TTR - Duplicitous Duplicator Dithers Deceitfully
Its been a little over a week since I highlighted @zer0hedge and his deceitful actions.
The response has been huge. Content providers rallied in support and personal messages have flooded in. Some expressed relief at the issue finally being put out into the open. Others advised caution, aware that a higher-level user could bully dissenters into silence.
I'm not here to make an easy buck - that's why I put effort into making original content.
If only @zer0hedge understood the underlying ethos of Steemit. He chose a more subtle, cunning attempt to game the reward pool instead.
@zer0hedge first began posting stories ripped from the official site (zerohedge.com), while avoiding people's questions as if he was the real Tyler Durden of Zerohedge.
Flying under the radar, reaping upvotes from confused users, @zer0hedge continued his duplicitous campaign. He allowed confusion over his identity to take hold and grow, like weeds poking through cracks in the sidewalk. He made no effort in the early days to clarify who he was.
The confusion was encouraged by his eerily similar user name - which only deviated from the original by inserting a "0" where a letter "o" should be. This one-character charade proved to be enough. Soon, minnows and dolphins were commenting and upvoting, all assuming it was an official source.
Enter user @patrice who saw the charade and made a post about the abuse - LINK (Note the use of the tag "steemit-abuse".)
Suddenly, a "disclaimer" appeared on @zer0hedge posts.
His deceitful strategy laid bare, he adopted the camouflage of the ignorant newbie. "I can't help that people think I'm zerohedge" he'd say, laughing through gritted teeth. "I just read the site and post things", along with "I drive people to the official site".
What @zer0hedge calls a service, I call plagiarism - or worse, identity theft. I'm not alone.
If everyone behaved like he did, Steemit would be filled to the brim with people misrepresenting themselves, parroting websites like a cabal of cut-and-pasting primates. This devalues the worth of the platform, each post a death by a thousand cuts.
With further action by myself and others, @zer0hedge adopted miniscule changes.
First he changed the logo - which he copied from the real site - by filling it in with yellow.
Then, he started to bold the author name up top - while still copying without permission.
There are ways to make amends, such as:
- Declining Reward Payout
- Openly stating at the top that the article is not his content
- Changing his user name and using an original logo - not a copy
- Adding in-depth commentary and analysis to the stories that are referenced, instead of presenting them as-is with zero effort
But until that happens, more posts will have to be made and attention brought to the issue.
Do your part, resteem and spread this to others - united in the purpose of making Steemit the absolute best that it can be.
Thank you, my followers and supporters - your comments have given me strength to continue this struggle against this bellicose bully.
(Original post - Copy Pasting Leeches - LINK)
I think it it's important to draw the distinction between
Fair use is permitted within copyright law. I'm not a lawyer though so go look it up - here is a useful blog post that talks about the subject: https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/. It is a useful and valuable thing and adds to the general wealth of content we have. I don't think anyone on Steemit is or should be arguing against it.
Note even embedding a YouTube video in a post, even though it will allow the entire video to be played, is still fair use since YouTube expressly allows that unless the uploader of that video selected the option to prohibit embedding. In that case the video just won't play - I see that all the time.
Yes there is the chance the YouTube video itself was ripped off by someone and Google has not yet forced them to remove it, in my experience eventually they will and quite likely the person posting a link doesn't even realized it was plagiarized (in which case we can politely tell them to attribute the original out even better find and use the original video). There is also content on YouTube where it is known to be plagiarized but YouTube allows it because they have some deals with the original content producer to compensate them for it by adding ads to the video. This is commonly the case with music uploaded or used as background music.
Plagiarized material - I think everyone on Steemit who follows our community ethos wants to see that gone and buried. It's a legitimate use of flagging / downvote in my opinion.
