Topic: Blokbro plagiarised Content , Roadmap and Whitepaper from LockNess.io (Read 1027 times)

As previously said, precisely because I had already talked about the project it was not correct to delete everything and redo from scratch. The fake programmer had access to the creation of the web page and the social promotion campaign that included advertising the project etc. Creating an ICO is not like asking for money, you are free to participate or not and if the minimum budget is not met, the sums of money are returned. So at the expense of asking for money and "running away" an ICO has the obligation to return the money if the minimum budget is not satisfied .. Here and in other social networks I have never pushed people to invest to buy BLKB so your statements do not they are correct. The images of the team and other errors were part of the site, in fact I noticed them after the ICO campaign ended where I asked the programmer for explanations and I fired him. the web page including the ICO phase was in the hands of the programmer and for my short time (I have a company to follow outside of this project) I realized these errors late. As mentioned earlier, I thought that the whole website was not yet officially published and I thought that the programmer had only activated the pre-ICO / ICO campaign at that stage. You are free to believe what you want, but that's how things went.

That is not entirely true. You promoted your pre-ICO/ICO token sale, both here and on other social media channels. It is the same as asking people for money.





Source: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100077819212475&sk=photos

Furthermore, at the time you began promoting your website here in February 2022 (as well on Twitter and other social networks), the fake team images were still part of the site. Your explanation that you were unaware of the "mess made by the fake programmer" is bullshit.

I'm sorry you're baffled but I'm not saying it wasn't worth the time and effort .. (1 year and a half of work I think that's not cheap) I just said that understanding address-based KYC is very delicate and it is not well seen by the communities and therefore recreating everything would have taken a lot of time, and since I am alone to carry on this belief, I did not think it was worth remaking a site, recreating a coin, etc. because I had already spoken of the project with many people and I would have lost more credibility to change everything and therefore I was forced to continue in this direction of changes ...., I reiterate that the concept of KYC on the address in the future will be necessary for a global adoption of cryptocurrencies and this is my belief. Another thing I have never asked people to invest their money or register on Blokbro, each person has to act with their own head and decide if it is a service that will be needed in the future. I honestly do not care that Blokbro (BLKB) makes an economic "boom" with speculation but I am interested in bringing greater security to transactions because knowing who you are sending cryptocurrencies to to buy something or for a simple exchange can only bring more security and transparency to transactions globally.

None of your arguments hold water. Throughout history we have seen numerous examples of different types of scams. Some are pulled off by professional fraudsters with almost flawless execution, while others are less professional and more ridiculous work of amateurs. The mere fact that you disclosed your identity does not necessarily imply your honest intentions. More often than not, scammers use fake personal information to give themselves credibility and to mislead their victims.


I am baffled by this. Why even start a project if you do not consider it worth putting your time and effort into it? That statement alone makes me think that this was just a failed attempt at quick money grab scheme, and not a serious undertaking. The point is, scam or no scam, it does not matter. Because if you (for whatever reason) do not consider a project a worthy challenge for you, you are better off doing something else and not wasting your time, or worse, asking people to invest their money in something you haven’t really figured out, or do not even care about.


This is completely irrelevant.

I understand your reasoning .. but I believe that a person who really wants to launch a bogus or scam project, first checks all the details without making mistakes, and second does not make changes repeatedly on the site because in this way he avoids leaving as few traces as possible .. another thing does not put its identity on the site ... I simply felt that for this small project it was enough to continue in this direction and see how people reacted because I know that the concept of KYC on the address is not well seen by the community and dedicate further time was not worth it. Regardless of the plagiarism and the mess made by the fake programmer, as I have always said, I'm not here to scam anyone and so much time to look for money. I wanted to see what the community thought. I have received a lot of criticism regarding the KYC on the address but I believe that in the future it will be necessary for the full adoption of crypto around the world. I remember that many people of a certain level in 2016/2017 (e.g. the CEO of binance) were completely opposed to the current KYC and had declared that they would never include it in their exchenge ... now instead we find that they have fully adopted it .

Maybe it was or would be to much work and you have done already to much for starting from scratch again.
You nearly have taking care of all details but a little misstake with the HTML files was the problem.
If you not have made this misstake i never would be found the plagiarism content.
And thats why we and a lot of Users are here that researching projects and investigate.

@holydarkness
Thanks for the great effort and Work

For the "plagiarism" issue and the whole debate, after a great clarification on your part, I admitted that what you say is right (I repeat my lawyer told me to clarify it, which I did). For point 2: I have not been able to realize why I do not dedicate my life only to this project, I have an activity to follow and many other work commitments. I asked this third person to build the site a certain way and we set a date for viewing. But he published the site and made the changes. when we got to the set date to view the result I discovered the whole mess. It is true what you say, I stated in my statements that I have mistakenly moved the HTML draft files, this is because when I discovered what happened I took the site off line and redone the work of the "fake" programmer .. in that situation he starts of his code mixed with mine. what was I supposed to do?! the name and the design and the token were already done .. what would you have done? I could have said at the beginning that a third person outside the team made trouble, but being the only person on the team it seemed obvious to me that mistakes had been made in moving files without blaming others not present in the site team. if I wanted to disguise and try to cheat people, I would have redone everything from zero taking care of every detail .. don't you think ?! I wanted to go on to see what people thought of this project of identification and verification of addresses .. but apparently, leaving out these messes, there is not much interest .. people prefer to be anonymous.

I think I have to agree that at this point it became a bit... useless to continue explaining the situation, but not because we will continue to point out how shady this project is --because, well, it is--, it's because you kept turning around, spinning words after words that I think you tripped yourself all around your own statements.

