Comments on: SLCC 2007 “IP Rights and the Law in Second Life” Panel Announced

By: Benjamin Duranske

Benjamin Duranske — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:47:59 +0000

I think this is right; a company that isn’t in-world yet that arrives and starts trying to enforce its trademarks against existing in-world infringers has got to consider licensing. They can’t afford to ignore the infringement completely, but a minimal license protects them legally (as long as they’re not ignoring there’s no abandonment argument) and should create some goodwill as well, if they license the better content creators. Of course, they have to be prepared to pursue action against people who refuse to either license or cease infringing activity, but licensing seems like a very good first step to consider.

As for SLCC, I didn’t go to this one, and as it turned out, a sort of surprisingly low number of bloggers/journalists attended, at least from the professional side of things. I understand it was well attended and a big success from a social perspective. The one that is becoming the one to go to for professionals appears to be the “Virtual Worlds Conference & Expo” — it is broader than just Second Life, and well attended by industry folks. I just attended the most recent one in San Jose and felt it was well worth my time. (Virtual Blind is a media partner with the Conference.)

By: Tamiko Franklin

Tamiko Franklin — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 09:31:01 +0000

What no follow up? How did it go?

Besides that I was wondering if anyone had any comments about a kind of (and I know these are dirty words) license regime in world.

For example, if a trademark owner doesn’t have an inworld presence but someone is inside and making money off of their brand would it be horrible to have that person pay a royalty that would not only allow them to continue thier business but give symbolic credit to the holder of the mark which would recognize their investment in their brand.

At the same time evidence of that license could be used in the event of failure to abide by its terms and subsequent action could be taken to ban the goods in world. The license could even be terminated in the event that the right holder decides to set up shop in world.

This is just an idea, but had I been at this conference and not in Zagreb, this is the kind of question I would have asked. I’m just wondering if anyone else did.

By: Benjamin Duranske

Benjamin Duranske — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 23:12:52 +0000

I did ask about that, actually, because it seemed strange to have two business guys on the panel. They told me they’re trying to get more attorneys and that it’s not set in stone. In fact, I’d have likely been on it if I could attend this year. Hopefully they’ll get one or two more lined up before the convention.

By: Henri DeCuir

Henri DeCuir — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 05:46:45 +0000

Any word on why there are so few actual lawyers on this panel? Just not enough who know about SL?

By: Benjamin Duranske

Benjamin Duranske — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:21:53 +0000

After posting this, several readers got in touch asking if I’m going to SLCC 07. I’ve also been in discussion with the organizers about the law panel. Unfortunately, I’m attending a wedding in Washington state that weekend, so I’m not able to attend. I wish I could — it looks like they’ve got some great events planned and the law panel should be interesting. Though I can’t make ’07, I’ll definitely plan to attend next year’s, and maybe participate on or help organize a law panel too.

By: FlipperPA Peregrine

FlipperPA Peregrine — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 14:49:03 +0000

Thank you for the write up – it should be an interesting panel! We’re actually looking for a fourth panelist who is qualified to talk on the subject. If anyone reading this feels they fit the bill and is planning on attend SLCC in Chicago, please give me an IM in-world and I’ll be happy to discuss it!

Regards,

-Flip