Which leads us to the copyright infringement area alluded to above. I doubt most Steemit users are lawyers, nor do they care too much about the nuances of fair use: you can read about them here: https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/ - I think we should leave arguing about copyright infringement vs. fair use to lawyers. However it is pretty clear that wholesale copying of an entire without permission is not fair use, it is copyright infringement. Even if the copier admits they are doing it and cites the source - it is still infringement unless the content creator allowed it such as by publishing it with a creative commons license, or by using a service such as YouTube that makes embedding on other sites a permitted and default licensing option even if many YouTube users don't actually realize that because they didn't read the fine print.
As the Nolo press article on fair use linked above mentions:
And that pretty much covers the zerohedge instance being discussed here exactly. "No speeding intended" my ass. It is totally willful copyright violation and taking benefit from it and robbing the Steemit rewards pool at the same time.
In my opinion is our duty as a community to highlight the illegal copying of content, make a best effort to notify the content creator to give them a chance to do something about it - which includes giving their permission and maybe working out a rev share with the re-poster (or not if they don't care or think the referral traffic is sufficient compensation).
Furthermore if we find out that the original poster doesn't consent to the copyright infringement but doesn't have the means to stop it, and the infringer is unwilling to do so voluntarily, then we should help the content creator out and stop the "content rape" by swinging the downvote hammer as we see fit.
There's the letter of the law, versus intent.
What you are discussing doesn't cover the pattern of duplicitous behavior. By pretending to be the official site, @zer0hedge has garnered an audience built largely on the belief that he was official.
And lets be frank, once someone subscribes or "follows" here, they don't often revisit their choices - leaving the content to populate their feed.
I think it is important to discuss identity theft and fraud in light of the evidence.
As I stated, @zer0hedge made a concerted effort to pass himself off as an official source before being forced incrementally to change his tactics. This still hasn't yielded the best result, but it does show his reluctance to present a truthful representation of who he is.
As one user has said - the mix between citation and original content varies, but seeing someone take other authors work, without permission - and make it 99.9% of their posts is clearly pushing the boundaries of what is expected and equitable.
Be mindful of the fact that most of the sources he is copying come from newsletters and other publications that are subscription-only content. The official Zerohedge site has relationships with these authors, which is why they are able to share it.
Encouraging someone to do the lowest-effort possible in contributing to the platform does nothing but ensure original content creators eventually abandon it - turning Steemit into yet another failed social experiment.
I'd say that alone is enough to push back hard against people who think copy-pasting equals "curation".
Well the issue of impersonation would be moot if it is clear he has always attributed the content as I believe he claims he did. I guess you are claiming otherwise. I certainly find his recent posts not that misleading and use of similar or copy-cat names are not uncommon here. Sure not using such a name and putting the disclaiming at the start of the article would be better. But for me it is mostly about does he have permission, and then if yes I couldn't care less - I might even subscribe to his feed then.
I have not gone back to the beginning of time to examine his early posts - it sounds like you have. Perhaps you could post links to or screenshots of his early postings which you say are especially egregious in their deceit about the account's identity? Thanks to the permanent nature of Steemit he would not be able to alter or delete them after one week.
Thanks.
PS. No word back from ZeroHedge. I'll report back if I hear anything.
If you navigate to my original post about the subject, there's a google-cache of his early postings. No disclaimer, no differentiation. Its the foundation upon which he's built an entire copy-paste empire.
Also, I take issue with "use of similar or copy-cat names are not uncommon here." Are you suggesting just because others do it, that it must be okay?
That kind of ethical lapse doesn't make sense in light of your other arguments.
You'll have to forgive me for missing that one link... I agree that 6 month ago post did not indicate he wasn't Zerohedge but hey at least he linked to the source.
However no matter how dodgy his past his and potentially misleading the name his current posts do seem to be far less misleading. Unless I wasn't really reading his posts at all it would be hard to miss the big disclaimer at all. I think we have to give everyone the chance to learn and reform. He can't really go back and fix the past since those old posts are immutable right (or can it be done with some low level API?)
So for me this is now mostly about copyright violation and what the original copyright holder(s) think(s).