Let's put this straight --and hopefully bury it all--, correct me if I'm wrong, but so far, the narrative provided by you goes like this:

You built the BlokBro project back in 27 January 2022 according to the oldest record archived by wayackmachine. To build this project, according to this statement and further clarified with this one and this one, which I shall translate with google so everybody can comprehend the situation without much confusion, said as below:


Which is quite strange for a well certified lawyer working for a company to suggest as such, to file a defamatory case against a copyright violation because according to him, it is not violation because the original author never registered their work, quite strange that they didn't know how an author's right works, or what a prima facie of defamation requires to lock a case. Only after a huge effort to explain the situation to you that any author and any work of art --that includes web coding and publishing a paper-- automatically protected by law, worldwide, the "I rely on what he told me" became this,


Suddenly, all of those "as mentioned above and I rely on what he told me" --namely, the point of arguments made at least up to the statement was written: to file for defamation and get the authorities involved-- became "my lawyer did not tell me to continue" and you got down to the case, the whole regulatory article, three months period, authorities invoked, and such, by yourself.

check point number 1: the lawyer is now became Francesco Reboldi himself looking for a way to understand how to exercise his work, poorly if I may add, because I and Stalker22 could point out and educate ourselves about the automatic copyright protection with ease.

Rolling back a little bit, there is this fact of very supportive feedback that said you did a good work, one Italian, one Japanese-slash-Italian, and one your alt itself, which later found out to be... "people who work with you" and sympathize with your situation. It might be a fake feedback, or not, the jury is still... undecided about that --hint: sarcasm.

Now, moving further to the case. With the defamatory threat defused and the copyright-slash-plagiarism-slash-not-plagiarizing situation cleared, it is found that your site exercised fake team member. A further investigation I did told me that it's changed several times according to the 19 archives by waybackmachine, from seven to two, back to four, before ultimately goes into one and only Francesco Reboldi, not to mention the fake reviewers. When this facts unearthed, a statement followed:


Check point number 2: so does all the incident of accidentally copy pasted codes, things sitting atop of another, etc. happens because you're too busy working alone, not to mention having to contact LockNess by yourself to demand for the depository, or did you hire a third person who made a mess?

The lengthy narrative aside, one immense question appeared following the fact provided above: how could you failed to realize that "the third person" you hired were using fake profiles and reviews for your site? Seven months, I repeat, seven months, January to August since the site went live with the said fake details up to this day, at least seven months went with either (1) you didn't check your own website for at least 7 months --and we're not talking about small details like typo here, it's glaring, it's literally sitting in the middle of the pages, and changed quite often-- or (2) you know, you just let it happen because well... I'd like to say the word, but it'll trigger us back to the square one and I'll have to write another narrative that took me hours to write. And whichever your answer is --unless you can procure a third, unexpected and very surprising, reason for those seven months-- another question should be asked: why should anyone trust a project who had a motivation as stated on the answer for the previous question?

simply because I had commissioned the work of the web page to a third person paying for it. pity that the page published it immediately and I noticed some errors after a few months, just like the members of the team and other things that I went to correct. I think it is useless to continue explaining the situation, because you will continue to impute that it is a shady project and to continue to talk badly about it0. Everyone is free to think what they want.

BlokBro and his reactions have been a big red flag to me but that his project is really that shady, where he made up fake team members, I'm even a little bit surprised.
Good work for presenting the evidence here about BlokBro's shady business.


Maybe your team members like Mr. Adams Howard were fired because they didn't show up for work? 


Why your former colleague didn't show up in your list of team members?

As for the company, it is my company .. and I honestly don't know who used the e-mail .. maybe one of our collaborators who works in the office who is interested in the Blokbro project with whom I talked about "Plagiarism". I have talked and discussed with people and I am not surprised that someone has signed up to support me .. this does not imply that I have created the accounts. As for the team I am the only member as you can see from the website .. My website is completely different as you can see, ... but the timestamp of the page shows that there have been changes in the past. However, the programming behind the platform's functionality I managed and built, while the pagian web you found was handled by a third person who made that mess (and this is where the file modification occurred causing the plagiarism ) when I understood what he was up to, I proceeded to modify the site and dissociate myself from that person. When you take control of another person's casino this happens.

Wow, ok, I'll definitely tag this guy. I didn't know we have an archived page of his, so I didn't know that the original content was altered. Anyway, I can answer that question about what happened to the team. He removed them because they're... "plagiarized".

Here's our Mr. Adams Howard, who apparently is better known as Ashish Pradhan the president of Siegwerk India, as published by The Economic Times



And our Ms. Grace Wood, I don't know who her real name is, but apparently she's a model, her image can be found on many sites, like this one for example.



I didn't put much effort to dig for Mr. Kajana as it is rather pointless, we've enough proof that the team is fake.

Now, moving to their reviewers,

https://arizonaexplore.com/category/grand-canyon-grid/





https://www.teatro.it/spettacoli/pontedera/era/2018-2019/poco-piu-che-persone-il-figlio

BlokBro, anything you want to add?

I don't need an IP address to tell that the accounts belong to the same person, whose motives here are not honest. Besides, most people here use Tor all the time.

But it's sad that those that claim to show their identity in order to ensure that they are real and more credible are the very ones carrying out shady practices more than the anonymous ones.

Nice catch! it's a shame that i didn't have enough smerits.

@BlokBro, you have already admitted that metalcecco is your alt account. You used it to post fake positive reviews on your project and to oppose the raised flag. So why are you still arguing?

But here is a new topic we can talk about. What happened to your team? Looks like you are the only one left.


archived

---

What a dumbass, lol. Nice find @holydarkness!

Yeah, about that... there is a teeny weeny details that igeble07 --or dare I say... you?-- forgot to omit: his email info. I have the archive here and here, but unfortunately web archiver can only log in as a guest on this forum --duhh-- and thus, the said information is protected by the forum. So, a screenshot should do. I've deliberately mark the forum timestamp, just to... add a little eligibility of the evidence.

.

About why an account who wrote a trust feedback in Japanese characters --I think it's hiragana, but I'm not a Japanese expert here-- actually registered under an italian email address, or if I may turn the situation, "why an italian registered email address wrote a feedback in Japanese instead of their own language?", is beyond my comprehension. I can only wonder if this is the same reason with uhh... certain someone who uses google translate to speak German.

But this is where things getting more interesting. You see, the email address used by igeble07 came from reboldimario[dot]it, the same detail for contact info also listed officially by reboldimario[dot]it, so it's kinda safe to say igeble07 really works on that company and have access to their email.



Now, it's been established here that metalcecco real name is Francesco Reboldi, and combing through the site, I found Francesco!



I don't know what's your opinion about this, but I personally think it is a good enough evidence to say that igeble07 at least works for you, if they're not you yourself.

As for Ylli, (un)fortunately he hide his email address from public, but seeing how: (1) he wrote in Italian, (2) his account was created only to write the feedback and gone inactive right after, with a, (3)creation date that's awfully close to igeble07, and how (4) above evidences heavily implies that igeble07 is related to you and (5) metalcecco is you writing a very positive and supportive feedback to yourself in way that took pretense that they're two different people, would it be too far fetched to think that he is also you, err... I mean your employee?

if that is the evidence proving that all those accounts are mine, sorry but I really think those are not acceptable evidence for proof. You should have proof that those accounts created them myself or that at least they come from the same IP. For the issue of plagiarism, it is right to have demonstrated and told the community about the fact, but we should also listen to the motivation that in my case was a mistake (I repeat, just show it to the public). it is true it is not a bank and it is a simple forum .. but I believe that showing the identity would ensure that people are real and more credible (this is what I think). If for you your evidence that I have all those accounts is enough for you to tell the world that they are mine, well do it people will evaluate these things, I repeat that they are not mine.

And it was as well-used to oppose a flag which you don't disagree with… I would have loved if you completed the sentence, like that. Tell me this is not manipulation and untrustworthy behaviour

Are you willing to do KYC? Lol
I don't need to look any further. @Stalker22 and I have already shown you the patterns involving your accounts and the manipulations on top of attempting to plagiarize content of another project

Why would I have to? This is a forum, not a fuckin' Bank or centralized exchange.
Wanna take advantage of doxxing me for exposing scam?

no, I repeat that metalceco is my only private account. prove that the other accesses are related to me otherwise you are making senseless accusations. It just seems ruthless. showing your identity is proof that you have nothing to hide and that you are not afraid to show yourself even if you discuss certain things ... I'm referring to you but in general).

Having alts in the forum is allowed. What is not accepted is trying to game the trust system using them, and you just did that. What you did is yet another form of proof showing how deceitful and untrustworthy you are.

You are the one being childish here. Stop plagiarizing content from other projects, gaming the trusts system and blaming it on other people.

No, dumbass. Everything is evident from your profile. These are facts not fiction.




https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=3441107

What does my identity have to do with this? I am not the one trying to scam and deceive potential investors.

Congratulations .. nice evidence based on fantasy, from you who do not even show your identity (turning a bit in this platform it seems that no one shows the true identity .. but what fear are you?! I thought this platform was on another level ) ... I'm not here to discredit you, indeed it's nice to accuse a project without evidence as in the case you are citing. So I'm a scammer, shady, deceitful, I just miss being a multiple murderer and I win the jackpot ... in fantasy anything can happen.

No, it is not a strange way of thinking. You think people here are stupid?

There is no question that these accounts were created solely for the purpose of shilling for your project. Regardless of whether they are your alts or you hired them, you clearly tried to game the system and mislead the community. The use of alt accounts to give positive trust and oppose the flag against you is called trust abuse and clearly violates the established community standards.

As logfiles said, this is another reason not to trust you and your shady project.

The whole debate for the term "plagiarism" is clear to me. What you are saying is not clear to me. metalcecco is my private and personal account (opened 3 years ago to seek help with the theft of BTC that I suffered through the support of Bittrex ...) The Blokbro registration is done on the project (I don't see where the problem is to have a 'private and public accout ... I also have them for both private and commercial social networks) This thing has already been said in the previous comments. the others should be users who follow me to whom I talked about this fact .. with your thoughts if they write other 5 or 10 people you will attribute these accounts to me .. Strange way of thinking.
To be precise, I am not deceiving anyone and I have explained everything clearly, this way of discrediting and continuing to say that a shady project is rather childish.

igeble07
Date Registered:    August 04, 2022, 03:57:56 PM
Last Active:    August 04, 2022, 04:30:17 PM

Ylli
Date Registered:    August 03, 2022, 07:50:15 AM
Last Active:    August 04, 2022, 07:54:12 AM

metalcecco
Date Registered:    March 07, 2017, 04:42:27 AM
Last Active:    August 04, 2022, 04:36:00 PM

Even a blind man can see that these are Blokbro's sockpuppet shill accounts

He's trying to game the trust system, too. More reason not to trust Blokbro and his shady project

@Stalker22 and @holydarkness

Thanks for explaining the whole thing in this case on a different way and more understandable for him.
I dont consider to raise a defamation case against him even he turning things around.
There is and never was a defamation from my side to him or to his project .
Really appreciate the work here of you both , thank you.

@BlokBro

I also have never spoken bad of you or have written something , also i havnt written that you scammed somebody or that it is your intention.
The purpose of this board is that you write here things , that normaly others have not seen or know about a project when there are some signs.
Also the rules of the Forum are to write such things here in this board and not somewhere else.
If you looking at other cases and threads and there titles i havnt insert the word Scam.
About the copyright thing it is as holydarkness have written , and in this case we dont talking about a copyright registrations.
And i know that your project and Lockness are different services projects , and this dosnt matter here.

Its stil the Fact that you used a Work from a other person and project without permission to use it , you even dont have mentioned a source link where you got it.
It was your one fault that you forgot to change the copied HTML text or file from Lockness, you have admitted that and approved that you have used some things from Lockness.
And this is plagiarism you made maybe accidentally , but it stil is it.

holydarkness, although you wasted a lot of perfectly good words on this case, I think you nailed it! 

I just wanted to add my thoughts on this:

Last time I checked, Italy was still a member of the European Union, so for all intents and purposes, I believe this applies:


You seem to be shifting your arguments a bit here, don't you? The common sense in this case is that you cannot just take someone else's work and present it as your own. But I bet that you knew this all along, so all this discussion was unnecessary.

