95 (thousand) Theses (for sale) 375
"I am shocked that that this company is engaging in what amount to piracy of my work. Actually, it's worse than that since they are offering it for sale. Imagine the lawsuits and jailtime I would get (a la FBI Warning) if I burned a few hundred CDs of the latest movie release and sold them on the Internet.
"I imagine a great deal of Slashdot readers have completed graduate work. I just wonder what they make of this?"
Well, we'll see. Contentville is funded by CBS, NBC, a huge book distributor and a database aggregator - it launched last month. These companies are in Congress right now lobbying for a law to protect databases - that is, to make re-using information from places such as Contentville illegal. Not just copying the information, but even using any of the data or facts from databases would be illegal. A number of database-protection bills are in Congress right now, and if one of them passes (very likely), the poster above won't be able to make use of his own thesis without paying Contentville - since Contentville went to the effort of compiling their database, and the law would protect that effort.
Steven Brill, so-called "media watchdog", is just in the process of settling with thousands of freelance writers whose work he also, uh, appropriated.
It looks to me like a crystal-clear violation of the No Electronic Theft Act, passed a few years ago. Will Steven Brill go to jail for not more than three years? No. He's a "media watchdog", and only "pirates" go to jail. (Aside to Steve: if the NYT or Washington Post start referring to you as a pirate, best flee the country - the FBI will take an interest in the case then.)
Contentville. We get our Content the old-fashioned way - by stealing it.
Here is the agreement on my MA thesis (Score:4)
other rights: the University of Alblerta requires the following
University of Alberta Library release form -- this is verbatim
and in full from my MA thesis:
Permission is hereby granted to the University of Alberta Library
to reproduce single copies of this thesis and to lend or sell
such copies for private, scholarly or scientific research
purposes only.
The author reserves all other publication and other rights in
association with the copyright in the thesis, end except as
hereinbefore provided neither the thesis nor any substantial
portion thereof may be printed or otherwise reproduced in any
material form whatever without the author's prior written consent.
That certainly does not sound like I have given away rights for third
parties to print and sell my thesis -- it sounds like I assigned that
specific right to the University of Alberta Library, and no one else,
nor does it appear to entail the U of A the right to transfer
reproduction, distribution, or resale rights to other parties. Yet,
UMI, and thus, contentville have it listed for sale.
Or do I misunderstand the relevant rights and laws in play here?
The difference is (Score:2)
Some would go farther to say that record labels are evil and the actual artists don't get any money anyway, blah blah blah, and with dissertations it's actually people stealing from the little guy, not the evil corporation. I don't know if that argument is valid or not, but just because napster (or gnutella, or whatever) allows people to distribute illegally copied materials doesn't make the technology itself illegal.
Heh, how bizarre :) (Score:2)
I have to be alarmed whenever I see bits of legal boilerplate like 'X owns all content on its (aggregated, database, pirated) website and use is prohibited unless you get licensing from us'. Common sense would seem to indicate that if they just gathered up public stuff they can't really do that- but common sense doesn't always describe the world around us, and good faith is in even shorter supply. I honestly thought the people holding mp3 patents were going to only go after software authors- silly me! Turns out they are only overlooking me, the musician-type person- and will happily clobber me with lawyers and demand $15,000 and one cent minimum per download if I'm seen making mp3s of my own music available on my own website. But CD rippers can do that free, because they're not a business! ;P
furrfu... furrfu phoo phoo...
Why's that? (Score:4)
(Kidding.)
--Threed-Looking out for Numero Uno since 1976!
Dubious or not, it is a legitimate service. (Score:2)
Mind you, if someone asked, I'd be reasonably willing to pass on a copy. This has happened, exactly once.
If I were relucant to do so, or someone interested in the MCNF problem couldn't find me, then it might well be worth $30 to them to get a copy of the thesis.
I would consider that price fairly outrageous, at around $0.21 per page, but while the price is fairly high, it's not likely to be a spectacular "profit centre" that I'd expect personally to rake in money over.
If I "went into business" selling copies of theses, printed as one-offs, $30 per thesis isn't an outrageous rate; I expect it would cost $15 a pop to search the microfilms and set it up for printing.
It's undoubtedly legal; it's not a "Napster-like" situation. And if my thesis proved to be a "best seller," I do have copyright so that I could sell it for a price undercutting UMI's pricing.
UMI (Score:2)
From the UMI agreement form I have to sign to get my PhD:
etc. etc.
Seems pretty clear cut to me - nothing illegal is going on here. If you signed the UMI agreement when you submitted your diss, then contentville are free to distribute it.
Nick
Re:GPL your thesis! (Score:2)
Of course not. The author of a particular change is always responsible for that change, they can't just call their changed version the same with a different version number, they can only make a derivative work which is also under the GPL but they are the responsible "owner". That means they only own their own parts for which they are responsible while the rest is unchanged. The original creator and owner of the original has nothing to do with their changes. That should be obvious.
