EDIT: The Observer contacted VIN to ask about the copying of the article. VIN neglected to apologize, and even had the chutzpah to congratulate the Observer that "this should give you a good profile as we have more than 10K unique visitors daily." [the apple: ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!]
I found this disturbing.
It is an article on VIN, a "frum news" website, but did they author the article? No. Instead, they copied and pasted an entire article from the Stern College paper, The Observer, and didn't admit that they lifted the whole piece. They passed it off as their own work, when in fact someone else researched and wrote it. No credit was given. No link to the original article provided.
What kind of ethics does that represent, when a "frum" news website is ready to steal -- yes, steal -- an entire piece?
Not to mention that this throws all their other news pieces into dubious light.
FWIW, VIN *does* source their articles. Look at the blue bar at the top of the article, on the right side.
ReplyDeleteIt would have been nice to put the author's name, however.
The Wolf
I'm going to have to agree here.
ReplyDeleteAlthough they *do* source the article, it's quite obscure and nearly unnoticable.
I don't think I would've seen it if The Wolf hadn't pointed it out.
They do it all the time.
ReplyDeleteOh - and they didn't ask before reproducing the entire thing.
ReplyDeletethe words plagiarism and lawsuit come to mind.
ReplyDeleteFunny, I saw that piece on my Reader right before I left, wanted to e-mail The Observer to ask about that. I've long wondered if VIN had permission to use a lot of what they post in the past; I'm rather certain that YW does this all the time (they used to not even mention the source they were ripping off). It's rather gross all around, but I think I'll stop before I go on too much of a rant about plagiarism. Good catch/post.
ReplyDeleteGag.
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, from what I understand of the US Copyright website: There's almost no question that The Observer is automatically considered copyrighted material and the republication in full of its articles is a violation of US Copyright Law.
ReplyDeleteVIN played this game with JTA until we sent them a DMCA notice. I strongly recommend having the Observer do the same, and I encourage you, if you know folks at the other mainstream Jewish papers who are having their stories jacked, to likewise do the same. VIN is pulling down thousands of dollars in advertising solely on the theft of others content. It's entirely illegal and frankly they ought to be stopped.
ReplyDeleteA small quote or two from an article, as long as attribution is given, would not violate copyright law; reprinting the entire article without stated permission does violate the law. So yes, VIN is in violation of the law. But it is also in violation of the Jewish precept of "ganevas da'as."
ReplyDelete'Journalistic Integrity'?
ReplyDelete'Aint that what them book learnin' types call a "contradiction in terms"?
It wasn't in a dubious light before?
ReplyDelete'Aint that what them book learnin' types call a "contradiction in terms"?
ReplyDelete:(
vosizneias and theyeshivaworld are two blogs that violate copyright laws on a daily basis. they copy full length articles and get paid for ads. thats just plain wrong.
ReplyDeleteon my blog post yesterday coincidentally, i took a different shot at them by asking who they are? by insisting on complete anonymity they invite suspicion
ReplyDeleteVIN & YW is based on stealing other peoples research & articles and posting them as their own. Only a tiny "source:___" sometimes gives credit to where they jacked it from. I think there is a huge potential for a lawsuit here.
ReplyDeleteDespite all that, I use VIN for most of my news plus they seem to have a much larger reader base (or at least commentators) than many other blogs.