Content Curation Question: Best Practices?

17 replies
Hi I was wondering what the best practices are for content curation. Not so much the gathering of the content, but more the re-posting part.

Do you have to go ask a webmaster or source if you visit their site and want to re-post their content with links back to their blog/site/content?

Anyone who does this and knows stuff I'd be grateful for some advice

Thanks in advance

Chris
#blog #content #curation #practices #question
  • Profile picture of the author richblogs
    This sort of thing comes under the legal area of copyright law known as 'Fair use'.

    Take a good read of Fair use - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Signature
    A journal of making money online.
    Make Money Online | Rich Blogs (http://richblogs.com)
    Chart my successes and failures of trying to earn my income online.


    Keep in touch: @RichBlogsDotCom or Facebook
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5456458].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author NicoleBeckett
    Chris, if you're re-publishing content from an article directory, ezine, etc., virtually all of those websites have terms of service that say as long as you publish the content in its entirety (including live links), you're fine. Some specific websites may even have a similar policy listed underneath each of their articles (I know mine do).

    If you run into a specific article where you're not sure what to do, a quick email to the author will get everything straightened out. And, as an added benefit, by getting in touch with people, you may be able to get more articles from them - before they're published on directories and the like.
    Signature
    Sick of blending in with the crowd? Ready to stand ahead of the pack? The right content writing services can get you there...
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5456479].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Harlan
      For the most part, when you curate, you can quote as much as or as little as you like.

      A federal court recently ruled that you can quote and entire article and it is protected under fair use.

      But curation isn't just presenting articles.

      It's much more than that.

      It's adding value and your own content.

      Without that - ya got nothing.

      It's what you bring to the table that makes your site worth something.

      Incidentally, Google just loves loves loves curated sites.

      Peace.
      Signature

      Harlan D. Kilstein Ed.D.
      Free NLP Communications Course at http://www.nlpcopywriting.com
      http://overnight-copy.com
      Get Fit In Four Minuteshttp://just4minutes.com
      Learn how to build a Super Site Without SEO http://supersiteformula.com

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5456521].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
        Banned
        Originally Posted by Harlan View Post

        For the most part, when you curate, you can quote as much as or as little as you like.

        A federal court recently ruled that you can quote and entire article and it is protected under fair use.
        Yeah right. Please link to the exact court case that ruled that way. It's fiction. No court in the US has ever said carte blanche that anyone can steal as much or as little copyrighted content as they want to. Just because you do that on your curated sites, does not mean that it is legal.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5517733].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Jim VanWyck
          Originally Posted by sbucciarel View Post

          Yeah right. Please link to the exact court case that ruled that way. It's fiction. No court in the US has ever said carte blanche that anyone can steal as much or as little copyrighted content as they want to. Just because you do that on your curated sites, does not mean that it is legal.
          Hey... its not one court decision.. its many.

          But here are some definitive ones,

          Google RightHaven court decisions.

          Righthaven was a company found and funded for over $100 million, just to track down copyright violations by blogger and news reposting sites.

          All you copyright "experts" throwing your opinions around can see quite easily in about 30 seconds search that not only did RightHaven LOSE every important case. but lost it's hundred million doing it.

          And in fact... while no court has said you can "steal" many courts have taken a very liberal view of the fair use doctrine when it comes to quoting and excerpting written content on the internet.

          Just google "RightHaven" and track a few links.... the court cases are many, the verdicts all the same.

          ==>Jim
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5533268].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author sbucciarel
            Banned
            Originally Posted by Jim VanWyck View Post

            Hey... its not one court decision.. its many.

            But here are some definitive ones,

            Google RightHaven court decisions.

            Righthaven was a company found and funded for over $100 million, just to track down copyright violations by blogger and news reposting sites.

            All you copyright "experts" throwing your opinions around can see quite easily in about 30 seconds search that not only did RightHaven LOSE every important case. but lost it's hundred million doing it.

            And in fact... while no court has said you can "steal" many courts have taken a very liberal view of the fair use doctrine when it comes to quoting and excerpting written content on the internet.

            Just google "RightHaven" and track a few links.... the court cases are many, the verdicts all the same.

            ==>Jim
            I've already many of the Righthaven cases. They aren't even close to applicable. Righthaven did not have the rights to sue anyone for copyright. That's what the courts found in the Righthaven cases. Righthaven was a pathetic attorney copyright troll that tried to make a business out of "purchasing copyright rights" and the courts smacked him down.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5533295].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Ralf Skirr
            You're getting the best response when you lead in with your own thoughts on the topic, or with an overview or introduction to the source you're going to share.

            By response I mean people commenting, discussing and sharing your 'post', or whatever you used to share.

            Plainly posting the shared content or link doesn't draw many responses.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5533296].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Chris Endres
    Ok thats great information guys... will apply thanks to each

    The thing I am looking at is sites like Drudge and Huffington. These guys basically take stuff from anywhere/everywhere and I want to know how to do that without getting into hot water...
    Signature

    "Observation is an act of creation through limitations inherent in thinking"

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5456642].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author JohnMcCabe
      Originally Posted by Chris Endres View Post

      Ok thats great information guys... will apply thanks to each

      The thing I am looking at is sites like Drudge and Huffington. These guys basically take stuff from anywhere/everywhere and I want to know how to do that without getting into hot water...
      Chris, you might want to spend a little bit of time hunting down that court ruling that Harlan mentioned so you have it in your back pocket should some author disagree with the information.

      Or you could ask him for a pointer in the right direction. I don't know if I'm still on his 'ignore' list from a little dust-up we had some time back on another thread. If I am, he won't even see this suggestion...
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5457201].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author theultimate1
    Great points (to be on the safer side), still nothing concrete seems to be coming up.

    Chris mentioned Huffington Post. Now, sites like those curate hundreds of articles/news pieces a day. If I had a niche site and was attempting to curate in the range of 15-18 articles a day, am I really required to contact each source (and in a "niche" site, information sources tend to vary a great detail)? I mean... I understand that it's a good thing, but even better when it's not required... while still providing a link back to the original source. Anyone got any concrete knowledge on how to handle this? I saw Harlan's mention of the court ruling in a thread of his... The thread got divided into two sides of a healthy debate, out of which I couldn't decide what to do (in regards to curation).
    Signature
    If Content Is Your King, Then This GhostRider.. err.. GhostWriter Is Your Knight!
    My Sample Articles
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5512451].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Jon Patrick
    Originally Posted by theultimate1

    am I really required to contact each source
    You don't have to ask anybody's permission to quote part of an article, link to the article, and write your thoughts about the article. That's "fair use." We've always been able to quote other people's writing to a reasonable extent in our own works, regardless of the medium, provided that the quotes are properly sourced.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5512832].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author theultimate1
      Originally Posted by Marianne Gonne View Post

      I do content curation for a cosmetics company. Usually I just quote a paragraph, cite and link to the source, and then add my own editorial comments.

      I usually scour for sources from Google News, press releases, Digg. And even though I never never never copy-and-paste the entire article and always always always cite and link to the source, I've nevertheless been very carefully monitoring this thread:

      http://www.warriorforum.com/main-int...-law-says.html
      Marianne, many thanks.

      Originally Posted by Jon Patrick View Post

      You don't have to ask anybody's permission to quote part of an article, link to the article, and write your thoughts about the article. That's "fair use." We've always been able to quote other people's writing to a reasonable extent in our own works, regardless of the medium, provided that the quotes are properly sourced.
      Hey Jon, thanks. So, what you and Marianne are suggesting is pretty much the same thing, I suppose!?!
      Signature
      If Content Is Your King, Then This GhostRider.. err.. GhostWriter Is Your Knight!
      My Sample Articles
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5516271].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author oneplusone
        The best explanation of content curation I've ever come across is in this free e-book here ...


        ... I've never come across a better explanation of the process anywhere.
        Signature
        'If you hear a voice within you say "you cannot paint," then by all means paint and that voice will be silenced.' Vincent Van Gogh.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5516638].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author goldenlogos
    Try to improve the content you're quoting with your style and feel.
    Signature
    Custom Logo Design - Quality logo design with a 24 hour turnaround, unique concepts and unlimited free revisions
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[5518499].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author jetwalker102
    The matter of what actually is good content curation and not simply stealing other people's content is still blurry, but I think I can offer some basic advice. Don't use entire articles, instead write your own introduction, insert a few snippets from the original accompanied by your own ideas or thoughts. Of course you should include a link and attribution to the original author. Generally, if someone asks you not to curate their content just be polite and accept their wishes. You can find out some more information about good content curation practices here: rubymediacorporation.com/blog/why-content-curation-should-be-a-vital-part-of-your-marketing-strategy/
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6601492].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author eibhlin
    In my opinion, it's irresponsible to make broad claims about the legality of quoting entire articles, especially without specific references to the laws, relevant cases and the decisions delivered in those cases.

    From what I've seen, decisions vary widely from case to case and judge to judge.

    But... I'm not a lawyer, so I cannot give legal advice.

    However, I can share my opinions, including this passage from my own book about content curation:

    ------------------

    Plagiarism and fair use

    You cannot use someone else's work, change it around and figure you're home free.

    There are no specific number of words you can use. Further, just because you rephrased it or spun it, and the content measures 80% unique at CopyScape.com, that isn't assurance that it's legal to use.

    As it says at the U.S. Copyright Office website, on their Can I Use Someone Else's Work? webpage ( U.S. Copyright Office - Can I Use Someone Else's Work? Can Someone Else Use Mine? (FAQ) ):
    "How much do I have to change in order to claim copyright in someone else's work?

    "Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, a new version of that work.

    "Accordingly, you cannot claim copyright to another's work, no matter how much you change it, unless you have the owner's consent." [Emphasis added.]
    The laws to read and understand are in Section 107 of the U.S. Code, and Title 17. Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. (Ref: U.S. Copyright Office - Fair Use, and Title 17, U.S. Code. - U.S. Copyright Office - Fair Use )

    When I use excerpts of others' work, it's usually as a reference for my own comments or criticism, or for teaching purposes. However, it's smart to keep this additional guideline in mind, from that same Fair Use page:
    "The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission.

    "Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission." [Emphasis added.]
    How much you quote can be a factor. Here's more from that same article, describing one of the four factors used by the courts to determine whether something is "fair use."
    "The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole."
    If all of that leaves you terrified of lawsuits, you may not have the temperament for content curation.
    -----------------------

    I'm not sure that's going to answer all of your best practices questions, but I hope it helps.
    Signature
    Artist, blogger, and author of a bazillion books, more or less. Find me at Eibhlin.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6658463].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kilco16
    thanks this very useful
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[6658479].message }}

Trending Topics