As for copycat names - nope, definitely not saying doing that to mislead people is cool, more that rules are only good ones if you enforce them regularly in a uniform way. If you get lax about it or discriminate people will start to assume no one cares or rules only apply to certain people. Ergo people break laws because they see rich people get away with it. If there were bots and many more of us being vigilant over copycat names on Steemit I think people would get the message.
But it does appear the fake Zer0hedge has learned his lesson in that regard - at least AFAIC.
Note on the flip side some real people on Steemit have been hounded by down voting and robots targeting their profile because there is no reliable recognized way to prove identity here. Clearly Steemit could do better, maybe integrate support for a token or service that verifies identity. There could be a bot for new accounts telling people how to do that. It would make a clear impression on identify theft and provide a solution for identity assertion (@cheetah I'm looking at you)
It sounds like you or Patrice may already have contacted the real Zero Hedge before, did they really have no interest in this reposting account?
I've already stated the actions I've taken. They were not aware that he was riding on their coat-tails.
Whether they take action or not themselves is beyond the scope of this discussion.
That's where your whole argument fall short.
Since day 1.
Like the picture you posted yourself.
Where is the "concerted effort" to you? and concerted with who?
The prior google-cache link in my first article shows it clearly.
Naturally you've gone into concern-troll mode again, playing the innocent newbie "What, who me?".
Its almost like you forgot what is posted from one day to the next.
How very odd.
Shows what clearly ?
What do you mean by shows?
Also relevant : https://steemit.com/steemit/@taskmaster4450/why-i-support-zer0hedge-even-though-he-steals-content-and-is-a-plagiarist-or-does-he
Speak of the devil and he shall appear.
One drop in the ocean, against your torrent of downvoting.
Here's someone that uses the same tricks as @zer0hedge to scam people out of their passwords - https://steemit.com/steemit/@arcange/scam-alert-fake-steemit-website-try-to-steal-your-password
How proud he must be.
(Note the self-vote @zer0hedge gave himself - typical for the kind of tactics this scam artist uses.)
Yeah, now self-voting your comment to bump it up when it's clearly relevant to the conversation is fraud.
Look how many of my comments I upvote, 1 out of maybe 40, Can you imagine what would happen if I was to downvote every of you post like you do with mine?
Your idle threats only show your true character.
What's the point in down-voting my responses to you?
You don't like engaging with the person you're trying to publicly shame?
You didn't read my post? How embarrassing for you.
I'll wait here until you have.
Nothing new, more of the same that you haven't finished responding to elsewhere.
What do you mean "you haven't finished responding"?
You missed the big post up top? The one detailing your thread of lies and deceit? Do you need it translated to another language?
Do tell.
In my view, this is a serious threat to the value of the Steem cryptocurrency and could cause a price crash.
First, the underlying value of this blockchain is currently content of the articles. There may be other sources of asset valuation being contemplated for the future (e.g., advertising, selling user/story data, developing software tools that require Steem for payment), but until such supplements are realized, content is king. Now, if someone is stealing the intellectual property (IP) of others and posting that copied material here, it will significantly undercut Steem value. The IP owners could file a lawsuit seeking all sorts of nasty remedies, including: monetary damages and an injunction to shut the Steemit interface down.
Second, potential investors would run as far away from this as possible. Current holders of the crytocurrency would see the writing on the wall and engage in panic selling. The value of Steem on the cryptocurrencies would plummet. This would be no different than a sales frenzy and crash on a Wall Street stock, or a run on a bank.
If you currently hold a significant amount of Steem in your account, you really should take something like this very seriously.
I might have a few recommendations:
Modify the user agreement to prohibit IP theft and plagiarism, and specifying sanctions to include complete forfeiture of all accounts and banning from the site.
Form a group of high-reputation users to police these infractions and use downvoting to reduce the violator's reputation to zero.
Empower admins to delete all copied material. To compensate for the loss of content, and not risk harming the value of the blockchain, divert the violator's funds to an "IP police" account, which could be used to compensate members spending time to expose the illegal activity. I believe this would preserve the value of the blockchain, because it's no different from a corporation hiring accountants and auditors to verify that the financial documents (balance sheet, transactions, etc.) meet generally accepted accounting practices.
