Let's face it, there is suddenly a little too much "money" to be made on Steemit for people outside the community to not start paying attention to it. With some Steemit blogs dedicated entirely to posting other people's content - without authorization - how long will the Wild West atmosphere last? Please comment to let me know what you think.
Subscribe to my newsletter: http://eepurl.com/cknIZr
http://youtube.com/lifttheveillive
http://twitter.com/lifttheveil411
lifttheveil411@gmail.com
▶️ DTube
▶️ IPFS
This is something I bring up every few months here. It is sad to see people flat out stealing from others just to earn a few bucks (lately a lot of bucks).
I get it, original content on a regular basis is tough to create. That doesn't mean go out and steal the work of others just to make yourself a quick buck here.
Whenever I see it happening I flag them and hope change happens but it seems to never come. I have commented on some in the past only to get a fight started like I am the thief in the situation.
Sadly I don't see it stopping soon.
Maybe if enough of us flag and bring it to light more people will join the fight and help make Stseemit a better place.
I don't think downvoting is the complete solution, but rather communities and user interfaces.
But I also don't see a lot of copyright violations as anything bad at all. What "Zer0hedge" does for example is totally fine imo and he even goes out of his way to show that he's not actually Zerohedge in both name and posts.
The type of content that he provides actually helps this platform quite a bit, because it lets users consume news without leaving the site. That increases both engagement and retention rates.
In the future it's also not impossible that this will peak the interest of Zerohedge or others and that they will start crosspublishing to establish their name here. By that time, the user interfaces and community functions could help us sort the content we want to see more efficiently and even mark confirmed authentic accounts.
So the bottom line, I don't think most copyright violations are neither immoral nor that they harm the platform. Rather I think that overall they will only help, as long as we have the option of hiding the really poor quality posts (including pure copy paste, impersonations and sensitive material such as porn etc) of course.
I think you make an important point here.
The information he puts out would not be available for many users otherwise.
Essentially he does exactly what any mainstream news outlet does.
They also merely regurgitate (copy and paste) their stories from Reuters and APA.
The difference is that he admits to it...
This is something I bring up every few months here. It is sad to see people flat out stealing from others just to earn a few bucks (lately a lot of bucks).
I get it, original content on a regular basis is tough to create. That doesn't mean go out and steal the work of others just to make yourself a quick buck here.
Whenever I see it happening I flag them and hope change happens but it seems to never come. I have commented on some in the past only to get a fight started like I am the thief in the situation.
Sadly I don't see it stopping soon.
Maybe if enough of us flag and bring it to light more people will join the fight and help make Stseemit a better place.
The point of copying my comment is...?
Thanks for pointing this out. If they don't already have copyright guidelines in place, I think Steemit will eventually have to implement them. There will always be those making a quick buck using other people's hard work. Imo, it's perfectly ok to curate content and post it, as long as the original content creator was contacted for permission. It all depends on the intent of the poster. In the case of the Zer0hedge curation blog, it looks like the intent was to easily get a large following, maybe even the forethought of making $$. I can see legal battles ensuing because of this, now that Steemit cryptocurrency is on the rise.
Personally I'm a little indignant at blogs that only post curated content, because I try to create original content on my page and get very little traction. Hopefully people will use discernment when upvoting and resteeming.
Cheers
They can implement them, but they can't block it on the blockchain level. I personally wish that they will do neither and instead focus on making the content on the site more easy for users to sort.
Thanks for bringing attention to this, I flagged this account for a while because of this blatant plagiarism.
It's bullshit.
I'm happy you spoke to an author from zerohedge.com about this and would like to hear more about this from the actual content producers.
@zer0hedge claims that it's not plagiarism because of the one line disclaimer. Also claims that it takes him a lot of 'time to curate' the few articles that he selects to copy and paste onto his blog. It must be a painstaking processes to select 4 or 5 articles about BITCOIN everyday.
He also uses the Zerohedge logo as his avatar and when called out on this just highlighted it neon yellow. Well that takes care of that, problem solved.
This is a serious issue, that people need to consider as the platform grows.
What message does this send to new users (the ones that actually realize it's not the real zerohedge)? It tells them that copy and pasted material is profitable and they'll emulate this strategy.