For clarification The term accusation is known to me but the term "scam" is a scam for profit ... alchè I'm not doing a scam to earn. as said the day after the publication, I apologized to Lafu both privately and publicly, also premising that there was an error in the publication of the files. With Lockness I had already apologized and in that case I asked for the copyright document without having any answer. Given that my lawyer did not tell me to continue but to clarify how I am, it is I who want to understand the right ... and rightly so if I find myself with a person who tells me one thing and you what about another I believe that it is interesting to understand what the right point of view is. In my case I had to file the copyright with the patent office because the system underlying the application that I created I wanted it to be patented, and I honestly thought that the copyright was based on this and that if it had not been filed (as fact from me) this right could not be applied (and here I thought that the word "Plagiarism" was not correct because it was connected to it). I have noticed that this thing varies from country to country, and it is true as you say in this case it is automatically protected by the copyright laws of the United States. (your explanation is exemplary to the detriment of others)

That said, clarifying the aforementioned word "plagiarism" whether or not it is correct in its use is not at all discrediting Lafu. I explicitly told Lafu that from my point of view he did not investigate and that in my opinion if he had analyzed the 2 projects he would have noticed that they are completely different and that therefore there was something strange. If he had then asked me why the similarity of certain things, which are not fully part of my project, I would have analyzed and confirmed the mistake without causing such chaos. I'm a beginner). but I understand this is the way we work here and I'm not here to dictate laws. As for Lockness, as mentioned before, I had already given the excuses and reasons for this fact and then fixed all the errors.

If Lafu claims he was discredited, that wasn't my intention ... and in your opinion, my project and I have not been offended, humiliated and discredited in public ?! Why is it that if a person claims otherwise she must be humiliated and offended? here too it is defamation ..

I like your argument and congratulate you on your work, but I would like people to understand that common sense often prevails over many things.

Uhh... sorry, what? Oh, yeah, sure. Always glad to be polite whenever I can. May I use this occasion to compliment your comprehension skill too?

Moving to the topic, let me answer your in-between-the-topic question first, as this is the easiest and the most obvious:


Please read the board title carefully, several times if needed. The board called, in case you still failed to realize, scam accusations. Keyword: "accusations". If I may use the broad term given by wikipedia --as you seems to love this encyclopedia so much:


Let's summarize the situation based on your point of view: Lafu accuses you of plagiarism, which you consider equal to a copyright infringement, and thus --in your opinion-- is not correct, borderline wrongful, because you've contacted the original author, LockNess, and they couldn't provide you the depository of the copyright for said document and/or written content, thus the said work is not copyrighted, and thus you should be free to copy them. Ultimately, these series of events, according to your lawyer, it is not correct and deserve a lawsuit for defamation.

Am I correct so far?

Lets continue, if we may further condense the situation, it goes to: LockNess did not register their work, so there's no copyright infringement, anything that or anyone who said otherwise --you plagiarize/stole copyrighted property-- is wrong.

I have to be the bringer of bad news, but allow me to let you familiarize yourself with the fact that there is this rule that said upon being published, a content owner automatically get their work protected by copyright. I am not sure with how it goes in Italy, but I know a lot of --if not most, or even every-- countries apply this rule.



And no, it is not limited to published papers, a website content are also automatically protected once it is published, and that nice "©" symbol is just a nail to the coffin, the unequivocal proof that the plagiat --that's you-- are completely aware that the material they're about to copy is protected --automatically.


Honestly, I'm curious how your lawyer didn't know or didn't explain these matters to you; worse, they suggested and encouraged you the exact opposite. This rule is pretty much known and drilled to students of higher education --during associate, bachelor, master, and doctorate-- to help them wrote a good and "legal" paper.

Now, one question is still left unanswered: wheth Lafu should sue you for defamation, based on your accusation that he didn't check facts before publishing this accusation, which leads to a case where you tainted his reputation. And another question seems to raise: whether Lock.Ness should sue you as well, for a blatant proof of copyright infringement.

Please share us your lawyer's insight regarding this.

Finally someone who speaks politely. Regarding point 1: I argue that plagiarism is a work reproduced in whole or in part and its authorship (authorship indicates the appropriation of the work and this is sustainable through copyright) is erroneously attributed to others and not to the author and therefore having violated the copyright, the term Plagio can be used (source: https://www.sba.unimi.it/Strumenti/17608.html#:~:text=In%20base%20to%20regulatory%20current,Settimio%20Paolo%20Cavalli%2C%20Alberto%20Pojaghi). In my case I have not violated copyright because it does not exist, so point 1 would be sustainable
Regulatory requirements: "
Plagiarism is a case considered in the context of copyright, although it is not explicitly mentioned in Law 633/1941 (PDF document Law on copyright) "source: https://www.sba.unimi.it/Tools/17608.html#:~:text=In%20base%20to%20regulatory%20registration,Settimio%20Paolo%20Cavalli%2C%20Alberto%20Pojaghi.
In my case I have not violated anything because from my investigations the copyright of Lockness.io does not exist and therefore the term plagiarism is not correct.

I am also waiting for an answer to the article section:
Why am I in the scam section? if you don't show the facts that it's a scam, that's wrong too.

So if I can, even from my point of view there are many things that are not right and are unjustly thrown against my project .. or am I wrong?
I understand the work that Lafu has done and in part it is to be admired (I never said that he has not done any work), but I think his research was light and not thorough .. I believe (this is my point of view) that he used a software that determined the same words in another site, when he saw that certain writings were the same as now he has made the statement. also from my point of view, she did not check that the projects were the same (and they are not) and she did not check the copyrights. That said, I never said Lafu didn't do any work. The Blokbro project and application is completely different from Lockneess.io and what was reported in certain parts of the Whitepaper and the roadmap could not be attributed to Blokbro because they are completely different, the next day I apologized both privately with him that publicly and I admitted that I encountered an error posting parts of HTML files (precise the lockness formats are in .Jpeg or .png format for the roadmap and in .PDF for the whitepaper ... I created the HTML + css + javascript files and to get an idea of the layout, error my leaving a draft part in the final code). do you really believe that for small pieces of text, mistakenly left, they helped me on the development of the project ?! The whole data identification and security application, that's very complicated, and the whole system I created was very complex. Certainly not 2 written in HTML. Lafu did not check the functionality of the project, he instead (I believe) took parts of my site and subjected them to a control with a software or with microsoft Edge which in turn gave him the same contents of Lockness .. when he saw this then he analyzed the page without investigating whether the sites in question had the copyright deposited and that the projects were the same (in my case it is and I also gave him the access credentials without him asking me beforehand If he had understood these things he would have also understood that I have nothing to hide. if I wanted to be "shady" as they defined me, do you really think that I would put the data of the project and my data associated with it in the profile? I think a little common sense would have made everything less complex.
Moreover, as they defined me with the term "shady", if I were really shady I would not put my data and the whole website in the profile that shows all the associated data and in this case I have nothing to hide. while (it is not a criticism because this site allows it) the users who are discussing with me do not report their data. why?! I repeat the Bitcointalk site allows it and that's fine ... but from my point of view if you want to be more credible and support your motivations, showing who you are makes you more credible.

