Require a Disclaimer for Commercial Systems/Games Reliant on Server Access (or similar)
Light Snacc
During my time in SL, I've come across several talented creators who maintain systems or games that periodically communicate with a server either in-world, or externally, to verify whether a user has permission to use the product.
In many cases, these systems are sold for an upfront fee.
The issue is that when someone pays for an asset that relies on ongoing server-side authorization, their ability to use that asset ultimately remains at the creator's discretion. This can create significant problems for customers, as access can be revoked at any time if the creator decides to ban them or discontinue authorization. I don't believe this is acceptable unless it is clearly disclosed before purchase.
I propose the following:
Any item that communicates with a server (whether in-world or external) for authorization, licensing, or functionality purposes should be required to disclose this fact. The listing/advertisement should also explicitly warn users that the creator may terminate their access to the product at any time.
I should clarify that this would be items that are sold FOR PROFIT, and not for free (as the loss is then not material).
This allows buyers to make informed purchasing decisions and better understand the risks associated with server-dependent products, rather than using it and ending up paying for something that they could lose access to over anything the creator sees fit.
Log In
Beatrice Voxel
I agree with this disclaimer being a requirement.
However, as someone who helps manage one of those server-side minigames, I see a LOT of abuse/griefing from the user side. They intentionally and repeatedly break the TOS of the game. They find exploits. They set up scripted bot accounts. They run scrapes against the web backend which degrades the game for all users and raises the costs for web services past any reasonable expectation for the number of users connected. And each and every time these people are confronted with what they're doing, shown logs of the web traffic or shown screen caps of the inworld behavior, "I paid for this! I can do what I want!" or they start screaming the word "lawyer". It's amazing the level of entitlement people get when they've dropped a few hundred Linden on something, once.
Designers need to be able to lock someone out of a 'service' if that service is being misused, exploited, or deliberately broken. And LL should not be weaponized to prevent such users from being removed.