Hi Kiera & all,

On and off, I have been following Patrick Lichty's adventures 'the 
Second Front Performance Art Collective' in SL. And have been intrigued 
on various levels, how it has been working out. He is a multi-talented 
individual, an academic, artist, tech-geek and curator. It would be 
interesting to know what skills, such as curating come into play when 
engaging in such an environment, and to what extent does SL itself 
either limit or offer flexibility when creating an art project?
 
But I would also still, like to hear from Kiera or collegues regarding 
the questions I originally proposed, it is all very fascinating :-)

wishing everyone well.

marc

 > Hi Kiera,
 >
 > I've got few questions that to me, are quite important and I hope 
that you and others on this list will find them as equally interesting, 
as I find them :-)
 >
 > >We understand the implications of such terms of service and bear 
witness to the
 > > gravity of working within a system essentially owned and controlled by
 > > another entity.
 >
 > If this is understood, in what sense and with how much gravity?
 >
 > What values and critical perspectives and ideas have been shared and 
discussed to deal with the nature of being controlled by another entity?
 >
 > I really find the recent fascination with SL very interesting. I must 
admit I do have misgivings regarding, various creative minds (many who I 
respect) spending so much time in supporting this platform, which as far 
as I can see is really a business that accumilates more publicity for 
its brand, as the energies of those participating within it become more 
appropriated, mediated and consumed - special or not.
 >
 > I see SL as a digested system, as opposed to a learned one. Where 
reasoning exists within a framework, systematically demanding a 
concentration based around a limited set of behaviours, patterns or 
rules. I perceive this as a psychological restriction, reflecting a 
position of submission where the mechanisms in put place offer a 
paternal bond between user and the omni-present father.
 >
 > >owned and controlled by another entity.
 >
 > This suggests a relatonship that proposes that responsibility lies 
not in the user but with the greater forces at work, the owners of the 
game. A power-based consciousness, a hierarchy who's main goal is to 
consume all energy whatever that is. A spectre rests, lurking behind all 
the play at hand, declaring a looming negativity that, perhaps is aleady 
sub-consiously considered; yet not fully realised. This looming question 
asks, why are there so many willing to be subsumed by SL rather than 
invent their own worlds, outside of its own, ever expansive, virtual arenas?
 >
 > Where is the DIY essence if 'open source' is proposed?
 >
 > > We are neither interested in nor capable of working
 > >with the source code of software within SL.
 >
 > >Rather, we are fostering open source culture, meaning
 > >technology-enabled practices like appropriation,
 > >remixing, mash-ups, and collage that challenge
 > >traditional ideas of authorship.
 >
 > How can an open source culture be fostered if it remains within the 
limitations of SL? Surely this is a contradiction to the spirit of open 
source. I really find it hard to see where the open source really exists 
in this activity. Isn't this a misuse or a redefining of the term?
 > >We are enabling a community of people who are interested
 > >in producing, transforming, and sharing work within this domain.
 >
 > This is an honourable notion, but why in SL? Wouldn't it be more 
critically engaged if it was outside of such a hierarchy?
 >
 > > We chose Second Life as a platform for our project
 > >because no equivalent environment exists.
 >
 > So the lesson for the students is that they do not need to build 
their own communites and independent, creative infrastructures because 
it is better to rely on structures that already exist.
 >
 > I am also wondering how much an influence is the SL brand and profile 
behind the decision making of this projeect.
 >
 > marc
 >
 >> Dear Andreas,
 >>
 >> Thank you for your question about how the open source aspects of OSMOSA
 >> relate to the Second Life Terms of Service.
 >>
 >> We are aware of the limitations (or potential for limitations via
 >> interference) placed by Linden Labs over all aspects of Second Life. For
 >> example, see item 4.2 from the Terms of Service: "you may not 
modify, adapt,
 >> reverse engineer (except as otherwise permitted by applicable law),
 >> decompile or attempt to discover the source code of the Linden 
Software" (
 >> http://secondlife.com/corporate/tos.php). Item 3.2 also limits the open
 >> source nature of the project, in that Linden maintains the 
non-exclusive,
 >> sublicensable right to exercise the copyright of content in our 
accounts. We
 >> understand the implications of such terms of service and bear 
witness to the
 >> gravity of working within a system essentially owned and controlled by
 >> another entity.
 >>
 >> We are neither interested in nor capable of working with the source 
code of
 >> software within SL. Rather, we are fostering open source culture, 
meaning
 >> technology-enabled practices like appropriation, remixing, mash-ups, and
 >> collage that challenge traditional ideas of authorship. Given the 
