Slashdot Mirror
Second Life Tries To Backpedal On the GPL
GigsVT writes "The Second Life viewer has been available under the GPL for three years. Linden Lab, the maker of Second Life, recently released a 'third party viewer' policy that all but erases the freedoms granted under the GPL. It includes such draconian measures as 'You agree to update or delete at our request any data that you have received from Second Life or our servers and systems using a Third-Party Viewer,' 'You must not mask IP or MAC addresses' (reported to the server), 'you must have a published privacy policy explaining your practices regarding user data,' and 'You acknowledge and agree that we may require you to stop using or distributing a Third-Party Viewer for accessing Second Life if we determine that there is a violation.'"
These restrictions only apply if you want to list the viewer on Linden Lab's third party viewer listing on secondlife.com. You can still connect to Secondlife with any client you wish.
things like second life make me afraid the movie idiocracy will come true...
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The items mentioned in the policy have NOTHING to do with the freedoms granted under the GPL. Draconican EULAs are par for the course in the online gaming world.
Read the last line before the Table of Contents: "If you do not comply, you are not allowed to use Second Life through a Third-Party Viewer, and in severe cases Linden Lab may terminate your access to Second Life entirely."
While I don't think what they're doing is good or smart, I suspect this would really only affect the GPLed clients accessing the Second Life servers run by Linden Labs and not client use on any private servers that are running. And Linden does have the right to manage the data they store on their servers as they see fit.
The beauty of the GPLed client is that users and developers can choose which servers to point their clients at--and pick the ones that have terms they agree wtih.
The plain jane SL viewer is sooo bland.
This kitty's sharpening his claws!
>'You must not mask IP or MAC addresses' (reported to the server),
Any bets that this has been driven by griefers more than anything else?
What do these restrictions have to do with the GPL?
How are they backpedalling?
Linden Labs is protecting their side of things which may impair on some people's ability to do other things!
What horrors will they unleash next?
Seriously though, not all of the policies are inherently bad. Some even have reasonable logic behind them.
That's just not true. You have all the rights granted under the GPL. What you can't do is connect to their servers with a client that doesn't conform to their policies. That conforms to the GPL, and they don't have any choice in the matter anyway: people use modified SL viewers to grief and spam, and that's basically what they are trying to prohibit.
Even if you couldn't connect to their servers with a modified client at all, it would still be useful: Linden Labs also open sourced the server. So, if you like, you can connect with your client to your server, or anybody else's server who allows it.
Linden Labs didn't have to open source anything; they did the enlightened thing and open sourced both their client and their server code. One of the most popular viewer is now an open source viewer, with many more functions than their original viewer. And the grid of non-Linden Labs servers will probably grow to be bigger than their own, money-making grid some time this year or next year.
And everything to do with the terms of service for access to their game servers. Feel free to make any changes you want to the client. But if you break their terms of service they won't let you connect. Sounds fair to me.
# (/.);;
- : float -> float -> float =
Linden Labs has not "backpedaled" on the GPL in any sense at all.
Linden generously donated a lot of code to GPL developers. They never promised to grant unlimited access to their servers.
There is really no cause for whining here. The community should be grateful to these guys.
From the policy:
This Policy governs access to Second Life and our technical platform that supports Second Life by any Third-Party Viewer or any third-party software client that logs into our servers.
I don't know about "erases all the freedoms granted under the GPL". You can do whatever you want with the code. *Whatever* you want. You just gotta follow their rules if you actually interact with *their* servers.
Also, 'you must have a published privacy policy explaining your practices regarding user data' is draconian? Really?
No trespassing. Violators will be shot. Survivors will be shot again.
There are people still on Second Life? The intersection of AOL and MySpace users I would hazard to guess! :-)
[Slashdot Comments We Liked]
i think it would be much much more draconian to not actively support and enable third party viewers at all...
So they release the source to their client and server under the GPL, and you're trying to claim that they're "back pedaling" on it because they want there to be a standard on the clients that connect to the servers they own and operate?
Get real! This is the type of whiny bullshit that gives people a bad impression of the GPL. The alternative is LL just kept everything close sourced. What you advocate here is a Wild West scenario where LL would be subject to any type of client being able to access their servers.
Given the submitter of this dreck, I'm not surprised...
This is a Term of Service addendum for third party viewers which connect to Linden Labs Second Life grids, it has nothing to do with the code itself, you can still use it on someone elses services if it does not comply. Typical kdawson FUD.
They need to do this because so much happens on the client side.
