<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bitacle: What&#8217;s Next</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/</link>
	<description>Content Theft, Plagiarism, Copyright Infringement</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 02:34:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: PlagiarismToday &#187; Bitacle Update: Some Correspondence</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-21597</link>
		<dc:creator>PlagiarismToday &#187; Bitacle Update: Some Correspondence</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2006 01:17:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-21597</guid>
		<description>[...] As reader Maria pointed out in her comments to the previous piece about Bitacle, the company Deranet appears in the DNS entries for Bitacle. Though I was suspicious as to whether or not they were the actual host, I decided to email them at the address provided. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As reader Maria pointed out in her comments to the previous piece about Bitacle, the company Deranet appears in the DNS entries for Bitacle. Though I was suspicious as to whether or not they were the actual host, I decided to email them at the address provided. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JB</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-21027</link>
		<dc:creator>JB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2006 14:03:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-21027</guid>
		<description>Joe,

Thanks for your help. I heard back from yesterday. I didn&#039;t get a chance to post about it but anyone who wants to write to them should send their letter to abuse at ono dot c-o-m. 

Thank you for your help!

Sarah,

This is important to note that Bitacle is NOT within the letter of the law.

Do a search on Technorati or Icerocket for your content. You&#039;ll find that they do not diplay your full content, just snippets of it. Bitacle, under their Aggregates feature, displays all of your content. 

Though blog search engines, and regular ones, scrape your content to make it searchable they do not display all of it.

Also, Bitacle does not offer an opt out procedure, Technorati and others do. They also adhere to robots.txt, something Bitacle doesn&#039;t do.

In the end, Bitacle may not be displaying ads, thanks in large part to my and other DMCA notices to Adsense, but they are still trying to. If you sign in to an account, you&#039;ll find that Google Adsense code still appears on some of the Aggregates page. It just doesn&#039;t work.

There&#039;s nothing legitimate about Bitacle yet, they have a long way to go.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe,</p>
<p>Thanks for your help. I heard back from yesterday. I didn&#8217;t get a chance to post about it but anyone who wants to write to them should send their letter to abuse at ono dot c-o-m. </p>
<p>Thank you for your help!</p>
<p>Sarah,</p>
<p>This is important to note that Bitacle is NOT within the letter of the law.</p>
<p>Do a search on Technorati or Icerocket for your content. You&#8217;ll find that they do not diplay your full content, just snippets of it. Bitacle, under their Aggregates feature, displays all of your content. </p>
<p>Though blog search engines, and regular ones, scrape your content to make it searchable they do not display all of it.</p>
<p>Also, Bitacle does not offer an opt out procedure, Technorati and others do. They also adhere to robots.txt, something Bitacle doesn&#8217;t do.</p>
<p>In the end, Bitacle may not be displaying ads, thanks in large part to my and other DMCA notices to Adsense, but they are still trying to. If you sign in to an account, you&#8217;ll find that Google Adsense code still appears on some of the Aggregates page. It just doesn&#8217;t work.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s nothing legitimate about Bitacle yet, they have a long way to go.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JB</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-122882</link>
		<dc:creator>JB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2006 14:03:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-122882</guid>
		<description>Joe,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thanks for your help. I heard back from yesterday. I didn&#039;t get a chance to post about it but anyone who wants to write to them should send their letter to abuse at ono dot c-o-m. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Thank you for your help!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Sarah,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This is important to note that Bitacle is NOT within the letter of the law.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Do a search on Technorati or Icerocket for your content. You&#039;ll find that they do not diplay your full content, just snippets of it. Bitacle, under their Aggregates feature, displays all of your content. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Though blog search engines, and regular ones, scrape your content to make it searchable they do not display all of it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Also, Bitacle does not offer an opt out procedure, Technorati and others do. They also adhere to robots.txt, something Bitacle doesn&#039;t do.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In the end, Bitacle may not be displaying ads, thanks in large part to my and other DMCA notices to Adsense, but they are still trying to. If you sign in to an account, you&#039;ll find that Google Adsense code still appears on some of the Aggregates page. It just doesn&#039;t work.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;There&#039;s nothing legitimate about Bitacle yet, they have a long way to go.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Joe,</p>
<p>Thanks for your help. I heard back from yesterday. I didn&#8217;t get a chance to post about it but anyone who wants to write to them should send their letter to abuse at ono dot c-o-m. </p>
<p>Thank you for your help!</p>
<p>Sarah,</p>
<p>This is important to note that Bitacle is NOT within the letter of the law.</p>
<p>Do a search on Technorati or Icerocket for your content. You&#8217;ll find that they do not diplay your full content, just snippets of it. Bitacle, under their Aggregates feature, displays all of your content. </p>
<p>Though blog search engines, and regular ones, scrape your content to make it searchable they do not display all of it.</p>
<p>Also, Bitacle does not offer an opt out procedure, Technorati and others do. They also adhere to robots.txt, something Bitacle doesn&#8217;t do.</p>
<p>In the end, Bitacle may not be displaying ads, thanks in large part to my and other DMCA notices to Adsense, but they are still trying to. If you sign in to an account, you&#8217;ll find that Google Adsense code still appears on some of the Aggregates page. It just doesn&#8217;t work.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s nothing legitimate about Bitacle yet, they have a long way to go.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sarah Louise</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-21001</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarah Louise</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2006 11:06:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-21001</guid>
		<description>okay...are they within the letter of the law now with this Bitacle Beta 2.0? Their FAQ (which is still in Spanish--preguntas frecuentes) and poorly translated, states this: 

