Update on Internet content stealing
The response from the "I-can-take-what-I-want" Internet crowd was quick and predictable when the second largest newspaper company in the United States, MediaNews, signed up with Righthaven to protect its copyright.
"How dare newspapers try to protect their unique content. It is ours to use for free."
Or, at least that's how I read this "report" from Mike Masnick of "TechDirt".
The writer concludes: "Still, all this is doing is making me wonder why anyone would ever want to use any Righthaven connected publication as a source ever again."
If when he says "use" he means "use without permission", then I agree with him. Maybe newspapers are beginning to bring a little law into the Wild West Internet. And, that's a good thing.
(Full Disclosure: Stephens Media is a client of Righthaven and a supporter of the effort to stop content stealing on the Internet.)
This entry was posted on Friday, Dec. 10, 2010 at 09:32 AM
and is filed under The Complete Las Vegan.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response.
27
Responses
to "Update on Internet content stealing"
Is that really full disclosure? No.
More lies right to our face.
More lies right to our face.
"If when he says "use" he means "use without permission...."
You mean like the SNL TSA video YOU used without permission that is now blocked by SNL on your article? Your level of your hypocrisy is stunning.
You mean like the SNL TSA video YOU used without permission that is now blocked by SNL on your article? Your level of your hypocrisy is stunning.
I, too, would like to the explanation on that one.
It was my understanding that full disclosure meant FULL disclosure; doesn't that mean the columnist would be disclosing his personal involvement in the Rightwing..ehmm, Righthaven scam?
Your "understanding"? That's giving yourself way too much credit. But enlighten us, big boy. What is my "personal" relationship with Righthaven?
Gee Sherm, I woulda thought you woulda made a full disclosure, since that's what you said. Maybe you don't understand what that means; look it up. I know you have so much "other" stuff to do, like write the lead ins for stories that other people write, but maybe you could assign...no wait a minute, you lost that authority, well, then maybe YOU could look it up yourself. Try a Google search for Rightwin...Righthaven and attorney and Sherm Frederick relationship. That should get you started.
Here's a description for you of a MORE "full disclosure though: "The newspaper is currently involved in a controversy over the licensing of its content to Righthaven LLC, a litigation firm that was "grubstaked" by Stephens Media." Is that enough, or "do you want another?"
Don't try to slither out. What is my "personal" relationship with Righthaven?
Sherm: Tell us all now that you have no such relationship. Stop playing games, you assert you made "full disclosure" are you lying or telling the "truth"?
Or, since you're "apparently" interested, how 'bout explaining this quote: "former Review-Journal Publisher Sherman Frederick's "published threat was unequivocal: 'don't steal our content. Or, I promise you, you will meet my little friend called Righthaven."' Now, I don't know 'bout you Sherm, but when I call someone a "friend" its cause I got a "personal relationship with them. Maybe its me huh?
How dare newspapers try to protect their unique content.
What unique content?
What unique content?
@Aformer.... the problem is that you're taking the word "friend" literally and using it in a rational world. Now slip on Sherm's slippers and look at it from his perspective...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVKPzmR1gds
(note -- youtube link does bot go to pirated content, unlike a certain former publishers did recently)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVKPzmR1gds
(note -- youtube link does bot go to pirated content, unlike a certain former publishers did recently)
It's fun forcing mindless posters, like aform, to back up their statements. Of course, in this case he can neither put up ... or shut up.
It's fun forcing mindless posters, like aform, to back up their statements.
isn't it though?
take for example the mindless poster who wrote on December 4th, "I'm against higher unemployment and deficit spending no matter who the president is."
HA --- that poster still hasn't backed up HIS statement --- despite his ginormous body of work. Wonder why?
lol.
isn't it though?
take for example the mindless poster who wrote on December 4th, "I'm against higher unemployment and deficit spending no matter who the president is."
HA --- that poster still hasn't backed up HIS statement --- despite his ginormous body of work. Wonder why?
lol.
Anyone believe Sherm made a "full disclosure"? Now, I know, I know, no one with any sense believes much (if anything) that Sherm writes anyway, but seriously "Stephens Media is a CLIENT"...of Rightwinghaven? Thanks for being the same BS artist in your current job, that you were in your former one Sherm! At least for as long as you get to keep this one that is.
