May User Interfaces Show part of the Original Content? Problem: Misinterpretations & Copyright Infringement

The Claim
The content created and published by an author and subsequently stored on the Steem blockchain is in principle owned by the author, ie the copyright of a post or a comment is owned by the author.
The Problem
Anybody is allowed to build user interfaces on top of the Steem blockchain. Since no rules are defined what content and how the content is presented to the user, this may lead to misinterpretations and copyright infringement.
The nature of the service defines the user interface, and some services and associated user interfaces emerged on the Steem blockchain showing only part of the content created by the author, in different formats than defined by the author.
Example: Steemit UI
The Steemit User interface is the interface used by most Steemians to create, publish and read posts and comments. It allows posts and comments with text, media and links formatted in a layout defined by the author. The Steemit User Interface also displays the posts as created by the author - including all text, media and links - in the format as defined by the author.
Note: The (example) post in image below is created by @huzaifabukhari.

image: Post on Steemit User Interface
Example: SteepShot UI
SteepShot is an Instagram like service using the Steem blockchain. Due to the nature of the service, Steepshot only shows an image of a post and the comments to the post. When a post contains multiple images, SteepShot only shows one image, the first in the post. In addition, SteepShot does not show the text of the post.
Note: The (example) post in image below is created by @huzaifabukhari.

