Virtual sex sparks real lawsuit

TAMPA, Fla. - Kevin Alderman didn't bring sex to "Second Life." He just made it better.

The 46-year-old entrepreneur recognized four years ago that people would pay to equip their online selves - which start out with the smooth anatomy of a Barbie or Ken doll - with realistic genitalia and even more to add some sexy moves.

Business at Eros LLC has been brisk. One of his creations, the SexGen Platinum, has gotten so popular that he's now had to hire lawyers to track down the flesh-and-blood person behind the online identity, or avatar, that he says illegally copied and sold it.

The $45 SexGen animates amorous avatars in erotic positions. It is software code, written in the scripting language of "Second Life" and placed in virtual furniture and other objects. Avatars click on the object and choose from a menu of animated sex acts.

Alderman filed a civil lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Tampa, Fla., last month alleging an avatar named "Volkov Catteneo" broke the program's copy protection and sold unauthorized copies. Alderman, who runs his business from home in a Tampa suburb, allows users to transfer his products, but prohibits copying.

"We confronted him about it and his basic response was, 'What are you going to do? Sue me?"' Alderman said. "I guess the mentality is that because you're an avatar ... that you are untouchable. The purpose of this suit is not only to protect our income and our product, but also to show, yes, you can be prosecuted and brought to justice."

[Click here to read the full article]

For Student Commentary, See the Comments Section of this Post

WhoseTube? Viacom Sues Google Over Video Clips

Viacom, the parent company of MTV, Nickelodeon and Comedy Central, filed a wide-ranging lawsuit against Google on Tuesday, accusing it of “massive copyright infringement.” Viacom said it was seeking more than $1 billion in damages and an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from committing further infringement.

Citing the $1.65 billion that Google paid for YouTube, the complaint said that “YouTube deliberately built up a library of infringing works to draw traffic to the YouTube site, enabling it to gain a commanding market share, earn significant revenues and increase its enterprise value.”

[Click here to read the full article]

For Student Commentary, See the Comments Section of this Post

The Name Game (Plus Typos)

THE practice of “cybersquatting” has evolved from the days when people bought a trademarked Internet domain name and hoped to squeeze the trademark owner for some cash. The law is pretty clear on that: you can’t do it.

But now, companies like Microsoft are filing lawsuits against outfits they say engage in a more complicated but potentially much more lucrative practice called “domain tasting” or “domain swiping.”

Here, domains are purchased, and Web pages festooned with advertisements built behind them to see how much traffic the U.R.L.’s attract. If it is not much, the domains are returned to the registrar within five days for a full refund. If the traffic is adequate, the domain is kept, and the domain owner collects money every time someone clicks on one of the ads.

[Click here to read the full article]

For Student Commentary, See the Comments Section of this Post