I have never spoken badly of Lafu and other users, while they have reputed me with many adjectives both me and the project .. and from this point of view they come out much more brilliant while I sink .. I'm not here to determine this. discussing, as in these cases, does not cloud Lafu but rather makes people grow.
So if I support my thinking about "plagiarism" and you support yours, who is right? it's not a question of compensation or anything, but what's the right point ?!. Having a lawyer in the company I asked him and quickly explained all this and his answer and as mentioned above and I rely on what he told me. you define plagiarism when the work is associated with someone else and not the author (the author is defined as the one who has copyright) I believe that informing the public in the correct way, and not because you are a legendary or master user, appreciated by the Bitcointalk audience. So how do we solve all of this? what I asked was to simply remove this page.

A little late to join as I get into this tread and have been wanting to comment on it since you posted this, but I got some on my plates that needs to be done. Apology for the delay, but without furter ado, may I suggest you to perhaps reconsider your "lawyer"? I don't think they know exactly what to do or what basis they can use, so instead they just throw random things at you... of course, I am assuming these lawyers are real people and firms and not just you googling some things.

I've nicely highlighted some critical point you raised as the basis of your threat to file a defamation complaint.

First, let's refer to this article published by a well-known law firm, just to make sure all of us here are on the same page, given recently, there are a lot of caught plagiat and scammers trying to get back by throwing these "we will sue you" threat, I think we need to be sure --well, at least I need to be sure-- if it is really applicable


Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but although you meet the other three condition to file a defamation complain, the first and foremost point to build the case is not met, and thus everything became obsolete. In order to prove a first look of defamation, it is need to be proven that the accusation is wrong, --e.g. Lafu spread false and baseless information that I stole 1M BTC from him while I actually never did, for this case, I might have a chance to build a defamatory case against him. In your case though, everything he said is true, namely you copied and plagiarize a content from someone else, so, all he said is fact and not a false statement. Again, as Stalker22 repetitively pointed out, the case is not a copyright infringement, it is a simple plagiarism. I don't think I need to join his effort to explain to you what the differences are, he explained good enough, and how you still persist that it is exclusively synonymous is well, beyond my comprehension. Lafu accuses you of plagiarizing someone's work, and indeed you are, how is it a defamation if what he said is true?

Second, let's assume for a sec that you somehow had a chance to build a case, on which country shall you build and have your court? In your country, Italy? Or is it on Lafu's --I assume Germany--? Are you sure the law on said country complies with what you build? And to what address shall the summoning order be addressed to? The court needs to made it known to the defendant that there is a case against them, and far as I know, you're the one who need to supply the details of the suspect. You somehow have Lafu's home address in your pocket? Please don't tell me your lawyer suggest you to address "Lafu, a member of bitcointalk, wherever he actually stays".

And the very last, the mundane thing, Lafu actually did some work of checking the information, how else do you think he knew you plagiarized a content if he didn't check past works of someone else? How you failed to see this simple thing and "accuse" him of not doing any work is beyond me. Perhaps Lafu should consider to raise a defamation case against you as you wrongfully made fake statement that he didn't di any work, made the said statement public, and you caused him a tarnished reputation as people will now think he didn't do enough work. Oh look at that, he actually has all the four points against you.

First, show me where I called you an idiot?
I called you a dumbass, dumbass! There is a difference. Idiot is a person of low general intelligence (a medical condition) while dumbass is slang for a stupid or foolish person. [source] Although, you are exhibiting some symptoms of moral idiocy.


No, you are wrong! For the nth time, plagiarism IS NOT the same as copyright infringement. You are accused of plagiarism, not copyright infringement. You took parts of someone else's work and published it as your own without attributing the original author. This is plagiarism by definition.


Take another look at this quote (which, by the way, you took without citing the source, so it is plagiarism again) and apply it to your case. Or, better yet, ask someone to translate it for you, because you obviously have difficulty understanding English words. Dumbass!

Thanks for the heads-up. I am going to tag and flag all his alts, and we see how he will try to trick newbies into believing his fake project that's created by plagiarizing content from other projects. BlokBro is one of the dumbest people I have come across lately.

Imagine stealing content from another project and continuing to claim that it's not plagiarism after being exposed.

First, be careful with the words "idiot", I have never offended anyone. I repeat metalcecco is my private account, Blokbro represents the project and the whole community (I don't understand where the concept is not clear to you and I don't understand the problem) The word "plagiarism" is referred to in conjunction with the violation of the Copyrhigt ... precisely we are talking that I have not committed copyright infringement and therefore this word "Plagiarism" cannot be used because it is related to copyright infringement. "Plagiarism - plagiarism occurs when a work is reproduced in whole or in part and its authorship is wrongly attributed to others and not to the author". So you are accusing it of plagiarism that it is not, and you are publicly defaming it causing a lot of damage .. also whoever exposed this article has inserted it in "accusation of scam" and here is another problem because the Blokbro project is not a scam ( if it is a scam you have to prove it by being concrete).
source : https://www.sba.unimi.it/Strumenti/17608.html#:~:text=In%20base%20alla%20normativa%20vigente,Settimio%20Paolo%20Cavalli%2C%20Alberto%20Pojaghi.

