http://www.cocomment.com/comments/PlagiarismToday Copyright 2007 coComment.com 2009-11-25T18:50:39.636+01:00 http://www.cocomment.com/images/logo4rss.gif http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1477464&comment_id=28296096 Jonathan Bailey I hate to say it, but this type of problem is very common with article sites such as the ones you posted to. However, you were very smart to set up a Google Alert to track your post, a great idea for many reasons, and you seem to be doing the right thing to handle it. However, most likely, it is going to come down to you asserting your copyright and getting the offending sites shut down. You probably will have to file DMCA notices on these sites at some point. If it comes to that, please let me know and I'll gladly do what I can to help. No matter what though, best of luck with this and don't hesitate to drop me a line if there is anything that I can do. 2008-07-04T02:50:45.768+02:00 2008-07-04T02:50:45.768+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1467848&comment_id=28172549 Jonathan Bailey Congrats on the success! 2008-06-29T05:19:53.524+02:00 2008-06-29T05:19:53.524+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1465896&comment_id=28135020 Jonathan Bailey Content theft is indeed a major issue on social news sites. Fortunately, there are several things to consider. First, all major social news sites have a means to report and get such articles removed. Though that requires the copyright holder be aware of the infringement, it can be done when needed. That makes it important for copyright holders to track their own work and be active in getting said content removed. Second, you are right that the best method is to simply not vote for infringing works, but it can be very tricky, especially when some small blogs are able to post great content. However, if there is a suspected case of infringement, I encourage users to report not just the site and the link, but the person submitting it to higher ups at the site. Even if they don't take action, they area aware of the concern and can follow up if it continues to happen. Some users make it their livelihood to spam infringing links to these social news sites and that hurts everyone. Finally, I don't think that the problem is limited to SU or Mixx. I've seen it heavily on Digg and other sites as well. Anywhere there is traffic to be gained by reaching the front page, there are spammers and scrapers trying to exploit. Thank you for the great article on this topic! 2008-06-28T17:14:33.287+02:00 2008-06-28T17:14:33.287+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1386813&comment_id=26509631 Jonathan Bailey First off, I'm glad that this case had a happy ending, that is great news. I know it is scary for the little guy to go agaist the media companies but, usually, they win if they are truly in the right. Indeed, the reasons you give for people infringing works are all ones I've heard. But one that you forgot is that the work didn't have a copyright notice so it doesn't have any protection. That is, of course, a misunderstanding of copyright law, but still a common excuse. Thank you for this great article and for drawing more attention to this issue. 2008-05-10T22:03:33.217+02:00 2008-05-10T22:03:33.217+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1037784&comment_id=20463913 JB Jeremy: So you cheated and used your brain on the bonus question, I'll be sure to remember that. In regards to your question, I'll respond the USCO would "Excellent question!" The truth is that they don't know and neither do we. They seem to have decided that putting something on the Web is NOT publication by itself but if you take extra steps like that they leave it up to the copyright holder to make the call. Yeah, that sounds dumb to me too. Amita: First off, I'm glad you had fun and that you found this site useful. I am going to subscribe to yours in a bit as well. As far as misreading the bonus goes, it happens. You were absolutely correct about Alice though. In fact, without that, I doubt we'd have the "Alice" video game that is so much fun. Well, that and three dollar copies of the novel in bookstores. In regards to the Rowling story, you were actually the first to let me know about it though another copy of it came into my feed reader today. It's a strange tale and, if I knew more about copyright in India I might have something insightful to say about it. I know that, in the U.S. at least, characters are protected by copyright and that protection is often separate from the protection the rest of the work has. That's what makes fan fiction illegal unless permitted by the author. So, could you be sued for dressing up HP for Halloween. Theoretically, yes, but the odds of that happening are slim to none. For one you would probably just a buy a costume that was properly licensed and second, even if you did it yourself, there would be little in the way of damages that they could