Comments on: Bragg v. Linden Lab Update – Trial Date Set, Court to Hold Disputed Funds, Joint Report Filed

By: Dwight

Dwight — Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:45:27 +0000

Linden Labs is not a nation nor is it immune from legal action regardless of its terms of service statements. Linden Labs will be shut down by its actions and prosecuted by the Treasury Department of the United States. It is in violation banking and securities law as it creates currency without a banking license and manufactures securities within its alleged monetary exchange practices. These statements are self evident practices of Linden Labs. Linden Labs may also be in violation of the Patriot Act as it no method in place to deter money laundering from terrorists worldwide. In fact it is the perfect venue to transfer terrorist funds. As the FBI’s further investigation of Linden Labs widens fewer and fewer people will use Second Life. It becomes more and more of a novelty than a social network. Fewer commercial advertisers are using Second Life. Second Life while once a great idea is on its to it self imposed suicide.

By: foster

foster — Sun, 12 Aug 2007 04:18:19 +0000

.”… Further, how does the court know that chat logs were not manufactured or destroyed at the whim of the controlling entity – the defendant?”

simple : according to the Patriotic Act, all the electronic communications /logs are available to certain govt entities. Remember ? No matter how LL pretends the $L are or are not real currency, in the case of gambling the feds decided. My point is : given the fact that SL’s logs are already copied and stored elsewhere , LL cannot aford to mess around. And the court can very simple ask the govt : ” is this log accurate or not ? “.

By: FlipperPA Peregrine

FlipperPA Peregrine — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:45:12 +0000

Wups, missed word: “had his first move NOT been to sue Linden Lab, and instead trying to recover” – sorry, its Friday. :)

By: FlipperPA Peregrine

FlipperPA Peregrine — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:44:27 +0000

I wish the first case of this magnitude didn’t have a plaintiff who at best admittedly skirted the land purchasing system, and at worst could be considered a fraudulent hacker. I don’t think this would have escalated had his first move been to sue Linden Lab, rather than trying to recover his funds over a few days. We’re all painfully aware that LL’s pretty bad with customer service (just see their BBB record), but I don’t think they’re malicious.

By: Nobody Fugazi

Nobody Fugazi — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 21:11:50 +0000

Interesting. I wonder if third parties that may be publicly mentioned (media, etc) will have recourse if they consider that their privacy has been adversely affected?

It does seem odd to be able to allow chat logs without a convincing argument as to why other people’s privacy may be infringed upon. Further, how does the court know that chat logs were not manufactured or destroyed at the whim of the controlling entity – the defendant?

Interesting times. Darned Chinese curses.