How Kitely responded to infringing content rumors

Fashionistas Island on Kitely, which allegedly infringed copyrights (Image via Fashionistas Island.)

About a week ago, a social media post accused a region on the Kitely grid of distributing infringing content.

Strictly speaking, any infringement complaint needs to be made by the original content creator, through official channels. That wasn’t the case here.

It was a pseudonymous user, DMCA GridSkipper, claiming that the Fashionistas Island had some infringing content — but offered no details about what specifically that content was or whose copyright was being infringed.

“It didn’t even include all the information required by a DMCA, primarily the infringing content was never identified,” Kitely CEO Ilan Tochner told Hypergrid Business. In addition, the person reporting was using a throw-away email address and a brand-new Kitely account.

Despite the lack of concrete information, the grid took action.

“We took the report seriously despite the questionable nature of the reporter’s identity as it really shouldn’t matter who reported it if the content itself was indeed being distributed without a proper license,” said Tochner. “We responded quickly to the possibility that there was infringing content to ensure that if it existed it would be promptly removed from our service.”

Within two hours, the grid set the region access to private, so that only the region owner could visit it, and contacted the region owner. Eventually, the grid took down all the content.

Kitely requires a formal complaint about any content to be done by clicking a Report World link on the world’s World Page, sending an email or internal message, posting the information on the forum or filing a DCMA take down notice on their website copyright notice link.

Some grid owners claim that they cannot remove or limit access to content before receiving a formal complaint from the content author or before being served with a formal DMCA. In fact, that is one of the excuses for infringing content in OpenSim and virtual worlds, in addition to 10 other excuses Maria Korolov wrote about last year.

But grids are increasingly getting more proactive when it comes to protecting creator rights on their platforms.

For example, DigiWorldz recently banned use of Athena Mesh bodies following informal complains on social media forums, even without formal DCMA notice or filing. The grid took the action after confirming with the original author that use of the meshes was violating copyrights.

 

Related Posts

David Kariuki

David Kariuki is a technology journalist who has a wide range of experience reporting about modern technology solutions. A graduate of Kenya's Moi University, he also writes for Cleanleap, and has previously worked for Resources Quarterly and Construction Review. Email him at [email protected].

98 Responses

  1. da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

    thumbs up to kitely

  2. sinann40@yahoo.com' Christine Cochran says:

    Awesome work, Kitely!

  3. Good, another place that had well known SL items. And I see they’ve gone off to a .ru addy now, the same place perhaps as Sassafras went? Good to see these places exposed.

  4. suzandekoning@icloud.com' Suz Blessed says:

    Great Job, hope other grids will follow this example and stop hiding behind excuses!

  5. laughorweep@gmail.com' Philip Rosseter says:

    “Strictly speaking, any infringement complaint needs to be made by the original content creator, through official channels.”

    This is so imprecise as to be misleading. What you mean is that for a complaint to be enforceable under a specific U.S. law, it needs to be made that way. But that shouldn’t be taken to mean that no one else should ever complain in any other way. As you go on to say, something good can happen. Legally, the issue may be between the creator and the infringer, but if the rest of us don’t want to live in a swamp, we may need to act. Naming and shaming can be a step in the right direction.

  6. sacrarium24@gmail.com' WhiteAngel Deed says:

    this is on my resource, see the view of the bailiff

  7. butch.arnold@digiworldz.com' Butch Arnold says:

    Indeed.. Great Job Kitely!

  8. cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

    Yay! It’s ground hog day all over again! We continue to circumvent the legal system. Now all it takes is a fake email address and accuse someone and you react. Phillip outlined the legal process and said it well. However the creators are not filling DMCA’s. They don’t care or they would. However there those who think they are holy and are destined to take maters in their own hands. Screw the legal system, screw the creators if they don’t have the balls to pursue legal proceeding. They have their agenda and my question is who is going to police those who are trying to police content in open sim? Who monitors their scripts that have been taken and modified, selling them as their own? Who verifies their content? Or do we turn a blind eye to them and become puppets?

    Yea pat yourselves on the back, you are acting like vigilantes taking up a cause that again creators don’t want to. You are skirting the law and in the end no better that those who have suspected legal content all base on an email. It will be interesting when someone is taken to court over his you are reacting. Now anyone can make an accusation true or false and cause someone to defend this ghost.

    Congrats on pulling another brick out of the wall, making it weaker. Be proud when it falls and takes innocent people with it!

    • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

      Question: How can some who owns a grid, enforcing their own policies be classed as a vigilante?
      Are you saying If someone stole your car and you hadn’t reported it and I knew it had been stolen that I should not do something about it?
      Wow!

      • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

        How would you know if it was stolen if I had not reported it?

        • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

          ok that your view i disagree leave it that. but one does wonder why you so up in arms about it.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Cause it is the way people are going about it. That’s the problem with the world today. Screw the rules and do as we damn well please.

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            Look at DMCA it doesn’t work how can it when creators cant be bothered with all the legal bs. Butch and Kitely decided they had reasonable grounds to remove the said content. it’s their grids. That’s the way the world works and always has. As I say why are you so up in arms about it?

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            The legal bs is what it is. Change the law. Why am I upset? Cause I know there are people with agendas (not you) and they are taking matters in their own hands. People pushing this are not the legal authority yet people act like they are.

            That’s what pisses me off. It ok cause it’s fun and games. But the same mentality is growing in rl.

            We will agree to disagree. Again my issue is about content, it’s about how grid owners are reacting. It’s all fun and games till it become real. You woukd care if you had to defend yourself off a hidden email.

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            sighs point taken but we both know the legal system nowadays isn’t just, you obviously know butch and he doesn’t do things on a whim or a fancy. This thread does more harm to OS as whole than anything else, Can you see what I’m saying. It is really a dead horse

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Yes I do and I wasn’t going to say anything, but kitely responded based a fake email. Keep in mind those who are pushing this without creators doo g are equally hurting OS. And yes reselling stuff is wrong.

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            ok

          • cinder.roxley@phoenixviewer.com' Cinder Biscuits says:

            The irony here is a sock account getting his panties in a bunch over a fake e-mail address.

        • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

          Hi Lurker,

          Please note that during these two hours we contacted the region owner before we took any other action and were later given a link to the opensimworld page where this activity was being discussed. The feedback the region owner received on that page supported the claim that some unlicensed content was being shared. Most grid owners don’t go around visiting people’s regions to check what content they uploaded and even when they do visit some region they can rarely determine who created what and was that content licensed to be uploaded to their grid. It is therefore very easy for what may be “common knowledge” to some people visiting a particular region to be unknown to the grid owner.

          As we had no concrete proof, we didn’t jump to suspend the user who owned that region but rather asked her to remove any infringing content she may have uploaded into our system. We also asked her to limit access to her region so people wouldn’t be able to copy that content before she finished removing it. She agreed.

          It is unreasonable for you to expect a service provider to continue hosting unlicensed content once it has good reason to believe it has been uploaded to its system. As you may know the protections offered to service providers by the DMCA only hold in US courts. Other countries have other laws governing how a service provider must react when it has gained knowledge of unlicensed content having been uploaded to its servers.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Well outside the us I can understand. It’s not always about the US. If you my posts you see why I’m frustrated. It’s how it comes off and you do have people pushing this for their own agendas.

            I had a creator tell me that she was tired of dealing with people contacting her over suspected content. She is happy with her results in SL and cares less about OS. Nor would she license it here. She basically chewed my backside.

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            I can understand your frustration but we, Kitely, need to follow a combination of both US law (our service runs from a California-based Amazon datacenter) and Israeli law (where our company is registered). It really doesn’t matter who is reporting the copyright abuses to us, we still need to react (but we have different options for how to do so depending on the exact nature of the report).

            In any case, we also need to take into consideration how Kitely Market merchants feel about this issue. They are the ones who provide the content we deliver to the Hypergrid. If they can’t trust our policies for protecting their copyrights, then they’ll stop listing their goods in our marketplace and all the people who buy items from Kitely Market will lose out.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            I think there is a difference between product that is sold in Kitely and product that is not sold in Kitely. The article does not make that distinction. If you have a creator here selling items then they should be protected. That is different than the Athena body which is not sold here. As pointed out it has been modified to work here, but us free. How many are bringing other items in and modifing them an then selling? I see no outrage there and that is happening. Attack the free item and ignore the other.

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            We respond to the reports that we get, we don’t go out looking for infringing content unless someone notifies us of its existence. This isn’t the first time we’ve taken similar actions when people notified us of potential problems without filing a DMCA. People usually only contact us if the region owner didn’t respond to their own requests, so we rarely need to get involved. This time the matter was discussed publicly on our forums and a third-party site, which is why I think it has gained coverage.

