In short dear, the emperor/ess is naked and showing cellulite.

Content Creators in SL Commence Action Against Content Theft

Just about every content creator in Second Life is concerned about the epidemic level of copying and straight out rip off of their designs and goods in Second Life. Short of being under a virtual rock it would be impossible not to be aware.

It's not clear whether it's the introduction of the copybot program or the increased use of third party viewers with their additional 'features' that has enabled such widespread theft, but one thing IS for sure, when Linden Labs uses as one of their main 'selling' points to prospective residents the ability to create content in SL (on the Linden Labs servers) they neglected to add the little 'detail' that once created and 'planted' in the SL 'fields', the creation will quite probably be harvested and resold in SL and other grid and Internet based markets by opportunistic thieves. Linden Labs also don't say that in fact their response to content theft is inadequate and slow to the point of enabling the content thieves. Yet it is all occurring on LL servers on a grid administered by LL salaried professional staff.

I have heard many (probably kids and those with the IQ of a carrot) that SL is a 'game', that it isn't 'real' money, that this doesn't matter, that it's not 'real' theft, that the content creators are 'only in it for the money' and somehow 'deserve' to be ripped off; that it's no big deal. Let's dig a hole, scrape the abovementioned idiot group into it and look at this issue logically....

Second Life is enhanced by the content created by residents. Without it there are no shopping, clubs, builds, great sims and environments to explore and enjoy, no virtual weapons, spaceships, vehicles etc. There are no schools, universities, community discussion and self help groups. In short.. what would it look like without content creators' creations? Cos funnily enough, it isn't Linden Lab providing all that you enjoy and that enhances your SL experience.

Without content creators you may as well be on email. Oh wait.. someone created email too..

Now here is the odd thing.. you may need to really engage brains and think about this.... ready.... this is a biggie....sitting comfortably for this Big Revealing Fact?

Content creation takes time.

'OMG!' I hear you say!....'It does?'

See, content does not create itself. (Told you this was a Big Fact..)

Content creation time at the hourly rate of say a web page developer = $
NOT lindens which can be converted to USD, but real money in real time. See here's the odd thing.. braced for another Big Fact?...

People.. real people.. with real computers, and real flesh and blood bodies at real keyboards with real (expensive) 3D and graphics programs... use their tools and skills to CREATE something that others can use. Yet for some reason, when it comes to bringing their creations into SL and even charging for it, they make themselves the target of those who feel they are entitled to a freebie life (the Gimmee-gimmee toddler mentality) or those who want to make a quick buck by stealing and reselling ( the 'psst wanna buy a watch...it fell off the back of a truck' brigade).

So what are content creators doing about this situation?

Well one group has lodged a submission for Class action against Linden Labs in the NY Supreme Court. For those unaware, a class action is a group of content creators in this instance - not just one content creator.

The 'Step Up' Campaign has been established and the number of content creators joining this campaign and taking strategic action is growing daily. Among these actions are 'designated no upload days'. As Linden Labs charges 10L for every texture and file upload this may help demonstrate a level of economic impact - of course the problem with this is that there will probably be double uploads the following day, but at least LL may be able to have a measure of the level of dissatisfaction and concern. The first designated 'no upload day' is November 5th slt. (see: http://stepupsl.wordpress.com/)

One would think that LL would already be able to identify these figures given they form a large part of the ongoing LL income.. but it seems either they 1) have not the technology to count these uploads and report on them in their monthly financial reports or 2) they don't think them significant enough to be concerned about. I doubt the former and feel the latter would be foolish and short-sighted.

Another form of action is now increasing. Many content creators are now selling their creations on the web and delivering in virtual worlds directly. They are charging $USD via for example, paypal or credit card at a price they feel makes creation and selling creations worth their while. This of course seems sensible, particularly given most harvesting the lush fields of LL are selling the stolen goods to other grids - the Open Sim users being the largest market of opportunity.

So what does this mean for LL and content creator residents? Watch this space.

In the meantime, previous court actions taken against LL have offered obiter dictum that has been followed. That the SL economy is 'real' that it translates to $USD through legitimate conversion and exchange. That SL is NOT a game, it carries none of the pre-requisites of a 'game'. That SL is a social networking and economic/commercial/business venture. That the LL Terms of Service does not override contract and criminal law either domestic or international. I predict another out of court settlement to avoid hard precedent being set.

