Mocpages user steals creations!

[Lt. Col. Thok]

*Barf* :-X How could he? What a little creep....and what is this about OTB forum? What a creep.

[mutley777]

Well complianing to the guys at MOC pages does nothing! There is a guy there that has a account using my screen name (mutley 777, notice the space) and taking credit for my MOCs and stuff. What makes it even worse is he has a few other peoples stuff too Which makes it look like i am stealing them!!! >:-(

[ExoBuilder]

Well complianing to the guys at MOC pages does nothing! There is a guy there that has a account using my screen name (mutley 777, notice the space) and taking credit for my MOCs and stuff. What makes it even worse is he has a few other peoples stuff too Which makes it look like i am stealing them!!! >:-(

I really don't understand why you would do this. To me, if I would like Lego. I would take pictures of my creations, not steal someone elses creations. also, you creations are known by alot of people out there on MOCpages.

Anyway, if they think you're stealing their MOCs, talk to me. I'll let Bane speak some truth into them >:-)

*sweet*

[BerndDasBrot]

I have watched this topic from the beginning and can only agree to all of you: people like him really really really infuriate me...

I just looked through "his gallery" and- erm- no comment. no flame.

There's a good quote from Garfield: "It's not the fact that he's shamelessly lying to me. It's his assessment of my intelligence that bothers me."

(I tried to translate it, for I only know it on german: "Die Tatsache, dass er mich so schamlos anlügt ist nur halb so schlimm wie seine Einschätzung meiner Intelligenz.")

[Ralph_S]

Well complianing to the guys at MOC pages does nothing! There is a guy there that has a account using my screen name (mutley 777, notice the space) and taking credit for my MOCs and stuff. What makes it even worse is he has a few other peoples stuff too Which makes it look like i am stealing them!!! >:-(

Perhaps I am biased because of my job (university researcher), where plagiarism is the closest thing to a mortal sin imaginable, but I can't quite drop this topic completely. In my opinion this really is a problem.

I am so fed up with the behaviour of some people on MOCpages and with the generally diminishing quality of the models on there, that I've removed most of my stuff from MOCpages and have decided to stick to flickr. Most people on flickr seem to take their building a bit more seriously that MOCpages' TFOLs and on flickr I have some degree of control over who sees my pictures and over who downloads them. I haven't removed everything though, because this way I will still be represented on MOCpages, making it harder for somebody else to pretend that they are me. The MOCs that I've kept are my greatest hits, so to speak. With one exception they've either been blogged on the brothers brick/ gizmodo or have been in brickjournal, so they are recognisably mine.

There is really nothing to stop anybody from opening an account on MOCpages pretending to be somebody else. You may think that I am getting paranoid. I don't think so. Mutley777 isn't the only one to whom this has happened. In fact, one of these guys who copy other people's pictures has a review on his page supposedly written by Eric Harshbarger, telling everybody that 'Eric' has given permission for him to post a picture of 'Eric's' Golden Gate bridge. It is obviously bogus, attached to a bogus account under the same name but with an empty front page.

I have to hand it to Sean Kenney. He does respond to complaints. Every time that I notified him that somebody was copying MOCs the copies have either been deleted or the accounts shut down, although it sometimes did take quite a while. There's actually so much of this going on that he's probably inundated with e-mails about it. Mutley 777's account seems to have been deleted, BTW. Trouble is, there's really nothing to prevent whoever is doing this sort of nonsense from opening a new account and starting the whole thing all over again, as 'the man of death' shows. He's actually left me a review, informing me that his account has already been deleted seven or eight times.

The OTB thing is somebody who reads that forum decided to get in on the action and -having seen that people get twitchy about this sort of thing- decided to rile them further by copying their creations and by adding a few silly insults on his MOCpage. He has been reported and it is a matter of time before his account is deleted.

