The Never-Blue Lizard People Do Not Recognize Human Copyright "Laws"

Print This Post

You may also like...

26 Responses

  1. Jess says:

    Plagiarism may be the sincerest form of flattery, but wholesale copying of content is nothing more than proof that the copier lacks both ethics and the intellect to write anything original. J. Croft ended up looking like nothing but a colossal douche-bag. Sadly, I’m sure he has plenty of company.

  2. Ansley says:

    "She's concerned that I might get snatched off the street and stuffed into some sort of Patriot's Terrarium or something."

    Can't. Stop. Laughing. Picturing. It.

  3. Robert Hewes says:

    I've been looking for publicity for my website lately — maybe scraping a well-read blog will get it for me? Hrmm, the Other McCain has gotten lots of traffic lately — maybe I'll target him?

    Is there any agreement on what is good netiquette for quoting other blogs? I've quoted up to a full paragraph (with attribution and "RTWT") — is that acceptable?

  4. Ken says:

    As far as etiquette — as opposed to law — goes, I think that a clear and prominent attribution link is essential, and that more than a couple of paragraphs is excessive — especially if that's substantially all of a post.

  5. Grifter says:

    "Silence and stonewalling, ultimately, are preferable to enraged, vaguely threatening, and semi-literate justifications, which is what I got the last time I complained about a scraper."

    But the vaguely threatening, semi-literate justifications, and your replies, were entertaining! As a newer reader, I'd love to see it live, as opposed to "watching the VHS" if you will, from a year ago…

  6. Ken says:

    Though it really depends on length of the source post. If it's a two-sentence joke and cutting it ruins it I can see, etiquette-wise, quoting the whole think with prominent attribution. If it's 30 paragraphs I can see quoting multiple paragraphs — particularly if you intersperse quotes with commentary.

  7. Robert Hewes says:

    Thanks, that makes sense. And if I may be so bold to ask, why haven't you invited the offending bloggers to a lovely session of taint-snorting?

  8. Ken says:

    You don't break out the good china for a pizza party.

  9. Matthew Cline says:

    It's David Icke who's about the lizard people, not Alex Jones.

  10. darius404 says:

    Matthew, you should know that this is exactly what Alex Jones WANTS you to think. It serves the purpose of putting the lizard people off his trail.

  11. AlphaCentauri says:

    I notice that when InfoWars posts are based on articles from professional news organizations, they just quote a paragraph and then end with a link to "Read the Full Article."

    I suspect that instead of sending a threat of a DMCA takedown, those organizations sent Kurt and Alex an invoice for the annual subscription to their news service that is required to have the right to republish their articles with attribution.

  12. TPRJones says:

    You may want to consider altering how your RSS feed works. As it is it feeds the entire article, which means all a scraper has to do to rip you off is republish your feed. If you changed it to the headline and maybe a couple of hundred characters at most of the body text, then scrapers using your RSS feed would only get that part from then on.

    I read through RSS, and sometimes I like something enough to click "share" which reshares the entire thing since that's what was in the feed. Should I stop sharing? I don't want you to think I'm intentionally ripping you off.

  13. Chipsa says:

    I like the setup of the RSS feed, however. I can avoid actually hitting up the site until I want to comment or read other's comments. Could stick an attribution somewhere in the middle of the RSS feed's article, such that they couldn't automatically snort it without manually pulling it out.

  14. John David Galt says:

    If you choke a smurf, what color does it turn?

  15. G Thompson says:

    Day by day, they are the tip of the spear, seeking the irrefutable proof that Lizard People faked the "Moon Landing" to create the illusion of a genuine space program, whilst actually preventing humanity from encountering That Which We Are Not Meant To Know.

    So basically they are stating that Voldemort is a Lizard that is never blue, living on the moon? Awesomeness!

    And Ken, your wife is very correct.. The US Surgeon General (not to be confused with the mayor of New York) states that dealing with any more than three loons and/or batshit crazies per lunar (or is that loony) month is dangerous to your health.

  16. perlhaqr says:

    Galt: Eventually, black.

  17. Rliyen says:

    Re: Croft.

    I had completely forgotten about that incident, so I doddered over there. And I saw that he's still a-scrapin', but with MOAR HUBRIS, because he has the following.

    He claims no copyright on any articles scraped, but he wants you to do the following if you take them:

    1)You reproduce in entirety 2)Link to (not giving his "blog" the time of day) 3)Accredit authorship to J. Croft

    So he's TOTALLY not an author to these articles, except where he claims he is.

  18. Narad says:

    If it's any comfort, Age of Autism recently linked to a 24Medica scrape from Natural News that changed authorship without citation and which in turn wasn't really all that explicit about being only a minor rewrite from… Alex Jones.

  19. Mark says:

    There have been 1 or 2 times where I used an entire article in a posting. They were very short articles, and I did attribute first the blog who pointed me to the article plus a link to the original. Usually by making the article in question a link.

    Is that type of linking/attribution allowable under Fair use?


  20. J. Croft says:

    I see you and your fan club got nothing better to do than whine about articles used under fair use-articles thrown up free on the internet.

    You want attribution. So do I but you don't see me reaching for the DMCA boilerplate lawsuit you undoubtedly have stacked like cordwood next to your desk…

    Tell me, how does it feel to be so insecure? How does it feel to be a flaming little punk ass who has nothing better to do than try to screw with people just because you have a microscopic set of genitals and a law degree? What's it like to have a pack of faggy mooks who can't even give a proper insult?

    "MOAR"… nice misspelling.

    Think I'm going to be paying more attention to your blog. Think I'm going to have more fun with your articles-like HERE:

  21. TPRJones says:

    "articles thrown up free on the internet … reaching for the DMCA boilerplate lawsuit you undoubtedly have stacked like cordwood next to your desk…"

    Okay, two things wrong here. First is that just because you can get to it online doesn't mean it's fair game. For example I can see episodes of TV shows on, but that doesn't mean I have the right to then turn around and republish that with my own ads attached. If you think that's true, I urge you to go and do that and see how that works out for you.

    Second, if you think this guy is eager to reach for a DMCA, you clearly don't read the sites you rip off. Fighting shitty uncalled-for DMCA harassment is one of the things they do around here. The difference here is not that now it's him being ripped off, the difference is that what you are doing a) isn't in fact fair use, and b) is fully deserving of a DMCA form.

    I don't think he's likely to actually sue you, but if you keep being an ignorant asshole in his comments like you just did, he in fact might. Just to shut you up.

  22. Ken says:

    Thievery is typical, but frothy pride in thievery is not.

  23. Dan Weber says:

    I think his second post is actually clear because it's satire. Poorly done satire, but still.

  24. Ken says:

    He's referring to us as "Poophat." I'm wondering if I should be making fun of him. He may be in middle school.

  25. Scott Jacobs says:

    I almost want you to sue him just to watch you make him cry in court…

  26. Joe says:

    Wow I completely overlooked this one .

    Interesting website traffic stats. = Alexa Traffic Rank:186,664 Traffic Rank in US: 33,938 (approx. reach 25 million)

    J. Croft’s = Alexa Traffic Rank:2,835,093 Traffic Rank in US: 691,618 (reach approx.. 400,000)

    So essentially J. Croft’s blogsite rates only slightly more interesting than watching grass grow. The reality is J. Croft is just a jealous whiney ass who is just angry that he is not as successful on his blog as Ken so he feels if he re-posts Ken’s content he will (1) magically increase traffic to his silly little conspiracy site – hasn’t happened – the 30 day view trend for his site is actually DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY , (2) hurt Ken’s feelings by insulting him – not likely or (2) make himself look all super smart and important – so VERY not likely.