READ THIS Dallas Morning News (DMN) has demanded we no longer allow their content posted on CZ

[waldoputty]

Maybe. But I know this has been an ongoing discussion. I remember when CZ updated the policy to say we could no longer post DMN stories in the forum. Instead we had to post links and headlines. Maybe they felt like they had already tried? I am genuinely not taking sides, but I think full transparency is the right approach.

if CZ already told posters to post links and headlines only, then what do they want?
certainly it is not commercially reasonable for CZ to check every single post to make sure there.
what possible measure could CZ have done???

there is nothing to stop DMN to come on the message board and directly appeal to the posters.
that would have been a smart marketing thing to do.
they could have sent their writers to come on, and ask posters nicely not to post the entire article.
do you think ANYONE here would have disrespected them.
instead they sent their lawyer to step on us just because they are big and we are tiny.
the writers could have had a pleasant discourse with the posters and generated lots of good will.
frankly, a lot of posters would have gave them good ideas and suggestions for putting more depth in their 100% fluff articles.

 

[casmith07]

I'm sure if all people were doing is posting links, they wouldn't care.

However, people often post enough content (along with the link), that they feel people aren't bothering to actually visit the site.

A business has a right to attempt to profit from their work, even if the way they're going about it might ultimately hurt more than help.

There's no cause of action here for DMN, and no precedent for even a remote argument.

 

[waldoputty]

There's no cause of action here for DMN, and no precedent for even a remote argument.

assuming you are right, CZ still loses because is reality going to pay a lawyer to fight in court?

 

[goshan]

if CZ already told posters to post links and headlines only, then what do they want?
certainly it is not commercially reasonable for CZ to check every single post to make sure there.
what possible measure could CZ have done???

there is nothing to stop DMN to come on the message board and directly appeal to the posters.
that would have been a smart marketing thing to do.
they could have sent their writers to come on, and ask posters nicely not to post the entire article.
do you think ANYONE here would have disrespected them.
instead they sent their lawyer to step on us just because they are big and we are tiny.
the writers could have had a pleasant discourse with the posters and generated lots of good will.
frankly, a lot of posters would have gave them good ideas and suggestions for putting more depth in their 100% fluff articles.

Agree good idea.

 

[NextGenBoys]

Legally there is no basis for the cease and desist order. As long as anything posted from DMN was properly credited, it's fair game. It's what happens when you work in mass media. Good luck with that in court.

On one hand newspapers claim to be the only unbiased source for mass media - look into the arguments made for legal advertisements if you want to put yourself to sleep - then on the other want to claim exclusivity when it comes to redistribution.

That said, the admin. at this place gets to make its own rules and I don't really blame them for wanting to avoid a legal pissing contest. I'd personally tell Belo to get bent but it's not my call to make.

I'd guess that whatever perceived loss in value they were getting by folks posting (fully credited) content to this site will be offset by the loss in value from the traffic due to the new no links policy. So in a way the admin. here have told Belo to get bent in their own way, I guess.

Great point.

 

[GoBigD]

We received a legal Cease & Desist order from the law firm of Dallas Morning News (DMN) today requesting we no longer allow DMN content on the site.

It's unfortunate given that we usually send DMN's web site several hundred users in traffic each day, but it is their choice and their content so we will abide with their legal order.

On the bright side, there are a lot of other great Cowboys news sources available which will help all of us keep up with the latest Cowboys news.

/reality

why dont you code the links to DMN so if someone wants to visit the site they have to copy and paste it onto the browser

 

[Pants]

DMN is dead to me, that is all (I hope they read THAT and realize that I have removed my shortcut to them)

 

[iceberg]

CZ actually helps them by sending them clicks their way.
What they are actually encouraging people to do now is to report/copy&paste their news and not link to their webpage.
These people are so ignorant they need to go the way of the dinosaur.

The cease and desist letter is simply annoying.
If their IQ was not below 100, they would have asked nicely for people to copy no more than 3 sentences and to post the link their website.
They deserve to lose subscriptions for this.
Hopefully, they lose at least 10 for being annoying when they could have asked nicely like @Phoenix just said.

Reality has every reason to say what he did.
Even if he thinks it is BS.

it doesn't take the DMN long to simply to a google search on their articles by quotes "in quotes" to see where else they are showing up. for you to think their property is yours to do with as you please is likely pat of the reason they find the need to protect it - even if in drastic measures such as this. regardless of your emotional stance on this, it *is* their property. if you now cut/paste the articles w/o a quote you're putting the site at huge risk esp *after* they said cut it out.

your right to not go there anymore. your right to tell them how bad you think this decision is. but it's not your right to take their work and put it where you want.