If it was different, Microsoft could just rewrite the latest Linux kernel as a Visual Basic/Virus Builder script, and claim Linus Torvalds and the Linux community to be responsible for the next Outlook problem... ;)
Re:Wait! (Score:2)
Really, though, it is a stupid site. I don't care one way or the other if it stays up or not, but anyone who buys from there is utterly and completely stupid. Most doctors will send you their thesis for free, and those who don't will send you their thesis for the cost of reproduction. If not, then this really would fall under the "abandonware" article that Slashdot posted recently.
Re:GPL your thesis! (Score:2)
Re:This is strange.... (Score:2)
By the way, if anyone buys the hardbound edition ($69.50), I'll autograph it for you.
-----------
I think this might help clear things up a little.. (Score:2)
The way it works, your Ph.D. must be "published", and open to anyone who wants to see it. That usually means that you pay to have it bound, with a copy for yourself, one for your advisor, one for your university's library, and one copy sent
to the University of Michigan's "University Microfilms", where it is dutifully imaged and saved. The thing started because, let's say you saw a
reference to my thesis, maybe in a journal article I published, and you want a copy. It would be a pain in my backside to make a copy for you, and
everyone else that asked, even if you did offer to pay for my copying costs. So... University Microfilms (UM) was established a number of years
ago, so that when you called me, I could just send you to them, giving you the reference number to my thesis. In exchange for reducing my hassle, I
assigned UM the right to copy the thesis and sell it to you, at a small carrying fee. I get no royalty on what is my copyright work, but I also get
no hassle. Now just because someone buys a copy, they don't have license to plagiarize, only to use, etc. It also allows people to always get a copy of your thesis, even if you're dead or unreachable. The guy who complained doesn't realize what the deal is, unless he specifically refused to have
his work submitted, but most universities require it as part of the process, because they also, don't want the hassle. This just looks like the e-commerce version of something that has been in place for years (at least 35-40).
That settled it for me, at least...
Re:We sighn away copyright when turning it in.. (Score:4)
Depending on the state, any such policies may be unenforceable. My Assignment agreement with my employer (governed by the State of California), not only cites, but quotes section 2870 of the California Labor Code:
a) Any provisions in an employment agreement which provide that an employee shall assign, or offer to assign, any of his or her rights in an invention to his or her employer shall not apply to an invention that the employee developed entirely on his or her own time without using the employer's equipment, supplies, facilities, or trade secret information except for those inventions that either:
i) relate at the time of conception or reduction to practice of the invention to the employer's business, or actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development of the employer; or
ii) result from any work performed by the employee for the employer.
b) To the extent a provision in an employment agreement purports to require an employee to assign an invention otherwise excluded from being required to be assigned under subdivision (a), the provision is against the public policy of this state and is unenforceable.
Since I actually live in Minnesota, I thought I'd look up our (similar) assignment law:
Chapter Title: EMPLOYMENT; WAGES, CONDITIONS, HOURS, RESTRICTIONS
Section: 181.78
Text:
181.78 Agreements; terms relating to inventions.
Subdivision 1. Any provision in an employment agreement which provides that an employee shall assign or offer to assign any of the employee's rights in an invention to the employer shall not apply to an invention for which no equipment, supplies, facility or trade secret information of the employer was used and which was developed entirely on the employee's own time, and (1) which does not relate (a) directly to the business of the employer or (b) to the employer's actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development, or (2) which does not result from any work performed by the employee for the employer. Any provision which purports to apply to such an invention is to that extent against the public policy of this state and is to that extent void and unenforceable.
Subd. 2. No employer shall require a provision made void and unenforceable by subdivision 1 as a condition of employment or continuing employment.
Subd. 3. If an employment agreement entered into after August 1, 1977 contains a provision requiring the employee to assign or offer to assign any of the employee's rights in any invention to an employer, the employer must also, at the time the agreement is made, provide a written notification to the employee that the agreement does not apply to an invention for which no equipment, supplies, facility or trade secret information of the employer was used and which was developed entirely on the employee's own time, and (1) which does not relate (a) directly to the business of the employer or (b) to the employer's actual or demonstrably anticipated research or development, or (2) which does not result from any work performed by the employee for the employer.
HIST: 1977 c 47 s 1; 1986 c 444
I also looked at my alma mater's policy [umn.edu], I didn't sign anything over (current policy, not the one while I was there).
Now, IANAL, but I'd like to think that MN and CA's employment agreement laws could be extended to academia, especially because students generally pay for their education, rather than get paid for it. In fact, since no pay occurs, I'd like to think that those assignments would also be null and unenforceable.
Where do Contentville's dissertations come from? (Score:2)
It looks like they simply pass the order to someone else.
Re:They say they are from 'UMI' database (Score:2)
I would expect that most institutions have a similar agreement with UMI and that most graduate students either don't care about the implications of the forced signature or (like me) figure that getting the PhD is a damn sight more important than having some guy pay a few bucks ten years down the road to see what a moldy dissertation about persistent neutron chains says.
The Site Forces Cookies (Score:2)
--
Ahem. Do you guys ever actually read the links ? (Score:3)
Excerpts from the UMI® Dissertation Abstracts database are being used by Contentville, which, in turn, collects orders for full-text dissertations. Dissertation orders are fulfilled by UMI® Dissertations Publishing, whose mission is to expand scholarly communication and improve access to academic research. All Dissertation Publishing Agreements with authors remain in effect. Dissertation authors retain all rights to their dissertations. All sales will be tracked for royalty payments. All contracted royalties will be paid, per the agreement. The UMI program continues to expand access to research and maintain a permanent archive of scholarly works. Wider distribution of dissertation research is intended to support the international scholarly community.
