<?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: Safer Without FeedBurner?</title> <atom:link href="http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/</link> <description>Content Theft, Plagiarism, Copyright Infringement</description> <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:12:29 +0000</lastBuildDate> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item><title>By: PlagiarismToday &#187; The FeedBurner Question</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-70461</link> <dc:creator>PlagiarismToday &#187; The FeedBurner Question</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 18:45:50 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-70461</guid> <description>[...] I&#8217;ve had a growing case of &#8220;buyers remorse&#8221; in the past year since I wrote about this issue. I&#8217;ve been reading closely the FeedBurner exit strategy and considering the [...]</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I&#8217;ve had a growing case of &#8220;buyers remorse&#8221; in the past year since I wrote about this issue. I&#8217;ve been reading closely the FeedBurner exit strategy and considering the [...]</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Shepard</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-37525</link> <dc:creator>Shepard</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 02:25:14 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-37525</guid> <description>Thanks for the reply and the link.  Lots of really good stuff here for us newbies.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the reply and the link.  Lots of really good stuff here for us newbies.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Shepard</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-121929</link> <dc:creator>Shepard</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 01:25:14 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-121929</guid> <description>Thanks for the reply and the link.  Lots of really good stuff here for us newbies.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the reply and the link.  Lots of really good stuff here for us newbies.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: JB</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-37517</link> <dc:creator>JB</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 00:23:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-37517</guid> <description>Shepard,To answer your question, it is definitely trivial to impliment such code. I&#039;ve experimented with it in the past. The problem is that it can also be trivially defeated, often by just disabling javascript or viewing the HTML code.Worse still, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to select text on a Web site including quoting, some bookmarking services and keeping one&#039;s place when reading a long work. The negative impact on legitimate users outweighs the benefits in stopping plagiarists.Besides, I encourage attributed copying of my work. Using such a script would defeat the point of my CC License.Honestly though, for most people, it is a very bad idea to use the no select text script. I&#039;ve written about it a few times on this site, most recent time here: http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-six-worst-ways-to-protect-content/Personally, I don&#039;t think I could ever use it or encourage others to do so.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shepard,</p><p>To answer your question, it is definitely trivial to impliment such code. I&#8217;ve experimented with it in the past. The problem is that it can also be trivially defeated, often by just disabling javascript or viewing the HTML code.</p><p>Worse still, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to select text on a Web site including quoting, some bookmarking services and keeping one&#8217;s place when reading a long work. The negative impact on legitimate users outweighs the benefits in stopping plagiarists.</p><p>Besides, I encourage attributed copying of my work. Using such a script would defeat the point of my CC License.</p><p>Honestly though, for most people, it is a very bad idea to use the no select text script. I&#8217;ve written about it a few times on this site, most recent time here: <a
href="http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-six-worst-ways-to-protect-content/" rel="nofollow">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-six-worst-ways-to-protect-content/</a></p><p>Personally, I don&#8217;t think I could ever use it or encourage others to do so.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: JB</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-121928</link> <dc:creator>JB</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 28 Jan 2007 23:23:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-121928</guid> <description>Shepard,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;To answer your question, it is definitely trivial to impliment such code. I&#039;ve experimented with it in the past. The problem is that it can also be trivially defeated, often by just disabling javascript or viewing the HTML code. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Worse still, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to select text on a Web site including quoting, some bookmarking services and keeping one&#039;s place when reading a long work. The negative impact on legitimate users outweighs the benefits in stopping plagiarists.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Besides, I encourage attributed copying of my work. Using such a script would defeat the point of my CC License.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Honestly though, for most people, it is a very bad idea to use the no select text script. I&#039;ve written about it a few times on this site, most recent time here: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-six-worst-ways-to-protect-content/&quot;&gt;http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-s...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Personally, I don&#039;t think I could ever use it or encourage others to do so.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shepard,</p><p>To answer your question, it is definitely trivial to impliment such code. I&#8217;ve experimented with it in the past. The problem is that it can also be trivially defeated, often by just disabling javascript or viewing the HTML code.</p><p>Worse still, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to select text on a Web site including quoting, some bookmarking services and keeping one&#8217;s place when reading a long work. The negative impact on legitimate users outweighs the benefits in stopping plagiarists.</p><p>Besides, I encourage attributed copying of my work. Using such a script would defeat the point of my CC License.</p><p>Honestly though, for most people, it is a very bad idea to use the no select text script. I&#8217;ve written about it a few times on this site, most recent time here: <a
