Another scumbag copying my site.

[djc]

US legislation so hardly relevant.

[djc]

Which would then be invisble to google and every other search engine

[Steve Firth]

Then why not just put a spell on the bloke that's ripped off your site?

[Andy Dingley]

Amazingly, I'm going to agree with you over something.

If you want to litigate, you can do it yourself. But if you want to _intimidate_, without the cost of going to court, then use a lawyer's notepaper. The correct function of lawyers is to achieve your goal without needing to go near a court.

[Andy Dingley]

Very relevant, if it cuts off their googlies.

[Andy Dingley]

or as the Alabama 3 put it on the new album "You left a virus in my daughter's playstation"

[Andy Dingley]

So build another website with his phone on it and pictures of the BIL's tiling 8-)

[nightjar]

As I said, it is quite difficult to write one trade site that is not very similar to another in the same trade. I certainly could not afford to get upset about every printer ink cartridge site that bears some resemblance to one of mine.

In your case, there is one small part that is the same, possibly lifted directly because he thinks it puts the message over well, possibly entirely by coincidence, because you tend to write things the same way. Elsewhere, you both want to get the same message over to the customer and are likely to use very similar phrases. If you think you can put the message over about flat pack assembly better with a different phrasing, why not do so and thereby improve your own site? However, overall there are sufficient differences in the writing style to mark the bulk of the site as original work.

Colin Bignell

[Mogga]

The pita is this bit FOR WEB SEARCH, YOU MUST IDENTIFY EACH SEARCH RESULT THAT DIRECTLY LINKS TO A WEB PAGE THAT ALLEGEDLY CONTAINS INFRINGING MATERIAL. This requires you to provide (a) the search query that you used, and (b) the URL for each allegedly infringing search result.

But that's easy enough. Just take quotes of yours Flat Pack Assembly is charged at our normal hourly rates, which makes us extremely competitive.

Which brings up two sites

Flat Pack Assembly Flat Pack Assembly is charged at our normal hourly rates, which makes us extremely competitive. One national company charges £45 for the first hour & £30 an ...

- 21k - Cached - Similar pages HANDYMAN365.NET Flat Pack Assembly is charged at our normal hourly rates, which makes us extremely competitive. ? You can save time & so Save Money by putting the boxes in ... handyman365. net/flat_pack_assembly.htm - 14k - Cached - Similar pages

I've put a space in his url to avoid the link counting as a link/

[Andrew May]

Are you sure? TMH has not 'lost' anything as a result of this copying. He is no worse off than if the guy had not copied his site. In that sense the small-claims court is not the way to go. If this other guy has damaged his electric drill and it cost x to repair then there clearly would be a loss but that is not the case here. It's the same with libel. I can't sue for libel in the small claims court because I have suffered no direct monetary loss.

I have great sympathy for Dave because its a frustrating when this sort of thing happens. DOS-attacks anyone?

Andrew

[Owain]

Of course he has, he's lost the money he would have charged for providing the service which this bounder has enjoyed.

That's like saying an author or publisher hasn't "lost" anything if someone photocopies their book.

But if the guy had not copied his site, TMH's laboriously hand-crafted and finely-expressed prose would not be appearing thereupon.

You might very well be able to show direct monetary loss as a result of libel, but libel is not sueable as a small claim because it is a complex area of law. Small claims are intended for simple cases.

Owain

[Ed Sirett]

Whilst I agree that stealing other peoples work is wrong, and exploiting others people work for you own profit is worse, reality is otherwise.

Effectively copyright is dead for _anything_ that can have a digital representation. All media is convergent and has now more or less converged. If is digital it's now effectively public.

I don't mean that any scumbag should exploit and MAKE A LIVING out of other peoples work. but stopping people sharing digital data is trying to forbid the tide.

The big changes are the record and video industries, they will be fighting every inch of the way against their inevitable remodelling. Other artists are familiar with the fact that you can get paid for a performance and you can be commissioned to produce a work butwon't have royalties. Sculptors, artists, many minor musicians, stage actors, entertainers etc. are all supported that way. As an illusionist you get paid to perform if you keep your secrets then all's well. If you give you secrets away then you still have the fact that you have more experience than the imitators.

Essentially the record and video industries have to move to a different business model, away from one which is essentially the "peek at a freak circus side-show model" to one of comissioning public works for the greater good.

Copyright still exists for printed materials and until the "universal book reader" has been developed. This concept which I think many people are or ought to be working on. Is a device that looks and feels exactly like a printed book. It powers itself from background light. When opened it displays a page of whatever book/tome/glossy you have set it up to be (at your computer). When you caress (cf touch) a page it moves forward or backward a page. That's save some trees!

[Andrew May]

That's exactly what I am saying unfortunately - an author could not sue in the small claims court if I copied his book.

Andrew

[nightjar]

Which would not prevent him claiming he had been using exactly the same wording on leaflets he had been distributing around the area for the past couple of years and which you must have seen and copied..

Colin Bignell

[Si]

In message , nightjar writes

Except that he could then be challenged to produce an example and, if necessary, the paperwork from the printer to confirm the date of production.

[The Medway Handyman]

In which case he would have copies and invoices to substanciate this. He only started advertising in October & the site was registered in Sept.

[Andy Hall]

One thing to think about is what aspect don't you like?

Is it that he has copied your site or is it that he is located in Gillingham?

Would you feel the same if he were in Birmingham? (admittedly they need all the help that they can get with English there :-) )

If it's that he presents a possible competitive threat then that would exist anyway.

If he changes some of the text but still essentially offers the same kind of service and business model then the competitive threat is still there - if indeed it is actually a threat anyway.

I would be pissed off as well, but one way to think about it is that if he has just lifted your site and business model lock, stock and barrel then it indicates that he's perhaps not as well organised and effective as you are at what you do and marketing what you do. In the end, it's those that count.........

[Owain]

... due to pay franchise fees on the business idea, not just for copywriting :-)

Owain

[dennis]

I can produce such a sample if needed.. and I have had the laser printer for years so I don't have a receipt. ;-)

Its all a bit of a storm in a tea cup IMO. There are only so many ways of wording it and there is probably prior art on it all.

[dennis]

If he changes his text then anyone who has previously found his site won't find daves site. However while its copied Daves site will come up first ATM. AFAICS Dave wins he loses.

Things may change if he gets more hits like the ones from all the posters here having a look.