It is still pretty clear that you do not understand what plagiarism is, and even with Wikipedia you cannot comprehend the concept.
As I said before, plagiarism is not the same as copyright infringement, and since you like to quote wikipedia, here is a quote for you:


Dumbass! 

Metalcecco belongs to me personally while Blokbro is from the company that I am CEO and I also represent my community ... the other authors can be parts of my community that I spoke to. When I wrote in German it is because first the form was in the German section, then they moved it and I didn't notice it. Plagiarism is the violation of copyrhigt. A work or website is required to specify whether it is copyrighted and if it is copyrighted, anyone can ask for access to the document that must be deposited. "With the term plagiarism (or piracy), IN COPYRIGHT, we refer to the appropriation, through total or partial copying, of the authorship of a work of the genius of others. The term derives from the Latin plagium (reduction into slavery or theft of someone else's slave) [1] and in this meaning it is reflected in the English plagiarism and in the French and German Plagiat. " (source: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagio_(diritto_d%27author) in this case the copyright is not deposited, anyone can use information and photos of the site and no one can say that it is plagiarism. Defamation, on the other hand , occurs when someone publicly comments on untrue facts or offends or causes damage to the company or person. In this case Lafu, without checking this information and without listening to my reason for error, points to the fact of plagiarism by writing it publicly, also causing damage to my project. I am not here to ask for damages on the project (although I could) but I am here to make you think about this fact and I ask for the removal of the article. I have 3 months to file a complaint and have the authorities intervene, but I believe that the matter can be resolved without this.Thank you for your attention

paglioccio? Is that Italian for clown? Yes, I would say the word fits the description.
By the way, why were you pretending to speak German before? It is obvious that German is not your native language.


Incorrect. No work is in the public domain unless the owner explicitly declares it to be in the public domain. Explicitly! By the way, plagiarism is not the same as copyright infringement. Do some research before you write such nonsense.


Hahahaha! Thats a joke right? Good luck with that.  

---

EDIT:
User metalcecco woke up after 3 years of inactivity to post this in the BlokBro ANN thread but deleted the post shortly after. It is worth mentioning that he was active mostly in the Italian local before. Two other members opposing the flag (besides BlokBro and his alt metalcecco) registered today and have zero forum activity. Quite clever, I must say.  

---

EDIT 2:


BlokBro's name is also Francesco as can be seen from his screenshot here and also, @Framcesco83 is the CEO of BlockBro and owner of the telegram group https://t.me/BLKB_Blokbro. Coincidence?

you see that you do not understand ... you can write that I am a paglioccio, that the project is senseless and other things ... but you cannot write "Blokbro plagiarized some Content, nearly the same Roadmap and few things from the Whitepaper from LockNess" because precisely the copyright is not there (I also reiterate the mistake made when creating my HTML draft files as already explained above). Like it or not, this is defamation against me and my project because you published that I plagiarized another website that does not hold copyright and you would be punishable by the law article 595 of the criminal code (simple defamation can be punished with a maximum of one fine, aggravated defamation is punished with imprisonment from six months to three years or with a fine of not less than 516 euros.
Social defamation is particularly serious because the offense can be read by an indefinite number of people. The same fate would happen for the editor-in-chief and the author of a defamatory article published in an online newspaper. Outraging someone on social media is like doing it in a public place, in front of everyone.) First you had to make sure that the Lockness site had a copyright. I don't want to get to this, I have already asked moderator Cyrus to delete the page for the good of both of us. but currently I have not yet received an answer from him. I will wait until 08/08/2022 after this deadline if the page is still online I will go to the police station and file a complaint with the authorities. I believe you now have a big picture of the whole thing.

I guess you both dont get it.
I dont care or it dosnt matter if the copyright is or was deposited or not .
Its a fact that you used the work from somebody else without an source link to it , even you made a misstake with HTML files.
So i think its useless to explain that its plagiarism for using others work as yours , its not my fault what you have done .

The Copiright must be deposited. Lockness entered the word in the Food .. they did not deposit anything. The code I used was to get an idea for the page leyaut .. that said, you can check the whole site .. it's genuine.

Add: If you take a good look at things you will notice that Lockeness's Whiterpaper is in PDF. so stop talking nonsense, I have not copied and pasted the HTML files .. those I created and used as a draft of the Layout while I was creating the site .. accidentally there are parts left as already explained above
Conversation with Lockness, see photos
https://i.imgur.com/2tI97J6.jpg

There is too much fury towards Blokbro. Blokbro confirmed the error due to bad handling of HTML files .. evaluating the facts his site is completely different and is operating with the utmost transparency. I also received copyright access and it is deposited. His intentions are good.

Thats interesting , so you copy and pasted there HTML code also and forgot about to change the text .
Its getting better and better , and Lockness have the copyright as they puplished there things first and i guess you havnt asked them if you can use it.
I think if i digg more into that i will find some other things maybe also from other pages or projects.
And im acting right and i am right that you have done plagiarism without the permission for use it.

Translated:
Not only layout ideas .
Its just sad and shady.

I don't even know why he's using German because he's using Google Translate. Or at least his German is so broken that it looks like Google Translate. Even Google Translate is better.
Blokbro is a waste of time. -_-

---

As Lafu already said it doesn't matter if Lokness.io is a crap site or even a fraud site. Plagiarism is when you are copying content from someone else. Could be a scammer, could be a criminal, could ba a clown. Doesn't matter. Read the rules!

Regarding your negative trust: I've submitted a negative trust for your childish reaction. Defaming people here just because you get critical questions is a big red flag.
And you are continuing your bullshit:



I've never mentioned anything about a lawsuit, stop making up fake claims!
That's clearly a trust abuse!

And stop sending me PM's!
The flaws of Lockness are not related to your wrongdoings here.

Mr Blokbro, you are wasting time replying and sending me PMs in German Language. Just so you know, I haven't even bothered to google translate any of the texts, as it seems a waste of time. It's like you speaking to a log.

I admitted that there was an error in the handling of HTML files .. more than admit this I don't know what to say. Locknes has no copyright deposited, accusing me of plagiarism you are acting incorrectly and defamatory punishable by law.
Negative scores no longer interest me ... you are slandering me unfairly.

@BlokBro

We are here not in the german local board and you have to write in english here , thats the first.
Next thing is , it dosnt matter if you searching now for the copyright or anything else because you used there content and work for yours.
Thats the fact and this is like cheating to make you work better and everybody should think that its your one work.
At least you admitted your misstake and plagiarism , but only after a few posts .

Für den Fall Locknes.io recherchiere ich ein bisschen und ehrlich gesagt, eine Seite, die nicht einmal die Annahme von Cookies und ausreichende Informationen darüber hat, ist sehr verdächtig und vor allem bereits strafbar. Darüber hinaus impliziert die neue Richtlinie nicht nur die Information der Cookies und des Zustimmungs-Buttons, sondern auch den Ablehnungs-Button, wodurch die Website jedoch trotzdem mit Einschränkungen funktioniert (ich arbeite daran, den Ablehnungs-Button einzufügen). Lockness.io hat nichts. Auch Lockness fehlt der Datenschutz- und Richtlinienlink. Dieses Dokument ist OBLIGATORISCH und ihre Geschäftsbedingungen sind sehr verdächtig.
Vor 1 Jahr nahm ich Layout-Ideen von Locknes und erstellte Entwürfe in HTML, um Ideen zu bekommen. Dann passierte mein Fehler mit dem HTML-Code

Ich füge hinzu: Ich untersuche ihr Urheberrecht ... Wenn die oben genannten Dokumente fehlen, bezweifle ich, dass sie das Urheberrecht eingereicht haben ... Ich werde Sie auf dem Laufenden halten

Wie gesagt, das Plagiat, das auf einer Whitepaper-Seite und einer Roadmap aufgetreten ist, ist auf meinen Fehler bei der Erstellung der HTML-Seite zurückzuführen. Wenn ich hätte plagiieren wollen, hätte ich alles kopiert und Blokbro mit der gleichen Funktionalität gebaut wie ... stattdessen, nützlich oder nicht, das Blokbro-Projekt ist einzigartig. Loknes führt keine Identitätsprüfungen an zertifizierten Adressen durch ... tatsächlich funktionieren ihr Whitepaper und ihre Zusammenfassung nicht in Blokbro. Selbst wenn ich jemanden täuschen wollte, würde ich meine Kontakte nicht in den Website-Header einfügen. Gehen Sie zum Abschnitt HTTPS: //blokbro.com/idaddress und geben Sie in das Suchfeld „Francesco Reboldi“ ein. Sie sehen meine VOLLSTÄNDIGEN Bestätigungsdetails (nur Vor- und Nachname können angezeigt werden). Machen Sie Ihre Nachforschungen und Sie werden sehen, dass ich echt bin. Ich habe nichts zu verbergen und ich bin nicht hier, um jemanden zu täuschen. Blokbro ist auch urheberrechtlich geschützt, ich habe Ihnen die Anmeldeinformationen dafür geschickt, wenn ich jemanden täuschen wollte, hätte ich das Urheberrecht nicht angemeldet ... Ich habe mich voll und ganz auf die gesamte Identitätsprüfung, Fragmentierung und Verschlüsselung der Prüfdaten für das Maximum konzentriert Sicherheitsgarantie und ich habe die HTML-Entwürfe nicht mehr durch die Originaldateien ersetzt. Dieser Fehler ist darauf zurückzuführen, dass ich alleine an der Programmierphase arbeite. Sagen Sie mir die Beweise, die ich Ihnen zeigen muss, um all diese Irrtümer aufzuklären. Vielen Dank

All the “concrete evidence” is in the OP. What else do you need us to prove here?

You plagiarized web content, you plagiarized the white paper, you plagiarized even the roadmap… and you think we are going to believe that you have good intentions here? Who does that?

Nachdem Sie den Fall überprüft haben, können Sie die negative Bewertung überdenken. Danke

Ich bin hier, um mich für mein exzessives und hartnäckiges Verhalten gestern zu entschuldigen ... Ich habe mich nur auf die Art und Weise konzentriert, wie Sie mich beschuldigt haben, und nicht auf viele Details, Entschuldigung. Die Anschuldigung von gestern ist richtig ... heute habe ich meinen unbeabsichtigten Fehler angesehen, und das war er dass ich, als ich an den ersten Entwürfen des Blokbro-Projekts arbeitete, einige Leyaut-Ideen anderer Krypto-Projekte verdrängte, indem ich Teile kopierte, um eine Idee zu bekommen. Als wir mit der Veröffentlichung des Codes fortfuhren, wurde ein Teil des Entwurfs-HTML-Codes auf den endgültigen Code gelegt, was zu dieser Katastrophe führte ... tatsächlich ist das Whitepaper nicht vollständig geklont, sondern nur 1 Seite und die Roadmap nur teilweise geschrieben. Ich habe bereits eine Reparatur veranlasst. Danke und nochmals Entschuldigung

Danke, aber mein Geschäftsmodell bleibt so. Einen Dienst anzubieten, der in der Zukunft dienen kann, ist bereits ein guter Anfang ... vielleicht wird er eines Tages abheben. Danke für alles .

Because it's shady business!

That's a good start but since Bitcointalk is very privacy oriented and against shitcoins, you should re-consider your business model.

And you are in the international part of the forum here! 

Es ist keine Warnung. es ist eine Behauptung, nicht einmal mit Blokbro in Kontakt zu treten. und es ist logisch, dass Sie Menschen mit einer hohen Anzahl von Zustimmungen sind, während ich mit "0" auf Sie hören werde. Was Sie sagen, um einen Gewinn in der Protokolldatei zuzuweisen, weiß ich nicht, was das bedeutet ... trotzdem danke für alles, und das Projekt scheint auch nutzlos zu sein ... aber darum geht es nicht. Nach anderthalb Arbeit mit vielen Opfern ist es nicht schön, für das abgestempelt zu werden, was man nicht ist ... danke für alles

update. Ich werde die beschuldigten Teile reparieren, die geklont zu sein scheinen.

Read it again, it's a warning against doing business with you due to concrete red flags.
If you think, you are right, you should have no problem scoring a win for opposing logfile's flag...

