On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 17:53:42 +0100, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote:
> 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 unpublished.
As a matter of fact, that's incorrect. Copyright is created at the
moment of creation, not when the item is published. So stealing
someone's unfinished copy is a violation of copyright.
>
>>> 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.
>
Good point.
>> 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.
I have that, also. You made a good point though.
i
|
|
