« Topics
12
Square Eyes7,187 posts since 31 Mar 2001
Digital Spy are making a big song and dance about their Big Brother 3 website. So I had a look (http://bigbrother.digitalspy.co.uk), and then compared it to the official Big Brother 3 website at http://channel4.com/bigbrother

To my surprise Digital Spy's articles are exactly the same as the official website, word for word and they've grabbed pictures from the site as well. I mean if all they're going to do is lift the articles from the official site, just why bother ?
Jason C10 posts since 4 Jan 2003
No, not all the articles are directly lifted from the official site, as a fair part of the written content is original, but that mainly lies with the live updates and opinion columns.

You seem to be forgetting that with the news and profiles, people require information quickly, so it makes sense to use the C4 articles to provide them with that rather than spending a good 10-20 minutes figuring out how to re-write an article that contains the information anyway.

Don't forget that the reporters to the site, of which I am one, are doing this voluntarily and have their own commitments too, so they can't spend masses of time writing brand new news articles either. Additionally, there hasn't been any major BB stories so far, so the chances are that the major news may be met with original content.
I Hate HTV West
Surely without rewriting it, it's copyright infringement?
Jason C10 posts since 4 Jan 2003
I Hate HTV West posted:
Surely without rewriting it, it's copyright infringement?


Not in this instance, because Channel 4 allow their news articles to be used on the DS site as long as they get a small credit at the bottom.
MikeG
Is it copyright infringement if you use text from something but give a link and credit to the person/site - [/b]NOT[/b]passing it off as your own
Jamie P
Digital Spy has got really bad. There was a time when it was the best forum to talk about media related stuff. But they've got so far up their own arses and the forum is a load of sh*t, infested with freaks, and really poorly designed.

TV Forum is now far better than Digital Spy ever was - content and design wise.

All TV Forum needs now, is to bring back the Profile Xtra feature! Very Happy
Big Brother1,801 posts since 21 Jun 2001
I have never liked DS. When I've gone to their site it's always "according to Media Guardian" - now to me media guardian is providing the news DS is providing.

As for this BB site I quite frankly find it pointless. Why bother providing the exact same content/images word for word when C4 do this. (I also see no credit to C4. I notice DS Copyright but nothing else.)

If they were to be doing some fancy anaylisis of the show then yeah I can see their point. But nothing. It's a waste of time and money.
mromega1,105 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Suggest you look again. The live reports are Digitalspy's own as are the two columns and pictures section which has better quality grabs than the C4 site.
itsrobert5,944 posts since 23 Mar 2001
Jamie P posted:
Digital Spy has got really bad. There was a time when it was the best forum to talk about media related stuff. But they've got so far up their own arses and the forum is a load of sh*t, infested with freaks, and really poorly designed.

TV Forum is now far better than Digital Spy ever was - content and design wise.

All TV Forum needs now, is to bring back the Profile Xtra feature! Very Happy


Yes, I agree there - bring back Profile Xtra !!
Whataday7,489 posts since 13 Sep 2001
It is perfectly fine to take stories from Media Guardian, as they have a content-sharing facility.

As for Big Brother, I think it is OK as long it is stated that "Big Brother is an Endemol production for Channel 4"
Neil Wilkes
MikeG posted:
Is it copyright infringement if you use text from something but give a link and credit to the person/site - NOT passing it off as your own


Indeed. In the case of Big Brother news articles, however, C4 have made the official news feed freetext - i.e. it can be carried elsewhere provided each article says "Big Brother is a Bazal production for Channel 4," which is what we do. We've found over the past couple of years that a mirror of the official news feed is quite popular, as often people have experienced access difficulties to the official site.

To say that the site is a con I think is quite unfair - as Jason points out, the majority of the content is original and requires many hours of input a day from unpaid reporters.

To those people who are disappointed with the main site and/or forums, I'm sorry you feel that way, however any opinions -- good or bad -- are appreciated and respected and taken into consideration in trying to provide a better level of service.

Neil