This does not add value to Steemit, it does the opposite. It's original content that will bring new users and readers to Steemit.
Yep I pmed one of the Tyler Durdens myself and told them about this account.
Please do. But it's entirely within his right, even judicially under copyright law as far as I can understand, to repost content this way. He's not merely copy pasting and he's definitely not claiming to be or represent Zerohedge.
Then again, I have zero respect for copyright laws. I follow them if I must, but I don't think state enforced restrictions on communication is how you get a flourishing society.
The internet doesn't run on copyright.
This is inaccurate.
The account uses the Zerohedge name.
zerohedge / zer0hedge - the use of the number slightly distinguishes the username from the website. Most users will not see a difference and will assume this is official.
Not merely copy and pasting?
Please elaborate?
What does this account add or do aside from the disclaimer?
You may think the non-affiliation is made clear but a lot of users simply vote on the title alone, they see @zer0hedge believe it's authentic and upvote without reading the article itself.
What of using the zerohedge logo?
After steemians challenged the account about this the user made a cosmetic adjustment changing the color but the fact remains that the logo and the name is still used.
I can respect your opinion about copyright without downvoting your perspective, although we disagree.
You mostly answer your own questions and thus leave me little to add, but here are a few points.
I'm ok with it, as it helps get attention to the posts themselves and he's clear both in profile and posts that he's not Zerohedge.
Then maybe we have bigger fish to fry, such as fixing the incentives.
That's entirely up to you. In cases that I downvote something it is sometimes specifically because I do not respect that particular opinion.
Getting paid for someone else's work is unethical..
Says who? Why must everyone both sow and reap? Why can’t one sow and another reap and both be glad together?
Sowing and reaping both imply limited work though.
You want something that involves no work at all?
Yes, getting paid specifically for someone else work is unethical. That's not what I'm supporting.
LETS KILL HIS ACCOUNT)) He/ She claims that "this content adapted to" Ooooo then it's "OK" to post. No man, it's garbage. Also you could visit @lndesta120282 . She may be one of them.
You will never kill it even if you take away all his rewards. With time many more will do the same thing if there are those wanting to read it, for profit or not for profit.
Today his posts fill an important function, as they let users remain on the platform while still consuming their news. This raises engagement levels and retention rates, which is a wonderful thing for a social media platform.
Why do they go here but not there - on official site? He atracted only 30 - 160 views per article - it's a death for huge site who makes money from leads. I think - you are not right.
I also visit their site from time to time, especially after reading his blog. If he didn't make those posts however, I would have spent more time off social media in general.
His content engages users, so I wish we had more similar accounts for other topics.
I am guesses you dont produce your own content also, right?
So Tell me this, If you write a book, would It be ok If someone started unauthorized copies, making money from it, but they justify that they have the name If the author and the name of the book on the first page. By the way, you dont see a dime from these sellings.
What would you call that?
I would call it reprinting and selling. Copying. There's not necessarily anything wrong with that. In fact some use it as a means to get publicity for their art. That would for the most part actually be a good thing for me most likely, as long as I also had supporters funding me separately.
That's not to say that funding and staying afloat can't be made a lot more difficult by copiers under certain circumstances, or that a writer should not be allowed to engage in copyrighting agreements with his customers or consumers. But this would have to look a whole lot different than what is currently going on. The issue I see with modern copyright law is when the state enters the picture and it's no longer two people making a voluntary arrangement.
All of this aside, I'm only endorsing small size or very clearly stated copying of the material of others. Nothing that would end up harming or even going against the wishes of the creator if they were to make them explicit.
It has to add value to the Steem platform and not simply be mooching of the producers of the content. @zer0hedge is a good example of someone fitting into the former category and not the latter.
At least I would highly doubt that he ever cost them money, attention or respect. My own visits to their site have increased since he started posting.
It's not his content. Nobobody can make 5 articles per day.
That's what you think.. I have done that before and so do many of the Tyler Durdens but we all work hard so taking credit or getting paid for someone elses' work is unethical and wrong.
For the guidelines check people like @steemcleaners .
Most of the bigger Steemians are Original Content Nazis. I am on a little different position. I think it is perfectly fine to repost or share something you found on the web as long as you dont pretend that it is original content.
I find it particulary annoying to link the source of pictures used in my post.
The idea of people officially reposting stuff is kind of meh to me. First off because I think intellectual property can not be stolen and 2nd i dont think it is that valuable to just blindly repost something even with permission.
What about 4 articles a day from the same website each and everyday?
While also using the name and logo of the website as your avatar?
Personally, I find this excessive, deceptive and just plain greedy.
I think in this specific case ( @zer0hedge ) it is "pretend that it is original content".
I always wondered why @zer0hedge is getting good payouts and rep, while new Steemians get visitied by cheetah just for "quoting too much". I think it is good that you flag @zer0hedge, but I am an anti-copyright person in general.
meep
A good question. And related:
All good questions, no matter which side we come down on the topic of copyright.
Really good questions and I'm happy to see you have an account working again on Steemit. I have the same questions about the way we're compensated here. Because cryptocurrency isn't officially "legal tender" then are we actually making "money" here? If so, when does it become money? So far I'm not selling any LTC for US$, so I'd have to say in that case it can't possibly be called "money" or "income" and would be exempt from taxes entirely. It's when the LTC is turned into $ or used to purchase a product priced in $ that things get tricky for me.
I mentioned the LTC because that's what I turn my SBD into as soon as I get it. Speaking of which, the Charlie Lee news today was pretty shocking.
So many details that instead of working out, will merely disappear over time.
I asked a while and of course got no response but is steemit in China? If so how does it get around the censorship of Chinese rules? If not how long before Steemit impliments rules to be allowed in China? You can't shut out 1 billion people on your block chain can you?
Good question. I doubt Steemit is greenlighted in China due to the nature of the content. I think Facebook is in China but it is seriously limited, at least based on what I have read on there from friends that are in China, or have traveled there.
Steemit though does not have any method of "censoring" anything in particular here at the "corporate" level like Facebook does. There is no corporation behind Steemit so it is open all the time.
I am new to steemit, but I don't really see a big problem here.
Personally I would probably not do it because it is not my style, and I also don't have the followers to really be able to spread information. So it is not worth it.
But this guy has a lot of followers and he is not actually taking anything away from anyone, he is just spreading information which might otherwise get lost.
As long as the original content creator is not on steemit I would say that's fair.
I, personally don't go on ZeroHedge but might be interested in an occasional article once in a while.
Of course, it is some kind of opportunistic and mooching, but nobody get's hurt, right?
If someone really behaves badly, there are to my knowledge also bots who look for duplicate content and the possibility of flagging and down voting.
Correct me if I am wrong....
Love your show, btw :)
Welcome.
If someone is profiting of someone else intelectual work without that person permission, yes, It is wrong. Period.
If the author publish his work under a license that allow reproduction (like creative commons) then It is ok, under the license terms. (Link source in the case of CC)
I dont get why is to hard for people to understand It is bad to profit over someone elses work without authorization.
How do you feel about content which is not on steemit, but, let's say for over 5 years on youtube and you believe that the video contains vital information which should be shared?
I would say that as long as you do not claim it as your own, it is beneficial for everyone if it gets shared. No one is harmed, everybody wins...
It all depends on what the author thinks about It. Its his work, time and effort after all.
So you are saying its ok to take an work and monetize It? You can choose to not monetize a video
No,no,no, I am not saying it's OK to take others work and monetize it just to make money.
That would suck.
But, if you share something you find interesting which is not on steemit and will never be, publish it and make it clear that it is someone else's work, it is a win win situation. The information gets out. Why not monetizing it then? Nobody gets harmed, the opposite, the original author might get some more followers on youtube...
For example:
I myself uploaded a video off youtube which was sitting there for many years without many views, but it contained a very important interview I thought everyone should see, become aware of it and hopefully create a discussion.
I will probably earn 0.02 steems for it.
It's about information being spread, not the money.
Here is the post if you are interested...
https://steemit.com/zionism/@herrleeb/rabbi-josef-antebi-exposing-zionists
Hum. I think that might be ok, since when you embed the video on the post, the creator get the ad revenue, and If he want to, he may forbide embedding through YouTube.
