Tousled Calla: A Business Divided

Darlings, we have alluded to this in the past rumor blogs but now comes the time to tell the story. A great empire divided earlier this month in a quite hush-hush way that raised a few eyebrows. The hair dynasty of Calla split down the middle by the 2 designers, Tigerlily Koi(now Calla) and Haedon Quine(now Tousled).

Their story is like many others before them. They met on Sims Online and came to Second Life together. They loved hair and began playing around with the prims to make the styles they wanted. A business was born: Calla. This store, who names their hair for flowers and other plants, held a beautiful anniversary celebration last year with many designers participating. Everything seemed beautiful but behind the smiles there was anger and bitterness brewing.

There are many businesses in SL with 2 owners(e.g. Here Comes Trouble) but the big difference here is that the these 2 women split the profits 50-50 rather than each taking their own financial share. This was their agreement from the start and therefore should not be held against either of them if this agreement still remained. There were times they could have renegotiated these terms. When the moved to their first major location on one of the Plush sims or when they set up Callatropia would have been good times to renegotiate their agreement. (Update: I learned there is a contract physically signed by both parties binding them to this agreement. This contract has not expired yet.)

Sweeties, for the past few weeks I have been observing. I sat at Calla's new location and sat at Tousled's location listening to the way the wind was blowing. It is really not as nasty as other blogs have made out. After reading Ms. Koi's own statement on the issue one major things remains clear, she has no legally binding contract with Ms. Quine so she doesn't have a prim to stand on when it comes to the legalities. The contract she is going on about should have been certified/return receipt so she had proof that this contract was in fact received by Ms. Quine. In the court of law, if you do not have a physically signed contract to show the agreement you cannot hold the other party to that contract. As for the chat logs, we all know that I can fake a conversation with anyone inside of SL so this does not count as a legally binding contract or written agreement.

Should Ms. Quine have had a 50% off sale during Ms. Koi's opening? No, but we have all done impulsive things that we cannot take back and Ms. Quine did express regret for this. Could Ms. Quine have foreseen that the Lindens would not abide their wishes and make Callatropia landmarks go to Calla Lily? No, she has no control over what the Linden's do after a request has been made. To assume she was lying shows that you never truly trusted the situation in the first place. I am trying to be unbiased here but this smear campaign is so one-sided it hardly seems fair to Ms. Quine.

The magical deadline of July 1st has not come yet so why shouldn't Ms. Quine continue to sell her items from her Calla brand. According to the chat logs(unreliable), she agreed to stop selling her Calla branded hair after July 1st. Why even blog about it before that date? Tigerlily Koi, you are making yourself look petty and afraid of your former-friend as a competitor. She should have every right to tell people she was part of Calla because she was. Many designers recently attended an IP Rights meeting and it was discussed that former business owners can tag their stores as formerly of and clearly that is what Ms. Quine has done and has the right to do. She is within her legal right to call her store Tousled by Haedon Quine(formerly of Calla).

This all comes down to contracts. If you are going to go into business with another person and share in the profits, you should always make a signed REAL WORLD contract before you begin. Otherwise you do not have any recourse if things do not work out the way you planned. Ms. Koi can shout and file until she is blue in the fingers but she does not have a legally binding contract stating that Ms. Quine cannot use the word Calla.

I have approached both Ms. Koi and Ms. Quine(as an alt). I found that Ms. Quine holds sadness for the break up and wishes Ms. Koi the best. I found that Ms. Koi was quick to point out that Ms. Quine was out to ruin her. I think the whole situation stinks. These girls need to have a SLbrity Death Match and let the prims fall where they may. We need to take this all into perspective. This is a new hair business that will be in direct competition with Ms. Koi so her statements are not necessarily going to show Ms. Quine in the best light.

Related blogs: Calla Comes to Light, Some Things I Need to Say, Wow! Drama at Calla, h(a)edonistic calla lily, Southern Charm

False Accusations Flying

Something foul is afoot in Second Life, my darlings. It is called false theft accusations. Two cases occurred over the last week that will leave you dizzy.