href="http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-six-worst-ways-to-protect-content/"></a><a
href="http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-s.." rel="nofollow">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/04/the-s..</a>.</p><p>Personally, I don&#8217;t think I could ever use it or encourage others to do so.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Shepard</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-37509</link> <dc:creator>Shepard</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 28 Jan 2007 23:22:27 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-37509</guid> <description>I have found much interesting reading here.  Thanks!Stopping the stealing of rss feeds is important, but one question does come to my novice mind.  What about preventing the copying of your writing on this site?Copying content manually is much more time consuming that an automated rss steal.  But still, anyone could manually copy anything you have written here and paste it on their own site as their own writing.    I have been told that it is easy to turn off the ability to select and copy text on a web site.  But since it is not disabled at this, of all, sites, I was wondering if my information was incorrect?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have found much interesting reading here.  Thanks!</p><p>Stopping the stealing of rss feeds is important, but one question does come to my novice mind.  What about preventing the copying of your writing on this site?</p><p>Copying content manually is much more time consuming that an automated rss steal.  But still, anyone could manually copy anything you have written here and paste it on their own site as their own writing.    I have been told that it is easy to turn off the ability to select and copy text on a web site.  But since it is not disabled at this, of all, sites, I was wondering if my information was incorrect?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Shepard</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-121927</link> <dc:creator>Shepard</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 28 Jan 2007 22:22:27 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-121927</guid> <description>I have found much interesting reading here.  Thanks!  &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Stopping the stealing of rss feeds is important, but one question does come to my novice mind.  What about preventing the copying of your writing on this site?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Copying content manually is much more time consuming that an automated rss steal.  But still, anyone could manually copy anything you have written here and paste it on their own site as their own writing.    I have been told that it is easy to turn off the ability to select and copy text on a web site.  But since it is not disabled at this, of all, sites, I was wondering if my information was incorrect?</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have found much interesting reading here.  Thanks!</p><p>Stopping the stealing of rss feeds is important, but one question does come to my novice mind.  What about preventing the copying of your writing on this site?</p><p>Copying content manually is much more time consuming that an automated rss steal.  But still, anyone could manually copy anything you have written here and paste it on their own site as their own writing.    I have been told that it is easy to turn off the ability to select and copy text on a web site.  But since it is not disabled at this, of all, sites, I was wondering if my information was incorrect?</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Dick Costolo</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-35970</link> <dc:creator>Dick Costolo</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 18:32:24 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-35970</guid> <description>Hi folks. This is a very thoughtful post, as usual, so I wanted to make sure we provided the courtesy of commenting here. The challenge here is that IP/user-agent controls are just the start of an arms race that will eventually render the existing plugins useless. IP spoofing and user-agent masking are as old as the hills and these scraping tools will simply be enhanced in a matter of hours to make the User agent look like a desktop newsreader and the ip&#039;s will bounce around. At that point, it becomes orders of magnitude more difficult to detect the offenders and the tools that are currently in effect at FeedBurner will once again be the tools at everybody&#039;s disposal. Note that I&#039;m *not* saying that this makes it &quot;not worth the time&quot; to add these protections, I don&#039;t want to imply that at all, they&#039;re obviously helpful. I&#039;m only saying that the added protection will be shortlived once a critical mass of people are using them. So, the challenge for us at FeedBurner is a) how do you add protections that don&#039;t become obsolete in days, and b) how do you leverage the power of the aggregate community to identify things that would be otherwise monumentally challenging for the individual to identify. Note also that we may not always publicly announce things we do here, since it obviously highlights to the scrapers that it&#039;s time to update their crawlers.