Caveat Creatores: Second Inventory?
How is Second Inventory completely flying under the radar? People are quite possibly illegally copying SL content into OpenSim and no one really seems to care, least of all Second Inventory:
Q: What about full perms products sold with license restrictions?
A: Normally, when you sell a full perms product with transfer/resell limitations, you are trusting the buyer’s honesty but nobody could stop him of selling them. With Second Inventory is the same, if he has full perm on your textures he can copy them and resell them, no technical limitations, just the buyer’s honesty.
And from the forums (posted way back in July 23, 2008) from Angelo Biondi:
SI doesn’t save and won’t save No Copy stuff. Indeed the warning you got is part of the copyright protection system that we imposed inside SI.
At the moment you can B/r only stuff full perms or created by you, the post you were talking about was related to those items which have at least the Copy flag. Unfortunately, due to some recent debates about the items ownership/rights, I can’t be optimist about the opportunity to get the approval on that idea from LL and generally from the community, rather it seems that further limitations will be issued. Anyway this is a transition moment and anything could happens so let’s see what the future will reserve to us.
Hoverer it’s also true the sometimes, the same people that declare their self against a more flexible approach, have their own copybot, and it’s also true that you can easily buy a copybot in-world, at every sl corner, but this is not the point… We will continue to go straight on our direction, respecting the TOS and the community requests.
Looks like Linden Labs agrees, somewhat:
You acknowledge that Linden Lab and other Content Providers have rights in their respective Content under copyright and other applicable laws and treaty provisions, and that except as described in this Agreement, such rights are not licensed or otherwise transferred by mere use of the Service. You accept full responsibility and liability for your use of any Content in violation of any such rights.
And then all of section three, which covers who owns what. Forgive my paraphrasing, but it pretty much says Linden can do whatever it wants with your content once it is uploaded, including sell it if they really wanted to. They own everything about it, except your original IP rights.
Linden Labs and Second Inventory are sort of saying, “hey buyer, it is up to you to be honest” while also saying “hey content creator, it is up to you to make sure your buyers know how they can use your content.” In other words, “Copyright is between the buyer and seller, it ain’t our problem.”
Webifying Virtual Worlds Content Inevitable
At first glance I am all for them getting out of the way where content is concerned. As uncomfortable as the future is to people who base their current livelihood on the Second Life content economy, let’s face it, virtual world content will eventually be as widespread and accessible as that from any web server URL, in fact, the OpenSim team recently discussed URL schemes for assets. No one complains about the icons on this wordpress page being downloadable and ’stealable’. The whole notion of the SL content economy will fade away into the broader content markets. Skin creators, for example, will not freak out about one person being able to change his skin to one of another avatar simply by copying and pasting that avatars skin URL, and if the creators do freak out, controls on that URL will be put in place, perhaps some form of the very HTTP access controls used now for premium content. Virtual world vendors will come to resemble any other web content vendor.
SL Full Perms != License to Use in OpenSim
Still, for now, I have stood before people in Open Life grid or their own private sims and remarked, “Hey, that skin looks great!” the response, “Yeah, I brought it over from SL using Second Inventory. It was full perms there.” It amazes me how Second Inventory is showing up in everyone’s groups and being recommended by people–most disturbingly by people in the corporate world working on content development and OpenSim projects. Perhaps it is because Second Inventory is a great tool for migrating content you have created between two OpenSim grids or regions. That seems legal enough. But there is nothing technically stopping you from bringing content from OpenSim grids into SL, or worse, from SL into OpenSim.
Full permissions or not, moving any content from SL outside of SL seems unethical and probably illegal. I was sure I would find a legal statement expressly forbidding the copying of content from SL into other systems, like OpenLife or any OpenSim grid. But after rereading the entire TOS and all the SI FAQ I could not find it.* I did find a lot of help in the SI OpenSim Integration Forum about how to bring full perms stuff from SL into any OpenSim.
Do content creators just not care about all this? Or is it that they don’t know what is going on? I bet most are too busy creating to be alarmed. I bet most content creators would at least pause to consider selling products with full permissions if they knew the creator attribution would be lost and those products redistributed in any way the buyer wants in any OpenSim or real life usage. Perhaps not. Caveat creatores.