From this I conclude:
1. Contentville are actually selling stuff that was already for sale off-line.
2. If your thesis is there, and you did not license it, presumably you gave a license to your University, which did. This is not unusual. Its generally in the agreement you sign in a hungover stupour during freshers' week.
Reselling (Score:2)
I'd be curious to see if kkkalen's dissertation is in all those places too. I would assume so.
Not entirely (Score:2)
Re:Information wants to be free (Score:2)
Distribution (Score:2)
The Value Add (Score:2)
Infrastructure (Score:2)
But... (Score:3)
And don't think for a moment that Napster doesn't have some plan to make money off what they do eventually. They are funded by VC's, and VC's are not known for their charity when it comes to fudning decisions.
Re:We sighn away copyright when turning it in.. (Score:2)
Damn media companies... (Score:2)
Heck, these are OUR copyrights that are being trodden upon!
Let's get the EFF to sue them, and force them to settle for something reasonable... like sending $100 PER THESIS SOLD to a fund that will help 2600 in its legal battles...
--
Re:Cripes (Score:2)
Well, tradition aside, since the copyright laws were rewritten in 1978, everything anyone writes is automatically copyrighted the moment it is put down on paper, or disc. They have no right to publish those theses unless they sign contracts with the people who wrote them. Plain and simple.
Re:corporate hypocrites (Score:2)
We're pissed at their hypocracy! (Score:2)
Wait! (Score:2)
You know, information wants to be free, free to be sold, repackaged, used, and anything people can come up with no matter what the original author's wants are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
try to avoid blanket copyright transfers (Score:2)
In fact, I have no problem granting UMI, my university, or a journal a transferable right to publish my thesis or papers. For me, the problem occurs when those institutions want to prohibit me from distributing or reusing my own work.
The Contentville Cop-out! (Score:2)
1) He claimed that they are not actually selling copyrighted materials. What thay are selling is the convenience of being able to easily obtain materials that are available (often for free) elsewhere. You, the cusomer, pays for the convenience of the fact that you don't have to look as hard as you otherwise would.
This point is total BS, since a search engine like Google is quick and accurate, and keeps the $5 (approx) dollars in my pocket. BTW: In the case of non-freely available materials, they're going to buy them on your behalf, and pass the cost on to you, along with the 'nominal fee'. Afterwards, I'm sure they'll keep a copy of the materials - so they don't have to re-buy them next time - but will charge the next customer the same 'acquisition + nominal fee' amount.
2) The attitude that customers can buy the articles/papers/whatever from Contentville for a nominal fee, or they can go and "... buy it for free
"Buy it for free" elsewhere? That right there defined the character of the man for me. He's about money. He's not trying to do the right thing, or change the world, or even make research simpler for others. He's in it to get rich, and for some reason I found such a blatanly greedy attitude repugnant.
Crash and burn, ContentVille! Die!
Two issues here... (Score:2)
1. In general, anything you say, do, write, think or produce is protected under the Berne convention.
2. However, #1. doesn't apply to those who have given up those rights either by posting on a forum with a TOS that includes implicitly giving up rights to postings or pysically signing some sort of document giving up those rights.
The Berne convention allows you to collect reasonable damages and (I believe, but don't quote me) reasonable attorney's fees. Copyrighting your work entitles you to $5000 per violation (and I believe other remedies, but I don't recall right now).
From what I have read in the above posts, many students have actually signed their Berne rights away. It all depends on the wording of that document they signed...
--
Quantum Linux Laboratories - Accelerating Business with Linux
* Education
* Integration
* Support
They claim they will track down and give you royal (Score:2)
Also.... (Score:2)
CONTENTVILLE.COM COPYRIGHT POLICY [contentville.com] Contentville.com will block access to and/or remove any material that it believes in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and submitted to our site. This policy shall cover all aspects of Contentville.com, including, but not limited to user comments or other content submitted to our site. What to do if you think a copyright is being infringed: -- Identify where or whom the material is from. --Tell us how the rightful owner may be contacted. -- Give us a statement of good faith belief that the material is infringing, and that the information provided is accurate and the complaint is authorized by the copyright holder. -- Send the notice of Copyright infringement to the following Designated Copyright Infringement Agent for Contentville.com: Catherine Seda Copyright Agent of Contentville.com Contentville.com 1230 Avenue of the Americas 16th Floor New York, NY 10020 212-332-6400 or via email to: copyright@Contentville.com Once we receive this information, we will: -- Block the infringing material or site -- Notify the infringing user -- In the case of a first time offender, the infringing material will be removed. -- In the case of repeat offenders, we will endeavor to remove them permanently from the site.