If this proposed class action succeeds, and there is no reason to believe it won't, this will herald in a new era for LL and content creators on the LL/SL grid.

And remember, every time someone rips off someones work, every time someone accepts the stolen goods either on SL or other grids, the eventual cost increases to all but the thief. Make no mistake, this is theft.

SLAM Magazine

I love satire and I adore irony so when I stumbled across the SLAM Magazine site recently I was interested. It seems it is a 'hoist by their own petard' site and that appeals to me in a curious way.*

One of the first articles that struck me was one where the subject of the article, glitterati poses, and it's posemaker, the avatar Katey Coppola had been involved in publicly defacing a competitor's entry in a photo competition. Glitterati and Coppola are an avatar representation of a natural person and his/her business based in a social networking site, Second Life.

The appeal of this article was that the admissions and the pictures of the defacement were in the offenders own words and pictures as posted publicly on the Internet by the offender herself.

The really intriguing aspect though, was reading the comments, I suspect from the offender or cohorts under a 'nom de plume stating, offender's 'side' was not represented - yet the total article was the offender and cohorts own words!

The irony of this did not escape me.

* http://slammagazine1.blogspot.com/

Content Theft, Copying and the Next Step: ES and Glitterati

Update on the recent posemaker case:

Glitterati & ES. Now renamed ES vs Glitterati

A Glitterati customer says there is an ES pose like one of yours.
Glitterati responds with 'they must have copied the Glitterati pose" - and shares this publicly despite clear evidence to the contrary.

This action was not only unreasonable and proved to be lacking in fact but marked the beginning of the corner into which Glitterati had placed themselves.

The poses in question were in fact clearly evidenced as having been developed and up-loaded to SL by ES prior to not only Glitterati's, but also prior to the Glitterati pictures placed on their Flickr site. It is hard to copy something someone made AFTER your creation!!

The latter fact still seems not to have permeated the minds behind Glitterati.

Perhaps Glitterati is a little confused and thinks that ES really means ESP?

Now the reasonable person would would engage the brain rather than the mouth at this stage, but not katy. In what could only be considered either a desperate face-saving exercise or an adolescent temper tanty, she embarks on a very public ES witchunt to the extent of calling on others to join her in this flaming and bullying of ES. This is rather like the yell of 'fight' or 'rumble' behind the bike sheds at school - you all know the type. The crowd forms, the bully blusters but sometimes, the 'reasonable' kid has had enough and bites back.

When this katy-led witchunt evolved into defamation and libel and republication of such on several sites on the world wide web. ES has no option but to defend its reputation.

Being reasonable people ES undertook this through the procedures set in place for dispute resolution.

Recent update:

Katy of Glitterati has not yet responded in a counter claim on the poses that Glitterati ( note: NOT ES!) was asked to decommission. The decommissioning was based on a Linden Labs (LL) investigation in which it was claimed that the Glitterati poses in question were in fact produced AFTER the ES poses. Glitterati claims that they did not defend in the appropriate manner as they wanted to continue to hide their 'real' identities - presumably from legal action arising from their actions.

However, katy and Glitterati did lodge their own claim with LL citing that 10 ES poses were copies of Glitterati's. This claim was also taken seriously by ES and LL. The poses subject to this claim were decommissioned as the claim was investigated, The cited poses were compared, found not to be copied and ES owners lodged a counter-claim, citing evidence to counter the Glitterati claims in accordance with proper procedures

Notice the difference in behaviours here. One party hides behind an avatar name and uses the web and the false sense of anonymity to mischievously flame, harass and defame in a baseless manner.

The party subjected to this behaviour takes appropriate action using proper grievance resolution procedures.

At this point the status is as follows:

ES has:

1. Provided evidence to LL in response to the mischievous Glitterati claims,
2. ES has filed a counter suit in response to the mischievous Glitterati claims (NOTE: no hiding behind false identities here!),
3. ES has engaged legal representation to undertake the counter suit.

One wonders when katy and her 'family' at Glitterati will work out that far from teen high jinx, their behaviour has stepped firmly into the realm of law. No wonder they seek to hide their 'real' identities. A writ served may well cause some questions around the dinner table.

Runaway?