collect. Besides, here you can always claim parody. In short, such a suit would be valueless and fraught with legal challenges. I think what made the case in India a target is that it was a for profit event, at least by Rowling's standard, and was much more public. In the end though, all of this is for nothing. The case was resolved and the party goes on: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Kolkata/Potter_pandal_already_a_hit_with_kids/articleshow/2454350.cms So, Jeremy, you were wrong on this one... She can't win just anything after all. I'm shocked too. 2007-10-13T03:29:50.601+02:00 2007-10-13T03:29:50.601+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1034289&comment_id=20462489 JB RS: This is what I love and hate about IP issues. It exists somewhere between hard science and magic. Making it probably the most confusing thing I've ever dealt with, bar none. I should have stuck with physics. Anyway, please do let me know what you find out! 2007-10-13T03:13:54.151+02:00 2007-10-13T03:13:54.151+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1032036&comment_id=20251947 JB Mr. J: Strange, could have been a server issue though. I just received word that my host was upgrading their MYSQL databases to include multiple users. Might have been an issue while that was going through. Let me know if you see any other problems! 2007-10-10T17:23:46.535+02:00 2007-10-10T17:23:46.535+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1034292&comment_id=20251745 JB Avish: Since this involves filing a DMCA notice with a host and not an actual DMCA policy that an OSP would need to create, the repeat infringer element is not necessary generally. If you wanted to add it you could, especially if its the same person ripping you off again and again, but most of the time a person filing a notice will not have an idea if the person is a repeat infringer or not. Hope that clarifies! 2007-10-10T17:22:25.698+02:00 2007-10-10T17:22:25.698+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1034289&comment_id=20251592 JB RS: I think you're about right there. At least at the core. The problem is that watermarking also can describe a process done to audio to add copyright information to it, either audibly or inaudibly. Also, you can "watermark" a word file by embedding copyright information into it that can only be read through a special plugin but can not be easily removed. Also, digital watermarking can be visible or invisible. Further confusing things. It's a messed up issue and even after all of this I am not one hundred percent sure I got it all right. Sad, but true... 2007-10-10T17:20:31.243+02:00 2007-10-10T17:20:31.243+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1032059&comment_id=20202928 JB Doug: The issue here is not whether or not copying took place. When you obtain copyright in a work you receive a set of exlusive rights to the work, reproduction is just one of those rights. Another, the one that is relevant here, is the right to publicly display or perform the work. The argument isn't that her "making available" equals copying, that it equals public display and violates that exclusive right. So the beer analogy, though entertaining, is a bit flawed in this case. There is still a valid legal question about whether or not making available constitutes public performance, but if this issue reaches the supreme court, I have a pretty strong feeling they will rule that it is given their track record in this area. 2007-10-09T05:44:36.355+02:00 2007-10-09T05:44:36.355+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1028754&comment_id=20202638 JB Will: The tao of Homer comes to mind here - D'oh! I completely misread your comment and I'm sorry. That makes much more sense. Proof I either need reading glasses, likely, or have been hit on the head one too many times, also likely. I think you're right about the nature of spam bots though. What I've seen some do is quote a portion of the original article and say "I Agree!" or something like that. Others says something like "The thing about is that they can't be and thus we can only hope to ." Sometimes it is garbage, but sometimes it actually works. I think you're right about that, in short. 2007-10-09T05:41:01.120+02:00 2007-10-09T05:41:01.120+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1032036&comment_id=20200313 JB Mr. J: The comments seem to be going through, have you been noticing any errors? I might need to see if there is something more that I can do. 2007-10-09T05:08:10.303+02:00 2007-10-09T05:08:10.303+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1028754&comment_id=20105593 JB Will, Thanks for the heads up, if you can email me the links I'd appreciate it. I delete any spam comments that get through as soon as I seem them but most of them aren't actually comments, they're trackbacks. reCAPTCHA stops pretty much all of the comment spam. I tend to stamp those out as I get them but, in a moment of bitter irony, I'll