What does the word “sharing” mean?
Some people think this means downloading/uploading but is this correct?
What are the results when people do not use the share function?
Why do some self-proclaimed “curators” download und upload (copy) to their own social media profiles/pages instead of using the share function?
The only reasonable explanation is that they want most advantages for themselves instead of letting the creators have the benefits.
The new Google+ Collections should be beneficial for a more altruistic sharing concept and not encourage download/uploading (copying) but some of these “curators” don’t use the share function to fill their collections. They continue to download the work of artists and upload it to their collections. What a shame even if they give credits to the creators because most social capital (views, followers and interaction) does not go to the creators but to the “curators” who therefore have very often high followers and views counts. No surprise, isn’t it?
In other networks like e.g. tumblr this kind of behaviour is not wanted. There is a special reporting function when download/upload was used instead of reblogging.
These “curators” simply refuse to use e.g. the 500px share function. They download the photos from there and reupload them e.g. to their Google+/Facebook profiles/pages. It would be so much better for the creators if a link to their 500px work was posted on the “curators” Google+/Facebook profiles/pages. The social capital (views/followers/interaction) would go to the photographers and no copies made.
On 500px you can now curate galleries and guess how that works … yes, you have to use the “add to gallery” function. Downloading and uploading to your own profile would be against TOS and 500px would ban you.
Too bad Google+ and Facebook let this download/uploading happen …