Jump to content
3DXChat Community

Izu.

Members
  • Posts

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About Izu.

  • Birthday 02/02/1997

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Recent Profile Visitors

1,106 profile views

Izu.'s Achievements

Advanced Member

Advanced Member (3/3)

255

Reputation

  1. Let me clarify what I mean by "clothing editor", as in the design and actual creation of a clothing item done from scratch and or tools used to create said clothing items. Just changing around textures and UV mapping them to a mesh isn't hard and would take all of about 30mins to add to the game, which could again lead to copyright problems. The actual process of making clothing meshes is what I had meant being hard to add. This would also be tons of work. What I had originally thought of that could technically work, is making "Pieces" of a clothing item, like for instance, For a "shirt" there would be like: Shoulders/Neck: Straps, V Neck, Plunge, Off the shoulder Sleeves: Puffy, Short, Long, Cuffed, No sleeves Etc, this could work and would be what I actually mean by a clothing "Editor", but this results in needing tons of different meshes for each piece and I think is currently out of the scope of the Dev teams capability. This idea could be expanded into different clothing "types" too, like for instance there could be a "shirt type", "jacket type", "skirt type" and lots of different options in each clothing type. But this idea is extremely far fetched and I don't see it ever being done. It would also sort of fit the theme of "editors" in 3DX as the world editor is just a bunch of pieces that you put together to make whatever it is you're making.
  2. I see constant mention of a supposed clothes editor, but not any mention of how people actually want this to be implemented, just that they want it. The idea of this kind of editor is harder to do than many think and also is a legal battlefield in the use of copyrighted images being used for textures. The concept while it sounds amazing is very impractical and would also be extremely hard to do and time consuming for a small dev team like 3Dx's. There might be some assets they could load in from the unity store for this type of thing, but it's not plausibly done the way you would want. The only way I see it happening is perhaps letting people upload textures to clothes, and allowing alpha channels to work on them, but again- that's a mess legally as people will use copyrighted images for textures. A pose editor on the other hand would be a lot more doable as then its just a matter of key framing the skeleton's nodules, Ik handles (if these models have them) and then playing it back to make it loop, which Unity has animation clipping for GameObjects. Just make it to where we are able to mess with unitys in editor animation clipping, and add a extension to the animation file that the game would recognize so that we can save them out. Then just have it to where you can load them up with your character in character creation so that when you connect to a world it'll ping off the server and read the file the same way that the world editor currently does when you upload the room.
  3. Blehm V. Jacobs, under 10th circuit court of appeals states that a stick figure is not copyrightable. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca10/11-1479/11-1479-2012-12-27.html http://clancco.com/wp/2013/01/drawing-infringement-copyright/ There is a lot of things that is and isn't able to be copyrighted. Things such as short phrases, ideas, expressions. Things that are public knowledge also can't be copyrighted. Fair use clause has very specific guidelines for what can, and can't be used. The areas for where "Fair Use" applies is as follows: commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education. Anything outside this generally doesn't apply for fair use. There is also "derivative works", which is explained here: https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf. To be protected by copyright, a work needs to be original, have a modicum of creativity, and be 'fixed' in a tangible way.
  4. Hey-oh! Its been a very long time since I've posted any new builds! Well, today I just finished up a bath house that I had been wanting to make since forever ago, sorry if some bits of it look a bit lazy. The effort of trying to cut back on detail so it's not as laggy but still keeping it up to my standards is a job in itself, hopefully it looks okay!
  5. You are very correct in that it is much more convenient, and way less time consuming if you were able to just eliminate the problem the moment that you find something is amiss. But, I'd say this comes at the expense of added privacy and protection for those that want to make a new a new character to perhaps escape harassment from ones who would want to bug and stalk someone in game. There are of course benefits to the full ignore, but there is also benefits to the way the new system is presented. I personally just find that the full ignore isn't a valuable as many make it out to be, and with it going away it comes at the cost of more privacy for the player base of 3DXChat. Privacy that of course could be taken advantage of for better or worse, I just think you can't argue against invasion of privacy and endorse ways to actively break it. I do believe Gizmo has foresaw the changes and taken into account each side, which is why I'd expect him to handle actual reports in a more timely manner and actively be working to handle wrong doers and the like. And if he doesn't, there'll be the backlash that obviously should arise if that is the case.
  6. I do find the situation of the ignore feature to be a bit funny. People were fully against any and all privacy concerns with Plexstorm, the streaming service a while back. Saying it's a violation of privacy and that it should be respected by any and all streamers, it's "illegal" and the like. But yet, many find Pandora to be a good thing. Violation of privacy doesn't mean anything to some, as long as they're not the ones being at the other end of it. Now, with the ignoring of these said "Trolls", whether its' through the full ignore or only one character that's tied to their account, it ultimately won't matter. Actually circumventing a block doesn't take much work at all, and isn't hard to figure out. The process is they just exhaust all their alternate characters by being blocked by the ones they want to bug and bother, wait till the end of the month, and then just make a new account. The money that was previously going to the account that they got blocked on will now go to the new account, then circumventing any and all blocks. And they didn't spend a dime more than if they were just paying monthly. This is not to say that the current ignore system isn't better than what the new one will be, it most definitely will be easier in some ways to just make a new character. But, I just feel like the full ignore isn't as valuable as people are making it out to be, as it already can be gotten around, and has been for some time now. There is also the fact that to buy XGold, it can be quite expensive. For just 20,000 XGold It costs about $25.00 USD, that is more than just a month's membership and you'd only get two characters out of it. For someone to get enough XGold through login rewards, they'd have to login for 34 days straight at 300 XGold Per day to get enough for another character. This comes out to a few days longer than what they do now, where they just make a new account at the end of the month, so it can actually be longer if they decided to keep the same account, keeping them away from you for even longer.
  7. Again, please don't strawman my statements, "Not true, having been stated previously by the numerous professional lawyers who all said that it's not illegal to dispense or record a private conversation between two people." No where in here did I ask for you state the statue for copyright law. I asked for you to show me the statue where it says it's in violation of current law to not do this (in violation of privacy to show private conversations) and to then provide evidence that, a court case, an actual ruling or specific law language that says the content of PMs are copyright protected. As stated above to copyright a phrase or sentence, could "Grant a monopoly that would eventually “checkmate the public” and the purpose of a copyright clause to encourage creativity-would be defeated." I bring up those points as it's on the legality of what you can consider private info and what isn't and an email and or- a conversation between two individuals doesn't constitute privacy, especially PMs on an "online" game. You say a PM, is a "fixed tangible medium of expression", to which is covered by copyright, to which I pointed out that a small phrases' and ideas have to be demonstrated to be otherwise in a court of law. I also pointed out that the extract was a view on law, not what was stated in the law, vs how the second extract I provided, shows an instance in a court case where they ruled it wasn't in violation of privacy. It's an interpretation of the language and how it can be inferred which would have to be ruled for in different circuits of the judicial system. This is my last message on the topic, you can refer to any of the links I provided for which I think explains in detail how this isn't a breach of privacy of anybody playing, (At least in western law). Making a claim like this, "The partner only has ownership over their own text." is completely with disregard to what actual professional lawyers stated in multiple instances up above.
  8. Not true, having been stated previously by the numerous professional lawyers who all said that it's not illegal to dispense or record a private conversation between two people. If you'd like to provide your credentials to make such a judgement call and provide the exact wording where it states that it is illegal to do so and is in violation of copyright infringement in a game, I'd love to see it. Please note that wording in terms of law is very specific and also very situational. If you can provide a court case where it's been ruled in favour of live streaming a video game PM chat is considered copyright infringement, then that'd be great. "The question comes down to whether you have any "reasonable expectation of privacy" over that email. Absent any agreement to keep your communications private, no one is under any obligation to keep secrets for you. If you chose to divulge something to someone, or to say something to someone in general, it is your relationship with that person that will determine whether there is any conceivable expectation of privacy." ""Federal law permits recording telephone calls and in-person conversations with the consent of at least one of the parties. See 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). This is called a "one-party consent" law. Under a one-party consent law, you can record a phone call or conversation so long as you are a party to the conversation."" "In the US a letter you send to someone doesn't have privacy, in the legal sense. They can show it to others without breaking any laws. Mostly because the US doesn't really have much in the way on privacy laws between citizens." https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=981729 This is an extract on the confines of someone's legal view on copyright laws with regard to email forwarding. https://danashultz.com/2015/01/15/telling-facebook-friends-means-telling-the-world/And this an extract with regard to the legality of posting information privately to one another on a platform and whether you can legally expect things to remain private and with whom the message is shared with. Edited: Also with regard to what you've stated about Fair use, please don't strawman, I was stating that with regard to the email clause and if it falls within fair use, not live-streaming. Hence having the pre-existing knowledge of the email, not an ongoing livestream. Edited: This is also on the contention that the thing you're trying to claim copyright infringement on doesn't contest as, an idea, small phrase/sentence. "Copyright laws disfavor protection for short phrases. Such claims are viewed with suspicion by the Copyright Office, whose circulars state that, “… slogans, and other short phrases or expressions cannot be copyrighted.” These rules are premised on two tenets of copyright law. First, copyright will not protect an idea. Phrases conveying an idea are typically expressed in a limited number of ways and, therefore, are not subject to copyright protection. Second, phrases are considered as common idioms of the English language and are therefore free to all. Granting a monopoly would eventually “checkmate the public” and the purpose of a copyright clause to encourage creativity-would be defeated. So how many words do you have to string together before you get copyright protection? 10? 20? 100? It’s not a matter of numbers. Whether you can stop someone else from using your literary phrases is dependent upon the uniqueness and value of the phrases as well as the way in which you (and the borrower) use them." https://fairuse.stanford.edu/2003/09/09/copyright_protection_for_short/
