Custom Content Re-Sell Debate...

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Just tagging to last......


When you upload anything to the game it becomes the property of EA. While EA is giving you the right to sell your creations, you have given up your rights to control the distribution of those creations. EA would even have the right to add 10,000 of your object in game and hand one out to every player, if they so choose.

Once you sell an item in the game, it is no longer yours to control. You can put all the warnings in the world and put up signs saying you don't want your objects re-distributed all you want but there is nothing you can do about it. You relinquished that right when you uploaded the object into the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you Gracie.

After reading this whole thread I was going to say this and you got to it first. Stores make a living off of selling other stores stuff. It has happened since the beginning of TSO time. With custom content, everything Gracie said applies. There is nothing anyone can do about someone else buying it up and reselling it.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

One of these days, you are going to make a post that does NOT reference SL in some comparative way, and I am going to fall on my frikkin' butt.

[/ QUOTE ]Name me one other online game that uses custom created content as comprehensively as SL, and then you have a point. Until then, we only have SL to compare against as a benchmark of how custom content should be handled.

Deal with it.

<u>You know, if you didn't want to argue with me, you could just put me on ignore, rather than complaining every time I make a perfectly legitimate, on topic, comparison between the games.</u>

[/ QUOTE ]
No way, Jose.
As I said before, I thoroughly believe that you are deliberately sabotaging TSO while using these boards to promote and advertise SL.
Your unending, uncompromising, uninformed, and at times, grossly untrue criticisms of the game have convinced me beyond any doubt that you are purposely trying to undermine it.
<blockquote><hr>

Until then, we only have SL to compare against as a benchmark of how custom content should be handled.


[/ QUOTE ]
The 2 games are similar in basic concept only. The only issues shared are subjective - morality, ethics, legality - and you clearly demonstrated over the years that your grasp of these concepts is highly suspect.
<blockquote><hr>

how custom content should be handled.


[/ QUOTE ]
"should"???? You are the expert of what constitutes the proper standards????
Hell, it doesn't even occur to you that others may not agree that SL is doing it right - I certainly don't.
No - you think that because *you* approve, that makes it fact.
What arrogance.
I'm sticking around, pal.
Deal with *that*.

 

[imported_Gracie Nito]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Just tagging to last......


When you upload anything to the game it becomes the property of EA. While EA is giving you the right to sell your creations, you have given up your rights to control the distribution of those creations. EA would even have the right to add 10,000 of your object in game and hand one out to every player, if they so choose.

Once you sell an item in the game, it is no longer yours to control. You can put all the warnings in the world and put up signs saying you don't want your objects re-distributed all you want but there is nothing you can do about it. You relinquished that right when you uploaded the object into the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you Gracie.

After reading this whole thread I was going to say this and you got to it first. Stores make a living off of selling other stores stuff. It has happened since the beginning of TSO time. With custom content, everything Gracie said applies. There is nothing anyone can do about someone else buying it up and reselling it.

[/ QUOTE ]

After wading through EA Online Terms &amp; Conditions I found this for everyone to read and comprehend.

<blockquote><hr>

Once you post or send any Content to EA Online, you expressly grant EA. the complete and irrevocable right to quote, re-post, use, reproduce, modify, distribute, transmit, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and perform the Content in any form, anywhere, with or without attribution to your screen name in EA's discretion, and without any notice or compensation to you of any kind and grant all licenses, consents and clearances to enable EA to use such Content for such purposes. You waive, and agree not to assert any moral or similar rights you may have in such Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also:

<blockquote><hr>

You also acknowledge that the time that you spend on EA Online is solely for entertainment purposes, and that no value can be attributed to such time. In particular (but without limitation), you understand that no value can be attributed to the time that you may spend accumulating digital objects (such as points, tokens and other in-game objects) or developing Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

 

[imported_Shirl1211]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

One of these days, you are going to make a post that does NOT reference SL in some comparative way, and I am going to fall on my frikkin' butt.

[/ QUOTE ]Name me one other online game that uses custom created content as comprehensively as SL, and then you have a point. Until then, we only have SL to compare against as a benchmark of how custom content should be handled.

Deal with it.

You know, if you didn't want to argue with me, you could just put me on ignore, rather than complaining every time I make a perfectly legitimate, on topic, comparison between the games.

[/ QUOTE ]


We can all state our opinions here even if they are right or wrong and we can count on them to fall under attack by you as it has been proven since page one. Perhaps you should use the ignore if you disagree with all but one person in this thread. Almost every post I have read has good sound advice as far as CC goes and in a recent comment a poster states that her BF is an attorney and said no legal issue so far you still try to discredit the opinions.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Just tagging to last......


When you upload anything to the game it becomes the property of EA. While EA is giving you the right to sell your creations, you have given up your rights to control the distribution of those creations. EA would even have the right to add 10,000 of your object in game and hand one out to every player, if they so choose.

Once you sell an item in the game, it is no longer yours to control. You can put all the warnings in the world and put up signs saying you don't want your objects re-distributed all you want but there is nothing you can do about it. You relinquished that right when you uploaded the object into the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you Gracie.

After reading this whole thread I was going to say this and you got to it first. Stores make a living off of selling other stores stuff. It has happened since the beginning of TSO time. With custom content, everything Gracie said applies. There is nothing anyone can do about someone else buying it up and reselling it.

[/ QUOTE ]

After wading through EA Online Terms &amp; Conditions I found this for everyone to read and comprehend.

