CASE $2\mathrm{.}1$

As If Your First Life Wasn't Bad Enough: Suing Your Virtual $$Second Life$$ in

Reality

Usually people go into a virtual reality game to get away from their day$-$to$-$day problems and to

live a different, more carefree lifestyle. Fighting dragons $($or each other$),$ going on quests, having

virtual dates, this would seem to be the formula for fun in the virtual world. Now, consider the

world of Second Life where some residents have taken the game far too seriously and filed reallife lawsuits against one another for actions taken in this virtual world.

Second Life, an online virtual world created by Linden Lab, mimics real life. In this online

computer game, users click to accept the Terms of Agreement, create their own avatar $($called

residents$),$ and then explore the world $($known as the grid$)$ to meet other residents, socialize,

participate in individual and group activities, and potentially create and trade virtual property and

services with one another$\mathrm{.}71$

An avatar named Richard Minsky filed a real lawsuit against another avatar in the game as well

as two directors at Linden Labs because Keegan $($the avatar being sued$)$ opened up an art gallery

in Second Life called $$SLart$,$ a name that Minsky had originally trademarked in $2008.$ Minsky

felt that his trademark had been violated regardless of the virtual nature of the gallery in

question.

Interestingly enough, Minsky's lawyer is someone he met through Second Life and has an avatar

himself. Reportedly the lawyer's avatar sent Keegan's avatar a $$cease and desist$$ order and also

sent the same orders to the directors of Second Life. In his own defense, Keegan stated, $$A

Second Life neighbor actually living in Australia did it for me$.$ As a logo I just put SL in capitals

followed by art. I may have thought of $$SLart$$ around the same time as Minsky. But that doesn't

matter in U$.$S$.$ trademark law: who gets there first wins.$72$ Since the suit, the sign was officially

taken down by Second Life and the trademark was officially given to Minsky in the game's

virtual reality as well. This case was considered a bench test of whether real courts can get

involved in virtual world disputes.

Second Life has been in other lawsuits as well. The most recent is a class action lawsuit filed by

several users accusing Linden Labs of changing the terms of virtual property ownership.

Residents claimed they were forced to agree to new terms that eroded their ownership rights to

virtual property and goods$\mathrm{.}73$ They claimed that the promises of ownership were empty and that

the company falsely advertised these rights so that they could add new people from around the

United States.

Questions:

$1.$How many critical issues are discussed in this case and what are they?

$2.$Identify the facts, assumptions, and sentiments $($FAS$)$ for each issue of the case.

$3.$Who are the interested stakeholders for each issue?

$4.$Choose one issue. What are the stakeholders' incentives?

$5.$As a director of Linden Labs, you have been asked to testify in court for a lawsuit similar to the

ones in the case. Present an argument that can serve as a defense for Second Life.

$6.$What strategy would you use as director of Linden Labs for accomplishing one of your issue

objectives?