You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: TTR - Duplicitous Duplicator Dithers Deceitfully
I assume that you meant.
"First, the underlying value of this blockchain is currently THE content of the articles."
Please walk me through how you pay to access the content of these articles.
No, because that's not the issue. When you steal the intellectual property of others and post it here, you force the Steem community into the position of "receiving stolen property." We have every right to out you as a thief, a criminal, and a fraud, and reject your "work" as violating community standards.
You're like the guy who finds a house that is vacant because the owner is vacationing in Europe, and then breaks into the house, changes the locks, and rents the property out to an innocent third party. The third party pays you two months rent and a security deposit. Later, the owner returns and demands that the third-party tenant pay him damages for trespass. The fact that he paid rent to you is irrelevant, because you never had the right to demand payment from anyone.
Property rights are like a quiver of arrows, where each defines what you can legally do with that property: convey to others, rent it out, make capital improvements on it, offer it as security for a mortgage. Since you do not own the articles posted at the web site www.zerohedge.com, your quiver is empty. You have no rights in that intellectual property, at all. When you received part of the Steem blockchain for posting the stolen articles here, you're like the fraudulent lessor in the example above. At any time, the real owner of the articles can sue the owners of Steemit and demand compensation, and we will have no defense if we say that we already paid you for them.
Any member of the community has standing to challenge you on this, because every time you post plagiarized material here, you reduce the value of the blockchain. A blockchain supported by worthless, stolen content is worth far less than a blockchain supported by original content. The former is weighed down by litigation risk and market risk (when people flee the currency). The latter isn't. Your actions are similar to diluting the value of a stock through fraud. And our right to complain is much like a shareholder's lawsuit.
You're not answering the question:
What you say would only make some sense if you assume that Steem value come from the blockchain itself making money by suing people for reusing the content on the blockchain outsite of steemit.com.
What if someone display the content of the posts from Steem blockchain on it's own front-end and make money from adding advertisement? and doesn't even say anything about it being taken from the Steem blockchain.
I think it is acceptable to do and it happen to also be completely unstoppable.
No, because your question has no material bearing on any of the issues involved here. It's nonsense. Whether or not I pay for "access" to intellectual property does not solely determine the underlying value of that property. Value doesn't come from mere "access"; it comes from the rights to modify it, trade it, distribute it, make copies of it for others. I have an app that displays news from the BBC, for which I pay nothing. Yet, copyright law is very clear. I do not have the right to copy BBC articles and distribute them to others.
I've seen posts on this social media site that state that the value of the blockchain is created from the content on this site. But if that content was stolen, plagiarized, and/or violated copyright law, it has no value. If everyone using Steemit did the same thing that you do (copy the works of others), the market would view Steem as a fraud. Steem holders would rush to sell their shares of Steem, causing the price to plummet. And exchanges would halt trading of Steem for other cryptocurrencies and/or cash.
The manner in which you have plagiarized on this site is a violation of copyright law. You are not the creator of the work, so you do not have the right to make and distribute copies of that work. Copyright infringement is a crime and a civil tort in many jurisdictions.
Regarding your question about adding a front-end with advertising, if the content was stolen from another site without permission of the creator of the original work, that would also run afoul of the copyright law. Wrapping the content with layers of abstraction (e.g., computer interfaces) does nothing to change the underlying legal problems. I imagine that a judge would laugh at your attempt at "intellectual property laundering."
In any event, I'll leave it to @ned and @steemcleaners to determine whether open and flagrant plagiarism should be punished. So far, everything I've read on this platform suggests that it should be.
What give value to this blockchain is that the outcome of the sort order of it's content is done in a decentralized way by it's token holders.
The content on this blockchain is free to be reused and lots of effort are being put to promote reuse of the steem blockchain on other front-ends.
I think what you should have problem with is miss-appropriation of production claims.
I do not claim that I wrote this content, I merely share it.
BTW Steemit.com like every other user content hosting website on the internet have procedures in place to deal with DMCA takedowns.
Wrong again. A cryptocurrency blockchain has value to the extent that a stable market exists for the purchase/sale of the currency and for its use as a medium of exchange. Its value is also dependent upon the rate of growth of the number of tokens. Add too many tokens at once, and it becomes worthless. Your position that a GUI feature (providing sort order) creates value in a currency is naive and uninformed.
Whether or nor people are promoting reuse of content is irrelevant to the issue whether some of that content has been stolen. There are laws and treaties in place making the unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material illegal. Stolen property has no value, except on an underground, black market hiding from law enforcement. No rational person in the Steem community wants to see the platform become a black market.
The DCMA is not the sole authority. If you are a US citizen, you are also subject to copyright law. If you are not, you are subject to the laws of your country as well as applicable treaties. And the procedure that you quote is not the only remedy available. Thieves and criminals are not in a position to dictate to others how and under what circumstances they are to be disciplined/prosecuted.
If you are so sure of the legality of your position, and the merits of your business arguments on valuation, you should show yourself. Tell us your name and the country in which you live. As things stand, you hide behind an anonymous account stealing the intellectual property of others. Even worse, the name of your account is a fraudulent deception attempting to confuse Steemit users. Steemit governance promotes the authentication of accounts and their association with known persons.
So before you post one more thing on this, you really need to divulge your identity.
To me a cryptocurrency get it's value mainly from how it diversify itself from Bitcoin. Steem isn't competing in the slightest as it relate to having a stable market.
BTC 24h volume : 2 559 000 000$
Steem : 928 000$
That's 2500x, or 3000x if you also account for BCH forks of BTC.
The number of SP votes on posts and is allocated reward is not a GUI feature!
Please learn a bit about Steem and commit to buying some before explaining people how it works.
PS: Another reason Steem is valuable is that it's users can post without having to divulge their real life identity.
@zer0hedge, you do realize that no one this thread views you as an expert on anything, right? Your "explanations" about how Steemit works is inconsistent with the fundamentals of how markets work. You've said things here that are terribly naive.
When you sign up for Steemit, the process pretty much drills into you the general policy that the creators don't want people creating anonymous accounts. Your denials don't make you right. They show that you are out of step.
Honestly, you really do have to share your identity, because without it, you have nothing. All that you so is copy and paste the words of others. The irony of all your hard "work" is this: the more you copy and paste, the more you show the rest of the world that you don't have independent thoughts that other people would value. That is the fate of a plagiarist. That is the fate of someone who steals intellectual property.
You must be really stupid if you think someone need to disclose it's real life identity to "have independent thoughts".
How long did it take you to come up with that?
Go tell Satoshi Nakamoto that he has nothing.
Including @patrice on these posts regarding flagrant plagiarization and copyright infringement of articles from www.zerohedge.com.
Learn the definitions of words before using them.
You didn't always attribute ownership of the material to its rightful owner. I believe you made numerous posts in the past using the deceptive username, using a logo copied from the other web site, and not clearly stating that you have no affiliation with the other web site. That is plagiarism.
Not doing this, not doing that, how convenient.
How about always linked to source and never claiming credit for it?
So it WAS plagiarism according to you 6 months ago ...