 

[iceberg]

Respect lol. Come on dude...Ive never read DMN nor clicked any of their links, even if posted here. This isnt about respect.

This is about large companies, daily, send cease letters to people they KNOW dont have money to fight back, and they have no case.

How would I know about this? From my multiple years spent talking with and working around FORD trademarks.

DMN doesnt want their content shared, per the letter, so why do they have twitter, facebook, email and text message sharing buttons built into each of their article pages?

Because they want their articles shared.

The only issue comes if Reality is running a for-profit site here, which based off donation posts I've seen in the past, is not the case.

Certainly, dont share the entire article. But to "respect" DMN's request to not share when they have SHARING built into their website is hilarious.

Keep your head in the sand.

sure they put sharing on there. lets look, shall we?

facebook, twitter, e-mail. i don't see "cowboyszone" or "hey, do what you want" either. when you share to facebook you get a headline and the first sentence more or less. *THIS IS WHAT I SAID YEARS AGO WE SHOULD ONLY DO HERE" - but i was told by the mod at the time they didn't want to have to police it and it would never be an issue. so i shut up. not my site.

people eventually cut it back to a few paragraphs and hoped that would be enough but it doesn't appear to be. in each of those buttons THEY control how much of their content is shared and give you a "clickbait" type taste of the article. do they not? do they NOT control how the info is shared?

i believe they do. so your connection and putting more, if not entire articles out here, being fine obviously doesn't even line up with your own sharing scenario. at least we agree sharing the entire article is bad. now how much should be shard? if your site, is that under your control or people who want to do it their way?

it's about hits. that's it. the DMN right or wrong feels posting more content than they allow pulls away hits, not gives them more. i would like to think they have an analytics team back there looking to see if this is true vs. a few angry people in here who saw a dashboard once for SEO and analytics.

the only issue really comes from who created/owns the content and how they wish to use it. again, i don't agree with their decisions, but it is their content and all this "we can get around it by..." talk is only going to make it worse. ie - "just don't link back to them but copy their articles over!"

i can only hope those suggesting that don't follow through.

again, i don't like their decision, i don't agree with their decision, but it *is* their content.

 

[iceberg]

Print is a dying media, eclipsed by the speed of the internet. Content is so prolific, and easily accessible, the DMN site will not be missed. I paid for content from them last year because I believe taking their intellectual property without paying for it is stealing. They are desperate to breathe life into the deceased.

From the bottom line point of view, this will backfire on them. I do not advocate a boycott of their product, however, I believe that is exactly what will take place. The people of this site will find similar information elsewhere as rapidly, if not quicker than a daily newspaper.

Truly this seems like bringing your best race horse to the Indy 500 and lining up against those machines. The newspaper will lose in the end. Then thirty years from now someone will resurrect the notion of typeset and graphics, and it will become fashionable again. Like bell bottoms. Then go down in flames as a fad.

I wish them luck, and hold no malice toward them. People's livelihoods are at stake. But from all signs, the water is close to rushing over the deck of the Titanic.

agreed. the argument over who can do what with the content is just stupid. it's theirs. end of story. if they say don't do it, don't. if you do run the risk of legal battles that even if you win, you'll lose $$$. are pyrrhic victories that valuable?

they are not setting themselves up to compete. they are following a cookie cutter mold and making decisions that will affect the next day or two in a given direction but the flow of information they're now a salmon swimming upstream in the dead of winter on a frozen river. they could just as easily put up a "forum" share button and work with select top forums to do the same as they are doing with facebook and twitter. they decide what to share and how - you just click and share. same thing. copying over 3 paragraphs and a link back doesn't seem to be what they want but that's how it is now. fix it, end it. they chose poorly.

but if they did a forum share with options for top forums - they now work with thousands of more visitors and have setup a much more friendly relationship with the forums, their members, and the entire online community. they become a productive part of it willing to find a way to work with you. not the ******* they're being now shutting it down and ending a popular highway to their door.

so rest assured i think they're being stupid but it's their call.

 

[iceberg]

if CZ already told posters to post links and headlines only, then what do they want?
certainly it is not commercially reasonable for CZ to check every single post to make sure there.
what possible measure could CZ have done???

there is nothing to stop DMN to come on the message board and directly appeal to the posters.
that would have been a smart marketing thing to do.
they could have sent their writers to come on, and ask posters nicely not to post the entire article.
do you think ANYONE here would have disrespected them.
instead they sent their lawyer to step on us just because they are big and we are tiny.
the writers could have had a pleasant discourse with the posters and generated lots of good will.
frankly, a lot of posters would have gave them good ideas and suggestions for putting more depth in their 100% fluff articles.

like i said - there's a lot of ways they could have become a part of this community and worked with reality and the site to pull traffic to them. all they did here was guard their content, sure. but now no one cares enough about it to go read it.

next up - subscriptions. another step to being out of business.

 

[waldoputty]

it doesn't take the DMN long to simply to a google search on their articles by quotes "in quotes" to see where else they are showing up. for you to think their property is yours to do with as you please is likely pat of the reason they find the need to protect it - even if in drastic measures such as this. regardless of your emotional stance on this, it *is* their property. if you now cut/paste the articles w/o a quote you're putting the site at huge risk esp *after* they said cut it out.

your right to not go there anymore. your right to tell them how bad you think this decision is. but it's not your right to take their work and put it where you want.

1. i dont remember the last DMN article that was real news.
2. reality has done what he needs to do to protect the site by posting the notice. i would guess they are setting up an search for all posts with a link to the DMN website and deleting those.
3. the primary reason anyone would likely post any portion of their article is to show it as an 'exhibit' for their point. generally you would want to provide the link as an additional 'exhibit' so that should take care of most of it.
4. if it ever goes to court, i doubt anyone can expect the message board to read every post and match it against articles in a publication.
5. instead of dealing with it in a civilized way, DMN chooses to try to treat posters like insects. then to ask us to help them market after the threatening letter by posting their links - why should any of us do them ANY favors? let their bean counter chew on that.
6. well, simple response is to NEVER link to ANY of their articles and use other publications' articles as 'exhibits' - it is highly doubtful they have any real breaking news that other cowboys outlets do not have.
7. i am not certainly to stop going to their website. the irrelevant number of clicks that the few of us generate does not help them.

 

[iceberg]

1. i dont remember the last DMN article that was real news.
2. reality has done what he needs to do to protect the site by posting the notice. i would guess they are setting up an search for all posts with a link to the DMN website and deleting those.
3. the primary reason anyone would likely post any portion of their article is to show it as an 'exhibit' for their point. generally you would want to provide the link as an additional 'exhibit' so that should take care of most of it.
4. if it ever goes to court, i doubt anyone can expect the message board to read every post and match it against articles in a publication.
5. instead of dealing with it in a civilized way, DMN chooses to try to treat posters like insects. then to ask us to help them market after the threatening letter by posting their links - why should any of us do them ANY favors? let their bean counter chew on that.
6. well, simple response is to NEVER link to ANY of their articles and use other publications' articles as 'exhibits' - it is highly doubtful they have any real breaking news that other cowboys outlets do not have.
7. i am not certainly to stop going to their website. the irrelevant number of clicks that the few of us generate does not help them.

nothing in here i disagree with. my only point is that it *is* their content. if they want to drive the bus off a cliff, their bus.

as for finding the articles - not hard to copy a paragraph and put quotes around it in google and simply see where the direct quote shows up. the site is setup nicely for SEO i'm sure with all the proper H1 tags and spidering. so i don't have to read every article, i just search for a sentence in google and if i land here - dated after the notice - it won't be good. the hard part is now on reality to stop posters from being hard headed.

 

[waldoputty]

nothing in here i disagree with. my only point is that it *is* their content. if they want to drive the bus off a cliff, their bus.

as for finding the articles - not hard to copy a paragraph and put quotes around it in google and simply see where the direct quote shows up. the site is setup nicely for SEO i'm sure with all the proper H1 tags and spidering. so i don't have to read every article, i just search for a sentence in google and if i land here - dated after the notice - it won't be good. the hard part is now on reality to stop posters from being hard headed.

it is easy to find CZ posts on google.
i do it all the time.
however, that does not make it CZ's responsibility to monitor their site by doing the google search.
DMN can certainly do it themselves.
they can go to reality and ask CZ to suspend those accounts and delete those specific posts.
CZ would certainly have to do that when given the proof.

i would just use other cowboys outlets as exhibits in articles and never link to any DMN article again.
Others may do likewise or they may still paste DMN content without the link.
DMN can be big brother about it, and pissed off posters even more than they have already.
go ahead.
it would be better if they go out of business because it would help better Cowboys outlets succeed.
they have to try REALLY hard to be as bad as they are.

 

[Reality]

I appreciate everyone's thoughts and suggestions on how to deal with this, but the reality of the situation is that DMN via their law firm has demanded we do not allow their content on the site and that is exactly what we are going to do. The C&D they sent was very clear on that.

