You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: A Wave

in #photography7 years ago (edited)

The comment spam is certainly a bigger problem from @greentomorrow, but there is indeed a wider problem of plagiarism on Steemit. Ethical posting has two basic principles:

  • If you didn't make it, say so.
  • If you know who did make it, say so.

I can let the occasional uncredited image embed from a newcomer slide, but when the entire post is an image that is clearly not original content, we have a serious problem on the level of a cut-and-paste article repost.

Sort:  

True, but using that image in any way, even without attributing it to the one saying you don't need to attribute kind of goes against the whole "no attribution needed" clause.

I am not saying the CC0 is a good license, I personally use CC-By, and for a very good reason: The CC0 undermines copyright, and all the other licenses by making them irrelevant, if CC0 is deemed legal. I mean how can anyone claim copying is unethical if the artist expressly permits copying without attribution? It is a paradox we don't want to see. The question "How do we question anyone for plagiarism if CC0 is legal?" comes to mind.

Yes, I think it's a bad license, but I can't prevent anyone from using it. Unless they are Finns, then the law prevents them from fully giving their moral rights away. CC0 or Public Domain, it doesn't matter, the moral rights are non-transferable, and the CC0 isn't binding here. Public Domain is, but only so-and-so years after the author's death.

I am not saying the CC0 is a good license, I personally use CC-By, and for a very good reason: The CC0 undermines copyright, and all the other licenses by making them irrelevant, if CC0 is deemed legal. I mean how can anyone claim copying is unethical if the artist expressly permits copying without attribution? It is a paradox we don't want to see. The question "How do we question anyone for plagiarism if CC0 is legal?" comes to mind.

If you publish work X under CC0, it has no bearing on the copyrights that apply to any other works by you or anyone else. It does not undermine copyrights in any general sense. You can still release other works under any license you see fit.

As I said in an other post, I'm of the opinion that if someone tried to pass off works created by other people that are in the public domain as their own by explicitly saying so or allowing people to believe that, that would be unethical even if it were legal and did not violate any copyright laws.

I do not care one whit about legality. Legality does not define morality. We are talking personal, ethical behavior. Laws are arbitrary, fluid dictates. Right and wrong are universal and reciprocal principles when properly understood.

If you want to get into copyright law and licenses, check out Against Intellectual Property by Stephan Kinsella.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.18
TRX 0.16
JST 0.029
BTC 76024.68
ETH 2926.23
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.60