How Plagiarism Can End Steemit And What You Can Do About It

in #plagiarism8 years ago (edited)

Recently, it has come to my attention that so far there are no objective solutions for instances of plagiarism in Steemit. Sourcing properly a piece found on the net, from a google search, becomes nearly impossible. Even if one sources material, the author might not allow content redistribution. In addition, as far as I noticed from a recent incident with a member, most people have no idea what referencing is.
 


Personally, I always reference my material except if they are old ones stored in my computer with no way to find them again on the net. It should also be noted that If one transforms a raw copyrighted visual material it can be considered their own. There have been various cases where the author changed an existing image and then went on with issuing their own copyright. Any addition to an existing material is considered more or less new intellectual property.

For example this guy took screenshots of instagram pictures with the comments underneath and sold them to instagram for 100.000 each in a gallery

There are also instances where people paid heavy penalties for just a raw picture in a blog. $8000 to be exact

Now Imagine what kind of crazy claims can come your way in 2, 3, 10 years from now when and if Steemit becomes an etablished social media platform.
 


Personal Take

If you take a look at my account most of the material are created from me. Whenever I use something raw such as an unedited picture I always reference underneath. Even if I transform the picture, whenever I am able, I also include a source just to acknowledge that the material is not mine. This I think is the most important part of referencing. Acknowledging that the work belongs to somebody else is the the best thing one can do for their own reputation here in Steemit and in case they end up in court. One cannot state ignorance if there is not even acknowledgment that the work they produced does not belong to them. That’s like stealing a car and then claiming that you found it in the street, by itself, with the keys on—and you just happen to take it for a ride.

Guaranteed Future Problems

A user that has neglected to reference a piece of work in the past might find themselves in trouble in the future if they are pursued legally. Let’s say user A writes a piece with a photo from National Geographic. The user doesn’t use any references to acknowledge that at least the material is not privately generated. The user also gets upvoted from a whale or founder. The transaction is then forever locked in the blockchain. Even if the author is anonymous, the founders are legally bound entities with their company being legally liable for defraud. Large amounts of money are exchanging hands generating value for the entire network. All parties using the platform areactively generating stolen rewards out of a post that has copyrighted material. Everyone is liable for copyright infringement and there is nothing practical to reverse it. Even the edit function is disabled so there is no way turning back.

 

Potential Solution

I believe there is a rather simple solution to this but it requires action from both the founders and the whales. Much like each post has a field for title, editor and tag there should be a separated entry field (with history) that imprints the copyright information. This will offer at least some legal protection. This field should have the option to be edited at any time in case a notice is received from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. @steemcleaners can incorporate their curation on this routine.

Whales and founders are also extra responsible since their voting power determines massively the success of a post. Whales should police each other out of sheer interest for their own benefit and the project itself. If a whale spots a copyrighted material, they should downvote it even if it has been upvoted from another whale. In this way they can at least claim that they did the best they could in case of a copyright lawsuit. Minions are adviced to do the same.

Final Thought

This is the first successful blockchain social media platform. If the project continues with the same pase it will attract attention. Some of it will be unwanted. There are tons of material already in Steemit from very reputable sources that are not properly copyrighted (including from whales themselves) that generate thousands every week. I urge the founders @dantheman and @ned to take action and address the copyright issue before it is too late for all of us. Also active whales like @smooth @berniesanders and @blocktrades are adviced to vote manually to avoid getting into trouble. This also ensures a better curation from their part.

I advice everyone, from whales to minions to never upvote anything that doesn’t have at least acknowledgment for their material since you might get in trouble in the future, lose your account or if you are a public entity to be prosecuted for fraud. The Blockchain is different from other social media since every single one's actions affects everybody else. It's like fucking and sharing the same condom with all your friends. In this case we are all shareholders in this platform and we all need to to contribute to avoid future trouble.

Steemit has a great potential but with great power comes great responsibility. There are no undo's in here. We control the future of Steemit. This is what decentralisation is all about.







Sort:  

This reminds me of a dumb quote: "The Secret to Creativity Is Knowing How to Hide Your Sources"

Well, it takes only one mistake from one member and shit can hit the fun. Remember what happened with pirate bay.

