Linden Lab Becomes First (and Only) VR Company to Join Tech Industry's Amicus Brief Against Trump's Muslim Ban

Linden Lab is backing up its strong statement condemning Trump's anti-Muslim ban with deeds, officially joining the amicus brief opposing it in court that's been filed by... well, pretty much every well-known high tech company in Silicon Valley. (Uber and Tesla also just joined the brief, even though CEOs Travis Kalanick and Elon Musk were/are members of Trump's tech advisory committee.)

This also makes Linden Lab the first and so far only VR-focused tech company to join the brief. (That's not counting fellow signees Facebook, which own Oculus, or Google, which develops Daydream, or Microsoft, which develops HoloLens -- but those giants are not categorized by their VR products.) For all the billions of dollars invested in VR startups in the last few years, and general outrage in the VR industry over Palmer Luckey's covert Trump support, the Lab stands alone.

Speaking of which, Linden Lab is one of the few amicus members from the game/3D graphics/MMO/3D platform/etc.-focused industry:

Of the 127 which signed so far, only Bungie, Intel, Zynga are with Linden Lab in that category. The game industry is notably timid when it comes to public/political controversies, even when it directly impacts them -- remember GamerGate? -- so it's especially praiseworthy for the companies to come forward against Trump's anti-American, anti-Muslim policies now.

Comments

[Bigger Picture]

The tech industry-by and large the bulk of companies listed in the brief-are highly dependent upon the H-1B visa program to import *lower paid foreign-born workers*

This is far less about benevolence and more about the almighty dollar,namely tech companies paying foreign-born workers LESS than their American counterparts for the same job. Just another viewpoint to be considered.

source:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-h-1b_us_5890d86ce4b0522c7d3d84af

[Wagner J Au]

That's conflating two different Trump policies. The tech industry's H1B visa hires are mostly from India, not from the Muslim-majority country's Trump is penalizing with the ban that the amicus is filed against.

http://www.businessinsider.in/86-Indians-in-computer-jobs-get-H-1B-visas/articleshow/48453766.cms

[Fact Checker]

Your "solution" is hypocritical.
Philip Rosedale not stepping in protecting innocent Muslims from obvious white oppression is sicking! The practices should be punished where they are against US law, like any other crime.
Boycott High Fidelity! when it comes to acting on those thoughts-Philip needs to step down or lose all funding!

[Cathartes Aura]

@Fart Checker. Hate White People much? You are a f$%ing hypocrite. ;)

[Shuichi Shinji]

@Fact Checker & @Doug Reynholm: Please just ignore Cathartes Aura. It's good to stand up against hate and fundamentalism, it's good to stand up against Trump's executive order and not stay silent, just so they can see that there is resistance and not everything is just accepted, but some people are just resistent to arguments and immune to thinking and on them every such attempt is wasted. He's just a troll, a little child sitting alone in front of his screen, hiding in anonymity, with no one talking to him except here, throwing a temper tantrum whenever someone doesn't share his own limited excuse for an opinion, even going so far as to fake another user's identity (which is so obvious if you just look), getting defensive when he has no real arguments and with every tweet...oops...with every post he just confirms that.

[Cathartes Aura]

@Hamlet Thank You. It's nice to see that even though you in no way probably agree with me on 99% of what I post you let me have my say. You do not censor even one of my posts. I appreciate that.

I can imagine the heat that you might get because of what I post. Thank You for standing up for Free Speech. Not many people these days do. Especially on the left.

And the Turkey Buzzard goes... Free Speech forever! ;)

[Dartagan Shepherd]

Funny. I bet if Trump lowers the corporate tax, LL will take it like everyone else. Likewise they'd also nix the political views if they started losing too many customers over it. Money always shows you how married people actually are to their views.

[jesus]

It's laughable that tech people are upset that CAPITALISM conked them over the head.

Some years ago, tech people had the opportunity to UNIONIZE, but guess what? They refused. "Let the free market system work" and "Unions are bad for people".

Now they are crying on their keyboards, powerless because they thought CAPITALISM was going to do okay by them.

Morons.

[Fact Checker]

The right for freedom of speech is important. It allows everyone to express their opinion and be heard. It does NOT include the RIGHT to be heard. It does NOT include the RIGHT to be given a platform by everyone to express these opinions. This said, Hamlet has every right to delete posts according to his own guidelines. I do not like it, but I also do not like Trump taking his right for free speech without any consideration. I know that freedom of speech applies to persons and I guess it also applies to organizations and companies such as LL expressing their concern over the temporary immigration ban and making a strong statement against it. I would like to know if the freedom of speech also includes "official persons" like the President or if there are other things to consider that outweigh that. I guess it applies to him as well and it is just expected of him to be considerate when using it. Is that the case?

I do not like that someone posted something using my name (3rd post) and wonder if sich libelous behavior is also covered by freedom of speech. I do not know who it was, but there are strong indications such as the choice of words, copypasting one of my own statements and the timing of the post, but it can clearly be seen by the different Typepad avatar icon to the left of the text which is chosen automatically depending on name and other attributes and which is different to any of my other posts. And it just makes no sense that I am faking something like this and so amateurish. But only Hamlet has some kind of proof in his logs.

I do not like that my disclaimer/clarification was deleted and I do not like that the insulting posts were deleted. I can deal with them and would rather let the insulters disqualify themselves than to abridge freedom of speech. But again, there is no right for a platform. In professional media, I would expect that clarifications are posted or printed together with the original false statement. I do not expect this in every forum, but I consider this blog professional enough to allow the chance to rectify wrong claims. In the end, it comes down to this: If I wrote the above (which I did not), I could want it to be deleted because I wrote nonsense; if I did not write it, I could demand it to be deleted because of libelous behavior.

But I do not. I value the freedom of speech very high and would like to see the original, fake post stay side by side here with this post. If this post gets deleted again like the original clarification, then I would like the fake post to be deleted as well, but I would prefer them both to stay. And I will ignore any insults. They have the freedom to speak them, but I have the freedom not to listen. And the freedom to speak against it. I am trying not to ignore persons and have a sensible discussion with anyone willing to stay objective and reasonable, no matter how severe the disagreement. Discussions and debates are essential to bringing us forward. Please do not abridge this opportunity.

I often see these days, that the freedom of speech is demanded, but not willing to be given. So many expressions of opinion invoke the freedom of speech and the freedom to be heard, but any opposing opinion is replied to with insults and to shut up. Basic rights are only accepted if they serve the own purpose. Women's rights are demanded from Muslims, but others violating them is just lockerroom talk. LGBT acceptance is demanded from Muslims, but the White House's LGBT rights page has disappeared suddenly. I do support these demands, at least for immigrants because they come into a country where this is law. And of course it applies to everyone, not just Muslims. There is no applying different measurements. See also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mOeVqqKIzg

I support any statement like the one from LL and the ones from other tech companies and in fact everyone, standing up against hostile actions. I am sure that business interests are a part of it and I do not like foreign workers being paid less. I support "same money for same work" wherever possible. But I do not think that business interests are the only reason for all these statements and protests. I do believe they are genuine. I will accept other statements because they are covered by freedom of speech and because different views and debating them are crucial for progress. And with the current US government, I fear for this basic right and this process. Standing up for them is important!