Copyright And The Blogger Syndicate
Published October 03, 2006
This week, our own Blogcritics mailing list was abuzz with the issue of copyright infringement. Not the kind that only happens when kids use their grandparents’ computers to download the latest Black Eyed Peas tune; but the darker kind, namely: taking the work of an author, say, a talented Blogcritics contributor, and reprinting that work, under your own name, without proper attribution.
This is a topic that is near and dear to the hearts of journalists, and as a result, one that doesn’t often get very balanced coverage. As writers, we believe that our creative work is sacred, and the United States, and International Law assures us that we retain certain rights in that work, including the rights to copy, alter, and distribute the work. In order to get published though, we often have to give up some of those rights, to let the websites, journals, and publications printing our work do their thing.
One of the side effects of this process, at least in the blogosphere, is that our creative works are distributed via feeds to loads of other sites and individuals who, in turn, reprint the feeds in their own formats.
To a certain extent, bloggers acknowledge this when they publish a work on a site with syndicated feeds (a la Blogcritics.org). In fact, part of why we write is to reach the largest possible audience; heavy syndication and high marks on social bookmarking sites like Digg, Reddit, and Technorati, are exactly what we want.
However, one of the problems we run into when dealing with this incredibly loose flow of works, is the potential dilution of authorship. In its simplest form, it may be that the author of a work is not immediately apparent; however, most feeds link back to the original source. More troubling however, is the out-and-out lifting of one author’s work and the reprinting under a different name (by troubling, I mean rolled-up newspaper across the nose bad).
This is of course, a very bad thing, and the toad who steals someone else’s work for their own, should be sent to bed without supper. As an author though, what can you really do about it?
1. Protect your blog to begin with.
How you go about this depends largely on whether you’re a contributor to a larger site that handles your formatting, or you run your own blog. If you run your blog via Wordpress, your job is easier.
- Copyright And The Blogger Syndicate
- Published: October 03, 2006
- Type: Opinion
- Section: Culture
- Filed Under: Politics: Law and Rights, Culture: Media, Culture: Arts, Books: The Writing Life, Sci/Tech: Blogging
- Writer: Rich Frankel
- Rich Frankel's BC Writer page
- Rich Frankel's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments
Terrific article about a suject of great importance in the digital age when images, words and ideas are presented in a manner so easy to appropriate.
It also just came up on my Yahoo Headlines widget as a featured news headline. Speaking of wide dissemination of ideas at a rapid pace.
Remember that episode of The Simpsons where Homer tries to protect his mound of sugar?
Same thing.
I will definately keep this in mind and thanks rich for tha attributing...
Written by "Jet in Columbus" © 2006 for Blogcritics.org
Thanks Rich - you didn't have to do that, but it just goes to show how much you're in the spirit of protecting intellectual property.
Alas, I do believe another infinitely more wise Blogcritic posted the link to our group a while back, I can't recall who it was, but we owe that person thanks.
Lorelle's article is great, isn't it? Very comprehensive. A real eye-opener too.
I am pleased to tell you this article is being featured in the Culture Focus today, October 4th.
Diana Hartman
Culture Editor
Thanks Diana, it was a wonderful treat to wake up to.






As a poet, writer of prose fiction, musician, and journalist, I've pretty much always been concerned about copyright.
I agree with much of what this article reports, and I agree philosophically with the concept of information being free. However, when this idea is misinterpreted, it hurts every communicator and artist.
Information is only that, information, and ideas are a dime a dozen. All of this should be freely distributed. Form is another matter.
If a writer's particular presentation of the information is used, then the writer should be credited for that and, in my opinion, paid for the use where there is money being made.
That's the real issue here. Anyone can have the information in my article, and can probbly find that information elsewhere. But if they take my actual article or some part of it, then I should always be given appropriate credit (and cash where possible).