PLEASE READ - Posting articles from other websites

[desredandwhite]

Hi all,

Just short and sweet - Could we all please stop posting full articles from other websites? I've had a friendly (no, seriously.) e-mail from the club to let me know that the AFL and other parties are clamping down on the use of material from their websites.

I realise that it's more convenient to read them all in one place (and in fact, I tend to just read the re-posted articles here as it's easier). But unfortunately the content has been written for other websites / publications, and they have every right to the traffic / pageviews that result from people wanting to read said articles.

What's still acceptable? Well, I'm trying to get clarification on this, but in the meantime I would say that the title and the link to the article would be okay. I assume that short exerpts or quotes would also be okay.

As an alternative, how about a daily or weekly thread where people can post links to Swans articles they find online - just so that they are captured in one place.

Thoughts?

[Grant]

Yeah, thats fair enough i suppose you have to see their POV.Just annoying having to click everywhere else to see them when they are all normally on this one great site.

I suppose you could a thread titled 'News articles' or some thing like that where everyone posts their links to them as they find them(as you have suggested) but maybe it could be cleared and restarted every monday or something to satrt fresh articles for the new week?

[desredandwhite]

I like that, Grant. Have it as a sticky, then all new articles for the coming week can go in there. Definitely worth considering that idea.

[Go Swannies]

So we shouldn't take any articles from the AFL or Swans site as they have complained. Fair enough. However, there's no reason to stop posts from other sites - especially Fairfax and News Ltd as they are not related to the AFL.

It would be interesting to see if us cross posting could be regarded as "fair comment" and okay. But the point re hits is reasonable for those dedicated websites. I'd say Sportal should be excluded too.

The idea of posting the heading and the link (as we do for match reports, etc) on RWO should be good enough for the AFL/Swans site articles.

[liz]

Originally posted by Go Swannies
So we shouldn't take any articles from the AFL or Swans site as they have complained. Fair enough. However, there's no reason to stop posts from other sites - especially Fairfax and News Ltd as they are not related to the AFL.

It would be interesting to see if us cross posting could be regarded as "fair comment" and okay. But the point re hits is reasonable for those dedicated websites. I'd say Sportal should be excluded too.

The idea of posting the heading and the link (as we do for match reports, etc) on RWO should be good enough for the AFL/Swans site articles.

Why, though, one rule for one source and one for another? Surely it is easier just to enforce one rule that says "links only" rather than worry about whether the source has complained. All such material is proprietary to the source and they are entitled to receive the traffic to their sites. Apart from anything else, it helps to drive advertising revenue.

[monopoly19]

I agree with Lizz - just enforce the one rule and then have a sticky thread of news articles (that lasts for a week, say) and we can posts links in there. It's fair enough that they don't want us copying them I reckon (however annoying it may be).

[CureTheSane]

I don't think the club really understands what the internet is all about.
Next thing you know reading an article from a newspaper to someone will be frowned upon.

I would like to know why the club would expect us to adhere to their REQUEST when they seem to not want to recognise us, let alone show any interest in participating in a site that is solely about them.

Be careful.... next thing you know they will be requesting that we do not post links for MP3's, or even mention the word 'download', no criticisms of any Swans players, media commentators, or personalities, that any use of the colors red and white shall not occur together, and that we not write the words Sydney Swans without the little 'R' symbol in place.....

haha, I crack myself up sometimes....

Seriously, what a joke.....

[liz]

Originally posted by CureTheSane


I would like to know why the club would expect us to adhere to their REQUEST when they seem to not want to recognise us, let alone show any interest in participating in a site that is solely about them.

Hmmm... may have something to do with the law.

[Damien]

Originally posted by CureTheSane
I don't think the club really understands what the internet is all about.

I do remember Eddie encouraging members of scumwood to log onto the internet (well the ones that could read and afford it), because Telstra pay clubs additional money based on traffic to each of the Official AFL club sites.

I am guessing this is why the club is concerned, as they would possibly be losing traffic to the site, therefore the site would lose value.

[desredandwhite]

I don't think the club is the one that is worried - they have obligations to the AFL and to the news outlets - it is their content that we have been using.

We've really only been using it for "personal" use, not gaining commercially etc from it, but the law IS the law, as Lizz says. Why do commercial websites have content? To drive traffic through their site. If they are not getting the traffic, then there's no point.

Again, I do apologise, it's going to make it a hell of a lot less convenient to read the articles, but let's toe the line eh? The RWO coffers, though comfortably full in terms of providing server space for the year, can't quite manage to hire even a moderately talented law student to represent us.

[CureTheSane]

Hmmm... may have something to do with the law.

Feel free to clarify where the law stands with regards to media outlets putting information and articles etc out into the public domain on an internet that is based in no country in particular. Any precednets out there?

And if there are, the answer is simple.
Find a server in the States, or Indonesia, or some other country.

Also, most importantly, I would be requesting for the Swans alist of which media outlets were upset over this.
The Age?
Australian?
Sun-Herald?
Herald-Sun?

How against the law is it if they don't care, of if they give permission?

very easy to walk in and say "it's the law"

Are there any requasts asking us to stop plagerising (if that word is at all appropriate in this instance)

[Go Swannies]

Lizz,

Back to what I said about fair comment. You are entitled to quote from articles for the purpose of discussion - and that is what we are doing here.

I'm reluctant to give away the right to copy and post articles here because it does give us a good overview of what's being said. And as it's legal to do so, why not? However, I can see a reason to nurture the dedicated sites so I suggested that as a matter of courtesy we just post links.

Newspapers are another matter. They regard their websites as PR for their publications - and a reason to charge more for the classified ads posted there. Only when the staff journalists went on strike a few years ago did the writers of those articles get a token percentage pay rise to cover their articles being published on line, in the owners' other publications - and even sold to publications overseas. Outside contributors and freelancers fared even worse - they are given onerous contracts to sign that a 19th Century Welsh child labourer would have baulked at. Effectively, they are not paid more for multiple useage - or even on-sales - and they assign all their rights in case the publishers decide it'd make a good book. We don't owe them anything and as we are within our rights to continue as we have, why not?

Also, you can publish as many links to the Age's Real Footy site as you like but if they aren't registered to F2 those who try to use it won't get access.

[liz]

Originally posted by Go Swannies

Also, you can publish as many links to the Age's Real Footy site as you like but if they aren't registered to F2 those who try to use it won't get access.

Doesn't that suggest, though, they there is some value for Fairfax in having people register? Which might be precisely why they might not want us to do this - it takes away from whatever value they gain.

It isn't hard to register on Realfooty and it doesn't cost anything.

[CureTheSane]

Des, I understand where everyone is coming from.
I know how advertising is a source of income for sites.

It is very easy to bend over when the club says to, but I consider this a fairly important issue.

People will come in and say that clicking a link is easy.

And it is, but people generally couldn't be stuffed.

As far as I know when articles are posted, the writers are given their recognition, and a link is generally provided.

I think that is more than enough.

And you don't need to appoligise, it's your site, and you make the decisions.
If you are forced into something, then so be it.
But like I said, I don't consider this site to be the 'bitch' of the Sydney Swans.
If we are going to be told what to do, we aren't much different to the official site....

Just my opinion....

[liz]

Originally posted by CureTheSane

Are there any requasts asking us to stop plagerising (if that word is at all appropriate in this instance)

If you re-read Des' opening post on this thread you will find the answer.