ATTENTION!!! Palagrism

[infra_red_dude]

My explaination was a generalised one. It is very possible that if something good happens that guy takes the credit but if he edits the tutorial and gives wrong info then the person following the tut is at loss and ultimately he may point to Charan's blog. This is all I wanted to say.

 

[Choto Cheeta]

@Ani

Is the fear for watching people read wrong information which makes you afraid or is the fear of not receiving fame and credit which makes you afraid ??

If the information is right do you still would want to charge for the information as by asking the redistributer for mentioning source ??

 

[praka123]

what next?encrypting ur page so that someone who pays $$$ will only have access all monopolistic ideas!now dont tell me a teacher have to patent his/her lecture classes *www.reghardware.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/thumb_down_48.png

 

[infra_red_dude]

If the information is right do you still would want to charge for the information as by asking the redistributer for mentioning source ??

I would just say, search for Mac4Lin and count how many times my name has been mentioned or I've been credited Not the threads on linux forums, they are not reviews ... but the actual reviews on sites like Linux.com/Esylum/Wire.com blogs etc.

 

[Choto Cheeta]

ahhh why are you bringing Mac4Lin in to the picture ?? I aleready have said, Mac4Lin / GigaSmile or any such is some thing for which I, my self is ready to fight for

but please think for the Guides and the tuotorials like suppose Shareing DataOne connection...

I as QM said, I can reach 100 people here with that... Suppose 10 poeple Copy paste it, and they each get 10 visitor... Now that information is shared between 200 even if once again 10 out of that 200 posts it and gets another 10 each so its now 300 and so on...

My purpose, sharing that little knowledge, by charing it as for back link or mention source.. it can reach only 100 people, but now it can reach 300 is not that what we want, is not that 300 is a bigger gaol than to ask for back link or mention the source or such ??

 

[praka123]

cant it be possible in a blog/site to have some html option such that each and every page contains the original site and author,license etc embedded and while someone copy paste to his/her site that it retains that (hidden) codes!
OK!wild dreams!

 

[Choto Cheeta]

@praka123

DRM like stuff ???? like Blog_DRM

 

[x3060]

he he he . . finally we came to DRM . see thats what . . . . na , i wont say the rest

 

[praka123]

yeah..i was thinking lil back as a monopolist and got that idea

 

[Choto Cheeta]

he he he . . finally we came to DRM . see thats what . . . . na , i wont say the rest

well thats may be end of line for many of us.... if Digital Rights Management is now implimented for bloging and foruming to prevent unauthorised sharing of information think what is going to happen

Information will no longer going to stay free

Bellow wont never be archived

I as QM said, I can reach 100 people here with that... Suppose 10 poeple Copy paste it, and they each get 10 visitor... Now that information is shared between 200 even if once again 10 out of that 200 posts it and gets another 10 each so its now 300 and so on...

My purpose, sharing that little knowledge, by charing it as for back link or mention source.. it can reach only 100 people, but now it can reach 300 is not that what we want, is not that 300 is a bigger gaol than to ask for back link or mention the source or such ??

and if the above cant be archived, the reason behind me for being in any forum or DB or Blog doesnt Exists

 

[Gigacore]

what next?encrypting ur page so that someone who pays $$$ will only have access all monopolistic ideas!

Heh! Hold ur horses.... oops Cats *gigasmilies.googlepages.com/10.gif. Have u ever seen any tutor so far that says u need to pay $$ to access it ?... well i'vent seen or heard anything like that before.

Well encryption, *gigasmilies.googlepages.com/39.gif Though all pages wont have any 128 Bit Encryption security, they will place a warning somewhere in the page for not to copy it. For example, few people place a "Copy Scape" on their pages which says "Don't copy content. Site is protected by Copyscape." and no offfense but our vishal has this thing in his site!

And Credits: You know a online encyclopedia, which is so popular and provding free infomation to everyone on the earth. Though whole wikipedia is free to use and edit, they have a GPL license and it means anyone can use it and edit it for free. But when someone wants to copy an article to his/her site/blog, then he/she has to put a line that says "This article is taken from wikipedia" So why is this? Wiki is so popular, still they want others to give credits to the author. This also means they want the people who dont know about wiki to use it.

If u have the time to read this wiki's License page. Then u will find this:

*farm3.static.flickr.com/2274/2150807712_7437807d83_o.jpg


So what does it mean ?

It means wiki's license says, u need to give a credit to the author though its free to use.

When a huge encyclopedia's licenses is saying u need to give credits to authors. Then i feel really SHAME on people who are saying, "No it doesnt matter" Though our tutorials on our blogs, forums or sites, have no license or the copyrights, why cant someone give a credit when he copies it ?

Ok ok.. this is going no where. I'll stop here

now dont tell me a teacher have to patent his/her lecture classes *www.reghardware.co.uk/Design/graphics/icons/comment/thumb_down_48.png

Arre, meow!

Few lectures wont allow students to record their lecture. Why is this? Go and ask them.

 

[praka123]

^^really?

 

[Gigacore]

^^really?

Yeah *gigasmilies.googlepages.com/32.gif

 

[infra_red_dude]

@Saurav
Nahi yaar, you asked me specifically na. Thats why I said and also said what may happen to Charan.

See I post a tutorial like getting hibernate button in XP. goto regedit hklm>software>policies>MS>System etc. etc.. and create dword etc. Nobody will mind copy pasting this stuff.

But you capture images, illustrate it, explain it to the minute detail.. spend 5 dayz working on it.. then surely it hurts when someone copy pastes it in 2 mins and claims it his work.

I'm making it clear, I haf no problems if credit to the original compiler of the tutorial is not given. The goal is to spread the knowledge and correct and authentic knowledge. But it is wrong to claim someone else's work as theirs. Thats all I am saying.

 

[Choto Cheeta]

@Santosh
@Ani

Please help me to understand this,

I as QM said, I can reach 100 people here with that... Suppose 10 poeple Copy paste it, and they each get 10 visitor... Now that information is shared between 200 even if once again 10 out of that 200 posts it and gets another 10 each so its now 300 and so on...

My purpose, sharing that little knowledge, by charing it as for back link or mention source.. it can reach only 100 people, but now it can reach 300 is not that what we want, is not that 300 is a bigger gaol than to ask for back link or mention the source or such ??

Should the information, the free knowledge dont reach out for that extra 200 people just that because i am not getting credit and fame ???

@Ani

i am still wondering if our goal really is to make sure the free information reach out for the mass and then just we didnt get the credit thats why we should not allow that extra 200 people to obtain this information, which we provided free ?? ....

 

[tuxfan]

Choto Cheeta pointed out this thread and brought me here after a long time I had a cursory glance at the posts (there are too many of them to read in detail).

IMHO, copying info published on web is fine. But due credit must be given to the original author. Don't try to pass it off as your own smartness while all that you can do is copy+paste! Show me a person who uses copy+paste and doesn't have some ads on his site. All those people copy+pasting are the ones who start blogs, not for the love of blogging, but to earn some income. When you are getting hits and clicks due to someone else's work, at least give some credit to the person, if not a share from the moolah (whatever!)

Whether the original author has applied some license to it (like Creative Commons or GNU Free Documentation License) or not, IMHO, it is a moral duty of someone copying it to give due credit for it to the original author.

Of course, enforcing these licenses is a far greater challenge, but I condemn plagiarism and won't like my content getting used without my permission and without giving due credit to me! I am currently writing a series of articles on something that may help people. I am spending considerable time on it and will not like someone else passing it off as his own work. I post it on blogs so that it remains free (as in free beer). Although I am not expecting any financial benefit out of it (I even disabled adsense), I do expect some credit (or even blame) for it when I have put in time and effort.

 

[Gigacore]

@ choto ok.. if not link.. why cant someone just mention the name ?

This way.. if someone(copier) doesnt wanna give credit to the author, atleast he can mention the author's name. If still the copier, doesnt mention the name. Then it surely means that he wants credits from others, for someone's hardwork! Few readers may think.. "oh this tutorial is very good!" and may praise the copier. Unfortunately the reader wont be knowing that its others work.


I'm out!

 

[praka123]

GFDL=nirvana

 

[tuxfan]

@Santosh
@Ani

Please help me to understand this,

Should the information, the free knowledge dont reach out for that extra 200 people just that because i am not getting credit and fame ???

@Ani

i am still wondering if our goal really is to make sure the free information reach out for the mass and then just we didnt get the credit thats why we should not allow that extra 200 people to obtain this information, which we provided free ?? ....

If those copy+pasting are concerned mainly about sharing of information, why can't they just post the link to the main article? That will be far easier than copy+pasting and they can post more links and share more information in the same amount of time!

We know that they are not copy+pasting to share information, but to make some quick+easy buck from ads and popularise their so called blogs without putting in any effort from their own side. IMO, this is a menace that encourages laziness coupled with dumbness.

Web is a great resource of information, but have you ever wondered about the amount of false (at times deliberately false, sensational and/or "ad-sense optinised") content out there? A copy+paster has no knowledge of what he is doing and "shares the info" whether right or wrong! The original author will in due course correct his mistakes (1 web-page), but the copies (100 web-pages as per your numbers) will keep floating around and mislead people.

There surely a fine line between SHARING and STEALING.

 

[vivekbabbudelhi]

There surely a fine line between SHARING and STEALING.

maturity.......!!!!!!!

this debate for sure is gonna continue for ages & then also there wouldn't be any solution to the issue......

IMO what best can be done is it to watermark ur images with ur name if u are really adamant at protecting "your creation" on some "public forums".....