RE: Does Steemit count as commercial usage of content?
And I forgot about what you said about Steemcleaners.
So the work of Steem cleaners is wrong and they should be called out for flagging and reducing plagiarism because it is just being shared and without the intent to resell and get money?
I think that this is more a matter of 2 things: ethics and perceived due reward.
We have votes and we have flags. We can use any of them any time we want. I could flag you right now, lol, or upvote you, and it all depends on my personal beliefs. This is my moral standpoint, and communities have ethical standpoints.
(Ethics are community-based while morals are culturally imposed and individual; ethics are like guidelines while morals are beliefs.)
Steemcleaners enforce a view of ethics that they believe in, as everyone has the right to do. And their view is shared by many people, so it's "ok" (it's accepted by the local instance of society). For Steemcleaners, it's bad to share pictures and texts and to imply that you're the owner and maker of them. If you make a text and use an illustrative picture that is very obviously not yours and you don't say that it's yours, then you can be safe from Steemcleaners. And this is "common sense" (it's the ethical view of the local instance of society).
So Steem Cleaners is evil, another form of the government and banksters to limit people and herd them towards staying in line.
Every community has regulators and authorities. Steem is no exception.
perceived due reward
In the Steem design, one of the instances in which people were encouraged to flag others was when they disagreed on the rewards they were getting. If you get 0.02 from copying my post, I can just flag you and you get 0. It's my self-enforcement of the reward system, just as it was designed.
Then people who are not in Steemit but had their work taken and used would not have the mechanism to flag someone so they cannot complain?
Steemcleaners operating on what is Ethically and morally right based on copyright law that majority of countries follow and thus is the right thing to do goes after people using parts and images from other other people so why would it be difficult to attribute and source then?
I don't think so as I have seen posts that Steemcleaners or other people report such instances and a warning goes up.
So here you are exercising your right to copyright then
Lol, I'm not complaining about that. Flag them away! Destroy the plagiarists!
Well, if you don't know the source, Qurator says you shouldn't post the image, but I say you should just say "Hey, I don't know the source".
In fact, if you know the source, but it's not free to use, Qurator says you should not use it. I say you should just use it and try to find the author to attribute it to. Support them if you can. But don't think that you can't share something just because it's not allowed for commercial use.
I'm all for enforcing plagiarism rules.
I haven't seen that. I'd have to look it up. As far as I'm concerned, if it's obvious it's not yours and you don't imply that it's yours, then you shouldn't get retribution for seeming crimes.
I'm against plagiarism. I'm not against posting a poem that I found, saying "hey, there's this author called Richard Goldmann who wrote this poem and I like it, I'll put it here". Commercial-use copyright laws would be against it, though, and would claim that I'm copying unlicensed work for commercial purposes (if the answer to the mother of questions, "Does Steem count as commercial use of content?" is yes)