To complicate things, people come into possession of full perms content in SL over time and eventually have no idea where they got it, let alone what the content usage limitations were when they acquired it, that is, if the humble content creator even bothered to including anything at all outlining that. Ways to trace content embedded in the content itself are Phillip Rosedale’s solution when asked some months ago about such things as copybot in a Podcast interview. Content traceability may well be the solution to the wider content question affecting all the internet rather than controlling access.
Some seem to be waking up to the huge issue content management and migration are becoming for LL, OpenSim, and Second Inventory. Here is just one. There will be more.
Second Inventory Discourages Open Solutions
Now I know content ownership is a tired notion in today’s pirate-all-the-music-you-can-eat world. The very notion of IP is being redefined. I do not particularly think the answer is tighter restrictions and content law. But this issue goes beyond that. Using Second Inventory might actually be hurting OpenSim development. SI is becoming something of a defacto content migration tool for use in OpenSim grids. There is no real system for content around OpenSim grids and when pressed SI consumers usually respond, “Well I don’t think there is anything wrong with it.”
There is something wrong with it. Second Inventory combines open source libraries (that do most of the heavy lifting) with its closed code and security encryption asking buyers to just trust its copyright policies, which, according to the FAQ are ‘coming soon’ and have already made LL leery. So while Second Inventory makes money for its closed and ethically questionable product, OpenSim misses the support, even pressure, to improve. Money always wins, I guess. But why would any user or proponent of any OpenSim initiative support such a thing? Desperation. That can be the only answer.
I certainly won’t be using Second Inventory for all the reasons above and frankly I wish others would not use it either. It is a personal choice.
* [If you find the legaleze calling out SL->external content migration please let me know. I honestly believe Linden and others think it is there. Perhaps the "we own it once it hits SL, except the IP rights" is enough since technically Second Inventory is acquiring SL's content, not from the content creator directly, which would make Second Inventory stealing, sorry, "using the more flexible approach," from Linden Labs unless they have an express license to do so.]
December 18, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Nice post and some very important points. We’ve actually known about the problem since OpenGrid started. In fact a friend established a proof of concept soon after. However this is the first time we’ve seen an ad for a device with the express purpose of moving objects between worlds. Caveat creatores indeed.
December 19, 2008 at 12:21 am
We pepare a service that continuously scans SL and all OS-Grids for content and identifies illegal copies. This approach won’t prevent the copying itself. It’ll instead provide the necessary information to detect copyright infringement and set up the according lawsuits.
Shameless promotion: Investing early adopters may get special conditions.
Some thoughts from early November:
http://www.talentraspel-mmokit.de/wordpress_en/?p=60
Greetings from the real world,
Kai Ludwig
Director
TalentRaspel virtual worlds Ltd.
http://www.talentraspel.de
December 19, 2008 at 1:09 am
Yes, this issue has been lingering for a while. It was only recently that I was motivated enough to squawk about it.
As for the rest, Kay, you mean to tell me you honestly have something you offer customers now that scans for content in “all OS-Grids”, identifies it as originating from Second Life, and tags that in a report so sim owners can act accordingly? Forgive my skepticism, but I smell vaporware. Just the act of identifying the content reliably coming from SL is, well, problematic, unless the assets Second Inventory moves are keeping their same UUIDs. That would at least be a hint at potentially compromised content. If you pull it off who would your clients be? OpenSim grid operators? Not a crowd with deep pockets, at least not at the moment.
Still, any effort is better than me just ranting about it. I will give you that. I suppose I am just trying to shape the conversation some and spread the word to perhaps a branch of content developers that have no idea what is going on. /me turns back to coding freebie scripts and creating other content destined for OpenSim and SL.
December 19, 2008 at 2:40 am
Can you point me toward any online discussions of these schemes? I’m interested in learning more about this.