wager the emails for them are getting filtered out by my spam filters. I hadn't even pondered that until now... 2007-10-06T00:09:01.554+02:00 2007-10-06T00:09:01.554+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1020536&comment_id=19936619 JB Kat: Since the answer might help others, I'll go ahead and reply here. When you create a work and get copyright protection over it, you have a set of exclusive rights over that work. One of those rights is the right to create derivative works, including translations. If someone is taking your works and translating them into a foreign language without your permission, that is a violation of copyright law and you would handle it like any other situation, through either a DMCA notice (or other host contact) or a cease and desist letter. However, there is a difference between translating someone's work and using someone else's idea to create a work in another language. Copyright does not protect an idea, just the expression thereof. You'll have to determine how much of your original work is being used and the best way to do that would be through an automated translation tool such as Babelfish and/or a human translator. If you need any help on the specifics of the case, feel free to send me an email! 2007-10-03T00:02:11.079+02:00 2007-10-03T00:02:11.079+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1019792&comment_id=19936585 JB George: First off, to clarify these reviews a bit, it's not a review of the backend of these systems, just the front end. I deal with backend issues on the Host Report page. This is more about looking at their policies and how well the sites comply with the disclosure requirements of the law. I also agree that there is a lot of room for improvement in the currently law. There needs to be greater defense against false DMCA notices, but also greater incentive to use filtering technology on sites such as Youtube. In short, the current arrangement serves no one. As far as Google's response goes, I'm sorry to hear that you've had so much trouble with them. If you want to, you can email me the particulars and I'll see if there's anything I can do. I hope that you're doing well and thank you for the comment! Water: I wouldn't know, I gave up on the Web advertising game a long time ago... 2007-10-02T23:44:36.862+02:00 2007-10-02T23:44:36.862+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1020536&comment_id=19776463 JB RS: Thank you for your sympathy and vote of support. It's not easy for me to admit that I made a mistake but I'd rather come clean with my errors and set the record straight than continue to tacitly support a potentially bad company. As far as letting everyone speak their peace, that's just me being a journalist. The four years in college wasn't a total waste. Thank you again for the support! 2007-09-30T19:54:34.916+02:00 2007-09-30T19:54:34.916+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1021827&comment_id=19776454 JB Deborah: Thank you for pointing that out, that is very worrisome indeed. I was told that it would be handled in a week. I'd gone by there but hadn't seen the image. I must have been clicking the wrong link. I guess I should have used my own research on that one and clicked the link in my own article... 2007-09-30T19:48:08.428+02:00 2007-09-30T19:48:08.428+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1021378&comment_id=19775644 JB RS: I guess, for me, the real question is whether or not the benefits outweigh the drawbacks and, quite frankly, I don't see that being the case here. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think there are better ways to promote oneself. 2007-09-30T07:17:45.932+02:00 2007-09-30T07:17:45.932+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1021355&comment_id=19775610 JB Valerie and RS: Neither of you missed, it was left out of the final draft of the show and I completely forgot when drafting the above overview. I've got some information on that topic in my latest Blog Herald Post: http://www.blogherald.com/2007/09/24/how-to-prevent-ad-blocking-some-sensible-strategies/ You can also read more about the issue on CNet here: http://www.news.com/Web%20ad%20blocking%20may%20not%20be%20entirely%20legal/2100-1030_3-6207936.html?tag=st.prev I'm sorry for the confusion and the late reply! 