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi folks. This is a very thoughtful post, as usual, so I wanted to make sure we provided the courtesy of commenting here. The challenge here is that IP/user-agent controls are just the start of an arms race that will eventually render the existing plugins useless. IP spoofing and user-agent masking are as old as the hills and these scraping tools will simply be enhanced in a matter of hours to make the User agent look like a desktop newsreader and the ip&#8217;s will bounce around. At that point, it becomes orders of magnitude more difficult to detect the offenders and the tools that are currently in effect at FeedBurner will once again be the tools at everybody&#8217;s disposal. Note that I&#8217;m *not* saying that this makes it &#8220;not worth the time&#8221; to add these protections, I don&#8217;t want to imply that at all, they&#8217;re obviously helpful. I&#8217;m only saying that the added protection will be shortlived once a critical mass of people are using them. So, the challenge for us at FeedBurner is a) how do you add protections that don&#8217;t become obsolete in days, and b) how do you leverage the power of the aggregate community to identify things that would be otherwise monumentally challenging for the individual to identify. Note also that we may not always publicly announce things we do here, since it obviously highlights to the scrapers that it&#8217;s time to update their crawlers.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Dick Costolo</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-121926</link> <dc:creator>Dick Costolo</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:32:24 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-121926</guid> <description>Hi folks. This is a very thoughtful post, as usual, so I wanted to make sure we provided the courtesy of commenting here. The challenge here is that IP/user-agent controls are just the start of an arms race that will eventually render the existing plugins useless. IP spoofing and user-agent masking are as old as the hills and these scraping tools will simply be enhanced in a matter of hours to make the User agent look like a desktop newsreader and the ip&#039;s will bounce around. At that point, it becomes orders of magnitude more difficult to detect the offenders and the tools that are currently in effect at FeedBurner will once again be the tools at everybody&#039;s disposal. Note that I&#039;m *not* saying that this makes it &quot;not worth the time&quot; to add these protections, I don&#039;t want to imply that at all, they&#039;re obviously helpful. I&#039;m only saying that the added protection will be shortlived once a critical mass of people are using them. So, the challenge for us at FeedBurner is a) how do you add protections that don&#039;t become obsolete in days, and b) how do you leverage the power of the aggregate community to identify things that would be otherwise monumentally challenging for the individual to identify. Note also that we may not always publicly announce things we do here, since it obviously highlights to the scrapers that it&#039;s time to update their crawlers.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi folks. This is a very thoughtful post, as usual, so I wanted to make sure we provided the courtesy of commenting here. The challenge here is that IP/user-agent controls are just the start of an arms race that will eventually render the existing plugins useless. IP spoofing and user-agent masking are as old as the hills and these scraping tools will simply be enhanced in a matter of hours to make the User agent look like a desktop newsreader and the ip&#8217;s will bounce around. At that point, it becomes orders of magnitude more difficult to detect the offenders and the tools that are currently in effect at FeedBurner will once again be the tools at everybody&#8217;s disposal. Note that I&#8217;m *not* saying that this makes it &#8220;not worth the time&#8221; to add these protections, I don&#8217;t want to imply that at all, they&#8217;re obviously helpful. I&#8217;m only saying that the added protection will be shortlived once a critical mass of people are using them. So, the challenge for us at FeedBurner is a) how do you add protections that don&#8217;t become obsolete in days, and b) how do you leverage the power of the aggregate community to identify things that would be otherwise monumentally challenging for the individual to identify. Note also that we may not always publicly announce things we do here, since it obviously highlights to the scrapers that it&#8217;s time to update their crawlers.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: cybele</title><link>http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2007/01/18/safer-without-feedburner/comment-page-1/#comment-35361</link> <dc:creator>cybele</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jan 2007 02:55:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=408#comment-35361</guid> <description>I am currently frustrated by a scraper who is using my feedburner feed. Their domain contact registration info is bogus, their webhost is bogus (probably a scraper farm). Feedburner did not detect this, I found it through Technorati (because of a keyword, not a link to my site). The DMCA notification to the &quot;host&quot; has gone unanswered.I am not on WordPress (instead I use ExpressionEngine) and have not been able to stop these scrapers (nor have the other sites being scraped).I really wish Feedburner had the ability or willingness to block these folks by IP or something.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am currently frustrated by a scraper who is using my feedburner feed. Their domain contact registration info is bogus, their webhost is bogus (probably a scraper farm). Feedburner did not detect this, I found it through Technorati (because of a keyword, not a link to my site). The DMCA notification to the &#8220;host&#8221; has gone unanswered.</p><p>I am not on WordPress (instead I use ExpressionEngine) and have not been able to stop these scrapers (nor have the other sites being scraped).</p><p>I really wish Feedburner had the ability or willingness to block these folks by IP or something.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (user agent is rejected)
Database Caching 2/19 queries in 0.013 seconds using disk
Content Delivery Network via Amazon Web Services: CloudFront: files.plagiarismtoday.com

Served from: www.plagiarismtoday.com @ 2010-03-21 17:50:57 -->