Fair Use With Steemit
I am posting pictures and not leaving links, nor do I need to. There is a fair use law that lets us use copywritten material without worry as long as the person posting it is not claiming that it is their own work.
People need to get off this crap of flagging because of pictures used. If you want to try to police people go after people that are plagiarizing text.
So wake up to what the law is and stop acting stupid. The people I'm talking about know who they are.
The rest of this post is going to be me commenting on pictures and I wont be leaving links to where they came from because by the law I don't have to. So get triggered flaggots. Fair use is fair. Get over it.
Looks like Woody just realized the next step in evolution in steemit. Also he looks gay in his village people outfit.
Wow this kids look excited, must be how the SJW's felt when they first showed up and learned they could censor people they disagreed with.
Damn those are some ugly shoes, and he looks about as shocked as some of the flaggots will after this post.
Damn those teeth are fucked up, just like the flaggots logic.
Well hope this sheds some light on the stupidity going around lately. hopefully some flaggots will get triggered and rage quit when they realize this is all legal.
oh and
100% Fair use post. That's fair!
Well, don't know if it's the govs view of the law, but I like it.
xD
Dude, that's not how you lookup laws. Steemit posts earn money and can therefore be considered commercial. It looks like you used a dictionary definition. Commercial use is not considered fair use. Please remove this horrible non-legal advice.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes: Courts look at how the party claiming fair use is using the copyrighted work, and are more likely to find that nonprofit educational and noncommercial uses are fair. This does not mean, however, that all nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and character of the use against the other factors below. Additionally, “transformative” uses are more likely to be considered fair. Transformative uses are those that add something new, with a further purpose or different character, and do not substitute for the original use of the work.
nope it falls under fair use.
this is not comerical use, I am posting my opinions online, people giving me money are not giving me money because of the pictures, they are giving me money for my effort spent and opinions. maby call the upvotes donations. unless we are bringing in the law and starting to tax everyone. :O
It Is fair use to do what I did.
look up the uses of copy written material under fair use.
this post falls under more then one.
Youtube posts make money off add revenue but fair use still applys.
comerical use is not if someone made some money.
movie reviewers make money and they use fair use.
I like you and will continue to follow and upvote your other stuff but your legal opinions and interpretations are naive. Copyright and fair use is far more nuanced than you are making it out to be and I think the advice here and sloppy sourcing is irresponsible.
People shouldn't think that they can use other people's copyrighted work and make money off it with zero risk of consequences. It's not the truth. If someone were to make $15K in SBD posting unaccredited copyrighted artwork that artist could have a very real lawsuit against them.
We are consciously submitting our posts into a commercial system with the expectations of rewards. This is commercial.
I'll leave it at that and look forward to your next post.
That is not the same as making a comment or review about the art, lso is not the same as using it for teaching or any of the other reasons people could use copy written stuff under fair use. there is a huge difference in what I did and said people can do compared to posting picts that aren't yours and climing they are.
Thanks for following and stuff.
I do not see in any way my post or what I am saying is not true. I accept I can be wrong though. so maybe someone can show me how I am wrong and what about.
Why didn't you supply those actual legal definitions in your article?
because I don't care enough to.
I covered my ass and that's all that matters.
Others can easily look up fair use if they want to know more.
I know my post is covered though.
Hall Monitors. (Remember those kids from school, who raised their hands to be the Hall Monitors. They grew up and still need a sense of power and control.
(I am just looking out for the value of Steem) That is what they will say. ;)
LMFAO!
I take it you have had to deal with them too.
I agree it is all a power trip. the whole value thing is lame, who's to say I value one post as much as another person does. I do not see value in a pict of some one elses car with no text value, but steemit does so who is anyone to try to decide what steemit "value is".
I get more value from a good joke then half the nonsence on steemit. lol
I think they grew up to be members of Steemcleaners....
While some pictures are clearly fair use others arent and also for alot of these artists we are getting their work out there.
You can also earn money which makes a post commercial instead of non-profit or educational. Unless you are adding to it and creating a new derivative work citing the original author should be done.
I've used my fair share of images without posting a source here and other places in the past but to outright assert that it's all covered under fair use is just plain wrong.
SMH you don't look in general English dictionaries for nuanced legal definitions.
What about people that money off book and movie reviews? it still falls under fair use.
without fair use law no one could make any review about anything unless they got the ok from the original content maker. their is a difference in comerical use and making money of something that legaly used copy written material because of the fair use law.
To say otherwise would say all parodys are illigal
Ugh parodies are a new derivative work that are a wholly new creations. This would be apparent had you provided the legal definition but you didn't.
Why are you so adamant about this stuff? Have you ever actually talked to a lawyer about these issues?
what does talking to a lawyer have to do with anything?
I am adamant about this stuff because with the knoldge of the laws you can avoid people flagging out of ignorance. parodies are not new derivative if the only thing changed in the song is a name or a couple lyrics changed around. it all falls under fair use. not plagiarizing. im not sayin you can post anything for any reason, im saying there is a fair use law that lets people use picts and vid clips also text in the correct context.
I have delt with enough fair use content on youtube to know my post falls into it and that I am not in the wrong. its ok to disagree but I know im in the clear and used fair use correctly.
just calling everything plagiarizing is ignorant. besides if it truly is plagiarizing providing a link to where it came from is no permission to use the pict and would still be copy right infrindgement.
