Quick reminder that the SL Bar Association’s first CLE (Continuing Legal Education) seminar will be held in in Second Life at the SLBA offices Tuesday, July 15, 2008 at 12:00 Noon Pacific. The seminar will feature SLBA President ‘Solomon Cortes’ (David Naylor) presenting “Virtual World Legal Issues.” This marks the very first time that CLE credit has been offered for an exclusively in-world event. There is no charge for the seminar, and you’ll earn 1 hour of California MCLE or England and Wales CPD credit for attending.  Registration is currently still open, but space is limited.

Denizens of Activision Blizzard’s World of Warcraft (yes…it’s official!) know that the Dark Portal connects Azeroth to the Hellfire Peninsula. Is a new, far more powerful, portal about to open between Azeroth and Cupertino, CA, the heart of Apple headquarters? Unless you’re living in a furbolg cage, I doubt it’s news that the new iPhone arrives today, July 11. More importantly, the 3G has been touted as “the most suitable mobile handset yet for virtual worlds and MMOs, given its fast data speeds, slick user interface, and ability to give applications access to its full processing power and other features.” This creates an easy-to-use entry point with wide appeal, giving virtual worlds and mmo games more exposure in the mass marketplace.

“Reliable sources” have been chattering about World of Warcraft on the iPhone since the phone’s release, some casting doubt on the iPhone processor’s ability to run the game. But with over five hundred software applications ready for tomorrow’s iPhone 3G launch, optimism abounds that this iPhone can bridge the gap. Keep in mind that WoW’s (or any other virtual world for that matter) first foray into the mobile market doesn’t necessarily have to be the full game experience…how about access to the game mail system or guild chat? Access to the in-game Auction House would satiate a whole legion of WoW fans and probably boost the already thriving game economy. Or port the creation platform for Second Life so people can edit prims on the subway?

But could the lack of action by Activision Blizzard allow competition to stealth in and claim the gold? Heavyweights EA and Will Wright (of Sim City and The Sims fame) are keen on Spore Origins, the iPhone’s port of their much-anticipated Spore release.

Peak Virtual Entertainment, (“PKVE”), has announced the open beta for its brand new massive multiplayer online web-game: “The Legacy of Holy Castle.” It looks to be leading the race to becoming the first web-browser MMO Strategy Game that is fully playable on both smart phone devices and on PCs.

Or how about Parallel Kingdom, a fascinating tool that invigorates real-world Role Playing games by using GPS to place the virtual world on top of the real world? Parallel Kingdom describes itself as the first Mobile Multiplayer Trans-Reality Game (MMTRG). I’m going to need more time to wrap my head around the implications of that. I’m curious to see what happens when hardcore roleplayers start questing out in public (if they aren’t already…maybe that explains the things I’ve seen on Market St.?)

Does a juggernaut like World of Warcraft even worry about these new games or are they just happy to let someone else carry the load of innovation for a change?

Social virtual worlds aren’t left out either. In February, Massively covered a sort of proxy Second Life running on the iPhone (YouTube video) and the faster network behind the new 3G iPhone can only enhance the social 3D experience.

Third-parties like Boxfab are creating hardware that will turn your iPhone into “a Virtual Reality display device which uses the iPhone as the viewing plate so that it becomes a wearable virtual headset simply by clipping on a special attachment.” Combine this with the new neuroheadset technology and the iPhone becomes an ever more powerful tool. With a potential new market having the size and enthusiasm of the iPhone community, it seems for now that there may be plenty of room for innovation from all sides.

How about the real-world impact of increased gaming and virtual world access on the iPhone? Will kids pay attention in school? (Have they ever?) Will automobile accidents skyrocket as drivers play Gran Turismo at stoplights? “Gaming While Driving” laws were proposed starting last summer…they may need to be revisited if these games take off. Paris Hilton single-handedly forced California to take cellphone driving seriously and it was formally prohibited last week. The rest of the country may be following suit under the weight of increased accident statistics and ballooning insurance premiums.

Sooooo…who’s getting the iPhone 3G???

At what point do we know that technology has gone too far? Looking back at historical waypoints, the answer is easy…when it’s too late. The latest in the line of totally amazing and potentially scary products has emerged. Emotiv, a San Francisco-based (take that, Silicon Valley) tech company has created the new EPOC neuroheadset, which allows computer users to use their thoughts to move an avatar and manipulate onscreen objects.

We’ve envisioned this technology for quite awhile, but it appears to now be getting very close to reality.

The EPOC neuroheadset features 16 sensors that press against a user’s scalp to measure electrical activity in a brain using electroencephalography. A built-in gyro tracks head movement. The sensors can also register users’ moods and facial expressions, merging the data in computer software that “learns” to match readings with what people are thinking.