&quot;If you doesn’t publish feed, it won’t be included in the blog’s search. Nevertheless, if you previously has published feed of the site that was indexed, the old entrances will remain in the index, although the new ones aren’t added.

The blog search don’t follow the archives ‘robots.txt’ or META labels like NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW.&quot;

I mean, well, it looks now like they&#039;re trying to be Spain&#039;s Technorati...are they within the letter of the law????</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>okay&#8230;are they within the letter of the law now with this Bitacle Beta 2.0? Their FAQ (which is still in Spanish&#8211;preguntas frecuentes) and poorly translated, states this: </p>
<p>&#8220;If you doesn’t publish feed, it won’t be included in the blog’s search. Nevertheless, if you previously has published feed of the site that was indexed, the old entrances will remain in the index, although the new ones aren’t added.</p>
<p>The blog search don’t follow the archives ‘robots.txt’ or META labels like NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW.&#8221;</p>
<p>I mean, well, it looks now like they&#8217;re trying to be Spain&#8217;s Technorati&#8230;are they within the letter of the law????</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sarah Louise</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-122881</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarah Louise</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2006 11:06:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-122881</guid>
		<description>okay...are they within the letter of the law now with this Bitacle Beta 2.0? Their FAQ (which is still in Spanish--preguntas frecuentes) and poorly translated, states this: &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&quot;If you doesn’t publish feed, it won’t be included in the blog’s search. Nevertheless, if you previously has published feed of the site that was indexed, the old entrances will remain in the index, although the new ones aren’t added.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The blog search don’t follow the archives ‘robots.txt’ or META labels like NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW.&quot;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I mean, well, it looks now like they&#039;re trying to be Spain&#039;s Technorati...are they within the letter of the law????</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>okay&#8230;are they within the letter of the law now with this Bitacle Beta 2.0? Their FAQ (which is still in Spanish&#8211;preguntas frecuentes) and poorly translated, states this: </p>
<p>&#8220;If you doesn’t publish feed, it won’t be included in the blog’s search. Nevertheless, if you previously has published feed of the site that was indexed, the old entrances will remain in the index, although the new ones aren’t added.</p>
<p>The blog search don’t follow the archives ‘robots.txt’ or META labels like NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW.&#8221;</p>
<p>I mean, well, it looks now like they&#8217;re trying to be Spain&#8217;s Technorati&#8230;are they within the letter of the law????</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: milo</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-20806</link>
		<dc:creator>milo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-20806</guid>
		<description>Powerful response to the Bitacle ballyhoo, but they&#039;ll get for sure another advertiser until they&#039;re closed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Powerful response to the Bitacle ballyhoo, but they&#8217;ll get for sure another advertiser until they&#8217;re closed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: milo</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-122880</link>
		<dc:creator>milo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:16:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-122880</guid>
		<description>Powerful response to the Bitacle ballyhoo, but they&#039;ll get for sure another advertiser until they&#039;re closed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Powerful response to the Bitacle ballyhoo, but they&#8217;ll get for sure another advertiser until they&#8217;re closed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: links for 2006-10-19 at [MacStansbury]</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-20662</link>
		<dc:creator>links for 2006-10-19 at [MacStansbury]</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:41:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-20662</guid>
		<description>[...] Bitacle: What’s Next They now serve no ads, now what? (tags: splogs spammers scrappers) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Bitacle: What’s Next They now serve no ads, now what? (tags: splogs spammers scrappers) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-20658</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:30:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-20658</guid>
		<description>I read through their site and I couldn&#039;t find any e-mail address other than the one in their legal statement &quot;ono@ono.en&quot;  Sorry but I don&#039;t have any more time to spend on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read through their site and I couldn&#8217;t find any e-mail address other than the one in their legal statement &#8220;ono@ono.en&#8221;  Sorry but I don&#8217;t have any more time to spend on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2006/10/18/bitacle-whats-next/comment-page-1/#comment-122879</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:30:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=358#comment-122879</guid>
		<description>I read through their site and I couldn&#039;t find any e-mail address other than the one in their legal statement &quot;ono@ono.en&quot;  Sorry but I don&#039;t have any more time to spend on it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read through their site and I couldn&#8217;t find any e-mail address other than the one in their legal statement &#8220;ono@ono.en&#8221;  Sorry but I don&#8217;t have any more time to spend on it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