All these people seem to crave attention most of all. I realise that continuing this discussion may actually be feeding that to some extent, but I do feel that people should be aware of this sort of behaviour and should take some precautions of their own. I don't mean that they should leave MOCpages, but everybody who uses MOCpages (and brickshelf) should keep an eye out for this sort of thing. They should also make sure they've got a damn good password, because some of these teenagers are wily enough to hack people's accounts and cause havoc that way. I've seen it happen to a friend of mine.

It only takes a few people who seem to not be willing or able to follow even basic rules of common decency to cause all kinds of trouble and to really undermine something which we could really enjoy otherwise.

Cheers,

Ralph

Edit: om an entirely different note, I just noticed 'MOC expert!' under my name. I am flattered of course, but who do I have to thank for that?

Edited April 6, 2008 by Ralph_S

[Chuck]

Meh. This has always been happening, and is one of the reasons I don't go on mocpages anymore. One time, some kid took some MOCs of mine and claimed they were his. When I E-mailed him telling him to take them down, he claimed "I put the pictures up first", as if he actually believed they were his MOCs. Eventually he took them down and apologized, though.

-Chuck

[Siegfried]

Edit: om an entirely different note, I just noticed 'MOC expert!' under my name. I am flattered of course, but who do I have to thank for that?

Yourself for making great MOCs! X-D I'm glad you like it.... you would have had it earlier if I knew you had an account.

[Admiral Blockbeard]

I may have a somewhat useful suggestion, when taking photos of your work have a back ground that clearly identifies you, like a logo of sought, then also before uploading the picture put your logo digitally on the photo!

Sure if they like they could spend hours trying to re edit your pictures to claim their own, but most likely it some little kid that knows little about it.

I am not saying it fool proof but it may act as a deterrent to those that want to simply copy your pics.

just my thoughts, and btw i think stealing MOCs is low and if any of our users are behind this kind of thing please stop it!

[WhiteFang]

I been looking at this topic from the start. IMO, stealing and ripping away other's people hardwork is WRONG! Users which spend their precious time to devote and deliver great creations from their own inspiration and sharing wtih fellow LEGO lovers. It is able to give us great insights to new ideas and widen our building experience horizons. But, there are some childish kids or people whom want to gain attention and publicity through other users' hardwork >:-( is way too wrong and too much.

These unconsiderate and unethical users only copy the orignal creator images and copy and paste and upload to their own folder. What can be worse? Claiming the work or creation to be rightfully yours instead of the orignal creator! This is too much. At least with the basic courtesy, ask permission from the orignal creator and share the credit with the person instead of "Saying this is my newest creation" which clearly the work of someone else. As quoted by the rest, if there are so many rippers around, users will feel detest into sharing their work especially when they knows that their creation will be taken away. This is not the "right" attitude! |-/

I am sure all of us in EB and other communities are mature enough and is able to handle this well. We are mature fans whom know how to differniate right or wrong! Say No to "Piracy" ;-)

[Caffeine]

This is what watermarks are for :-|

[Vaders_son]

Sorry to renew this rather old topic, but I just looked up the link in the 1st post and it appears that this has been nothing else than some students' survey of some kind of internet behaviour in this case...

Benny

[WhiteFang]

Sorry to renew this rather old topic, but I just looked up the link in the 1st post and it appears that this has been nothing else than some students' survey of some kind of internet behaviour in this case...

Benny

Previously, the link was filled with great MOC work, claiming to be his own creation. That's why it created a big up-roar. But now, it claim to be some students doing some experimentation in their project.

I think as a whole to conduct market research in this manner is totally unethical. Experimentation should be conducted in a proper correct controlled manner. Instead, these students make use of other people's creation to gather primary research data and of course through an unconventional channel.

Firstly, they did not obtain permission from the orignal creators.

Secondly, they did not declare their purpose of research. The problem which reflected as Survey of Internet Life is poorly undefined. The scope of the whole project has created self-selection bias for the students whom adminster the experimentation and did not specify the sampling frame. In addition, their experimentation is a failure as they did not controlled the flow very well. Thus, this increase the probabilty of both sampling and non-sampling errors. In such case for the use of experimentation, sampling error should be higher than non-sampling error due to its low sampling frame used.