Hier https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3014 lautet der Vorwurf Betrug. aber es ist nicht.

Danke für alles.

You are presenting your shady business here and have plagiarized a whitepaper, so people will ask critical questions. 
What do you expect?


You haven't written your whitepaper "in a similar way", you have copy pasted parts of it. 


Nobody has banned you but you should provide some evidence why your service is trustworthy (and useful).
You can't because it's shady business (useless AND bad for privacy).


LOL, where did I call you a SCAMPER (you mean scammer)
 

---

Stop threatening me!
Quit your bullshit!
I just asked legitimate questions and you are getting completely mad at me?

Now, you've earned a negative trust from me as well!!

---

Doesn't matter where it's from, it's still plagiarism. You can plagiarize from a Greek restaurant for your shady business, it's still plagiarism... 


And it's international board here... 

Der Mangel an Beweisen, den ich meine, liegt an den Behauptungen, ich sei ein Betrüger ... Sie können schreiben, dass ich einige Teile plagiiert habe, und fragen, warum Teile auf sehr ähnliche Weise geschrieben sind, bevor Sie gesperrt werden (in diesem Fall würde ich habe Ihnen 100 Punkte richtig gegeben %) und in diesem Fall hätte ich einige Nachforschungen darüber angestellt, was ich getan habe, und vielleicht stimme ich Ihnen zu. stattdessen hast du mich als SCAMPER denunziert .. ooooo Ich kann dich nehmen und wegen Verleumdung vor Gericht bringen !! (Auch hier ist das Copyright hinterlegt. Ich habe die Anmeldeinformationen an @logfiles und @mole0815 geschickt, um sie einzusehen.) Außerdem weiß ich nicht, wo das Problem liegt, ein Konzept oder ein Projekt zu schreiben. Das Geld, um es zu gründen, $ 9200, wurde bereits ausgegeben und die Plattform wurde erstellt ... Ich wiederhole, ich bin nicht hier, um nach Geld zu fragen (um die Grundlagen für die verifizierte Adresse zu erhalten, benötigen Sie weniger als 1 US-Dollar ... seien wir ehrlich, ich werde es nicht bekommen reich an diesem Betrag ... wenn Sie es analysieren, werden Sie verstehen, dass es dazu dient, zu überprüfen, ob Sie wirklich der Eigentümer der Adresse sind, ohne Sie nach vertraulichen Informationen zu fragen.) Ich glaube, Sie sind mit ungenauen Aussagen viel weiter gegangen. Das können Sie auch zugeben. Ich bitte Sie, die Anschuldigungen, die Sie gegen mich erhoben haben, noch einmal zu prüfen. Francesco Reboldi

Update: Update: Ich füge hinzu, dass Loknees.io einen völlig anderen Dienst als Blokbro ausführt

Lack of concrete evidence?
Lafu has compiled the evidence quite in detail.
I would really like to give you the benefit of doubt but all I can say is: Lafu is right. It's some shady business to plagiarize texts, isn't it?

But you are promoting the project, where submitting private information about Blockchain transactions is exchanged for your (pretty useless) shittoken.

You should admit your mistake and say that Lafu is right.
Plagiarizing whitepapers is some shady business.

Hallo, in dem Bericht behaupten Sie, dass es sich um Betrug handelt, und warnen die Leute, dass sie Geld verlieren können. Wenn Sie zumindest danach gefragt haben, werden Sie sehen, dass das Pre-ICO und ICO bereits durchgeführt und abgeschlossen wurden (ich verlange von niemandem Geld). Die erhaltene Summe war sehr niedrig, etwa 9200 US-Dollar, und ich konnte das Blokbro-Geschäft gründen, die Plattform erstellen und alles, was für den Start erforderlich ist. Bevor Sie eine betrügerische Person beschuldigen und melden, sollten Sie konkrete Beweise haben. Können wir das friedlich lösen? Ich warte immer noch auf eure Antworten. Francesco Reboldi

therefore I request the removal of the scam report for lack of concrete evidence. I’m here not to convince people to buy the token but to expose a concept based on address verification.

hi ,I was reported this link where you quote me for scam.. I want to know with what evidence you generate this. The whole site is authentic and even if certain phrases are similar, I do not see the motivation to accuse of scam . the photos you show are completely different.  Please provide evidence that this is scam or true plagiarism of the website.

Great effort Lafu.

To answer your question, it's more than enough evidence to have the account tagged. If they can even plagiarize the white paper including Road map then the project is just out to scam and nothing else. Better the users are warned of such projects.

Flag: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3014

Blokbro plagiarised some Content , nearly the same Roadmap and few things from the Whitepaper from LockNess

User : BlokBro
First Thread from the User : BlokBro token BLKB

Website Blokbro : https://blokbro.com  © Copyright BLOKbro 2022 All Rights Reserved
Website Lockness : https://lockness.io/     Copyright © 2021 Lockness. All Rights Reserved.

---

Twitter LockNess : https://twitter.com/LockNess_BSC  created on June 2021

Twitter Blokbro : https://twitter.com/BLKB_BLKB  created on February 2022

---

Blokbro Whitepaper : https://blokbro.com/whitepaper/
Archived Whitepaper : Page 1 , Page 2 , Page 3 , Page 4 , Page 5 , Page 6

Lockness Whitepaper : https://lockness.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Lockness-Whitepaper-1.pdf

---

Whitepaper and Content plagiarism
From : lockness.io
Source :  https://lockness.io/crypto-benefits/
Source : https://lockness.io/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Lockness-Whitepaper-1.pdf

From : blokbro.com
Source : https://blokbro.com/whitepaper/whitepaper-Risk

---

Roadmap plagiarism

             
               

Source : https://lockness.io/roadmap/                            Source : https://blokbro.com/#0

---

As of the Date of the creation of the Website and the Twitter Account Lockness was first puplic and online.
Looks like blokbro has done a directly copy and paste from Lockness with there Content , Roadmap and Whitepaper with some little changes without an source link.

So im asking the forum community if this is proof enough and evidence to tag the account ?
Maybe others also have something to add for this case or can look into it .