If I build something, that is MY build, and ceases to be anyone else's intellectual property. There comes a point where a building material manufacturer lets go of their product, and allows it to become a part of something greater. It took MY vision, MY experience to create that unique build.
Listen, folks. Without my visions of building, your building materials are useless.
The lines between a "sane" license of use, and most licenses of uses we see on the grids, have been very much blurred. I would say that those who make building components fall into one of three categories:
- Category A: I don't care what you do with my stuff.
- Category B: I care what you do with my stuff, but I recognize that once I sell you these materials, you are free to create with them, and I hold no rights over your final product.
- Category C: I more than care what you do with my stuff, I have rights over your build, and where you take it, and sell it, and if I don't like a particular place, I have the right to tell you not to take it there and I will cause you all kinds of grief and OMGWTFBBQ if you don't listen to me BECAUSE I AM THE ONLY ONE WITH RIGHTS. FURTHERMORE I CAN CHANGE MY MIND LIKE THE WIND AND I EXPECT YOU TO CHANGE YOUR BEHAVIOR WITH IT!
I can hear many of you saying "but there are many suppliers that fall between those categories" and I'll agree with you. MY concern is those who fall squarely into Category C. THEY are the ones who think their rights go too far.
It does not help that providers like Linden Labs also have forgotten about the rights of the builder and have gone way too far in the direction of the "screamers" in Category C. It is that which encourages the screamers, and makes them think they have far more rights than they really do.
All the paranoia about intellectual property rights has also pretty much obliterated the idea of interdependability between suppliers and builders. What happened to the notion of everyone providing a part of a greater whole which can, in turn, benefit a much larger audience? I guess it fell by the wayside when too many individuals popped up wanting to make a quick buck at the expense of others, suppliers and builders alike.
Like it or not, there will always be people who want to make a quick buck, and will steal the hard work of others to do it, if they can get away with it. Be that as it may, it's about time the suppliers started to calm down and accept that this will happen and the only thing they can do is hope that other people tell them about it before the thief profits too much.
Speaking of thieves, not all suppliers are on the up and up, either, which further clouds the issue. If you're creating derivative works of other original elements, especially if they came from the wilds of the Internet, you'd best make sure you can sell those derivative works, because you too can be DMCA'd by the original owner of those elements.
Contrary to Anonymous, I do know my stuff. Obviously, they didn't like what I had to say and had to accuse me of being uneducated and misinformed, in order to make themselves feel better about how they're trying to screw around with builders. See, I'm pretty sure I know who Anonymous is, and they fall squarely into Category C above.
I am hoping to see more suppliers fall into Categorys A and B, above, and stop trying to infringe on the rights of the builders who buy their materials and incorporate them into builds.
I said it earlier, and I'll say it again: Your supplies are worthless if they're not incorporated into a build.