Ron Borges - Plagiarist?

So asking for attribution within a bylined notes package is being a little nuts? Everything in these notes packages was printed in its original paper -- so simply throw in the half-sentence that begins, "It was reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that not everyone within the Packers organization was happy that Brett Favre decided to return." It's not that hard or unwieldy and is much more journalistically sound. A byline indicates that Person X is responsible for everything within this story -- when that isn't the case, we need to inform the readers.

 

I would. But I don't think it's fair to impose new rules without warning when the disclaimer has sufficed for like a quarter-century.

 

I agree with the spirit of your post, but where do you draw the line? Is thebiglead run for profit? Is this site? Should I credit AP each time I post a pic on a thread?

 

I don't know. Next time I see a Getty image on biglead's site, I'll shoot an e-mail to Getty and I guess we'll find out.

 

How much does a Getty subscription cost, btw? There's no prices on the site.

 

So the disclaimer, in conjunction with permission from the other writer, means you can copy and paste articles with impunity?

 

Very fair point. Blogs that make money (the ones that are part of corporations) do subscribe to the service. Tiny blogs such as ours aren't making big bucks (it's more of a hobby). Actually friendly with a couple photo editors who I have shown the site to ... and we have discussed this. They know the site isn't paying the rent, and are cool with it. Getty/AP etc are already going after the big blogs that make money.

There are simply too many tiny blogs to go after. Something like 56 million total. And less than .01% make any real money.

 

This really shouldn't be AP's call, but the call of paying members. If we consider a local blog a competitor/nuisance and we are paying AP for membership, why should our competitor/nuisance be able to freely steal what we have to pay for? If you want to consider yourself legit, pay for your content like legit media do.

 

Nuisance? Wow, haven't been called that since I was seven. A) We dont use AP/getty photos all the time, B) I have no problem turning over my income statements from the blog when they come calling (In fact, I need another person to laugh at them besides the significant other), C) How'd we shift away from Borges?

Do you realize the cost and time though, to go after EVERY BLOG pulling pictures from Yahoo/Sportsline/etc, and take them to court over it? And at the same time, aren't you the guy who says blogs don't matter?

But for you, starting tomorrow, we'll begin to make it a priority to credit photos.

So back to Borges ...

 

This is Borges-related. Borges had permission to use what he used, although he should have rewritten it. You are taking material we pay for -- a credit does not suffice. As AP is a NEWS COOPERATIVE, we are subsidizing you, basically. You are not really stealing from AP, which is non-profit, you are stealing from the newspapers that fund AP:

http://www.ap.org/pages/about/about.html

Whether you make money is irrelevant. We are not in the business of subsidizing people's hobbies. Either buy your art or go without.

 

I do not know about a subscription. I do know that if you buy via newscom.com, a live Getty photo is $145 each.

Rates for AP vary according to circulation size and what extras you want. You can buy AP photos individually for personal or commercial use. The AP says:

 

Verrrrrrrrrrrry sad example.

What Borges did was tantamount to returning from the restroom, asking you what happened, looking at your laptop monitor and writing exactly the same thing you wrote.

Had Borges merely been looking at a notepad and writing off what he saw, he would have digested what was in the notes network and put the item into his own words, not claimed somebody else's under his own byline.