<blockquote><hr>

Once you post or send any Content to EA Online, you expressly grant EA. the complete and irrevocable right to quote, re-post, use, reproduce, modify, distribute, transmit, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and perform the Content in any form, anywhere, with or without attribution to your screen name in EA's discretion, and without any notice or compensation to you of any kind and grant all licenses, consents and clearances to enable EA to use such Content for such purposes. You waive, and agree not to assert any moral or similar rights you may have in such Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also:

<blockquote><hr>

You also acknowledge that the time that you spend on EA Online is solely for entertainment purposes, and that no value can be attributed to such time. In particular (but without limitation), you understand that no value can be attributed to the time that you may spend accumulating digital objects (such as points, tokens and other in-game objects) or developing Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, that's what it demands/says all right.
But does it pass the LEM test? Let's see.
(L)egal - yes.
(E)thical - in todays business standards? A grudging "probably".
(M)oral - I guess that depends on a person's definition of morality.

But, how about "despicable"? "Borderline sleazy"?
After all, there must be something 'not right' about demanding the rights to other people's work without fair compensation. Hell, without ANY compensation.
I'm just sayin'.

 

[imported_Gracie Nito]

<blockquote><hr>



But, how about "despicable"? "Borderline sleazy"?
After all, there must be something 'not right' about demanding the rights to other people's work without fair compensation. Hell, without ANY compensation.
I'm just sayin'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regardless, of what you may think of the contract. These are the terms you agree to when you play. When I read the agreement, it appears that anyone that tries to assert their moral rights over content they uploaded to the game is the one that is in violation. By putting up a sign claiming that re-distributing their content is illegal or immoral would be a violation, would it not?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

As I said before, I thoroughly believe that you are deliberately sabotaging TSO while using these boards to promote and advertise SL.

[/ QUOTE ]LOL

You give me far more credit and power than I deserve.

I think you'll find that there are a lot more things that are going to bring TSO down than me not being happy with a few of EA's decisions.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>



But, how about "despicable"? "Borderline sleazy"?
After all, there must be something 'not right' about demanding the rights to other people's work without fair compensation. Hell, without ANY compensation.
I'm just sayin'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regardless, of what you may think of the contract. These are the terms you agree to when you play.

[/ QUOTE ]
I know that, Gracie.
Please don't imply that I am ignorant of the facts of the agreement.
But let's take a look at that "agreement".

I don't "really" agree. That is - I don't think it's a fair or equitable contract.
I had no say in the terms or conditions, and I am not permitted to negotiate. I clicked on the tick box because I had no choice if I wanted to play the game. This is closer to "coercion" than "agreement".
Yes, I know - I didn't *have* to sign - nobody *forced* me. I could have found another game to play. But, I signed - so, I'll live with it.
But I don't have to like it. From an intellectual standpoint, it is quite insulting.

And the "agreement" doesn't say I give up any right to criticize it.

 

[imported_Dali Dalinza]

<blockquote><hr>

Once you post or send any Content to EA Online, you expressly grant EA. the complete and irrevocable right to quote, re-post, use, reproduce, modify, distribute, transmit, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and perform the Content in any form, anywhere, with or without attribution to your screen name in EA's discretion, and without any notice or compensation to you of any kind and grant all licenses, consents and clearances to enable EA to use such Content for such purposes. You waive, and agree not to assert any moral or similar rights you may have in such Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also:

<blockquote><hr>

You also acknowledge that the time that you spend on EA Online is solely for entertainment purposes, and that no value can be attributed to such time. In particular (but without limitation), you understand that no value can be attributed to the time that you may spend accumulating digital objects (such as points, tokens and other in-game objects) or developing Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, that's what it demands/says all right.
But does it pass the LEM test? Let's see.
(L)egal - yes.
(E)thical - in todays business standards? A grudging "probably".
(M)oral - I guess that depends on a person's definition of morality.

But, how about "despicable"? "Borderline sleazy"?
After all, there must be something 'not right' about demanding the rights to other people's work without fair compensation. Hell, without ANY compensation.
I'm just sayin'.

[/ QUOTE ]

My reading of the former clause is that it is intended to release cc in case EA uses it in advertising or marketing. It is the same if they show your game home in advertising, for instance. It is "their" game and they are stating their entitlement to all virtual objects in the game, whether created by their staff or the players. If you create a really cool set of cc objects that make it to the pages of a magazine, they don't want to have you objecting that your rights have been violated. The latter clause basically states that you can't hold EA liable if, at the end of the day, if your objects are wiped away, you feel you've wasted your time and money playing their game.

I admit to not understanding the argument against stores buying up and selling cc. It is "the way of the world" and I don't understand how you can expect people to behave differently in this game than they do in real life, since this game is built on real life. Designers in the real world expect payment for their work, and once they have cash in hand their custom content is out the door with a life of it's own.

In rl the only problem is when designers don't get paid. I have a friend who designs textiles and, no kidding, I have watched her chase a person down the beach who was wearing shorts made of one of her designs manufactured by a company who didn't buy the rights to her design. ("Excuse me, I need to see the tag on your shorts." -- what a pick up line, eh?

)

It seems to me the players who are against resale of their cc want to be altruistic and provide fun at affordable prices. That is admirable. Unfortunately, in the free market established (and encouraged) by the game design, I don't see how it can be realistic to expect other players not to try and make a profit using whatever objects they collect for sales. The only way would be to lease the object, which if you are a cc creator who is really set at keeping control of your cc, is the best option.

Cherry Bomb -- thanks for the Adam Smith reference. Indeed!

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

As I said before, I thoroughly believe that you are deliberately sabotaging TSO while using these boards to promote and advertise SL.

[/ QUOTE ]LOL

<u>You give me far more credit and power than I deserve.</u>

I think you'll find that there are a lot more things that are going to bring TSO down than me not being happy with a few of EA's decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]
Two things that I am quite sure I did NOT associate with you.

 

[imported_SimTripps]

Replying to last...