The platform includes three components:

• The Affectiv™ suite measures discreet emotional states.
• The Cognitiv™ suite detects conscious thoughts.
• The Expressiv™ suite can identify facial expressions in real-time.

Currently, the neurohandset is showcased in a new martial arts fantasy game, where an animated “master” leads players through exercises in a rural Asian setting that include lifting mountains with their minds. But, as Emotiv co-founder Tan Le points out, “There is no natural barrier [to the technology] from what we can see.”

Where there is no natural barrier to technology, you’d better believe some unnatural things will arise. How will the legal community apply its laws to the unbridled depths of the human psyche? Throw cognitive reason, often our last line of defense before doing something terribly stupid, out the window and see what happens.

Read the rest of the post »

I downloaded and installed Lively yesterday (the “it’s in the browser” hype aside, Lively requires a download since it operates as a plugin). Somewhat oddly, there was no EULA or TOS document to agree to during the installation process. Indeed, there were no options or buttons to click on at all. Double-click “Install Lively” and a few minutes later, a you see “Thanks for installing ‘Lively by Google.” No click-through? No draconian terms of service? Cool. But on the other hand, no options regarding what is installed and where it went? I’ve never much liked hidden installs, particularly from companies that are in the business of cataloging everything.

Turns out the TOS is on the web site, and a comment from PJ on VB’s first post on Lively breaks down the install: “you have to download their installer program – which then sets itself up as service on your system for instance. You don’t get to chose where on your system to install it either. And while a browser plugin might be necessary to run this in the browser, why would it be necessary to install a [Browser Helper Object] for google update?” That’s a very good question.

Though there’s no click-through agreement, the Lively Terms of Service themselves are linked at the bottom of the Lively homepage. My initial impression is that they’re either kind of half-baked in comparison to the TOS and EULAs we’re used to seeing from MMO games and virtual worlds, or a genuine attempt to slim down the legalese. Either way, there are aspects which seem likely to be revised in the future.

For example, the Legal Notices section currently includes this provision:

Your Intellectual Property Rights

You agree to release Google, its affiliates, and their agents, contractors, officers, and employees (collectively, “Google Parties“), from all claims, demands, and damages (actual and consequential) arising out of or in any way connected with a dispute. You agree that you will not involve any Google Party in any litigation or other dispute arising out of or related to any transaction, agreement, or arrangement with any other user, any developer, or any other third party in connection with the Lively Service. If you attempt to do so, (a) you shall pay all costs and attorneys’ fees of any Google Party and shall provide indemnification as set forth below, and (b) the jurisdiction for any such litigation or dispute shall be limited as set forth in the Terms.

Three comments on this. First, it is one of the most direct “do not sue us for stuff users do” provisions I have ever seen. It says if you have “a dispute … with any other [Lively] user … developer, or … third party” you agree not to sue Google too. It isn’t quite that simple. Though the provision provides some protection for Google, there are a number of theories under which you could bring suit in spite of it — if you did and lost, though, Google would probably try to collect its attorney fees under the provision above. Somewhat oddly, Google does not reference their DMCA policy here, which is actually what would govern their liability for at least the copyright side of IP. That policy is linked in the “Community Standards” section of the TOS.

Second, although this doesn’t say so directly, it appears that users do get to keep whatever IP rights they’d otherwise have in anything they create in Lively. This isn’t specific to Lively, it comes from Google’s general TOS (repeated on the Lively site). Aside from giving Google an irrevocable license to make copies and modify your content in order to host it, “you retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.” This is arguably better than Second Life’s TOS, as it doesn’t carve out an exception for patent rights. At least for now, though, user created content aside from largely pre-defined venues is not really an option anyway. From the Lively FAQ:

Add and Remove Objects: Can I Create Content?

Most of the avatars, clothing, and objects were created by vendors working for Google. We’re also working with a small number of trusted testers, vendors and creative agencies as part of a test for creating custom items.

We hope to enable user-generated content and even more customization soon, but until then we’ve given you tons of choices from the catalog to help personalize your Lively experience.

Finally, regarding this section, it appears that the legal documents are just as much in beta as the service. This provision, for instance, was clearly just copied and pasted out of a gmail-specific document.

Indemnification
Google does not claim any ownership in any of the content, including any text, data, information, images, photographs, music, sound, video, or other material, that you upload, transmit or store in your Gmail account.

The Community Standards section is also interesting. That is where Google sets out what you can’t do in their virtual world. It’s a rather long list, and appears to squarely place Lively in the PG-13 camp. The whole list of no-nos is below:

Read the rest of the post »