Directory listing

[JBanczak]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...

 

[paulavery]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

i'm amazed they haven't taken it down yet... or given credit.

 

[RFSitters]

I agree, that is somewhat shady to post a release with no attribution, but in the end if the effect of the press release was promote the inns, and not the directory, they should be happy the inns got more exposure. It is cheeky indeed.
It's also kind of rough to publicly pillary them for doing something perfectly legal by smearing their name on every innkeeping forum. I'm just playing devil's advocate now..

Hear, hear. If the purpose of the press release is to promote the B&Bs in the release (as it seems it should be), then wider distribution achieves the purpose. Isn't that the goal of everything done by BandB.com?

 

[IvyLee]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.

 

[EmptyNest]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

Sandy & Marty are always willing to let us use their stories and releases with our membership and in newsletters etc......but we ALWAYS give them credit.
If a news paper or anyone for that matter....picks up the press release they still should credit the source. I believe just credit is due in this instance as well.

 

[JBanczak]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.

 

[IronGate]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.

 

[IvyLee]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

That was the point I've been making the entire time, and that's the way things actually work.

 

[IronGate]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

That was the point I've been making the entire time, and that's the way things actually work.
.

That was the point I've been making the entire time, and that's the way things actually work.

I've got your back.

 

[EmptyNest]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

And why did those 2 UVA students get kicked out of grad school just a few months ago???
Because they copied stuff from on line and did not bother to credit their source: Wikipedia:-(
If it isn't illegal, then It is only common courtesy to cite your sources when you use someone else's works. Sorry but that was drilled into me in college.

 

[IronGate]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

And why did those 2 UVA students get kicked out of grad school just a few months ago???
Because they copied stuff from on line and did not bother to credit their source: Wikipedia:-(
If it isn't illegal, then It is only common courtesy to cite your sources when you use someone else's works. Sorry but that was drilled into me in college.
.

And why did those 2 UVA students get kicked out of grad school just a few months ago???
Because they copied stuff from on line and did not bother to credit their source: Wikipedia:-(
If it isn't illegal, then It is only common courtesy to cite your sources when you use someone else's works. Sorry but that was drilled into me in college.

Wikipedia is not a press release!!! Totally different scenario.

 

[JunieBJones (JBJ)]

Irongate Wrote: "Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. "
I VOTE YOU AS MAYOR OF B&B-VILLE! Once you open your inn will you advocate for us small family run B&B's who are trod upon by the "Dudes"?

 

[IvyLee]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

And why did those 2 UVA students get kicked out of grad school just a few months ago???
Because they copied stuff from on line and did not bother to credit their source: Wikipedia:-(
If it isn't illegal, then It is only common courtesy to cite your sources when you use someone else's works. Sorry but that was drilled into me in college.
.

If this were any type of media other than a press release you would be correct. People are trying to merge an advertisement, with journalism.

 

[JBanczak]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

Maybe I'm completely in left field, but I can't find anything on the web, anywhere from any professional source that says press releases can be copied without giving credit or that it is a legitimate and ethical practice. If it is out there, I'd love to see it. That is why I posted those two links.
As far as having an adversarial relationship with innkeepers - it is always a fine line on forums because often times things are taken personally. We participate in these forums and are willing to have an open debate with innkeepers. No other directories do this. We often debate whether or not we should, as we often feel that things are taken the wrong way. This thread is a prime example - we feel wronged that another site is plagiarising us, it is clear that a lot of innkeepers agree, and some do not.
Because of this then, our ethics get called into question, which quite frankly I do not feel is fair. Whether you agree with our pricing or not, we eat, sleep and breath this industry, and are passionate about getting more consumers into the B&B beds. I am on a one week vacation right now, and I've spent all day working. This is not uncommon for us.
I would expect on a forum that we are not always going to agree on everything - but I believe the ultimate result of a forum is to see all opinions expressed and try and get to the truth of an issue - and I believe that it only works with honest, factual communication.

 

[JunieBJones (JBJ)]

I will add that it is very gracious of Swirt to allow you as a Directory/Vendor to promote, defend and blab on this innkeeping forum, after you put your shoulder back in from the back patting.