  9. This is, of course, talking about a situation where fair use isn't applicable and also isn't a conversation held between two parties. Copyright infringement in the use of forwarding emails and storing emails could and more than likely will fall under fair use, as long as it's not being commercialized or being used in a slanderous way or for ill intent. Also- I'd like that website to please cite its source and what statues and states it's referring to. And for all intents and purposes, it still doesn't address the concerns of private messaging in a game.
  10. Not quite, as with Facebook, you're allowed to privately hold a conversation, (This is exactly what 3dx allows for) which is what those were referring to. And even states that they "Posted" them. https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-legal-to-share-private-text-messages--3212412.html https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-legal-to-publish-text-messages-online-in-nj--2967927.html https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-illegal-to-repost-private-facebook-messages--2037165.html https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-legal-to-share-a-voicemail-that-i-received--471095.html There's plenty more on there if you'd like for me to post them, most if not all of them agree that once you have a conversation with someone both parties are legally able to post or share the contents of the conversation. Regardless of it being either an email, voice mail, private message, text, or anything of the sort, as soon as you share something with another individual it's then owned by both parties unless it falls under any of the points I've already listed.
  11. I know, I'm not saying that it's okay for people to do it or even try to use it for this kind of thing. But- it's completely legal for people to share a conversation that they're part of, in fact, law specifically states "It is legal to obtain the contents of a conversation conducted over telephone or radio or private conversation as long as at least one party to the conversation is aware of the recording", meaning the person recording is legally able to do this, because they know about the recording. For this to be applicable in a court of law, the person insinuating that their rights have been infringed upon has the burden of proof and must provide evidence that "defamation, incriminating evidence or harassment" has occurred.
  12. https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-illegal-to-post-screenshots-of-facebook-mess-2995421.html https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-illegal-to-share-private-text-messages-if-i--3212465.html https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-posting-private-emails-to-a-public-forum-illega-71053.html https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-legal-for-someone-to-forward-a-text-message--1046878.html https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-illegal-to-share-private-text-conversation---3212432.html This is a site where lawyers are asked legal questions, they respond and give their opinion and view of the law. Most if not all of them agree that it's not illegal under U.S law to share a private conversation between two parties.
  13. Incorrect, it's completely legal to publish private messages under U.S federal privacy laws. It states that a conversation held between two parties is owned by both parties and that as long as the information contained isn't used to defame, incriminate or harass it's completely legal to share. The intent to cause harm has to be demonstrated in a court case. The only exception is whether the message contains copyrighted material. I posted two resources in my post that you can look at. Edited: In the course of European law being applicable, the EU Data Protection and PIPEDA both state that things such as names don't fall under private along with certain parameters such as: Government Facilities that fall in accordance with the Privacy Act, Individuals making use of said information for personal purpose and use, and Organizations which purport that information for journalistic, literary, or artistic use. In the course of what goes in PM's, you should not be disclosing personal details or information.
  14. This doesn't violate any known law in the west. In fact, as far as I know there's not any legal trouble the streamer could get in trouble for. Some North American laws, such as in Canada and the U.S both allow people the right to record sound, take pictures and even film people without their consent in public places. This extends to video games because there is no actual private or personal information being infringed upon, and can't quite be categorized as "private property". And even then 3DX's ToS says to not include personal information in your profile or username. On the topic of PMs being recorded, this is a no-go as well. As long as the message doesn't contain copyrighted material, it's completely legal to share a "PM". By engaging in a conversation with someone, your words can now be considered "Shared", and generally as long as the information isn't used to defame or embarrass, it doesn't violate western law or 3DX's ToS. This also doesn't fall within' copyright infringement, as 3DX staff is allowing the service to be used on their game. And is legal(ish) as long as you're not charging people to view said service. They've even been promoting youtube videos of the game for a few years now, (Many game developers and companies allow people to upload videos of their games, as it can be viewed as free publicity and a chance to expand their user base). More or less, you shouldn't be including or discussing personal details in the game and if you decide to do it, you should find another platform to discuss it on. http://www.thebowenlawgroup.com/blog/the-legal-risks-of-live-streaming https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/is-it-illegal-to-post-screen-shots-of-text-message-2037296.html
×
×
  • Create New...