Update this article has dissappeared from Lockergnome but is referenced on The Mortuary Portal we have the full story as it was originally posted on the extended entry.
Give me a break if Cnet is so paranoid that they have to send out Cease and Desist letters to tell sites to quit linking to their content then I think they have lost sight of the medium of which the publish news in.
I used to get all of the print magazines and there are still a ton of them but the news arrives a week late so I quit subscribing. You don’t think that by reading there data on the web and then commenting on it and then providing a link to the article isn’t driving traffic to there site.
I would not even be reading Cnet news if it wasn’t online. Very interesting to say the least. I bet they got pissed when someone was criticizing and taking a opposing view. I just wonder how long before we get our letter in the mail. [Lockergnome]
Article pulled in it entirety from The Mortuary Portal
Kevin Christley
TheMortuary.org Senior Editor
An editor of one of the sites that I closely work for has informed me that CNET.com has issued a cease and desist notice citing that linking to their publicly published articles is in direct violation of U.S. Copyright Law and fails the “Fair Use” provision.
The site in question has a policy in place just like TMP does… Excerpt no more than three paragraphs and always provide a direct link to the article in question. In no instance have they (or our site) ever mis-represented the authorship of any article, but have sent traffic to their site in an attempt to educate the public on the issue.
In our search to uncover relevance in copyright law, we checked out a recent article at Patents.com:
“…Under US law, for example, even if the copyright owner has not given permission, it is still okay to copy something so long as the copying falls within what is called “fair use”… and the use to which the copied matter is put (quoting for use in literary criticism or for educational purposes is more likely to be fair use than some other uses).”
“…The designers of the World Wide Web intended that it would be precisely that — a web. One of the hopes and goals of the designers was that after the passage of some years, a meaningful fraction of the sum total of human knowledge would be on the Web, and that it would be fully cross-linked.”
While I can fully understand their zeal to protect their “intellectual property”, brief quotations and linking to an article for educational purposes falls squarely under “fair use” in the United States.
A little known fact to the CNET lawyers, a full copy of all viewed web pages are stored in the internet cache of most popular browsers. This is a full copy of their work. Does that mean that everyone who views their web pages is breaking the law? No. It simply means they are ignorant of the technology behind the web.
Their arguement is capricious and breaks the fundamental ideas behind the world wide web. In providing a brief excerpt and link to their publicly available (and viewable) content, we are simply guiding people to their site to learn more about the subject. This gains CNET (and other sites) more potential new readership that find CNET is a pretty interesting source of information on the web.
I hope that CNET’s Legal Staff changes their mind about this and ceases and desists from making a mockery of the basic functionality of the WWW. If you wish to lodge a written protest of their actions, feel free to contact them via the following snail mail address:
General Counsel
CNET Networks, Inc.
235 Second Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: 415.344.2000
And just in case you were wondering, feel absolutely free to republish this article in it’s entirity, or simply link to it from your site (we love the traffic). ;)
Yeah, it appears so. It is unfortunate that I was given incorrect information by the Editor of the site that informed me of the action.
CNET News.com was very pleasant to work with, and they helped clarify the issue in full once we had their contact number and verified the real story behind it.
I am a staunch protector of our internet freedoms (which seem to erode daily) and that’s why I went on the warpath when I heard second hand that they were issueing C&D’s and to expect one to come our way. Needless to say, CNET never planned on serving anyone a C&D, just to ask compliance with their linking policy, which is very fair.
After the conversation, I went through my site and fixed some of the issues that they felt was excessive use of quotes, which I agreed might tell the full story and potentially stop our reader from checking them out, and they seem happy with the results.
In this age of needless litigation, it is refreshing to be able to work out a compromise with simply a short phone call and verbal agreement.
Kudos, CNET News.com – You have restored my faith in the web!
Kind regards,
Kevin
So, tempest in a teapot…..
I had the pleasure of talking to CNET’s John Roberts this morning to try to clear up some of the confusing issues behind the story we broke concerning supposed ‘Cease and Desist’ letters being sent out to independent web sites who post links and brief quotations of intellectual property belonging to CNET (new.com).