First is the case of poor Laynie Link. One of LaynieWear's new releases for the Fashion Expo was a dress called Andromeda which brings to mind the glow sticks we all used as children. A dress made from light that she began creating May 7th and completed on May 12(Date evidence from her website: here,here, here, here, & here). The Fashion Expo began on June 5th so this meant Ms. Link had to wait almost a month to release her product. On June 24, 2008, Laynie Link was sent an accusatory message from someone claiming she stole their work for her project. The accuser proudly boasted that he sent notecards to everyone he knew that she was a thief and filed a DMCA. The accuser has one very BIG problem. According to the creation dates of the two projects, Laynie Link made her creation over 2 weeks prior to the accuser. The accuser's designs were created between May 21 to May 24(Date evidence from LaynieWear: here & here). Now unless Ms. Link is a psychic, there is no possible way for her to copy something that was completed until 12 days after she finished her work. Clearly this designer must be taking a page from the accusers in our earlier blog. I do not seem him going after Spiral Walcher who also has some clothing items made from light. To Ms. Link's accuser: The DMCA provides that you may be liable for damages (including costs and attorneys fees) if you falsely claim that an in-world item is infringing your copyrights. I hope you have deep pockets because if I were Ms. Link I would follow up on this.


The next case is not as clear cut but clearly as ridiculous. It is the story of Delora Starbrook. On June 23, 2007, Ms. Starbrook released her first four hairstyles. A designer, who has been called the Queen of Prims by her friends, has been the person the Goreans go to their fine silks because of the detailed primwork. She has also been a staunch supporter of content creator's rights. Another hair designer named Tekelili Tantalus came out to accuse Ms. Starbrook of stealing her work. Her story changed to stealing her artistic ideas. Rather than approach Ms. Starbrook first, the accuser ran off notecards to groups and everyone he knew. Do the hairstyles look similar? Yes. Are they the same? Not by a long shot. It became clear on the boards and other blogs that the accuser's view was not supported by the public. Despite her ugly smear campaign, the accuser keeps stating that she will not file a DMCA. At least she is slightly smarter than Ms. Link's accuser because he realized he doesn't have a prim to stand on. Some people might be confused by the reference to Ms. Tantalus by the male-like appearance in SL but people should really pay attention to who is in the room when they confess to being a woman. I have to hand it to Ms. Tantalus for being one of the only designers to go the other way.

I hope that they accusers realize that their false claims against these 2 designers are going to hurt their own businesses. No one likes to do business with someone quick to make false statements about their competitors. It makes you look like you are afraid. Darlings, it all comes down to this one thing: concepts that existed long before Second Life existed is NOT your intellectual property. Hair with ornamentation like seen in Ms. Starbrook's works date back to Cleopatra so unless you are willing to accuse the Ancient Egyptians of stealing your intellectual property you owe her an apology. Glowing clothing dates back to the 70s with the era of laser light shows and neon clothing so unless you are will to file a DMCA against the clothing designers of the 1970s then you owe Ms. Link an apology.

Other designers with light/glow based products: Gwen Carillon, Liderc Dagger, Nedalin Malle, Chill Flanagan, Spiral Walcher, and more.

Other hair designers with fantasy styles in similar styles: Sinnocent Mirabeau, Sabine Gully, Rose Columbia, Helena Stringer, Venovara Ivory, Hern Worsley, Helyanwe Vindaloo, Sunnivah Jiutai, and more.

3 July, 2008: There are some new blogs to add to the discussion involving Ms. Starbrook & Ms. Tantalus - PrimTwister War, You make widgets. Someone makes a better widget. ZOMFG! I.P. THEFT!!!, & Blah Blah, Fashionista Hair Dramaz.

Rumour has it...

There are more and more rumours flying about.

Rumour has it, sadly, the copybot has returned in full force. (true)

Rumour has it that Bianca keeps a whipping boy in her closet. (false, I hope)

Rumour has it a recent design team break up has gotten very ugly behind the scenes with snide comments and forked tongues on both sides. (true)

Rumour has it that a certain blog team/design team are in fact lovers. (maybe)

Rumour has it a certain jewelry/accessory designer is a diva of the highest order. (true)

Rumour has it a talented builder/designer is secretly designing hair. (maybe)

Rumour has it that several designers are being excluded from a huge event because of old rumours of theft. (maybe)

Rumour has it that a dedicated designer is an edgy, emotional mess. (maybe)

Rumour has it Elle has a secret stash of Smarties. (true)

Rumour has it a certain blogger has imagined disagreements on more than one occasion resulting in paranoia. (true)

Fashion Consolidated RIP

Darlings, there was a time when Fashion Consolidated was THE group to belong to for the best updates on the grid but over past year this has change drastically. Now it seems that Fashion Consolidated is THE group to belong to if you want to find ripped and stolen items cheaper than the originals. It is disgusting.

Once, to get a designer label, the designers would have to message the group owner and she would come and look at the store. Vouching for its credibility, she would grant them a designer's tag so that they could send out notices to the group. As the group and SL grew this became a harder task but rather than putting together a team to help validate the new designers the Linden became the driving force of Fashion Consolidated. Sure, there is a team to approve new designers but not the way it used to. Now for only $1000L, you to can be a "designer" in Fashion Consolidated and send out notices for your "creations".

