I found out another site was aggregating my, and other’s, blogs, indicating that they had the best folks in knowledge management. Flattered as I was, I asked that my blog be taken off their roles. Let me explain why.
First, I hadn’t been asked. I think it’s only fair to ask for the right to copy someone else’s work (I recall the time Jay and I found a white paper we’d jointly written being given away as an article in a university consortium’s newsletter!). Let the author know why you’re doing it, and what the proposal is for them (publicity, cash, what have you). Many would be happy to be included in a list, but I want to opt-in, not opt-out. I wouldn’t even have found out if WordPress (my blog software) didn’t track references to the blog as comments.
I note that the indication of who the posts are from is hard to find. There’s a link to the original, to be fair, but otherwise there’s no list of who’s included in this list. Where’s the blogroll? Who is aggregated there?
Another concern is that there’s no indication of *who* is behind this. From an authenticity and trust factor, I like to know who’s behind a site. I get mighty uncomfortable when I find site for organizations and there’s no human name to be found. Why are they hiding it? One of the criteria in being web-literate is knowing not only the authorial voice (who you’re listening to), but also editorial voice, that is, who’s doing the selecting, who “approved this message”.
However, worst of all was the advertising all around the page. Google ads to the left and right, Amazon ads in the body! So, if people go to that site, this (unknown) person’s making money. And I don’t mind people making money, but they better add value. That’s why I recently went through the trouble of getting a Creative Commons license for my site. I want attribution, and I don’t want anyone making money off of my work (at least, if I’m not :). I don’t have a thing against ads on blogs or sites, if they’re making a contribution, e.g. an aggregation, adding value by being selective, communicating who it is and why they should be trusted.
So I opted out. I’m willing to be wrong, but frankly this didn’t strike me as a fair relationship. And a lesson in work literacy. So, am I too uptight? Or was this a reasonable decision? (And fair warning to my fellow bloggers.)
Given that you license your blog under Creative Commons, the first set of reasons do not justify a take-down request: they do not have to ask or notify or even identify yourself.
Given that your Creative Commons license has a NC (Non-Commercial) clause, though, gives you the right to require that the use not be accompanies with advertising. “I want attribution, and I don’t want anyone making money off of my work (at least, if I’m not :)” These are very common concerns and you are right to raise them.
I’ve found my posts on many aggregated sites like this. I only asked once to be removed because it violated the Non-commercial aspect of my Creative Commons license. Since then, I’ve adopted a CC-Attribution-only license, and I don’t even bother with who uses my posts. It’s the Internet and stuff will be copied. I figure that any re-use of my stuff is good for me in the long run. With some of the trashier sites (just copied posts, Google & Amazon ads), I delete any trackbacks on my blog, so there’s no link back to them.
BTW, I’m amazed that they took any action, as most of these sites don’t even bother.
Stephen, you’re right, they don’t have to ask, but I’d quibble whether having a link back is really providing attribution.
Harold, I like your approach, but I think I’ll stick to Non-commercial for now. If I get as popular as you, it may not be worth fighting ;). Don’t know if they took action, but to their credit, their about page did claim you could get taken off (or put on). Who knows?
Yes, i found a couple of posts from a personal blog on one of these link-farming sites.
It can be unnerving to find your own words on someone else’s site, without any clear indication of who runs the site or why. (Even if you have licensed the thing under creative commons, it can be unsettling when people do not act in good faith.)
Seems you were lucky they even had contact details though.
kind regards, michael
Well, there’s the letter, and there’s the spirit. When people stick too closely to the letter, it’s often a sign they don’t care much about the spirit. So your switch to the attribution license is probably wise.
“Link farming” is a great term, Michael. I occasionally find a weird link to my blog — one was from a gourmet-cooking site; it turned out the blogger had re-used a CC photo of mushrooms that I’d used. Most are as mysterious to me as spam is annoying.