Linden Lab#Bragg v. Linden Lab / weigh of lawsuit
all previous commenters are right...the lawsuit is trivial, and if we included every such lawsuit that every silicon valley company has been engaged in, wikipedia would be in trouble. I'm going to cut it down to the most basic facts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandusky sweeper (talk • contribs) 18:28, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
|WikiProject Business||(Rated Stub-class)|
(section created on 06:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC))
Legalese isn't my speciality, so I'll (Signpostmarv) let someone else work this in:
Linden Research, Inc., Philip Rosedale, and Marc Bragg have agreed to settle the “Bragg v. Linden and Rosedale” lawsuit currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The parties agree that there were unfortunate disagreements and miscommunications regarding the conduct and behavior by both sides and are pleased to report that Mr. Bragg’s “Marc Woebegone” account, privileges and responsibilities to the Second Life community have been restored. For the benefit of the Second Life community, the Parties have mutually agreed that the terms of their resolution shall remain confidential. The Parties ask that this confidentiality be respected.
Linden Lab has like 250 employees now. That information in the article is pretty out of date. However, I don't have a source for this other than "some lindens mentioned it". hehe Gigs 06:54, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Is the lawsuit relevant to this article?
I would submit that the answer to above is no, as it has no particular or specific relevance to describing the history and policy of Linden Lab, and rather seems to be presenting a side of a case. The entire article is thin, and needs a drastic rewrite, or complete deletion.
- If you refer to the comments I left back in october, you'll see it does- especially since the case is long since over.
- Signpostmarv (talk) 20:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Too much emphasis
There is simply too much emphasis placed on the lawsuit within this article. I agree with Yonatan that the lawsuit doesn't deserve half the article space. It hardly seems in line with Marty Linden's quote that's cited above:
"For the benefit of the Second Life community, the Parties have mutually agreed that the terms of their resolution shall remain confidential. The Parties ask that this confidentiality be respected."
Linden Lab Cutting Services?
So is this quote from the Corporate Affairs and Culture section true? Sounds like someone had some troubles logging in and has an axe to grind. I looked at the Linden site and couldn't find an official policy of cutting services during peak loads.
No, it was due to technical things.
Linden Lab, security and privacy
I don't put this into the article because I am involved myself:
- Linden Lab promises a bounty of $L10,000 (that is just 31€) for previously unknown security issues that are reported to the security section of their bugtracking sytem. There are lots of reports about this bounty not being payed. In the cases in which it has been paid I know about (SEC-254, SEC-267) it took more than 4 month after the issue was fixed.
- Security issues that effect the economy of Second Life by providing a way to copy no-copy scripts (SEC-254) are fixed very quickly with two weeks. Security issues that effect the privacy are not addressed timely. SEC-267 is about unencrypted transmitting of the password, the email address labeled as private and the session cookie although an https session was started. SEC-xxx about sending the entered password on account creation via unencrypted email is still unfixed. SEC-346 is still unfixed, too. It not only allows the steeling of items and money, it enables other website to check if and into which account someone is logged in. Note: As Second Life is commonly used for sex-related activity it is a serious privacy threat that websites, which might your real life identity, can actively query for your second life account name.
- When Linden Lab failed multiple times to respond to security issues, it was given a 10 day dead line for replying (that is just a simple reply, not a fix) in accordance with the guidelines of responsible disclosure. Since Linden Lab failed to reply multiple times although reaching Linden Lab on other channels (support ticket, item report, notecard to Jack Linden) in addition to the security section of their bug tracking was tried, Maike Short posted a warning to the forums about this risk. The warning did contain information about the type of vulnerability with general background information as found on Wikipedia, the impacts (steal items, stealing money, identity discovery, vandalism), the risk (very high because of serve consequences and no required user interaction), and the history of the ignored tries to contact Linden Lab. The warning did not contain in-detailed instructions on how to exploit this vulnerability, nor did it contain sample code or the exploit that had been made available to Linden Lab. Maike Shorts accounts where banned for "Residents may not take any actions or upload, post, e-mail or otherwise transmit Content that contains any instructions, data, scripts, or other computer programming routines that are intended to damage, detrimentally interfere with, surreptitiously intercept or expropriate any system, data, content or personal information.". The posting on the forum of the affected service was deleted, the positing on the official forum remained.
- Lessons learned: Linden Lab does gather and log private information about the computer hardware to link different accounts together (like the one you use for business and the one you use for sex). It would have been better to send the report anonymously to full-disclosure right way instead of posting it to the internal forums. This would not only have saved my account (I already miss the friends i made during the last years) but it would most likely have gotten Linden Lab to fix this vulnerability quickly. --Maike Short (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2009 (UTC)