RE: [Notice] nTOPAZ's view on content ecosystems
The protection of copyright means that creativity is limited on the other hand.
So, can creative work be developed in a controlled environment? We don't think so.
I would like to clarify our position, since by reading this, its clear its not understood and that you are misinterpreting the position of Jaguar Force.
We do not protect copyright, we do not enforce copyright laws and we do not agree with copyright laws in general precisely because of what you are saying in the text quoted. We believe that copyright laws stagnate creativity and innovation.
Jaguar Force is NOT about copyright, Jaguar Force is all about fighting deception not about enforcing copyright.
When we ask users to cite the sources of the texts/images/videos they post, this is only so that they clearly denote that something is not theirs, when we ask users to cite and show the sources of their art, as for example when they are copying somebody elses photograph/drawing(s) is only so that curators/viewers see what part of the final work's creativity comes from the user and what part they took from somewhere else, how they transformed it, what they added, so that curators/viewers can assess and discern the value that the user added to the final work and what part comes from the sources used, so that curators can reward the work accordingly, not because we want to enforce copyright laws.
In short: Jaguar force is about preventing the deception of the curators and users of this platform
We will make a post shorty about this issue, so that everyone knows clearly where we stand in this regard.
Glad to see you are really trying to make your point clear and that you are not just on a witchhunt, like many of my friends and I were led to assume in the beginning of this often heated debate.
finally a statement, to which I think most of our fellow steemians could relate to. The question remains, what is the best way to go about it. I have told you on more than one occasion, that I always try to see the different positions, and although I naturally feel closer to my friends in the artist community, I also want to understand, where you come from.
In my humble opinion, part of the problem is, that many perceive you like some kind of drill sergeant from a bootcamp. So, communication and perception might be quite an issue here. I was once told, that only 30% of communication is made of words, the rest is tone of voice, speed of speech, level, gesture and so on.... doh! So, what are you going to do, when its all in writing?
I'm starting to wonder if you are really aware of how you come across. While I think you just want to appear neutral and fact oriented, a lot of people are alienated, because to them you appear aggressive. So, everyone digs their trenches and gets ready to fire back at you.
I have said that before and I believe it even more today. Your intentions are right, but you need to work with the community, not against it, in order to make a necessary change. The world is full of things we don't like, injustice and wrong doing everywhere. Whenever I get frustrated about it, Gandhi comes to mind, who supposedly said: "You have to be the change you want to see in the world". Why don't we all try together?
Throughout history, anyone who accepts the challenge of doing "dirty work" in deregulated systems will always be labeled as inopportune, insensitive and an enemy of the system. The reason: the search for freedom and to do what we like. But behold, this "doing" has to go through the sieve of the right and that is where the dilemma lies: what is the right thing?
As a community of creators and curators, we are pleased that there are people like @jaguar.force, without it, the pretended "originality" that we want to sell to those who are not part of the platform, would not materialize and investors would see it as a risk to invest in a place where those who strive to deliver quality are not respected.
From @engranaje we applaud the challenge to make #Steem a respectable blockchain.
Does your scope only cover art posts? Or do you plan on expanding on writing posts?
Was it necessary to make several posts about a single user rather than post a single compilation post about the accused in question? There's no need to recycle the same topic if a single post can cover a single user's progress.
Hi @adamada, Our scope includes all kinds of plagiarism and abuse, I invite you to open and read our profile page, in it you will find 22 cases of written plagiarism, although we have reported well over 100 cases of that type of plagiarism.
We decided early on to make posts on a one case per post basis so that each case is self contained in its correspondent post and the posts are kept short. As we find new cases by the same user we make new posts detailing the previous cases so as to contextualize the case. So yes, it was necessary in many cases as we initially found one case and after looking deeper we found more and more cases. I hope that covers your question and if you have any further questions please dont hesitate to contact us.