Re: Resale debate

I have yet to officially 'set up shop' in EA Land, as I'm waiting for the final merge, however... in TC3, where the first cc was born, I would NEVER sell someone else's work at my store. I certainly love to collect cool cc, but for decorative purposes only, not resale profit. I'm not against reselling, since the uploader's name will always be on it (same with crafted items).

If I saw someone else other than Thrill, for example, selling Thrill's cars, I'd always know they're Thrill's lol..

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

Once you post or send any Content to EA Online, you expressly grant EA. the complete and irrevocable right to quote, re-post, use, reproduce, modify, distribute, transmit, broadcast, and otherwise communicate, and publicly display and perform the Content in any form, anywhere, with or without attribution to your screen name in EA's discretion, and without any notice or compensation to you of any kind and grant all licenses, consents and clearances to enable EA to use such Content for such purposes. You waive, and agree not to assert any moral or similar rights you may have in such Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also:

<blockquote><hr>

You also acknowledge that the time that you spend on EA Online is solely for entertainment purposes, and that no value can be attributed to such time. In particular (but without limitation), you understand that no value can be attributed to the time that you may spend accumulating digital objects (such as points, tokens and other in-game objects) or developing Content.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, that's what it demands/says all right.
But does it pass the LEM test? Let's see.
(L)egal - yes.
(E)thical - in todays business standards? A grudging "probably".
(M)oral - I guess that depends on a person's definition of morality.

But, how about "despicable"? "Borderline sleazy"?
After all, there must be something 'not right' about demanding the rights to other people's work without fair compensation. Hell, without ANY compensation.
I'm just sayin'.

[/ QUOTE ]

My reading of the former clause is that it is intended to release cc in case EA uses it in advertising or marketing. It is the same if they show your game home in advertising, for instance. It is "their" game and they are stating their entitlement to all virtual objects in the game, whether created by their staff or the players. If you create a really cool set of cc objects that make it to the pages of a magazine, they don't want to have you objecting that your rights have been violated. The latter clause basically states that you can't hold EA liable if, at the end of the day, if your objects are wiped away, you feel you've wasted your time and money playing their game.

I admit to not understanding the argument against stores buying up and selling cc. It is "the way of the world" and I don't understand how you can expect people to behave differently in this game than they do in real life, since this game is built on real life. Designers in the real world expect payment for their work, and once they have cash in hand their custom content is out the door with a life of it's own.

In rl the only problem is when designers don't get paid. I have a friend who designs textiles and, no kidding, I have watched her chase a person down the beach who was wearing shorts made of one of her designs manufactured by a company who didn't buy the rights to her design.

It seems to me the players who are against resale of their cc want to be altruistic and provide fun at affordable prices. That is admirable. Unfortunately, in the free market established (and encouraged) by the game design, I don't see how it can be realistic to expect other players not to try and make a profit using whatever objects they collect for sales. The only way would be to lease the object, which if you are a cc creator who is really set at keeping control of your cc, is the best option.

Cherry Bomb -- thanks for the Adam Smith reference. Indeed!

[/ QUOTE ]
The same thing could be accomplished with an unlimited license - they don't need to take possession of somebody else's work.

The 'fair compensation' arguement applies to EA as much as anybody else.
As someone pointed out - they can make 10,000 copies and sell it in their stores or hand it out for free. They can use it in various ways to directly or indirectly generate profit for EA. All without a penny of compensation to the creator.
OTOH, only an extremely small amount of CC is created from scratch - most is created from object bases that are already owned by EA - so it could be argued that the point is moot.
Ok - fair enuff. Still.... the way they word those "agreements" just rankles the hell out of me. They shouldn't call them that.
They should call them -"Take it or leave it"s.

 

[Purdy]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I have actually solved my own problem here and, hopefully other cc creators will follow my lead.

On all my uploads I will be including in the description, "This item can be purchased for "x amount" at "insert store here" or directly from "insert name here". "

If the person doesnt check the description before he/she buys it, then its thier own fault. I dont think any store is going to want to stock an item that makes them look as tho they are over pricing

[/ QUOTE ]

If the item is set for sale you cannot view the description. so customers would see this after their purchase.

I for myself agree to the poster in some way. not because another gets out profit if he/she is reselling my items, but i am sad for the customers who buy it there because they can get it cheaper from the creator themself.

I am creator in Second Life also and there we have the same problem. if anyone is buying an item from you he/she is the new owner. they just can resell it like they want. The only way for us in SL is we can make an item Copy or Trans. if you make it copy the buyer can make as many copies as he/she wants but is not able to resell it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasnt aware of this, I thought the customer was given the opertunity to read the description before buying. I think that should be implemented.

Geez, guess I'm gonna have to just work harder to beat out the AFK stores to get my cc seen

[/ QUOTE ]


Besides the auction system that TSO wants to create maybe they should create some time of search system like the site My Simon. It's a price comparison shopping site. You type in the item that you want to buy and it searches for the stores that sell it and the price. This will help ppl find the lowest prices and help the stores that don't show up in the top 10 make some business. Then you can IM the owner that you want to purchase that item and find a good time that you 2 can get online together to purchase it.

With this search system ppl will see that you have the lowest price for your CC.

 

[imported_Qute Pi]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I have actually solved my own problem here and, hopefully other cc creators will follow my lead.

On all my uploads I will be including in the description, "This item can be purchased for "x amount" at "insert store here" or directly from "insert name here". "

If the person doesnt check the description before he/she buys it, then its thier own fault. I dont think any store is going to want to stock an item that makes them look as tho they are over pricing

[/ QUOTE ]

If the item is set for sale you cannot view the description. so customers would see this after their purchase.