            You never hear about the cases where things are handled quietly because they are not publicized.

            In any case, the laws we have to comply with don’t relate just to content sold via our marketplace, they require action for any unlicensed content (on our system) that we are notified about. Following the law is not optional.

      • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

        There surely would be questions why you waited 2 years to take action when it was an open secret that the car was stolen. Is it possible you were benefiting from it during that time and you only now are taking action becasuse now there is new car availabe on the block called Ruth2? Surely it is more than a happy concidence that just after the release of Ruth RC2 some grids get the balls to to take some action. More likely they feel safe that they are not going to be persued for allowing any questionable content to be distributed through them and can now again pander to commercial content creators in doing away with anything of a competitive nature.

        • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

          Nope arial theft is still theft no matter how you look at it.

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            And blatant self serving hypocrisy is still hypocrisy Da.

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            OK so if you knew something was copied from say one of friends, you would say whoopee good stuff?
            Its not about free content its about theft there is till plenty of legitimate free content available.
            Way I see it is both Butch and Kitely acted within their rights on their grids. If people don’t like it they wont go there.
            So why the big song and dance?
            Come on I would like to know what your and Lurkers true motives are, I may be wrong and if I am I apologise but your argument seems to be condoning or at least enabling content theft.
            But I would love to know your true motives

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            I have no hidden motive. I’ve been open about my thoughts. I’m not a distributor of free content. I am clear about the process. That’s my problem sticking their nose in something that not their business. Today is suspected legal content. Where does it go from there?

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            I don’t Know about your country but in mine we look out for each other the govt. isn’t going to and neither is the legal system

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Ha sounds like a vigilante to me 😉

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            no its called being neighbors

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            anyway thanks for both yours and Arielles views
            We are all different and have different ways of viewing things

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            My friends are on Opensim and I will take issues with those who copy and distribute their content if they didn’t wish it to be. Creators on S/L are not my friends. That does not mean it is open season on them but it does mean I would want a greater degree of proof if they were challenging content distributed here as being theirs.

            Why do you get involved in this subject? Are you one of those commercial creators who benefits if free quality content is removed from distribution?

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            nope i get involved because i see someone being proactive about it and they get slammed for doing the “right” thing
            And again it is not about free content read the article it is about stolen content

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Prove what is free and illegal content?

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            butch contacted the original creator butch inspected the product there were enough markers and the comment to strongly indicate it was indeed stolen if the person whom bought it into open sim wishes to challenge butchs decision that is their choice but do you think that is likely

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            And yet the creator did not handle it. Butch chased it down., but we have discussed that before.

            Kitely didn’t even do that. That’s my issue.

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            alledged Da. The creators were not willing to go so far as to assert their rights over it legally…if they even could in many cases simply due to the bodies having a high degree of Opensim intellectual property added to it to make it usable here.

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            that is a good point Arielle, there are indeed some products that have basically been rebuilt from the ground up. And I think it would be difficult to say they are copied, but there are also some items you have to say oh come on
            I mean who owns the rights to a shape or colour

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            But we are not doing that. We are using a broad stoke in addressing this issue.
            Where do you draw the line. See why I get worked up? Is shapes next?

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            Through some of these debates over the past couple years I have done a lot of research into copyright laws past and present. Historically copyright wasnt a moral issue but an economic one. Once an invention or writing was made public, one lost any ability to control what happened to others copying it unless a royal or state decree gave one specific rights to it which was only done to benefit the greater good of the community. Royal decree would at times grant an inventor a monopoly on an invention or writing so they could persue further work to them which in the end would be of even greater benefit to the community. If there was to be no further benefit then it such royal decrees would not be forthcoming as it was in the communities best intersts to be released without encumbrances regardless of any supposed moral or natural rights.

            How that plays out here is that content which has no market here cannot actually be called theft. The creators of S/L who are not willing to make their products available here cannot assert their right to distribution unless they at least file a dmca notice to verify that the content is actually theirs to begin with and they do not wish it to be distributed. There was no such verification so no need for anyone outside of Kitely or Digiworldz to have any qualms with any such content.

          • keacashier@gmail.com' DA Hayward says:

            i don’t know i don’t wear athena, I guess you need to ask Butch that

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Well said. People in OS are bringing product here, modifing it and selling it. No outrage. But a free product modified is banned. Especially when the original creator cares less. If the creator is selling it here then I can see the outrage.

            I don’t have the answer but this is not a black and white issue.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Do you act that way in rl? When you see something you think is stolen. Do you have a friend who copies movies ? Do you call the police? Do you call the movie studio? Same difference right? You have any copied movies or songs?

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            no i don’t have friends to my knowledge who do that

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            What if you did? What would you do?

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            no idea i wouldn’t go running to the police but it doesn’t mean id have the copies in my house either

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            But that’s my point. People are running to grid owners and crying. They tried going to the creators and they don’t care. So they are still going to push their agenda. Yet they would do the same in rl with movie or song. See my frustration?

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            kind of I do, but the more we go on about it the more we harm the spirit of open sim. And I happen to think open sim is a wonderful place to be

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            Opensim is but self serving greed from commercial interests is what is harming that spirit. It needs to be called out for what it is.

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            I disagree
            I might think that about a certain other very very large grid but most I have meet on open sim greed isnt their motive, maybe a couple but not the majority

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            Agreed that the great majority in Opensim are not motivated that way. The very few that are, have been very visible and vocal and are unfortunately trying to spoil the whole batch. It is not the copybot or illegal content that will destroy Opensim but vigilantiasm and witchunting.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            And I like it too. People aren’t going to come here when grids act like Kitely. Granted Butch went the creator, this was not the same.

            But you seem not to accept that our points have some merit.

          • da.tonyhayward@gmail.com' Da Hayward says:

            yes they do
            everyone’s opinion has merit to a certain degree

          • cinder.roxley@phoenixviewer.com' Cinder Biscuits says:

            Seems like the only one crying here is you.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            I’m not crying. I’m just sharing my opinion, whether you agree or not it can be a healthy discussion.

            As DA said. This horse has been beat to death.

          • cinder.roxley@phoenixviewer.com' Cinder Biscuits says:

            Crying and whining for three months and “sharing an opinion” aren’t mutually exclusive, poopsie.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Crying and whining? Is that the best you can do to discredit my opinion? Trust me there are more that have similar opinions but people aren’t going to post knowing that’s going to make them a target of ridicule. Stay classy Cinder! Hugs Ya!

          • cinder.roxley@phoenixviewer.com' Cinder Biscuits says:

            It’s your word, poopsie. lol

  9. cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

    Love the song Thanks!

  10. themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

    Following your comments in this thread i am just thinking where are the limits of the viewers’ options we are all using
    I was looking on Betty’s opensimworld page -as everybody has done i believe- and i see that this picture you are using for your editorial is her property
    You just used a web viewer free to everybody, you right clicked the picture-save as and you received the right by your self to publish it
    She did the same i think if i am not wrong
    Used a free distributed viewer, most possibly right clicked an object and saved it
    What is different than what you did ?

    • lmpierce@alcancemas.com' lmpierce says:

      Maria and David may wish to weigh in on this… The use of images for news and editorial purposes is permitted under copyright law. Similar allowances are made for educational purposes. The main controversy over copyright infringement is the taking of images or content, without express permission by the copyright holder, for personal or commercial use (outside of the exclusions noted above), whether monetized or not. Also note that in virtual worlds, the terms of service may permit the capture of images of places visited for later redistribution. Participants are considered to have permission to share images in such circumstances. Also note that there can be a positive PR value to allowing the capture and display of destinations, therefore even if a copyright is held, the copyright holder may not object to such image distribution.

      • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

        i am not a lawyer to debate on your feedback but i still think that the picture has to have an editorial license
        It would be useful for our general knowledge an expert’s reply
        Still remains the thought about what the free distributed viewers are allowing you to do and what is the ethic to use all options are providing

      • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

        so…if i have a fashion blog, i can copy clothes for editorial purposes ?

        hmmmmm…you see ? is not so easy

        • lmpierce@alcancemas.com' lmpierce says:

          This might help you get started on copyright law. Note that this is U.S. copyright law as the publication of Hypergrid Business is a U.S. enterprise:

          107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use

          Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

          (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

          (2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

          (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

          (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

          The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

          Here is the source URL: https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html

          • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

            it cannot be so simple the rule even in US not to mention Europe…this way i can copy a clothe, wear it, do some pictures and criticize it in my blog …i am still a copybotter …and Mr David is the same using that picture
            i am almost sure you are loosing a detail googling and copying specialists’ fields out of your knowledge

          • lmpierce@alcancemas.com' lmpierce says:

            The link is to the website of the U.S. Copyright Office. You may not have noticed the .gov suffix. I provided that link for you to use to verify your own understanding of U.S. copyright law. I defer to their representations.

          • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

            you can understand i am not a legal specialist and this thread is not serving a lawyer’s thread than a discussion to a free-time gamers that are using a paperwork called quads and tris to simulate various silly meshes that can help our free time in virtual world become more interesting and funny…..my “viewer option subject” is still pending a reply and your “link type” reply is not helping any member of this thread on my thought …if you can highlight the lines that we are discussing about would be helpful
            Thank you for your time spending anyway

          • lmpierce@alcancemas.com' lmpierce says:

            I’ve added as much to this discussion as interests me. Best regards with your concerns.

          • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

            “as interests you” …so modest

          • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

            i would really spend my annual bonus for a 6 months US trip to follow a court about an infringed mini dress shirt paperwork listening the experts and creators explaining the judge about their copyrights in front of an audience

  11. koshari9@gmail.com' Koshari Mahana says:

    As a content creator I wholeheartedly support Kitely’s thorough and quick action. I’ve had a lot of my buildings stolen from several different grids, os and otherwise. It’s not fun, it honestly feels very violating. It’s not so much about the money it’s about respect and when people steal and sell (or give away) creations that were never intended to be free it’s blatant disregard for another human being. Content creators are not imaginary digital avatars, they are real people who have spent hours, days or even months on their creations. For many, it’s their income just like creating paintings, literature or music is for others. It doesn’t matter if it’s digital, it’s still work being done by a person and that person doesn’t deserve to be stolen from and have their names taken off their creations.

    I’m currently having a problem because 2 of my buildings (that I know of) are floating around the metaverse as freebies. I know the name of the person who claims to be the creator and I’ve tried to contact him but he’s not responded. It hurts. I have not taken any formal action as of yet other than to request that the people displaying the items take them down, and they have, they were very nice about it because they had no idea that the person who claimed to be the creator wasn’t actually the creator. Again, it’s not so much about the money, it’s about respect. It feels awful when I go into a free store and see my creations with someone else’s name on them being given away for free.

    Of all the grids I’ve ever been on Kitely is one of the few who show respect for their content creators and I will defend Ilan Tochner to my dying day. I have not found any, not even one of my buildings as a freebie in Kitely. Once someone listed an item of mine on the market, I contacted Ilan, with proof that it was mine (proof is critical) and he promptly contacted the person who listed it and asked that it be removed, which it was. I would never expect a grid owner to remove something without proof. Ilan is fair, he sees all sides and acts accordingly. He doesn’t jump the gun, he investigates. I wish all grid owners were as wonderful and respectful as he is.

    Circling back…
    Now I am trying to find out how to contact the person who is claiming to be the creator of two of my houses and giving them away for free on various grids (again, not on Kitely). But I refuse to name names on a public forum because one never knows how things unfolded and who is actually the thief until they investigate it. If anyone reading this happens to see any of my builds being given away with another creators name on it, please don’t write it online in a forum, please contact me privately so I can look into it personally.

    • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

      99% of the discussions surrounding the copying and distribution of content has been that of S/L creators who do not market here nor can even be bothered to file DMCA’s for it here in Opensim. It has unfortunately detracted attention away from Opensim creators who market here and have also had their products freely distributed. My issue with Ilan, Terry/Butch and Maria is that their public focus has been on content from S/L rather than local creators.
      Personally I would suggest posting a couple pictures of your botted buildings here or Opensim Virtual so we know which buildings they are to either remove them from our inventories should we happen to have them or report to you directly who is distributing them.

      • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

        Hi Arielle,

        I can’t speak for the other people you have issues with but I can tell you that we (at Kitely) treat all copyright violation complaints the same, regardless of where the content was taken from. I really don’t know why you’ve gotten the impression that we focus on content from SL (or from any other source for that matter). If you have a link to any such statement from me then please post it.

        • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

          Ilan, do you feel the a author fairly represented your actions? When I compare your comments I’m not sure it did. Certainly you know if it did.

          I’m still bothere that action was taken based on an email. Because I could submit a complaint without factusl basis and appears you would investigate?