image: Post on SteepShot User Interface
The Questions
I like to get your opinion on the following:
- Do you think ripping the original content apart is copyright infringement?
- Do you think by only showing part of the post/commment content and/or mixing parts of the post/comment content from various authors, may lead to misinterpretation of the of what the author(s) intended to bring across?
- When yes, do you think this is (or can be) a problem?
Looking forward to your opinions and ideas.
There is no doubt this is going to be contested and questioned from various perspectives.
On a personal level, this is all rather "wikipedia-like." Once I've decided I'm going to contribute something to some "branch" of Steemit... at that point I'm setting it free into the public domain. Is it nice to get credit? Absolutely... but these are uncharted waters where standard rules don't apply.
On a broader level, since this account actually represents a small art gallery, I have to be cautious about which artists and what work I include in my content. And that can be a little awkward, sometimes.
Interesting way to look at Steemit as Wikipedia-like. Not sure if I can look at it like that, in the end, our content cannot be changed in itself. Thanks for sharing your views. Gives me something to think about for sure.
It's part of storing content on the blockchain. I can build a site that pulls the content while removing attributes such as the link to the creator's account or even a link to the original article on Steemit. Yes that's a problem for the author and can easily lead to their work being repackaged and resold. No, there's nothing anyone can do about it. If let's say a big company like Amazon, and I'm not saying that they would do this but using them as an example, tried to create a content-selling platform and scraped the Steem blockchain clean, there's nothing anyone would be able to do. You can sue all you want but they'd win.
Technically I can imagine it'll be complex even impossible to do anything against stripping part of the content before showing this to the user. However T&C for using the APIs can be created stipulating what is allowed and what not.
Not sure what you exactly mean here, if you mean to say someone else can delete my content on the blockchain, I think this is actually prevented by the software around the blockchain. If you mean someone will download all the content and sell this or do something else with it, this can be forbidden by T&C IMHO.
What I mean is that someone can take your content and all the data as they see fit. Look at Golos. They took a huge portion of the user accounts. No one can delete anything off the blockchain as its nodular. Forbidding it by terms and conditions doesn't matter. It's like putting a brick of physical silver on a sidewalk and writing a card that says "private property don't touch". Shit's gona get touched.
You now thinking about how to reply here I just got another question: can Steemit posts be used to inject code? The reason I'm thinking this is because our site suffered a devastating attack through injection back before it was taken offline (unrelated). The admin who handled it just started chopping entire sections of script and content from the cms, which is not something anyone expected. Plus it was an inside job. But now that we're talking about inclusion (and if you look at my feed I've got the same topic covered yesterday) I'm wondering if injection is possible.
Reading also your post, I can just say (not being a developer): Steem is a database; it is called a blockchain in cryptospace. Steem is an open database in that the content in the database is open to anybody to read. It is also open to anybody who wants to write to it. It has APIs that can be used to connect any service you want to the Steem database/blockchain. Any website/CMS service that uses a database to store information can use blockchain technology to store data, such blockchain can be public (like Steem), or could be private (not open for anybody who does not have rights). But please keep in mind, for aCMS that requires a database to store data, it is very questionable if blockchain technology is required. Any database can be designed in a way it is fail save, it has many copies, all copies are always in sync etc etc. Take for instance LDAP technology and create a master/slave configuration with many slaves. Include procedures how to handle DB upgrades in a proper way, always take backups, then execute the upgrade, check if data was effected and so on.
It's not required but it may be desired. It's a hassle to mirror servers and run backups; it's easy to pull posts from the Steem blockchain.
You should know that I'm not an engineer, but know some stuff because I worked my whole life with Engineers, Software Architects and Developers, and Installation and Support Engineers of high critical businesses services and applications. So see what I write below in that light; I may be wrong, is what I'm saying :)
First of all depends what you like to store. I dont know enough of blockchain and the APIs of Steem to know if it makes sense to use Steem blockchain for the content of your service. Your service is a different service than Steemit service for instance. I would think, you not necessarily want to mix content of different services in a single DB (Steem blockchain is a single DB). How wold you distinct content from Steemit and your own service? Mixing content of different services complicates content management I would think, also a service is as fast as the bottlenecks are and I dont think Steem is quick, maybe 50 or 100 tx/sec. That is nothing in the world of fast DBs. But, your service may not require fast DBs. Also, you may not want to use all the reward features the Steem blockchain provides. But maybe you do want to. But when you like to use all Steemit generated content, so basically all post content on the Steem blockchain, then you may indeed want to use Steem as your content source but also as your content storage...that said, the content generated by your service will be shown int he Steemit interface as well? I suppose so!
Wow real interesting. I think they need to show the entire post.
LOL. That goes against the nature of the service, since an Instagram service is about images, not about long posts. In the non-Steemit world these are all separate services with maybe the ability to share content from one service to the other, but they use their own content databases and content rules. With Steem that is not the case, we share the database with content, the rules around content, rewards, curation etc. By nature Facebook, Instagram and Twitter are totally different services, but with Steem we going to end up with these different services using same rules at the backend. I would say: SteepShot should have its own blockchain. Zapple (the Twitter of Steem) shall have its own blockchain.
True I stand corrected. And you are right maybe Steep should have its own blockchain. Zapple interesting. Didn't know about that.
Zapple is still in creation, but their intention is to become a Twitter on the Steem blockchain.
Intresting toughts :)
I think we may have a serious issues. I don't like my content to be shown only for a little part in Steepshot. They also take only the first image, the Steemit UI thumbnail.
What are your thoughts?
Idk i didnt use Steepshot .......... but if any one use my post i had to be notified right ?
SteepShot present your post to others by taking the first image, show the title and the comments. So if for instance this post you commented to will be shown with the first image, the teddybear + the titles + all these comments. The text will not be shown at all.
.......... whats the point than ?
You mean the point of SteepShot? Or my point?
The one of SteepShot , i just think is stupid exept if they repost only photography or art :)
I cant say what SteepShot does is stupid. Instagram is not stupid? SteepShot is very similar to Instagram. Zapple will be Twitter like, also that is not stupid at all. And if I would have wanted to implement Instagram-like service or Twitter-like service in the cryptoworld, on a blockchain, I would've taken the exact same path as these guys do. Use an existing social community and their blockchain, when one is available. And yes, one is available, Steem blockchain. Only in a later phase, I would develop a new blockchain and connect SteepShot or Zapple to that one only, or to that one as well. However, I do think for those that do not use SteepShot and Zapple, but are here for blogging while images are supporting the blogs, but not leading in our blogs, SteepShot and Zapple are de-valuing and maybe even harm us as a blogger. But then again, we have no rules on the Steem blockchain, anybody can read and write content stored on the blockchain and is allowed to present it to their service users in any many they see fit. If that is good? I dont think so. Do I have a solution? No, not really. Do I like to find a solution? Yes!
I don't think it is copyright infringement. I would presume the users of the other services understand its limitations, and hopefully follow up by viewing the full article. But who knows. I guess its just different uses of the Steemit blockchain, and delivered through various means. But no false claims of ownership or actual theft of content (that is copyright infringement).
When we grow the community and usage of the blockchain to millions of users, it is questionable if a SteepShot service user knows about the Steemit service, or use the other interfaces. Instagram has a different purposes than Facebook and Twitter. We will get all of them on the same blockchain, using the same reward mechanisms, but all have different purposes and show different part of the content. I think this can become an issue!
Copyright: When I for instance decide to create a user interface where I take the first paragraph of text from one of your posts and combine that with a paragraph out of one of my posts and present that to some user, is that allowed in your opinion? Somewhere there are boundaries, I think, not sure where they should be, or are by nations laws.
I agree that in the future this may become an issue. It certainly raises questions. But if an actual copyright violation takes place, then that is the same no matter what the platform. And would be best handled the same as usual. Media and communication methods are constantly evolving so I guess we have to keep an eye on it, and possibly be willing to evolve to some degree also.
You have for sure a good point wrt copyright infringement.
Very interesting!