I for myself agree to the poster in some way. not because another gets out profit if he/she is reselling my items, but i am sad for the customers who buy it there because they can get it cheaper from the creator themself.

I am creator in Second Life also and there we have the same problem. if anyone is buying an item from you he/she is the new owner. they just can resell it like they want. The only way for us in SL is we can make an item Copy or Trans. if you make it copy the buyer can make as many copies as he/she wants but is not able to resell it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasnt aware of this, I thought the customer was given the opertunity to read the description before buying. I think that should be implemented.

Geez, guess I'm gonna have to just work harder to beat out the AFK stores to get my cc seen

[/ QUOTE ]

You can view the description just like you would on any item that isn't custom content. If its on sale, click on it, then all the way to the right near the wear section there is an information button. Which shows item name and description. What you can't view when its on sale is the custom viewer section.

 

[Roger Wilco]

<blockquote><hr>


My reading of the former clause is that it is intended to release cc in case EA uses it in advertising or marketing. It is the same if they show your game home in advertising, for instance. It is "their" game and they are stating their entitlement to all virtual objects in the game, whether created by their staff or the players. If you create a really cool set of cc objects that make it to the pages of a magazine, they don't want to have you objecting that your rights have been violated. The latter clause basically states that you can't hold EA liable if, at the end of the day, if your objects are wiped away, you feel you've wasted your time and money playing their game.

I admit to not understanding the argument against stores buying up and selling cc. It is "the way of the world" and I don't understand how you can expect people to behave differently in this game than they do in real life, since this game is built on real life. Designers in the real world expect payment for their work, and once they have cash in hand their custom content is out the door with a life of it's own.

In rl the only problem is when designers don't get paid. I have a friend who designs textiles and, no kidding, I have watched her chase a person down the beach who was wearing shorts made of one of her designs manufactured by a company who didn't buy the rights to her design. ("Excuse me, I need to see the tag on your shorts." -- what a pick up line, eh?

)

It seems to me the players who are against resale of their cc want to be altruistic and provide fun at affordable prices. That is admirable. Unfortunately, in the free market established (and encouraged) by the game design, I don't see how it can be realistic to expect other players not to try and make a profit using whatever objects they collect for sales. The only way would be to lease the object, which if you are a cc creator who is really set at keeping control of your cc, is the best option.

Cherry Bomb -- thanks for the Adam Smith reference. Indeed!

[/ QUOTE ]

Spot on Dali, great post, but facts don't matter to those people who insist on trying to pass judgment on those whom they have granted ownership of something to in exchange for simoleans.

To me there is nothing here even worthy of debate, it a non-issue. If you sell or give away something at below the fair market value of the object you shouldn't be shocked and surprised at seeing resellers buying up and selling it at the price it should have been sold at in the first place.

I see nothing at all wrong legally, ethically, or morally at the resale of improperly priced goods. As a matter of fact, IMO they should be lauded for identifying a potentially improperly priced good, and assuming the financial risk of buying it and attempting to resell it at the “correct” price. A good reseller can profit on the spread between what ignorant or altruistic original sellers price their goods at, and what the market actually will bear. It’s naïve in the extreme to expect or want any other result from improperly priced goods.

 

[imported_Dali Dalinza]

<blockquote><hr>



Besides the auction system that TSO wants to create maybe they should create some time of search system like the site My Simon. It's a price comparison shopping site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good idea !

As an Ebay seller, I am often astounded that buyers will bid higher for a used object I am selling than the same object is selling for new elsewhere on the 'net. I always compare prices using one of the price comparison bots (sorry! some bots are good!). It is obvious many people don't bother.

Human nature. What ya gonna do?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

It’s naïve in the extreme to expect or want any other result from improperly priced goods.

[/ QUOTE ]What about people who made cheap items as a service to the community, only to see some scumbag come along and buy it all up and sell it at 10x the price they intended to sell it at?

Over in that-place-that-upsets-Donovan-so-much, a lot of people sell cheap because they choose to. It isn't up to someone else to decide the value of someone else's creations, only someone purchasing an item for their own use.

 

[imported_Dali Dalinza]

I agree, Roger. I don't understand the arguement for keeping control over cc, even though some of my good buddies are the ones for it which makes me want to take their side.

I feel like a "bottom feeder" when I am doing my Ebay selling thing. I buy items at garage sales, flea markets, and at Salvation Army outlets for pence and sell for dollars. I thrive on sellers who don't know, or don't care, about the "real" value of the items they are selling. A few times I've brought the item's possible value to the attention of the seller. The usual response is, "I don't have time, I just want it out of here." That is how the Salvation Army fills the shelves. That is what makes "Antiques Roadshow" such a hit.

The cc items in TSO bear the creator's name. That is more than most rl objects have.

Cookie (I think it was Cookie?) recently suggested a communist economy for TSO. I think that, or a socialist one, might be the only answer for those who want to change free market operations in EA Land.

 

[Roger Wilco]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

It’s naïve in the extreme to expect or want any other result from improperly priced goods.

[/ QUOTE ]What about people who made cheap items as a service to the community, only to see some scumbag come along and buy it all up and sell it at 10x the price they intended to sell it at?

[/ QUOTE ]

What about them? If somebody is determined to ignore they fair market value of something and give it away or intentionally underprice it "for the good of the community" they shouldn't be surprised to see it being bought up and resold. They're naïvely wishing and hoping to ignore the forces of the free market.

 

[Roger Wilco]

<blockquote><hr>

I feel like a "bottom feeder" when I am doing my Ebay selling thing.

[/ QUOTE ]
You shouldn't. You perform a valuable, under-appreciated service as a middleman who uses their expertise at identifying the actual value of goods people want to get rid of quickly. You profit by providing a service to those who can't be bothered to sell things for what they are worth.