Terms of
 >> Service, can there be a public domain within SL? We find that, 
within the
 >> limited world of SL, there is a public domain of sorts. This is the 
domain
 >> of objects that have been set to be copyable, modifiable, and free 
(not for
 >> sale). We are enabling a community of people who are interested in
 >> producing, transforming, and sharing work within this domain.
 >>
 >> We chose Second Life as a platform for our project because no equivalent
 >> environment exists. SL is a simple interface in which to create 
content –
 >> factors crucial to a student project such as this one. More 
importantly, SL
 >> already engages a large and vibrant community.
 >>
 >> We believe that we can adhere to the spirit of open source within this
 >> system. We have adopted the Open Source Definition as a metaphor for
 >> cultural production. For example, item two of the definition states, 
"The
 >> program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source
 >> code" (http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php). If we think 
of a work
 >> of art as the coded object, then what is the source code? In open source
 >> cultural practices such as appropriation and remixing, the source 
code is
 >> the original work that is being transformed. In SL, we are able to 
provide
 >> not just a copy of the original work, but the original itself, endlessly
 >> replicable and always/never original.
 >>
 >> In addition to being a forum for open source art, the structure of 
OSMOSA is
 >> also open source. Curating and architectural design are open: any SL
 >> participant can alter the museum building, the selection of works 
included,
 >> the text describing these works, and the arrangement of these works 
within
 >> this space. Just as Wikipedia is an open source encyclopedia, so 
OSMOSA is
 >> an open source museum. The crucial difference is that Wikipedia is 
built on
 >> open source wiki software, while OSMOSA operates within a proprietary
 >> system. We acknowlege that Linden Labs has the ultimate authority 
over the
 >> source code of SL as software. As such, the museum is limited but 
functional
 >> as an open source project. Importantly, OSMOSA contributes to the SL 
version
 >> of the public domain and invites new conceptions of art, culture, 
artist,
 >> curator, museum, and open source.
 >>
 >> We look forward to further engagement with these issues.  Our ideas 
about
 >> open source art and culture are evolving through dialog such as this.
 >>
 >> Thanks again for your interest,
 >> Deborah Abramson
 >> Kiera Feldman
 >> Davis Jung
 >>
 >>
 >> *From: *Andreas Broeckmann < [log in to unmask]>
 >> *Date: *April 29, 2007 11:55:46 AM EDT
 >> *To: *Mark Tribe < [log in to unmask]>
 >> *Cc: * [log in to unmask]
 >> *Subject: **Re: Open-Source Museum Opens in Second Life *
 >>
 >> hi,
 >>
 >> can anybody who is closer to this project explain how its 'open
 >> source' aspect relates to the license agreement that people admit to
 >> before getting busy in SL? can there be something 'open source' (as
 >> in _source_) in SL?
 >>
 >> curious,
 >> -a
 >>
 >> Open-Source Museum Opens in Second Life
 >> http://www.3pointd.com/20070427/open-source-museum-opens-in-second-life
 >>
 >> Posted Friday, April 27th, 2007, at 10:32 am Eastern by Mark Wallace
 >> Tags: art, culture, design, Second Life
 >>
 >> A group of students from Brown University have launched an
 >> open-source museum in the virtual world of Second Life. Known as
 >> OSMOSA, the Open-Source Museum of Open-Source Art, the museum is
 >> located »in Second Life's Eson region« and features a mess of
 >> artworks that anyone can copy, modify, alter or otherwise contribute
 >> to. The museum itself is open to alteration as well, which is a
 >> fantastic idea. The modding got under way at the opening party
 >> Tuesday night: an already-altered image of Manet's Olympia (with
 >> space helmets added to make it more excellent) came out the other
 >> end of the night with some interesting additions and adjustments...
 >>
 >> I dig this project. You can read more at OSMOSA's wiki page, but
 >> basically, according to one of the students, "By "open source," we
 >> mean that OSMOSA is in the public domain: visitors can add, modify,
 >> and remove art from the museum. In addition, the OSMOSA building is
 >> also open source, in that anyone can modify, add to, or delete parts
 >> of the structure." Love it.
 >>
 >> The museum was organized by Deborah Abramson, Kiera Feldman, and
 >> Davis Jung (aka Deborah Maertens, Koco Furse, and Jinsaedavis Jun in
 >> Second Life, respectively), and built out with help from SL
 >> residents Kenny Hubble, Soupcan Tomsen, and "the Loyalist College
 >> Team."
 >>
 >> As a living art-structure, OSMOSA could be very cool. One thing the
 >> project is lacking at the moment, though, is a good way to record
 >> the changes going on there. I'm waiting at the very least for an
 >> OSMOSA blog, or perhaps a Flickr set where the OSMOSAns could record
 >> the evolution of the site. Regardless, I think it's a great idea,
 >> and I look forward to seeing what comes out of it. I'm not saying an
 >> open-source museum is any better or worse a way to produce art, I'm
 >> just interested in watching things bubble.
 >>
 >>
 >>
 >
 >