I've never been a hard-core fan of various duplication movements that favor the presence of duplication being treated as a tolerable measure of leveraging our tech-driven resources. For example, whenever I produce a demo using public information, I always work hard to find ways of trimming and slimming any appearance of improperly applied duplication of the data without distracting from the overall visual objective which may call for duplication to occur.
Recently, I came across a discussion thread surrounding what turned out to be an issue surrounding the presence of identical content showing up in the major search engine indexes. The individual was asking for observations regarding the new site and one of the posters immediately offered up a perspective towards the downside of hosting duplicate content which the site clearly contained.
There hasn't been and probably won't be any clear and entirely conclusive method to say yea or nay on whether or not any licensing issues are at play with any piece of duplicated materials and it turned out the site owner did purchase the content from a 3rd party service provider. So although the discussion became hot and heavy for a while centering around common terms such as theft representing the reason why duplicate content is present in other sites, even I still harbor conflicting contradictions on Fair Use policies and how they are being implemented, let alone the impact of selling licensing rights to content that can quickly be construed as laziness, an attempt to spam the indexes, etc. if someone is interested in analysing a site from such a position. Once the site owner clarified the content came from a 3rd party service provider, the discussion toned down significant, but such confusion still can leave raw marks on someone's ego.
Therefore, if you are purchasing content from a 3rd party for online use, be sure to do your homework and try to find out how many others currently have the same content posted on their websites. Sometimes you can work your way through the search engine indexes for such a discovery, but unless you have one of these leads, you may very well have to outright ask the company.
The purpose for this type of research matters when it comes to a site owner wanting to gamble on garnering organic traffic from end-users accessing these indexes. If the site owner doesn't care about their presence in the search engines because they are satisfied with the traffic they are generating, purchasing the licensing rights to content is not a terrible market position to take. Ghost writing comes to mind and its role throughout history.
However, if the site owner is out to actively attain and sustain a Top whatever ranking, they risk auto-scoring mechanisms tilting their address towards the debit side of life. Basically, if you don't first bring the traffic, you're not going to out-score another site with the same content actively soliciting traffic through a variety of means and methods unless you bring additional strategies into your mix that also can quickly tip into the deficit column, such as keyword stuffing and link farms...no matter what major commercial search index you access. This type of popularity contest does not always find its way into other databases designed to be searched by an end-user, such as a library or a catalog, but it holds special significant for the searchable indexes such as the top 3 in the stock market.
Time to get back to hand-crafting more content.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Crime Free + SOPA + Copy = Oh my!
Scattered Crime-free Housing Mandates Across the Country + Felonious Copyright Infringement = Sheer Maddening Madness For the Copyright Holder
Although at first glance this may seem a little too sideband for this particular project, however copyright infringement issues fall smack in the middle of a potentially hazardous to everyone's legal health circumstance.
First, there are many crime-free housing laws lurking in the municipal code books of many municipalities across the United States. Without veering too far off base, a key risk element to a percentage of these crime-free housing mandates is the ability to immediately evict an individual based on the arrest of an individual on a charge of felonious behavior, without any due process being provided to the individual being arrested.
Opposed as I remain to what I cannot help but view as cowardly tactics being employed to do the "dirty work" landlord's have always had the power to inject whenever the desire to evict someone from a piece of property while a lease is in effect has arose, there is something far darker lurking these halls of virtual justice for the rightful holder of a copyright.
No, the copyright process as a whole does not need to be wiped clean and entirely eliminated as some school's of thought promote, but perhaps most importantly, there is no need to adjust the felonious behavior scope to cover one and all with a felony charge if they are improperly utilizing a copyrighted piece of work.
Since the definitions surrounding the meanings of "utilizing" a copyrighted piece of work range from the Fair Use end of the spectrum, right down to a demostration online proposed to be performed on a member of Congress should SOPA laws as they existed at the time were to be adopted and enacted into law.
So while I was off working on an entirely different portion of this V Decision Tree projection, it crossed my mind the SOPA legislation is still in the legislative machinery.
I figured this was as good of a place as any to drop off an extension of the theoretical demonstration of a politician being accussed of a criminal act involving a piece of copyrighted material.
If that politician was to be arrested on felony charges for the picture(s) he had on his website, it wouldn't matter if he was able to produce paperwork showing permission to use said pictures in terms of his being able to keep his home. He'd be kicked out. Kicked to the curb. Here's your stuff! Get out! You caused a cop to come to your door for suspected reason of felonious behaviors and are no longer welcome in this community. Leave! Exit! Do not pass Go! Do not collect any money from the act. Screw you and here's the bird!
Oh wait. I forgot.
If that politician owned his home, he would be entirely excluded from the Crime-free housing laws on at least a few municipal code books I've reviewed over the years. In fact, many of these laws focus solely on the renter being the more likely individual to perform a felonious act than a home owner. Yup! That's why some of the largest and most damaging financial scams over the years were performed by renters, not home owners. After all, an individual can own a corporation that owns a home that then leases the home to the owner...
