And why is that? Because you didn't got as much merits as me? I can also say you plagiarized your entry as I don't think you made the background image yourself, is just downloaded from the internet and you have just put a trophy and a box to cover some details like a chip or something. So don't talk and especially don't give negative trust for plagiarism when you also make it.
P.S. Bitcointalk funny thing: a plagiarist who is calling others plagiarists getting merited.
P.S. Bitcointalk funny thing: a plagiarist who is calling others plagiarists getting merited.
I'd love for you to post a link to where I downloaded the background on my 1st entry and put a trophy on top of it?
Do you have anything to say about my 2nd entry?
(shameless plugs
)Yours came from: https://www.freedommag.org/special-reports/new-yorker/caption-the-cartoon/the-last-supper.html
Where it says below the image:
Quote
--snip--
Freedom asked our staff artists and writers to come up with the appropriate cartoons and captions inspired by Lawrence Wright, Paul Haggis and the rest of the apostate Posse. And to get everyone in on the act, we invite you, the reader, to vote for your favorite captions on each of the cartoons above.
--snip--
Freedom asked our staff artists and writers to come up with the appropriate cartoons and captions inspired by Lawrence Wright, Paul Haggis and the rest of the apostate Posse. And to get everyone in on the act, we invite you, the reader, to vote for your favorite captions on each of the cartoons above.
--snip--
This, to me, says there were artists that created this cartoon and they held a contest on what caption goes best with the image.
I told you privately I was going to post something this weekend to garnish a community consensus, but based on what I'm seing here today, I don't think it's necessary.
If theymos thinks I was out of line with this feedback, he is welcome to call me out on it.
1) If someone from the contest used someone else image (even stock image) or idea should be considered plagiarism. There is no "true plagiarism" or "little plagiarism" there is only plagiarism. And if I look on the entries of the contest 90% are plagiarized.
2) The image I downloaded from freedommag.org made by an unknown artist is also plagiarized since he used da Vinci's idea (the last supper).
In my personal case, if using the image of someone who plagiarized da Vinci without giving credits is consider plagiarism, then I plagiarized the "unknown plagiarist" for 1 day (between the post and the added credits edit) so please ask a moderator/admin to remove all the merits received between or subtract them from the contest if removing them is not possible. My mistake, I can accept it.
2) The image I downloaded from freedommag.org made by an unknown artist is also plagiarized since he used da Vinci's idea (the last supper).
In my personal case, if using the image of someone who plagiarized da Vinci without giving credits is consider plagiarism, then I plagiarized the "unknown plagiarist" for 1 day (between the post and the added credits edit) so please ask a moderator/admin to remove all the merits received between or subtract them from the contest if removing them is not possible. My mistake, I can accept it.
1) Stock imagery is used all the time, various images online have various usage rights. A free public domain image that has no usage rights and is free for personal or commercial use, IMO, does not necessarily require credits in this situation. A stock image could depend on the type of usage rights a person has been granted when acquiring it. You appear to be getting into copyright infringement, which I think is worse than generalized plagiarism, as you are defining it. The two terms could go hand in hand but there are some differences.
2) It appears to me that "staff artists" created the image, as per my comment above. Da Vinci's stuff is in the public domain and I personally wouldn't consider it plagiarism nor copyright infringement.
1) According to https://www.copyright.com/blog/plagiarism-vs-copyright-infringement/
"Plagiarism ≠ Copyright Infringement
Traditionally, the two notions of plagiarism and copyright infringement have been associated with one another. If its plagiarism, it must be copyright infringement, and vice-versa. However, this is simply not true. A case may not be considered infringement because it has followed a fair use protocol, but may still be classed as plagiarism. On the flipside, a case of clear copyright infringement may not fall into the plagiarism category because attribution has been given.
So, let me try again to answer the question clearly. What is the difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement? The two occupy different spaces that run parallel with one another. The only way to determine whether something constitutes plagiarism or infringement rests on what issue it is you are trying to address."
2) (...staff artists and writers...) don't subtract what you want from context
OK, so once again: If i didn't gave credits to the base image for 1 day, how do we handle this case? Do I get a merit cut, or I get negative trust for eternity?
EDIT:
Since plagiarism (a term so interpretable) is used way too often as an excuse to give negative trust and ban people around this forum, way too many Legendaries (OGs) give merit rewards to others if they prove others did plagiarism because they just suspect this (a form of persecution). Since this forum is about cryptocurrency (a privacy thing) but you have no privacy since every move, every post is recorded and stored somewhere out there. Since every time someone is accusing you of something, you must prove you are not guilty and not other way around (they should prove you are guilty) I just find this forum too centralized, too communist and... just a waste of my time so consider this is my last post.