<< VICTORY CLAIMED ~ MAIN ~ COLUMN SOLVES OIL OVERCONSUMPTION >>
NYT - AUSTRALIAN EDITION
Webdiary houseboy Wayne Sanderson has hit on an ingenious method of earning money via the internet; he simply lifts subscriber-only content from the New York Times, posts it at his own site, and then charges people for the privilege of being alerted by email to this creative process. He’s been doing it for months, usually erasing the evidence after a day or so.
“But … but … isn’t this some kind of blatant breach of copyright?” you may ask. NO! It can’t be, because Wayne is bound to uphold the Holy Webdiary Ethical Charter of Honest Ethicals, and is therefore incapable of doing wrong. Although it might be interesting to get the NYT’s opinion.
UPDATE. Noting that Sanderson runs a copyright notice on pages filled by the work of others, Evil Pundit asks: “Why doesn’t Wayne sue the New York Times for publishing his copyrighted articles by Paul Krugman?”
UPDATE II. Scroll to the end of the lifted Krugman column and you’ll spot a credit/link reading “Paul Krugman/NYTimes”. That link takes you not to the NYT, but to Sanderson’s subscription page. Annual subscription $77; at current exchange rates, TimeSelect is ten bucks cheaper.
From the Holy Webdiary Ethical Charter of Honest Ethicals:
My expectations of you
As a journalist I have ethical obligations to readers; as a contributor you do not. Still, there’s a few guidelines I’d like you to follow. David Davis, who’s read and contributed to Webdiary from its beginning and helped draft these guidelines, explains
(my boldering and italicising)
Doesn’t she realise that David Davis is, er, gorn? and he’s been partially erased from the site….
But, but, that page is “©2004 The Daily Briefing. All rights reserved”.
Why doesn’t Wayne sue the New York Times for publishing his copyrighted articles by Paul Krugman?
Posted by Evil Pundit on 2005 12 06 at 12:27 AM • permalinkCrash. This is very important news I am sure, but at some point you have to quit breaking into other peoples’ websites with off-topic stuff. I allow a certain amount of this, but you are abusing the privilege, and I have had complaints.
If you want Tim to post about something you feel is important, his email address is available on the sidebar of the main page. Or else please take advantage of the many free services out there and get your own blog.
Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2005 12 06 at 12:58 AM • permalinkPray, do not speak ill of Wayne. He is traumatised. Having worked for the ABC Radio and ABC Television he aspired to, but ultimately did not get The UN Peace Prize.
BLAIR YOU APPALLING HYPOCRITE!
You know you’ve been posting comments for YEARS with words FULL of letters OTHER PEOPLE have been using for CENTURIES! You haven’t even BOTHERED to CHANGE the COLOR of the INK!
And yet you have the nerve to criticize Sanderson for this petty, picayune peccadillo? Oh, SHAME!
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 12 06 at 01:01 AM • permalinkRichard - EVERY word in your comment was stolen from something I wrote in grade 6; now give them back right now.
As for Sanderson’s not at all sophisticated scam: on top of all other things WD, is this Tim’s way of torturing us; does this nightmare never end; is Tim, in fact, paying them all to do hideous, humiliating, unethical, and unclean things? Surely they don’t do these things of their own volition. No-one is that dumb.
Sanderson should be applauded for showing some inititative and the can-do spirit that makes Australia great. He will be an inspiration and role model to Margo.
Posted by Mystery Meat on 2005 12 06 at 01:31 AM • permalink<i>Annual subscription $77</i>
He’s still asking people to pay for the same content they can get for free at Webdiary?
Posted by Evil Pundit on 2005 12 06 at 01:33 AM • permalinkPixy - as the saying goes, quite accurately: you don’t know what you don’t know.
It’s true that incompetent people are unaware / oblivious to their incompetence, and the reason is not willful stupidity, or even denial, it’s simply because they are truly unaware of what it takes to be competent; they quite literally do not know.
Nah! hes such a fan of the Chinese system hes giving that a go.
You know steal intellectual property, rebrand it as your own and sell it on. All very communist dont you know?Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2005 12 06 at 05:23 AM • permalinkAh what a comedy. I remember not too long ago that Wayne Sanderson was challenging a bloke to a physical fight because he had stated that Wayne was up to no good and was spending little time on putting together The Daily Briefing while rolling in MargoK cashola.
Looks like that original criticism was right on the money, pardon the pun.Posted by Hank Reardon on 2005 12 06 at 07:29 AM • permalink#15, Ck
as the saying goes, quite accurately: you don’t know what you don’t know
There’s a saying that says that? I thought I thought it up. My version was/is: some people are too ignorant to realise how ignorant they are. (See the complaint of ushie re THAT TONE a few posts back.) So now I have to provide an attribution? Bummer.