If that "content" is plagiarized, not only does it not create value for the Steem community, it exposes the owners to litigation risk. Why would you think that you could steal the intellectual property of others and then try to sell it here like some sleazy pawn shop? What puts you above the law?
I see you got its attention, he's rather sensitive to anything that derails his income.
I appreciate your comments, they bring more depth to the conversation than this copy-paster ever did.
If anything, it only shows that Steemit itself is easily gamed, which unless it changes will ensure its lifetime will be spectacular and brief.
Hopefully there will be a fork to address the issues you raised, or parasites will bring the entire platform down.
And this one can't even see that - that's how blinded by greed he is.
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.
I am proud of the content that I write, but as a newbie, I am not sure that it will be seen, appreciated or rewarded. To see users such as this simply copy and paste content from the internet devalues Steemit. Well done for speaking out. I hope many will listen and that this type of activity is addressed.
That is the "death by a thousand cuts" I spoke about. Every time @zer0hedge gets an upvote for his pirated content, he drains the potential rewards that could go to people like yourself that create original works.
The callous nature of his scheme shows a rather dark side to his character.
I see a lot of work that does not look original, but also many really interesting and well written posts. Is there any moderating on Steemit or is it like the Wild West (much like cryptocurrency industry)?
Its largely self-moderated, which leads to unfortunate outcomes like bot-voting - for example, I've noticed @zer0hedge will cut-and-paste a story ripped from zerohedge.com, and within a minute or two he'll have 30+ upvotes.
There are other tricks too, like "sockpuppet" accounts, writing supporting comments or articles for other people, giving the illusion that they have a receptive user base. Or simply scamming the potential rewards through upvoting their own comments.
It is "wild west" to a degree, but sometimes major violations of community standards results in higher-level users getting together to downvote an abuser.
Welcome to Steem, The more steem you have the more voting power you get.
That's the most novel aspect of steem.
So yeah it's a bit like the wild-west in some ways.
It's both frustrating and exciting, but delighted to be here and interacting with so many new people. I might not always like what they write (and vice versa), but it does seem to be a bit less aggressive than the Wild West. Thankfully, we have keyboards rather than six-shooters
Relevant definitions - Grifter
(See also - Confidence Tricks)
good job friend..
Thanks, the scammer is running roughshod all over the comments as usual, making threats about using his higher-level status.
I appreciate your support against this bully.
you are welcome my friend..
nice post.thanks for sharing.
Appreciate it, I can use all the support I can get against a high-level bully.
@talltim I have contacted Zerohedge directly to ask their opinion. I personally don't want to see Steemit turn into some banal copy-paste content aggregation site. But in this case of it turns out Zerohedge are cool with this copy-paste and reward skimming so am I although to be honest I can't imagine why they wouldn't want to post directly and take the rewards themselves.
Like you said, if they were "cool" with it then we'd see a direct endorsement. I haven't seen anything like that, either on their site or via a registered and verified user here.
My guess is you'll get a response that equates to "we're really busy, what do you expect us to do", which doesn't mean it is permitted, only that they have multiple irons in the fire and can't personally tend to every parasitic outbreak.
Its sad, because by encouraging users like this to run roughshod over the ethos of Steemit, it only means the eventual death of the platform.
Even if they are busy and disprove I hope they would say something unequivocally disapproving like "This account is in no way represents our is connected to Zero Hedge and the practice of reposting our content without permission is a violation of copyright law." And to further put words into their mouth I'd hope they would say "We would appreciate the assistance of the Steemit community in any and every way to remove the existing infringing material from public view and to prevent further profiteering from our and or authors copyrighted material. Please feel free to circulate this statement and request to all concerned. Yours Zero Hedge".
Something like that.
Congratulations @talltim! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPDang. This reminds me of someone I know...