Read this first, don't get to upset yet. (Score:5)
http://www.contentville.com/c ontent/dissertations.asp [contentville.com]
*from the page*
Excerpts from the UMI® Dissertation Abstracts database are being used by Contentville, which, in turn, collects orders for full-text dissertations. Dissertation orders are fulfilled by UMI® Dissertations Publishing, whose mission is to expand scholarly communication and improve access to academic research. All Dissertation Publishing Agreements with authors remain in effect. Dissertation authors retain all rights to their dissertations. All sales will be tracked for royalty payments. All contracted royalties will be paid, per the agreement. The UMI program continues to expand access to research and maintain a permanent archive of scholarly works. Wider distribution of dissertation research is intended to support the international scholarly community.
--Brandon
Give it away (Score:2)
__________________________________________________ ___
Re:Wait! (Score:2)
I don't think you can generalize about
FWIW, I consider myself a
--
Re:Wait! (Score:2)
Half of what I know about the more advanced topics in CS comes from theses & papers that I download from the authors' Web sites, or from FTP sites that collect papers from the authors' institutions or research groups, or from topic-oriented Web/FTP sites, where the authors submit their own articles in hopes of wider circulation.
Also, lots of subjects have "announce" lists where authors post the abstract and download site of their theses & tech reports relevant to that subject.
I not sure whether the internet has become more important than libraries and duplication services as the primary distribution channel for research yet, but it is well on its way. When I'm looking for papers on a topic I certainly use Google more often than I use a library catalog.
--
Re:Well.. (Score:2)
Actually, that would be the ideal way of disseminating research, provided that you had an easy + effective way of searching for the subject matter you need.
Combine that with a system that builds and maintains a "reverse bibliography" (i.e., who quotes this paper), and you would have a killer app for the research community.
--
Re:GPL your thesis! (Score:3)
FSF introduced a "content" license last year; it would probably be applicable.
> Would anyone be willing to GPL their research the same way they GPL their source?
Academic research has for the most part been "free" for centuries. You write your theses with the expectation - nay, hope - that thousands of other people will get a free copy out of their library, read it, and quote it extensively in their own work. And that their work will build on it.
What is not expected is that they will appropriate the whole thing, or major chunks of it, and stick their name on it.
--
Re:Wait! (Score:2)
Re:Why for sale? You can get them from the authors (Score:4)
Re:Distribution (Score:2)
I would be happy to send it to anyone who wants it, for free.
This isn't like Red Hat making money selling Linux. Red Hat has free downloads, and puts some really significant work into the distribution they produce.
But Contentville is basically just a photocopying company. They are obviously attempting to profit from my work, and the work of thousands of others who intended their research to be freely available.
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Re:Why for sale? You can get them from the authors (Score:2)
Yes, anyone who wants to can get my thesis from a library through an interlibrary loan.
But they should not be allowed to turn around and sell it without even notifying me or paying me a dime.
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Re:I just spoke to them -- here's the deal (Score:2)
I have a better idea now. On the details page where they list the options for purchasing from them ($30 for PDF, up to $66 for bound copy) I want them to put a link that says something like:
"The author of this thesis has made it available for free download from (my site)".
I think that is the best solution, and true to the spirit of the scientific method and the GPL.
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Re:Ideas should be free, this isn't... (Score:3)
It's nice in some ways - I can easily link to it from an on-line resume, for example, and it might help some researcher find my work.
But overall, I don't approve of Contentville's use of my copyrighted material: in particular, selling it for a profit.
It's not that I don't want people reading it. After all, I wrote it with the expectation that other researchers would use it and hopefully benefit from it. That's the whole point of the scientific method.
My thesis is copyright by me. I have allowed the University of Victoria library unlimited rights to make FREE copies of it for the purposes of interlibrary loans and whatnot - that's part of the deal with publishing it at UVic. But I'm sure that no-one is supposed to profit from copying it except (optionally) me.
I'm going to check the details of the copyright on my thesis tonight. Then I'll be writing a letter to Contentville demanding that they give my thesis away for free (or at most the cost of copying and postage).
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Re:GPL your thesis! (Score:2)
I think the Open Content [opencontent.org] license would be more appropriate for everything outside CS thesi. But a better question is why you would want to. The academic community has no desire for collaboration on a single paper, instead they cite other works within existing copywrite law. Rather than making your thesis Open Content, it would be a much more beneficial act to ensure that it's available on-line (for free) so that everyone could read it to enhance their own work.
This is NOT a big deal (Score:5)
I keep the copyright, and if UMI ever sells more than a few copies, they pay me royalties. (Although I'd be shocked if they ever sell another copy after the one my mom bought) Contentville is forwarding orders on to UMI, so I'd get paid if someone bought my thesis through Contentville.
The reason for requiring theses to be published is to ensure that the research they contain is always accessible. Sure, I'll send you a copy of my thesis if you ask me, and so will most other academics, but it's nice to have a central repository where theses are always available. Sometimes it's hard to find or get in touch with an author (try getting Ted Kaczynski's thesis directly from Ted!).
Basically this story seems like someone writing a book and then complaining when they discover Barnes & Noble selling it.
Well.. (Score:3)
Why do you think /. will be sympathetic? (Score:3)
Is everyone a hypocrite? (Score:2)
What I see is two groups:
1.Corporations try to maximize profits by selling everything they can get their hands on, and trying to own (by forcing artists to contract to them) all works.