December 19, 2008 at 4:02 am
Ryan, most of it is indirectly discussed during the threads about off-loading the asset server, decoupling it from the rest of the UGAIM. One thread called ‘Distributed asset server proposal’ touches on it. Another called ‘Global UUIDs’ also gets into URL schemes. More than once the concept of asset URLs including global UUIDs has been mentioned with ‘3D internet’ in the same thread. Mind you, this is just discussion at this point, but the idea is very much on everyone’s mind. I am extremely excited by where this could go. People that provide content could setup their own asset servers and serve up the content to any avatar on any grid and manage that content from a centralized location. This is extremely attractive to content creators since although it allows decentralization of assets, it allows centralized metrics for content creators/publishers. You could actually monitor content usage and popularity, even eventually tied to subscriptions or registered purchases. Obviously this is a big step away from what Second Life is doing now. But it just makes too much sense not to entertain as a real solution to both OpenSim asset management as well as SL asset management. Imagine how corporations would love it being able to host asset/content servers within their walls while allowing viewers to be unblocked. Asset load would be completely distributed across as many or as few asset servers giving out content via URL requests to any of a hundred just to render everything in a single build. Combined with caching, that could very well become the future architecture of the 3d internet.
December 19, 2008 at 9:27 am
Mo, I appreciate your skeptisism and I’m no friend of vaporware too. You are correct in challenging us to just show what we have and we’ll for sure do as soon as we are really ready too.
Our developers made a small example of automated SL scanning processes and generating statistics from the results: http://www.talentraspel-mmokit.de/portal/index.php?id=62 No big deal but quite impressive. Scanning for content is technically the same, just add some sophisticated comparison algorithms.
As we already can provide an on-demand service, early adopters may ask at info@talentraspel.de under NDA for what can be done right now, estimated public release of the service should be Q2/2009.
It is always difficult to announce news approaches without giving away the business secrets and at the same time getting some attention and perhaps investment to get things running faster.
But we can reveal at last that our service won’t rely on UUIDs. It uses sophisticated comparison methods, like those used by the industry to identify copied music and/or images, to detect asset copyright infringement. For prim structure copyright infringement detection we put some content-hashing agorithms in place that allow for intentifying copyies by a “look-a-like” probablity. No easy stuff, not yet completely finished, but it already does the job.
The most important thing in this case it to do at least something because even the slightest mechanism to detect at least the majority of the plain copies is better than the current situation of having nothing at all.
We target customers that have commercial interest in detecting where their IP has been copied to. Time will show if enough interest can be generated to keep the service at a reasonable rate and perhaps provide some basic information free of charge.
But beside to commercial aspect we hope at least managing to set up a functional standard for asset control to give everybody a solid base for dealing with IP in OS based VR environments.
Greetings from the real world,
Kai Ludwig
Director
TalentRaspel virtual worlds Ltd.
http://www.talentraspel.de
December 19, 2008 at 5:29 pm
[...] that with a good long time ranting about Second Inventory and I think I have another mentoring block. What I really need to do is get back to skinning as [...]
December 21, 2008 at 3:16 pm
You’re right, most SL residents and many content creators are completely oblivious to the existence of “Second Inventory.” The people that are familiar with it are the larger creators who justifiably want a backup of their work and the small, but growing number of people who want to bring content from SL to Open Sim.
Regarding the statement;
“Do content creators just not care about all this? Or is it that they don’t know what is going on?”
As a member of the Content Creators Association (CCA), I can tell you that the members of the CCA are, as a group, definitely aware of the various forms of content “misappropriation” and export taking place. Discussions about “bot” technology and how to combat it are frequent.
The movement of content from SL to OpenSim is inevitable. It’s up to content creators to determine whether that movement will be controlled by unscrupulous content “appropriators” and uninformed (IP Knowledge-challenged) end users or themselves. Every content creator that wants to protect their creations and profit from their sale, should be establishing a sales presence in each of the major OpenSim environments. Given the choice, I believe most people would rather “do the right thing” and pay a reasonable amount for content, rather than obtain it from a “questionable source.
http://www.plurk.com/VWestland
December 31, 2008 at 3:18 pm
You can rant all you like about new technology undermining your old business models, but it won’t change a thing. Past epic successes like sweeping back of the tides or destruction of the looms suggest that one’s energies might be better spent in other directions.
The people who will come out on top are those who capitalize on new technology instead of treating it as a problem, because the mark of a good business person is to use one’s current environment to one’s advantage.
What that means in the context of SL and forthcoming open grids is simple. Use the most advanced software systems to help you automate design and production of new items. Create a brand, and keep its name in the limelight by associating “new item” and the brand name — newness and identity are all that will matter. Make new items every few days, because it is only novelty that makes your creations unique, for a while. And most importantly, stop complaining — it just highlights that you’re not in tune with digital realities, which is the opposite of the modern image that you want to portray and a clear indicator of your imminent failure. Instead, use that time to make new items or better production processes or arrange exclusive deals.
The people you rail against are also your potential customers, and if there’s one good thing that the RIAA has shown is that demonizing your customers is not a good business move. Think about that before putting up signs in your stores that treat potential customers as potential copyright violators. If you must rationalize it using an old-school concept, treat all those “problems” as community-driven advertising, but such rationalizations should not be necessary — it’s simply the natural state of things in a digital world.
The old concept of creating something digital once and then expecting to live off its copies for perpetuity is dead, dead, dead, if it was ever alive in the fist place. Like everyone else, you now need to work continually to earn a living, and unless you automate the process of design and production then you no longer have a viable business in this digital world. The window for profits is now shorter, but business always works within constraints and that is just one more constraint among many.
Understand that, be agile, adapt your business to be in tune with a digital world in which assets are ephemeral, and the profits will come from those who value novelty and temporary exclusivity. It’s more likely to succeed than trying to sweep back the tide.
Morgaine.
December 31, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Morgaine, if your comment was directed at my original post then I must have really failed to get my main point across that Second Inventory is not helping the OpenSim movement, but hurting it in the long run by addressing a need with a closed tool where an open tool is needed.
The part about people pirating content is indeed a tired argument, but a very real one for any content creator using Second Inventory in a production corporate environment where ‘tired old business models’ include very real, very damaging litigation or risk of it. Even the hint of bad IP in a project can tank months of work.
Morgaine, I could not agree more that the modern digital age requires agile, reactive, living business models focused on new products, services, and content. But there are several very big, well resourced companies, who’s stock could not be performing better, that do not ‘get’ the need for agility nor the ‘ephemeral’ nature of digital assets just as they have not figured out that selling software is a dead business model as well. The conservative lawyers of this companies, which can get IP violators fired with one phone call, are on the non-progressive side of new ‘who cares if they copy it, we’ll make new stuff’ business models.
So as tired and frustrating as is the archaic ‘take a year to make a product and sell if in perpetuity,’ not to mention the concept of ‘patent everything and make money off of licenses’ another hugely popular favorite at these monsters, we that work at them must be aware of IP content issues or find other employment one way or another.
You mention me ‘railing against’ things, but rereading my post the only thing I rail against is Second Inventory itself and perhaps people who feel absolutely no remorse at all taking someone’s product after immediately created and repacking as their own content. Do you honestly not find anything wrong with that? Do you not think that something worth ‘complaining’ about? I don’t have a lot of content and most all I give away for free or contribute to the OpenSim core so honestly my concern is more about tainting projects in a way that would make them unusable later after IP certification scrutiny.
By the way, I would not put my post in the ‘complaint’ category and I don’t have a store to put ‘demonizing’ signs up in. Perhaps you were speaking generally about others who have. I was more calling attention to an issue many seem blissfully unaware of, and worse, about which many others seem to want them to be blissfully aware. Second Inventory just isn’t ok in my book and so far I have not heard a compelling argument to change that position.
Your comment reads with a tone of software piracy justification veiled in ‘you cannot fight it so forget about it and find some way around it.’ Inevitably money will be much harder to make by selling content and will require fresh, novelty, and brand, agreed. I am just not ready to say that copying and using someone’s content in a way they have asked it not to be is ok–especially when people are still losing very real IP infringement lawsuits all the time. But, forget the lawsuits, it is just very uncool.
There was an interesting case-study about the better digital content business model you refer too. It was a great radio story on NPR about a self-made musician in China who successfully gave all this music away for free and focused on marketing, web site, and performance gigs to make his money since ‘there is no way to prevent rampant piracy in China.’ according to this musician himself. So far he has been successful, but had to work very hard to stay fresh and give live performance rather than sell CDs, since although he does sell some, he does not depend on that income because he has given in to the reality that you suggest we all should.
This will be an interesting time for digital content and IP law, no doubt.
Thanks for the comments.
January 3, 2009 at 10:02 am
So whats the Thing ? about transfering Stuff from SL to OSGrid..as example ?
Just as Info, you will never Sell something on OSgrid, cause it’s a Freegrid.
So all CC’S keep cool and let the stream float..you will loose nothing !.
January 3, 2009 at 10:04 am
Ahh i forgot, your deamonizing Stuff that helped SL to get better.
Things like OpenSim, LibSL etc did more for SL as you ever can do..or are willing to do.
January 3, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Wow, some people clearly are not reading this thing. This last one about “deamonizing Stuff that helped SL to get better” is so far off the mark I will just let it speak for itself. I suspect an english language barrier that preventing Kaliber from actually understanding most of what I wrote. No worries.
I just laughed out loud at the
Kaliber you mean well and your passion is something I admire. I am sure if I understood my post as you seem to have I would have similarly commented. Just know, friend, that everything about me is promoting OpenSim, libsl and other open virtual worlds platforms such as Cobalt-Edusim. I would not have spent my entire Christmas vacation working on scripts to improve basic animation and pose functionality in SL and OpenSim if I did not feel that way.
If I am demonizing anything, it is Second Inventory. Yes, it is the Devil, but perhaps a necessary evil until a better method of transporting content between sims comes. Until then, Morgaine has almost convinced me to throw caution to the wind and just pirate all the content I can get with libsl, everyone’s doing it, no one can stop it, so I might as well enjoy the spoils as well, right?
January 4, 2009 at 7:14 am
Ok sorry about that, Mo.
I hope, think, bet (choose one) ..that OGP and the thingy about Intergrid Connection will transfer the complet Inventory of an Avitar between different Grids.
Then in my Option ist SI mandentory, well for this point.
January 4, 2009 at 7:15 am
I meant soon, near Future.
And yes English isnt my native Tounge, thats right
January 5, 2009 at 2:28 am
Mo, you perceived correctly that my comments weren’t really directed at your article to any large degree at all, but far more at those who missed the point you were making and followed up with their usual content protection arguments. It’s those whom I see as trying to brush back the tide and destroy the looms that mark technological progress. Your article merely gave them more fuel.
Sometimes one can write too many words, and it obscures the main point. Maybe your point deserves highlighting without ancillary distractions.
Second Inventory is a closed source program riding on the hard work of open community developers for its own financial benefit and giving no code back. It fills a void in the open code portfolio which should be addressed with open code because it is an important facility for grid interoperation, object migration, and personal backup. It is reducing community interest in developing an open toolset for this, because nobody really likes writing code that has already been done once. Unfortunately the use of BSD licensing is acting against community interests here, as it allows that tool to remain closed and simultaneously reduces the likelihood of its reinvention.
That’s where we are. It’s not good.
Morgaine.
January 5, 2009 at 6:11 am
I have to trackback to the thread Gwyneth started in which Hiri adds excellent content creator insights and concerns about moving any content to OpenSim. Don’t let the actual theme of the content she talks about distract from the points she makes. She may well have summarized what all SL content creators are feeling and what could be the most substantial obstacle facing OpenSim adoption.
January 21, 2009 at 9:16 am
[...] Combined with some of the thoughts Morgaine raised about ownership and the dilemma of digital content it seems more obvious than ever that web 2.0 content vending business models, such as renderosity.com will continue to merge with distribution technology into the different virtual worlds starting with the ability for consumers to buy content targetted for a specific world but also giving in to consumer demand to keep and maintain their own content independent of any given world. Such has been the one of the lurking demands manifest in Second Life inventory’s recent popularity. [...]
January 21, 2009 at 10:25 am
Pffffhahaha, I am sorry. I can’t help myself. It seems Second Inventory suddenly stopped working in Second Life and without any warning. Can I please be permitted a big I TOLD YOU SO. Sorry, could not help it.
January 21, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Mo,
thank you for a very thought-out blog. You are really spot on; these issues must be dealt with.
Now, I have been around for quite some time, being one of the original founders of OpenSim, and I feel I would like to add to the discussion.
First of all, the OpenSim project has always been very aware of these issues and problems; it’s why we’ve always made sure that we define the boundaries of the project very clearly – for example, we brought OSGrid out of the OpenSim project very early because we realized that we didn’t want an official ‘OpenSim Grid’ – and we said very early that we would never implement a monetary system in OpenSim; provide hooks and references, yes – but never any particular monetary system. It’s just not within scope.