I know some of you have said, "It's not official, just ignore it!" but that's just not realistic. It is their content and if they do not want it on the site, then I see no reason to have it on the site. It was a mutually beneficial relationship and they no longer see the benefit from their side.

I know how they handled it is not a smart move on their part given the traffic and potential subscribers we sent them each day, but they have every right to protect their content. I feel bad for the fans who liked their content, but those fans can still visit their site directly to read their content if they want.

Fortunately for Cowboys fans, we have a lot of other great sources of Cowboys news and content available to us, so we will be fine going forward.

 

[goshan]

it is easy to find CZ posts on google.
i do it all the time.
however, that does not make it CZ's responsibility to monitor their site by doing the google search.
DMN can certainly do it themselves.
they can go to reality and ask CZ to suspend those accounts and delete those specific posts.
CZ would certainly have to do that when given the proof.

i would just use other cowboys outlets as exhibits in articles and never link to any DMN article again.
Others may do likewise or they may still paste DMN content without the link.
DMN can be big brother about it, and pissed off posters even more than they have already.
go ahead.
it would be better if they go out of business because it would help better Cowboys outlets succeed.
they have to try REALLY hard to be as bad as they are.

It is CZ's responsibility if there is DMN content on this site. It is DMN's content, and can't be used by a third party without their consent. DMN has said they are ok with headlines and links, but not with articles pasted into postings. CZ doesn't have to police it, but DMN can hold them accountable for any content illegally showing up on CZ. So Reality is making the decision to eliminate all DMN content, including links and headlines, because he doesn't have the time/money to police it.

Every online publisher is in the same boat BTW.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

I want to preface my comment (and all previous and future comments on this matter) as not a criticism of this admin. That's not my goal or point. Consider my discussion points theoretical.

That said, I've never seen this place republish a DMN (or any other) story and not give proper credit. It's been suggested previously that the mods look away and allow stories (or parts of stories) to be lifted from DMN without the credit - which would be more direct means for a copyright infringement suit. Pretending that the site can't police itself isn't any better. CZ has already set the precedent that it can and will police itself (profanity, for example), so pretending it can't with regards to republishing copyrighted content is not a winning strategy.

The thing I come back to is that it is possible (easy) to get that DMN content for free online directly from their site. It could be argued that given the nature of their website and the ease with which to circumvent the paywall (giving away a certain amount of free stories will always make the paywall security more theoretical than concrete) opens the DMN up to fair use of shared content - providing proper credit is applied. The only reason I argue so fervently along this point is because I oversee some publications with an online component and we have a similar model. And I had to learn the limitations - and had to become comfortable with those limitations - going in.

Had the DMN enacted a hard paywall, the situation would be different. Then their claim to securing the content - or at least attempting to secure the content - would be legitimate.

Now, if this place enacted the headline, link, maybe one sentence allowed model, there is absolutely nothing DMN could do. Because that is what you get from social media and they are freely and actively sharing their content via third parties that way. They've opened pandora's box, so to speak. It's also how most bloggers and content aggregators get away with pulling so much content from different sources onto their own domains.

All of that being said, I agree with the CZ stance being taken now. DMN can't have it's cake and eat it. If they want this venue to promote links and DMN content to this vast audience of potential DMN customers, they need to rescind the C&D order in writing. Short of that, this place should pretend DMN doesn't exist.

 

[dogberry]

If the content of a DMN tweet is the same as a DMN article does that pose a problem?

DMN owns the copyright on their tweets, but can't claim damages if it is republished?

The DMN is a major source for information on the Cowboys.

People will read the paper and fragments of those readings will be incorporated into comments here.

Mods will be alert to DMN material, but will they be require to buy a subscription to the paper in order to know what is protected content (this is complicated by the large flow of unprotected DMN tweet flow)?

Will paraphrasing be allowed while direct quotation will be forbidden?

 

[munkee]

if CZ already told posters to post links and headlines only, then what do they want?
certainly it is not commercially reasonable for CZ to check every single post to make sure there.

I agree that the DMN demand is absurd, but it would be fairly trivial for them to check every post on the site. They would only need to script up a spider on their side that checks all new posts daily for DMN links and content. I'm sure any IT person on their staff now has the skills to set this up.

 

[Pants]

I agree that the DMN demand is absurd, but it would be fairly trivial for them to check every post on the site. They would only need to script up a spider on their side that checks all new posts daily for DMN links and content. I'm sure any IT person on their staff now has the skills to set this up.

So If I type "DMN is stupid and I won't go in their site any more", they will see it?

good times