Imperfect

curtail copyright confusion

I want to view the situation Jedda describes in When Someone Takes Credit for Your Work from different angles.

On confusion

Hanlon's Razor comes to mind:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

The stranger likely doesn't know some or all of the following non-exhaustive points:

  1. Copyright licenses exist.
  2. Blogs can be licensed under a copyright license.
  3. The blog in question is licensed under one.
  4. A functional, if not full, understanding of the license terms.
  5. Where to search for a license note, particularly when it isn't beside, within, or otherwise readily visible within a creative work.

Take myself for example. I don't think about licenses when I blog or think about blogs. If I don't, I suspect most people don't. Even if they did, it's entirely possible to miss a license note tucked away in a website's footer. Then again, would a more visible note change anything?

I don't know if my blog is licensed under any copyright license. The only other blog I can recall using one is Into The Void. Even that is licensed as part of the public domain, which makes sense as they Rebel Against Copyright.

On approaching copycats

While copying without credit can have its downsides, copycats bless us in other ways. Could copycats be approached with kindness and openness to opportunity first? That could fix the underlying lack of proper attribution, if not maximizing mutual growth.

Unreachable copycats could still find a public ask for them to be banned from the platform they use. This might make them and others think twice about sharing for better and worse. They could also find a public ask to connect and fix the root problem. Them reposting copied works on the same platform increases these odds.

Another idea is presenting a short primer on copyright licenses. Explaining the used license through this incident could proactively prevent future incidents and teach people something new.

On perseverance

My mind drifts to memes and their seemingly alive and organic virality. Meme makers don't need to witness nor take ownership of their memes' entire success to feel like they hit it big. Credit does preserves context among other benefits. However, enough reach can get people curious about a creative work's origin without the author's input.

If I cultivate a body of work so prolific, helpful, and idiosyncratic, I predict long run success with or without credit. Whether or not that those are achieved, I can always learn from others including copycats smarter than myself.

Seeing and hoping for good outcomes

Bad actions can create good results. Blatant copying gave reason for my post, the post that inspired it, and conversations within the latter to exist. In the last few days, both the copied and original work received more eyeballs than it would have on its own.

I hope that proper attribution and mutual growth, not banishment, resolves this situation.

Want to reach out? Connect with me however you prefer: