The other day I blogged a skin, (above) I know, so rare for me, but I moved heaven and Earth (actually went full alpha, no attachments) to buy it because this skin designer always creates some of the finest quality skins available. And having an Asian shape, skins are a struggle for me and this one looked specifically Asian. But as a whole, I have a skin, it works for me, so I stick with it, even though it’s 4 years old. There are very few people who haven’t at least HEARD of Aida Ewing’s Glam Affair. And so many attest to the quality of the product, myself included, that what has transpired bothers me enough to blog about it.
I won’t go in great detail, the particulars are here. But generally speaking, another skin designer, Ambra Hoxley of a store called Poudre purchased a template from another store, one I refuse to mention because I refuse to potentionally send business to them for nefarious purposes, and she used the templates for her skins. The templates are obviously the original artwork of Aida Ewing and were stolen. My point here? When confronted, Ambra has taken the stand that she purchased the templates so she has the right to use them. I suppose, technically, though perhaps illegally, she can. I reckon its equivalent to purchasing a paint by numbers of the Mohna Lisa and then trying to sell it off as the real thing. But does it make it right? I mean, who raised you anyway and what kind of message do you want to send to people, Ambra? The message that you can’t create your own original artwork, so don’t mind if what you use is stolen? I say, if you can’t, then don’t. That is my single most disappointing factor of Second Life. You have some amazingly creative, original artists creating high quality products but you have a large number of noncreative, template toting artists. Great, use a template to learn, but at some point, take the training wheels off and graduate yourself to the real world where originality is the key to true success. Seriously.
The take from? By refusing to remove the offending stolen skins from her store, Ambra Hoxley, is perpetuating the theft, but more importantly if you the consumer buy them, you are too. Content creative artwork is the sole ownership of the person who legally created it. Period. Just because you bought it, from a thief at that, doesn’t give you the right to use it. But, heck, I can’t stop you from buying from Ambra Hoxley of Poudre, so if you’d rather look like you are wearing a “prolex” instead of a genuine Rolex, you go right ahead. As for me, I’m too classy to waste my Lindens on a chick who thinks using others creative content is OK. Well, thats just my opinion on it. Take it for what it’s worth to you.
Wall: Storax, Patio Lounger for two **NEW**
Shutters: floor.plan, shutters
Chair: Di’s Opera
Trunk: Lisp Bazaar, vintage trunk
Small Box: The Loft, White Storage Box.