[-empyre-] Re: // Second Life: Who's art is it anyway? //

[h w]

Could be that Second Life's public space isn't  "in" SL itself if (i  
agree with Julian) it's an administrative gamespace, so everything you
  
'make' in SL is SL bound.  But how about a public space of
risk and ambiguity at its edge or threshold, as it were, its  
passage=moment.   I mean, at the laptops in real space / place where  
subjects are flicking in and out of it?  If you make a film from SL  
and put it on you-tube? (like 'China Tracey" did
 http://hk.youtube.com/watch?v=5vcR7OkzHkI&mode=related&search=&v3

================================================

Julian covered that (emphasis mine):

> you're allowed to take photos of it, 

>***even make derivative works***,
 
>but the island itself will always be the fixed home of the original.


Making a film of it be like "allowed to take photos" and "make
derivative works".

Frankly, I agree with Julian, and would take his point further: since
this is posing as a "public" space, there is a great deal of data
imbricated into its development and performance. Obviously, if
Microsoft or Fox News or GE simply bought SL right up, residents would
get upset... However, now that the SL protocol has been reverse
engineered, it only makes sense that there would be incentive for
corporate interests to set themselves as interstitial portals, or
Windows, on SL that provide "enhanced abilities" but also track and
catalogue behaviour to be used for data mining and other
investigations.

Myspace was bought outright by News Corp, and Facebook has its own set
of issues. Given the complexity and immersive character, SL is a more
challenging "space" to conquer, but given the profit motive and
coroporate investment in Linden Labs, SL's creator, that are resulting
in higher prices, and the level of investment can be quite high
(example: from wikipedia: total first year cost for a "16 acre" piece
of virtual ground is US$1,650 setup fee and US$295 a month server
fees... a total first year cost of $4,895.) There is incentive for such
questionable behaviour,as such people clearly have disposable income,
and waving cash around attracts people who want it.

SL *is* a private space, and it *is* run by a corporation, so it *is*
responsible to exhibit profit oriented behaviour as a requirement of
its existence. Given that it is not the only game in town, and the
classic problems of capitalist economics (declining profit over time,
etc.) One sould not expect SL to be "benign". In fact, I would expect
it to become  more draconian and limited over time. To protect the
children and all that, of course...

HW

[edit] 


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
No Cost - Get a month of Blockbuster Total Access now. Sweet deal for Yahoo! users and friends. 
http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text1.com