Does Twitter Matter? A Case Study in Joke Stealing

[downtown]

First, the OP Link. It's a little long, and I'm not sure a block quote makes it a little easier, but if you want to get the full story, click here: http://www.mrdestructo.com/2013/05/twitter-theft-and-how-huffpo-and.html

Basically, some dude named Sammy Rhodes set up a twitter account that basically just copies jokes from other people (typically famous, or at least, with large twitter accounts). Rhode's has been able to give himself a very robust twitter account with over 100,000 followers as a result. Somebody made a tumblr account to call him out on his plagiarism, which can be seen here. http://borrowingsam.tumblr.com/.

The OP link argues that large media companies, like Huffington Post and BuzzFeed have made a bit of a living running aggregations of tweets as posts, contributing to a growing devaluation of the intellectual property of tweets that lifting wholesale from others no longer feels "wrong".

Many of you know that I regularly write for a sports website (Landgrantholyland.com), and we see this sort of thing in sports journalism ALL THE TIME...where somebody writes a story, and somebody else tweets seconds later that "sources" say XYZ, without saying where the info (tweet) came from.

Others say that the idea of getting upset over 140 character blurbs is stupid, that somebody can't possibly claim intellectual property or "ownership" over something like a joke, or even most news stories, and this sort of thing has been going on over 100 years, and is only more public thanks to twitter. The OP would probably argue that since twitter can be a main source of professional advancement for writers, plagiarism legitimately hurts them.

What do you think? Is this sort of behavior okay, or should it be condemned? Would you be upset if this happened to you?

 

[illram]

He's passing it off as his own which is wrong. Of course the value of the jokes he is taking is questionable but, still wrong IMHO.

 

[bhsup]

What does twitter say? Some websites claim that whatever you post on their site becomes their property and not yours. Do you know whether twitter claims that or not?

 

[illram]

That's a good point but regardless of whatever legal technicalities are at play it's still objectionable and worthy of ridicule.

 

[Souron]

Intentionally passing jokes off as one's own is wrong, but telling jokes that you heard somewhere without attribution is not. So my first instinct is this kind of thing should be allowed.

 

[illram]

From the article it looks like he is taking jokes and slightly re-wording them and passing them off as his own. Which is about as low as it gets in the comedy world. (And the writing world I would imagine.)

 

[shadowplay]

Comedians steal each other's schtick all the time. It's looked down upon, but it's hardly unheard of. I wouldn't compare it to stealing another author's work.

 

[illram]

Stealing someone's "schtick" to me is different than flat out ripping off another person's joke. E.g. being a humorous dufus ala Kramer is taking a guy's schtick, but to me that is different than just flat out stealing Jerry Seinfeld's jokes for your standup routine.

 

[emzie]

Rephrasing an idea is still plagiarism. Don't matter the format.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

What does twitter say? Some websites claim that whatever you post on their site becomes their property and not yours. Do you know whether twitter claims that or not?

9. Copyright Policy

Twitter respects the intellectual property rights of others and expects users of the Services to do the same. We will respond to notices of alleged copyright infringement that comply with applicable law and are properly provided to us. If you believe that your Content has been copied in a way that constitutes copyright infringement, please provide us with the following information: (i) a physical or electronic signature of the copyright owner or a person authorized to act on their behalf; (ii) identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed; (iii) identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit us to locate the material; (iv) your contact information, including your address, telephone number, and an email address; (v) a statement by you that you have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law; and (vi) a statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and, under penalty of perjury, that you are authorized to act on behalf of the copyright owner.

We reserve the right to remove Content alleged to be infringing without prior notice, at our sole discretion, and without liability to you. In appropriate circumstances, Twitter will also terminate a user’s account if the user is determined to be a repeat infringer. Our designated copyright agent for notice of alleged copyright infringement appearing on the Services is:
Twitter, Inc.
Attn: Copyright Agent
1355 Market Street, Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94103
Reports: https://support.twitter.com/forms/dmca
Email: copyright@twitter.com

I don't know if Twitter jokes are considered intellectual property.

 

[illram]

I think they absolutely are.

 

[Zelig]

By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed).

Tip This license is you authorizing us to make your Tweets available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same.

If you want to retain useful rights to your content, don't post it on Twitter.

 

[warpus]

Carlos Mencia has built up an entire career on the premise that jokes can and should be stolen from other comedians.

Does this guy make money off these jokes somehow? Is the fact that he's got so many followers stroking his ego and that's all there is to it, or is there another objective here?