You are the grease that makes the market work.

 

[imported_Dali Dalinza]

<blockquote><hr>

They're naïvely wishing and hoping to ignore the forces of the free market.

[/ QUOTE ]

As well as the pressure to earn simoleans that has been built into the game, and being made ever more intense by current game development and design.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

It’s naïve in the extreme to expect or want any other result from improperly priced goods.

[/ QUOTE ]What about people who made cheap items as a service to the community, only to see some scumbag come along and buy it all up and sell it at 10x the price they intended to sell it at?

Over in that-place-that-upsets-Donovan-so-much, a lot of people sell cheap because they choose to. It isn't up to someone else to decide the value of someone else's creations, only someone purchasing an item for their own use.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly what is happening!

If the consumer did not willingly pay the higher prices at the resellers shop, then the resellers would not be selling them!

It is the consumer, not the creator that establishes a free market <u>value</u>. No one can sell a discretionary item like CC for more §, than someone is willing to pay for it. They can, as Roger pointed out, sell it for less.....but never for more.

And in reference to your comment about only 4 stores selling TV's where you live...

...where I live (and it is *not* considered a large city) there are hundreds and hundreds of places large and small selling TV's. It is a fact of life that folks will buy a more expensive one, just to save themselves the time of a city-wide search for a cheaper product.

So yes, convenience is a valid component in a fair market price....and in a store mark-up. It is a commonly known fact, that Best Buy is going to sell a TV for less than a little Mom &amp; Pop store....but the little stores still have sales, because some people find it more convenient to buy from them....even at the higher prices.

 

[Guest]

TTL

I see alot of reference to those of us who are trying to keep prices low for our fellow players, knowing how rough it is to make any simoleans in the game. In my opinion, I think those of you who think we underprice are the ones who think people should be pushed to use those ATM machines. I, in no way, want to make people feel the need to purchase simoleans just so they can buy something I make, so I keep prices low. It sickens me, that the scum on the top of the list are reselling things at double or more prices and that so many people shop there just because they think those stores are actually top of the line stores, when in fact they over abuse the visitor hours more so than anyone else.

I realize it's not "illegal" what they are doing. They are just sucking out of the game whatever they can, like leeches. It does make me want to quit bothering to make things anymore because I am not in this to make scum rich. I have a feeling that is the way it will go here, if EA doesn't do something to protect the creators, there won't be many bothering.

I hate the idea of having to go out of game to shop a catalog, but that may be the only solution, where only the actual creator of objects can sell, and they can set the price they want for things. It works in IMVU that way, you can't resell what you buy, if you don't want it anymore, you delete it. They also have it set up that people can basically "clone" an object, IF the original creator wishes, and recolor/retexture to sell, but... the original creator gets a bigger cut from each concurrent sale than the one who made the copy. Just some food for thought.

 

[imported_LFancey]

I have not read every post here but enough to get the drift of the debate.

Donvan brings up the point very well.

Buying something in game from a store and then re-selling is not in anyway an issue.

Wholesaling as defined here: Wholesale

"Wholesaling is the sale of goods or merchandise to retailers, to industrial,
commercial, institutional, or other professional business users, or to other wholesalers and related subordinated services.[1]

According to the United Nations Statistics Division, "Wholesale" is the resale (sale without transformation) of new and used goods to retailers, to industrial, commercial, institutional or professional users, or to other wholesalers, or involves acting as an agent or broker in buying merchandise for, or selling merchandise to, such persons or companies. Wholesalers frequently physically assemble, sort and grade goods in large lots, break bulk, repack and redistribute in smaller lots"

Retailers as defined here: Retail

Retailing consists of the sale of goods or merchandise from a fixed location, such as a department store or kiosk, or by post, in small or individual lots for direct consumption by the purchaser.[1] Retailing may include subordinated services, such as delivery. Purchasers may be individuals or businesses. In commerce, a retailer buys goods or products in large quantities from manufacturers or importers, either directly or through a wholesaler, and then sells smaller quantities to the end-user. Retail establishments are often called shops or stores. Retailers are at the end of the supply chain. Manufacturing marketers see the process of retailing as a necessary part of their overall distribution strategy.

Bulk purchase from a store (wholesaler) at a discount to a store (Retailer) who breaks into individual units and resells at a price over wholesale.

Why would a wholesaler use this method when they can sell at the same price? Several reasons. They are in the manufactuing business, have the raw materials, equipment, or skill to make such items. They also avoid the cost of many stores and tend to operate from a distribution center.


Food for thought.

Cheers,

Lee

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I have not read every post here but enough to get the drift of the debate.

Donvan brings up the point very well.

Buying something in game from a store and then re-selling is not in anyway an issue.

Wholesaling as defined here:
Wholesale

"Wholesaling is the sale of goods or merchandise to retailers, to industrial,
commercial, institutional, or other professional business users, or to other wholesalers and related subordinated services.[1]

According to the United Nations Statistics Division, "Wholesale" is the resale (sale without transformation) of new and used goods to retailers, to industrial, commercial, institutional or professional users, or to other wholesalers, or involves acting as an agent or broker in buying merchandise for, or selling merchandise to, such persons or companies. Wholesalers frequently physically assemble, sort and grade goods in large lots, break bulk, repack and redistribute in smaller lots"

Retailers as defined here:

Retail

Retailing consists of the sale of goods or merchandise from a fixed location, such as a department store or kiosk, or by post, in small or individual lots for direct consumption by the purchaser.[1] Retailing may include subordinated services, such as delivery. Purchasers may be individuals or businesses. In commerce, a retailer buys goods or products in large quantities from manufacturers or importers, either directly or through a wholesaler, and then sells smaller quantities to the end-user. Retail establishments are often called shops or stores. Retailers are at the end of the supply chain. Manufacturing marketers see the process of retailing as a necessary part of their overall distribution strategy.