I find it rather ironic that this group has a posted theft policy when there have been so many stolen and ripped items being sent out in their notices. We have a close friend who successfully filed a DMCA, sent the information to the group owner, and that designer is still a designer in Fashion Consolidated. Clearly, the theft policy does not work anymore. I just read on the feeds yesterday about a notice sent out that was stealing works from another store. This happens almost once a day if not more.

When did Fashion Consolidated stop being about the creators and start being about money? Reading their official blog, I learn that to be a designer, all I have to do is buy a $1000L kiosk from OnRez or SLX, rez it in my store, fill out the right things, and then I am listed as a designer. With the current return of the copybot, there is no stopping a thief from creating a store, getting listed with Fashion Consolidated, and looking like a legitimate business because they have the Fashion Consolidated Seal of Approval. In the end, these $1000L payments are going to the owner's pocket. There are currently 1295 people listed as designers. I know not all paid that $1000L but if they all did that is $1,295,000L with the exchange of $274L per $1 USD this means that this group has earned the owner $4726.28 USD. This does not include the designers who paid and were kicked out for various reasons. This is a nice income for just running a group.

RIP Fashion Consolidate, you have "jumped the shark".

Copyright: The Worst Offender

Darlings, our limited time in SL® brought us to go on one of these famous, Ohana Isle Treasure Hunts. The link was sent out to one of my groups to go the hunt. To what do my wondering eyes should appear but a giant house of trademark infringement. There is one business that is entirely based on the Disney® empire. This store not only sells items that infringe on Disney's registered trademarks but they are even named after a copyrighted television show, House of Mouse. Given the recent trademark issues that LL® has imposed on its residents, I am shocked to see a store such as this not only in SL but on the sim as established as Ohana Isle. After some discussion, I believe one of the hunters was going to report the store to see what would happen.You would think the sim owner would recognized the severity of this infringement and disallow this shop on their land.

Let's see what Disney owned properties are being used here: Pirates of the Caribbean, Finding Nemo, Alice in Wonderland, Nightmare Before Christmas, House of Mouse, Winnie the Pooh, Sleeping Beauty, Peter Pan, Mickey Mouse Club, Lilo and Stitch, Fantasia, Disneyland Theme Park chacters, Disney World Theme Park characters.

Pictorial evidence:




©Disney/Pixar.
"The Legend of Tarzan" Owned by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. And Used by Permission.
©Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. and Disney Enterprises, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
TM and ©BVS Entertainment, Inc. and BVS International N.V. All rights reserved.
©ABC Family Properties, Inc. and BVS International N.V.
Underlying Property TM and ©TOEI Animation Co., Ltd. All rights reserved.
©Aoki Takao.BB2 Project.TV Tokyo. Licensed by d-rights inc.
SPIDER-MAN and all related characters and the distinctive likenesses thereof
are trademarks of Marvel Characters, Inc and are used with permission.
TM and ©Marvel Characters, Inc. All rights reserved.
TM and ©Disney

More on Disney copyrights and trademarks are located at http://home.disney/com.

Minn-Pu

It all began simple enough. Minnu Palen released her much awaited Gen 4 skins that had been delayed due to a content theft protest to protect her fellow skin makers. Minnu decided to educate us all about the designer Alexander McQueen. This time she has tried to claim the work of Danae Kotsi as her own. I have been following the threads on Shopping Cart Disco(here, here, and here) and SL Univerise very closely.

Do I believe that Minnu is guilty? You bet your sweet arse I do. Even my slightly near-sighted Nan can see that these skins are the same. To come almost a month later(must have been feeling the DMCA breathing down her neck) and state she used some of the work is just a load of codswallop. Her paid defenders(employees of GLAM World) were so quick to say that we were all blind and they look nothing alike. They believe us all to be simpleton without independent thought in our heads. It is utter rubbish.

All of this has lead me, sweet readers, to delete every bit of Minnu products that I own. It saddens me to waste all of those lindens but it disgusts me to even have her products in my inventory.

Such a big ado was made by Minnu Palen about content theft. Oh the irony.

Viacom International Inc. and Nickelodeon© neither sponsors nor endorses this site. This site is not affiliated with Viacom International Inc. and/or Nickelodeon. Spongebob© Copyright 1999 Viacom International Inc. All Rights Reserved. Nickelodeon©, Spongebob© and all related titles, logos, and characters are trademarks of Viacom International Inc.