BoxRec

I know there are a few regular writers on this site.

When you do an interesting piece and a leading national newspaper prints pretty much the entire piece as their own without any credit or acknowledgement, what are you thoughts on this?

I know a lot of boxing sites regurgitate news, but give credit / acknowledge the sources - yet the Nationals ride roughshod over us all.

It makes me laugh, when you hear Murdoch claiming he is gonna sue Google for stealing news..

http://www.epuk.org/files/ABCD_of_copyright.pdf

might be helpful here-

Its funny you started this thread because I only seen today on Boxrec News that Ian McNeilly has a warning to National Newspapers not to 'lift' any of the writers work so to speak. Its's on the Contact Us part of Boxrec News if I remember correctly. Proper order to, there are too many excellent unpaid writers out there who 'earn' the wages for the big boys without getting credit for it.

no copyright on quotes so people can take what they want...

sg1985 wrote:'no copyright on quotes so people can take what they want...'

D

It's true. You can write something like: "I love deep-fried cheeseburgers," said Eric Esch, in an interview with Boxing News.

If somebody is quoted in the public domain, it's reusable. Same with news. There's no copyright in news, and quotes are merely a form of news. It's the "craft" of writing that holds copyright. Merely typing the words that somebody else speaks is not the craft aspect, it's what goes on in between and around the quotes, the descriptive passages, the narrative, the commentary, and so on.

BBC did it with Terry's piece on Billygate. Then pretended it was their own story.

Emerson Poncey Name Ghent wrote:BBC did it with Terry's piece on Billygate. Then pretended it was their own story.

The thieving barstewards!!! :x

Happened to me with Bruno last year. Express credited BN, Star didnt. the latter apologised, corrected the article online and linked it to our site. but its a food chain - they will feel they can do what they want for the most part.

If it's a straight lift, somebody's being lazy and it's worth a moan, but I've never cared when somebody's taken my stuff and built it into their own piece, or if that person is paid more than I am. There are too many things wrong in this world that matter to get precious about the way boxing information is regurgitated, and if you don't like the money you're getting for your own piece (or not), then don't do it.

If its any consolation - I thought that piece was too good to be Pat Sheehans

Happens to me every week........Wales on Sunday for example, lifted an entire story I did on a little boy who died after a cardiac arrest last week. Did not check anything with me. Luckily there were no issues with it, but if there had been.....

Personally, I try and always give a guy credit. Pocketrocket has done some stuff for the Daily Post and I make sure his name is always with it. Only fair.....

Can't stand the lazy bastards who lift EVERYTHING.....

Agreed.

It's not that we're being overly precious - it's just courtesy.

I suppose by adding us in, it spells out to their editor who has actually done the graft.

If they were going to do it correctly, they would sample lots of different sources to give an overall flavour of the situation, rather than cut and paste the lot.

Years ago it was common (and wrong) practice for a local news agency to sell stuff from the local paper the moment it came out because they knew the journalists on the local paper were not allowed, under their contracts, to sell anything. Obviously lifting a story as important as a child having a cardiac arrest without following it up is a very risky, stupid thing to do, but most boxing 'stories' have little more than gossip-significance and aren't really saying anything beyond giving a boxer or promoter publicity, so as discourteous as it might be, in the overall picture, in most cases it's no big deal.

bobmee wrote:Years ago it was common (and wrong) practice for a local news agency to sell stuff from the local paper the moment it came out because they knew the journalists on the local paper were not allowed, under their contracts, to sell anything. Obviously lifting a story as important as a child having a cardiac arrest without following it up is a very risky, stupid thing to do, but most boxing 'stories' have little more than gossip-significance and aren't really saying anything beyond giving a boxer or promoter publicity, so as discourteous as it might be, in the overall picture, in most cases it's no big deal.

Your right in everything you say bob.

But to coin your phrase, it's no big deal for them to add a link or a nod towards their source either.