Bulk purchase from a store (wholesaler) at a discount to a store (Retailer) who breaks into individual units and resells at a price over wholesale.

Why would a wholesaler use this method when they can sell at the same price? Several reasons. They are in the manufactuing business, have the raw materials, equipment, or skill to make such items. They also avoid the cost of many stores and tend to operate from a distribution center.


Food for thought.

Cheers,

Lee

[/ QUOTE ]

But... they are buying from retailers to up the price and resell as a retailer. They are not buying from wholesalers. They are not buying from warehouses, they are not making a deal to sell with the custom content creators so they can buy at cheaper rates, they are buying up from other shops that are authorized to sell the creators goods.

 

[Guest]

You should not make assumptions, CntryGrl, I have no agenda other than to keep the record straight. And accusing Donovan &amp; Roger Wilco of pimping the ATM's is downright dangerous....

As for CC creators that wish to provide a service to the community, rather than make a living, it is up to them to establish avenues of original distribution that meet their goals.

In this thread, we are just trying to clarify, that there is no moral, ethical or legal grounds for controlling items once sold.

If a creator does not want resellers to buy their products, then they need to refine how they sell it.
*They can use trade function only, to sell to customers they have establish as end users.
*They can have 'admit-only' stores and only include valid end users on the list.
*They can hold private, invite-only sales or auctions.

None of these are fool proof, and what the customer does with the item after the sale is beyond the control of the designer. So the only thing a designer can hope to control is the original sale price.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Buying something in game from a store and then re-selling is not in anyway an issue.

[/ QUOTE ]Not to you maybe, but it is to a number of people.

You might want to go back and re-read the whole post and see the many valid points that are being made as to why reselling custom content is a bad idea, rather than just dismissing the idea.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>



But... they are buying from retailers to up the price and resell as a retailer. They are not buying from wholesalers. They are not buying from warehouses, they are not making a deal to sell with the custom content creators so they can buy at cheaper rates, they are buying up from other shops that are authorized to sell the creators goods.

[/ QUOTE ]

All that means, is that they are investing and risking their money on the belief that the market has placed a higher value on the object the the first retailer did.

 

[Guest]

I accused no one in particular. You mention names I'd not considered when thinking of those who, as you call it, pimp the ATM.

 

[imported_LFancey]

I hear you CntryGrl however, nothing is preventing this from a legal stand point.

I submit for your review:

"The pricing technique used by most retailers is cost-plus pricing. This involves adding a markup amount (or percentage) to the retailers cost. Another common technique is suggested retail pricing. This simply involves charging the amount suggested by the manufacturer and usually printed on the product by the manufacturer.

In Western countries, retail prices are often called psychological prices or odd prices.

Often prices are fixed and displayed on signs or labels. Alternatively, there can be price discrimination for a variety of reasons, where the retailer charges higher prices to some customers and lower prices to others. For example, a customer may have to pay more if the seller determines that he or she is willing to. The retailer may conclude this due to the customer's wealth, carelessness, lack of knowledge, or eagerness to buy. Another example is the practice of discounting for youths or students. Retailers who are overstocked, or need to raise cash to renew stocks may resort to "sales", where prices are "marked down", often by advertised percentages - "50% off"."

Hence the manufacture may offer "Suggested Retail Pricing" however, SRP is usually never the actual selling cost and may go up or down based upon many factors.

In fact one poster here is marking his content up with "SRP" like language.

Cheers,

Lee

 

[Guest]

As I said before Lee, I realize it's not illegal, but that doesn't change the way I feel about their business practices.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

It’s naïve in the extreme to expect or want any other result from improperly priced goods.

[/ QUOTE ]What about people who made cheap items as a service to the community, only to see some scumbag come along and buy it all up and sell it at 10x the price they intended to sell it at?

Over in that-place-that-upsets-Donovan-so-much, a lot of people sell cheap because they choose to. It isn't up to someone else to decide the value of someone else's creations, only someone purchasing an item for their own use.

[/ QUOTE ]

After reading up to Gracie's statement of the ToS excerpts she found, I was so disgusted I'd decided I was never going to make a shred of CC to sell, which is sad since I roomied at a friend's store both because I wanted to live with him, and for that express purpose.....we wanted to make CC together that coordinated and sell it. Now though after thinking about it I realize that doing that would do exactly what I admonished nodgree against.....screwing the newbies that we've been trying to help so much. Now I realize that what I probably need to do is only sell to people I know very well, since those people *would* pass the LEM (I like that, see how easy it is to agree with someone's points even if you disagree with their fundamental stance on other things?) test, and therefore would be people I'd be comfortable dealing with. Some of you make fun of those of us that feel that way calling us 'naive' but the fact that there are less and less 'naive' people in the world is what has put it in the state that it is today, so that you have to be 'jaded' to 'succeed'. Pfffft. I'd rather be a poor sim and know that my CC will be in the hands of only those who will TRULY appreciate it, than to be rich by other people taking, as somoene else aptly put it, the easy way out by letting me take the time to make the CC, whether its a recolor or a totally new creation, and them profiting off of it.

I also like your idea, Qute Pi of the agreement that you give to all people who buy your CC, though I'd like to know more about how you enforce it when you find violators of the spirit of the agreement, as well as the letter. Ethics and morals don't play enough of a role in the 'letter' of the law these days, and never will until people start standing up for them again.

So that's how I'm going to solve my own dilemma. Those that agree can do something similar if they wish. Those that don't can continue to rely on the 'letter' of the laws and agreements if they wish, but doing so IMO will not affect any change, so I'm not gonna do that.

