Sad news: I've been ripped off by a major vendor

It genuinely makes the IT Skeptic sorry to say that a major ITSM content vendor has seemingly stolen my content. This kind of thing shouldn't happen. Be aware that Two Hills actively polices our intellectual property and will aggressively defend it.

This doubly shouldn't happen from an organisation that sells digital IP. We are not talking a phrase here and there: this is a 489-word post almost in its entirety, presented as their content with no acknowledgement of its source.

I asked for the content to be taken down and it was immediately, so I won't be naming names...this time.

It is of course possible that the famously absent-minded IT Skeptic has forgotten I gave permission to use the article. In which case I would have asked for an acknowledgement and link. But I don't recall, there is nothing in my mailbox, and there wasn't an acknowledgement. The fact that the only edits I can find were to remove the words "IT Skeptic" and a reference to "BOKKED" makes me confident this was not the case.

To make it even worse, where I had quoted someone and linked to it, they left the links out! it was a crude cut'n'paste.

Our terms and conditions are here. Copyright terms are also at the bottom of every page.

A "brief extract" is a quotation, within the normal definition of "fair use". It is not a whole bloody 500 word post.

For example this isn't fair use - it is 50% of the post. Their little mash-up website is barely worth the bother but I have asked for it to be removed. I suspect all I will achieve is spam to that email address. I assume it is an email harvester. A defunct one - it hasn't been updated for over a year: check the dates on news items. I wonder why BMC, CA, Managed Objects, and other vendors associate with this stuff. Google has them sussed: page rank zero - not unranked, zero.

" any form" means changing the medium is not fair use. Put it in a book, read it on a podcast, print it on a poster - it is still the same content and requires permission.

I hope this is clear. If it can be made any clearer without the need for two hoodies with baseball bats please let me know what we can do to clarify these terms.

Digital vendors should know better.


My bad

Hi there,
I was just looking in the weblogs of that site and came across your posting. The content in question was put up so visitors could go directly to your article because it was quite interesting.

The website hasnt been updated in over a year and it never will. I am trying to get it taken down at the moment. The site was originally put together to rival the likes of tool selector, etc.

Many apologies for upsetting you. That was never the purpose. Like I said before the site is coming down as soon as possible.

the gist

Thanks. I was pretty mad at the other offender and it washed over onto yours so you probably copped more than deserved. The other one was a ripoff pure and simple whereas the mash-up site is just quoting much too much of the articles before linking. This happens all the time but I don't think it makes it OK: quote so much, over half, that you have the gist and don't need to go there but they pretend it was "just a quote and link"

I have been suspicious

I have been suspicious of "ITIL"/"ITSM" "gateway" sites for a good many years, since repeatedly discovering sites with very little content but linking to each other (one of the old techniques for increasing ranking, I believe). There are clearly a fair number of players in the industry who are just in it for money, which is quite depressing.

Stealing other people's content is fortunately something I've seen less often ... but it's still depressing.

a minor irritant

I don't have a problem with being in it for the money - I'm trying to make a living off this stuff myself. As i've said before if you want to change the world work for UNESCO or Red Cross. I also don't have a problem with (legal) SEO techniques - I use 'em myself.

On the other hand, like you I have little respect for mash-ups - sites that don't create content just recycle it. They are everywhere in the internet.

Just to be clear, that mashuip site is a minor irritant. The incident I'm talking about was unrelated to that content or that site, and involved a commercial site not a mashup (and nothing to do with Ian Clayton BTW, we remain good friends)

Very sad

Sorry that this happened, but kudos to you for being "on it." The internet age has opened up a lot of questions about copyright, and it is important that we all be vigilant to protect the integrity of original content.

the laziest form of theft

The fact is nobody looks out for us but ourselves. I encourage everyone who publishes content to devote a little time each month to policing it.

Even dear old Google is effective: spot an unusual turn of phrase in your work, quotate it and google it.

There are free tools on the web.

Or if you can afford it then look to firms that provide a commercial solution.

I hate digital piracy. It is the laziest form of theft.

Sad, very sad

Journalistic standards and rules should apply. Heck, what happened to simple respect and aknowledgement for another's ideas. The very least they could have done was include the links to make it look like a decent rip off!

All I know for me personally is that as a result, I will be skeptical as to the accuracy or relevance of any of the *#!* this website puts up.

Maybe it's really just run by Chokey's arch enemy or something...........

The story behind Chokey???

BTW, skep, what is the story behind Chokey???

I thought it was the mascot for the All Black's world cup team?

sex politics and sport are prohibited

sex politics and sport are prohibited on this blog, except when I get politically wound up occasionally :-D

actually, recall that i don't consume any popular media so i really don't know how they are doing!

Syndicate content