Ok @ilgiaguaro, you are not making this easy for me.
My #1 recommendation for you to help us win the war against art paraphrasing (intentional or not) is to lose the combativeness with the community with these cases. It's not doing yourself, @jaguar.force, or the anti-abuse community any favors.
We all may lose our bearing from time to time especially in the face of antagonism but we must strive to maintain a sense of professionalism if we desire the broader community to rally behind us on these issues. If we come off as jerks, we are more likely to be dismissed.
I also would very much like for artists on Steem to make every reasonable effort to source the inspiration of their works or at least clearly indicate their work as being derivative so that curators are informed in their voting but we need to reach consensus on the approach that works, preferable one that is dimplomatic.
In the case of creating portraits from photographic works, I believe it is reasonable to include the source so the photography received the credit that is due. That would be ideal. If they don't have a link, I think at least some sort of disclaimer for it being a derivative work is appropriate. What we don't want is artists embellishing their talent by trying to pass off a work as not being derivative.
Another issue I would like to bring up is semantics and connotations with art paraphrasing cases, my stance on these has to NOT treat them the same as art plagiarism. When an artist cropped, rotated or otherwise modified anothers image to avoid detection, that's worthy of harsher criticism than a user that may have accidentally forgot to source inspiration. I think the key is to approach the former case (paraphrasing) with gentleness and respectfully ask they add the source on that and future submissions.
I would venture to say there is a good chance they will comply but, if the approach is accusatory, there is greater probability that the user may shut down and become uncooperative. After doing a bit of research into your comments, looks like you may have given @yakubenko 2 hours after the SFR mention for art paraphrasing before writing an anti-abuse post on them for art plagiarism. I think that was a hasty move and more work could have been done to resolve before going full blown expose mode. By doing that, they may now be deadset as your opposition when you may have won them over otherwise. I don't agree with your method but agree with the principle of sourcing inspiration.
To sum it up, I would recommend the following:
- Not treating art paraphrasing as the same thing as art plagiarism due to the more serious negative connotations in the latter case.
- Pursuing correction of failure to source inspiration with gentleness, respect and patience.
- I would withhold any judgment about the character of the user especially if the first attempt to correct the issue.
Lastly, please make sure you work on the presentation of your submissions. For example:
omg also on steemit?
ohhh yesssssss and not only one..
Recommend using a Word processor grammar check. There are a number of failures to capitalize or errors in punctuation. We need to make sure we try to maintain high quality standards for @utopian-io.
Your contribution has been evaluated according to Utopian policies and guidelines, as well as a predefined set of questions pertaining to the category.
To view those questions and the relevant answers related to your post, click here.
Need help? Chat with us on Discord.
[utopian-moderator]
