How should I feel about this?

Post by **heidiramma** » Sat Dec 26, 2009 9:50 pm

Are you on the paycheck for getting royalties?

Post by **lena_chita** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 1:15 am

A sixer-- is that like a six-pack of beer? I'll be happy to offer that as a retribution.

I have gone through the RC database and removed the descriptions of the older routes I have added to the database, changing it to "see redriverclimbing.com for details". The descriptions have not changed yet, but I am supposed to get an E-mail when this happens.

But if you want all of it removed, you have way more than just 2-3 people doing the same thing so maybe a general announcement on RC is needed?

If it is any consolation, this is being done to routes in all areas, not just RRG. The reason why I did it initially was b/c I saw that the descriptions of the routes I was marking on my climbing log (added to database by countless other people) were taken verbatum from the respective (published) guidebooks for the areas.

Post by **pkananen** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 2:43 pm

The DMCA provides safe harbor to service providers (such as rockclimbing.com) from users posting copyrighted material, but the provider must remove the content upon request of the rights holder.

So, in the end, it's not rockclimbing.com's fault, even though they have to fix it if requested.

Post by **Steve** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 3:58 pm

You should feel sad and betrayed, down on humanity.

My question is why bother to update the rc.com guide when there is a sweet as on-line guide right here at rrc.com?

Post by **DHB** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:48 pm

I think there's some way to edit the HTML for the descriptions page so that it can't be copy/pasted, but there's no way to prevent them from just doing it manually.

The web is a slippery slope of copyright infringement. You try and do some good by providing an online resource for people but someone has to go and rip it off.

I guess it brings up an interesting question. The guidebook on here is provided free of charge. The guidebook on RC is free of charge. I guess its all a matter of the pride you take in your work. You don't like it when you see people ripping off your stuff, which is completely understandable, but if I were new to the Red and came to this site for the first time, I would have no idea who made up the guidebook, just like I have no idea who edits the guidebook at RC. It's not like attributing the RRG.com and RC.com descriptions to you is going to bring you any more business as a guidebook writer. Some might call it egomaniacal to want to have your name on everything you do, even if getting credit for it brings you nothing.

Then again, the guidebook was created in print form first with the intent of making money both for you and the RRGCC. Maybe having the online guide defeats the purpose of a print edition all together by providing free content. And maybe by asking RC not to take down your descriptions, but to attribute them to you and the guidebook, it would lead to more print sales because people would see that your work is legit. Who knows.

No matter what, people see the internet as nothing but free. Free words, free pictures, free movies; and for the most part, it is, which makes it impossible to keep your work as yours. Nobody realizes that the internet IS NOT public domain, and for 99% of users, copy/paste is a shitload easier than doing the work themselves. I don't think there's ever going to be any way to escape this problem unless you just boycott the web altogether, which really sucks.

But the short answer is that I'd ask them to take it down if it were me since I'm pretty vain about my work.

Post by **tbwilsonky** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:57 pm

Steve wrote:My question is why bother to update the rc.com guide when there is a sweet as on-line guide right here at rrc.com?

like, duh. the only thing better than one tick list is two tick lists.

Post by **lena_chita** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 5:59 pm

Steve wrote: My question is why bother to update the rc.com guide when there is a sweet as on-line guide right here at rrc.com?

Well, since I got singled out for this, I'll try to answer.

Completely different things, IMO. No one is using RC database as a guide for directions/finiding routes, it is too spotty, incomplete and inconsistent for it. If you look in RC database you will see that for some areas that have dozens of routes there would be maybe one or two recorded in the database, b/c that's what someone climbed and wanted to add to their log.

Most people who bother entering routes in the database on RC just like to keep an online log of routes they climbed -- since the RC database covers all areas, not just the Red. Entering a new route in a database doesn't give you weight, credence, or anything whatsoever. The information about who entered any given route in the database is there in the route description, and it is possible to find all the routes that any specific person entered, but it is buried deep in the user profiles.

Red is probably unique in terms of up-to-date online guidebook. Most areas don't have that. In most areas the routes that go up since the last edition of the guidebook are word-of-mouth sort of thing, until the next print edition comes out.

So when I initially added some routes to the RC database-- either for the NRG, or RRG-- they were routes from a published guidebook, and everyone just seemed to copy the route descriptions from the paper hardcopy into the RC database. I did not think too much of it at the time.

But when it came to putting in a route that was not in a published guidebook, I had a lightbulb moment and thought: "wait, it isn't right to copy unpublished route information from the online guide"-- that's when I switched to just putting "see redriverclimbing for details" in route description.

Post by **p0bray01** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 6:02 pm

take em to Yosemite.... hang em by their toes, smear honey on them and watch the action begin!!

Post by **clif** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 6:30 pm

and if she puts on a good show i'd buy a subscription

Post by **ynot** » Sun Dec 27, 2009 8:12 pm

get mr. T to throw mohawk grenedes at them.

Post by **Meadows** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 1:07 am

RC.com I understand is owned by a company (it was bought from the person who owned it originally) so I assume profits are involved. I would bet they would take concern with your work being transferred to their site. You are published and it says so when we open the online guide.

Ebay will even remove copied and pasted text/pictures that are not authorized for use for fear of copyright infringement.

Post by **gripster** » Mon Dec 28, 2009 9:31 am

clif wrote:why would a link not suffice anyway?

ditto

Post by **Josephine** » Tue Dec 29, 2009 4:55 pm

Post by **p0bray01** » Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:21 am

I like the Mohawk grenade idea....