 

[JBanczak]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

And why did those 2 UVA students get kicked out of grad school just a few months ago???
Because they copied stuff from on line and did not bother to credit their source: Wikipedia:-(
If it isn't illegal, then It is only common courtesy to cite your sources when you use someone else's works. Sorry but that was drilled into me in college.
.

If this were any type of media other than a press release you would be correct. People are trying to merge an advertisement, with journalism.
.

This is copied and pasted from the Cronkite School of Journalism (notice the attribution )
In general, there are only three circumstances under which a journalist does not have to provide attribution:

• Common knowledge: When information is commonly known to a majority of people, you don’t have to attribute it. Examples include: The World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked on Sept. 11, 2001; Janet Napolitano is the governor of Arizona.
• Background information: When information is undisputed factually and is available from a wide variety of reliable sources, you don’t have to attribute it. For example: Dennis Erickson, who took over as ASU’s head football coach in December, has 18 years of coaching experience, including six seasons in the NFL.
• Observation: When you witness something first hand, you don’t have to attribute the information. For example, if you are covering a protest and you see that passing motorists are honking and waving in support of the protestors, you can report that without quoting anyone or attributing the information to another source.

Attributing information from press releases:
Press releases are a common way for journalists to get information. A good reporter will use the press release as a starting point, going on to do his own reporting and gathering his own quotes. If you do use information from a press release, however, the rules of attribution apply.
Example: Gov. Janet Napolitano has issued a press release stating that she plans to expand a low-cost state health insurance program to help thousands of middle-class families pay for health care for their children. The press release includes the following quote:
“We owe it to our children to do better,” Napolitano said. “We owe it to their future.”
You have been unable to reach the governor for a quote, so you:

1. Use the excerpt as is. You have misled your readers into thinking that Napolitano spoke these words to you.
2. Paraphrase the excerpt, writing: Napolitano said the measure is necessary for the future of the state’s children. You still are being dishonest about the source of the information.
3. Use the excerpt but disclose the source: “We owe it to our children to do better. We owe it to their future,” Napolitano said in a prepared statement. This is better. You have told your readers that the information came from a written statement from the governor’s office.

 

[JBanczak]

I will add that it is very gracious of Swirt to allow you as a Directory/Vendor to promote, defend and blab on this innkeeping forum, after you put your shoulder back in from the back patting..

It is not back-patting, I'm applying aloe vera from all the lashings I get here!

 

[EmptyNest]

For what they cost you could for a year membership you could hire a good publicist on a per project basis...

.

I disagree that Press Releases cannot be plagiarized. Show me a time when a professional journalist would take any part of a press release, and print it without attribution. We literally get thousands of reprints per month of our releases, and any professional gives attribution.
If a scientist did a press release of a new medical breakthrough and posted it on his blog - a fellow scientist could not get away with copying it verbatim and calling it his own discovery... It is the same here - we did research on inns, contacted them, got them to give us quotes and additional photos, then released it. Another website cannot claim it as it's own.
We have numerous content partnerships where we let websites post our content - everyone from Expedia, to Vast.com, Away.com, LA times, even Google - we send them every photo/url/review we get - and all of them have a written agreement with us with permission to use it.
If you would like to read more about this exact issue, you can go to the American Press Institute page and see a very well written article on attribution and plagiarism... and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/
This is just one more example of why our directory is more expensive. Forget the fact that we drive more traffic, but we actually employ people who need to make a living here to put together original content, in addition to everything else we do. I guess we could just fire all of our employees and copy all the content from our competitors to save some money and lower our prices... but of course they don't have those employees putting this together in the first place - they copy ours - so that really wouldn't work...
.

What's the goal of press release? To generate exposure and pickup, therefore its' entire existence is TO BE PLAGiARIZED.
As I said, it's a bit shady, but it's common. The scientist argument is hogwash, are you joking? A new discovery is not in the realm of freely avaialble information (ie a list of travel ideas), so that doesn't apply.
"and it is crystal clear what The Innkeeper did is plagiarism"
.A directory is not a media outlet, so API really has no say because directories don't have an obligation to have journalistic standards, they are for profit vehicles. That article is about the ethics of plagiarism, not the fair use of press releases.
If the LA Times ran the release verbatim and only mentioned the inns, would you complain? No. You complained because you don't approve of the outlet. Whenever you put a release on the wires, it can be shot through thousands of distribution outlets - some strip the links, some the photos, it could be any part that dissapears and this happens thousands of times per day.
This is a huge waste of my time. It seems every time anyone disagrees with you, even on points that are debatable like fair use of news releases, you get nasty.
Plus it's pretty clear as your last paragraph shows you could care less about the ethics of this,or media ethics in general, you only care about propping up your business and slamming everyone elses.
.