<!-- W3 Total Cache: Db cache debug info:
Engine:             disk
Total queries:      19
Cached queries:     0
Total query time:   0.525
SQL info:
    # | Time (s) |    Caching (Reject reason)     |   Status   | Query
    1 |    0.001 |  disabled (query is rejected)  | Not cached | SELECT option_name, option_value FROM wp_options WHERE autoload = 'yes'
    2 |        0 |  disabled (query is rejected)  | Not cached | SELECT option_value FROM wp_options WHERE option_name = 'aiosp_post_title_format' LIMIT 1
    3 |    0.002 |  disabled (query is rejected)  | Not cached | SHOW TABLES LIKE 'wp_feedfooter_rss_map'
    4 |        0 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT comment_date_gmt FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_approved = '1' ORDER BY comment_date_gmt DESC LIMIT 1
    5 |    0.005 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT   wp_posts.* FROM wp_posts  WHERE 1=1  AND YEAR(wp_posts.post_date)='2006' AND MONTH(wp_posts.post_date)='10' AND DAYOFMONTH(wp_posts.post_date)='18' AND wp_posts.post_name = 'bitacle-whats-next' AND wp_posts.post_type = 'post'  ORDER BY wp_posts.post_date DESC
    6 |    0.468 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT wp_comments.* FROM wp_comments  WHERE comment_post_ID = '358' AND comment_approved = '1'  ORDER BY comment_date_gmt DESC LIMIT 10
    7 |    0.002 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT t.*, tt.*, tr.object_id FROM wp_terms AS t INNER JOIN wp_term_taxonomy AS tt ON tt.term_id = t.term_id INNER JOIN wp_term_relationships AS tr ON tr.term_taxonomy_id = tt.term_taxonomy_id WHERE tt.taxonomy IN ('category', 'post_tag') AND tr.object_id IN (358) ORDER BY t.name ASC
    8 |        0 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT post_id, meta_key, meta_value FROM wp_postmeta WHERE post_id IN (358)
    9 |        0 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT post_id, meta_value FROM wp_postmeta WHERE meta_key='_pprredirect_url' and post_id in (SELECT post_id FROM wp_postmeta WHERE meta_key='_pprredirect_active')
   10 |    0.042 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-24 01:17:48'
   11 |    0.001 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-21 14:03:04'
   12 |        0 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-21 14:03:04'
   13 |    0.001 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-21 11:06:19'
   14 |        0 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-21 11:06:19'
   15 |    0.001 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-20 11:16:20'
   16 |        0 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-20 11:16:20'
   17 |    0.001 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-19 14:41:12'
   18 |    0.001 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-19 14:30:19'
   19 |        0 |            enabled             | Not cached | SELECT COUNT(comment_ID) FROM wp_comments WHERE comment_post_ID = 358 AND comment_parent = 0 AND comment_approved = '1' AND comment_date_gmt < '2006-10-19 14:30:19'
-->