Another thing that would not be within scope, would be to cater for the special case of transferring content in and out of the Linden Grid. The Linden ToS is so full of caveats that we just shun the very thought of getting entangled into something like that. Instead, we concentrate on finding good ways to share content between OpenSim grids – and let other projects like the OGP find ways to deal with the special Linden case.
I would definitively say that it would be justifiable to think that the problem is that, in order to protect your content, LL has to protect your content from yourself – ie, thru technology and law bind the content you created on their grid to their grid (as there is no way to ever get it out again, even if you are the original creator, and there is not even a way to get it in in any other form than thru their tool. Abiding to the ToS, that is.)
That is basically what causes the existence of tools like SI.
Although I think you have a point in SI hampering open source alternatives, one needs to realize that there was once an open source alternative – and it was called CopyBot.
Now, an interesting thing is starting to happen; content creators are starting to use OpenSim as their local, stable, controlled build environment, using tools like Second Inventory (but not only SI) to move content INTO the Linden Grid – which gives them the full control over their IP and content they deserved in the first place.
Actually, given that SI could, in theory, rip _any_ inventory items from SL, they have implemented some security checks to at least address the most obvious infringements – otherwise, LL would probably come after them with a blowtorch.
At any rate I would argue that OpenSim has nothing to do with this – it’s not within our scope. Over time, we will surely add security, permissions, watermarking and hashing to the core to be able to implement drm policies of grids that chooses to enable them – but OpenSim will never be a policy-making body for the users of the platform; just like you could use Apache to publish unlawful material, you can use OpenSim to do the same.
January 22, 2009 at 12:38 am
Thanks for your post Stefan. Honored to have your contribution here. I agree that content movement is at best an indirect issue for OpenSim to tackle.
I do think that creating serialization and other standards for flattening content so that it can be transported and stored reliably, even versioned, outside of any sim would be nice in helping accomplish that.
Clearly it is a double-edged sword since making content more liquid would foster any distribution of content approved, illegal or otherwise. But would this be any different than other established digital content? Probably not. As much as content creators might not like it, it seems more clear to me now that sim content will inevitably become as easy to move around as music files are today and with all the same implications.
My biggest gripe with Second Inventory is that I would love to have a reliable open tool that does the same. The dilemma, as you point out, is such a tool then becomes subject to engineering that allows one-way enforcement from opensims into SL, for example, to be circumvented.
One day sim content will be bought and sold on the real market like products from Amazon now, probably in much the same form as Apple’s iTunes store sells content now. Maybe Apple’s move away from DRM protections to make customers happier with how they handle that content is a sign of what is to come for all digital assets. Add in Linden’s recent move more directly into the virtual assets market and things could get interesting. Could Linden become the Apple iTunes store of 3D content? Perhaps. I still think with Amazon’s demonstrated OpenSim interest they still have a very real shot an integrating virtual products into their real world product sales.
January 26, 2009 at 4:16 pm
I’m not sure how you would check that someone is producing unauthorized Mickey Mouse ears in a virtual world, never mind original pieces of art.
People should not be so quick to commercialize based on SL’s “notransfer” bit.
February 5, 2009 at 9:49 am
Guess what. I bought Second Inventory. With all its bugs and quirks and delays receiving the product, I love it.
I know. “You need some maple syrup to go with that waffle?!” Have your fun, but hey, I am just an avatar after all. I am entitled to change my mind. [Fact is, I wish more people would come clean rather than hanging onto their agendas and hype. (Did I say that outloud?)]
Until I can complete a better review and blog post eating my words in this post, hopefully with a video tutorial demonstrating a simple tranfer, here’s the reason why I’ve converted.
It transfers my stuff from SL to OpenSim so I can OAR it up
It allows you to log into groups and chat without viewer
It actually has a rather nice support team
It at least protects content not yours from transfer
It has to be closed to protect the content protection
It doesn’t cost that much, about $40US
I became desperate. There is nothing else.
I was able to transfer a 27 prim build, with my textures, from SL to my OpenSim grid here in under 20 minutes. I will show you here eventually how.
It is a love/hate thing. I love the tool, but hate that such a tool does not exist as a competitor. I also came to terms with the commercialization of OpenSim products. It is just a matter of time. I am sorry for my frustrated tweets when I had nothing to show for my $40 for over three days. I was in a bad place. Now I am more than content with the product despite its many bugs and quirks.
/me walks away sheepishly to build some more OARs.