Thanks Paul and Catlady - I agree, that credit is all that is due here. But this is not the first time this happened, it just happens to be the latest.
Ivy - I believe you have come up with your own definition and standards on what you feel is right here. I posted the link to the American Press Institue so you could see what a professional organization says about this.
http://www.americanpressinstitute.org/pages/resources/2006/09/when_does_sloppy_attribution_b/.
Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4].
Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism [5], and there is a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site.
It is important to reiterate that plagiarism is not the mere copying of text, but the presentation of another's ideas as one's own, regardless of the specific words or constructs used to express that idea. In contrast, many so-called plagiarism detection services can only detect blatant word-for-word copies of text.<<<
I'm not sure how you could take my post to mean that I do not care about ethics? You do not see our business plagiarising others out there. Quite the contrary - we have a team of people who do nothing but generate original content for the industry. I'm not sure how it becomes unethical to think that other websites wouldn't steal it and claim it as their own. I understand that there are innkeepers on this forum who are not happy that we have changed our gift card pricing, or that we raised our prices this year for listings - but I do not believe that is unethical. We have always been very upfront with our members and the industry about exactly what we do with our website.
.

. . . Here is the definition from Wikipedia dealing directly with online plagiarism:
Online plagiarism:
>>>Since it is very easy to steal content from the web by simply copying and pasting, the problem of online plagiarism is growing.[citation needed] This phenomenon, also known as content scraping, is affecting both established sites [3] and blogs [4]. . . .

This argument is specious. BedandBreakfast.com put the information out there as a PRESS RELEASE, not as a blog entry, an article, or any other copyrighted piece. It was clearly identified as a press release at the beginning and the end of the information, which completely changes the "rules of engagement", as it were. The information was handled as you should have expected, since you released it. Somebody picked it up and and provided another avenue of dissemination. Please stop acting like a petulant child because you were not given the credit for gathering the information in the first place. If it is going to upset you so much, stop issuing press releases, and only post copyrighted articles.
Gotta say, dude, that as an aspiring, the adversarial relationship you seem so intent on having with your membership is not filling me with a lot warm fuzzies.
.

And why did those 2 UVA students get kicked out of grad school just a few months ago???
Because they copied stuff from on line and did not bother to credit their source: Wikipedia:-(
If it isn't illegal, then It is only common courtesy to cite your sources when you use someone else's works. Sorry but that was drilled into me in college.
.

And why did those 2 UVA students get kicked out of grad school just a few months ago???
Because they copied stuff from on line and did not bother to credit their source: Wikipedia:-(
If it isn't illegal, then It is only common courtesy to cite your sources when you use someone else's works. Sorry but that was drilled into me in college.

Wikipedia is not a press release!!! Totally different scenario.
.

But it is the same thing...someone else's work!!! Whom ever wrote it should be credited.
I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Wikipedia is an online free-content encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
I have looked at it for a few things... But I certainly wouldn't have used it as a reference for a grad school paper.
How do you know if what you are finding there is even good information. Not something I put much trust in.

 

[gillumhouse]

So quit already!! Neither side is going to win over the other. The directory theinnkeeper.com has received more attention than they could ever have hoped for! The winner is - theinnkeeper.com or whatever their name is!!

 

[kris_pip]

So quit already!! Neither side is going to win over the other. The directory theinnkeeper.com has received more attention than they could ever have hoped for! The winner is - theinnkeeper.com or whatever their name is!!.

Not to continue adding fuel to this fire, but the question of whether this is "plagiarism" is really the question of whether the use was an infringement of the copyright, or a licensed use, or a fair use. Certainly, the expression in the article is entitled to copyright protection, but you would be very hard-pressed to argue that -- by labeling it as a press release -- you were not giving media outlets permission (i.e., a license) to use the expression. As others have explained, the purpose of a press release is to encourage media outlets to post it as a news story (whether there is attribution or not). You are doing the work for the media outlet in order to get the publicity.