IP Law Outer space is not the Final Frontier The BIG SEVEN The Magic Circle The nature of ownership in virtual worlds Which IP rights Place and Jurisdiction Control and Process TOS ID: 379482
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Virtual Worlds and" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Virtual Worlds and IP Law
Outer space is not the “Final Frontier”Slide2Slide3
The BIG SEVEN
The Magic Circle
The nature of ownership in virtual worlds
Which IP
rights?“Place” and Jurisdiction
Control and Process: TOSRampant infringement or Transformative Fair Use?ISP or Content provider: Safe Harbor?Slide4
The Magic Circle
What happens in X, stays in X
Not a “legal” principle with standing, but,
a widely held “philosophical” approach that seems to have some merit
If the content and outcomes all stay
inworld, courts may be less interested in the litigation.The more that comes out, the more it seems that RL laws might apply.
Even within the circle, though, claims can still be made.Slide5
The nature of ownership
Most providers specify (TOS) that they own everything
this stance gets re-examined in
slides
8 & 10.Where/when players/residents “own,” things, one has to get very deep into the TOS to find out what that means. Generally, it’s a license for use within TOS specified parameters.
However, encouraging the sense of ownership raises the stakes for disputes and litigation.
Players buy, sell, and trade AS THOUGH they own (both in and out of world) regardless of TOS.Remember that the sense of (and behaviors surrounding) ownership reflects back on the magic circle.Slide6
Which IP rights?
Using LL/SL as an example
(cause most others keep all rights to themselves)
Linden Lab allows copyright
with limitations
Linden Lab specifically rules out patents
their TOS “over-rules” US law (in a way)Has specific TOS concerning personal tortsStrangely positioned on trademarks (which are HUGE)
Large new procedures for their marksSilent on marks belonging to others.Slide7
“Place” and Jurisdiction
As with other online
issues, whose law?
Complicated by
The sense of “place” in virtual spaces: where are they?To what extent does it matter if host is centralized or distributed?
Esp. once there is inter-portability AND self-hosting.The multinational globalism attached
Many have internal jurisprudence proceduresSee next slide for TOS questionsLegal status of these procedures
Some are trying to enact new world ordersSlide8
Control and Process: TOS
Most IP issues (along with everything else) are laid out here.
As are appeal procedures both against the co. and between participants
Bragg
v. LL started to lay these bare (and aside)Slide9
Rampant infringement or Transformative Fair Use?
If it appears in a virtual world, it can’t be protected.
Does appearing in a virtual world thereby qualify as transformative fair use? This has not “worked” (often) as a defense in games cases.
Users often treat
VWs
as NOT RL and as though RL rules don’t apply. Infringement is just rampant.RL rights holders haven’t been hugely interested in trying to protect their stuff. Not enough $ in doing so (yet). In some ways,
VWs are too esoteric to draw full attention.User cases show how and why users ARE.
Gibson Island on SL shows (maybe) how and why RL rights holders SHOULD be. Slide10
ISP or Content provider: Safe Harbor?
One would think that providers put in WAY TOO MUCH content to claim ISP pass-through. Yet.
They all claim it.Slide11
Everything has changed . . .
All laws are in place and best as we can tell, apply. There are cases that indicate as much.
Jurisdictional issues are as complex as IP law, globalism, and the internet can make them.
IP law is hardly the tip of the iceberg. Ownership of every aspect and behaviors of every kind, not just IP law issues, are at play and risk. What one "owns," "uses," and "does" in virtual spaces are all at issue. If IP law is behind (new media), IP law in virtual environments is even “
behinder
.”
There are lawyers beginning to specialize in this phase of IP law.
There are content holders with interests. There have been and will be cases.Think how poorly the system deals with the internet and international. Then multiply to infinity and beyond. Slide12
Background
Anne Wells
Branscomb
(ed.)
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
: “Emerging Law on the Electronic Frontier” Volume 2, Number 1: Part 1 of a Special Issue June, 1996
. Especially:Part One:
http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue1/index.htmlDavid R. Johnson, Due Process and Cyberjurisdiction
.Tamir
Maltz, Customary Law & Power in Internet Communities.Juliet M.
Oberding, A Separate Jurisdiction For Cyberspace?Part Two:
http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue2/index.htmlNiva Elkin-
Koren, Public/Private and Copyright Reform in Cyberspace.
Post, David G., and David R. Johnson, (2006). "The Great Debate--Law in Virtual World." First Monday. 11 (2)
http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue11_2/post/index.html Duranske
, Benjamin.
Virtual Law: Navigating the Legal Landscape of Virtual
Worlds
, ABA, 2008