Linden Labs Sends "Permit-and-Proceed" Letter

linuxwrangler writes "In sharp contrast to the incidents chronicled at Chilling Effects, Second Life creators Linden Labs have sent the parody site Get a First Life a proceed-and-permit letter. From the letter: 'Linden Lab is well-known for having strict hiring standards, including a requirement for having a sense of humor, from which our lawyers receive no exception. In conclusion, your invitation to submit a cease-and-desist letter is hereby rejected.' The letter also grants permission to use the parody logos."

Comments

pun intended

[macadamia_harold]

Second Life creators Linden Labs have sent the parody site Get a First Life a proceed-and-permit letter.

In other words, they're virtually going along with the joke.

Its a great game.

[Frogbert]

I've always said second life is like four times better then half-life.

Re:Its a great game.

[Pyrex5000]

Or, according to Verizon math, Second Life is four hundred times better than half-life.

IP and Fair Use

[DeadManCoding]

In an age of the MAFIAA and other organizations dedicated to maintaining stupid IP laws and restrictive fair use laws, it's nice to see a company realize that a parody only helps them more. After all, this is free PR, and good PR at that.

Re:IP and Fair Use

[lamasquerade]

...it's nice to see a company realize that a parody only helps them more.

Indeed, or even that behaving socially (as opposed to the MPAA's sociopathic actions) is more important that whether or not GetAFirstLife's action helps them. Reading the letter I was struck by just how ridiculous the expected behaviour of companies is. We expect them to act ultra-selfishly - and of course this is covered by the focus of a corporation, profit above all else. But to see a company have some humour, and even grant something it doesn't need to (possibly for a long term profit motive as suggested by parent, but also possibly just because it can and it's nice) shows that the all-profiting, knee jerk bullshit that we are used to is not at all necessary.

Re:IP and Fair Use

[GuyWithLag]

Actually, Linden Labs had to permit or deny use of their logo, or risk losing the trademark. This is a clever move by them both from the legal side and the PR it generates.

Re:IP and Fair Use

[Sique]

This is a clever move by them both from the legal side and the PR it generates. There is nothing wrong with being clever and funny at the same time (even though the /. moderation system seems to think otherwise).

Re:IP and Fair Use

[miyako]

I see this complaint all the time, but if something is already modded funny (which doesn't give karma) can't you just mod it underrated- which will give karma and not change the label? That's what I generally do if something is funny enough to be worth karma, or largely funny but also insightful.

depressing

[qw0ntum]

How depressing is it that this type of thing would only happen in an online world? I think if someone did this to Disney they would send Mickey to come eat you or something.

Re:depressing

[Anonymous Coward]

I think if someone did this to Disney they would send Mickey to come eat you or something.

Make that the little mermaid. She can eat me any time!

Re:depressing

[richie2000]

I think if someone did this to Disney they would send Mickey to come eat you or something. I can see the cartoon now: Minnie laying on the bed with the speech bubble: "Mickey, come eat me". ;-)

Yay linden labs

[ocelotbob]

Now if only other people could be so lenient towards copyright...

Re:Yay linden labs

[Boogaroo]

Copyright and trademark are different situations. To protect your trademark(logo, company name, etc) you MUST take action to protect it. If you ignore it, you may lose your trademark protection. If you license/permit the usage to a group, this is seen as a way to protect your trademark since you've considered the usage and allowed the parties to use the trademark.

If they did nothing at all, that would cause potential problems. Their response is both classy, and covers their ass.

Re:Dangerous precedent being set

[deft]

something tells me you wouldnt be hired where they require the sense of humor.

Re:Dangerous precedent being set

[creysoft]

They acknowledge First Life's inherent right to parody several times, even jokingly stated that they were insulted by the idea that their lawyers WOULDN'T recognize such a right. The only "license" here is a license for the derivative trademark, which they note "may require a license." Notice they didn't say "does require a license." It's more, "Hey, we think this probably falls under fair use. But just in case it doesn't, and anyone ever hassles you about it, here's a license saying you can use it anyway."

The final clause is standard CYA language. If, for example, First Life started using their derivative logo to do something damaging to Second Life's reputation, Second Life's lawyers may look into it, and if, in fact, the logo is infringing, they may revoke the license. Surely you can't reasonably expect them to grant them a perpetual, non-revokable license to do anything they want with a very slightly modified logo?

The whole thing's basically a joke anyway, to let everyone know that they know about First Life, and are 100% OK with it. It's also a cheap jab at companies with less sense of humor.

Isn't it sad ...

[gone_bush]

that we are commenting on the application of common sense.

Re:Dangerous precedent being set

[mrchaotica]

Maybe so, but he's got a point. The law doesn't have a sense of humor, so lawyers can't really afford to have on either.

Lighten up people, it's a joke

[melikamp]

What's with all the lawyer bashing and paranoia? These guys are clearly making fun of him. Just because the person is a lawyer, doesn't mean he is out to rip you off. There are plenty of good lawyers around. In fact, most lawyers wouldn't do something unethical just because it pays so handsomely well.

Because most lawyers are dead.

Ah, haha, I just couldn't resist...

Re:Dangerous precedent being set

[Joebert]

I have a better sense of humor than this feeble attempt at attracting attention.

Not according to todays Slashdot moderators you don't.

Around here, a sense of humor seems to be defined as answering the question,

"What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean ?"

with "A good start !", not "Evidence !".

Re:Dangerous precedent being set

[anagama]

The parody site operator of getafirstlife.com should reject this letter immediately. How many companies in the future will start referring to this action as a basis to stop "fair use"?

Wow. Layoff the paranoia pipe a bit. Everyone knows that parody is OK. It has been for years. Companies have been parodied on Saturday Night Live since the stoner age. If they were gonna get the fair use provisions relating to parody changed, they would have done it already.

Secondly, if we want companies to be good citizens and respectful of individual's rights, should not also individuals respect companies when the company does something right? I do. I went to second life from the first life page and signed up for an account. Who woulda thought they actually have a linux version (alpha) for the game?

What I see is a company that is not full of pricks, plus they supply a linux version of the game. Isn't that what (we linux users at least) have been saying would be great? I say that's worthy of my support so I flipped them a few bucks.

Good law, not just good humour

[john-da-luthrun]

This is actually quite smart from a legal point of view. Once Second Life had decided not to go down the road of trying to sue the parody site into oblivion - a wise decision given the PR meltdown such cases tend to cause - it then had a choice.

If it ignored the parody site, that could dilute or otherwise weaken its trade mark rights, making it harder to take action against truly problematic infringement in future. However, by sending a "permit-and-proceed" letter, it not only gets some positive PR for taking a pragmatic and humorous approach - it also transforms the parody site from a trademark-diluting independent endeavour into something that is, in effect, licensed by Second Life. This means they can still be seen to have asserted their trade mark rights rather than allowing the parody site to continue without any intervention at all.

A similar position can arise in relation to land, at least under English law. If someone encroaches on your land for a sufficiently long period of time (12+ years) and you do nothing about it one way or another, you can lose your rights in the land (many people living near railway lines have extended their gardens to the edge of the line by these means). However, if you say to the encroacher, "Oh, that's fine, carry on, I don't mind, you have my permission", then that turns it into a licence, and they cannot then claim "adverse possession" against you later.

Lawyers and Sense of Humor?

[JRHelgeson]

Corporations with a sense of humor, and lawyers with common sense? Wow: Second Life really is a fantasy world.