Humblegunner,
In full disclosure, I used to be a contributor to the site, but I have not in a long time (several months). I also don’t think I am a spammer, as read here way more than I post.
Are you familiar with Pinterest? If so then you should know that every image is back linked to the original source. While I agree that claiming another’s content as your own would be stealing, the model of Pinterest where users share pictures they find on the internet onto pin boards with links back to the original content is not stealing. From what I can tell each picture on this site links back to the original source where it was found. So in that vein it is essentially a Pinterest like site dedicated to anti-liberal pictures. This would be the same as creating a pin board on Pinterest and positing there right.
BTW, I doubt the content owners dislike the hits their site gets from back links from Pinterest, but if they did, they can always ask that the content be removed.
I appreciate your comments, and honest assessment. I wasn’t trying to cause a ruckus.
Cheers, Zantus
I note that you list yourself as the author of the content
in the thread header, and also that your blog is monetized.
On the first point, you are lying.
On the second point, you are using Free Republic to advertise.
Neither of those are particularly endearing traits.
Wouldn’t you agree?
Zantus -
I made my comments to Humblegunner based on his opinion about what he and I likely agree on, with respect to the theft without attribution of other peoples web content; without investigating if such is true with regard to the web site zpatriot.
I did not exhaust myself checking out every story and image on zpatriot.
Of the images I did investigate I did find, as you suggested, that a link for the Internet source of an image B$ it was posted on zpatriot is present in some form on zpatriot.
That means as far as zpatriot is concerned, it is honoring those links and not “stealing” the images for its own use.
I cannot say that holds true for every source zpatriot links back to; were/are THOSE sources EVER using purloined content or not.
However;
Using google image search, for three of the images: one seems to be an original source, and two eventually linked to flicker accounts. A possible problem is that both of those images at flicker say that their owners do not permit public downloading of the image, but that protection is turned off/or not applied at zpatriot and you are allowed to copy the images there. Then again, for all I know, the owner(s) of the flicker account(s)/source(s) MAY BE the one(s) who delivered the image(s) unprotected through the links to zpatriot, as google image search could find no other copies.
In conclusion, like you found, I found nothing unsavory about zpatriot’s posting of the images that I looked into - the links are there and seem to go back to what appears to be an original source.