My $.02 (OK, more like nickle) on the Broken Camshaft

[Jenny Curtis]

Hi Qlist:

Reading the recent discussion about Brendan's page I just have to
throw in my opinion.  Brendan e-mailed me and asked if he could borrow
my rust repair guide for his page.  He wanted to edit it to fit into
the format of his page.  I agreed but not without a bit of bristling.
I think that it was the whole idea that sat wrong with me of having my
content entirely lifted off my page, even if I was given credit.  I
realize that when you edit something to fit a certain format you might
have to change things.  That's why it's editing.  But in many cases I
think the author should have the final say, especially if it's
something technical and changes to the text suddenly make the
information wrong.  I edit technical writing as part of my job and I
ALWAYS have the author look at the work after I edit the style to make
sure I haven't changed the meaning of something.

If some people had their content borrowed without their permission
then that's a whole other story.  That's just out and out nasty.  I
read a story about the Sunday Times in England that completely ripped
off a web site that was about humorous incidents that happened between
an English guy and his German girlfriend.  The Times changed the names
but stole the content word for word.  Ironically, the original author
was a freelance writer and he probably would have sold it to them for
less than they had to pay out in legal fees and lawsuit damages.  Even
more humiliating for the original author was having to defend himself
to people who e-mailed him to say "you sad pathetic loser, you just
ripped this off from the Sunday Times."  While I realize that this
case is not as severe as the Sunday Times' plageurism combined with
copyright infringement, taking something from someone's else web page
without their permission, even if you credit them, is still copyright
infringement.  The web is still the wild, wild west.  There is very
little recourse for this kind of theft and my own site contains
examples (Cary Grant stills from copyrighted movies, sounds from
movies, etc.) that are copyright violations.  So far in five years no
one has ever threatened me with a lawsuit if I don't remove them.  I
figure it's all sort of harmless fan-based fair use that in the end
probably makes far more revenue for the property holder than it does
for me.

As for whether or not Brendan's site is in the spirit of the web, I
would have to say that it is not.  The original reason for inventing
hypertext, etc. was for phycisists to share papers back and forth.
The difference here was that they were papers that they submitted to
an archive.  There is a vast difference between submitting your work
and having it lifted without your permission.

On the other hand, I think that the overall idea behind the site has
merit.  Wouldn't it be great to find  BTDTs quickly and easily and be
able to print them in a nice tidy format?.  If the site is merely a
list of links then it becomes impossible to control the format and
it's less useful.

OK, I realize that it's more like a nickel, so I'll shut up now.

Jenny Curtis
4kCSQ: The Eurotrash Princess