From the latest @steemcleaners report:

The word “copyright” is being removed from our comments. Even though what we are looking for falls under the “fair use” of copyright law, it is not a legal issue that we are concerned with. Our comments are being reworked to ask for the same thing in a different context. Copyright law doesn’t really apply here since it can only be enforced by the creator of the content being infringed upon.
Source

What I want to see is that a contributor makes it clear when the images or words used are not their own work.

I'm personally not interested in trying to judge whether or not an image has been edited significantly enough to be considered "original" under copyright laws. That is something for the owner of the original image and the courts to decide.

I do think it is a good idea to provide a link to the unaltered images. There has been some discussion in the steemitabuse-classic channel on this. Many who are photographers and graphic artists themselves have inferred that they believe contributor posts that do not acknowledge the original work should not be rewarded. These posts may even need to be commented on and/or flagged.

I'll leave the actual problem of handling copyright law and DCMA up to Steemit, inc.

I agree 100% @patrice We owe to set the standard although we need to remind ourselves that this is th blockchain. We are all shareholders. If one steals, we all steal.

As for Steemit, inc. they are only obliged to remove copyrighted material if they are asked to.

But it is important for the community to help root out plagiators, I just do not know how to take the Steem-dollars away from people... how should it be done, and who should do it? It could impair the decentralization of the place. Honestly I see no other solution than a vigilant community... work, work, work in steemabuse-classic.

I always use the creative common search https://search.creativecommons.org/ engine. Then I check for each picture what the licence requirements are. Sometimes they do not want it to be used for commercial purposes which would be the case for steemit. In the case of the material having an copyright owner then you need to reach out to the owner and ask for permission before including it in your post. Referencing will not be sufficient.

Indeed, it won't be sufficient but at least one can show aknowledgment so that people won't vote at random. Every single upvote is an invstement. An exchange of money under a legally bounted entity.

I am even thinking to post only my own material. There could be a separe upload boc for each picture where one has to include a creative commons approval.

Things is we are bound to this thing. Each and every upvote demonstrates responsibility and monetary exchange.

Even if the author is anonymous, the founders are legally bound entities with their company being legally liable for defraud

I don't think that is entirely true. I suspect the Steemit lawyers have looked into this issue, and I don't think they would have proceeded if they were on the hook for this. They have taken the position that they reserve the right to remove the displaying of any copyrighted material from the Steemit website, if it is brought to their attention.

I believe it is the responsibility of the poster to properly reference their material, as you have recommended above. If they do not do this, then they are at fault. If after the fact, a post is found to be in violation, then I think having it removed would be a better solution than the community having to do the work to update the copyright info for the post retroactively.

This is a really good and well thought out post though. I think it is important for all of us to take copyright seriously, and I'm appreciative of the fact you are posting constructive solutions to the problem!

We all earn moneyu here from each other. We are all shareholders. In the real world the goverment won't care if one or two shareholders stole money when knowingly others have invested in them. We all owe to have checked.

If a whale upvotes a post that has copyrighted material or with no references and that posts make thousands and attracts traffic from outside sources what do you think the legal impact would be?

We need to stop upvoting material that is not pro[erly referenced. sooner or later someone will start knocking and then until further notice of endless battles in court everything will freeze.

remember pirate bay. same thing here. the blockchain issue is very similar to the torrent one.

If a whale upvotes a post that has copyrighted material or with no references and that posts make thousands and attracts traffic from outside sources what do you think the legal impact would be

It is a really interesting question! I will honestly say that I do not know with 100% certainty. It is the main area where I think you and I are not in full agreement though. (Are there any lawyers in the room?) :)

My limited legal understanding though says that owners of Steem/SP/SBD currency are not liable for illegal payments made by the system. I realize it is not 100% the same, but it is loosely analogous to someone holding BTC being held liable because someone else paid for drugs using BTC. We are at the end of the day holding currency, and not shares in a company.