2.Slashdot people trying to maximize their freedoms by trying to make everything free, cheap, and easy to obtain.
Obviously, this is a cyber-punk world already. Where is the Government? Shouldn't it be trying to strike a balance between these obviously flawed sides? 1. Makes you broke, as you will pay to monopolies all your money and then some just to get what you need. 2. Is unstable, and makes darn certain artists and engineers alike won't be paid. If you got rid of society's engineers and artists, would you be left with a free internet, but a job at a factory or a farm? Not likely, a company will just step in over the powerless free-thinkers and take a big, monetary bite out of the whole thing and institute a #1 all over again.
I own copyright on this statement.
-Ben
We sighn away copyright when turning it in.. (Score:5)
I am in biology (molecular immunology), so your field/school may be differant (sounds like it is) but I would not say the blanket statement that all of these thesis's (?thesi?) are taken without permission.
Re:GPL your thesis! (Score:4)
If you GPLed your thesis, anyone could then rewrite the whole thing, change your conclusions to something you don't agree with, change the rev number, keep your name on it, and republish it without your permission. That would truely suck.
All of a sudden anyone could attribute any quote to your work by just reving the docutment.
Quack
Not GPL - FDL (Score:3)
FDL takes some approaches that it would be very hard to take on programs. It contemplates invariant sections, which should always appear. It also provides for invariant texts which should appear at the cover, back or first/last pages of the book.
OK, I think I understand now (Score:2)
My.MP3.com = GOOD
Contentville = BAD
Have you ever heard of something called 'consistency'? The sad thing is I do get it. If its a big corporation, its bad, but if its the 'empower user' its good. Even if the 'empowered user' is backed by millions and millions in venture capital. I seriously doubt this DB protection law would make it illegal for the guy to use his own thesis; he does have a copyright on it. I don't think that any sane person would believe that he couldn't. So why did you write it? why did you say it? Flame bait? I'd say so. A baseless appeal to all the brain-dead slashbots out there
Copyright is dead, deal with it.
We don't know how bad things are in north korea, but here are some pictures of hungry children. -- CNN
(lame joke) New moderation system (Score:2)
-1 I didn't get the joke
-1 Stupid
-1 Individual thought
----------------------
+1 I agree +1 Bitting commentary on the state of slasdot +1 I'm modding myself up with another account +1 Stupid, but then so am I.
We don't know how bad things are in north korea, but here are some pictures of hungry children. -- CNN
The Shape of things to come... (Score:2)
An interesting take on where things are headed, it's over three years old and remarkably prescient...
--
Where's mine? (Score:2)
Maybe Slashdot Should... (Score:2)
Re:corporate hypocrites (Score:4)
My Ph.D. thesis is there. I'm going write them a note telling them they cannot sell it.
They may not be selling it. UMI makes available abstracts for papers they can't (and don't) sell.
UMI is at http://www.umi.com [umi.com]. They have answers on their site to a lot of questions that are coming up here. It might be worth peoples' time to do a little research before flying off the handle...
Re:Hmm... does anyone else find this amusing? (Score:2)
Done with resumes too (Score:3)
I can't completely blame them, though. I didn't put a robots.txt on my site, so all of this content is up for grabs. Sad, in a way.
Contentville made FC (Score:5)
Countermeasure: dissertations in dmoz.org? (Score:2)
1. dissertations are being offered to interested folks. This is GOOD.
2. those interested folks have to pay for them, money which flows into the pockets of some company which probably adds ZERO value (apart from offering a database service, but we'll get to this). This is BAD. Science can only progress when there are giants (and midgets and everything in between) on whose shoulders we can stand. There's no need for a toll booth here, in fact it will only hinder the advance of science.
3; the people behind companies like this one are trying the same old buy-me-a-law trick which gave us laws like the DMCA and aberrations like UCITA. This is BAD. Very BAD. Money talks...
Well, I think the copyright holders for the dissertations (the authors) mostly agree with the fact that this information really wants to be free. So why not make it available for free? If everyone were to add their dissertation to an on-line database (like dmoz.org), and offer the service of mailing it (for some low fee to cover expenses) to interested parties, the information really IS free. And sleezes like contentville will find a dry well where the once suspected an oasis. This is GOOD (tm)
If dmoz.org is not sufficient, maybe someone with a server to spare and a few gig's worth of diskspace can put them online, run htDig:: over them, and offer full text search capability?
Maybe Andover is interested? It'll give a lot of page impressions...
"Protecting databases" (Score:2)
If a University decides to have its student's works collected before going out, that would be a database as well.
I'm pretty sure that this already goes on to some extent (at least with
Of course, it's after the fact.
And, the ubiquitous IANAL =)
much ado about nothing? (Score:2)
I don't see how this is any different from before, except that it's on a web page.
Site Doesn't Work (Score:2)
No cookie.
To access this site your browser must be accepting cookies.
This even after I specifically told Lynx [browser.org] to accept their cookie. Looks like someone needs to learn how to properly construct a web site.
They say they are from 'UMI' database (Score:5)
Where do Contentville's dissertations come from?
