[Report Abuse]
[Login to Blog] crimeriddendump's Blog
Plagiarism ... WHO CARES?
Last comment by crimeriddendump 2 years, 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 (535) 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
More expensive than Times
April 23, 2015
Dennis Wyatt always wears his delusions on his sleeve. From the crime statistics of Manteca , to his wild PG&E conspiracy theories, the do-no-wrong high pedestal he places SSJID and the MPD, how Frank Aquilla is a relevant political figure as opposed to a religious and racial bigot, or how ...
Read More »
South San Joaquin Republicans FAKE
December 18, 2014
There is zero evidence with the California Secretary of State, nor the FTB, nor the IRS regarding the existence of an actual organization called South San Joaquin Republicans. The Republican Party of San Joaquin County has stated that they South San Joaquin Republicans is not at all sponsored by or ...
Read More »
Manteca OK with Hate
December 02, 2014
Sad to see that more than a month after the hate crime perpetrated against the Muslim community in Manteca that nothing has changed. Has the city tried to raise any awareness of Muslims in Manteca? No not at all! The city council could invite an Islamic opening prayer to the ...
Read More »
Typical Manteca Bigotry
October 27, 2014
The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees the rights of free speech and free assembly, regardless of how racist, hateful, or in the case at the Manteca Library on the night Jan 15th. Real Christianity - not a club of like-minded simpletons - believe in the teachings of Jesus ...
Read More »
MB reading comprehension
July 28, 2014
The MB Facebook page has a post that read: "Good morning! In-N-Out has officially been named the best burger chain in the country according to Consumer Reports, based on food quality, value and service. Do you agree with the survey? Go to www.MantecaBulletin.com and vote in our poll." One problem; ...
Read More »
[View More Blogs...]

Powered by
Morris Technology