Steemit Inc. could be liable, because they are displaying the content. In the same way as Facebook, Reddit, etc. are able to resolve themselves by censoring illegal content though - Steemit Inc. should be covered by doing what they do. (And they do.)

It does get to an interesting question though. How do you hold the blockchain liable?

With all of that said though, I do agree with you 100% that we all need to do our part to stop plagiarism, and that we have a shared responsibility to identify and flag it when it happens. Liability aside, I think most of us agree that we all lose when these types of content 'creators' make off with a stake of the Steemit reward pool!

It has already been touched on a lot in the comments, but I do want to end by giving a shout-out to the people in the @steemcleaners community. I think they are doing an awesome job, and providing an extremely important service to the members of the Steemit community with what they do!

Thanks for the post!

//We are at the end of the day holding currency, and not shares in a company.//

maybe if we were just using steem and steem dollars. steem power though makes the whole thing different.

You don't hold a blockchain liable. you hold the currency liable and the company build on top of it.

steem power though makes the whole thing different.

Steem Power is still just a currency, with an agreement to lock it in for a period of 2 years and ability to influence the blockchain. There is no implied ownership over the blockchain by holding it, or (I believe) any liability in the actions that are taken on the blockchain. I do see your point though. It is a gray area :)

You don't hold a blockchain liable

Yes, I do realize that :) .. It was more a rhetorical question, since the nature of this being run by a decentralized blockchain does leave a gap as far as who can be held liable for what happens.

you hold the currency liable and the company build on top of it.

Yes, this is where we will probably have to agree to disagree for now. I hold the position that the only company in the picture (Steemit Inc.) is not liable for what happens, and that having a stake in SP does not transfer liability of the blockhain's behavior onto the holders of SP either.

time will show tim :)

I don't think very many here understand the magnitude of the legal problems that can come from copyright lawsuits. This is a conversation that needs to happen over and over again, until a lot more people do. On Reddit you can post any old thing because you aren't getting paid for it, here it is different. You ARE getting paid. Plagiarism opens both you and steemit Inc. to potentially massive financial problems. Thanks for discussing this @kyriacos.

@justtryme90

Indeed. I have not seen any real discussion other than shoving problems under the carpet. Voting is the most powerful tool we have to end this yet we use it much like sheeple use it in the real world for electing their leaders..

sad.

LMFAO!!!!
This shit is funny!
https://steemit.com/plagiarism/@skeptic/a-look-at-your-logical-fallacy-is-by-kyriacos
Look at him copy and pasting and hiding hittler in his posts.
Fucking pot calling the kettle black I swear. -smh-

For anyone caring to follow @skeptic 's mental disability battle here is the link. He just learned yesterday what a hyperlink is. Just 2 days ago he was confused what referencing was. Please guys. Give him your support. Humans like him live among us. They need all the support they can get.

https://steemit.com/life/@kyriacos/our-place-in-the-cosmos#@skeptic/re-kyriacos-our-place-in-the-cosmos-20160925t000751363z

Yes please read the whole thing to see how full of shit this dude is.
kool you made a new hittler poster that wasent on the original post you hid his pict in.
you need to learn about fair use act.

and no I don't need to leave links to that screen shot I just posted.
but please go back and see his copy pasta and how this is all a red herring to draw attention away from his copy pasta proven.

https://steemit.com/plagiarism/@skeptic/a-look-at-your-logical-fallacy-is-by-kyriacos

The fact that I did not know how to hyper link does not mean I don't know how to post links it just means they look like the link so people can nknow what they are instead of your little 1-2-3-4-5 shit with hittler hidden in the 3.
You used pictures with copy rights on them and you werased them from the picts then claimed them to be your own when the text you put on them was stolen from a website and your even copyed and pasted them wrong. the proof is their. please everyone check it out.

Also see the link to my post. I don't have to hyper link it to post it. -smh-

Copyright text applies to more than 10 words. Again you are ignorant. That was also circumstential. I didn't actually copy any text.