It's really douchebaggy, but this sort of thing happens all over the internet... and in real life. 9gag steals most of their content from other sources, for example. I am guessing that most of the time nobody cares enough to get lawyers involved, if there would even be legal basis for that.. I have no idea, but some of this is just the reality we live in.. IMO

 

[bhsup]

Well that settles the legal side of things, I guess. Still, legality aside, Illram is right and I can't really say I differ from the views he's espoused in the thread so far.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I don't like quotes without a definite, verifiable source, so now I'm wondering why I was undecided in the first place.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

Twitter can be a main source of professional advancement for writers, plagiarism legitimately hurts them.

 

[Zelig]

Twitter can be a main source of professional advancement for writers, plagiarism legitimately hurts them.

I really would have a hard time professionally respecting anyone who used Twitter as their main source of professional advancement.

 

[rugbyLEAGUEfan]

I really would have a hard time professionally respecting anyone who used Twitter as their main source of professional advancement.

You missed what I did there

 

[Tycho Brahe]

First, the OP Link. It's a little long, and I'm not sure a block quote makes it a little easier, but if you want to get the full story, click here: http://www.mrdestructo.com/2013/05/twitter-theft-and-how-huffpo-and.html

Basically, some dude named Sammy Rhodes set up a twitter account that basically just copies jokes from other people (typically famous, or at least, with large twitter accounts). Rhode's has been able to give himself a very robust twitter account with over 100,000 followers as a result. Somebody made a tumblr account to call him out on his plagiarism, which can be seen here. http://borrowingsam.tumblr.com/.

The OP link argues that large media companies, like Huffington Post and BuzzFeed have made a bit of a living running aggregations of tweets as posts, contributing to a growing devaluation of the intellectual property of tweets that lifting wholesale from others no longer feels "wrong".

Many of you know that I regularly write for a sports website (Landgrantholyland.com), and we see this sort of thing in sports journalism ALL THE TIME...where somebody writes a story, and somebody else tweets seconds later that "sources" say XYZ, without saying where the info (tweet) came from.

Others say that the idea of getting upset over 140 character blurbs is stupid, that somebody can't possibly claim intellectual property or "ownership" over something like a joke, or even most news stories, and this sort of thing has been going on over 100 years, and is only more public thanks to twitter. The OP would probably argue that since twitter can be a main source of professional advancement for writers, plagiarism legitimately hurts them.

What do you think? Is this sort of behavior okay, or should it be condemned? Would you be upset if this happened to you?

The most remarkable part is that his versions are always worse.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

First, the OP Link. It's a little long, and I'm not sure a block quote makes it a little easier, but if you want to get the full story, click here: http://www.mrdestructo.com/2013/05/twitter-theft-and-how-huffpo-and.html

Basically, some dude named Sammy Rhodes set up a twitter account that basically just copies jokes from other people (typically famous, or at least, with large twitter accounts). Rhode's has been able to give himself a very robust twitter account with over 100,000 followers as a result. Somebody made a tumblr account to call him out on his plagiarism, which can be seen here. http://borrowingsam.tumblr.com/.

The OP link argues that large media companies, like Huffington Post and BuzzFeed have made a bit of a living running aggregations of tweets as posts, contributing to a growing devaluation of the intellectual property of tweets that lifting wholesale from others no longer feels "wrong".

Many of you know that I regularly write for a sports website (Landgrantholyland.com), and we see this sort of thing in sports journalism ALL THE TIME...where somebody writes a story, and somebody else tweets seconds later that "sources" say XYZ, without saying where the info (tweet) came from.

Others say that the idea of getting upset over 140 character blurbs is stupid, that somebody can't possibly claim intellectual property or "ownership" over something like a joke, or even most news stories, and this sort of thing has been going on over 100 years, and is only more public thanks to twitter. The OP would probably argue that since twitter can be a main source of professional advancement for writers, plagiarism legitimately hurts them.

What do you think? Is this sort of behavior okay, or should it be condemned? Would you be upset if this happened to you?

Plagiarism is plagiarism. Yes, I would be upset.

This is one reason why I don't use Twitter. Another reason is that I have a couple of stalkers from years back who got Extremely Upset that I once said something reasonably nice about Kevin J. Anderson and I was polite to the guy running the official DuneNovels forum (I wouldn't allow people to troll/flame him on my Dune forum after he joined). They've made a dedicated hobby of trying to ruin KJA professionally, in part using Twitter, and I've no wish to get involved in that (which is what would happen if I had an account and they found out). Anything I posted there would be twisted and used and reposted on sites where I have no way of having it removed. Therefore, I stay away.

If you want to retain useful rights to your content, don't post it on Twitter.

This is excellent advice.