Here I am, with yet another suggestion.

As we all know, locking remixing has been suggested several times and been denied because of the Creative Commons License, newer users not being able to play around with the code, etc. And I've been thinking about how to stop project/art stealing while still letting newer users play around with the code of someone's project and upload it. And then I came up with an idea: An option when you upload a project that lets people remix but does not let them share their remix.

This seemed like a good idea. Newer users can still play around with the code, project/art theft is prevented. But then I realized some problems: What if someone wanted to upload a genuine remix of a project, but then couldn't? And what about the last part of the motto “Share”? And then I came up with the best idea: Letting people remix your project, but not letting them share it until they have permission from the owner.

But then I realized yet another problem: What if a project owner who has a project with the box checked is no longer active? Then no one can remix their project. Then I came to my final idea: Perhaps there is some log that tracks all the unanswered requests for permission, and if a request is left unanswered for too long, then the moderators can check the project to make sure it's not a copy.

So, what do you guys think? Would it take too long to implement? Is there still more problems? Feel free to tell me.

I think its a plausible idea, until the very end.

I think that the worst art theft, the one that everyone's getting upset about isn't in remixing but it's when costumes are saved or put into the backpack, then put into a new project without giving credit, not a remix, so this doesn't solve that.

Yeah, there are still many people complaining about art theft, where people just drag costumes/sprites into their backpack and use it elsewhere without credit.

Another problem is that some users don't like remixes at all and will just decline all of them.

And that the remixer has to wait a while before getting to publish it, which shouldn't really have to happen, as it discourages users from remixing (“why should I remix when I have to wait a bunch to share my project?”)

I like the idea, but there are still a few flaws

PhirripSyrrip wrote:

I think that the worst art theft, the one that everyone's getting upset about isn't in remixing but it's when costumes are saved or put into the backpack, then put into a new project without giving credit, not a remix, so this doesn't solve that.

Hmm. I was thinking an attribution tag, but if someone just makes one change…

Maybe it could work the same way for projects with stuff taken from the backpack…?

kayybee wrote:

Another problem is that some users don't like remixes at all and will just decline all of them.

And that the remixer has to wait a while before getting to publish it, which shouldn't really have to happen, as it discourages users from remixing (“why should I remix when I have to wait a bunch to share my project?”)

I've thought about the first problem. Maybe users could get in trouble if they decline something that didn't copy anything?

I don't really think the second problem is that bad. But maybe that's just because I have more patience than most people.

Isn't it already implemented? If the author doesn't mind their work being remixed then they share it. If they don't want it remixed then they don't share it! Simples.

drmcw wrote:

Isn't it already implemented? If the author doesn't mind their work being remixed then they share it. If they don't want it remixed then they don't share it! Simples.

No, because people can share remixes without permission from the owner. And even if the owner says no remixing, people can and will still remix.

Bravo

kayybee wrote:

Another problem is that some users don't like remixes at all and will just decline all of them.

And that the remixer has to wait a while before getting to publish it, which shouldn't really have to happen, as it discourages users from remixing (“why should I remix when I have to wait a bunch to share my project?”)

My thoughts exactly.

mitchboy wrote:

An option when you upload a project that lets people remix but does not let them share their remix…

Go on…

…Letting people remix your project, but not letting them share it until they have permission from the owner….

Okay…

…if a request is left unanswered for too long, then the moderators can check the project to make sure it's not a copy.

You lost me there. Just a couple hundred projects to check a day would prove too much for a moderator. And someone could bypass this by downloading their remix before waiting for mods to check on it, therefore uploading as a new project.

Your idea is okay, but it wouldn't necessarily solve the problem of theft. There needs to be some automated part to this where it would draw the fine line between stolen and not-stolen, preferably where seeing inside starts.

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

mitchboy wrote:

An option when you upload a project that lets people remix but does not let them share their remix…

Go on…

…Letting people remix your project, but not letting them share it until they have permission from the owner….

Okay…

…if a request is left unanswered for too long, then the moderators can check the project to make sure it's not a copy.

You lost me there. Just a couple hundred projects to check a day would prove too much for a moderator. And someone could bypass this by downloading their remix before waiting for mods to check on it, therefore uploading as a new project.

Your idea is okay, but it wouldn't necessarily solve the problem of theft. There needs to be some automated part to this where it would draw the fine line between stolen and not-stolen, preferably where seeing inside starts.

Also, not to mention that they could use the username block to specifically not display the stolen art for the creator. I hope nobody gets any ideas from this

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

Your idea is okay, but it wouldn't necessarily solve the problem of theft. There needs to be some automated part to this where it would draw the fine line between stolen and not-stolen, preferably where seeing inside starts.

That's the problem. There is no fine line between stolen and not-stolen (at least to a computer). Someone could change one pixel/block on a project, then change it back. This would be a copy to a person's mind, but not a computer, because according to a computer, two changes have been made.

Making it automated would be so much work, I think it actually would be easier for them just to review each project. This works fine on geocaching.com, but geocaching.com has a lot more moderators and less things to review. Maybe it could only work for people who have been active in the last 2 weeks?

OMG, greatest idea ever: a “(block)” that tells the original owner of a project! When a new project is made, the sensing block will automatically set itself to the username who created the project. It cannot be changed once it is set, so any remixes (including downloads) will have the block set to the original owner's username permanently. This way, if someone isn't giving credit (or they don't know who originally made the project), anyone can check inside for this variable, which will tell who made the original project.

Pros:
-Would not prevent remixing
-Would not prevent sharing
-Would provide proof of ownership
-Would not need much coding to add.

