Re: copyright

I think it is kind of ironic that you can use a site like www.archives.org
to look at your old site to prove copyright infringements when
www.archives.org themselves are infringing copyrights by archiving sites
there in the first place.

It is clear on my sites that they cannot be reproduced, copied, downloaded
or archived in any manner, shape or form without my written permission, yet
my site is clearly archived on their servers.

By the way, even if they showed five different dates for one of my old
sites, the site that comes up is my current site.

As far as I know in Canada you do not need to register a copyright before
suing. The copyright exists as soon as the work is created. I do agree with
Bob that meta tags will probably not be grounds for copyright infringement.
It is frustrating that, Michael, that you found an exact replica of what you
wrote but my question is, if the old site is no longer there, why is it a
problem? Just wondering. Code is lifted of web sites all the time and that
is definitely copyright infringement but just like recipe books who knows
where the original came from.

Just my .000000000000000000002 Canadian cents worth.

Andie

P.S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Laurence" <webguy(at)re-data.com>
To: <hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org>; "Michael Muehlendorf" <haoka(at)wi.tds.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 3:00 PM
Subject: Re: copyright


>
>
> Hi Michael
>
> First off to prove copyright infringement is one thing.
> To file suit or any legal action the copyright must first be registered.
> $30
>
> You may see your old site at www.archive.org.
> Great source for this type of situation :)
>
> 2 great sources for this
>
> http://www.whatiscopyright.org
> www.ivanhoffman.com
>
>
> meta tags are not grounds for copyright infringement (too ambiguous)
unless
> they contain your company's name and/or trademark in them. A great deal of
> meta tags are generated by software.
>
> I am not a lawyer but I do know a great deal about this.
>
> Save your dime ;)
>
> Many users of the same software will generate an optimized page for the
> search engines and it could be that this was optimized by this type of
> software.
>
> The legal stuff again: I am not a lawyer and this is not meant to be
> construed as legal advice.
>
> bob L
> RE-Data.com
> Thought For The Day:
> I know no time which is lost more thoroughly than that
> devoted to arguing on matters of fact with a disputant
> who has no facts, but only very strong convictions
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Muehlendorf" <haoka(at)wi.tds.net>
> To: <hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 11:03 AM
> Subject: copyright
>
>
> > Hello List -
> >
> > Something strange happened to me last night. I had been doing searches
> from
> > AltaVista, MSN, Yahoo, etc. for a site that I recently did, just to see
> how
> > its standing was percolating up (or down). It's doing way beyond my
> > expectations.
> >
> > When I was done, just for the heck of it, I did a search for an old site
> > that I did in 1996 for a local manufacturing company which no longer
> > exists, and no longer has a site. When I had done the search engine
> > registration on this site, the results were absolutely phenomenal. I
used
> > techniques that I had picked up on these lists, and other places (plus I
> > sacrificed a couple of chickens...hehehe). In any case, some search
terms
> > for this particular site would bring it up as number one in Yahoo, MSN,
> > Lycos, etc. etc. It was great.
> >
> > Well, when I did this "fun" search last night, there was a URL that came
> up
> > in the results, call it xyz.com, and the synopsis that the search engine
> > gave was, word for word, the "description" meta tag from my old site.
So,
> I
> > clicked the link, went to the site, and viewed the HTML source. The meta
> > tags for "description" and "keywords" were VERBATIM from my old site
from
> > 1996, and this site was published in 1998. I immediately felt that
whoever
> > did this site "stole" my meta tags because of the great results they
got,
> > hoping that they would get the same good results.
> >
> > Well, I was flabbergasted. Then, I was p*ssed! I started to write an
email
> > to the webmaster, but had second thoughts. I think I just want to retain
a
> > lawyer. What do you guys think?
> >
> > Any comments or help would be appreciated.
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Mike
> >
> >
>
>

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA