You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Does Steemit Have A Copyright Problem?
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.
One detail i noticed only now... the discussion here is about @zer0hedge, and not @zerohedge (wich is an identity thief, not plagiarist)
Its Fair as long as the creator publicly allowed It.
If not, its stealing someone else intelectual work.
Its Fair to talk about the article and reference It, but not copy-paste.
This is a very "modern" or typical view, but libertarians (both left, center and right) tend to disagree.
Its easy to say when its not your work being stolen dont you think?
Is it? The way I see things I'm not trying to mooch of anyone. I also support helping content creators protect their invested productivity. But the scope and means differ, because my philosophy happen to be different than yours.
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.