2007-09-30T06:03:08.026+02:00 2007-09-30T06:03:08.026+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1020536&comment_id=19774076 JB Deborah: I won't answer the comments directed at Susan. I will say that you're welcome for the English recap and, yes, Google Translate did a bang-up job. If it made it so that a non-speaker like myself could understand it, it is impressive. Also, you are correct that MyDropBox and SafeAssign are the same product and thank you for clarifying that here. I wanted to list them as separate since A) They were listed separate on your results and B) They are two separate brands with two different targets, as you pointed out. In that regard, it's similar to how iThenticate and Turnitin are the same service, but different brands. Of course, that brings me to my real screw up with this article, flipping the names iThenticate and iParadigms. Easy mistake, but iParadigms is the company and iThenticate is their business product. I've corrected the article to reflect that and confirmed that I got far too little sleep this week. 2007-09-29T07:14:04.528+02:00 2007-09-29T07:14:04.528+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1014564&comment_id=19767618 Jonathan Bailey Redwall: It's going to be interesting to see how and if that works out. My hopes is that new promotion schemes do arise that benefit advertisers, publishers and users. Rose: I've been experimenting with ABP since I wrote this column and I've noticed some strange results. For example, the ads here on the BH still show up fine. The sponsor ads at least. It's interesting to see how the Internet changes when you switch it on and off. I honestly don't know which I like better right now. 2007-09-28T18:01:48.680+02:00 2007-09-28T18:01:48.680+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1019792&comment_id=19756631 JB Cybele: I've worked with Adsense before with similar results. I think I've waited as long as a week for a reply, I'm not sure what causes the wild fluctuations in their response time. RS: It's a simple bell curve issue. Microsoft, with a C, should be in the middle of the pack, not at the lead. When I started this series, I envisioned there would be a tall, narrow bell curve hovering on the C range. Instead, it's proved to be very lopsided, centering on the C-D range and favoring the F crowd. Besides, when five out of seven services have severe problems with their DMCA/Copyright policy or no policy at all, there is an issue. I guess we'll see how things evolve though. Steve: Generally, when I look at these policies, I look for the following things. Registration with the USCO Complete information on their site That the information between the two matches A policy to ban repeat infringers Full contact information for the DMCA agent A thorough explanation of how to file a notice That the policy is easy to locate on the OSP site If a site is missing two or more of those things, I bump them down to a D. The exception is if the site has a single issue that puts it in direct conflict with a law, such as with Google. If a site shows a great deal of thought in one or more areas, I upgrade it to a B. It gets an A if it shows some kind of radical advancement that makes things much easier for Webmasters who need to file a complaint. That's a general rundown of the process. Not complete in every regard but it gives you an idea of what I do with each host. Hope that answers the question! 2007-09-28T15:49:12.701+02:00 2007-09-28T15:49:12.701+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=1019320&comment_id=19726182 Jonathan Bailey Like others, I'm thankful for the link but worried about the spam implications. I have pretty good spam control on my site, but I still have to worry that a list like this might create unwanted attention. I'll be sure to comment again if I notice any unusual behavior on my site. 2007-09-28T05:27:26.496+02:00 2007-09-28T05:27:26.496+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=973182&comment_id=18417659 Jonathan Bailey Yes, I must confess, I made fun of it too on my podcast. I feel guilty for picking on such low-hanging fruit, but who can help themselves with this song? 2007-08-27T05:21:15.744+02:00 2007-08-27T05:21:15.744+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=928186&comment_id=17945048 JB Jeremy and Patrick, Glad you like the feature. It's only a pity that I can't play... Will, If you have a problem reading reCAPTCHA, just hit the refresh button, you should get another one you can read. I haven't had any myself that have given me trouble but I am wary of that. Let me know if it keeps up, I'm glad that you like the feature! 2007-07-30T18:39:06.654+02:00 2007-07-30T18:39:06.654+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=921417&comment_id=17865756 JB Mark, Perhaps then these comments will motivate him to change it. I've already tried to talk with him and would gladly help. 2007-07-28T16:05:32.878+02:00 2007-07-28T16:05:32.878+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=921417&comment_id=17836302 JB Rich, True, the terms could use a little tweaking and some explaining. But it is still neat to see how the different variable interact with one another and what variables get the most weight. It's a fascinating toy, but you are right that the terms are a bit over the heads of your average citizen. Thank you for the comment! 