French Connections - hopping mad!!!

[paolo]

If there is copying of text that is a poor response from French Connections. They are publishing this content and they are acting as if they are not involved at all. I would think they are responsible for what is published on their site.

Regarding the use of frames - these do make your site invisible to search engines, although oddly your homepage is indexed.

[Giddy Goat]

So does that mean that potentially, the "imitator's" text stands more chance of showing up on a search than mine would?

Aaaauuuggghhhhh!!

[vrooje]

Since the text has been shuffled a bit by the 'imitator', and added to in parts, a word here and there changed, does that weaken my case at all?

I am not a lawyer, but I am 99% certain that plagiarism does not have to be verbatim. My students often learn this (to their dismay) when I hand them back a zero due to the fact that they plagiarized the course textbook. Their answers of, "no, I paraphrased, look, I changed 'they are' to 'they're' and I took out that whole sentence!" aren't terribly convincing.

[Giddy Goat]

That's encouraging! Thanks Brookie!

Still waiting on a response from the advertiser....

[paolo]

So does that mean that potentially, the "imitator's" text stands more chance of showing up on a search than mine would?

Yes.

[Jimbo]

debk wrote:

At that point, I replied that, in that case, let's forget about the other advertiser.... instead, I was notifying THEM (the listing site) that THEY were in violation of my copyright and expected an immediate rectification of the situation.

Done.

debk's robust approach is a textbook example of how to proceed when your copyright has been stolen. If you don't get immediate satisfaction from the perpetrator, go after the user. Things might get a bit unpleasant but you have right - and the law - on your side.

Just don't let these deeply unpleasant people get away with it. As Paolo confirmed, the thief who stole GG's material is now getting better search engine exposure than GG. There but for fortune go any of us.

Jim

[debk]

OK, just let me say that this was all done as politely as possible. The real problem was that prior to switching tactics (ie, prior notifying the listing site that THEY were in violation), I was dealing with an underling who wasn't much worried about my complaint of copied text.

When I repositioned things to notifying them of THEIR violation, my email was sent directly to a manager who replied very nicely about how hard they work to protect their copyrights and, therefore, how hard they will work with me to protect mine. And they did. They even bcc'd me on some of their emails to the offending advertiser so that I could see the baloney of responses/excuses that they were getting.
debk

[Jimbo]

OK, just let me say that this was all done as politely as possible.

Sorry, didn't mean to suggest that, at the first hint of trouble, you should send for Uma Thurman and her big samurai sword. Being polite and businesslike is essential in these potentially volatile situations.

debk got a swift result because she clearly understood the implications of copyright abuse with regard to the renting companies. She was flexible enough to switch the focus of her attack and not to get deflected by the waffling of the third company's underling. The fact that two listing companies removed the offending material immediately and the third after a bit of prompting is very encouraging and I'd certainly be keen to give my business to listing companies with an ethical approach.

Most people steal copyright material from the internet because they think the owner will never find out and, if they do, there is nothing the owner can do about it. Swiftly disabusing the miscreant of this notion and making them fully aware of the legal and financial implications of their actions, will - hopefully - persuade them that the game isn't worth the candle.

If it doesn't work, you can always see if Uma is free on Friday.

Jim

[Giddy Goat]

I agree that FC's response was a bit lame, and in the meantime I have had a courteous response from the advertiser, who has consented to remove the duplicated text - in the strong light of day, it wasn't as bad as first thought, and so all's OK.

However, just now, and as suggested, I was typing some search phrases from our website into Google, to confirm Paolo's comment about its construction around frames, and the probability that the text is not being spidered as it should be. I don't know why I hadn't tried this before. You are absolutely right Paolo, I tried loads of phrases, and the only ones which showed were on the home page.

But do you know what else I found in the process? I am now not just hopping mad but boiling with rage!!! As usual the test phrase didn't turn up our website, but the ad of another gite in the area, this time in Holiday Lets, where the theft was completely and utterly and faithful. I know the name of the owner's personal website(not linked to by HL) so thought I might just take a little peek at that too while I was at it - and surprise surprise, they have purloined further sections from our website to stick on theirs.

Believe it or not, I have met these people, and even tried to help them earlier this year. So it wasn't a case of anonymous borrowing - they'd actually visited our property!

I am sure Ross at HL, who knows me well (don't get excited, not that well!) will react speedily; as for the text on the owners' website, I'll have to tackle them directly, and it will be with horns blazing!!

Thank you all so much for your support - Deb, (aka dietcokek!) this isn't as bad as your experience - your material used by another advertiser on 3 listing sites plus images; phewww! But I've got to make sure our website is visible by the SE's, no question, and will be seeking advice/help in this regard on another thread.

Under the affluence of some therapeutic incahol

[debk]

Believe it or not, I have met these people, and even tried to help them earlier this year. So it wasn't a case of anonymous borrowing - they'd actually visited our property!

I feel your pain. The people who stole our text and images are friends of our next door neighbor. Very stinky.

I just used copyscape for another quick check and found that they'd done it AGAIN on another site. Grrrrr. What a pain in the butt. (No offense meant to all you goats.)
debk

[Giddy Goat]

Grrr in sympathy Deb. And no offence taken!

[debk]

Dear Deb,

Thank you for your request.

We will de-activate this property immediately until we have further details regarding the owner of this apartment. Moveandstay system needs 24 hours to remove this property completely.

Thanks.

Regards

debk

[Giddy Goat]

[Ross Hugo]

Hi All,

I have just spoken with Jane about this issue and we will indeed follow it up on her behalf.

Also on this theme, you might want to take a look at holidayhomeonline.com and then compare it with the HolidayLets.Net site: www.holidaylets.net

Can anybody spot the difference?

They're based in Cyprus, so apart from spending a small fortune on lawyer's fees, I'm not sure what we can or should do about this. I guess we should just consider it a compliment.

We had a similar scenario 18 months ago when maisoneurope copied the site, but it doesn't seem to have done them much good, so we wish the same fate on the aforementioned outfit.

Regards to all,

Ross

[/url]

[Jimbo]

Ross Hugo wrote:

I have just spoken with Jane about this issue and we will indeed follow it up on her behalf.

Hi Ross

I'm delighted that you're following up quickly on Jane's behalf following the cynical theft of her copyright material. I wondered what now happens if you find the case proved. Obviously, you will demand that the offending passages are removed but do you go further and remove the offender from your site altogether?

If you (and the other reputable renting companies) were to remove proven offenders from your sites as a matter of course, I think it would be a tremendous deterrent. If you advertised your intention to do so on your site, that would be even better. If reputable rental companies circulated in-house black lists of known offenders to each other, too, that would be about perfect.

I'd be delighted to give my future business to those companies batting on behalf of the good guys.

Jim