Linden Lab Plans Changes to TOS and New Ways to Report Copybotted Content
During a meeting with Philip Linden, Brad Oberwager, and Brett Linden, Linden Lab outlined its plans for managing content theft in Second Life moving forward. The discussion primarily focused on the use of CopyBot viewers and the unauthorised extraction of content from Second Life to a hard drive, followed by its re-upload—either back onto the Second Life grid or onto other platforms such as Roblox, IMVU, and The Sims.
The meeting included a mix of content creators from the Discord group Creators Supporting Creators and members of the Second Life Bloggers Network. Both groups require an application to join—if you’re a blogger, you can find more information HERE, and if you’re a content creator, you can find details HERE.
Please note that the Second Life Bloggers Network primarily serves as a way to syndicate blog posts to their feed. Invitations to meetings like this one were extended by the Lindens, but participation in the network does not guarantee access to future discussions.
This meeting was a follow-up to a previous discussion where creators submitted questions on various topics. The issue of CopyBot use and content theft had been raised earlier but couldn’t be fully addressed at the time. Since Linden Lab had new information to share, they scheduled this second meeting and extended invitations to bloggers so they would be informed about the upcoming changes.
First and foremost, CopyBotting is not the same as a replication of an item— with many influenced by real life media and inspiration being at our fingertips with sites like pinterest and google itself, the chances of this if replicating a RL item are more likely. This doesn’t mean that if you release a halter dress with a plunging back and front, finished with a big bow, and someone else creates a similar design, you can charge in, guns blazing. The issue at hand is the use of CopyBot viewers—specifically, the process of extracting someone else’s content from Second Life and re-uploading it elsewhere, whether for personal use or financial gain.
Lately, there has been a rise in external predators targeting Second Life content. Some come purely to steal, while others—shockingly—are Second Life residents who have decided that taking from their own community is their right. Some even go as far as encouraging others to do the same, turning content theft into a monetised practice.
To make it clear that this behaviour will no longer be tolerated, Linden Lab has taken action. They not only had social media posts promoting these activities removed, but they also eliminated the associated Second Life accounts entirely. This isn’t just a standard ban where someone can return with a new account—this is a full removal, blocking the individual from re-entering on their main, alts, or any future accounts. These recent cases are just the beginning of what’s to come.
They went on to explain that if you have CopyBotted content in your store and are reported and proven to have stolen the work, it’s not just that one item that will be removed—everything in your store will be taken down, whether you created it legitimately or not. However, this does not necessarily mean that previously purchased copies of the stolen content will be removed from customers’ inventories. That said, who wants to knowingly wear stolen content?
I’ve seen a forum post where someone expressed concern that 50% of their inventory might be removed. My question is: why would you assume that half of your inventory contains potentially stolen goods? If you’re conscientious about where you shop, this shouldn’t be a concern at all. The removal of items sold by thieves means less likelihood of people unknowingly spending money on stolen content. In my opinion, it’s a win-win situation. Personally it did not even occur to me that I would lose anything from this change, and if I did wake up and see that part of my inventory was gone, I would be so grateful that I did not have to do the removal myself, because I would be scream crying that it had infected the rest of my precious.
As for those who don’t own a store but believe that stealing for personal use is somehow acceptable—think again. That CopyBotted pair of shoes you saved $1.37 on just cost you your entire account. Linden Lab will wipe your presence from the Second Life grid, along with any alts or future attempts to return.
One of the best ways to check if an item is copybotted in-world, particularly if you believe it’s being sold by someone other than the creator, is to rez the item alongside the original. A demo will work fine for this purpose, and you may want to obtain it on an alt that’s not tied to your main account. Then, switch to wireframe mode (Ctrl+Shift+R) and compare the mesh side by side or even overlap them for more certainty. While copybotted and re-uploaded mesh may be more dense, you should still be able to spot clear indications that it’s the same model. Once you’ve identified these telltale signs, take as many pictures as possible, making it clear which is the original and which is the copybotted version. These images will be useful to include with your report.
Linden Lab understands the various ways store owners acquire their content—this was discussed in multiple contexts during the meeting. They recognise that creators make and sell full-perm products in Second Life, whether through the Marketplace or in-world stores. They are also aware that some people purchase assets outside of Second Life and import them, whether they personally created them or not. However, these types of purchases were not the focus of the discussion. This meeting was specifically about CopyBot viewers and the theft that occurs through their use.
Linden Lab is preparing for the complexities of enforcement, acknowledging that not every case will be as black and white as some might assume. That’s why it’s crucial to have all the necessary information in order before filing a report against another store for this type of theft. They were also asked if people would be removed retroactively, while it was said that they could not do that, it was made very clear that if the offenders were still in Second Life and still selling the items previously reported, they could submit a new support ticket about that item. This is great news for people that had either given up entirely or just about given up on ever seeing anything happen.
Ideally, the original creator should be the one to file the report. With the upcoming addition of a dedicated support ticket dropdown for these cases, the process will be more structured and streamlined. However, if the original creator is no longer active in Second Life and the content is clearly stolen, you can still build a case. Providing comparison images, timeline details (such as when each version was released), and any other relevant information will strengthen a report.
Once again, copying something is not the same as CopyBotting. Be absolutely certain before taking action—this is not an opportunity to take down competition or launch a witch hunt based on personal grievances or assumptions. If Linden Lab detects any signs of misuse, this behaviour will not be welcomed and could even have consequences for you.