Thirdly, instead of explaining to the public and involved parties in a much responsible manner, they make it sounded like its their own fault.

Lastly, I will like to conclude that such actions cannot be tolerate especially when they used education to conduct and gather results in such unprofessional way. What can I said, they are just only students.

Edited April 24, 2008 by WhiteFang

[Siegfried]

Previously, the link was filled with great MOC work, claiming to be his own creation. That's why it created a big up-roar. But now, it claim to be some students doing some experimentation in their project.

I don't believe it. For one, there are no such students in their directory, two the usage of all upper case is odd, three "Incorperated" but most of all, their line of..

INSTEAD OF BEING MATURE AND IGNORING IT, IT SEEMS THAT MOST OF YOU HAVE TO RATE THEM LOW AND RANT A BIT ON THE PAGE. THIS SHOWS THAT MOST OF YOU ON HERE HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN POINT OUT WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN POINTED OUT, JUST SO YOU CAN FEEL BETTER ABOUT YOURSELVES.

...just reeks of a twitty teenager who has been caught out and is trying to have the last laugh. Since they claim that they will post results in a few days, posting most of their conclusions early makes no sense.

While I'm pretty darn sure I am right, being wrong really worries me as if this really is some university students I fear for the future. Eitherway, they are a bunch of dolts.

[WhiteFang]

For one, there are no such students in their directory

Sinner, you really done a search in their directory? That's great, at least you proved that it is a scam. I was skeptical about it earlier ago. But I gave it the benefit of doubt. Thanks for your clear clarification too

[MacK]

Previously, the link was filled with great MOC work, claiming to be his own creation. That's why it created a big up-roar. But now, it claim to be some students doing some experimentation in their project.

I think as a whole to conduct market research in this manner is totally unethical. Experimentation should be conducted in a proper correct controlled manner. Instead, these students make use of other people's creation to gather primary research data and of course through an unconventional channel.

Firstly, they did not obtain permission from the orignal creators.

Secondly, they did not declare their purpose of research. The problem which reflected as Survey of Internet Life is poorly undefined. The scope of the whole project has created self-selection bias for the students whom adminster the experimentation and did not specify the sampling frame. In addition, their experimentation is a failure as they did not controlled the flow very well. Thus, this increase the probabilty of both sampling and non-sampling errors. In such case for the use of experimentation, sampling error should be higher than non-sampling error due to its low sampling frame used.

Thirdly, instead of explaining to the public and involved parties in a much responsible manner, they make it sounded like its their own fault.

Lastly, I will like to conclude that such actions cannot be tolerate especially when they used education to conduct and gather results in such unprofessional way. What can I said, they are just only students.

"INSTEAD OF BEING MATURE AND IGNORING IT, IT SEEMS THAT MOST OF YOU HAVE TO RATE THEM LOW AND RANT A BIT ON THE PAGE. THIS SHOWS THAT MOST OF YOU ON HERE HAVE NOTHING BETTER TO DO THAN POINT OUT WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN POINTED OUT, JUST SO YOU CAN FEEL BETTER ABOUT YOURSELVES."

Thanks for the update Vader's son, and you bring up some good points WhiteFang, and Sinner. Honestly their whole "experiment" seems rather pointless it was obviously just going to create a rucess. What were they trying to prove though this research? That people get mad and act "immaturely" when someone posts pirated images, its human nature to step in, and try to fix the problem (in this case pirated images). Not to mention that a lot of MOCpagers are just children, so their not extremely mature like the students say everyone should be.

This whole experiment seemed rather immature as well: steal some images of good MOCs, wait for a few comments to come up (rather obvious what the comments will generally say), then post a conclusion (that IMO was rather rude), and then briefly apologize to a few people before continuing on with rather biased research (most people who commented on MOCs were likely young, and MOCpages is a Lego site many people are going to care about pirated MOCs, something the students failed to realize .

Edited April 24, 2008 by MacK

[Hinckley]

I honestly doubt it was an experiment as sociologist and social psychology students rarely berate their test subjects for their behavior when the experiment has concluded. And by rarely, I mean never.

[Siegfried]

I honestly doubt it was an experiment as sociologist and social psychology students rarely berate their test subjects for their behavior when the experiment has concluded. And by rarely, I mean never.

Spot on. I even contacted the University about it. Universities don't like their name being misused.

[Vaders_son]

So what did the University tell you?

None of those two students exist and there has never been a project similar to this one?

Dude, this kid is getting himself ever more deep into this stolen-mocs-thingy.

[Ralph_S]

So what did the University tell you?

None of those two students exist and there has never been a project similar to this one?

Dude, this kid is getting himself ever more deep into this stolen-mocs-thingy.

I read the same message on MOCPages. It's been up there for a few weeks. I don't believe the experiment explanation for one second and being rude in an apology obviously defeats its purpose. It's rubbish. All the copied photos of my MOCs have been removed. That's good enough for me.

Cheers,

Ralph

[Asuka]

(...)

WE GOT A LOT OF PUBLICITY FOR IT, WHICH SHOWS THAT PEOPLE ON HERE CAN'T IGNORE IT AND MOVE ON, LIKE ANY MATURE PERSON WOULD HAVE DONE, DUE TO THE PROBLEM HAVE BEING NOTICED AND THE OWNER'S NOTIFIED AND THE WEBSITE ADMIN.

(...)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. YOU HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN AN EXPERIMENT TO SEE HOW PEOPLE REACT TO CERTAIN CHANGES ON THE INTERNET. THE RESULTS WILL BE ANALYSED AND THEN DISPLAYED ON HERE IN A FEW DAYS.

(...)

Steven "Ste" Mason AND Joseph "Joe T" Thompson.

BRISTOL UNIVERSITY, WEST OF ENGLAND.

Stealing other persons work, presenting it online and claiming it as one´s own without giving any credit should be viewed as

some kind of CHANGE ON THE INTERNET..??

And, considering that suspicious statement, a MATURE way to react upon this should be simply ignoring the whole case without

commenting on it..??

That´s ridiculous and plain senseless.

And an obviously pretty feeble fraud.

[blueandwhite]

Bristol University clearly has no standards. The grammar and general sentence structure on that page is autrocious! If only more universities would discourage the use of proper sentences and promote the disgusting abuse of the caps lock key.

Bravo to Bristol!

[Ralph_S]

Bristol University clearly has no standards. The grammar and general sentence structure on that page is autrocious! If only more universities would discourage the use of proper sentences and promote the disgusting abuse of the caps lock key.

Bravo to Bristol!

Funnily enough there's a Bristol University and there's a University of Western England, located in Bristol. They're separate institutes. These guys claim to be from the Bristol University, West of England. Go figure. Do you really think that this has anything whatsoever to do with a university? I don't.

BTW, Bristol University is highly respected in the UK as well as internationally.

Cheers,

Ralph

[blueandwhite]

Funnily enough there's a Bristol University and there's a University of Western England, located in Bristol. They're separate institutes. These guys claim to be from the Bristol University, West of England. Go figure. Do you really think that this has anything whatsoever to do with a university? I don't.

BTW, Bristol University is highly respected in the UK as well as internationally.

Cheers,

Ralph

Clearly this is just a kid. First of all, no university would sanction such a bogus and frankly childish study. The fact that we have a disclaimer written (poorly at that) entirely in capital letters certainly doesn't make this very credible. As you undoubtedly guessed, my previous post was more than a bit sarcastic.

[Ralph_S]

Clearly this is just a kid. First of all, no university would sanction such a bogus and frankly childish study. The fact that we have a disclaimer written (poorly at that) entirely in capital letters certainly doesn't make this very credible. As you undoubtedly guessed, my previous post was more than a bit sarcastic.

Sorry mate. I didn't guess that, otherwise I would have written a rather different reply.

Cheers,

Ralph