Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

Duck07 wrote:Nemec should be called out publicly for this especially when he works at a site with a paywall. There is a serious problem with journalists who report on another journalists story as if they were the ones to break it. This failure to properly attribute is a problem worth correcting.

I would have a bigger problem with it if it wasn't actually the high schoolers who should be getting paid. JHop should be paying these high schoolers to find out when they're visiting, what they thought, etc. Info isn't free.

I've always thought that selling recruiting info that is destined to be made public anyway is a problematic business model. I understand that people like Justin are good at finding stuff out before everyone else, and he spends time to research and build relationships, etc., but ultimately, he is selling something that he doesn't own. He does own his analysis, but not the info about whether a kid is visiting or committing to this school or that one. So if he can make money selling something he doesn't own, great, but I am having a hard time finding sympathy if someone else posts the same info.

Are we pretending that JHOP didn't build his own reputation by sharing paid info from other sites with us?

karlhungis wrote:Are we pretending that JHOP didn't build his own reputation by sharing paid info from other sites with us?

Ha! I remember the olden times on C4Q.

Nemec should be called out publicly for this especially when he works at a site with a paywall. There is a serious problem with journalists who report on another journalists story as if they were the ones to break it. This failure to properly attribute is a problem worth correcting.

Agree. Ripping off someone else's work without attribution (and, these days, a link) isn't just problematic, it's chickenshit.

pezsez1 wrote:

Nemec should be called out publicly for this especially when he works at a site with a paywall. There is a serious problem with journalists who report on another journalists story as if they were the ones to break it. This failure to properly attribute is a problem worth correcting.

Agree. Ripping off someone else's work without attribution (and, these days, a link) isn't just problematic, it's chickenshit.

It's illegal is what it is. It's plagiarism, plain and simple.

What JHOP, or anyone else getting their content posted without permission, especially paid subscription content, should do is send a letter to both Nemec and the CEO of the Oregonian, post the complaint with them and then give them a reasonable time to reply and act. Sending it Registered mail would be best so they have a date posted.

If the article(s) haven't been removed by the deadline then all that needs to be done is to contact the Oregonian's website hosting company and fill out what's known as a DMCA notice. The hosting company will then contact them and once plagiarism has been proven, give them notice to remove the content immediately. If they refuse their web host can, and will, shut down the entire website - not just the page or pages plagiarized.

By the way, giving attribution to a paid (exclusive) resource where you're a member is an admission of guilt that you stole it.

SuperDuck wrote:

pezsez1 wrote:

Nemec should be called out publicly for this especially when he works at a site with a paywall. There is a serious problem with journalists who report on another journalists story as if they were the ones to break it. This failure to properly attribute is a problem worth correcting.

Agree. Ripping off someone else's work without attribution (and, these days, a link) isn't just problematic, it's chickenshit.

It's illegal is what it is. It's plagiarism, plain and simple.

What JHOP, or anyone else getting their content posted without permission, especially paid subscription content, should do is send a letter to both Nemec and the CEO of the Oregonian, post the complaint with them and then give them a reasonable time to reply and act. Sending it Registered mail would be best so they have a date posted.

If the article(s) haven't been removed by the deadline then all that needs to be done is to contact the Oregonian's website hosting company and fill out what's known as a DMCA notice. The hosting company will then contact them and once plagiarism has been proven, give them notice to remove the content immediately. If they refuse their web host can, and will, shut down the entire website - not just the page or pages plagiarized.

By the way, giving attribution to a paid (exclusive) resource where you're a member is an admission of guilt that you stole it.

It's not a copyright violation to paraphrase someone else's information. Unless he's copying things word for word, it's not illegal at all. Just unethical.

Tray Dub wrote:

SuperDuck wrote:

pezsez1 wrote:

Nemec should be called out publicly for this especially when he works at a site with a paywall. There is a serious problem with journalists who report on another journalists story as if they were the ones to break it. This failure to properly attribute is a problem worth correcting.

Agree. Ripping off someone else's work without attribution (and, these days, a link) isn't just problematic, it's chickenshit.

