Earlier this week, Darren Rowse, the author of problogger.net, posted an article entitled “Introducing a Shoddy Blogger�? that drew attention to a blogging tips site which was, at the time, nothing more than a collection of articles ripped off from other blogs without credit.
Though Darren’s usual subject matter is how to make money from blogging, a subject he seems to know a great deal about, it seemed to be just another outing. After all, blogs that exist solely to plagiarize are a dime a dozen and articles about them are a regular occurrence.
But what made this unusual wasn’t the outing itself, but the conversation that followed it. Even though the vast majority of people offered their support, a few people had strong issues to Darren’s article and that created both a firestorm and some of the most interesting plagiarism discussion I’ve read in a long, long time.
In the comments to the original piece, one blogger named Id.Ology, who had previously had his copy and paste ways exposed by another commenter, took extreme issue with the discussion, saying in part (Note: All spelling and grammar errors are in the original):
“I’ll copy something interesting to me as I wish–you can see yahoo news copys the whole news from different news source like new york times etc without giving orginal links or MSN news doing the same.�?
(Editor’s Note: The above is, clearly, inaccurate. Not only do such sources always attribute their links, but almost always have some kind of preexisting agreement with the sources. Only Google News, to my knowledge, searches without permission and they only provide summaries of public articles with links to the full pieces.)
One blogger in particular, Steven Clark (AKA: Nortypig) of Pig Work, disagreed openly with the prevailing attitude both in the comments of Problogger and in several entries on his own blog. It escalated until he publicly unsubscribed from Problogger.
Though Steven repeatedly has stated he doesn’t approve of content theft, he has said that such plagiarism is a “fact of life�? and said that the actions of Darren and the others who agree with him are largely motivated out of greed. In one entry, he called them an “elitist mob�? and said that, “My views are simply that the web is about WE and US and not ME and MY.�?
The article and discussions demonstrate a wide variety of attitudes about copyrights on the Web, ranging for the traditional copyright standpoint all the way to the anti-copyright viewpoint. It’s just proof that no one viewpoint on copyright is valid for everyone and no two people are going to have the same comfort level when it comes to their work.
The only point I don’t understand is how some people can claim to be against plagiarism but also angry when others defend their copyrights. As Edmund Burke once said, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.�? If no one raises their hand to stop plagiarism, then the problem is going to get worse and worse until legitimate writers and content creators stay away from the Web in droves not wanting their works to be stolen.
Furthermore, you can agree with something either implicitly or tacitly; through action or inaction. You might disagree with plagiarism and think that it’s immoral, but if you fail to do something about it, you’re facilitating it. No matter what your personal feelings on the subject are, you’re supporting plagiarists by refusing to help and even thwarting those that seek to stop them.
Finally, in regards to the blog whose plagiarism started this whole discussion, the blooger there has apologized for the theft and has begun attributing its sources religiously. It’s a refreshing change and I hope it sticks. Only time will tell if this blogger has really learned their lesson or not though.
No matter what though, this is a good read on the subject of plagiarism and showcases a lot of the different viewpoints on the subject. Anyone who is interested in the subject should check out this dialogue. It’s very educational.
Further Reading:
Content theft: its plain scary!: More information from The Blog Herald
Using Other People’s Content: A good follow up by Darren on the subject.
A Quick Guide to Referencing : An excellent guide from The Blog Herald on referencing sources. Targeted at bloggers.
Note:
Yesterday I promised that I would explain how to add RSS footers into various blogging software packages. That article is being postponed until tomorrow due to a desire to get this article up as soon as possible. I’m sorry for the inconvenience.
[tags]Plagiarism, Blogging, Content Theft, Copyright Infringement, Copyright[/tags]
Pirated-Sites.com are a good place to start Cary – http://www.pirated-sites.com/ – and I’ve been in the same boat exactly. Email a polite request as to why they have a replica. If you’re lucky they left some of your more identifying pieces of code there. But chances are they’ll just change the pallette and a couple of minor things. The amount of change can be quite minor really before it becomes generic. I just figure if they don’t know enough CSS to make a site then the moment they try to change it too much they’ll have it fall apart anyway.