2007-07-27T21:37:47.194+02:00 2007-07-27T21:37:47.194+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=920946&comment_id=17826461 JB Patrick, Glad you liked it! Jeremy, I agree completely. It is confusing, probably far too confusing. However, the confusion is from the law and you were easily the best at it. If someone as talented as you at this struggles with it, imagine how much a layperson will? That's the whole point of the game. 2007-07-27T18:12:06.812+02:00 2007-07-27T18:12:06.812+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=919436&comment_id=17800389 JB Maria, SK2 is a great plugin. Especially when you use it with the Akismet addon. However, with it running at full power, I noticed a bad slowdown when posting comments. I got complaints about it previously. I switched to Akismet to offload all of that filtering and it worked well. Now I'm pretty much sold on reCAPTCHA though. I'll be writing more about it soon. Oh, and regarding my email address, it's not in plain text. The address on the right is an image with a link to the contact form. Unless I missed something, it shouldn't be in text anywhere... 2007-07-27T05:05:32.592+02:00 2007-07-27T05:05:32.592+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=918535&comment_id=17789345 JB Jeremy, By the by, if no one else can come up with the correct answer, I'll give you the link. I doubt anyone is going to get much closer than you. 2007-07-27T00:05:48.867+02:00 2007-07-27T00:05:48.867+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=918535&comment_id=17787047 JB Jeremy, Bribery is welcomed and loved. PayPal button is to the right, I'll have the answer in your inbox is 5 minutes... :P Very good guess. Easily the best so far. But you still have at least one problem... You, as well as the other posters, are forgetting a requirement of the DMCA. And yes, I am evil... 2007-07-26T23:26:07.861+02:00 2007-07-26T23:26:07.861+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=918535&comment_id=17785979 JB Jeremy, That was strange, we posted at the same time. I'll give you three a hint since you're all starting to get closer. Remember that the DMCA can be used to file a notice for any copyrighted material. It is not limited in any way. 2007-07-26T23:03:28.192+02:00 2007-07-26T23:03:28.192+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=918535&comment_id=17785768 JB Valerie, First, check out ChillingEffects.org for samples of DMCA notices that have been submitted. Most use a letter format. I find numbering easiest though. As far as your second guess, you're much more on the right track there. That is the type of issues we're looking at... Good luck! 2007-07-26T22:59:37.417+02:00 2007-07-26T22:59:37.417+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=918535&comment_id=17782542 JB Valerie, I valiant effort but not the answer I'm looking for. Format doesn't really affect the validity of the notice. It just makes it easier for me to template :) Most lawyers use a more traditional letter format, like the others. Not a lame-o guess though, perhaps not as far off as you might think... 2007-07-26T21:55:13.741+02:00 2007-07-26T21:55:13.741+02:00 http://www.cocomment.com/sidebar?object=people&context=explore&mode=detail&id=PlagiarismToday&conv=31082&comment_id=48279 Jonathan Bailey Steve and David, These results are from dictionary.com Thief: One who steals, especially by stealth. Steal: To take (the property of another) without right or permission. There is no mention in either case of the intention to deprive the owner of an object. If someone steals my car and returns it a short while later, they still stole it and they are still a thief. They didn't intend to deprive me of it, I might have even been asleep when it happened, but the law will still call them a thief and prosecute accordingly. Also, if you actually take the time to read copyright law, you'll see that copyright infringement IS a crime. For proof of that, just pop in the nearest U.S. DVD and read the FBI warning or visit these links: http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/17usc506.htm http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf (Skip down to "Remedies" on page seven and you'll see that it's an offense punishable by up to five years imprisonment) Copyright is an element of intellectual property, emphasis on the word property. Copyright guarantees you a set of exclusive rights to a work including to reproduce, perform or make derivative works based upon the original. When someone violates that, they steal, or if you prefer, deprive, that right from the person who holds the copyright. It is entirely possible to steal immaterial things. I can steal your freedom, your right to privacy and countless other intangible things you enjoy. Infringing copyright is no different, it is stealing a right granted by the Constitution (Article 1, section 8) and not wanting to call it theft doesn't change what it is. Personally though, I find it pointless to sit here and argue semantics when a much larger issue is at stake. There is a very real need for a dialog on this subject and arguing about definitions is merely avoiding the issue. 2006-04-13T15:30:16.288+02:00 2006-04-13T15:30:16.288+02:00