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            Hi Lurker,

            The article is accurate, but missing some information. The complaint was done on the Kitely forums. Following which I contacted the region owner asking her to remove any unlicensed content she may have uploaded into Kitely, both from her world and from her inventory. She replied in the forums that she had done so, but the person who posted the complaint claimed that that world still contained problematic content. I then asked that person for details while asking the region owner to make her world private until she finishes removing all problematic content. She did so at my request (we didn’t have to force this change on our own). You can see this forums thread here:

            https://www.kitely.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4396

            I suggest you pay close attention to the last post I wrote on that thread. It shows that you are commenting here based on a false assumption about what exactly transpired and how we handled it.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            False assumption? Certain the link to your forums gave clarity to the sitaustion. You state you contacted her and asked her to remove illegal content. You do not say you contacted her and asked if she did. By asking her to remove unlicensed content you as making g the assumption she is guilty based this post. That’s how I’d take it if you contacted me inthst manner. And let’s look at the name of the original poster …..DMCA. They are self acclaimed vigilante police seeking out suspected illegal content. Not a creator like the creator that just posted here. This poster validated my position that you people taking matters in their own hands. It’s one thing if a creator bring it to your attention, it another for a random person to make that accusation. Again I could accuse anyone.

            We are going to disagree on how you handle these situations. Again I’m all about support a creators request…. not someone random seeking to take matters in their hands.

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            As I’m quoted in the article, it doesn’t matter who notifies us. If we have a valid reason to believe that there is a problem then we’ll act to resolve it. In this case there wasn’t any concrete information given by the person who posted about the issue so we were left with pointing the region owner to the forums thread and asking her to “remove any unlicensed content she may have uploaded into Kitely” (that is a direct quote of my request). She obviously knew what it was about and, even according to the person who complained, had removed at least part of it before we asked her to restrict access to her region until she finishes removing all such unlicensed content.

            You seem to care more about the process than about the fact that unlicensed content was actually present and removed.

            Why do you think it is okay for unlicensed content to be distributed until the content creator takes action to remove it?

            An injustice is an injustice even if no one complains about it. Pointing fingers at people who try to stop it from continuing and stating that only the victims have a right to complain and that until they do no one should take action is NOT supporting the victims (content creators in this case). I suggest you take a step back and evaluate the morality of what you’re preaching.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            There are process in place to deal with illegal content. Filling DMCA the legal tool to use. It’s the law ! I’m not for illegal content but in how it is handled. Do I don’t need to evaluate my morality. Theft is theft. But you are innocent till proven guilty, or I thought so. Wait till you are sued for violating due process based on claims that may not be factual. We are a society of laws and procedures. Maybe I should sign and start throwing around accusations so you can investigate those who mod stolen property and sell it as their own. Big well known names

            I have right to my opinion and I’m sorry you don’t like it. I love when people talk about morality here do they practice that in rl? ( Not saying you) I’d bet we all have friends In who have copied songs or movies and I’d equally bet people don’t run to the owners or police about it. There are DMCA’s that are filled

            There’s a witch hunt going on and if your willing to allow that to happen then you help weaken our legal system.

            You run a good grid. I’m sure you are good guy and want to the right thing. All I advocate is let the process be handled by the creators and their request the like lady did here. That is the right way not someone names DMCA Gridskipper.

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            Filling a DMCA takedown notice forces a service provider to act in certain manner or risk losing its safe harbor protection in the US (other countries have different laws). But that isn’t the only way a service provider can be informed of illegal activities on its site (even in the US). A service provider needs to act to takedown such content when it becomes aware of its existence or risk losing DMCA safe harbor protection.

            “To qualify for the § 512(c) safe harbor, the OSP must not have actual knowledge that it is hosting infringing material or be aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent. It is clear from the statute and legislative history that an OSP has no duty to monitor its service or affirmatively seek infringing material on its system.[12] However, the statute describes two ways in which an OSP can be put on notice of infringing material on its system: 1) notice from the copyright owner, known as notice and take down, and 2) the existence of “red flags.””

            See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infringement_Liability_Limitation_Act

            Getting a detailed report from a user can be a red flag. Getting an unspecified report, as had been the case this time, can’t result in removal of content as we had no direct knowledge of what that infringing content was. But prudence dictated we contact the world owner and notify her of the report and ask her that if any infringing content was uploaded that it be removed. Acting otherwise would have been negligent on our part and could have potentially removed our DMCA safe harbor protection.

          • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

            Understandably you have things you have to comply with. I respect that, but when people present no factual information I feel there is no do process for the grid owner. Maybe you have to act the way you did, but that does make it right per say

            It’s complex as what is it isn’t illegal content. Hard to prove.

            Anyway thanks for your clarification.

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            Thank you Lurker.

            We do our best to follow the laws that regulate our company’s actions given the location of our servers (California, US) and the country where our company is registered (Israel). We could debate whether they should be changed, but until they are those are the laws we’ll follow.

          • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

            Filling DMCA by whom ?

            Filling DMCA by IKEA that is a RL business and follows international fiscal and commercial laws in case an OS creator is profiling their furniture using them as background image in a 3D software is one story

            Filling DMCA by a called creator in a game that is not a RL business, is not issuing any invoice, not applying VAT, not regulated by any competition council for market share violations, not offering any valid warranties, using an exchange that is not regulated by any central bank is a ghost story that can only remain as a discussion in your virtual invented courts

          • themakedonian@gmail.com' cuore spezzato says:

            Copy text (i replied to Lurker by mistake)

            Filling DMCA by whom ?

            Filling DMCA by IKEA that is a RL business and follows international fiscal and commercial laws in case an OS creator is profiling their furniture using them as background image in a 3D software is one story

            Filling DMCA by a called creator in a game that is not a RL business, is not issuing any invoice, not applying VAT, not regulated by any competition council for market share violations, not offering any valid warranties, using an exchange that is not regulated by any central bank is a ghost story that can only remain as a discussion in your virtual invented courts

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            A DMCA takedown notice has to be filed by the copyright holder but a red flag can be raised by anyone or anything.

            Kitely is a real business that pays taxes, it is regulated by Israeli and US laws (including DMCA as our servers are hosted in California). We are the ones that are held accountable for hosting unlicensed content if we do not take action to remove it from our system once we become aware of its existence. The aforementioned quote demonstrates that we do not need to receive a DMCA request for that to be the case.

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            Wagging
            fingers at people who try to stop it from continuing and stating that
            only the victims have a right to complain and that until they do no one
            should take action is NOT supporting the victims (the content creators
            in this case). I suggest you take a step back and evaluate the morality
            of what you’re preaching.

            Some of us are getting the distinct impression that the ones complaining about the S/L content are doing so to get rid of competitive content rather than out of any sense of morality about victimized S/L creators. I have noted with interest lately that the most vocal ones have nothing to say when it is an Opensim creator that has had content botted and distributed. One would think that when it is one of ours, they would be that much more vocal than ‘victimized’ creators on another grid.

            The S/L creators whose content is being distributed really cannot be termed victims anyway when 1. they don’t market here and 2. they have likely netted 10’s if not 100’s of thousands of Lindens from Opensim people buying their products in S/L after having had the opportunity to demo them here in Opensim. Another thing, it had to have taken a lot of time and trouble to specifically name all that content with the correct product names and creators because it doesn’t come out like that naturally. Maybe it is a snub of the nose at S/L creators, maybe it is a message to Opensim people where to find it in S/L or maybe it is the largest demo release ever with the covert blessings of the original creators.

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            The thing is, Arielle, that the law doesn’t make a distinction regarding how many people had already bought the content, where that content originated, or why the person reporting it had done so. The service provider, i.e. us in this case, still needs to make sure that it doesn’t continue hosting infringing content once it is notified about it. So, while I have no way to know whether or not your suspicions are founded, it really doesn’t matter. People shouldn’t share/sell other people’s content without their permission, regardless of who the creators are.

        • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

          The point is that you are treating all content the same llan. Neither the laws nor the original S/L creator required or even asked you to deal with the content at Fashionestas in the manner you did. You really have no idea if it even is a copyright violation in the strict sense of the term because you don’t have specific legal notification from the original creator as to the status of the content in Opensim. Copyright violation complaints are supposed to be only from the proven content creator to prevent abuse of the takedowns and give both parties the opportunity to address the alledged infringing issue with each other. Suspensions and terminations of accounts in no way should be because some heckling trolls who at best are trying to take down competing content.

          • ilan@kitely.com' Ilan Tochner says:

            When we become aware of suspected copyright violation (without getting an official DMCA takedown request) we contact the person who has that content rezzed in their world and ask them whether they have a license from its creator to use it in Kitely. Almost always they don’t and they just remove the content themselves. If they say they do then we get back to the person who reported the issue for additional information.