Why this copyright issue concerned me so much was the fact that such legal precidence has the potential to legally stop the web from working the way it was originally intended.
What we reported was derived from second hand knowledge, and it was refreshing to discover that what we had originally reported as fact was incorrect, and for that we apologize for not being able to follow up on the facts before breaking the story.
Mr. Roberts, who is not from CNET’s legal staff (as originally reported), said that he had sent an email (not a Cease and Desist Letter) to the editor of one of the sites with whom I am affiliated with, requesting that they abide by CNET’s linking policy, which if you read it is fairly generous.
Our official stance on linking and brief quotations was to never exceed three paragrahs in a direct quotation and to always link directly to the article at it’s source. Our intent of this policy is never to mis-convey the fact that the content belongs to another site and that we simply providing a brief teaser of the article so our viewers want to read the full story at the original source.
Mr. Roberts was very understanding, and is admittedly not a lawyer. His intent of emailing the original letter was simply to protect CNET’s intellectual policy, and that he never requested the offending site to remove all CNET links from the site in question, only the content that he felt infringed on CNET’s intellectual property. He also confirmed that he never sent a Cease and Desist letter.
He said that CNET encourages linking to their content as long as it follows their linking guidelines (posted as a link at the footer of their web pages) and does not go out of the bounds of Fair Use (which he agreed can be quite broadly interpreted).
He said that in some cases, three paragraphs of direct quotes could be excessive, depending on the length of the story in question, and I agreed entirely with him. To our knowledge, we have always abided by this idea, and if the story was extremely short, our direct quotations were shortened as a result.
I agreed to him, that like Google, we would strive to shorten our direct quotations of CNET content to under a paragraph if possible, and always attempt to remain within their posted guidelines.
All in all, it was a very good conversation, and it is nice to know that CNET isn’t trying to be the bad guy here. They offer a great service to the web community in allowing sites like ours to link to their content through RSS feeds and great articles of interest.
It is unfortunate that the information I received was incorrect and that I did not have contact information with CNET and was unable to clarify the facts prior to posting our editorial.
I’d like to thank CNET’s John Roberts for clearing up the issue for us this morning, and I appreciate knowing that contrary to what we originally reported, CNET encourages ‘fair use’ linking to their content. I will strive to ensure that we at The Mortuary remain well within those guidelines.
Hmm, so typical of management types to sue first, ask questions later when dealing with issues like fair use. Since no C&D letter has been issued yet, I’m sure its because the lawyers looked at this issue and said “umm, thats fair use, we can’t do anything”. But the PR people will continue to send meaningless threats to try to scare you.
Remember, it’s not lawsuits that stop people, its the threat of lawsuits. Most small sites like the one in question don’t have the time or money to even approach a courtroom, so they quickly give up.
Although in this case, if what they say about the situation is true, MP is in the right. I look forward to seeing if this goes any further.
And on another note, I can’t f*(%ing stand people who go out of their way to correct other peoples grammar. Esp. on a website that doesn’t intend to be anything more than a blog/geek news site. Get a f’ing life!
Please share the text when you receive it, Kevin.
I too think it doesn’t sound like CNET. I’ve always found them to be the most net-people-friendly corporation around. I’ve had lots of good experience with them. And think highly of their whole operation.
So I’d really like to see the details of these matters.
Well, it sounds unlike CNET, but it’s a very true story that I broke. The site in question was sent a cease and desist email sent by CNET Lawyer John Roberts (email) john.roberts@cnet.com (phone) 415.344.2836.
I will be contacting him on Monday because it seems he now wishes to serve our site with a C&D letter now. I have yet to get this email, but am told it’s on it’s way.
The news article is still on LockerGnome, but it is now in the archives and not viewable from the main page.
Enough
Then quit visiting I am not an english major. Like most doctors my writing sucks but I know my way around electronics like it is no ones business.
This is just a small site that is edited by myself and few volunteers. Usually late at night or very early in the morning when we have finished the jobs that put bread and butter on the table. If your going to bitch about a few grammatical errors then move on.
Can’t find the story at Lockergnome. Got another link?