JB
Attribution is fair and I hope nobody has ever felt that I haven’t given it to them on the I run or previous ones. I worry that people with a bit of right on their side though are using a little truth to suit their monetary agendas on some blogs. For instance, I go to places like ProBlogger a lot for both business and web development ideas, not for blogging but as a web developer. I see someone write something about basic SEO (search engine optimisation), a lot of what I see on ProBlogger is not new in my line of work by the way. So do they own ‘basic SEO’? Nobody else can blog it? Which is funny because I might have found that on A List Apart a year or two earlier and its kicked around for a long time with a slight rewording and then its up again on other blogs. Finally making ProBlogger or another who gets copied and points a finger. You see some of these guys are expanding it out from ripping text straight off the page. They just want accreditation for the link and complaints are as much about the naming as them not getting a link. And that I think is up to whether or not I particularly want to give them one, its a courtesy.
So a lot of my issue over there was about the mixing up of all these issues and calling it copytheft or whatever on the one hand, and running around and trying to push enforcement of things that weren’t in fact law. Hyperlining to them for example. And the conversation was rude, I just put in one comment and came back the next day to find myself flamed by Duncan Riley from BlogHerald. In fact Duncan’s article publicly outing WebPro News had comments shut abusively I noticed as everyone didn’t agree with him. The final comment simply asked why he never accredited the Old Bailey tv show image that was in the article – a fair question? He said he’d take an image off his tv next time but that’s not exactly the right thing either I’d expect.
All I really did was put forward the suggestion and walk away that it is a reality of the internet we work with that it isn’t secure and you can’t protect your stuff outright. So, knowing this fact of life, they should consider first what content they put up there. If its really valuable information that is marketable and sellable publish a hard copy book before they put it on the web. I didn’t think that condoned copytheft. So I came back after a day and found the witch-hunting continuing and unsubscribed.
I really do hope that these guys see that point. A little right on one’s side isn’t a licence to be that way. And the final article by Darren Rowse angry was confirmation to me at least they had all lost their marbles.
Anyway I guess its water under the bridge and I’m moving on. ProBlogger is for some but not for me anymore. So I hope you understand better where I’m coming from – it was the BlogHerald guy saying I supported content theft actually, and its still irksome to think about. If I’ve ever actually said that one I seriously never intended to say so.
OK I have to run, sorry for the laboriously long comment. Have a great day.
Pirated-Sites.com are a good place to start Cary – http://www.pirated-sites.com/ – and I’ve been in the same boat exactly. Email a polite request as to why they have a replica. If you’re lucky they left some of your more identifying pieces of code there. But chances are they’ll just change the pallette and a couple of minor things. The amount of change can be quite minor really before it becomes generic. I just figure if they don’t know enough CSS to make a site then the moment they try to change it too much they’ll have it fall apart anyway.
JB
Attribution is fair and I hope nobody has ever felt that I haven’t given it to them on the I run or previous ones. I worry that people with a bit of right on their side though are using a little truth to suit their monetary agendas on some blogs. For instance, I go to places like ProBlogger a lot for both business and web development ideas, not for blogging but as a web developer. I see someone write something about basic SEO (search engine optimisation), a lot of what I see on ProBlogger is not new in my line of work by the way. So do they own ‘basic SEO’? Nobody else can blog it? Which is funny because I might have found that on A List Apart a year or two earlier and its kicked around for a long time with a slight rewording and then its up again on other blogs. Finally making ProBlogger or another who gets copied and points a finger. You see some of these guys are expanding it out from ripping text straight off the page. They just want accreditation for the link and complaints are as much about the naming as them not getting a link. And that I think is up to whether or not I particularly want to give them one, its a courtesy.
So a lot of my issue over there was about the mixing up of all these issues and calling it copytheft or whatever on the one hand, and running around and trying to push enforcement of things that weren’t in fact law. Hyperlining to them for example. And the conversation was rude, I just put in one comment and came back the next day to find myself flamed by Duncan Riley from BlogHerald. In fact Duncan’s article publicly outing WebPro News had comments shut abusively I noticed as everyone didn’t agree with him. The final comment simply asked why he never accredited the Old Bailey tv show image that was in the article – a fair question? He said he’d take an image off his tv next time but that’s not exactly the right thing either I’d expect.
