I have been noticing that particular people who follow my Blog have been consistently cloning my post contents of the latest and re-posting these, which are actually originated from my Blog, at other Internet places as if they found the contents themselves, *without citing* the original source of the contents, i.e., my Blog! I have commonly seen this happened at the two major Pentax forums from time to time, namely, at the DPR and the PF.
It should be noted that I have been spending numerous hours and am doing my own hard works in the light of finding any Pentax related news and reports as well as writing technical articles that I think should be interested to many Pentaxians. The behaviour of those people who just knew to steal my contents but refused to cite me is really too disgusting enough! >:-(
In this regard, I feel obliged to remind those content thieves that it is strictly prohibited for what they have been doing and it is simply a serious infringement to my own copyrights and I do not want to see such kind of thefts anymore! Still, I opt not to disclose their names and post the links this time but next time I will not hesitate to do it immediately! By then, don't blame me for any name mentioning if it does happen again! :-o
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Logging you in...
Comments by IntenseDebate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
MrBig · 626 weeks ago
RiceHigh 110p · 626 weeks ago
Arn · 626 weeks ago
Yep, that's why it's so funny !
RiceHigh 110p · 626 weeks ago
Tomasz Worek · 626 weeks ago
(btw, copying content of your page without adding source is nothing nice and I understand that you are angry)
Asahi · 626 weeks ago
Wallace · 626 weeks ago
RiceHigh 110p · 626 weeks ago
Wallace · 626 weeks ago
http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2012/03/thinnest-k-m...
I don't actually mind but the point is that you can't use other people's images and posts and then complain when the same thing happens to you. I make a point of only using my own images or if I must I download images from the manufacturers press site. You have my permission to use those pictures by the way.
RiceHigh 110p · 626 weeks ago
I think this is just how the Internet is working. If you just don't want anyone directly link to your site and contents, I think you should state it somewhere at your site, or simply, to disable direct linking at your web hosting server.
Susan · 626 weeks ago
I suggest you to move to nikon,
Or if you love pentax that much, just use pentax me/k1000 as i do.
This "pentax plastic toys" doesnt make any concern,
Even the pentax 645 is fake with sensor size (not 64x45mm but smaller);
When you realize the circumstances you'll realize that "we" have to learn alot,
Try read kenrockwell and you"ll apreciate some sarcasm,
Or maybe you aint real photographer? Well its okay, and i dont write this to make some trouble to you,
Best regard,
With love,
Susan, CA.
Yvon Bourque · 626 weeks ago
I often use the same source that you use and mention their website. Many sites try to help readers see all that is available on the Pentax Subject and it's my pleasure to mention these on my blogsite, along with credits to them.. As long as your site is not copied in is totality and as long as your post is pointing to another site, it's everyone's right to use the same source. That source should be the one mentioned, not yours. Now if you write a complete article, authored by you, no one has the right to copy your post in its entirity and publish it as their own. I don't believe this is the case here.
Please continue finding interesting Pentax blogs or sites, so that we can all share it with all Pentax owners out there. You know, sites like 1001 noisy cameras is read by thousands and what they do is bring news about photography in general, found on thousand of websites. Theyare not stealing blogs or posts, they are simply gathering information to share with photographers.
Dave's clichés · 626 weeks ago
RiceHigh 110p · 626 weeks ago
zosX · 626 weeks ago
MrBig · 626 weeks ago
zosX · 626 weeks ago
Raw · 626 weeks ago
Chris · 626 weeks ago
That set aside, quoting without citing the source is simply arrogant. Whoever does this makes the reader believe somebody else's thoughts are those of his own, while they are truly those of the original poster. Wannabe bloggers do that, not serious people with thoughts of their own that would be worth sharing.
Just my 2c. Feel free to quote me but name the source.
Chris
RiceHigh 110p · 626 weeks ago
rj_sd · 626 weeks ago
I guess the dumbest post was saved for last. Are you saying individual or corporation that invests resources into developing a technology that is patented does not own that intellectual property? Is that what your little brain concludes? That’s like telling private business owners “you didn’t build that” really only someone without a brain could come to that conclusion. I guess the level of intellect shown here can be traced to the fact that most of the population depends solely on government for their education.
Put it this way no one will invest or work without a reward (Money). It’s a simple free market concept. Without copyright & patent law no one would be able to reap the rewards of their own creative work. You know like creating lifesaving medicines and such, folks do not work invest and create out of the benevolence of their hearts.
Chris · 626 weeks ago
By the way, you are reiterating the stuff that IP-owners would like you to believe, namely there would be no creative work without patents. Well how come the wheel was invented?
And the media industry would like you to believe there would be no music without today's restrictive copyright laws. Ah, right, so they did not have music a thousand years ago?
(Just for the record, where did you get your education if not from governmental institutions?)
James · 625 weeks ago
And indeed there was music a thousand years ago, and the business model in those days was that you either paid the musician or it was being done (at the musician's choice) for free. Generally it was a case of no fee = no music. Now technology allows us to steal from our troubadours... It's different.
Chris · 625 weeks ago
For example, if we could have music only by enforcing a copyright, then by all means, I'm all for it. But that assumption is not true: since copyright laws are NOT needed in a society to bring up music, tell me why society has a need to enforce an artifical notion of "ownership" to digitized data, while criminalizing millions of people (probably including you and me) who occasionally copy a song without paying for it.
Or do you see a certain right carved in stone that past business models have to be profitable forever? In that case, one should have forbidden recorded music in the first place, because it killed many performing musicians' career.
C