The 3D Internet and Its Policy Implications

Michael R. Nelson, Director, Internet Technology and Strategy, IBM Corporation, and Chris Francis, Government Programs, IBM UK

ABSTRACT

The past year has seen a great deal of buzz regarding virtual worlds such as Second Life, immersive 3D online environments where tens of thousands of concurrent users can go to play games, collaborate, or interact with information in new ways. While resembling massively multi-player online games such as World of Warcraft, the new virtual worlds are much more--they provide a versatile, flexible platform where users can create and share content, develop new software tools, easily create simulations, and build virtual environments (e.g. an office, a store, even a golf course or a raceway).

This paper describes how businesses, academic institutions, and governments are exploring how virtual worlds might be used, what benefits they provide, and what business models are likely to succeed. It also describes how Second Life and other aspects of the 3D Internet are indicative of a fundamental shift in how users view the Internet. No longer is it merely a network for transmitting information; it has become a place--a place where users (and their avatars) can build things, interact with others, or just "hang out."

This paper examines how this shift in mental model might lead to new approaches to regulation (and deregulation) of the Internet. The paper, which is based on interviews with more than 20 of the leaders of the virtual world community, examines how the development of the 3D Internet might be hindered or helped by policy decisions regarding:
1) Intellectual property
2) Open standards
3) Wiretapping and electronic surveillance
4) Consumer protection
5) Contract law and rules of incorporation for businesses in virtual worlds
6) Taxation
7) Tariffs
8) Security, identity, and trust


INTRODUCTION

The Internet is entering a new phase, as significant as the development of the World Wide Web.  Prior to the Web, the Internet was primarily used for one-to-one communication:  e-mail and remote log-in.  The Web made the Internet a one-to-many, broadcast medium, too.  Today, thanks to Web 2.0, Web Services, the Grid, Software as a Service, and other forms of distributed computing, the Internet is becoming a platform for computing—as well as communications.  This platform, often called the Cloud, is a many-to-many medium, linking millions of users to thousands of computers simultaneously.  It represents a fundamental shift in how computing is done and has profound implications for government policy.  To quote Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google:

We’re moving into the era of “cloud” computing, with information and applications hosted in the diffuse atmosphere of cyberspace rather than on specific processors and silicon racks. The network will truly be the computer.  Sophisticated browsers and technologies like LAMP or AJAX—not neon lights or Greek heroes but simple building blocks that enable people to produce and distribute content—are critical in this new world. They are the kind of technologies that transform audio, video, text and digital data into intuitive, easy-to-use services. They make Google, MySpace, YouTube, Gmail, Yahoo! and Microsoft Live possible, and they haven’t even entered adolescence.[1]

The 3D Internet is one of the most interesting and exciting new services being offered in the Cloud.  Virtual worlds like Second Life and online games such as World of Warcraft allow users to create avatars who can navigate a three-dimensional world, create new virtual buildings and software tools, interact with other avatars, and share information (whether video clips, plots of data, or three-dimensional architectural models) in new ways.  The computing power and the data that defines these virtual worlds are provided by thousands of servers and storage systems scattered amid the Cloud.

 

Government policy—and policy makers—will have a major influence in how the Cloud evolves.  Applying old, national regulatory approaches to Cloud computing becomes difficult when the data and software needed for a single service may be stored on thousands of computers in more than a dozen different countries.  This paper attempts to identify the key questions that need to be addressed if policymakers are to help, not hinder, the development of the 3D Internet.  Key focus areas include:

1)     Intellectual property

2)     Open standards

3)     Wiretapping and electronic surveillance

4)     Consumer protection

5)     Contract law and rules of incorporation for businesses in virtual worlds

6)     Taxation

7)     Tariffs

8)     Identity, and trust


THE TOUGH QUESTIONS

 

Intellectual Property

A virtual world such as Second Life is defined by the intellectual property provisions in the contract between users and Linden Labs, the creator of Second Life.  One of the reasons that Second Life has grown so quickly is because Linden Labs allows users to create and protect their own content and profit from it.  So copyright is a key enabler of virtual worlds.  But thorny questions arise when copyrighted content is brought into a virtual world.  Suppose a Second Life user imports a video feed from his cable television service so he and five of his virtual friends can watch a television program in his virtual living room.  Is that fair use?  What if he’s sharing the video with 500 friends in a virtual auditorium?  What copyright and broadcasting law applies if the programming is from Brazil, the user resides in Canada, and the servers supporting the virtual world are in California?

