Comments on: Second Life Picture Pile Up (and blackmail, virtual world style) http://www.vintfalken.com/second-life-picture-pile-up-and-blackmail-virtual-world-style/ Exporting an SL photographer's Second Life Thu, 24 May 2012 01:45:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Zinc Karas http://www.vintfalken.com/second-life-picture-pile-up-and-blackmail-virtual-world-style/#comment-109860 Zinc Karas Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:00:38 +0000 http://www.vintfalken.com/second-life-picture-pile-up-and-blackmail-virtual-world-style/#comment-109860 Someone obviously doesn't even have a clue what happens in a pile up group, why pictures are submitted in its pool or why Vint posted this. Oh well, knowing the subject you are preaching about is so outdated. Probably communist too. Someone obviously doesn’t even have a clue what happens in a pile up group, why pictures are submitted in its pool or why Vint posted this. Oh well, knowing the subject you are preaching about is so outdated. Probably communist too.

]]> By: Prokofy Neva http://www.vintfalken.com/second-life-picture-pile-up-and-blackmail-virtual-world-style/#comment-109453 Prokofy Neva Sun, 25 Jan 2009 04:45:57 +0000 http://www.vintfalken.com/second-life-picture-pile-up-and-blackmail-virtual-world-style/#comment-109453 "“All Images submitted to this pool must be Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike”. " Bad idea. Nobody wants to be forced into communism as they upload pictures. This is a good example of why Creative Commons is a shill, and ultimately damaging to intellectual property and not supportive of it. The thrust of CC is to force people through peer pressure to put their works up for free -- and that leads even to zealots like Vint Falken even insisting that the rules be made worse, and that you are FORCED to offer them for free in exchange for the chimera of "credit". If CC were serious about supporting artists, they'd have one of the licenses be "copy my work after you click here and pay me something for that copy". But they don't do that, because they are communists. It shows. You don't need the silly CC regime to claim copyright, which exists without it, or to share copies without concern about how they are used, which also exists without it. CC is a distraction, and merely a bid for ideological control of the Internet. ““All Images submitted to this pool must be Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike”. ”

Bad idea. Nobody wants to be forced into communism as they upload pictures.

This is a good example of why Creative Commons is a shill, and ultimately damaging to intellectual property and not supportive of it. The thrust of CC is to force people through peer pressure to put their works up for free — and that leads even to zealots like Vint Falken even insisting that the rules be made worse, and that you are FORCED to offer them for free in exchange for the chimera of “credit”.

If CC were serious about supporting artists, they’d have one of the licenses be “copy my work after you click here and pay me something for that copy”. But they don’t do that, because they are communists. It shows.

You don’t need the silly CC regime to claim copyright, which exists without it, or to share copies without concern about how they are used, which also exists without it. CC is a distraction, and merely a bid for ideological control of the Internet.

]]>