Cease and Desist... copyright complaint from Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

VIA email from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette | 04/05/2004 | Corey Waugaman, PG Permissions Department

[Jim Robinson]

Subject: Cease and Desist...

Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2004 14:10:47 -0400

From: Corey Waugaman

To: Susan Kish , "'webmaster@freerepublic.com'"

To Whom It May Concern:

It has been brought to our attention that you have republished Pittsburgh Post-Gazette material without permission. This is a direct violation of the Copyright Law of 1976. Please cease and desist immediately.

It is the policy of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette not permit the posting of our material on any web site but our own.

Material to be removed:

Allegiance to party complicates local race for incumbent Diven

All eggs are not created equal

CMU slur brings apology

AND ANY OTHER POST-GAZETTE MATERIAL

Please remove all of our material from your web site within 24 hours. Periodic checks will be made to verify your compliance. If the material has not been removed within the allotted time, legal action will be taken.

Feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Corey Waugaman

PG Permissions Department

[Paleo Conservative]

That's very true. In some instance a correction is made for the very reason that we were able to read it and notify the originating party.

But other times it isn't so innocuous. Sometimes the spin of a story is changed based on how events turned out so that the DemocRATS get the best possible coverage.

[antiRepublicrat]

Another vote for Jim to institute a news story caching engine if the lawyers say it would fall under the DMCA's caching exemption.

[Darksheare]

"Periodic checks will be made to verify your compliance."

Sue them for harrasment and corporate spying..
*ugh*
NO!
Ignore that, that's too close to what the Libs would do.
God I've lived in New York too long..

[Paleo Conservative]

The real problem comes when they start keeping archived articles away from anyone, at any time. That's something to watch out for.

Or they modify articles in the archive without telling anyone or leaving any evidence that the "archived" story is not the original version.

[metesky]

I have a list of registration aliases ready to go.

[AppyPappy]

Access to original content is extremely important for accuracy's sake.

Correct but we don't own the article itself so we have to summarize. You could simply state any stats or info in the article. There is nothing they can do to you if you do that.

[DentsRun]

So, who's bringing this stuff to these papers' attention. Seems like we have one of these things pretty frequently. Is someone ratting out FR?

It could be they have a clipping service that checks for copyright violations. Or maybe just someone at the paper doing searches. I have noticed on occasion when I do a Google search that I sometimes get a hit on Free Republic.

[mtbopfuyn]

Is someone ratting out FR?

Probably since publicity of their publication should be appreciated. If they don't want it read and discussed, they shouldn't put it on the web in the first place. I'd like to know if the site that must not be mentioned has had such C&D letters. If someone has an account over there, it'd be fun to post this and other banned news sites and monitor if they get chastised as FR does.

[Brad’s Gramma]

Sigh.

BTTT

[FourtySeven]

Or they modify articles in the archive without telling anyone or leaving any evidence that the "archived" story is not the original version.

True, but who's to say that hasn't happened in the past?

We've all done the microfishe/film thing. For almost 100 years it's been the staple of archiving and sourcing. I think it's safe to say that it's reliable. Besides, however easy it is to alter a roll of microfilm, think of how easy it'd be to alter a website? I suppose that's you're point there, and again it's possible. But if we cast doubt upon any archival process, then who's to say another will be any better? In other words, who would be the final "archiver"?

Again, I'm not too worried about the "informational implications" of these copyright claims. I'm just POed that, with every chance they get, the leftists want to play informational games. It doesn't seriously affect my ability to archive though. At worse, I can simply cite an article, and force anyone I'm debating to go to the library. hehe

[jackbill]

There's only one liberal in my extended family. He's a journalist for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

When did they start hiring journalists? Wonders never cease.

[philetus]

Pittsburgh Post Gazette 800 number

They have this free number because they want to hear from all of us.


Customer Service: 1-800-228-NEWS (6397)

[philetus]

Nevermind. It's a call center in N. Carolina.

[Willie Green]

It could be they have a clipping service that checks for copyright violations. Or maybe just someone at the paper doing searches.

Posted articles sometimes contain the author's email address,
and I assume they must sometimes receive emails from our forum participants.
While it hasn't happened often, I can recall instances where the author has registered and entered into the discussion of their article. (I vaguely remember this happening with one of the Pittsburgh papers, but can't recall whether it was the P-G or the Tribune-Review.)

Anyway, that is another avenue by which they become aware of our discussions.

[TYVets]

"So, who's bringing this stuff to these papers' attention. "

Let me guess:

#1. Their Banker

#2. Their Accountants

[MineralMan]

"Posted articles sometimes contain the author's email address,
and I assume they must sometimes receive emails from our forum participants.
While it hasn't happened often, I can recall instances where the author has registered and entered into the discussion of their article. (I vaguely remember this happening with one of the Pittsburgh papers, but can't recall whether it was the P-G or the Tribune-Review.)"

That makes sense. It seems to me that FR is going to get moved to a position where posting excerpts is the only way we'll be able to deal with it.

I have no problem with that, although I do dislike excerpted stories where the originating site requires a subscription.

Still, I think that excerpting is finally going to have to become the standard here.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

I'll go them one better and not go to their site at all. It's my right.

[Libloather]

Allegiance to party complicates local race for incumbent Diven
All eggs are not created equal
CMU slur brings apology

Sounds like some real breaking news there. Cease? Maybe. Desist? I dunno...

[Jim Robinson]

Received another very nice reply from the Post-Gazette. They originally asked for a removal of the posts in question. I asked if excerpts and links would be acceptable. They said excerpts and links would be fine and thanked us for bringing attention to their paper (though some of it is negative).

We have had a couple others (The Onion for example) that would not even allow excerpts. They wanted Links only. Yeah, right. Just doesn't make much sense to post a title and link only. Doesn't leave much to discuss. LOL

[lonewacko_dot_com]

Many NewsMax articles are simply rewrites of other paper's reports: "According to AP, etc. etc."

"Furthermore, the Pittsburgh Picayune reports that all eggs are not created equal. They say etc. etc."