Avarice
If you ever want proof that the Interweb can be a confusing place then you have to look no further than a little spat that has broken out here in recent times.
It started when a charity was contacted by an agency representing Irish newspapers and a demand was made for a payment for a link on their website.
The agency reckons that any link to a newspaper is worth €300, which seems a little steep? About €300 too steep in my opinion. Strangely enough, one of the papers the agency represents – the Irish Times – also thinks it is €300 too steep.
I’m with the Times on this one. The whole essence of the Interweb is that it is free, and is bound together with links. If someone wants to quote one of my scribbles [why? I don’t know] then I have no problem with that provided they link back to the original. If they quote and don’t link, then that is plagiarism in my book.
I think the agency’s biggest problem is that they don’t understand the Web. If I am to be billed for every link, then I simply won’t link. As my readers wouldn’t then have a reference point, I would probably have to plagiarise the original article, which would be wrong but necessary. Even if I only copied extracts, the biggest loser is the paper as their work is now unattributed and they are losing potential traffic. They are very unlikely to discover my little ploy, unless they do a regular search for articles containing their text and I would wish them luck with that one!
I see this is now to be discussed by our Lords and Masters, as if they didn’t have better things to do.
It’s all a massive waste of time caused by that modern disease that is sweeping the country – trying to scrape cash off anyone and everyone under any pretext, no matter how daft.
Damn!
I have just included three links.
€900?
I wonder if they’ll accept a cheque?
If I link to a web page I'm already paying them, in PageRank.
And traffic.
They maintain a link is a breach of copyright. I would have thought that the opposite – quoting without a link – would be the breach?
Fucking idiots.
Heading down the logic path, Google must owe them billions.
Heh! Good point.
Actually the IT would owe me a few bob too. It has to work both ways.
you ever notice the indo has no links, if its a piece about some new youtube hit on the web, there is no link to youtube, fcuking cnuts
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/psys-hit-clocks-up-one-billion-youtube-views-3334102.html
Not only do they not have external links but they insist on linking every second word internally which is really fucking irritating.
Incidentally, if some prat includes a link in a comment, am I then liable for the bill?
firstly, there is no legal basis for liable.
these guys where chancing their arm, using bully and scare tactics
to scam money from nonprofit charities.
Pretty poor behaviour under any light.
feck.. meant to sign tit-bit Maurice Pratt..
Another name from the past. Is he still alive?
Hence the title of this little brain-fart! 😉
If they had any sense, the papers would be using the links as evidence that people read their website, and then accordingly charge extra for the advertising on those pages.
The only way to avoid being plagurised is to cease publishing, although perhaps that's their next step.
Welcome, Mick! An excellent point. Generally the one to benefit most from a link is the recipient. The problem with the papers though is that they just dislike all this competition, and there is damn all they can do about it.
Don't let this give you any ideas, okay? Thanks.