In stark contrast to the grace, foresight and respect for colleagues and friends demonstrated by Baron Grayson and Sue Stonebinder, another 'business' closure in SL defies all logic and is remarkable by the seemingly deliberate intent to leave as much mess, unpaid bills and confusion as possible. It also raises some interesting points of law. So lets look a little closer at the events generating some interest.

The owner of the 'Runway' magazine published in SecondLife and at the centre of the mess decided to leave SL. Not a particular problem. The magazine had after all, only been operating for 12 months and and it's focus was in no way unique; yet another fash mag among so many. Even the name , 'Runway' was unoriginal.**

Having read the Runway blog and taken all statements into consideration, it seems clear, the ‘magazine’ owner did not follow acceptable business practice. maggie mahoney did not call a meeting with staff and creditors prior to the announcement of their leaving sl. She made no reassurances or apparent provision to wind up her business affairs in a proper manner. She merely stated:

RUNWAY CLOSES ITS DOORS :: CEOs PASS INTO REAL LIFE
By Maggie Mahoney • April 8, 2009

"RUNWAY will not be sold. It has been left to the staff if they desire to continue its legacy;

if not, it will pass along with Maggie and Ocean."

• In short, the owner announced that she had left Sl and made a clear statement that she relinquished the magazine and had in fact, left it to the staff.


• The staff were named.


• There were no statements relating to financial reports, debts and properties including the magazines headquarters, nor were there statements or reassurances in terms of provision for unpaid debts.


• Staff had not been advised of this decision prior to publication in the Runway blog. Indeed, many had their attention drawn to the blog by people NOT connected to the magazine.

In fact to the contrary, it was clear that the focus was the owner's own 'happy ever after' ... as maggie mahoney stated in relation to she and her paramour:

"They both now live happily ever after in real life ".

Pretty clear so far.

Now while it is nice that people live happily ever after and like to share such, that was not really the issue at hand. No amount of flowery sentiment could cover the issue affecting magazine staff and others involved in this 'business venture'. Therefore....

The fallout was inevitable.

Consider the obvious:

• In order for staff to maintain the magazine as so clearly intended by maggie mahoney, they needed more information.. all they knew was what was in the rather sparse ‘runway closes its doors' blog entry.


• All parties. including the owner, agreed that no effort was made prior to and during that ‘media release’ to address significant outstanding issues and in particular, outstanding debts.


• It was alleged by the Editor that 'staff and freelance writers had not been paid for their last month of work, while the owner reassed everyone that they would be paid in a matter of days'(1) Payment was allegedly not received.


• All parties including the magazine owner agree that no provision had been discussed between the ‘owner’ and the creditors.

In a later contact with the magazine's editor, maggie mahoney advised the Runway editor :

" If the staff wishes to continue RUNWAY - its yours. We are giving it to you. You have our permission to use the RUNWAY logo and continue it in the nature that it was intended" (presumably as a fash mag)

Staff having been 'given' the magazine, made a decision to try to clean up the apparent mess and sought the assistance of the owner of BOSL. He agreed to pay all debts and incorporate the magazine into his businesses while retaining it’s identity. This was apparently not what the ‘reinquishing owner’ wanted. Belatedly, the ‘owner’ then rescinded the ‘give away’ and resumed ownership of the ‘magazine’ - and it’s debts.

Hopefully now a proper businesslike exit will be undertaken. Time will tell.

I fail to see why anyone other than those that have made such an unfortunate announcement and left such a confusing mess should be vilified. At best the actions of the magazine owner were amateurish, at worst, a cynical attempt to abandon a sinking ship. The latter is borne out by the owner's own rather pessimistic financial statements relating to the 12 month venture into online publishing. On the matter of amount of funds available from the sale of her sim however, she remains silent.

' I have setup a trust fund to pay for the server space for the website from the proceeds of the sale of the sim' ... The funds from the sale of the sim were earmarked and pulled down to be put into a trust account to maintain the cost of the website accounts, domain renewals, and hosting accounts for the staff ...to see that they were paid.


One would assume that people were more important than the website of a financially limping magazine. Perhaps the order in which she specified the purposes for which the 'trust fund' was established says much about the owner's priorities. Notwithstanding this aside, let us look at this statement.....