I like that he is adamant about it. Honestly, he is handling it, in my opinion, the best way it could be handled. Myself and others have had issues with the "required" aspect of it. For a new user throwing up a fun post and getting chastised sucks also. Instead of a post tackling the groups or hating on them... he is bringing the heat on himself... so to speak.
Additionally, sourcing a picture in no way legalizes it's use, it simply gives a reason to flag.
its ok for me to show a picture of some art you did and comment on what I think of it or use it for a bunch of stuff. saying I made the picture or it is my property or anything like that is where the line is drawn.
It will get interesting as more people post and push fair use on steemit.
Thanks for the comment!
The picture with the guy with the shoes: there' a poster with a black cat in the background. Is it a subliminal message?
Must upvote the kitty! 8D
I too am following and enjoy your material (Fee Fees hilarious!) but side with content junkie's comments here. Even the definition you used in fair use specifies "brief excerpts" which covers your book and movie reviews arguments - they use excerpts as the law says, to make comments and critiques, which is fair use even if they make money. The networks might even have to pay a licensing fee like radio stations, but part of the system that book and movie reviewers operate in includes the possibility of promotion of the movie, book, etc, whereby the content creator earns money as a result of the review.
A painting or photo is a complete work in itself, it can't be so easily excerpted and is more likely being exploited. The internet made copying images so darn easy that theft is almost hard too hard to police anymore, but you still can't take a photographer's work and put it in a print magazine and get away with it for very long, you will be sued. Some artists pay huge tuitions to go to school to do what they do, so it's best to pay them to repost their images (legally, and for those who want to press their rights, you are found to be mitigating/diluting the potential future value of their work, not "promoting them" as some will argue - both are true, but if they didn't ask for your help promoting, then... ); if you can't pay them, asking permission is the next best, but in the internet age we typically just right click and paste, so a link back to your source is the absolute minimum that should be done. Mistakes happen, we can all get lazy, but as a practice....? Uncool.
Also I agree that posting on Steemit will be found in time by courts to count as commercial use - the payoff factor as a motivator just can't be ignored. Just my opinion tho. However, it's better to police ourselves to prevent lawmakers from having to get involved. I'm afraid the community is going to essentially vote against you on this one. Still following tho!
Thank you for the input and for following.
If Steemit will be found in time by courts to count as commercial use then we will all start getting taxed and have to legally create a company to use steemit.
people use fair use (mself included) on youtube all the time and make money off the vids. you could say the ad revenue is what they are making money off of not the video but I could say in the same way im not making money off my posts just the upvotes.
im not trying to get away with posting others work and claiming it is mine to make a buck im just getting tired of a post getting flagged because it has a photo in it without a link to it. a link to where you stole the pict from is not permission t use it. so unless your using the pict in a fair use context then adding a link is no better then not adding one.
I will continue to use pictures in accordance with fair use and when someone points out how I uncorrectly I will fix it if I am in the wrong.
People that do movie/book reviews on youtube and make money, they fall under fair use and do not have to get permission even if it is a bad review and actually makes the book/movie lose money from it.
I honestly don't see a problem with people correctly using fair use. I do see a problem with people flagging for plagiarism when the person flagging doesn't understand the laws.
Thanks for the comment again. hope im not t much of an ass. 8D
Sure, not being an ass at all. I just think you're being adamant about an argument that you are wrong about and going to lose ultimately! As said my opinions about fair use are separate from your flagging troubles - and if you're right then you have a very legitimate gripe the top tier should address. And of course bad reviews is a possibility...
Finally, we actually WILL all have to pay tax on our SBD, I will probably post an article on this one day. While there's no tax (yet) on digital currency I don't think, the second it hits your U.S. bank account in USD it becomes taxable, period. Whether it falls under income tax, capital gains, or windfall will be trickier to define, and will be different depending upon circumstance. Another author here already has a good piece on documenting expenses that accompany "blogging for income" - we're all going to need advice like that once this thing blows up, count on it!
the day i we have to pay tax on sbd I quit steemit. the currency is no longer any good to me. the sbd never has to go into a bank account, cant you stick in a digital wallet and use a bitcoin atm? the second it becomes taxable is the second it is traceable and loses its ability to purtace stuff with it and stay anonymous. just like I can go buy something from the neighbor with cash and their is no paper trail. the second that happens I drop all my crypto into physical gold and watch it all crumble.
but that's a whole other thing.
like I said earlier though im not looking to go around and post a bunch of others work. if I happen to be using thers pictures in a way that falls under fair use im going to do it.
this is the stuff I usually do that are others pictures that I use.
https://steemit.com/halo/@skeptic/steemit-girl-halo-playboy-sharia-edition
https://steemit.com/feminism/@skeptic/memes-from-feminism-and-motorcycles-by-moony
idk I post all kinds of stuff.
like I said if I do post stuff and it does not fall under fair use I will happily fix it. im not trying to get in trouble, just point out that we can use pictures that are copywritten if they are used under fair use.
I would like to think im not a blogger. im my own thing. 8D
I am not intending any of the above to reflect opinions on the flagging issue btw.
Yeah, i figured that. i followed back.