Copyright Infringers

[bunltd]

Since the latest Google update, I've found 3 sites that are using various portions of my site's content verbatim, only changing the name or e-mail. One even has links to my site included in the stolen text!

My question is this: I've sent off e-mails to the owner of each site, with links, excerpts, screen caps, as well as links to their hosting companies AUP, and asked them to please remove the offending material within a certain time frame. All very proper.

Is there anything else I am missing? I've been working on the content for this particular site since '96 in one form or another and while I'm flattered, I'm also more than a little ticked.

What other steps can you take aside from the copyright notice on each page?

LisaB

[tedster]

Here's a good resource:

[chillingeffects.org...]

[bunltd]

Thanks Tedster. Good site, will have to spend some more time reading. :)

BTW - one site has already e-mailed me. They said they were unfamiliar with my site and were surprised. Now how do you figure they didn't realize they copied the text verbatim? Gremlins, or maybe the Iraqi Information Minister did it?

LisaB

[Clovis]

bunltd,

maybe the responding offender got the info from another site that hasnt yet responded.

[bunltd]

Clovis:

That's what I kinda figured... They copied from a copy of a copy - or somesuch. Doesn't make it any less annoying.

[pendanticist]

Now how do you figure they didn't realize they copied the text verbatim? Gremlins, or maybe the Iraqi Information Minister did it?

Uh, because some psuedo-webmaster type SEO person with absolutely no scruples made it for them, whereupon they regailed in the fact that they had a web site designed by a real webmaster and moved on with their lives....

...until you came along.

Check out this thread for a novel twist Regarding Reporting a DMCA infraction...
Second infraction from an American University [webmasterworld.com].

Pendanticist.

[edited by: pendanticist at 9:13 pm (utc) on April 16, 2003]

[Clovis]

youre right, still pretty annoying. GO GET 'EM LISA B!

did you hire a copywriter to begin with then adapt your own copy as time went on, or is everything on your site your own? not that it matters, just curious about how you do your site.

the company i work for has several copywriters on staff for the clients we service, and even researching the web it seems the cost to have good copy written for a site isnt expensive.

when you weigh the risk of getting caught for infringement against the cost to have it done right, it just doesnt make sense.

[gcross]

My question is a tad different.

How exactly did you manage to find sites with matching content?

[bunltd]

Pendanticist: thanks for the link - you're right that is a strange twist. Does it resolve to a different IP than the first time - it might if it is a cached copy...

Clovis: I have written it all, it's a work in progress dating back over 6 years - refined as needed.

gcross: I found them doing routine searching for a) backlinks (at ATW) to my site, b) and searching for those specific phrases. Since that turned up some interesting results it just took a little research to produce the nifty information packed C&D letters to send to my new "friends"

[Tapolyai]

Have a unique sentence, and search for it in Google...

Something esotheric. Something like Copyright by bunltd...;)

[pendanticist]

How exactly did you manage to find sites with matching content?

I found mine doing backlink checks with ATW, Google and etc., but that was mainly because they copied everything in a certain file/index.

Does it resolve to a different IP than the first time - it might if it is a cached copy...

No, that particluar Univesity has several servers.

Note: I don't wish to have this thread turn into mine, as I have one that needs addressing based on it's own merits. I only posted it as a point of reference to show just how readily someone can steal your content... even those who teach our children.

Thanks.

Pendanticist.

[Jenstar]

I have come across several cases of people stealing entire pages from my site since this last update went live. When I send letters to the infringers, I always send a legal cease & desist letter (C&D). It includes the date I expect the stolen content to be removed by. It also includes all the legalese about how copyright infringement is punishable and he/she could be held liable for financial damages. You can find blank C&D templates on the web.

I send this to every email address for the infringer I can find (including whois info, anything on the website, and also by hunting around on the web as well.)

If the infringer doesn't respond, try contacting the host next. Many hosts won't tolerate any cases of copyright infringement on their servers, as they don't want to be held liable either.

There is also the DMCA route that others have mentioned. But I tend to find the above easiest, and usually results in the content being removed immediately.

[bunltd]

Update: Two of the infringers have removed the content - both were relatively gracious, but acted like they didn't realize that it was copied. I find that difficult to believe.

I still have not heard from the third and my deadline is approaching - I am loathe to visit this particular site to verify compliance since it triggers the nasty Xupiter... Guess I'll have to button down the old browser and visit. Blah.

LisaB

[Jenstar]

I think every single person has responded back to me with a "Oh, I am so sorry, I didn't realize I couldn't do that." One even told me that she had been told by her web designer that everything on the web is free and you can take whatever you want to! Yea right.

I think most play the innocent act so that you don't persue any further legal action once they have been discovered. Considering one of the infringers was a published author (of a book, no less) there is no way she could NOT have known that stealing content is copyright infringement. But they all seem to play dumb.