 

Open Standards

On June 15, 2007, in Cambridge, MIT and IBM co-hosted a conference on virtual worlds.  The need for standards was a hot topic.[2]  According to one of the participants[3], Bob Sutor, IBM’s Vice President of Standards and Open Source,  "The last thing you want is a lot of different ways to do the same things. You need standards for how to teleport between different virtual worlds and to bring objects with you."[4]  Without standards, a piece of software crafted in one world, will be useless in another world.  Particularly important is the question of how you establish identity in a virtual world or an online game and whether there will be standards that allow you to authenticate yourself across different virtual environments.  However, the existence of standards does not mean everything should be moved from one world to another.  The key is the suitable level of interoperability between zones that might be intended for different things.  You might not want a certified identity in a world designed for role playing alternate identities.  You might only want to transport an image or a subset of an avatar’s capabilities between worlds.  For example, when going from a role-playing world to a more business-oriented space, an avatar of a wizard might be able to attend a business meeting but would be unable to do magic and the wizard’s wand might becomes a stick.

 

Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance

 

Some of the most vexing policy issues related to virtual worlds involve electronic surveillance and law enforcement.  Under what conditions can a law enforcement agency gain access to a Second Life user's data and how should and when could a user’s activities be monitored?  Which national laws apply?

 

Consumer Protection

Estimates vary, but even the most conservative assessment concludes that billions of dollars of economic activity is happening in virtual worlds and in online games—and the total is growing rapidly.  In 1994, the BBC reported that “gaming activity has a gross economic impact equivalent to the GDP of the Southern African nation of Namibia.”[5]  In 2005, Professor Edward Castronova at Indiana University cited an estimate that the annual trade in virtual goods amounted to more than $887 million.  Online game companies and virtual world providers spend a great deal of time dealing with consumer complaints regarding bogus goods sold by users.  Yet, the consumer protection laws that govern are unclear.  In most cases, the contract between the user and the virtual world provider specifies users’ rights and responsibilities, but usually the only enforcement mechanism is to bar a violator from the game.  How can someone who believes they’ve been defrauded by another Second Life user seek compensation, if they are in Japan and they bought the virtual goods from someone in China?  It’s even more complicated if the transaction was not done “in world,” but instead happened though an auction site such as eBay.

 

Contract Law

Companies are starting to establish virtual stores in virtual worlds like Second Life.  Teams of designers are working together to create buildings and services for avatars to use.  Ailin Graef, a German entrepreneur, is making more than $200,000 a year by designing, building, and decorating virtual apartments and houses in Second Life.[6]  How will virtual design teams, made up of employees in a number of different countries, most of whom have never met each other (except as avatars in Second Life) handle legal issues regarding incorporation, employee compensation and stock ownership, and intellectual property?  While other transnational companies have dealt with these issues in other contexts, the virtual nature of the goods being produced, the transient nature of the work force, and the intensely collaborative nature of these teams raise new issues.  Government regulations that assume that a company has an office and hold physical meetings of employees or Board members may need to be revised. To help facilitate creation of virtual corporations creating goods and services online, legislation has been introduced in the Vermont legislature to address some of these issues.[7]

 

Taxation

Now that billions of dollars of virtual goods and services are being created and sold in virtual worlds and in online games, it is not surprising that national and state governments are considering whether such transactions should be taxed.[8]  But which tax regime should apply?  And when should the tax be collected?[9]  Should it be collected in virtual currency if the transaction takes place “in world”?  Or should tax only be collected with the virtual currency used in a virtual world is converted to a real-world currency?  Who’s going to do the necessary paperwork?

 

Tariffs

Related to the question of taxation—and perhaps even more complicated--is tariffs.  Given that many virtual products are the result of collaboration between team members (or between different companies) spanning several countries, which makes it hard to even assign a “country of origin,” it is hard to see an elegant or effective way to charge tariffs on the importation of virtual goods.

 

Identity and Trust

Perhaps no issue is more fundamental than the question of identity and trust in virtual worlds.  One of the attractions of the virtual worlds such as There.com is that users can live a fantasy life through an anonymous avatar.  Yet, inhabitants of virtual worlds can verbally assault or harass others in a virtual world—and often easily avoid punishment (other than having their avatar banned from the virtual world.)  For example, the virtual headquarters for Presidential candidate John Edwards in Second Life was vandalized by hackers.[10]  The lack of spoof-proof ways to link avatars to real people has fueled concerns among law enforcement agencies that virtual worlds are being used for illegal gambling, distribution of child pornography, money laundering, and other illegal activities. 