All I really did was put forward the suggestion and walk away that it is a reality of the internet we work with that it isn’t secure and you can’t protect your stuff outright. So, knowing this fact of life, they should consider first what content they put up there. If its really valuable information that is marketable and sellable publish a hard copy book before they put it on the web. I didn’t think that condoned copytheft. So I came back after a day and found the witch-hunting continuing and unsubscribed.
I really do hope that these guys see that point. A little right on one’s side isn’t a licence to be that way. And the final article by Darren Rowse angry was confirmation to me at least they had all lost their marbles.
Anyway I guess its water under the bridge and I’m moving on. ProBlogger is for some but not for me anymore. So I hope you understand better where I’m coming from – it was the BlogHerald guy saying I supported content theft actually, and its still irksome to think about. If I’ve ever actually said that one I seriously never intended to say so.
OK I have to run, sorry for the laboriously long comment. Have a great day.
nortypig,
First off, thank you very much for the post and for the clarification. I appreciate you adding to the discussion.
To answer your question though, there isn’t a law that requires adding a link to a post you use in another blog. The link doesn’t provide any protection one way or another.
You see, if you use a whole work without permission, it’s copyright infringement with or without the link. If you use a snippet and attribute the original source, it doesn’t matter if the attribution isn’t in the form of a hyperlink so long as it is easily located.
I’m pretty sure that there are other ways to attribute a source other than hyperlinking. However, it’s by far the easiest and most direct way. I suppose you could use MLA or Chicago style, but it seems to me that a hyperlink is much easier. It’s a win-win.
The problem is that most people who don’t hyperlink don’t attribute at all. That’s where plagiarism comes in. Even in the case of small snippets that might fall under fair use, you have to attribute your source. Any non attributed use of someone else’s work is a violation of copyright law.
Hyperlinks are just the easiest and most accepted means to an end. If you want to find another way to bring an attribution up to legal code, I’d be willing to hear it.
Oh, and though I’m glad you love the look of the site, I can’t take much of the credit for it. I borrowed heavily from a theme and other code snippets, the credit is in the footer. I did a fair amount of hacking on my own, but I had a huge head start. Once I get back home, I’m going to start on a custom layout though.
Cary,
I’m sorry to hear that someone stole your site. If there’s anything that I can do to help, just let me know. My resources and knowledge are at your disposal.
Let me know how it turns out!
My concerns are more based on – the hunt began months ago regarding real assholes that are blog spamming our content and evolved into “anyone who repurposes our content”. A lot of bloggers are just normal people having fun disseminating information and communicating, we’re not worried about click throughs or funnelled site visitors.
But more I particularly read ProBlogger for a year as it was less political and of a calibre above this cat fighting that seems to be the mood of the moment there.
I don’t even know the law on this one exactly to be honest. Is there a law saying you must hyperlink to a source on the web? I kind of doubt it but if i’m wrong that’s no surprise. And I’m particularly concerned that this has evolved into the witch hunting of public outings – in some cases to be proven wrong like BlogHerald regarding Calcanis (if I recall rightly at 8am). Some people are in the belief out there that if they see a link to a software program that they own that link somehow and deserve accreditation for mentioning it first, a kudos accreditation.
But I neither support the ripper offers either as you notice. Very true. And am willing to live with the idea that we all have multivarious webs that we live in with our own ideas of best behaviour and bad. That’s what makes it so special. Unfortunately if a group hang out long enough together a certain group think can occur where they believe that theirs is the rule of law on the web. What is the law?
Statements in their comments such as only certain people should be allowed to have blogs for instance make me a bit ill. Its very elitist to believe so.
Anyway an interesting offshoot flame went on over at Andy Merrits blog http://andymerrett.co.uk/ with the BlogHerald guy as well. Its worth a read.