Here are some suggestions on how to protect yourself and ensure you have proof if you ever need to verify that your work is your own.
Content Creators: How to Protect Your Work
Keep thorough records of your work. Take occasional screenshots as you develop a release, including your models and textures. Be sure to capture key details like outliner views, layer panels, and work-in-progress stages—showing that a single set of nails (for example) might involve 48 different layers, each adjustable and editable. A CopyBotter won’t have these working files; they will only have the final exported version.
Consider saving your files in stages if that adds an extra layer of security for you. Make it a habit to store these records in a dedicated product folder on your computer.
Another valuable tool for proving ownership is the Beta Grid. The Beta Grid retains all your uploads, meaning that earlier versions of your work—uploaded before the final release—are securely stored on another Second Life server. If a dispute arises, this provides strong timeline evidence.
Personally, I like to see my creations evolve, so I often have multiple iterations of an item over weeks before reaching the final upload. This natural workflow can serve as additional proof of ownership should it ever be needed.
There are several other measures you can take to protect your work, which were discussed during the meeting and later in the Creators Supporting Creators Discord. That group provides ongoing support for creators beyond these formal discussions.
While I won’t disclose the more personalised methods—since we don’t want to make it easier for thieves to bypass protections—the general rule is: the more effort you put into making something unmistakably yours, the better.
One extra step you could take is to take snapshots that only you would have. For example, you could include yourself with your computer in the photo, showing your project on-screen. While this is something you’d only share with Linden Lab in the event of an issue (and I sincerely hope this never happens), it’s another unique detail that a thief is unlikely to have access to, and it would also have timestamps. I often take pictures of my screen when working on something and send it to my Mum—nothing like having a Superfan on speed-dial—that would be considered proof of ownership along with all the other bits and pieces.
I empathise with how much extra work this seems, but good practices are that for a reason. This new system is going to be a benefit to many, but will also in some cases potentially be a hindrance, and we want to make sure that the right people are protected, and only they can do that for themselves.
Stores that Purchase Their Content
When it comes to protecting yourself as a seller, especially if you’re not the creator of the content you’re offering, there are several important considerations. Keep thorough records of all your purchases, both in and outside of Second Life. Always read everything carefully—make sure the product you purchased for 15.00 USD (or even free) is allowed to be resold, and that you’re permitted to bring it into Second Life and sell it. Don’t rely solely on transaction history from platforms like the Marketplace. Take screenshots of the receipt and, if possible, the Terms of Service (TOS) and Terms & Conditions (T&C) for that product and the entire site. While you might have purchased it in February, the rules could change by May, so having proof of what you agreed to at the time is important.
It’s also essential not to advertise your content as original if you didn’t create it. Doing so is asking for trouble. Even though someone else originally created it, it’s still not your work. If a customer sees that exact product at an event or another store, it could lead to a report, and you’re setting yourself up for conflict and accusations of copybotting as both items would most likely be the same mesh.
If you buy models outside of Second Life and modify them in 3D software to make them your own, be sure to take before-and-after screenshots. These records can help protect you if the need arises. If someone were to CopyBot your modified version, you have not only your changes but your purchase history of having bought it correctly to work with—the thief will not have either.
As of the writing of this post, the new implementation of the report via ticketing system is not yet live. I assume that when it is, Linden Lab will release a blog post of its own to ensure it reaches as many people as possible. I’ve come across a lot of information about this meeting, both from others and on the Second Life forum. At one point, I even felt like I was being gaslit, as some things being stated as fact were far from accurate.
The meeting was focused on “strengthening content protection,” and Linden Lab involved the Creators Supporting Creators and Bloggers Network groups because, as mentioned, this topic had come up in past discussions, with questions that hadn’t been fully addressed. So, it seemed like a perfect opportunity to provide clarity, in my opinion. Linden Lab is making a sincere effort to be as transparent as possible about the many changes coming to Second Life. They’re aware of the past accusations about a lack of transparency, and these concerns have clearly not fallen on deaf ears. There are various ways they’re working to increase transparency, and this Zoom call was one of them. Many people attended, but some who could have didn’t.
It’s easy to criticize from the sidelines, especially when you’re not part of the conversation. While I understand that people want information, approaching it in a negative way doesn’t help anyone—it could even cause people to retreat.
The Lindens have started streaming live some of the User Group meetings, allowing people to watch, whether they’re in or out of Second Life, or catch up later. However, this particular meeting wasn’t live-streamed because Linden Lab wanted those attending to feel comfortable and secure in the space, especially since a few of them were live on camera. That was respectful! There were also off-topic discussions during the meeting, with people asking for help with various things, so broadcasting it would’ve meant either getting consent from everyone or informing people beforehand, potentially changing the dynamic of the meeting itself.
Behind-closed-doors discussions aren’t inherently bad. We’ve had these types of meetings in Second Life for as long as I can remember, with NDAs and other protocols in place. This is how things progress, how Second Life grows. We don’t want Linden Lab to close the door on any resident feedback—if that were to happen, we’d lose out on valuable input and meaningful conversations, like the User Group meetings, and it would just lead to a more rigid, one-size-fits-all existence.
p.s no AI was mentioned in the way it has been discussed elsewhere…that leap was the craziest form of telephone I have ever seen.