Before I started doing stuff for britishboxing.net and Boxing Scene I used to do stuff on wikipedia for years and pretty much all the biographies of Irish boxers on wiki are done by me. I have seen wholesale copy and pasting of paragraphs and even whole pages lifted in plenty of locations - especially the one I did for Michael Gomez.

Doesn't bother me and to be honest as long as boxing/boxers are getting publicity its all I care about. If I can make it easier for someone in the national media to do an article on boxing then I am happy.

Deno1986 wrote:Its funny you started this thread because I only seen today on Boxrec News that Ian McNeilly has a warning to National Newspapers not to 'lift' any of the writers work so to speak. Its's on the Contact Us part of Boxrec News if I remember correctly. Proper order to, there are too many excellent unpaid writers out there who 'earn' the wages for the big boys without getting credit for it.

I haven't Deno - all I've said is for people on nationals not to pester me for information (which used to happen on a regular basis when I was Editor of British Boxing.net) when they pay someone else highly to write about boxing for them.

Lowersmiths is correct - no copyright on quotes - just don't take the p*ss is my rule and quote the source too where possible.

What used to annoy me to death is when good, young writers used to get huge chunks of their articles lifted - sometimes almost word for word - usually by regionals - and they used to just tell me in passing well after the event and were almost pleased to see this happen. The journos just pretend they've done the story.

When BN picks up bits from Yankee websites they usually quote the source. They used to occasionally lift briefs from BBN and NEVER cited the source, presumably because they didn't want to give us the oxygen of publicity. Well, I say never...I only ever saw an acknowledgement twice, the first time being whenI let them have a whole story of mine, gratis, years ago. They didn't lift that much but still.

If they quote the source then it's all good.

As a writer, it would probably be appreciated and appropriate to be given credit for writing the original piece, but that's just about ego. As a reader, do I care who wrote the original? Not really. Reading a page of stories interrupted by a constant list of credit acknowledgements is irritating. To use the previous example - 'I love cheese-burgers,' Eric Esch told Boxing News' would be a pointless acknowledgement, because Eric isn't saying anything that he might not have said to any other journalist or passer-by in the last ten years. All I'm interested in is what the writer does with the quote and how the story is built. Obviously, wholesale lifting of material for 'news stories' or features without following up or developing the piece is wrong, lazy practice and shouldn't happen. Given the nature of deadlines or the need to find a filler every so often, it's inevitable that repetitions without follow-ups will happen, though.

bobmee wrote:As a writer, it would probably be appreciated and appropriate to be given credit for writing the original piece, but that's just about ego. As a reader, do I care who wrote the original? Not really. Reading a page of stories interrupted by a constant list of credit acknowledgements is irritating. To use the previous example - 'I love cheese-burgers,' Eric Esch told Boxing News' would be a pointless acknowledgement, because Eric isn't saying anything that he might not have said to any other journalist or passer-by in the last ten years. All I'm interested in is what the writer does with the quote and how the story is built. Obviously, wholesale lifting of material for 'news stories' or features without following up or developing the piece is wrong, lazy practice and shouldn't happen. Given the nature of deadlines or the need to find a filler every so often, it's inevitable that repetitions without follow-ups will happen, though.

Nothing to do with ego over here, Bob. I'm actually not bothered about being name checked personally...but it would be courteous for the website to be name checked simply because most of the print readers (even boxing fans) won't know the website exists and I'd like people to visit it. Especially when one is starting a new venture. And I don't mean getting named for the odd quote either, that would be daft - unless they build a whole story around it and the interview was of an exclusive nature.

Lifting the whole fecking thing is theft...and to do so without acknowledging the source makes it worse. I do understand why they do it though.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

Deno1986 wrote:Its funny you started this thread because I only seen today on Boxrec News that Ian McNeilly has a warning to National Newspapers not to 'lift' any of the writers work so to speak. Its's on the Contact Us part of Boxrec News if I remember correctly. Proper order to, there are too many excellent unpaid writers out there who 'earn' the wages for the big boys without getting credit for it.

