Tucson Citizen.com
The Data Port - Politics, Literature, And The Little Disturbances of Man

Are Gannett and Vibrant Violating Our Copyrights?

by on Jun. 15, 2011, under Copyright, Gannett, Vibrant

It occurred to me a few days ago that I missed the second anniversary of the launching of TC.Com. In order to get some perspective on where we were and where we might be going I went back over two years of Data Port posts.

In nearly every one of them an advertising outfit called Vibrant had inserted links to ads in my text. Clicking on the underlined word (my text) takes the reader away from what I wrote and to some corporate blurb. My permission was not sought and  (need I mention) Vibrant made no offer to pay me for hits on their ads that might be generated from my copy.

It strikes me that underlining my text in ways which take the reader away from what I write constitutes a violation of my copyright. It is a substantial alteration of my text. It’s good to remember that when we signed on to TC.com we were assured we retained the copyright to our columns. In her farewell column to us all Dr. Diane Katz (Win at Work) reports that “local management” can do nothing about it.

I assume that this means Gannett is finding a way to make an additional buck from what we write . In addition to not being paid, our copy is being screwed with.

Good Grief

 

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 15th, 2011 at 5:03 pm and is filed under Copyright, Gannett, Vibrant. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

RSS feed for this post (comments)
  • Art Jacobson

    Note the delicious irony…no sooner do I post than up pop two underlinings

  • Mark B. Evans

    If the Citizen is to continue to exist and provide this forum for local bloggers, it must do what it can to make a profit. The text ads are one way we’re attempting to do that. Moreover, I sent you an email a month or so ago informing you about the new ads.

    As for violating copyrights, this is from the Terms Of Service:

    “Your License to Us. By posting or submitting any material (including, without limitation, photos and videos) to us via the Site, you are representing: (i) that you are the owner of the material, or are making your posting or submission with the express consent of the owner of the material; and (ii) that you are 13 years of age or older. In addition, when you submit or post any material, you are granting us, and anyone authorized by us, a royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, unrestricted, worldwide license to use, copy, modify, transmit, sell, exploit, create derivative works from, distribute, and/or publicly perform or display such material, in whole or in part, in any manner or medium, now known or hereafter developed, for any purpose. The foregoing grant shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such posting or submission, including, but not limited to, rights under copyright, trademark, service mark or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction.”

    • Robert Coates

      @Mark Evans — are you saying that Vibrant pays Gannet for those highlighted links in the middle of news stories?  I don’t think they do.  I think Vibrant just gets people to load software on their computer that will supposedly improve their ability to search, and that software on their computer is what is doing the links

  • Art Jacobson

    I see in your last editorial you’re shilling for Scott Trade. Does that feel appropriate to you?
    I have no objection to advertising, but this method savages the text. We signed on to “work” for free but this goes too far.

    I once wrote for a business journal here in town. Sometimes I’d be handed an assignment
    to write a blurb, following up on a press release.  The editor just needed something to fill in between two columns of ad copy. I wrote, and got paid. The ads were not slap up against one another. I grant you it wasn’t great business journalism, but at least the publisher didn’t insert an appeal to buy Cheese Crackers in the middle of my piece.

    I think this makes Gannett look cheap and grasping.

  • Robert Coates

    @Mark Evans — are you saying that Vibrant pays Gannet for those highlighted links in the middle of news stories?  I don’t think they do.  I think Vibrant just gets people to load software on their computer that will supposedly improve their ability to search, and that software on their computer is what is doing the links.

    • Art Jacobson

      Robert…

      I have loaded no software on my computer. This is all Gannett’s doing.

      • Robert Coates

        You didn’t load the software intentionally, but it is there.  It may just be a cookie and not full-fledged software.  If you go to Dictionary.com, they load over 100 things on your computer, for example.  Any many other sites do the same thing.  Gannet may not have anything to do with it, and they may not be benefiting from it.

  • leftfield

    I wondered what those underlined links were.  It is a sad state of affairs that there seems to be no escape anywhere from advertising.  Brain wave research has been supportive of the argument that our thinking and emotions are altered even when we think we are ignoring the advertising.  

    Given the amount of time it takes for all the advertising to load when one clicks on a page on this site, I had assumed that plenty of money was being generated by advertising.  Based on Mr. Evan’s comment, it would seem this is not so.  Despite the law of gravity and the promises made, money only seems to trickle up, not down.  This is also sad.  We were right – we should have gotten on those wooden ships and left a long time ago.   I guess the smart ones did. 

«
»