[Report Abuse]
[Login to Blog] crimeriddendump's Blog
Plagiarism ... WHO CARES?
Last comment by crimeriddendump 1 year, 1 month ago.

Take Me To Post Comment Form

I'm curious why the Bulletin finds it acceptable for some users to post copyright protected images as "user photos" in the community section of this publication. The Bulletin has a sad history of allowing plagiarized material in the printed section of the publication as well as the online comments. Now, it would seem the Bulletin's lax attitude toward copyright law as now percolated into the online picture section.

All photographs were original taken by someone. I know this sounds trivial, but, it's important as this the many people's job. These people are generally paid per publication or website that licenses their photography, or graphic design, for their own use. Taking an image from anther website and reposting it without permission is analogous to shoplifting.

Some will argue that they are taking the images from Wikipedia and wikipedia is free, therefore, they can take whatever images they want and do whatever they want with them. These people have clearly not read the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license that governs the usage of many Wikipedia and Wikipedia Commons content. The "meat and potatoes" of this license is the following:

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported , one is free to:
to share – to copy, distribute and transmit the work
to remix – to adapt the work
Under the following conditions:
attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work).
share alike – If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one.


First, I see ZERO attributions giving credit to the original author in ANY of the plagiarized images posted here from Wikipedia. Second, by definition, posting to the Bulletin alters the image as well as the license to the Bulletin;s more restrictive commercial license - something that is explicitly forbidden by the CC-A-SA.

Plagiarism is a seri-os offense. It's sad that a supsed journalistic publication would have such little regard to protect copyright holders. Why hasn't the management taken some reasonable effort to help ensure that the Bulletin is not disseminating stolen material?

What steps should be taken to mitigate the Bulletin's obvious and continual problem with plagiarism?


Latest Activity: Mar 16, 2013 at 8:08 AM



Blog has been viewed (429) times.

Bull153 commented on Friday, Mar 15, 2013 at 16:28 PM

@ crimeriddendump a.k.a. Hoffman...

... Let's see...

"Plagiarism ... WHO CARES?" - From your post's rating, apparently nobody.

"What steps should be taken to mitigate the Bulletin's obvious and continual problem with plagiarism?" - None... no problem.

- Ron

crimeriddendump commented on Saturday, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Sad that someone feels his own opinion and personal graveness outweigh facts and reality. Especially funny since Bull153 just logs in an out to obsessively downgrade blogs he does not agree with and then up vote his own only so that he can make a point about it later.

The facts are that copyright law is regularly and routinely violated by some posters here. Bull153 has been especially bad with plagiarizing images seeming to think any image on this internet is free and he can do whatever he likes with it. Frank Aquilla has posted numerous letters that are copied word-for-word from other sources. Heck, the Bulletin itself attempted to create a whole new online section called DealOn that was nothing but a complete copyright violation. Also to note, IRONICALLY, Bull153's latest blog uses a copyright protected image.

The sad thing is that Bull153 is right. Seems no one at the Bulletin cares about copyright violations. Oh well. I guess if living in his own imagination rather than reality is what makes Bull153 happy, then so be it. Who am I to argue against imagination with facts ...


Log In to post comments.

Previous blog entries by crimeriddendump
 
Murder? What murder?
March 30, 2014
Dennis Wyatt seems to be doing an excellent job continuing to ignore Manteca's growing crime problem. Each month so far, Dennis Wyatt has used backward math to try and claim Manteca's crime rate is falling when the exact opposite is true. Now, there is a dead women discarded like trash ...
Read More »
 
"christian" Bulletin
March 20, 2014
Just weeks after CEO Perrea and CEO Dillman where given quick access to the Bulletin's opinion pages, we have yet another "christian" church CEO Richardson seemingly supporting his CEO peers. The closing line " whatever antagonism there may be to God’s Beacon Light of Truth, those who assault it will ...
Read More »
 
More Dennis Wyatt lies
March 19, 2014
Why does Dennis Wyatt feel the need to constantly lie to the readers of the Bulletin? In his latest column, Wyatt tells the following lie: "No wonder the Bulletin’s social media was abuzz with comments regarding Richland Communities pondering a housing plan for the 184 acres the firm bought on ...
Read More »
 
"Where there’s meth ... "
March 16, 2014
“Where there’s meth, there’s mail theft." Seems Manteca's locked mailboxes are being pried open in the middle of the day for "meth addicts" to steal holiday greeting cards. WAIT! I thought Dennis Wyatt told us several weeks ago that crime was "down significantly???" What city has low crime AND people ...
Read More »
 
Measure M diversion THEORY
March 14, 2014
I was thinking more about the Measure M bit and wondering why Jason Messler and MUSD would hire lawyers to take Measure M money oversight away from a citizens commission. Now, I think I have the answer. Vocational Schools. Seems Messler is starting this whole new vocational initiative. Now, there ...
Read More »
 
[View More Blogs...]





 
Powered by
Morris Technology