I haven't Deno - all I've said is for people on nationals not to pester me for information (which used to happen on a regular basis when I was Editor of British Boxing.net) when they pay someone else highly to write about boxing for them.

Lowersmiths is correct - no copyright on quotes - just don't take the p*ss is my rule and quote the source too where possible.

What used to annoy me to death is when good, young writers used to get huge chunks of their articles lifted - sometimes almost word for word - usually by regionals - and they used to just tell me in passing well after the event and were almost pleased to see this happen. The journos just pretend they've done the story.

When BN picks up bits from Yankee websites they usually quote the source. They used to occasionally lift briefs from BBN and NEVER cited the source, presumably because they didn't want to give us the oxygen of publicity. Well, I say never...I only ever saw an acknowledgement twice, the first time being whenI let them have a whole story of mine, gratis, years ago. They didn't lift that much but still.

If they quote the source then it's all good.

my bad, misinterpreted you

maybe the rubbish I churn out now is just too bad for anyone to want to nick it! Terry and Ian should take it as a compliment. ;)

I read the MEN every lunchtime and although James Robson doesn't appear to have a great depth of personal boxing knowledge at least the boxing section isn't just as much of an extension of the Hatton PR machine that it used to be. I didn't think I have ever read read any critical analysis about boxing in the MEN.

If you consider the writing for football in the MEN a journalist wouldn't be afraid to lay the boot into a player or team for a poor performance or dubious activities in the boardroom - but I have never seen anything like that in the boxing section - again I guess it comes down to the writers level of knowledge. Sorry I am going off topic.

I hate it, and have suffered it. BN did it to me a few years ago, took huge chunks of an interview I done, what pissed me off is they credited Ron Borges ( the original plagerist) for quotes from a different fighter, but little old muggings, got, well, mugged. Got an apology from the writer and editor.

I just thinks it lacks class. But its the nature of the business. The classless dicks win.

I'm sure most of the writers on this site take my posts to use as the basis for their articles but I don't mind. Good luck to you I say.

DavidPayne wrote:I hate it, and have suffered it. BN did it to me a few years ago, took huge chunks of an interview I done, what pissed me off is they credited Ron Borges ( the original plagerist) for quotes from a different fighter, but little old muggings, got, well, mugged. Got an apology from the writer and editor.

I just thinks it lacks class. But its the nature of the business. The classless dicks win.

I am surprised that I am not winning then David! ;)

slapbangwhallop wrote:

DavidPayne wrote:I hate it, and have suffered it. BN did it to me a few years ago, took huge chunks of an interview I done, what pissed me off is they credited Ron Borges ( the original plagerist) for quotes from a different fighter, but little old muggings, got, well, mugged. Got an apology from the writer and editor.

I just thinks it lacks class. But its the nature of the business. The classless dicks win.

I am surprised that I am not winning then David! ;)

Still time.

Terry D wrote:

slapbangwhallop wrote:maybe the rubbish I churn out now is just too bad for anyone to want to nick it! Terry and Ian should take it as a compliment. ;)

I read the MEN every lunchtime and although James Robson doesn't appear to have a great depth of personal boxing knowledge at least the boxing section isn't just as much of an extension of the Hatton PR machine that it used to be. I didn't think I have ever read read any critical analysis about boxing in the MEN.

If you consider the writing for football in the MEN a journalist wouldn't be afraid to lay the boot into a player or team for a poor performance or dubious activities in the boardroom - but I have never seen anything like that in the boxing section - again I guess it comes down to the writers level of knowledge. Sorry I am going off topic.

Stu Brennan did a great job for them. Seems to be on the footy these days. I am forced to read the MEN once a week by a certain trainer wot has a column in there.

I enjoy Joe's column, it gives a good first hand incite into a very busy camp.