Perhaps. On the other hand creating a fork, using code of Steemit to launch new platform (Steemit is not blockchain, it's an intellectual property) and copy-ing all content (including posts of those who were denied to receive an airdrop) should also be considered fully illegal.
I'm sorry I'm doing this again but you need to understand some basics my friend. Nobody forked steemit. Steemit is just a stupid front end (that had no updates for the past 3 years) for the decentralized backend code which is the actual blockchain. Steemit is an intellectual property and it was never forked, only steem was forked and it was something with MIT license. I would like to help you again if you are ready to listen. If you navigate to the repository of Steem, you will be able to find the below license file.
https://github.com/steemit/steem/blob/master/LICENSE.md
We would not call a blockchain decentralized if it was not open-source. Your statement about forking is wrong. That's how every other cryptocurrency is created. Not all but usually a new token is created from an existing token's source code. We cannot badmouth the new token saying that it was airdropped illegally because it has a value higher than the parent token. This is a free world, the Hive tokens were just airdropped and in any case it would have even gone below 10 cents but it didn't. That is purely investors call and basic demand and supply. Maybe investors want new token more than the old one because of various reasons.
By the way the users were also contributing to a decentralized open-source platform where the content was also public and decentralized. I guess the MIT license also applies to the contents as well. We don't have enough laws for decentralization yet and that doesn't mean that it is illegal. The contents are still under the same owners and were never manipulated as a different owner or something.
Thank you for your comment @bala41288
I believe that I do understand basics and I'm seeing those basics from different point of view.
If you're telling me that anyone can fork blockchain and can use content created by users and at the same time exclude right to have tokens on forked blockchain - then it's hardly different from what Justin did recently. Trying to convince people otherwise is not going to work.
One could argue, that STEEM also forked out. And they decided to exclude group of users from this forked blockchain. Surely there are some differences, however both actions are in my opinion heavily illegal.
Blockchain can be open source - however OUR content is OUR intellectual property. And I don't think your explanation would last in any european or US court a chance. Do you possibly think that anyone sued for copying intellectual property and benefiting from it could defent himself, then you may be surprissed.
Exactly.
To wrap it up: we're slowly witnessing problem of lack of regulations and people looking at things from angles which are suitable for them. We need more regulations. It cannot happen that someone will create new fork of STEEM and will copy my entire work to new chain, without my agreement/consensus. This should be illegal. And sooner than later it will be.
Yours, Piotr
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit