User:Dgw/Blog copyright discussion (2007-11-17)

This discussion was copied from the Wikipedia Reference Desk (Humanities section) three days after its creation, on 11/20/2007. The discussion was started on 11/17/2007. It is kept here for my personal reference and ease of access as I deal with the continued sending of DMCA notices. Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 04:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Help enforcing blog copyright
OK, after months of contributing I have a question to ask. I've noticed several copies of many of my blog posts on sites across the Internet. My question is, is there any way I can easily get them removed, without resorting to paper communications or a lawyer? I haven't the money for a lawyer, and paper just frustrates me (hence my always being here :P ). I don't know if this falls under the Legal Disclaimer linked at the top of this page, but I thought it was worth asking anyway. Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 11:40, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * (This is not, and should not be construed as, legal advice) The Digital Millennium Copyright Act might be useful. Algebraist 15:06, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Generally speaking when people want things taken down from the internet for copyright reasons they file a DMCA takedown request. You file it with the ISP who hosts the sites. --24.147.86.187 (talk) 16:08, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * A number of questions suggest themselves:
 * Do you object to these copies for copyright reasons or for reasons of privacy?
 * Where (in which jurisdiction) are the sites that copy your blog posts located?
 * In some countries, when privacy is at stake, people are advised as a fist step to approach the owner of the site and request removal. Needless to say, such requests may be ignored, but at least by making them you can later prove that you have done your best to solve the matter amicably. Bessel Dekker (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * There is no privacy involved here, as far as I know, since my name does not appear within the posts (though my pristine Internet pseudonym does). Admittedly, one of the sites is only using excerpts, which may weaken my case against them, but the other has copied the entire post and framed it with ads. The first site appears to be registered in Russia; the second, in Germany (based on WHOIS queries).


 * As one site is a squatter (holding onto a misspelling of propeller.com) and hosts pornographic content, I especially object to that association, but that's the one using excerpts. I can send C&D letters via email and see if they listen, and then contact the hosting providers, I guess. Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 16:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Very unpleasant indeed. However, I should not think that the use of excerpts weakens your case: they are still your texts, and obviously are not used for purposes of review or critical demonstration. I think that the two steps you mention, would be best to begin with. Chances are that nothing comes out of them, it should be said in fairness, but after a reasonable interval of time, further steps could be taken. Keep us posted! Bessel Dekker (talk) 16:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I will. Fact is, I'll probably post another question if those two steps fail. You can also keep track of status on my blog (link in UBX on user page), where I will be posting about this problem, and once a day or two has gone by and this thread is moved the RD archives, I'll copy to a subpage for posterity. Thanks for the advice, all! Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 16:59, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Consider yourself bookmarked! Bessel Dekker (talk) 17:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * [Cue The Jeffersons theme] Who knows, you might even decide to subscribe. :) Your edit summary threw me for a loop there. BM doesn't mean "bookmarked" in the popular culture I know. :P Took me a little bit, but I did get it. Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 03:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC)