Data... Pros or Plagiarists?

I think you should stop playing nice.

Posted by JP on 2007/09/25

Is there a legal element to this?

Posted by Tim on 2007/09/25

disgusting.

i think an example needs to be made (even if readers just link this to Muti.co.za)

Posted by thescott on 2007/09/25

I don't think legal is a real issue. The open nature of the web will mean that this sort of thing will go on forever.

It is only when customers of people like DataPro realise that they don't have the sort of expertise that they advertise that anything will happen.

Posted by Andrew on 2007/09/25

mmm...Sarah, one has to question their creative originality. Marketing is all about creativity and copying someone else's content is indicative of your expertise in my opinion.

It would be interesting to see when they respond to your post, and indeed IF.

One more thing. Regardless of whether the copywriter has "left" the company, I'm sure someone there should realise what has been done.

I don't for one second believe that no one knew anything. Possible, yet improbable.

Posted by Henre on 2007/09/25

I think it's good that you gave them the time to correct it. I think it's great that you gave them the benefit of the doubt (as in we didn't know and the guy has left) but enough is enough and blogging about it is a good start.

The problem is "all publicity is good publicity" and all this does is drive visitors to the sight to see it for themselves - which is not what you want...

My suggestion is to invite them to a beer-a-thon and drink them under the table. Last man standing wins and the loser pays... Isn't that a South African solution?

Posted by Paul Parkinson on 2007/09/25

What leaves me absolutely gobsmacked is the fact that people assume that they can get away with intellectual property theft. Why "roof" copy from a company that tracks the dissemination of content online online for a living? From a reputational and business longevity perspective, it's the equivalent of shooting yourself in the foot. And then in the ass. - Andre

Posted by Andre Bothma on 2007/09/26

To Quirk and copyrighters in general,

In response to this very sad and unsettling affair, I can but apologise to Quirk for this horrible circumstance.

Unfortunately, this is a bit of a legacy issue as this content was done before I was involved, and I have been told was taken from a mini concept site that had been thrown together in the past. In fact, the idea that someone can do this so blatantly is rather horrifying to me. It does not however, take away from the fact that the content was there.

I do in fact take this very seriously and the menu options were removed on Friday immediately after confirming with Janine which pages it was. Unfortunately, some links to those pages were missed. That was certainly not done with intent, which was why they were removed shortly after this blog was posted and we became aware that those links were still there.

I have heard that the past always comes back to bite you in the bum, but I never realised that other peoples’ pasts would do that to us too.

Once again, apologies to Quirk and watch out for DataPro’s FRESH, NEW and ORIGINAL content that will be appearing soon.

Regards,
DataPro Electronic Marketing Team

Posted by DataPro Electronic Marketing on 2007/09/26

An apology is good - but no names? A bit of an impersonal apology IMHO

Posted by Paul Parkinson on 2007/09/26

I understand its terrible to see your content stolen but this makes me think. What about Pictures. Designers that lift photo's and stuff from other sites and use it in their designs so they don't have to go to the paid photo archives. Isent that just as bad as stealing copy? (PS- No I don't work for Datapro)

Posted by Chewbacca on 2007/09/26

PPS: Kudo's to Datapro for replying - takes big kahuna's to admit you are wrong. Will remember you guys as the company that ownes up when things go wrong. Bravo.

Posted by Chewbacca on 2007/09/26

What makes this issue all the more interesting is that the duplication of content is going to mess with your own search engine rankings. This really is not on, and the apology is a little lame, really. I hope they sort it out quickly.

Posted by Mike Perk on 2007/09/26

Quirk - do you ever use photos avilable for free on the internet in developing sites and stuff? I know alot of dev houses do? Do you guys?

Posted by chew on 2007/09/26

Quirk - do you ever use photos avilable for free on the internet in developing sites and stuff? I know alot of dev houses do? Do you guys?

Posted by Chewbacca on 2007/09/26

If images are free - as in free-for-all rights - as suggested, would it be a problem if Quirk did use them in developing sites?

Posted by Andre Bothma on 2007/09/26

Obviously image galleries that are open for use by all and have it clearly stated that no rights are attached are excpetions. I used to work for a certain gaming company that used to nick images that were from other websites and protected and cropped them to fit. Mainly because the company was too cheap to buy hideously expensive images and the poor designers were a bit desperate. i was just wondering what the thoughts on that were? I know copy can be tweaked and "taken" from other sites and "personalised" - BUT images are alot harder. I think i have seen this one blushing spanish women on alsmost every second gaming site I came across- just diff backgrounds and stuff. So i know its done. I mean Datapro could have stolen that content and just tweaked and it would ahve been theirs and original ;). Images are different.

Posted by Chewbacca on 2007/09/26

I remember reading an article many moons ago about the most famous "picture girl" used in a bunch of advertising campaigns.

They featured numerous examples and it was quite funny.

The catch phrase was something along the line of "Spot the ad girl" or something.

Irrelevant information, I know. Apologies.

Posted by Henre on 2007/09/26

@Henre - *off topic* - she's called "The Everywhere Girl" and you can find her here:

http://www.theeverywheregirl.com/

Posted by Paul Parkinson on 2007/09/26

Classic Paul. Cheers!

Posted by Henre on 2007/09/26

As CEO of the Vox Telecom Group of which DataPro is a member I apologise to Quirk.biz for this blatant plagiarism. We have no excuses, are accountable for the staff and consultants we employ but we will put in checks an balances to ensure we are not caught out again.

Douglas Reed CEO Vox Telecom

Posted by Douglas Reed on 2007/09/26

Great reply Douglas. That's the spirit!

Posted by Paul Parkinson on 2007/09/26

Douglas and Datapro, thank you for your response. I really appreciate your candor and sincerely believe that a company like Vox Telecom or Datapro would never have condoned an incident like this.
To be honest this has been a lesson for me too and from my side there are no hard feelings at all.
I wish you and your team all the best.

Rob Stokes CEO Quirk eMarketing

Posted by Rob on 2007/09/26

Just jumping back a few comments to Quirk's use of photos.

We go out of our way to use photos that are either free, or we pay for those we use. Generally, there is a large amount of stock available that is free to use, released under Creative Commons or similar open licenses.

If we cannot source the image that we want, and we spend a lot of time trying to get the right ones, we will normally purchase Royalty Free stock.

It is very infrequently that we purchase anything else, as one needs to pay licensing fees every few months or annually.

The risk of stealing images is too high. I have witnessed, (at an old agency) a client who reused an image that was licensed for a limited period. Thankfully it was the client, and not the agency, as the client was caught, and given 2 options: Pay up, or go to court. They ended up having to pay over R100 000, a large dent in anyones cash flow.

I have also worked in agency's where theft is the norm, not the exception. This went so far that even their software was all stolen too. The I have worked in places like Quirk where the opposite is true.

If anyone wants to know where to get good free or reasonably priced stock, get in touch with me, and I'll happily help point you in the right direction.

Posted by Andrew on 2007/09/27

I just couldn't resist adding this link which i found on Digg a few days ago:

www.virtualhosting.com/blog/2007/100-legal-sources-for-free-stock-images/

The title of the article is: 100 (Legal) Sources for Free Stock Images

Posted by Jean on 2007/09/27

thanks jean, thats a great list. if you cant find what youre looking for free, try istockphoto.com

Posted by gavin on 2007/09/27

Isn't this a great example of how things can go horribly wrong in a second and yet be recovered sensibly and respectfully with an honest and open answer?

Good on you both for dealing with the issue in such a way as it reflects positively on both companies...

Posted by Mike on 2007/09/30

umm....
What happened to "O.R.I.G.I.N.A.L"ideas dataPro?
c'mon?

Posted by Yasser on 2007/09/30

Then of course there is also the truism that people who live in glass houses shouldn't.

Some people call it "research", some call it ideas scraping.

In terms of online content (as opposed to academic research), I personally believe that ideas are made to be set free:

But, for the sake of an acid test for the original post (referring to "content borrowing"), compare the following two posts.

The first headline, published on my blog on 1 October, starts an article on tips for lowering one's carbon footprint:

http:saclimatecrisis.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/saving-the-planet-one-purchase-at-a-time/

The second headline and accompanying raticle, by the author of "Data Pros or Plagiarists?", was published on Blog Action Day (2007/10/15), some two weeks later, and includes tips for saving the environment:

http:www.gottaquirk.com/post/985/saving-the-world

Now whilst I fully agree on the need to clamp down on plagiarism, I do think that what is a called for is a good dose of realism when it comes to the use and "borrowing" of language (it's free for all), a dash of humility and a WHOLE lot less high horse when it comes to mud flining regarding

"O.R.I.G.I.N.A.L"ideas

Posted by Andre on 2007/10/29

Then of course there is also the truism that people who live in glass houses shouldn't.

Some people call it "research", some call it ideas scraping.

In terms of online content (as opposed to academic research), I personally believe that ideas are made to be set free:

But, for the sake of an acid test for the original post (referring to "content borrowing"), compare the following two posts.

The first headline, published on my blog on 1 October, starts an article on tips for lowering one's carbon footprint:

http:saclimatecrisis.wordpress.com/2007/10/01/saving-the-planet-one-purchase-at-a-time/

The second headline and accompanying raticle, by the author of "Data Pros or Plagiarists?", was published on Blog Action Day (2007/10/15), some two weeks later, and includes tips for saving the environment:

http:www.gottaquirk.com/post/985/saving-the-world

Now whilst I fully agree on the need to clamp down on plagiarism, I do think that what is a called for is a good dose of realism when it comes to the use and "borrowing" of language (it's free for all), a dash of humility and a WHOLE lot less high horse when it comes to mud flining regarding

"O.R.I.G.I.N.A.L"ideas

Posted by Andre on 2007/10/29

Damn I thought it sounded quite catchy. Obviously playing on an old saying isn't as origional as i thought it was - I was quite impressed at how clever I was being that early on a Monday morning;-)

I actually did a little Google search to see how often that old saying was adapted (apparently anything from handbags to robots has helped save the world).
While I don't see a coincidentally similar headline as being on the same level, I do think you make a very good point - I wonder if there are any more 100% original ideas out there.

Posted by Sarah M on 2007/10/29

The power of the blog.... BOOM...i must say i didnt know it shot humble pie..

Posted by smith on 2007/10/30

Let's face it, using the words, "saving X one Y at a time" is hardly completely original.

What you've got there is a basic headline formula.

Replace 'X" with any number of things that people are often keen on saving (money, the earth, time, energy etc.) and you've got any number of variations.

In fact, you could replace "saving" with any number of verbs too.

Anyway, my point is that there is a big difference between writing according to a basic formula and copy/pasting someone else's words verbatim.

Now, if you copy/paste and then proceed to reword the same idea completely - well, therein lies the grey area....

Posted by Darren on 2007/10/30