 

[imported_LFancey]

My bad CntryGrl, The legal comment was not directed at you but I can see now how it looks that way. Rather it was general information that seemed apropo to this general thread.

I am all done now.

Cheers,

Lee

 

[Guest]

I would like to see the ability for us creators to change the description of our objects, as in change one, all copies of same change. I would like to add something to mine at this point, the SRP would be nice, but I realize that it is subject to change, so it would be better if we had the ability to change it, as needed, in the future.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

After reading up to Gracie's statement of the ToS excerpts she found, I was so disgusted I'd decided I was never going to make a shred of CC to sell, which is sad since I roomied at a friend's store both because I wanted to live with him

[/ QUOTE ]It could be that the ToS simply hasn't been updated yet.

Before custom content, everything in-game WAS created by EA, therefore it was theirs to do what they want with.

Usually when there is a ToS change (at least with other games), you have to click an 'agreement' of some description before you can continue to play the game under the new rules.

I certainly don't recall having done that ... which leads me to either the fact that the ToS hasn't been updated, or EA are in breach of contract by changing the rules without informing us.

 

[imported_Gracie Nito]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

After reading up to Gracie's statement of the ToS excerpts she found, I was so disgusted I'd decided I was never going to make a shred of CC to sell, which is sad since I roomied at a friend's store both because I wanted to live with him

[/ QUOTE ]It could be that the ToS simply hasn't been updated yet.

Before custom content, everything in-game WAS created by EA, therefore it was theirs to do what they want with.

Usually when there is a ToS change (at least with other games), you have to click an 'agreement' of some description before you can continue to play the game under the new rules.

I certainly don't recall having done that ... which leads me to either the fact that the ToS hasn't been updated, or EA are in breach of contract by changing the rules without informing us.

[/ QUOTE ]

I clearly remember having to click a checkbox in TC3 when the user agreement was changed months ago. If you read the agreement tho, it stipulates that changes can and will be made and it is your repsonbility to keep up with those changes.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

After reading up to Gracie's statement of the ToS excerpts she found, I was so disgusted I'd decided I was never going to make a shred of CC to sell, which is sad since I roomied at a friend's store both because I wanted to live with him

[/ QUOTE ]It could be that the ToS simply hasn't been updated yet.

Before custom content, everything in-game WAS created by EA, therefore it was theirs to do what they want with.

Usually when there is a ToS change (at least with other games), you have to click an 'agreement' of some description before you can continue to play the game under the new rules.

I certainly don't recall having done that ... which leads me to either the fact that the ToS hasn't been updated, or EA are in breach of contract by changing the rules without informing us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong again AJ.....they did change the ToS and require everyone to sign it, last spring or summer.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

Wrong again AJ.....they did change the ToS and require everyone to sign it, last spring or summer.

[/ QUOTE ]I don't remember that ... did they really have custom content covered a year before it was introduced?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

After reading up to Gracie's statement of the ToS excerpts she found, I was so disgusted I'd decided I was never going to make a shred of CC to sell, which is sad since I roomied at a friend's store both because I wanted to live with him

[/ QUOTE ]It could be that the ToS simply hasn't been updated yet.

Before custom content, everything in-game WAS created by EA, therefore it was theirs to do what they want with.

Usually when there is a ToS change (at least with other games), you have to click an 'agreement' of some description before you can continue to play the game under the new rules.

I certainly don't recall having done that ... which leads me to either the fact that the ToS hasn't been updated, or EA are in breach of contract by changing the rules without informing us.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope you're right, because I don't remember having to do it either recently....but I'm not sure EA *has* to do this, and if they don't chances are they won't since the *letter* of the law is respected so much more than morals and ethics, as proven in this thread. I can fully understand EA's retaining primary ownership of all items in the game, but the part that really got my goat was the part about the players not having rights to enforce other rules that they felt were appropriate with regards to what THEY spent time to make. EA wants to share ownership, or be chief partner (as in top ownership having 51% while the maker has 49%) that's fine, but I don't think it is morally or ethically just for them to say that players cannot add other things within reason to their own work. When EA staff takes the time to give us free objects made from scratch with new code like people were asking for before CC was made, THEN they can retain 100% say-so over it. If they're not going to take that time, and instead pass the buck to the players to take the time and market the goods, then they need to give those players some rights with regards to their own stuff, as long as the player understands that EA still retains *primary* ownership just because it is their game. Dictatorial type practices like this is going to kill CC for the players that could give us the most imaginitive stuff, I fear, because who wants to put hours into creatiing an object if they literally have 0 say-so over it after it's marketed, according to EA? A few people might, but not many, and the game's quality of CC will suffer in the long-run, I fear. Maybe this is something that can or will be rethought, once EA understands the players strong feelings on it....one can certainly hope.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

After reading up to Gracie's statement of the ToS excerpts she found, I was so disgusted I'd decided I was never going to make a shred of CC to sell, which is sad since I roomied at a friend's store both because I wanted to live with him

[/ QUOTE ]It could be that the ToS simply hasn't been updated yet.

Before custom content, everything in-game WAS created by EA, therefore it was theirs to do what they want with.

Usually when there is a ToS change (at least with other games), you have to click an 'agreement' of some description before you can continue to play the game under the new rules.

I certainly don't recall having done that ... which leads me to either the fact that the ToS hasn't been updated, or EA are in breach of contract by changing the rules without informing us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong again AJ.....they did change the ToS and require everyone to sign it, last spring or summer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember it. It was a whole big todo shortly after TC3 came out and not too long before CC was introduced if I'm not incorrect.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

I remember it. It was a whole big todo shortly after TC3 came out and not too long before CC was introduced if I'm not incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]Then I would have assumed it got some 'debate' here on Stratics... are you able to link to a post so I can bring myself up to speed?