[herb]

Had one joker that put up about 100 plus one page sites that included our copyrighted material and several of our competitors. He was using a java redirect to an affiliate page so most people never saw the offending page.

Wrote him several times, no response. Sent a “take-down” request to his upstream provider. Got an auto responder from them but the sites were gone in about a week. Haven’t heard back from his provider yet, but they advised that they would look into it and relay their findings and any action they had taken.

[bunltd]

We have success! The final infringer has changed his copy! His new copy is full of misspellings (modivated) and other grammatical fun, but is that any surprise? I think not.

Thus concludes this episode of Copyright Infringers in the Uncharted Territories...

LisaB

[webpundit]

My question is a slight twist to the discussion topic. When conducting searches on many topics, I've found several sites with similar content. That is to say, albeit they're not exact copies, it's evident that copy for one has been 'inspired' from the other. What this consists of is merely changing sentence formation, words etc.

My question is what recourse do the websites with the original content have against these other perpetrators? Does that fact that the duplicate content is not an word-for-word copy, affect copyright rights?

Thanks!

[Jenstar]

This depends a lot upon how close the work is to the original. It needs to be verbatim - as in word for word. If all the sentences are identical, but they are simply put in a different order, this is still considered copyright infringement.

But if the only thing similar to between the two articles is the idea of what the article about, this is not considered copyright infringement. How you put the words together is copyrighted, however, your idea or theme is not. Most articles online have been "inspired" by other articles.

I could write an article on "How to Grow the Best Apples in your Backyard." If you have a site on growing apples, you could read it, think this kind of information would be great on your own site and then write your own article on "Growing the Best Backyard Apples" that covers the same ideas I put in my article. But as long as you use your own words, this would not be copyright infringement.

Jen

[digitalghost]

Q. If I paraphrase the entire work can I use it?

A. No, the work's expression may be protected by copyright, this makes you a plagiarist.

>>But if the only thing similar to between the two articles is the idea of what the article about, this is not considered copyright infringement.

That depends. If the idea is uniquely presented paraphrasing the work's expression is infringement. There are several cases in which paraphrased works have been found to infringe. Guides and tutorials are extremely hard cases in which to prove infringement though.

Someone nabbing your idea and paraphrasing it is more insidious than someone lifting your copy verbatim and it is also harder to find. Just ask any university professor how paraphrasing is dealt with though if you're unsure about whether a work needs to be copied verbatim in order to qualify as infringement.

[Jenstar]

I probably should have added to my post above. If the idea/theme can be found in more than 3 places, it is generally not protected (not sure how this applies when it is only found online, and not in traditional media such as a journal or book). Academic work has much stricter guidelines to follow, because many of the ideas behind the papers are completely original ideas (not found in other works), and can be protected by copyright law. So DigitalGHost is correct about the idea/theme thing. Copyright law when it is applied to academic work is a much trickier area, and a lot of it (in my experience, anyway) tends to fall right into that grey area with no clear boundaries of if it is or isn't true copyright infringement. Then often the claim of "forgotten footnotes/endnotes" arises.

With paraphrasing, it is much harder to find. That is often why these high profile copyright infringement cases tend to be brought about years after it is published, because often similarities are not word-for-word, but close enough you know one was taken from the other (ie. Stephen Ambrose - some of his infringed books dated back to 1970).

[dan the whaler]

Hi all,

Not directly related, I have occasional problems with people lifting my photographs from my site. I've recently found the most effective thing is to send an invoice to the financial department set out as if for a legitimate sale, saying where the picture was taken from and where it is placed.

They come down like a shot! A fear I think that maybe the invoice will go through the system and I'll be paid without any-one checking. Probably wouldn't work with smaller companies, but my problem is often with Universities who are big enough to lose invoices in the system.

Funnily enough I also get schools wanting to use my stuff and they always ask, the higher up the education ladder, the more arrogant they seem to get, maybe spent too long getting free money and resources to do their own thing.

[Tapolyai]

Jenstar, I believe even one occurance of prior work (by other[s]), would invalidate the copyright in court.

[mgream]

Copyright protects expression of ideas, not ideas themselves. Patents and other forms of IPR protect ideas. You can copy the idea from a copyright work and not infringe the copyright in the work, so long as you don't copy the expression of the work.

At least in the UK, you have to prove connection between original and copy to show infringement. This means that separately created works that may be equivalent in expression do not infringe each other and are separately protected. In the US, you do not need to show connection, but substantial similarity (I believe). Let's not forget that the web is worldwide.

In looking at infringement, the test for copy can't be avoided by paraphrasing or so on - any intelligent assessment of infringement is going be able to determine this, and the courts are known to lean towards finding that infringement has taken place as they are sympathetic to the rights of the copyright holder. Repeated judgements have stated that the test for infringement is one of 'quality' rather than 'quantity' and there is no absolute formula as each case has to be decided upon its specific facts and merits.