Poor Little Blog Copiers!

For those of you who have criticised my reaction to blog copiers then I ask you this …

How many of you spend countless hours of your personal time at night and at the weekends learning this stuff and sharing it freely, then to find someone taking credit for your work?  How many of you spent 6 months writing a book to find it on warez sites 2 weeks after it was published?

Sure, I reacted very strongly.  Absolutely I did.  And you know why?  These people who blatantly copy other someone else’s work to get hits on their sites should have more than enough common sense to know it is wrong.  The previous individual was in the IT business and in his 50’s or 60’s.  The latest “poor baby” is in university, and even ignored the copyright I now place on every single blog post.  They know better and still feel OK with ripping off other people’s work.

If you’re having pity on criminals then I’m sure there’s some poor misunderstood gang members on a local street corner you can go adopt.  Come talk to me after you’ve hugged a hoodie in your home.

Until then, if I catch ‘em, I’ll cripple ‘em with the truth.

12 thoughts on “Poor Little Blog Copiers!”

  1. “For those of you who have criticised on my reaction to blog copiers then I as you this …”

    Anyone criticizing you is a DAMN fool!
    Hey people, if you don’t like it, don’t copy. Simple

  2. I agree with you. On my blog, I copy one or two paragraphs and link to the source. That’s the right thing to do. Always give credit to the original author.
    Keep up the good work. You’re blog posts have helped me loads for advancing my knowledge.

  3. I usually don’t even copy more than a phrase from blogger sites. I always link back to the blogger’s site as well. It is the proper thing to do. Give credit where credit is due. I may copy more from a vendor site when listing new features, etc. but that is different.

  4. I certainly understand your position Aidan, and I believe you to be in the right. The “nice” thing to do is to copy a paragraph, 2 at the max, and then link the reader back to the original blog. The original author then gets the impression, and if they choose to monetise their site, they end up with the revenue (which is how it should be).

    One thing I *do* ask though, is can you please reinstate the full article RSS feeds? I understand why you’ve removed them, but for someone like me who lives exclusively in Outlook for this sort of thing, it really has reduced the value I get from your excellent posts. For me, it’s not a choice of “reading in Outlook, or reading on the website”, it’s simply “reading in outlook when I have the time and somethign catches my eye, or not reading at all if I need to click links to see if the topic relates to me”. I’m not trying to be contrary here (it’s your blog, do as you please with it), but wanted to give you some honest feedback on the change and how it’s affected me.

    Again, please don’t take this as critism of your decision, or that I side with the copiers – I do not. I have received a tremendous amount of value from your blog over the years, and hope to continue to do so for many years to come. It’s made me a better admin, and able to make better decisions in my day-to-day work. And for that, I cannot thank you enough.

    1. Unfortunately I can’t because the aggregators use RSS to steal other people’s work. Sorry, the few spoil it for the rest of us.

  5. Agree with you. But it’d be nice if you still allowed us to right-click your pages. After all it’s still very easy to copy content even with this hurdle. It just makes it more cumbersome for regular people.

  6. I assume you have no issue with digesting your Blog *titles* and link directly to them? If you do, I apologize and will immediately stop. Just let me know.

    1. Hi Stan,

      Absolutely no problem, and thank you for doing that. You’re doing the polite thing and it is appreciated!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.