Return-Path: X-Original-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: mmox@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7568428C280 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:56:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.879 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.097, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x8Qsprc4pW+O for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:56:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-fx0-f176.google.com (mail-fx0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF7F28C1DE for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:56:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by fxm24 with SMTP id 24so346396fxm.37 for ; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:57:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jVNJRoZZC0UbNxctdta04iYQz/zy55NMDoTp4d86LyA=; b=vnqwUE9HFvB3kIkrKftPAXz/UeCaBh7bNRYIDnD1u7knEg4Kn3j/sdpbhtkZxwk0YS mjfcv2YkiihsWL3/TU04pp2fhplyM8Vw8sEMGRYOvGwE6nITFuF/+NbYcLhlGPGOM+SD XxJbB9Jug1Zb1BkvVewOsDeSFIIsa4WnN7XYQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=NSniAqNC3zvJSCRxFabzLeajVeqp+NncvKKd4fe3KWvg058yKrwbwl9PiR+5yPfN14 4Eu0zELusdAm/aZVewNic64KNrBWoBgC+/OFHuzVe/OnOSr1QKFJAILnxl9+FwP0qvQi fVuruusJVXSu/JT0ZzQ0rWpg4PxtRa/SOep/k= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.181.37.6 with SMTP id p6mr347553bkj.29.1235631434820; Wed, 25 Feb 2009 22:57:14 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <27a487810902241253v1f2c5b82q9dac1cd39e34ec07@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 06:57:14 +0000 Message-ID: From: Morgaine To: William George Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5b387beebe60463ccdc4b Cc: mmox@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mmox] Time to rethink the commercial angle X-BeenThere: mmox@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Massively Multi-participant Online Games and Applications List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 06:56:56 -0000 --001636c5b387beebe60463ccdc4b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I need to correct something on my previous post: On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Morgaine wrote: > > Since the free and open grids have assets that are either public domain or > licensed under free-distribution licenses like GPL, BSD, CC and others, it > makes no sense whatsoever to hold back interop between such open worlds just > because the proprietary worlds can't get their act together. > > Fortunately, they're not being held back in the slightest. ;-) > I should qualify my last line slightly. The open worlds are not being held back for interop *among themselves*. However, they are being held back currently by the fact that items created on proprietary worlds *without any kind of encumbrances* ("full perm" in SL terminology) cannot be marked as "interoperable" by their creators, and hence cannot currently be released to open grids despite this being their author's desire. This is a failure of proprietary grids or worlds to put their interop money where their mouth is, given that there are no rights, permissions nor licensing barriers to permitting this. That's a pity, and it's not specific to SL. Morgaine. On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Morgaine wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 8:53 PM, William George > wrote: > > In order to sidestep some of the thorny (and circular) discussions on >> property rights, as well as the petty technical arguments backed by >> "customer interests", I propose that only worlds with free access and only >> unencumbered objects be allowed to interoperate, at least to start. >> > > > The word "allowed" isn't appropriate since there is no permission required > to distribute unencumbered objects nor to interoperate. > > Apart from that though, the spirit and promise and viability of what you > envisage is clear. The future of open grids is unbounded, simply because > unencumbered object exchange is unhampered by any constraints except > computer resources, and enthusiasm in the open community probably exceeds > the known physical constraints of teh universe. ;-) > > Since the free and open grids have assets that are either public domain or > licensed under free-distribution licenses like GPL, BSD, CC and others, it > makes no sense whatsoever to hold back interop between such open worlds just > because the proprietary worlds can't get their act together. > > Fortunately, they're not being held back in the slightest. ;-) > > Morgaine. > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 8:53 PM, William George > wrote: > >> In order to sidestep some of the thorny (and circular) discussions on >> property rights, as well as the petty technical arguments backed by >> "customer interests", I propose that only worlds with free access and only >> unencumbered objects be allowed to interoperate, at least to start. >> >> The commercial objectives are taking up too much of _my_ limited >> bandwidth. >> >> Remember when the internet did not have any commercial interests? This was >> up until 1994, not really that long ago. >> >> Waka >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mmox mailing list >> mmox@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox >> >> > --001636c5b387beebe60463ccdc4b Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I need to correct something on my previous post:=

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.c= om> wrote:
=A0
Since= the free and open grids have assets that are either public domain or licensed under free-distribution licenses like GPL, BSD, CC and others, it makes no sense whatsoever to hold back interop between such open worlds just because the proprietary worlds can't get their act together.
=A0
Fortunately, they're not being held back in the slightest. ;-)=
=A0

I should qualif= y my last line slightly.=A0=A0 The open worlds are not being held back for = interop among themselves.

However, they are being held back currently by the fact that items crea= ted on proprietary worlds without any kind of encumbrances ("fu= ll perm" in SL terminology) cannot be marked as "interoperable&qu= ot; by their creators, and hence cannot currently be released to open grids= despite this being their author's desire.

This is a failure of proprietary grids or worlds to put the= ir interop money where their mouth is, given that there are no rights, perm= issions nor licensing barriers to permitting this.=A0 That's a pity, an= d it's not specific to SL.

Morgaine.







On = Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Morgaine <morgaine.dinova@googlemail.com><= /span> wrote:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 8:53 PM, William George <= wjgeorge@dce= o.rutgers.edu> wrote:

In order to sidestep some of the thorny (and circular) discussions on property rights, as well as the petty technical arguments backed by "customer interests", I propose that only worlds with free access= and only unencumbered objects be allowed to interoperate, at least to start.


The word "allowed" isn't appr= opriate since there is no permission required to distribute unencumbered ob= jects nor to interoperate.

Apart from that though, the spirit and pr= omise and viability of what you envisage is clear.=A0 The future of open gr= ids is unbounded, simply because unencumbered object exchange is unhampered= by any constraints except computer resources, and enthusiasm in the open c= ommunity probably exceeds the known physical constraints of teh universe. ;= -)

Since the free and open grids have assets that are either public domain= or licensed under free-distribution licenses like GPL, BSD, CC and others,= it makes no sense whatsoever to hold back interop between such open worlds= just because the proprietary worlds can't get their act together.
=A0
Fortunately, they're not being held back in the slightest. ;-)=

Morgaine.






On Tue, F= eb 24, 2009 at 8:53 PM, William George <wjgeorge@dceo.rutgers.edu<= /a>> wrote:
_____________________________________= __________
mmox mailing list
mmox@ietf.org
ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmox



--001636c5b387beebe60463ccdc4b--