But I liked your article it was balanced and fair. Sorry my comments were in moderation but I ended up following the link back here for a look. Its one everyone will probably have to agree to disagree on though lol. I have to run off to uni now. If you want to comment again its fine, I just deleted it as repetative spam before I found this article, sorry. I need to fix the usability of that one for sure.
Nice site too, another WordPress customiser.
My concerns are more based on – the hunt began months ago regarding real assholes that are blog spamming our content and evolved into “anyone who repurposes our content”. A lot of bloggers are just normal people having fun disseminating information and communicating, we’re not worried about click throughs or funnelled site visitors.
But more I particularly read ProBlogger for a year as it was less political and of a calibre above this cat fighting that seems to be the mood of the moment there.
I don’t even know the law on this one exactly to be honest. Is there a law saying you must hyperlink to a source on the web? I kind of doubt it but if i’m wrong that’s no surprise. And I’m particularly concerned that this has evolved into the witch hunting of public outings – in some cases to be proven wrong like BlogHerald regarding Calcanis (if I recall rightly at 8am). Some people are in the belief out there that if they see a link to a software program that they own that link somehow and deserve accreditation for mentioning it first, a kudos accreditation.
But I neither support the ripper offers either as you notice. Very true. And am willing to live with the idea that we all have multivarious webs that we live in with our own ideas of best behaviour and bad. That’s what makes it so special. Unfortunately if a group hang out long enough together a certain group think can occur where they believe that theirs is the rule of law on the web. What is the law?
Statements in their comments such as only certain people should be allowed to have blogs for instance make me a bit ill. Its very elitist to believe so.
Anyway an interesting offshoot flame went on over at Andy Merrits blog http://andymerrett.co.uk/ with the BlogHerald guy as well. Its worth a read.
But I liked your article it was balanced and fair. Sorry my comments were in moderation but I ended up following the link back here for a look. Its one everyone will probably have to agree to disagree on though lol. I have to run off to uni now. If you want to comment again its fine, I just deleted it as repetative spam before I found this article, sorry. I need to fix the usability of that one for sure.
Nice site too, another WordPress customiser.
Great write-up…I followed those comments as they were happening, and it was definitely getting hot in there. You’ve done a really excellent job of summarizing what was a rather covoluted conversation in the first place.
It’s funny, too. I got home yesterday after a long day of following all this talk about content theft only to find that someone had stolen my whole site…literally!
Too much
nortypig,
First off, thank you very much for the post and for the clarification. I appreciate you adding to the discussion.
To answer your question though, there isn't a law that requires adding a link to a post you use in another blog. The link doesn't provide any protection one way or another.
You see, if you use a whole work without permission, it's copyright infringement with or without the link. If you use a snippet and attribute the original source, it doesn't matter if the attribution isn't in the form of a hyperlink so long as it is easily located.
I'm pretty sure that there are other ways to attribute a source other than hyperlinking. However, it's by far the easiest and most direct way. I suppose you could use MLA or Chicago style, but it seems to me that a hyperlink is much easier. It's a win-win.
The problem is that most people who don't hyperlink don't attribute at all. That's where plagiarism comes in. Even in the case of small snippets that might fall under fair use, you have to attribute your source. Any non attributed use of someone else's work is a violation of copyright law.
Hyperlinks are just the easiest and most accepted means to an end. If you want to find another way to bring an attribution up to legal code, I'd be willing to hear it.
Oh, and though I'm glad you love the look of the site, I can't take much of the credit for it. I borrowed heavily from a theme and other code snippets, the credit is in the footer. I did a fair amount of hacking on my own, but I had a huge head start. Once I get back home, I'm going to start on a custom layout though.
Cary,
I'm sorry to hear that someone stole your site. If there's anything that I can do to help, just let me know. My resources and knowledge are at your disposal.
Let me know how it turns out!
Great write-up…I followed those comments as they were happening, and it was definitely getting hot in there. You've done a really excellent job of summarizing what was a rather covoluted conversation in the first place.
It's funny, too. I got home yesterday after a long day of following all this talk about content theft only to find that someone had stolen my whole site…literally!
Too much