But, If you download the video, post on your Channel, then post here that IS a problem. That is stealing.(also YouTube have Copyright detection mechanisms)
That is the big issues with text. If you copy(without authorization), people read what you copy, and two things happen:
1 they miss the source, and think you wrote It
2 people see the source but since already read the text, dont Go to the source.
Both ways the author dont get paid for his work, and someone not related profit from his brains.
If you wanna talk about this great article, say what you think about It, and link the source. This is How It must work. (Unless, of course, the author authorize Full reproduction)
I agree 100%
It will last until the motion picture lobby gets involved. It will not be good for anyone on Steemit when that happens.
scary stuff!! I may start re-using some interesting stuff myself :D
If you make good posts, something like Zer0hedge does that includes a note explaining who actually created the material, then I will gladly upvote it. But it has to be quality and interesting for me.
Great question. I can only speak for myself. I do use other sources as a reference and use screenshot to highlight certain passages. As I class myself as an 'investigative journalist' I am simply giving an opinion on information freely available over the internet. I would say that in my own case, the money I receive is for the effort in collating the data to form an educated opinion. It is the opinion not the sources that are the Primary feature of almost all of my articles. I always list sources and insist readers look at that persons work to then understand my stand-point. I think in a court of law that could work....maybe. Can't agree more with the need to deter from blatant piss taking of the steemit rewards. Can't really give a vote to someone just re-posting a video or article, in its entirety, not when they haven't even bothered to make it their own in any way.
Totally see why this needs discussion, great post.
simple things please simple minds maybe..
Now the real question everyone is wondering... did you copy this copyright post? :D
Interesting question. I would think, in the example that you gave, that it is in fact a plagiarism question, and since the original writer or publication own copyright, and as steem is convertible to currency, by our laws here in the US, someone might owe someone something... You always ask the good questions, Blessings.
Frankly I hope this continues forever, as long as they don't pretend to be the actual creators of the content.
Copyright was not made for the internet and the internet doesn't thrive on patents.
Copyright is the "right to copy" and that means for any format or platform, internet included.
I'm saying our current copyright laws are archaic, impractical and mostly immoral. It was not made for the internet age and above all I'm opposed to modern copyright law because it involves the state.
What's on the books doesn't change my opinion on that one bit. We can always discuss what is ethical, thus "right", but in that regard I do not think @zer0hedge for example is crossing the line.
Especially thanks for sharing crypto feed..Carry on my friend...
Congratulations @lifttheveil411! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPI think there are bots who can easily identify copied content, like @cheetah et.al. And people who are aware that copied content can have a bad effect on our platform. They are also engaged in identifying content that is copied and flag them.
There are, but unfortunately they can't always spot it until much later. Reporting helps a lot though.
Important post, but have you flaged his post?
Have you denounced it to @steemcleaners?
There is some work around this issue, but it is mostly the community job to help with this.
I don't have a strong enough opinion yet to flag zer0hedge and, like I mention in the video, I follow him. I am on the real ZeroHedge every day though, so I've already seen the original articles before he gets a chance to repost them. I'm interested in getting people to think about the issue because I think we will see it more and more with the value of SBD and Steemit users continuing to rise.
Well If the author of the article didnt authorized him or shared under a creative commons license, its plain plagiarism, maybe could be called theft piracy.
The Copyright problem can be solved sort of like this:
-DownVote the post
-Send the post to steemcleaners.org/abuse-report/ ( @steemcleaners )
-Bots like @cheetah which detect copyright posts
Could something like this help?
https://po.et/
I also worry about this regarding the media side of Steemit. When you have dTube and dSound, you’re going to have a situation where people are looking to make money off aggregating audio and video.
I have been thinking this question since the first day of knowing the steemit platform. It remembers me the first day of YouTube where it is a platform for porn and movie streaming. I don't think they are coming with a solution anytime soon. It really relies on the community to flag and down vote those videos I guess/
Steemit can choose which topics or authors it allows on its site (as there are many other site using Steem), but in terms of removing rewards and much else it still has to happen by other means.
Its only a matter of time until the government tries to shut down Steemit.. I don't think they can!!