Ignoramus31151 wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 15:20:06 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:
>> The reason I oppose this is two-fold:
>>
>> 1. The original writers have nothing to protect them from this
>> plagiarism. If some lady in Berkshire wrote in her Geocities homepage
>> about how to cook blackberry pie and she then found a copy on a PR7 dot
>> com site, would she sue?
>
> What is the copyright license on these recipes?
It is a matter of ethics rather than pre-defined law. However, it can be
taken further if needed and handled juridically, I think.
Hypothetical example: If I was in the process of writing a thesis and
somebody scooped it off a temporary directory of mine to then edit and
publish it, would that be law breaking? Probably no because it was yet
unpublished.
>> 2. Search engines penalise for duplicates. How will the SE's know which
>> one is the original? It is more likely that the Geocities page is owned
>> by a low-profile person who mirrored a popular page.
>
> I would appreciate some clarification here.
>
> How do SE's identify duplicates?
I don't know, _but_...
I have an easy way to check if content is original and I know academic use
it to detect plagiarism. You just take an entire key sentence and paste it
into Google et al. You then see if the sentence matches elsewhere and then
follow the sentences around it. Apply, rinse, and repeat if necessary.
> That's a pretty difficult task, given that sites wrap content with
> their own headers/footers/banners etc etc.
>
> I have some wikipedia content at a site of mine (in full compliance
> with their license), so this issue is quite relevant to me.
With Wikipedia you are probably 100% safe. I'd still encourage you to have a
site that reflects on your knowledge. It will make you feel better, trust
me.
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com
|
|
