Our Cheating Hearts

Virtual handbag using brandname

I’ve probably made at least one previous reference to the problem of design piracy. It’s an issue which resonates with me probably because I’ve seen it first-hand during trips overseas and while conducting tours through manufacturing supplier workshops where the original, patented product is sitting on a workbench and the “we make better” prototype version is being constructed on the shop table next to it – looking for all intent and purposes like the same product. To add insult to injury, there’s also a good chance the tour guide will proudly volunteer how they run the latest, greatest CAD software and then chuckle about how they bought it pre-installed on a harddrive (for some out-of-the-way places, lack of broadband makes this a nice option). That the effort is being both unofficially endorsed and officially rewarded by both Western retailers and consumers, makes the competitive landscape look less like a football field and more like a Cambodian minefield. I’m not saying it’s impossible to overcome these inequities, but I am saying it hurts small Western businesses both directly and indirectly; and like a drug addict enjoying the honeymoon of a new high, there will in my opinion come a time when the honeymoon ends and withdrawal sets in.

If I sound frustrated, I am. Not with the creative effort and process and the joy of designing, but with the nonchalant attitude of the consuming masses who somehow feel it’s their birthright to acquire everything they desire – regardless of how they acquire it or what impact their actions have on others (or themselves). And this applies across the board: from the dirty products they buy in the real world, to the hacked software and entertainment products they download on the internet. The sad part is, I think the honeymoon has yet to reach the bedroom.

What we’ve not really yet seen is the merging of tangible product with virtual 3D content. But we will. And the collision between the two worlds may turn out to be a kind of perfect storm. On the one hand are the learned attitudes and practices of the “download” culture. Add to this the “credit you deserve” and “gotta have it” mentality that leads people to purchase foreign goods which pillage the intellectual capital of their own culture while sending jobs and money to others (not realizing that these things sustain their system and their own quality of life). And on the other hand is the potential to some day download a file and fabricate the product on demand (already a possibility in some sectors, like posters and printed t-shirts). No, the quality won’t be as good initially. And no, rip-offs aren’t normally as well-made and long-lasting as pricier originals. But then since when has the consuming public shown that quality trumps price; just look at the history of Wal*Mart and how they grew to the world-consuming retailer they are today – “From the beginning, Walton had bought goods wherever he could get them cheapest, with any other considerations secondary“).

The world through my eyes – as a creator of both real and virtual product – looks like this:

>Second Life resident public comments – “Yes I violate trademarks…. My personal approach about copyright issues is this: I will break them.

>Ongoing white collar job lay-offs in the U.S. reported today – “Ford cutting 1,700 salaried positions

>Virtual products using trademarked brands (above image): SLBoutique fashion accessories

>And the reason for today’s entry courtesy of BusinessWeek blog Well Spent: – “The Cheating Culture

Again, this is not a new issue for me. Since “reBang” was started with the original intent of creating products that spanned both the virtual and real product worlds, I’ve both observed and commented on it before. I just wish that at this point I had some solid sense of whether the effort is worthwhile.

Rosedale Interviewed

Via the Second Life forum I made my way to a Gamesblog interview of SL founder and CEO Philip Rosedale. From the interview:

In May 2005, the total amount traded in-world was USD$1.47 million. There were 1.3 million transactions between 19,500 unique users.

And to think this is really still in its infancy.

(edit: C|Net has latched onto this interview. you can read that entry here)

Second Life Marketing Rope-a-dope

I spent too much time writing up and posting on the Second Life forum a lengthy follow-up to a question I posed at yesterday’s Second Life “Town Hall Meeting”. It’s way too long to post in its entirety, so I’ll attempt to condense it and post the “summaries” I included.

My original question and the response:

Csven Concord: What guidelines does LL currently have in place regarding the marketing and advertising of RL products in SL, and any measures (if any) to limit the impact of RL advertising on SL’s newly emerging internal markets?
David Linden: People can advertise in SL with prior approval. That’s something that Robin manages.
David Linden: Currently we are not actively pursuing external advertising.
David Linden: next

Not really the answer I was hoping to receive. So here are the first two “summary” requests that have to do with the Linden Lab requirement to submit for approval any inworld advertising of a real life product or service:

A) Could Linden Labs please promulgate the Guidelines for submitting and gaining authorization to advertise inside the Second Life simulation?

B) Could Linden Labs please maintain a listing of RL brands which have been given authorization to advertise inside the Second Life simulation?

The disconnect in all this is that there are already many branded products in the Second Life simulation. Which are authorized and which aren’t? I suspect many of them are unauthorized advertisements as well as being illegal violations of copyright and trademark. But Linden Labs is careful in their Terms of Service to avoid responsibility for user content; they don’t “police”. And their position is both practical and understandable. It also creates an interesting Catch-22 situation for them: how can they filter content but also claim lack of control over content?

More importantly to me, it also creates a problem for Second Life’s inworld content creators. They’re competing in a virtual market increasingly filled with real world brand names. That makes selling original product all the more difficult. And what is their recourse? Well, as far as I can see, they have no officially documented means to address this issue. To file a complaint of copyright infringement to discourage this unfair practice, the complaintant is required by the Terms of Service to include what appears to be a legally-binding statement that not only is the information provided correct (the alleged intellectual property violation) but that the complaintant is the copyright owner or agent of the violated intellectual property. That’s pretty nonsensical to me. The practical result is that content creators are negatively impacted by these rules, and incentives for creating content under these conditions are also negatively affected. Why bother creating a new brand of virtual product when anyone can rip a logo from some real life corporation and plaster it all over their versions of a virtual product and get all that free brand equity… and not have to be overly concerned with the objections of legitimate inworld brands. In a funny way, this reminds me of leather jackets I’ve seen in third world countries – with, for example, “Fruit of the Loom” labels stitched inside (if only they’d known for which products those labels were intended).

So, the summary for that problem was simply:

C) Could Linden Labs please explain this apparent conflict of interest between the handling of content and the acknowledged need to support content creation inside the Second Life simulation?

This is either going to be really interesting or it’s going to be really ignored. I personally see a simple way to deal with this: allow anyone to report intellectual property violations. Of course that would require Linden Labs to be more vigilant in their efforts to filter content. And with the potential to get hit with a liability uppercut, I suspect not getting pinned in a corner is a strategy. Let’s see how long that lasts.

Book On Virtual Branding

Betsy Book has posted an announcement over on Terra Nova that her latest paper, “Virtual World Business Brands: Entrepreneurship and Identity in Massively Multiplayer Online Gaming Environments“, is available for download. Get it here.

This is a subject that’s been occupying my mind of late, though regarded from perhaps a slightly different perspective. I look forward to reading this.

Killer Spore

About a week ago I posted this entry on a Will Wright interview and also made mention of a link to a video (the Will Wright/Spore one). Well, I tried to watch that video, couldn’t get it to play, then didn’t get back to it. Turns out I had browser issues. So yesterday I made my way back and watched it. Wow. It’s much better than I had imagined. But before you watch the video, check out this speculative article on the future of character design/creation. That way, when you watch all the cute characters shown in the Spore demo, you’ll be aware that it doesn’t have to look “cartoony”. It could look as good as this (mature content).