You never even mentioned "found my shit on google"

anyways. good job to @blocktrades supporting people who damage Steemit. I guess he is a little sour with my latter post still.

have fun boys.

yeah that is why the site you copied from shows that you wernt paying attention and added the wrong example to the wrong fallacy. I posted a screenshot and a link to the text it was stolen from and the snippit of it has the mistake you made highlighting that you wernt even paying attention to what you were copyig and pasting. keep up with your charcter attacks because you have nothing to back youself up with. its funny to me.
You are wasting your time trying to red herring and ad hominem.
so keep it up im enjoying the humor.

That is not the wrong fallacy. it is often perceived as the same since they are so close. As you can see from all the copyright accusations, all your crap, you ended up in one posted that supposely i copied and made a mistake after you did extensive research to find mistakes.

You are a moron afterall. This is not an insult but a dictionary definition. A look at your posts confirms that as well. 2 months in and you don't even how to hyperlink. you knew. you are just lazy ignoring copyright laws.

they are not the same fallacy. if they were they would be grouped together like the actual fallacy you took the example from. your example is of false dichotomy/black white/false dilemma. -smh-
did you even read the text you were copying?
this is all retarded.
learn about fair use.
I will start putting fair use at the bottom of all my postsso you can all fuck off with your bullshit.
so go back to copy pasta and calling the kettle black, fucking swear.

This is a great post. Very nicely written too. Thank you for bringing this subject forward.

This is a point that is that is of interest to all users. I have only reposted twice so far, because I try not to use it at all, but I am definitely reposting this.

Thank you again!

@michaelstobierk

Thank you. This affects all of us. All of our hard work could go to waste because of silly neglegence.

I could not agree more. Thank you again!

Keep in mind that steem blockchain only hosts URL links.

In other words, it's our browser that pulls IMG links from other sources, while steemit.com only serves HTML without images.

@alexgr

Unless they expire then we are still liable. All of us.

Are you saying that in time the evidence goes away?

How about "the image host is liable" for putting copyrighted content there?

Youtube, for example, is a video host. When there is copyrighted material, they usually take it down (some times automatically / algorithmically) if the copyright owner has an issue. So even if I put a link from Steemit it may be a dead link within minutes.

This is not how the piratebay case went. If one is knowlingly ignoring basic copyright parametres as stated in almost every contract when owning an online business then you are liable.

Here in Steemit not only they are not taken down but there are automatic bots upvoting things at random.

Most reputable sites are directly linked and the links are pretty much immortal. Don't forget. It will take only one case and then the pandora's shitbox will pour down to all of us.

It seems like the system is able to detect something entered as being duplicate content, which can be plagiarism some times. In regards to the plagiarizer getting paid for doing it. It's sort of like the lawyer that says something wrong. Sure the other lawyer gets to object and get sustained...but the jury already heard it, damage has been done.

@vegascomic

Text can be more or less regulated. The problem, the real problem is the images, the visual content.

We can at least avoid upvoting anyone without proper references. There can be a checkbox saying

"I aknowledge that all material belongs to myself (or) I have properly used references to the best of my knowledge. I understand that neglegence in taking proper action for referencing material not produced by myself might result in the loss of my account".

Is this so hard to add?

I completely agree with everything you're saying. Lately I've been creating my own art and would hate it if I found someone ripping me off here or elsewhere on the internet. (Although I suppose I did rip ACDC off in my last video :)

it wouldn't be bad if someone was referencing you though. You could at least gain some fame

A totally unrelated/related issue ... I'm thinking of turning these woolen socks into 3D sock puppet characters in various scenes... then requesting that people NOT create hilarious memes from them.

Any thoughts :)

You can't. All visual material are only liable for copyright unless used as such in their original form. Otherwise you will be trying to copyright things like the "circle" :)

No idea what to do....but good article!

You can actively downvote material that have no proper referencing

I down voted an abusive member and now they are following me. We need a way to block members, muting isn't strong enough. The dude started down voting my content. So I am hesitant right now regarding the down vote.

posting material without referencing is practically stealing from your account since Steemit belongs to all of us. We are all shareholders.

I agree, 100%

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.18
TRX 0.13
JST 0.029
BTC 58625.96
ETH 3101.66
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.41