Your boss owns half of Righthaven.
That is full disclosure, you lying twit.
That is full disclosure, you lying twit.
Sherm, don't leave your peeps hanging ---- you've got loose strings floating all over this thread.
Oh --- I know. this is going to be like every other time you've "slithered out" on your obligations. right?
lol --- so predictable.
Oh --- I know. this is going to be like every other time you've "slithered out" on your obligations. right?
lol --- so predictable.
Ignorant babble.
"Ignorant babble."
Does that count as another days "work" Sherm?
Does that count as another days "work" Sherm?
lol -- "ignorant babble"? why so dismissive, Sherm? Seems you keep prying open Pandora's box then complain that you're to pooped out when the fun's about to start.
or were talking about the guy who babbled, on Dec 4th, "I'm against higher unemployment and deficit spending no matter who the president is."?
lol.
or were talking about the guy who babbled, on Dec 4th, "I'm against higher unemployment and deficit spending no matter who the president is."?
lol.
Any plans Sherm to discuss your unauthorized use of the SNL/TSA skit and their blocking you from showing anymore because of the copyright violation? Or are you prohibited from discussing it because Righthaven is suing you?
I love how this man has no hestitation about flat-out lying under the guise of journalism.
What a shameful display. I'm embarrassed for giving you the page views.
Your boss owns half of Righthaven, you lying twit.
What a shameful display. I'm embarrassed for giving you the page views.
Your boss owns half of Righthaven, you lying twit.
It's fun forcing mindless posters, like aform, to back up their statements.
Be when we challenge you; you seem to be 'mindlessly' absent. May we consider an absence of response as acquiescence?
Be when we challenge you; you seem to be 'mindlessly' absent. May we consider an absence of response as acquiescence?
i hope mike masnick sues you!!!
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101212/23404612248/sherman-fredericks-steals-me.shtml
hypocrite!!!
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101212/23404612248/sherman-fredericks-steals-me.shtml
hypocrite!!!
sherm, please take a moment to fully understand what 'fair use' is. i think it'll benefit you in the long run. yes, you can feel free to quote me here; i won't claim copyright on my comment. besides, you seem to be pretty familiar with what CTRL+C and CTRL+V do.
The biggest problem I have is that the Righthaven operation is a business model based on naked, no warning lawsuits. No cease and desist warnings or other methods that would allow potential violator to remove content the RJ finds violates their copyright, just sue.
With principals and/or entities affiliated with the RJ partnering with Steve Jones, the litigator extrodanaire and Righthaven founder, the paper is far from a disinterested party pursuing the noble cause of copyright protection,.It is a for profit partner in the use of our legal systems extremes to extract money from anyone who dare make a mistake, intentional or otherwise.
Juxtapose this against a history of pro tort-reform editorial content, and you have the ultimate in hypocrisy and a publication that has redefined itself and as a high tech ambulance chaser with a printing press.
What's worse is that the public message from the RJ
With principals and/or entities affiliated with the RJ partnering with Steve Jones, the litigator extrodanaire and Righthaven founder, the paper is far from a disinterested party pursuing the noble cause of copyright protection,.It is a for profit partner in the use of our legal systems extremes to extract money from anyone who dare make a mistake, intentional or otherwise.
Juxtapose this against a history of pro tort-reform editorial content, and you have the ultimate in hypocrisy and a publication that has redefined itself and as a high tech ambulance chaser with a printing press.
What's worse is that the public message from the RJ
Sherm, Sherm, Sherm --- your business model probably cost you a million or two clicks today. why? well I see drudge linked to the bellagio heist story via TV station feeds (one from LA). wonder what that was worth to the RJ?
as they say in my hood --- you can't fix stupid.
as they say in my hood --- you can't fix stupid.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Comments (27)
Registration Notice: The Review-Journal has implemented a new registration procedure that requires all existing and new accounts to validate and login using Facebook. Visit the Registration FAQ for more information.
Share your thoughts on this story.
Sign in or register to make a comment.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.