Excerpts from the UMI® Dissertation Abstracts database are being used by Contentville, which, in turn, collects orders for full-text dissertations. Dissertation orders are fulfilled by UMI® Dissertations Publishing [umi.com], whose mission is to expand scholarly communication and improve access to academic research. All Dissertation Publishing Agreements with authors remain in effect. Dissertation authors retain all rights to their dissertations. All sales will be tracked for royalty payments. All contracted royalties will be paid, per the agreement. The UMI program continues to expand access to research and maintain a permanent archive of scholarly works. Wider distribution of dissertation research is intended to support the international scholarly community.
UMI [umi.com] is a Bell & Howell" [bellhowell.com] company (I think that's the company that makes educational film strips, and slide projectors). All I can find on copyright from UMI, is how they are will to act as your agent in applying for a copyright. (see this [umi.com]) But on a page [umi.com] linked from there, they say:
UMI publishes dissertations and theses only from accredited institutions and only with a signed publishing agreement from each author. We offer free informational packets with comprehensive details about the publishing process and other UMI services, along with the forms to fill out.
So my guess is that only the abstracts have been 'stolen', and that if you haven't signed an agreement your dissertation isn't really available.
Re:Hypocracy? - slightly OT (Score:2)
Sorry, did I short-circuit your brain on that one?
Re:Hypocracy? - slightly OT (Score:2)
But then again, "Dog bites man" isn't news, but "Man bites dog" is.
Let's get sued. (Score:2)
but wait, there's more:
look, www.contentvillefree.com is available. So here's what we do, and i'll pay the $35 if i can get some help building it.
I buy it. You mail me your thesis, to which you've attached the gpl that refers to content, just to be safe. I post the thesis. Then, we put a link to contentvilleFree on all of our pages, we word-of-mouth, hey, maybe some or the more daring out there even break contentville and re-direct it to our site.
Then, contentville is worthless. Why would anyone pay them when they can get the same info for free? We'll allow for micropayments or paypal or something. Suckers.
Then, and this is the best part, I get sued. And i go on tv, and i tell everyone how much Time-Warner wants creators of IP to get paid, unless the creator isn't paying *them* 50% of album sales. Then, see, they don't mind.
I'll close down the site, of course, cause i've got a job and better things to do, but it gets this on tv.
I only need a couple of papers to get myself sued. I can get them up within the week. Let me know if you have any interest in either helping or contributing a paper. They're so effing good at manipulating images, i think that it's time that we brought it to them, poor, exploited academic style -- "it's my life's work -- i can't pay my rent -- and time-warner's charging $29.95 for it! so sad, so sad!" tv will love it.
seriously. shit. i've got some vacation time coming. i'll get sued.
Ideas should be free, this isn't... (Score:3)
If a private institution wants to profit off (An unbound copy of my works is $29.95 -- Which seems like alot).
Do I need to attach a friggen license to my papers now?
I think these are only from US universities. (Score:2)
I just spoke to them -- here's the deal (Score:5)
In their standard agreement they make everyone sign, they set themselves up as technically being a publisher and they reserve the right to distribute your work in printed and electronic form. They say that if your thesis generates more then $10 in sales in a calendar year, they will pay you a 10% royalty. The ownership of the copyright remains entirely with the author. This is the same agreement they have used for a long time when theses are ordered by other libraries and sometimes by individuals. The only part that's new is the aggressive marketing.
They are running this as an opt out program. If you do not want them selling your thesis online you can call 800-521-0600 x2873 and they will remove your work from the database.
In all, this seems to me like it is not theft. They are taking advantage of the small print in an existing contract to sell books. This isn't too different from conventional publishing except they didn't inform the authors that they were cranking up the marketing machine. They were not able to give me any cases where they had actually generated sales through Contentville or where they had paid any authors, but they have only been up about a month. The woman I spoke to also said that they will only be issuing royaly statements to authors who generate more than $10 in sales.
Because of the minimum sales requirement and the lack of accounting statements for all writers, this gives them the opportunity to underreport sales and steal from people if they want. Time will tell how they will handle this part
Re:But... (Score:2)
Hardly. If this was like the Napster situation, we would be peacefully boycotting this database of entries because they forced the grad students to sign a licence to get their thesises presented for peer review at all, and from this same licence, they would be able to turn around and sell these for 60$ a pop. As it stands, they are violating copyright, not using unfair monopoly policies and price gouging to extort money from people.
The Napster issue is not about piracy. It is about the unfair monopoly used to keep prices on CDs high. I personally support the lowering of the prices, and will not buy CDs until they are at a fair price (10 to 150$ Cdn), VS the existing 20 to 26$ I have to pay. In the meantime, I listen to public MP3 streams, rather than resorting to piracy.
---
Re:Damn media companies... (Score:2)
Why limit it to $100? Go for the full cost of the degree, including tuition, books, whatever. And insist on a complete list of name of all the people it was sold to. Sue them, and notify their thesis committees that they have purchased copies, just to protect against further plagurism.