' I have setup a trust fund'

As a trust fund is a legal entity which is not merely established under domestic torts law, but also recognised by international law, I feel certain all parties owed will be awaiting further details in order that they may meet with the trustee , submit their accounts and receive their outstanding payments in full. There is no reason why this trust should not have clearly named beneficiaries where those beneficiaries have an interest in any monies available to pay amounts owed. After all, as demonstrated in Bragg, SL is considered a ‘real’ economy and the magazine owners do owe ‘real $USD’ in accordance with the exchange rate.

It seems to me attention needs to be firmly centred on the owner of this ill-fated 'business' venture. Hopefully the so-called ‘trust’ maggie mahoney advises she has ’set up’ for debtors has indeed been been appropriately and legitimately established and is not a mere term tossed out to mollify those they owe and as a belated attempt at damage control.

After all, the owner of Runway is the architect of this mess and bears sole responsibility for it. Nothwithstanding the obvious mess, subsequent hurt feelings and people alleging they are owed money, the legal issues raised by the fallout from this virtual and www based 'publication' are of interest and I think worth some consideration.

*** please note despite the identical name the 'Runway' magazine and it's associated blog cited in this article is essentially SecondLife based and has no association with the US based Runway Magazine, Runway LA or runway magazine Australia all of which are legitimately incorporated companies.

(1) For further information and references:

Drama and Divas and The Whole Damn Thing

11 April
By Thalia Jie – former Fashion Editor of RUNWAY Magazine


In respect of the demise of RUNWAY magazine, I have no obligation to make any comments, however I will state that various blog postings made about Frolic Mills and the RUNWAY/BOSL merger are not factual. The facts are:

• On the 8 April 2009, RUNWAY announced the departure of both CEO’s from Second Life in a blog posting. No prior notice was given to staff. [http://www.runwaysl.com/blog]

• RUNWAY did not pay its employees or contracted writers for their last month of work, while reassuring everyone that they would be paid in a matter of days.

• RUNWAY owners, Maggie Mahoney and Ocean Bates created the impression, right up to the day that the demolition started on the RUNWAY build, that it was business as usual.

• A public statement was issued on their blog that RUNWAY magazine “has been left to the staff if they desire to continue its legacy” however no mention was made of outstanding revenue from existing advertising contracts.

• Neither of the RUNWAY CEO’s replied to emails or telephone calls

I personally would like to thank Frolic Mills for agreeing to an invitation to join myself, EmmZ Tzara and Vera Canning in a meeting to discuss these events. Frolic Mills gave his commitment that all RUNWAY staff would be paid and all advertising contracts honored. The result of that meeting was that the transition to BOSL was agreed to and work proceeded on the May issue of RUNWAY magazine. Designers and advertisers were reassured that everything was returning to normal.

On April 9 2009 a further statement was issued on the RUNWAY blog by the departing CEO’s of RUNWAY announcing that: “RUNWAY will not merge with BOSL” and citing coercion on the part of Frolic Mills.

My decision regarding the BOSL/RUNWAY merger was not made through coercion or manipulation nor was I forced into any actions in a state of “shock”. I find that implication personally insulting.

My decision to merge with BOSL was made on the following basis:

• Paying RUNWAY employees monies owed

• Paying freelance writers/photographers for RUNWAY projects

• Honoring existing RUNWAY contracts with advertisers up to and including the July issue of RUNWAY

• Acting decisively and promptly as the news of the CEO’s departure had been announced in a public forum

• With full knowledge that despite the RUNWAY blog statement that RUNWAY magazine “has been left to the staff if they desire to continue its legacy”, a blog statement is not a contract, and it is not a legal transfer of ownership.

• Misgivings regarding exactly what “the legacy” of RUNWAY magazine entailed.

On April 9 2009, in the same blog post, CEO Maggie Mahoney stated that she has “decided to retain the branding rights and trademark [to RUNWAY magazine] and let the magazine officially close”

Please direct all inquiries regarding monies owed by RUNWAY to Maggie Mahoney and Ocean Bates.

I have listed the facts as I understand them, and there will be no further comments.

Thalia Jie
11 April 2009

CNN: ireports

CNN in world. The team at Turner Broadcasting have a strong presence in SL. The report team based in Sl attend editorial meetings with CNN staffers Nicole Saidi and Henry Hanks each Tuesday in world. Previous stories are commented on and assignments handed out. Probably one of the most challenging and exciting activities in Sl. Crossing over from s/l into real life it is wonderfully rewarding to identify issues that are topical, thought- provoking and even perhaps picked up by CNN for broader publication.