 

In order to examine this issue, IBM recently did an in-depth study of identity in virtual worlds and collaborative spaces (e.g. Wikipedia), which face similar issues.  The conclusion is that there is a clear need for decentralized system for single sign-on authentication based on open standards and open source software.  Fortunately, in the last couple years, an ecosystem of companies has been developing to provide such services.  Shibboleth, OpenID, and Project Higgins are key pieces of this ecosystem.  Governments may have a role in spurring development and deployment of such systems.

 

 

CONCLUSIONS

The policy research community is just beginning to explore the difficult regulatory and technology issues related to virtual worlds.[11]  Virtual worlds are at a very early phase.  In many ways, we are at a stage similar to where the World Wide Web was in 1993, when the first commercial and government Web sites were being created, security was poor, and very few legal and regulatory issues had been adequately addressed.  The explosion of e-commerce and e-business that happened in the 1990s could not have happened without clarification of key cyber-law issues. 

 

Today, virtual worlds are still predominantly used for entertainment, but they are becoming a platform for commerce, education, and e-government.  Furthermore, virtual worlds are combining elements of the real world (via Google Maps, for instance) to create what MIT’s Technology Review calls “Second Earth.”[12]  We can only realize the full potential of such new applications if policy and regulatory questions are answered and user concerns adequately addressed.

 

Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger and John Crowley at Harvard, have speculated on how today’s regulatory structures will be applied to virtual worlds.[13]  Their important law review article sees four possible scenarios:  (1) Virtual world providers will serve as regulators by enforcing the terms of their contracts with users to prevent cyber-fraud and ensure proper behavior, (2) Governments could try to block their citizens from using virtual worlds that don’t abide by government restrictions and regulations (although this will never be 100% effective, just as governments have not been able to completely block access to Web sites), (3) Government may try to minimize the real-world impact of virtual worlds by, for instance, banning the sale of virtual goods for real-world currency, or (4) “Real-World Assisted Virtual World Self-Governance,” which is by far the most interesting scenario.  Under this approach, governments provide support for mechanisms where by users of virtual worlds can agree upon and enforce their own “community standards” and rules of conduct.  Such self-government is already starting to happen in place in Second Life and other virtual worlds. 

 

How policy and policy-making will evolve in virtual worlds and online games is not clear.  But what is clear is that more research is needed to ascertain just what is happening in these new online spaces.  Furthermore, the policy research community can help by developing and debating  creative suggestions regarding how best to address concerns about cyber-fraud, illegal activity, intellectual property theft, consumer protection, and identity.  Without solid data and new approaches, we can expect to see old-style regulatory proposals propelled by anecdotes.  That is clearly not an effective way to foster growth of new virtual world applications.

 



[1] “Schmidt, Eric, “Don’t Bet Against the Internet,” in “The World in 2007,” The Economist http://www.economist.com/theworldin/business/displayStory.cfm?story_id=8133511

[2] http://www.research.ibm.com/research/press/virtualworlds.shtml

[3] http://www.virtualworldsnews.com/2007/06/liveblogging_mi_3.html#more

[4]“Do Virtual Worlds Need Standards?,” PC World, June 13, 2007,  http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,132847-c,onlineentertainment/article.html

[5] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3570224.stm

[7] http://cairns.typepad.com/iilp/2007/05/johnson_testifi.html

[8] http://news.com.com/2100-1043_3-6140298.html?part=rss&tag=2547-1_3-0-5&subj=news

[9] http://news.com.com/Are+virtual+assets+taxable/2100-1043_3-6027212.html

[10] http://gamepolitics.com/2007/03/01/edwards-sl-hq-trashed/

[11] http://www.amazon.com/State-Play-Virtual-Machina-Technology/dp/0814799728

[12] https://www.technologyreview.com/Infotech/18911/

[13] Mayer-Schoenberger, Viktor, and Crowley, John, “Napster’s Second Life?:  The Regulator Challenges of  Virtual Worlds,” Northwestern University Law Review, Vol. 100, No. 4, http://www.vmsweb.net/attachments/pdf/NWLR100n4.pdf