You don’t remove the UUID code itself, you replace the texture the UUID refers to with another texture.

Just like replacing the texture on a webserver host with one in the same folder with the same name.

A friend of mine did this with textures of his on the internet of his which were backlinked to. when he found out people were backlinking to it, he replaced a texture he hosted on his webserver with a very silly one. All of a sudden their webpages didn’t show a lovely background anymore but silly pictures of ‘my little pony’. It worked great.

Its simple like that.

And if it isn’t we’d like to hear from a Linden WHY it isn’t. Their 2 years long ignorance makes me think they simply don’t WANT to answer the question, because ieiher they had to take action, or admit their DMCA/copyright promises aren’t worth a lot.

Sending a DMCA notification with the location of an item (in a vendor, or in inventory) to indirectly identify the UUIDs to remove so far also hasn’t worked. Linden Lab has been, evidently, ignoring these requests, choosing to continue to remove the vendors instead, even when explicitly asked not to do this.

Linden Lab has been asked why they don’t remove textures. They haven’t answered yet. One-on-one communications with Linden Lab has, in my experience, unfortunately not proved that effective so far - you can send clear letters with clear questions and receive, at best, one-liners as a response. We realize Linden Lab is busy, though.

Naturally social control is important. This is happening: many customers do inform content creators of suspected infringement, and content creators communicate with each other as well. That’s not to say matters cannot be improved, but there is already quite a lot known. If the DMCA notifications would be handled in such a way to block, remove, or replace textures, they would indeed be a lot more effective. It wouldn’t block copyright infringement entirely, obviously, but for those in business of copyright infringement it would become much harder.

One social aspect that could be improved is Linden Lab communication with content creators - perhaps content creators could delegate a group that Linden Lab promises to listen to on a regular basis? To my knowledge such a forum does not currently exist, but I may be mistaken. Linden Lab does not need to promise to implement the recommendations of the forum, but just a regular two-way channel of communication on this topic, would, I think, be of help to content creators who are worried about copyright violations.

As I have mentioned in a earlier post i was shocked after buying these programs just how many recognisable filters there are in some of these shops, they are breaking their program licesnse agreement, this has not gone unoticed vy the creaters of these filters, and in the support forums for thelikes of filter forge there are links to SL pages, some are even talking of legal action.

This will be very intresting I’m sure, though would they take LL, or the texture re-seller to court… who knows ?

MaL

this totally makes no sense IMHO. So rich people should give away their money too, because chances are they will be stolen anyway? Sorry, but that does not sound like the kind of world i would want to live in

Replacing an UUID of a texture for a “this texture was removed due to content theft would require simple manual intervention. Not “significant rewirite of code”