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I remember it. It was a whole big todo shortly after TC3 came out and not too long before CC was introduced if I'm not incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]Then I would have assumed it got some 'debate' here on Stratics... are you able to link to a post so I can bring myself up to speed?

[/ QUOTE ]

It did... and I am able to.

but I won't.

 

[Purdy]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>



Besides the auction system that TSO wants to create maybe they should create some time of search system like the site My Simon. It's a price comparison shopping site.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good idea !

As an Ebay seller, I am often astounded that buyers will bid higher for a used object I am selling than the same object is selling for new elsewhere on the 'net. I always compare prices using one of the price comparison bots (sorry! some bots are good!). It is obvious many people don't bother.

Human nature. What ya gonna do?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well since you and me seem to be the same kind of shoppers - why don't you create a price comparison bot for TSO so we can use it since I don't know how. hehe

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I remember it. It was a whole big todo shortly after TC3 came out and not too long before CC was introduced if I'm not incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]Then I would have assumed it got some 'debate' here on Stratics... are you able to link to a post so I can bring myself up to speed?

[/ QUOTE ]

It did... and I am able to.

but I won't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then you've just proven that, as a Stratics staffer, your aim isn't to help educate people, it is just to interject sarcasm and/or flaming based simply on who you do and don't like, just like it was before you became staff. Well, at least you're not trying to put on airs....LOL.

Luckily, the search function works so it's not totally necessary for a staffer to link to posts like this, but I feel bad for anybody who wasn't here when this went down, and might in fact be totally new and not even know *how* to use the search function to find this post that you say you can link to but will not. Funny, I thought that part of becoming staff was having a drive to help educate people who wanted to be educated, or at least teach them how to educate themselves.

[sarcasm]Seems I was wrong[/sarcasm]

I'm on the hunt for this thread that is spoken of. If I find it, I will post a link for anybody interested in reading up on it, that was either on break or not here at all during that original time frame. It might have been during one of the times I was not reading the boards on a regular basis, so I could have missed it since I don't remember it either.

 

[Roger Wilco]

<blockquote><hr>

I see alot of reference to those of us who are trying to keep prices low for our fellow players....

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not trying to "keep prices low for your fellow players", you want to see prices kept artificially low after you sell something for less than what it's worth.

There's a huge difference.

 

[Guest]

I am not selling things for less than they are worth. Some people are selling things at outrageously high prices. There is the huge difference.

 

[Roger Wilco]

<blockquote><hr>

I am not selling things for less than they are worth. Some people are selling things at outrageously high prices. There is the huge difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no such thing as "selling things at outrageously high prices". If the price is to high it doesn't sell. If it sells, it is by definition not "outrageously priced".

 

[Guest]

That is your opinion. I feel that when someone prices something that costs them around $10 to make at $900, well that is outrageously priced.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

<blockquote><hr>

I remember it. It was a whole big todo shortly after TC3 came out and not too long before CC was introduced if I'm not incorrect.

[/ QUOTE ]Then I would have assumed it got some 'debate' here on Stratics... are you able to link to a post so I can bring myself up to speed?

[/ QUOTE ]

It did... and I am able to.

but I won't.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then you've just proven that, as a Stratics staffer, your aim isn't to help educate people, it is just to interject sarcasm and/or flaming based simply on who you do and don't like, just like it was before you became staff. Well, at least you're not trying to put on airs....LOL.

Luckily, the search function works so it's not totally necessary for a staffer to link to posts like this, but I feel bad for anybody who wasn't here when this went down, and might in fact be totally new and not even know *how* to use the search function to find this post that you say you can link to but will not. Funny, I thought that part of becoming staff was having a drive to help educate people who wanted to be educated, or at least teach them how to educate themselves.

[sarcasm]Seems I was wrong[/sarcasm]

I'm on the hunt for this thread that is spoken of. If I find it, I will post a link for anybody interested in reading up on it, that was either on break or not here at all during that original time frame. It might have been during one of the times I was not reading the boards on a regular basis, so I could have missed it since I don't remember it either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Carrie, it is not my job description to be AJ's secretary and go find links of OLD news that he could easily seek out himself.

If you have any issues on how I do my volunteer job please address it with Mike Rizzo or anyone else who volunteers for a higher position than me

I also did not become staff to educate people on how to operate stratics.
But if a newbie to stratics needed help I would help them as they are a new and it can be confusing.
AJ on the other hand has posted here longer than I have and has been on staff and an admin way longer than I have been. He's fully capable of doing it himself if he is interested.

 

[Guest]

<blockquote><hr>

That is your opinion. I feel that when someone prices something that costs them around $10 to make at $900, well that is outrageously priced.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, that depends on whether or not they are trying to get compensated for their time, which anybody who hasn't crafted things IRL to be sold might make the mistake of doing. Those who have done it will realize that the public will not tolerate things being priced that much, so that the most they will get for their time is about $1 to $1.50 an hour USD, tops, if that. Still, Roger is correct....unfortunately. The public as a whole sets the bar for what is 'outrageous' and what isn't. If even one or two people will buy that $10 item for $900, then the seller isn't gonna care that nobody else will, because in the end they'll make enough off the people who have the money to waste to make it worth their while.

The only way to combat this is if the community gets unified in what they will, or will not accept, which has been proven time and time again over the years won't happen over all.....which means that only the individual players who feel strongly enough about it will take the time to shop with the 'little guy' who is truly out to help the cosumer, while those who could care less will just plunk money down to the first person they find what they want at.