Has it occured to anyone.. (Score:2)
Selling copies vs. restricting rights (Score:2)
If Contentville is selling you copies of a thesis, and they've acquired rights to distribute it either from UMI or because it's public domain, it's similarly just fine for them to charge zero or reasonable or truly outrageous prices for the friendly (?) PDF download or the dead tree version. On the other hand, if they assert that they own copyright on the copy they sent you, they'd better have done a really careful job of checking their UMI contracts, you're doing a public service by suing them
On the other hand, providing abstracts is fair business, and a useful service to the community.
corporate hypocrites (Score:2)
they cannot sell it. If they continue to sell it, they will be
hearing from my lawyers. Hypocritical corporate bastards!
Also, on Wired, re: UnCover's class-action suit. (Score:2)
On Wired.com: http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,38203,00. html [wired.com].
Writers to Recover Millions from Uncover: Ruling in favor of authors as copyright holders, U.S, District Court Judge Fern Smith last month awarded $7.25 million to a group of five freelance writers. The class action suit claimed that Uncover, an Internet-based document delivery service, illegally sold magazine and scholarly articles without obtaining permission from, or compensating, the authors.
A few choice quotes from the CEO of UnCover, too, about authors who are unreachable, as well as getting rights on multiple authorship works.
Damn, my thesis is not listed (Score:2)
I can't seem to find my paper on their site. What do I need to do (or what did I need to do) to get it listed? I have no problem with their profiting from the work, since I never really cared for the subject matter that much (what does a device driver programmer care about groupware?!?!), and I doubt they'll make any serious money from it.
--
Ownership (Score:2)
Re:We sighn away copyright when turning it in.. (Score:2)
I've found it's the same at my school, and I'm just an undergrad: any work we do as part of class is, according to the campus officials, owned by the school. Which confuses the hell out of me since I know I sure as hell didn't sign any kind of copyright transfer form. Of course, the onus is on them to prove that I did work X as related to my school-work. And it's not like they can check up on every single project we do to make sure we're not violating 'their' copyright. So, in my case, keeping quiet works nicely. Harder when it's a published work, however.
BTW, do you know if these rules also apply to full professors at universities? (ie, the school owns their work, not them?)
Re:Cripes (Score:2)
Now if Contentville suddenly started suing people for distributing and copying papers (even ones downloaded from their site) then there would be a problem. However, as long as Contentville is charging for the priviledge of searching through their database, then it okay by me.
duh...your problem is with your university (Score:2)
Leave it to idiots at slashdot to think this is some big deal.
I've talked to Contentville (Score:3)
So, it might benefit you more this way because it'll be easier when doing research to track down dusty theses chock full of unpublished results.
If I recall, the UMI agreement works out to something like $7 for every thesis sold if more than 5(?) are sold in one year. OK, the chances of my seeing dime of $$$ is slim (although my thesis was a big hit in Russia and Eastern Europe, so I"m told :-), but it's
not the rip-off that was initally portrayed
although it WOULD have been nice if Contentville
had had a FAQ explaning things.
If I learn more, I'll post it.
GPL your thesis! (Score:5)
Hypocracy? - slightly OT (Score:5)
Mine is there and I never gave them permission to sell it. As far as I know, I am the sole owner of the copyright on my thesis.
How many musicians on napster gave their permission for their work to be distributed? Why do people on slashdot complain about *their* copyrights being violated, yet vehemently defend their right to violate the copyrights of musicians? It all seems silly to me...
Why for sale? You can get them from the authors! (Score:5)
I've asked for theses from the original authors before, and they are always happy to oblige by sending a copy.
Academic people have given up their rights to a thesis,which is owned by the university (who provide them happily too).
So what the heck are they trying to do?
If anyway is interested in my thesis (when I am done in a few years that's it
Why the generosity? Research is sponsored mostly by public funds, so the research goes back to the public.
Besides, it's always gratifying to know your thesis is interesting to some people
Re:Hypocracy? - slightly OT (Score:3)
Errrm, do you work for ContentVille, mate?
It's one thing to distribute freely something that is not meant to be distributed freely (i.e. music) under current copyright laws (*), as in the Napster case, and it is another thing to distribute for a price something that is meant to be distributed for free.
Now, did I short-circuit your brain on that one? What makes /.ers upset is that this information (the theses) are meant to be distributed freely and some tossers at NBC want to make money out of it instead. The same exact tossers that sue you for freely distributing their copyrighted products! Isn't that rather ironic?
People (Napster users) take goods for sale and distribute them freely.
Corps take free goods, claim their rights and distribute them for a price.
'Nuff said.
Trian
Re:We sighn away copyright when turning it in.. (Score:3)
Bzzt. Thanks for playing, please try again:
A transfer of copyright ownership, other than by operation of law, is not valid unless an instrument of conveyance, or a note or memorandum of the transfer, is in writing and signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or such owner's duly authorized agent. U.S. Copyright law, 17 USC 204 [loc.gov]
"by operation of law" covers inheritance, seizure of assets for bankruptcy, etc...
Database protection (Score:3)
It's similar to the arguments for open source software's security: if you think there might be something sketchy inside, open it up and take a look. You don't neccesarily even have to have the right to change or copy it, but you should be given the opportunity to see exactly what's in there, if only to check for security risks, illegaly copied code, etc. With big, aggregated databases protected, we will lose the ability to know exactly what kind of data is being collected about and from us, and from where.
The sad thing is, this company will probably do quite well. They're using the most realistic model for online publishing that I've seen in a long time, and I don't see Congress going against the combined will of just about every major media company, advertiser, and retail company in the nation just to protect trifles like consumer rights or privacy.
Re:GPL your thesis! (Score:3)
You might do better with the GNU Free Documentation License [gnu.org]:
The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other written document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially. Secondarily, this License preserves for the author and publisher a way to get credit for their work, while not being considered responsible for modifications made by others.
This License is a kind of "copyleft", which means that derivative works of the document must themselves be free in the same sense. It complements the GNU General Public License, which is a copyleft license designed for free software.
We have designed this License in order to use it for manuals for free software, because free software needs free documentation: a free program should come with manuals providing the same freedoms that the software does. But this License is not limited to software manuals; it can be used for any textual work, regardless of subject matter or whether it is published as a printed book. We recommend this License principally for works whose purpose is instruction or reference.
That's what I'd go for. Obviously, the GPL is probably fine too.
Michael
...another insightless comment from Michael Tandy.
Info on Copyright from their site (Score:5)
We would like you to know about the terms and conditions under which Contentville.com provides its services to you.
COPYRIGHT
Except for materials in the public domain, all of the content on Contentville.com is the property of Contentville.com or its content suppliers and is protected by copyright laws. This includes text, graphics, logos, icons, images and software. The compilation of all content on this site is the exclusive property of Contentville.com and is also protected by copyright laws. The content and software on this site may be used for shopping, searching and selling. Any other use, including the reproduction, modification, distribution, transmission, republication, display, or performance is prohibited.
TRADEMARKS
CONTENTVILLE.COM; the CROSS-CONTENT SEARCH services; ALL STAR NEWSPAPER; BEHIND THE CONTENT; and READERS REJOICE are service marks of Content Commerce L.P. Our logos are also service marks. Content Commerce L.P. service marks may not be used in connection with any product or service that is not ours, or in any manner that is likely to cause confusion among customers, or in any manner that disparages or discredits Contentville.com.
USE OF OUR CONTENT
This site or any portion of this site may not be reproduced, duplicated, copied, sold, resold, or used for any commercial purpose that is not expressly permitted by Contentville.com. We reserve the right to refuse service, terminate accounts, and/or cancel orders in our discretion, including, without limitation, if we believe that user conduct violates applicable law or is harmful to our interests.
VISITORS' POSTINGS
When you post anything on Contentville.com you grant us a non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, and fully sublicensable right to use, reproduce, modify, publish, create derivative works from, distribute and display such postings throughout the world in any media. You also grant us the right to use any name that you submit with anything you post. You represent and warrant that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the materials you post on this site and that their use by Contentville.com will not infringe upon or violate the rights of any third party.
CONTENTVILLE.COM COPYRIGHT POLICY
Contentville.com will block access to and/or remove any material that it believes in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and submitted to our site.
This policy shall cover all aspects of Contentville.com, including, but not limited to user comments or other content submitted to our site.
What to do if you think a copyright is being infringed:
-- Identify where or whom the material is from.
--Tell us how the rightful owner may be contacted.
-- Give us a statement of good faith belief that the material is infringing, and that the information provided is accurate and the complaint is authorized by the copyright holder.
-- Send the notice of Copyright infringement to the following Designated Copyright Infringement Agent for Contentville.com:
Catherine Seda
Copyright Agent of Contentville.com
Contentville.com
1230 Avenue of the Americas
16th Floor
New York, NY 10020
212-332-6400
or via email to: copyright@Contentville.com
Once we receive this information, we will:
-- Block the infringing material or site
-- Notify the infringing user
-- In the case of a first time offender, the infringing material will be removed.
-- In the case of repeat offenders, we will endeavor to remove them permanently from the site
Over-reaction (Score:5)
This seems to be yet another over-reaction by the Slashdot community. I would rather that slashdot posted a handful of more accurate stories than post a dozen flawed stories each day.
I wish that the story posters would realize that half of the stupidity and misinformation in comments seems to directly result from something that is flawed in the original posting of a story. Keep in mind that a good many people would rather spout something inane rather than actually read a link. For that reason, if you post a story, please try to keep it accurate. If you cannot be neutral and feel you must make a statement for freedom or some other cause then try to say something intelligent. Otherwise it is just so much trolling and flaimbaiting right on the homepage! (Last time I posted something like this, I got modded down as flamebait. But I am going to put my karma on the line yet again because I am not a coward.)
Re:Dubious or not, it is a legitimate service. (Score:3)
If you haven't assigned or licensed copyright to contentville, or to someone to whom you also gave the right to assign on or sub-license, contentville is infringing your copyright.
If you're in that situation and minded to sue, you're entitled to damages, an account of their profits or (and this is the one that will probably make most sense) statutory damages, which could be up to $100,000. You're also entitled to be paid your attorney's fees of bringing the action.
Essentially, it's free money, provided you never signed over the copyright to your thesis. Talk to a local lawyer with a copyright practice if you want to get your hands on it.
This is strange.... (Score:5)
Permission to Distribute (Score:4)