Cons:
-Adds to the list of priorities for the ST
-Would not prevent adding scripts/sprites/etc. to the backpack

No support. The creative commons legal code says:

“Distribute” means to make available to the public the original and copies of the Work or Adaptation, as appropriate, through sale or other transfer of ownership.
…
3. License Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright) license to exercise the rights in the Work as stated below:

to Reproduce the Work, to incorporate the Work into one or more Collections, and to Reproduce the Work as incorporated in the Collections;
to create and Reproduce Adaptations provided that any such Adaptation, including any translation in any medium, takes reasonable steps to clearly label, demarcate or otherwise identify that changes were made to the original Work. For example, a translation could be marked “The original work was translated from English to Spanish,” or a modification could indicate “The original work has been modified.”;
to Distribute and Publicly Perform the Work including as incorporated in Collections; and,
to Distribute and Publicly Perform Adaptations.
….

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

That means that the author has no right to prevent people from displaying their remixes under Creative Commons share alike, meaning that this suggestion will not technically work. Sure, you can make a rule like this that only applies to scratch, but you will have to allow people to share their remixes outside of Scratch with attribution. Not really useful to stop theft to me.

Me support!

This is a very well possible idea, so support.

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

OMG, greatest idea ever: a “(block)” that tells the original owner of a project! When a new project is made, the sensing block will automatically set itself to the username who created the project. It cannot be changed once it is set, so any remixes (including downloads) will have the block set to the original owner's username permanently. This way, if someone isn't giving credit (or they don't know who originally made the project), anyone can check inside for this variable, which will tell who made the original project.

Pros:
-Would not prevent remixing
-Would not prevent sharing
-Would provide proof of ownership
-Would not need much coding to add.

Cons:
-Adds to the list of priorities for the ST
-Would not prevent adding scripts/sprites/etc. to the backpack

That would interfere with what the lock should actually do…

turkey3 wrote:

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

OMG, greatest idea ever: a “(block)” that tells the original owner of a project! When a new project is made, the sensing block will automatically set itself to the username who created the project. It cannot be changed once it is set, so any remixes (including downloads) will have the block set to the original owner's username permanently. This way, if someone isn't giving credit (or they don't know who originally made the project), anyone can check inside for this variable, which will tell who made the original project.

Pros:
-Would not prevent remixing
-Would not prevent sharing
-Would provide proof of ownership
-Would not need much coding to add.

Cons:
-Adds to the list of priorities for the ST
-Would not prevent adding scripts/sprites/etc. to the backpack

That would interfere with what the lock should actually do…

Locking projects is not okay. Creating a sensor that reports the original creator of the project is.

mitchboy wrote:

drmcw wrote:

Isn't it already implemented? If the author doesn't mind their work being remixed then they share it. If they don't want it remixed then they don't share it! Simples.

No, because people can share remixes without permission from the owner. And even if the owner says no remixing, people can and will still remix.

The owner doesn't have the right to say no remixing if they upload the project to Scratch.

mitchboy wrote:

drmcw wrote:

Isn't it already implemented? If the author doesn't mind their work being remixed then they share it. If they don't want it remixed then they don't share it! Simples.

No, because people can share remixes without permission from the owner. And even if the owner says no remixing, people can and will still remix.

You can remix any of my shared projects. Try and remix my unshared ones. Let me know when you have. I won't hold my breath!.

PhirripSyrrip wrote:

mitchboy wrote:

drmcw wrote:

Isn't it already implemented? If the author doesn't mind their work being remixed then they share it. If they don't want it remixed then they don't share it! Simples.

No, because people can share remixes without permission from the owner. And even if the owner says no remixing, people can and will still remix.

The owner doesn't have the right to say no remixing if they upload the project to Scratch.

Exactly.

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:

OMG, greatest idea ever: a “(block)” that tells the original owner of a project! When a new project is made, the sensing block will automatically set itself to the username who created the project. It cannot be changed once it is set, so any remixes (including downloads) will have the block set to the original owner's username permanently. This way, if someone isn't giving credit (or they don't know who originally made the project), anyone can check inside for this variable, which will tell who made the original project.

Pros:
-Would not prevent remixing
-Would not prevent sharing
-Would provide proof of ownership
-Would not need much coding to add.

Cons:
-Adds to the list of priorities for the ST
-Would not prevent adding scripts/sprites/etc. to the backpack

Hmm… this seems interesting. Maybe you could even put it on all sprites so it would work with the backpack, too.

jh1234l wrote:

No support. The creative commons legal code says:

“Distribute” means to make available to the public the original and copies of the Work or Adaptation, as appropriate, through sale or other transfer of ownership.
…
3. License Grant. Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the applicable copyright) license to exercise the rights in the Work as stated below:

to Reproduce the Work, to incorporate the Work into one or more Collections, and to Reproduce the Work as incorporated in the Collections;
to create and Reproduce Adaptations provided that any such Adaptation, including any translation in any medium, takes reasonable steps to clearly label, demarcate or otherwise identify that changes were made to the original Work. For example, a translation could be marked “The original work was translated from English to Spanish,” or a modification could indicate “The original work has been modified.”;
to Distribute and Publicly Perform the Work including as incorporated in Collections; and,
to Distribute and Publicly Perform Adaptations.
….

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

That means that the author has no right to prevent people from displaying their remixes under Creative Commons share alike, meaning that this suggestion will not technically work. Sure, you can make a rule like this that only applies to scratch, but you will have to allow people to share their remixes outside of Scratch with attribution. Not really useful to stop theft to me.

Hmm. So my idea could still theoretically work, right?