.NET code, you can change avatar scan distances and avatars in a scene, so with an individuals viewing distance also increased we see gross increases in bandwidth at the server side.
With the SL viewer and the Linden Lab servers, the relationship is somewhat like HTML javascript form verification with some but not complete server input cleansing. They have been expanding input checking at the server side but it is lagging behind.
If I could use a simplified example: The server sends to the viewer all avatars in a scene. A scene is a viewable distance which is 64 meters to 512 meters governed by the slider in your graphics preferences. The avatar scanner distance is hard-coded to a max of 16 avatars in the viewer. The scanner distance default is 96m. But some minor fiddling in the
Moving from that to the buzzwords of DRM and copyright laws(DMCA etc), the server sends the hash keys to the viewer of server assets(textures etc). It is somewhat trivial to match these keys to what it in RAM in form of a texture.
Simply put the Second Life viewer can be modified to be an indexer of Digital Works created by both Linden Labs and users.
This means LL has lost control of content, and it is content that gives Second Life a competitive advantage in 3D perpetual world games.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
They aren't backpedaling on the GPL at all. The code is still GPLed, and you can use it however you want, according to that license.
They do limit your ability to access their servers, and to list you in their pages as a recognized 3rd-party viewer - they have certain requirements for both, and they have now clarified those requirements. But that has nothing to do with the GPL, it's an entirely separate issue.
tl;dr: It's like Wordpress (the software) is GPLed, but Wordpress.com (the website with hosted blogs) won't let you write a blog on their website that links to malware etc.
This is like saying that Firefox is backpeddling on open source because Mozilla.org is free to block you if you spam their forums.
However, I hear that because of the new policy, Emerald is closing shop. Anything that gets rid of those "giving access to our change history would mean someone could release binaries of our changes before we do!!" assholes is a good thing.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
The reason LL is doing this, is because of all the content theft. Since they opensource the client, its not to hard for someone to take a really nice designed fully functioning castle, and copy it, and with the built in micro payment system sell it themselves. While, I have always had the philosophy, everything on the web is capable, and it has survived just fine, there is a lot of people up in arms over this, and LL is trying to stop that from happening, which sadly, they won't be able to do really.
Second Life has become more than a game. It is now a platform. With OpenSim several other grids have popped up. I even run one at home myself. Some of the more advanced clients even allow you to surf from one grid to another (IE my box at home to OSGrid). This opens the door to a future 3d based web. I know.. you laugh.. I would to.. if I didn't know all the details.. There is lots of things going on with the platform. Its being used for education & collaboration in grids like reactionGrid. Microsoft doesn't even host there sim with Linden Labs anymore, they host on a 3rd party grid.
I am the first to admit that the interface, scripting language, and Linden Labs, sucks! But those things are slowly changing. Within the next couple months you will be able to script in C#, and they are introducing client side scripting. Today they release a new client that allows you to bring the web into the 3d world (Even flash) and it works GREAT!
i guess that eliminates all their directly connected ethernet customers...
signatures are for fools with hands
Very interesting
Having lived in SL for more than 3 years this comes as no surprise. There were team of people writing viewers specifically for griefing and IP theft. As a example there was a viewer that had a "crash server button" and as such I do believe that this policy is well over due. https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/community/blog/2010/02/23/introducing-a-new-third-party-viewer-directory-and-policy
The only slightly dubious thing is that they do seem to want to restrict distribution of clients that could connect to their servers, even if they could also be used in other ways.
This part was "slightly dubious?"
You acknowledge and agree that we may require you to stop using or distributing a Third-Party Viewer for accessing Second Life if we determine that there is a violation.
This is exactly an attempt to erase the freedoms granted under the GPL.
I think the problem and the reason nobody seems to get the problem is that the story submitter, GigsVT, wanted to include more excerpts than just the worst one, and the worst one was the one that deserved the most scathing criticism, and the most scathing criticism is what got the headline. Imagine that.
So what do we have here? Let's see:
It's confusing when there's more than one thing, and all of those things are not the exact same thing, isn't it?
Mod parent down.
Also...
You must not mask IP or MAC addresses (reported to the server)
This is like DRM: It only negatively affects those who want to conform to the rules, and does nothing to stifle those it calls attention to. The worst part is that "mask" is a completely informal term.
Changing your MAC address is routine networking for many people whose network admins tie their access credentials to their MAC addresses.
Someone might want to protect their privacy while cybersexing (snicker) or someone may even want to leak important information to the public using Second Life (I do have a fantasy to modify the open source Quake 3 engine to trickle out a stream of data out in the least significant bits of player movement. Can you imagine the Chinese trying to figure that one out?)
These aren't just obscure corner cases or open source zealotry, these are things I personally expect to have from open source software. I switched from AOL instant messenger to an open source IM client because I wanted an IM client I could retrofit with my own crude privacy software. Years later I am using sophisticated OTR, and I have TOR at my disposal if I feel the need to "mask" my IP. I realize this isn't a GPL violation, but distributing the client under the GPL and then telling me I can't protect my privacy (while not violating any other terms of service, mind you; remember this anti-"masking" restriction is only something that affects people who want to obey the rules, not those who wish to cheat them) is a bit like giving me an "open source cellular handset" and then telling me exactly what audio codec I'm allowed to use for voice conversations so spy software can analyze my calls for content, you know, unless I build my own cellular network.
nothing to see here, move along
So they don't want you lying about who you are, seems reasonable enough, and hardly qualifies as draconian.
They want to know what you're doing with user data, presumably to make sure there's no privacy invading bullshit going on [...]
Wait, I'm confused, is stripping away privacy reasonable or privacy invading bullshit, now? Or does it depend which viewpoint most supports your argument at the time?
Unfortunately, no. The sources can no longer be licensed under GPL, because Linden's new policy conflicts with GPLv2's clause 6:
"You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein."
This is literal wording taken from the GPLv2 license, and is further reinforced in the GPLv2 FAQ.
Linden Lab is imposing massive further restrictions on developer recipients of their code, making it completely impossible for them to distribute the code without accepting those restrictions. This restriction of the ability to distribute code is not permitted by the GPL (of any version).
GPL cannot be used to grant fewer freedoms than the GPL specifies. That's a core term of the license.
The freedom to develop and distribute cannot be impeded while you license under the GPL.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
> any third-party software client that logs into our servers
That is the same as DRM. This is what the GPL wanted to prevent with software that uses any 'media' that tries to enforce rights on the software being used. It doesn't matter if that media is the hardware or a server.
I've detailed the issue in a prior post.
The GPL is no longer available to developers of Second Life clients, because Linden Lab has added new restrictions on a developer's freedom to develop and distribute, and those restrictions are not GPL-compliant.
Lindens have to choose one, either GPL licensing, or removing the developer restrictions on developers given in the document linked from the Slashdot summary. They can't have both simultaneously, the GPL doesn't allow it.
Don't confuse this with Linden's right to dictate the terms of their service, which they of course have. The conflict with the GPL is not in their restrictions on the USAGE of a modified client, but in their imposing restrictions on the freedom to develop and distribute it.
The GPL doesn't care about usage, it is only concerned with the freedom to develop and distribute.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Unofficial_Licensing_FAQ (This page was last modified on 12 January 2009)
then they're idiots.
The problem is that yes, people in general ARE idiots. Why? Because we accommodate idiots. If we would stop catering to people who can't be bothered to learn to read, to learn to use a computer, to learn to walk and chew gum at the same time, then they will do one of two things. Either they will finally get enough rope and hang themselves through their stupidity (thus removing themselves from the gene pool), or they will wake up and say, "Hey! I need to learn some things if I'm going to survive!"
Years later I am using sophisticated OTR, and I have TOR at my disposal if I feel the need to "mask" my IP.
It's funny you should mention OTR. One of the more popular third-party viewers for Second Life encrypts IMs with OTR, and the people running Second Life aren't happy with this at all because it interferes with their ability to monitor IMs. (Seriously - they have real time monitoring of IMs and in-world chat to try and catch troublemakers, or at least did.)
There is another angle to this that wasn't realized earlier.
This new policy makes Second Life incompatible with CC-SA and GPLed content within the world as well.
It places a new restriction on the export of content that is incompatible with the terms of CC-SA and GPL.
"You must not use or provide any functionality that Linden Lab’s viewers do not have for exporting content from Second Life unless the functionality verifies that the content to be exported was created by the Second Life user who is using the Third-Party Viewer."
So you can only export what you have uploaded, not what you have received from someone else. This makes Secondlife incompatible with GPL and CC-SA content within the world.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Don't confuse this with Linden's right to dictate the terms of their service, which they of course have. The conflict with the GPL is not in their restrictions on the USAGE of a modified client, but in their imposing restrictions on the freedom to develop and distribute it.
The Third Party Viewer restrictions only apply to users of the service. If you never use Linden Labs' service, you aren't bound by them.
The GPL is no longer available to developers of Second Life clients, because Linden Lab has added new restrictions on a developer's freedom to develop and distribute,
They have done no such thing. The have restricted the freedoms of people who access the service under the TOS. If you never access their service, you aren't bound by the TPV restrictions.
You can easily see that in Section 8 of TPV: if you violate the Third Party Viewer policy, you don't lose the rights to the source code (which would be the GPL remedy), you lose the right to access the service.
That's only relevant if the further restrictions are part of the Copyright of the code. I haven't extensively investigated this case, but that doesn't sound like what's going on here. The code is still GPL'ed and you're still allowed to use it according to the GPL's guaranteed rights. HOWEVER, anyone connecting to Lindon servers (GPL'ed code or some custom proprietary code) is subject to the terms of service placed on the users of their servers. So this is an EULA agreement issue, not a Copyright one.
E pluribus unum
*shrug* not really - the developers can still make their code as they see fit, they just can't use it to connect to Linden Labs servers. They are free to host their own though.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
This sound like some "special" consultant, with no clue about GPL is giving advise.
A job I worked had one come in and screw things up royally in the same manner with no clue about the contracts or legal ramifications involved and as a bonus he installed cracked software on the company computers and fired randomly employees with brains enough to keep the company afloat, before skipping off with the money and right before the private investigator produced evidence he was a charlatan.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
"This is exactly an attempt to erase the freedoms granted under the GPL."
"One egregious attempt to retroactively take back rights expressly provided to you by the distribution terms of the Second Life viewer."
Where does the GPL grant the freedom to violate terms of service? Distribution terms are not rights to violate terms of service.
"Changing your MAC address is routine networking for many people whose network admins tie their access credentials to their MAC addresses.
Someone might want to protect their privacy while cybersexing (snicker) or someone may even want to leak important information to the public using Second Life (I do have a fantasy to modify the open source Quake 3 engine to trickle out a stream of data out in the least significant bits of player movement. Can you imagine the Chinese trying to figure that one out?)"
How does the GPL authorize you to do these things?
"These aren't just obscure corner cases or open source zealotry, these are things I personally expect to have from open source software."
Who cares what you expect? Open source doesn't promise any of that.
"I realize this isn't a GPL violation, but distributing the client under the GPL and then telling me I can't protect my privacy..."
The client is distributed under the GPL, the service isn't.
"...is a bit like giving me an "open source cellular handset" and then telling me exactly what audio codec I'm allowed to use for voice conversations so spy software can analyze my calls for content, you know, unless I build my own cellular network."
As open source advocates are fond of saying when it suits them, if you don't like it then don't use it. You can always write your own.
One can argue that their approach may not be the best one, but it's within their right to take that approach.
Since my video card wasn't blessed by the Second Life gods as good enough, my only experience with it was somewhere between terrible and horrible. Linden can take it's virtual world and flush it down the toilet (real or virtual) as far as I care. I'm glad I didn't invest much of what little time we have on this earth to a fake one.
There's a huge difference between what you're talking about, and getting listed in some directory.
Furries make the internet go.
This post is somewhat inaccurate; Linden Lab has not open sourced the Second Life server. There is, however, an open source project called OpenSim that is developing a server that implements the Second Life protocols and which can be used with an SL viewer. The restrictions that Linden Lab has announced actually sound reasonable to me. Basically they're saying that you can't break the system, you can't mask your identity (which would make it impossible for them to enforce bans), and if you steal content they can ask you to delete it. The devil will be in the details; now that they are starting up a program of approved third party viewers, will they approve them in a timely manner? Will they approve all viewers that comply with the reasonable restrictions announced so far, or will they ban viewers for other reasons? Time will tell.
The summary discusses some extra problems surrounding the new Second Life policy, but the poster should really have pointed out something much more fundamental first:
The new policy is no longer compliant with GPLv2 clause 6. Lindens can no longer use GPL at all.
Losing their previous GPLv2 compliance is clearly major back pedaling. (What's more, they've totally closed the source of their main viewer, which was previously GPLv2, but that's a separate issue.)
What they released previously as GPL cannot of course have its GPL license revoked, but they're trying to undo even the GPL rights on the old code, because their new terms cover all developers of Second Life Viewers without limitation.
Access to their servers is irrelevant to this new anti-GPL problem, by the way. Whether GPL code can be used for access is of no concern to the GPL, but what they've done is to impose restrictions on development and distribution of GPL code, not just restrictions on access.
It's a very bad situation.
And I haven't even mentioned that the new rules are incompatible with the GPL's "NO WARRANTY" clause either. What a mess.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
No