You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Copyright and Plagiarism – Your Opinions Please.
Dutch copyright law is similar; the mere act of writing gives you copyright. I also don't think that what I post is automatically in the public domain. It is mine until I say otherwise, like I do for photos I give to Wikipedia. I make some money on the side as a photographer, and it would be a real problem for me if all my photos went into the public domain the moment I advertise them online.
this is true everywhere, including the US. Some countries enforce more actively, but for intellectual property law like copyrights, trademarks and patents, most countries (nearly all) rules and laws are based on worldwide international treaties.
Someone in the US offering to "register" your work to provide it with copyright protection is a scammer.
Exactly so. My works are on Amazon, Smashwords etc, but it's my choice to distribute them in serial form on Steemit, no one else's.
not necessarily. The status of copyrighted material on steemit is murky in many ways. For example, you chose to distribute your work on steemit. Fair enough, you made that choice.
But what about busy? Your work will also be available there (because its on the steem blockchain). You might not have a problem with that. But if you did, you really wouldn't hace any option. What about future sites based on the steem blockchain, some of which might conceivably be for profit endeavors ? What about sites that aren't entirely steem blockchain based, but which access the steem blockchain using javascript.
The argument could be made (and im not saying that its necessarily the conclusion i agree with) that when you put your work on a public blockchain, it enters the public domain. An analagous situation would be, imagine if you wrote a poem, then printed that poem on a billboard.
Having done so, you cannot assert the right to stop someone from photographing the billboard and distributing the photograph.
One could also make the argument that youre giving non exclusive licensing to the steem blockchain. That is to say, that you accept that the steem blockchain can give it to anyone to display, but not to reuse.
its really the type of situation that doenst have much of a precedent.
Great Post! How about the case where you don't care if the content is copied and distributed in any fashion. Which consensus model should we use? The one who cares about distribution or the one who doesn't? And what about the middle ground where you can only distribute if you attribute properly? How would you arbitrate this on the block chain? Right now the only consensus I see is the feline. But as you know it is pretty dumb (at least Turing Test wise).