# Showing my startup, Blockai. We're helping photographers claim their copyrights.



## NathanLands (Jul 25, 2016)

see post below. 


-'Stache


----------



## KmH (Jul 25, 2016)

Welcome!
At the least, your link is going to be deleted per the "Welcome!" sticky post link above.

Also what you have posted may well be adjudicated by the moderators as SPAM so there is also a possibility you will be banned for also violating TPF's TOS.
However, you may instead be invited top pay to advertise here on TPF by becoming a *Supporting Vendor*.


> * Spamming is not tolerated. Do not cross-post messages in multiple forums in an effort to gain attention. Furthermore, should it be obvious by your signature or posting style that you are here only to promote your business or product, you may receive a warning or possibly be banned.



Copyright registration is not very costly.


----------



## NathanLands (Jul 25, 2016)

KmH said:


> Welcome!
> At the least, your link is going to be deleted per the "Welcome!" sticky post link above.
> 
> Also what you have posted may well be adjudicated by the moderators as SPAM so there is also a possibility you will be banned for also violating TPF's TOS.
> ...



Hi Keith. Copyright registration with the Government is not made for the web, there's no API or public data you can use to find out who owns the copyright for a file. We're not trying to replace the need to register with the Gov. In fact, the U.S. Copyright Office has been out to our office and like what we're building.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 25, 2016)

Nathan, you are deflecting.
What you are doing is advertising - and this site requires that, if you want to advertise, you must pay for the audience.

L


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 25, 2016)

The copyright office eh?  Sounds like government mind control to me.  

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 25, 2016)

I kind of find it ironic that someone whose self-styled mission in life is to enforce 'the rules' doesn't read those that apply to himself.


----------



## KmH (Jul 25, 2016)

What rule/rules would that/those be?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 26, 2016)

Bitcoin?? A step in between registering with the Library of Congress and doing nothing (granted, that may be so). I don't know what's with the emphasis on that but as it says on the LOC site, it's easy to do...
Steps To Copyright (Taking the Mystery Out of Copyright) (Library of Congress)

Interesting what turns up in a search.

Why would there be an advantage in using this instead of just registering copyright? I don't see why I'd want a certificate from Blockai showing my photos are 'registered' (and paid for and recorded) in the Blockai database. But I guess the phrase 'paid for' explains it - seems like a way for Blockai to make money but I don't see any advantage for me as a photographer. I can register my photos myself... and think about where I'd post them, and get/stay informed about copyright (and infringement) thru pro photographer organizations, etc. etc.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 26, 2016)

And you 'believe' that a record created on the blockchain would serve as sufficient evidence in court?? (I'm reading the article on Techcrunch.) And sending the Blockai certificate would be more serious than an Instagram photo? Well, yeah, probably... but why would I send an Instagram photo instead of a DMCA takedown notice?

The article on Petapixel says the Blockai certificate shows proof of 'publishing' - but a copyrighted photograph is not necessarily published, it would depend on how the photo was used. But then, Petapixel articles aren't necessarily accurate, but thankfully there's a comment from Jack Reznicki who's at least one voice of some reason with some knowledge of copyright.


And if this could potentially give copyright violators a way to pay artists, does Blockai keep some of that payment or does it all go to the photographer?


(And why is it when I start looking into these type things, it's the proverbial onion being peeled? I don't really want an answer, it's a rhetorical question.)


----------



## Overread (Jul 26, 2016)

The UK and US copyright and government have been looking for ways to monetize the service for years and are continually trying to push through this kind of company; ergo one where copyright shifts from being managed by the government into one managed by independent companies; often multiple competing ones. Generating jobs and income and also making a nightmare of a mess of copyright as different companies police different areas; or might cross over so eventually people would hve to pay to be in multiple "libraries". 

It's also pushed for by big companies who want to be able to use more online resources that are "unclaimed" by making paid registration a formal step and thus anything that isn't paidfor in an archive loses its protection under copyright and thus is free game to use. 

It's a system made for big businesses and to generate revenue and nothing else and serves no interest to the actual creators of content at all.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 26, 2016)

KmH said:


> What rule/rules would that/those be?



You're kidding, right?


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 26, 2016)

Guys, seriously.. cool it.  Don't you get it?  All this information is being collected and transmitted directly to the "Copyright Office"... which as everyone knows is just a front for the NSA.


----------



## table1349 (Jul 26, 2016)

OP.......FYI I do believe that the forum does accept bitcoins if you wish to advertise here.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 26, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> Guys, seriously.. cool it.  Don't you get it?  All this information is being collected and transmitted directly to the "Copyright Office"... which as everyone knows is just a front for the NSA.



And the NSA is a cover for the DHS.  Which is the right-hand of the Illuminati.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 26, 2016)

480sparky said:


> And the NSA is a cover for the DHS.  Which is the right-hand of the Illuminati.



Dude.. seriously..in a public forum.. great.

Ok, well I'm going to be leaving town and changing aliases again.  Thanks Sparky.  Way to go... 

Sheesh...


----------



## table1349 (Jul 26, 2016)

480sparky said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Guys, seriously.. cool it.  Don't you get it?  All this information is being collected and transmitted directly to the "Copyright Office"... which as everyone knows is just a front for the NSA.
> ...


All of which work for the Bilderberg Group who actually runs things from Area 5.


----------



## table1349 (Jul 26, 2016)

robbins.photo said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > And the NSA is a cover for the DHS.  Which is the right-hand of the Illuminati.
> ...


Ooh.....ooh....ooh....... this time be a  platypus, the gouberment will never be suspicious of a platypus.


----------



## waday (Jul 26, 2016)

Wait... so.... this statement from their terms:



> 2.3. Publishing.You understand by using Blockai that anything you publish has a permanet record of its creation on the Bitcoin Blockchain which cannot be erased. By publishing images or other media via Blockai, you are agreeing that you have right to claim the copyright and it's yours and not someone elses. If you publish someone else's creation, we can only filter it out of our products but cannot remove the record of creation on the blockchain. If you publish someone else's creation and profit from it, you may be legally liable for damages to the original content creator.



Does this say that if someone else claims your work, it will be permanently linked to that person, even though they don't own the copyright?

(Also, way too many grammar and spelling errors in the terms.)


----------



## Overread (Jul 26, 2016)

It says they can "filter it out" but that it remains locked within their system but doesn't go into detail about what that means to the actual copyright owner (and sounds  either scammy or passing the buck of responsibility or poor coding on their part). 

Also it sounds like they take no steps on behalf of the actual copyright owner so - if there is an infringement then the original copyright holder still has to do all the work.


----------



## waday (Jul 26, 2016)

Ok, that's what I was thinking, but wasn't sure. Sounds way too scammy to me.

Also, I don't like when companies can't provide information to me like an adult. They have to put it in 5 single-sentence steps with cartoons. _Yeah, cause that makes it easier to understand._ I end up having more questions than when I started.


----------



## unpopular (Jul 26, 2016)

Overread said:


> It says they can "filter it out" but that it remains locked within their system but doesn't go into detail about what that means to the actual copyright owner (and sounds  either scammy or passing the buck of responsibility or poor coding on their part).
> 
> Also it sounds like they take no steps on behalf of the actual copyright owner so - if there is an infringement then the original copyright holder still has to do all the work.



Well, this seems like a great way to establish a chain of ownership to stolen property!


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 26, 2016)

waday said:


> Ok, that's what I was thinking, but wasn't sure. Sounds way too scammy to me.
> 
> Also, I don't like when companies can't provide information to me like an adult. They have to put it in 5 single-sentence steps with cartoons. _Yeah, cause that makes it easier to understand._ I end up having more questions than when I started.




single step sentences with cartoons taught me everything i know about women.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 26, 2016)

gryphonslair99 said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > 480sparky said:
> ...



That's because a platypus is a racehorse_ designed _by the gubbamint!


----------



## OGsPhotography (Jul 26, 2016)

I enjoyed the platypus picture thanks.


----------