It just seems outright insane for someone to expect me to default label someone a felon if I catch them using any materials I may own the copyrights on. There are degrees to such activities, just as there are degrees applied to all other areas of law. Can there be victims? You bet! Fines? To the victor will go the spoils? Arrest? Hmmm...
Loss of home due to arrest for copyright violations and crime-free mandates combined?
Again. Seems a little extreme of a potential event at the hands of every individual, no matter how these legislative methods are leveraged in and out of the court room history books.
So basically it would boil down to this. Every time I was to spot someone broadcasting my copyrighted materials, I would have to figure out what local police department would have jurisdiction so that I could present my evidence and then submit my request for enforcement of the laws that tell me this is the only way to begin the resolution/restitution process and if the person isn't hauled off to jail on my immediate say-so due to the evidence I could bring to the circumstance...what...file a complaint against the police department for not properly discharging their duties? What if a copyrighted piece of materials has no markings designating it as such? Just think of the number of graphics dumped onto your hard drive every time your computer caches a website. Do I have permission to have them there? My browser suggests that I do and so does my operating system, but what if I move them?
Therefore, I may not have alternatives to offer and maybe I've been misinformed/mislead about the enforcement measures still in the legislation, but this perspective still fits in as an extended thought coming from this particular effort no matter what the SOPA outcome becomes.
There has to be better ways of keeping up a system of copy rights/responsibilities/enforcement for one and all to at least try to abide by...
Right?
Although at first glance this may seem a little too sideband for this particular project, however copyright infringement issues fall smack in the middle of a potentially hazardous to everyone's legal health circumstance.
First, there are many crime-free housing laws lurking in the municipal code books of many municipalities across the United States. Without veering too far off base, a key risk element to a percentage of these crime-free housing mandates is the ability to immediately evict an individual based on the arrest of an individual on a charge of felonious behavior, without any due process being provided to the individual being arrested.
Opposed as I remain to what I cannot help but view as cowardly tactics being employed to do the "dirty work" landlord's have always had the power to inject whenever the desire to evict someone from a piece of property while a lease is in effect has arose, there is something far darker lurking these halls of virtual justice for the rightful holder of a copyright.
No, the copyright process as a whole does not need to be wiped clean and entirely eliminated as some school's of thought promote, but perhaps most importantly, there is no need to adjust the felonious behavior scope to cover one and all with a felony charge if they are improperly utilizing a copyrighted piece of work.
Since the definitions surrounding the meanings of "utilizing" a copyrighted piece of work range from the Fair Use end of the spectrum, right down to a demostration online proposed to be performed on a member of Congress should SOPA laws as they existed at the time were to be adopted and enacted into law.
So while I was off working on an entirely different portion of this V Decision Tree projection, it crossed my mind the SOPA legislation is still in the legislative machinery.
I figured this was as good of a place as any to drop off an extension of the theoretical demonstration of a politician being accussed of a criminal act involving a piece of copyrighted material.
If that politician was to be arrested on felony charges for the picture(s) he had on his website, it wouldn't matter if he was able to produce paperwork showing permission to use said pictures in terms of his being able to keep his home. He'd be kicked out. Kicked to the curb. Here's your stuff! Get out! You caused a cop to come to your door for suspected reason of felonious behaviors and are no longer welcome in this community. Leave! Exit! Do not pass Go! Do not collect any money from the act. Screw you and here's the bird!
Oh wait. I forgot.
If that politician owned his home, he would be entirely excluded from the Crime-free housing laws on at least a few municipal code books I've reviewed over the years. In fact, many of these laws focus solely on the renter being the more likely individual to perform a felonious act than a home owner. Yup! That's why some of the largest and most damaging financial scams over the years were performed by renters, not home owners. After all, an individual can own a corporation that owns a home that then leases the home to the owner...
It just seems outright insane for someone to expect me to default label someone a felon if I catch them using any materials I may own the copyrights on. There are degrees to such activities, just as there are degrees applied to all other areas of law. Can there be victims? You bet! Fines? To the victor will go the spoils? Arrest? Hmmm...
Loss of home due to arrest for copyright violations and crime-free mandates combined?
Again. Seems a little extreme of a potential event at the hands of every individual, no matter how these legislative methods are leveraged in and out of the court room history books.
So basically it would boil down to this. Every time I was to spot someone broadcasting my copyrighted materials, I would have to figure out what local police department would have jurisdiction so that I could present my evidence and then submit my request for enforcement of the laws that tell me this is the only way to begin the resolution/restitution process and if the person isn't hauled off to jail on my immediate say-so due to the evidence I could bring to the circumstance...what...file a complaint against the police department for not properly discharging their duties? What if a copyrighted piece of materials has no markings designating it as such? Just think of the number of graphics dumped onto your hard drive every time your computer caches a website. Do I have permission to have them there? My browser suggests that I do and so does my operating system, but what if I move them?
Therefore, I may not have alternatives to offer and maybe I've been misinformed/mislead about the enforcement measures still in the legislation, but this perspective still fits in as an extended thought coming from this particular effort no matter what the SOPA outcome becomes.
There has to be better ways of keeping up a system of copy rights/responsibilities/enforcement for one and all to at least try to abide by...
Right?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)