Then again, when a thing is true it’s quite likely that there are plenty of people with at least two properly synapsing neurons who will realise the truth of it. Hence the saying I guess. That thought makes me happy.
#16 Actually TFM, Wayne is following a very old and (dis)honourable journalistic tradition - stealing from one source is plagiarism, stealing from many is research…
BTW - Do we know where the Daily Briefing is hosted? Do we let the hosts know about a legal breach on one of their hosted sites? Do we care?
—Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 12 06 at 07:32 AM • permalinkhe he he.
Here’s the best one from the same thread.Wayne Sanderson
“I come from good country stock, who earned every dollar they ever made by honest toil”Posted by Hank Reardon on 2005 12 06 at 07:38 AM • permalinkJanice - quite common in business; relates to whether or not stuff is really under control, for example; and whether people are asking the right questions, or drilling down enough to find out “what they don’t know” - then you have to cross your fingers that you really do know everything.
Oh, all except the stuff you don’t know.
So, when everything goes pear shaped, as it does, it can sometimes be because of all that stuff that no-one knew about.
If you get my drift.
As you note, it can also relate to ignorance, but the problem of the incompetent being oblivious to the extent of their incompetence is easier to demostrate, prove, and re-validate on a daily, if not minute by minute, basis. BTW - “studies have shown” that the incompetent rate themselves WAY higher than competent people rate themselves; see, they really believe they’re doing an outstanding job.
Ck, Janice, have a read of Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments.
It’s the classic paper on nincompoops. Sample:
In 1995, McArthur Wheeler walked into two Pittsburgh banks and robbed them in broad daylight, with no visible attempt at disguise. He was arrested later that night, less than an hour after videotapes of him taken from surveillance cameras were broadcast on the 11 o’clock news. When police later showed him the surveillance tapes, Mr. Wheeler stared in incredulity. “But I wore the juice,” he mumbled. Apparently, Mr. Wheeler was under the impression that rubbing one’s face with lemon juice rendered it invisible to videotape cameras.
Hi Janice and Caz, I thought Donny Rumsfeld may have summed it up well:
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.
That’s clear… I think ;-)
—NoraPosted by The Thin Man Returns on 2005 12 06 at 07:51 AM • permalinkMybe it’s a franchised blog?
$77 for all the junk you can eat…
Posted by W i l l i a m on 2005 12 06 at 08:33 AM • permalink17 RhikoR, I know it must be late, because I read that comment as ....something large and spidery.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 12 06 at 08:35 AM • permalink15 CK
It’s true that incompetent people are unaware / oblivious to their incompetence, and the reason is not willful stupidity, or even denial, it’s simply because they are truly unaware of what it takes to be competent; they quite literally do not know.
This plausible excuse pretty much evaporates the moment they encounter somebody who DOES know better, and who DOES attempt to explain their blunder to them. First they don’t hear him, then they don’t understand him, then they don’t believe him, and then they tune him out. From that point on, their formerly innocent ignorance is fairly appraised as malfeasance, and they should be bitch-slapped immediately. Sanderson & co are WELL beyond this point. I hope the NYT sues their asses good and hard.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2005 12 06 at 11:10 AM • permalink23 CK
BTW - “studies have shown” that the incompetent rate themselves WAY higher than competent people rate themselves; see, they really believe they’re doing an outstanding job.
They’re all above-average drivers AND have excellent senses of humor, too. Just ask them.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2005 12 06 at 11:13 AM • permalinkThe amateur imitates, the pro steals…
Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2005 12 06 at 03:12 PM • permalinkWhy does she need funding? Why can’t she pay her own way like the rest of us? (well, I’m on blogger, but I still pay for my connection).
Cut with the whining, woman. Go get a job, and blog in your spare time like the rest of us.
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2005 12 06 at 06:02 PM • permalinkWayne probably thinks, as Peter Schikele said P. D. Q. Bach thought, that plagiarism isn’t stealing but rather is like recycling.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2005 12 06 at 06:39 PM • permalinkMichael—So Wayne is writing The Unbegun Blog...?
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2005 12 06 at 08:43 PM • permalinkdoing the legal equivalent of penetrating Wayne with something large and splintery
Or large and equine. Nothing’s too good for someone who does the same to the Times. Complete knavery.
Posted by tree hugging sister on 2005 12 06 at 11:57 PM • permalinkNo Richard, I suspect it will be The Stoned Blog. Or perhaps Phil and Margo and Ted and Alice: A Blog In One Unnatural Act.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2005 12 07 at 12:19 AM • permalinkekw - well, well, just when I thought I knew all there was about pushing your buttons, you go and surprise me. Now, where’s dictionary and this year’s financial statements? Oh, look, I have a lovely little business plan here, all about growth projections…and the compliance manual I’m writing, well, I thought that would have only one use.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
SPRUNG..