It's illegal is what it is. It's plagiarism, plain and simple.

What JHOP, or anyone else getting their content posted without permission, especially paid subscription content, should do is send a letter to both Nemec and the CEO of the Oregonian, post the complaint with them and then give them a reasonable time to reply and act. Sending it Registered mail would be best so they have a date posted.

If the article(s) haven't been removed by the deadline then all that needs to be done is to contact the Oregonian's website hosting company and fill out what's known as a DMCA notice. The hosting company will then contact them and once plagiarism has been proven, give them notice to remove the content immediately. If they refuse their web host can, and will, shut down the entire website - not just the page or pages plagiarized.

By the way, giving attribution to a paid (exclusive) resource where you're a member is an admission of guilt that you stole it.

It's not a copyright violation to paraphrase someone else's information. Unless he's copying things word for word, it's not illegal at all. Just unethical.

It is if it's from a paid subscription where the information is deemed to be for members only.

SuperDuck wrote:
It is if it's from a paid subscription where the information is deemed to be for members only.

It's really not. You cannot own information like that, that's a bedrock principle of copyright law (read about it here if you want). Stealing the exact expression of the information (i.e. verbatim copying) is one thing, but just conveying the information is not actionable.

Listen to yourselves. You think someone owns the fact that high schoolers are coming to visit this weekend, just because they posted it behind a pay wall? Maybe JHop should apply for a recruiting info patent?

Phalanx wrote:Listen to yourselves. You think someone owns the fact that high schoolers are coming to visit this weekend, just because they posted it behind a pay wall? Maybe JHop should apply for a recruiting info patent?

For me its that Nemec is supposed to work at a reputable news organization and that the lack of sourcing news is a major ethical problem. While I don't mean this issue of which recruits are visiting per se is of large importance there are more compelling issues where this happens.

On a more hopeful front, perhaps the sudden transfer of Kingsley and for the alleged reason of expected playing time can be a boon in getting these top-ranked guys to become Ducks AND know they have to put in the work. Obviously Moss and Kelly are going to be geeked up about KT, but the coaches will have the chance to say that KT's work ethic is what has put him in this position to be the #1 pick and it will be their work ethic that decides for them just as it has been his work ethic that has led to his success. If Connerly becomes a Duck it would seem like he knows he's got to put the work in after everything that's gone down.

Duck07 wrote: For me its that Nemec is supposed to work at a reputable news organization and that the lack of sourcing news is a major ethical problem. While I don't mean this issue of which recruits are visiting per se is of large importance there are more compelling issues where this happens.

On a more hopeful front, perhaps the sudden transfer of Kingsley and for the alleged reason of expected playing time can be a boon in getting these top-ranked guys to become Ducks AND know they have to put in the work. Obviously Moss and Kelly are going to be geeked up about KT, but the coaches will have the chance to say that KT's work ethic is what has put him in this position to be the #1 pick and it will be their work ethic that decides for them just as it has been his work ethic that has led to his success. If Connerly becomes a Duck it would seem like he knows he's got to put the work in after everything that's gone down.

If the visits are this weekend, how do we know that Nemec or anyone else couldn't just find out from the same source as Justin? Why would the coaches or someone inside Oregon football share that with one person trying to charge everyone for the info, and not others who are letting it go for free? I just don't get the problem here, unless it is a word-for-word transcription that isn't sourced. Also, did JHop source his stuff? I mean, he didn't coordinate this visits himself, right? So he got the info from somewhere else?

If Mario can land Connerly, UW fans will demand to fire their coach. It's that simple.

A lot of the recruits just post when they're visiting on social media so it's not exactly like it's hard for JHop or anyone else to know the dates.

So, we have:
* 5 star OL Josh Connerly
* number one JuCo CB Keionte Scott
* High 4 star Edge Cyrus Moss
* 4 star DL Nyjalik Kelly
* 4 star WR Darrius Clemons
* 4 star LB Lander Barton

Surprised to see Clemons on the list. Does this mean they lost Anderson or one of the other WR recruits?