            As for Kitely Market product listings, when we receive information that makes us believe that a product listing includes content that was made by a third party, we request the merchant verify that they have an explicit license from the creator to sell that content in Kitely Market. Assuming that they do, we then require them to add a line to their product listing that explicitly names that creator and states that the product is sold in Kitely Market with their permission.

            In this particular case, we didn’t receive a DMCA takedown request and we weren’t provided with sufficient information to warrant the removal of any content ourselves. We contacted the region owner, pointed her to the accusations that were made on our forums, and she removed the content she knew or suspected was what that forums post referred to. Lacking concrete proof of Kitely TOS violations on her part, we didn’t suspend her account. Her Kitely account is still active.

          • arielle.popstar@gmail.com' Arielle says:

            What you are saying here in the post certainly sounds like the correct method of dealing with it up to the point it went. The article itself seems confused as to what happened so hopefully the author will read your post and correct the article so as to not confuse or worse, mislead future readers.

            I also will apologize here for implicating you as having a bias towards the S/L content. I lumped you in with some Kitely residents who do and jumped to a conclsion.

      • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

        I agree. I wish I knew which buildings you were talking about.

      • koshari9@gmail.com' Koshari Mahana says:

        *(I dont’ know if these photos will go through or if they will be marked as spam because they have a url)

        These are the two I’ve recently found for free floating around the hypergrid. It’s impossible to say where they were copied from because I have had them for sale in several os grids, InWorldz and in SL. They may not have even been copied from a place where I have them displayed, they could have been copied from a person who purchased them legitimately and actually lives in them. Because the creators name has been changed it’s apparent that they found a way to download them to their computer and upload them again, fully textured.

        I can only think now that there is probably no way to get them off the freebie market entirely, especially if they have been put out with full perms (I always have them set as copy/mod).

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/4d88508eea41b8d58b516feb19c38e53ab56baef76e9926da1b530ba8a6f1105.png

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8d0c0d82eb52f41767775d69fb32f8e0063a6d9fa650bf0e6fecd164af215f80.png

        • koshari9@gmail.com' Koshari Mahana says:

          Again, if anyone finds them please don’t post it on the public forum, just contact me privately so that we can avoid publicly accusing a person that might actually be innocent. I’m in search under Koshari Mahana in Kitely.

        • lmpierce@alcancemas.com' lmpierce says:

          Hi Koshari,

          Just FYI, images like the ones you’ve posted usually go through, whereas embedded URLs are briefly withheld for moderation (buy not necessarily considered spam) until I can get to the moderation panel. Spam filtering is an automatic system by Disqus – I do not initiate spam withholding, although I can review anything held as spam and decide to approve it. I cannot say exactly how Disqus decides which posts are spam, but it does a pretty good job. Having said that, it did erroneously withhold one of your recent posts, which I’ve just approved, and I cannot tell you why it did that. BTW, if I know someone is posting content, as you have done, I tend to keep an eye out in case future posts are withheld. Please remember, however, that I’m not at the keyboard 24/7 so sometimes there’s a delay.

          Finally, if something you post isn’t appearing and it should, please email me at: [email protected]

    • cptyk9t2@aol.com' Lurker says:

      Thanks for your post and I’m sincerely sorry you having to fight this battle. Am I correct in assuming you are building and selling in OS? I do support you as a creator taking action and working with grids to address those who stole your work. This is how this process should work, with you taking action and notifying grids. As you can read I’ve taken issue when that hasn’t happened and grids have taken actions without direction from the creator.

      Again I don’t support distribution of know stolen product being sold here. I hope you get resolution to this.

  12. fredafrostbite@gmail.com' Freda Frostbite says:

    I just want to say I have absolutely no doubt that Kitely handled this matter appropriately. I visited Fashionista very soon after its opening was announced. There was not a single item there that I did not recognize from SL and none of it was being marketed on Fashionista by the original merchants. Some of the items were so recently copybotted that their names were not even changed from the names they are listed under by their real creators in SL. Some of them even named the original creators in the name of the object. I do not know if the owners of Fashionista knew that the items they were giving away were not opensource. I really don’t know that and so won’t accuse them of doing the copybotting themselves, but I do know the items were not rightfully theirs to give away or opensource for all to share. Kitely did what should be done in a case like that.