The Lemon Fool

I assume that copying of material first posted on this site at another discussion forum would be frowned upon. The owners of TLF have put in a tremendous amount of work to establish and maintain these discussion boards; there is also the amazing contribution of the volunteer moderators and posters who make this a pleasant place for people to exchange ideas.

It would be a shame if it were damaged by plagerism or attempts to solicit members to transfer without the explicit authorisation of the owner. It would be ironic if the party helping themselves to TLF material were also a person carrying out a campaign against underhand financial practice!!

Hopefully it will turn out that any such activity has been done with the blessing of TLF owners. If not, it seems to me that it would be better, and extremely easy for other sites to simply place links to material at the Motley Fool that they like.


Huge thanks to the owners of TLF for this forum.


GS

GoSeigen wrote:I assume that copying of material first posted on this site at another discussion forum would be frowned upon. The owners of TLF have put in a tremendous amount of work to establish and maintain these discussion boards; there is also the amazing contribution of the volunteer moderators and posters who make this a pleasant place for people to exchange ideas.

It would be a shame if it were damaged by plagerism or attempts to solicit members to transfer without the explicit authorisation of the owner. It would be ironic if the party helping themselves to TLF material were also a person carrying out a campaign against underhand financial practice!!

Hopefully it will turn out that any such activity has been done with the blessing of TLF owners. If not, it seems to me that it would be better, and extremely easy for other sites to simply place links to material at the Motley Fool that they like.


Huge thanks to the owners of TLF for this forum.


GS

GS,

I guess there is a reason for you posting this ...

1. If there are specific issues going on that cause you concern then please drop one of the (volunteer) Mods a note and we can take a look at it. Any of us will do in the first instance, even me.

2. Are you, perhaps in haste, confusing The Motley Fool (TMF) with The Lemon Fool (TLF) ? Or is there a more subtle reason for saying Motley Fool ?

regards, and thank you by the way for the praise for the Mods,

dspp

dspp wrote:

GoSeigen wrote:I assume that copying of material first posted on this site at another discussion forum would be frowned upon. The owners of TLF have put in a tremendous amount of work to establish and maintain these discussion boards; there is also the amazing contribution of the volunteer moderators and posters who make this a pleasant place for people to exchange ideas.

It would be a shame if it were damaged by plagerism or attempts to solicit members to transfer without the explicit authorisation of the owner. It would be ironic if the party helping themselves to TLF material were also a person carrying out a campaign against underhand financial practice!!

Hopefully it will turn out that any such activity has been done with the blessing of TLF owners. If not, it seems to me that it would be better, and extremely easy for other sites to simply place links to material at the Motley Fool that they like.


Huge thanks to the owners of TLF for this forum.


GS

GS,

I guess there is a reason for you posting this ...

1. If there are specific issues going on that cause you concern then please drop one of the (volunteer) Mods a note and we can take a look at it. Any of us will do in the first instance, even me.

2. Are you, perhaps in haste, confusing The Motley Fool (TMF) with The Lemon Fool (TLF) ? Or is there a more subtle reason for saying Motley Fool ?

regards, and thank you by the way for the praise for the Mods,

dspp

Perhaps related to this?

https://www.fixedincomeinvestments.co.u ... r/page/11/

Post #1949?

Thank you staffordian. It is being checked into. There may be nothing to see. regards, dspp

dspp wrote:
GS,

I guess there is a reason for you posting this ...

1. If there are specific issues going on that cause you concern then please drop one of the (volunteer) Mods a note and we can take a look at it. Any of us will do in the first instance, even me.

Yes, I've done that now. The last couple of days there have been several instances of identical posts appearing at two different forums, which I commented about publicly on TLF. I don't know if it's contrary to TLF's rules but clearly it causes difficulties with attribution, copyright, liability etc. When it didn't stop I thought it right to escalate.

2. Are you, perhaps in haste, confusing The Motley Fool (TMF) with The Lemon Fool (TLF) ? Or is there a more subtle reason for saying Motley Fool ?

Very much so, I'm becoming more confused by the day. I meant Lemon Fool of course!

GS

GS,
Got that, thank you, this may take some time, bear with us.
Regards,
dspp

Hi GS

Thanks for raising this. Have your posts been copied on the other site or have extracts just been taken?

Did you give your permission for either of the above?

Many thanks
C

Clariman wrote:Hi GS

Thanks for raising this. Have your posts been copied on the other site or have extracts just been taken?

Did you give your permission for either of the above?

Many thanks
C

Clariman, I have sent a PM.

GS

GoSeigen wrote:

Clariman wrote:Hi GS

Thanks for raising this. Have your posts been copied on the other site or have extracts just been taken?

Did you give your permission for either of the above?

Many thanks
C

Clariman, I have sent a PM.

GS

Thanks. Will respond later today.

GoSeigen wrote:I assume that copying of material first posted on this site at another discussion forum would be frowned upon.

I imagine he is referring to this thread

https://www.fixedincomeinvestments.co.u ... es-at-par/

The fixedincomeinvestments forum appears usually quiet, but has exploded into life with the Aviva announcement. The thread has been running in parallel with the TLF ones with some commentators posting the same or similar material on both.

Good morning,

You raise a tricky issue as there are a number of threads on this forum that discuss scraping various web sites for share prices and other information.

As the sites being scraped are often not mentioned it is hard to be sure but it almost certain that scraping is against those site's Terms Of Service.

Clearly if there is someone scraping the TLF either automatically or manually and the TLF objects does this not mean that the scraping threads must be removed as well as any links to scraping tools?

Bye

Ian

IanSmithISA wrote:Good morning,

You raise a tricky issue [...]

Bye

Ian

You're right, it's an extremely thorny problem, I can only depend on the opinion of someone expert in cutting through these difficult issues and ensuring everyone acts honourably:


https://www.fixedincomeinvestments.co.u ... #post-2004

OldBoyReturns wrote:

PrefInvestor wrote:
Hi OBR, any chance of posting the text of the times article here ? Otherwise I can’t read it because if the paywall. Same for many other people I would think. Thanks In Advance Pref

Hi PrefInvestor – sorry but the article will be subject to copyright and my contacts at the Times will not be happy with me if I did that. [...] However, you can register for free with the Times and that will get you free access to a number of articles a month.

There. It's important to respect the copyright of someone else's work. Or not to upset those scratching your back. But whichever, go to the original site and read it there.


Very wise words. What would you suggest?


Bye

GS

AIUI: Copyright rests with the author. By posting on TLF you implictly grant an unlimited licence for TLF to reproduce. But TLF doesn't own the work.

The author is therefore free to post it in several different places if they wish. And would also be the person to raise a complaint if their work was copied against their will.

At least that's how other sites work. e.g. Facebook. I haven't seen such terms explicitly stated here, but hard to think of anything else which is workable(??)

Gryff

GoSeigen wrote:There. It's important to respect the copyright of someone else's work. Or not to upset those scratching your back. But whichever, go to the original site and read it there.

Normally quoting extracts is OK.

Hence Mark Taber logically would not have a case against you for posting an extract of the material he put on his site here.

johnhemming wrote:

GoSeigen wrote:There. It's important to respect the copyright of someone else's work. Or not to upset those scratching your back. But whichever, go to the original site and read it there.

Normally quoting extracts is OK.

Hence Mark Taber logically would not have a case against you for posting an extract of the material he put on his site here.

I suspect not, but my practice (at least when I don't forget, am in a rush etc) is to quote an extract and link to the original, that both credits the source and encourages readers to look at the whole thing and not just the quote I've picked to support the argument I want to make!

Peter

IanSmithISA wrote:Good morning,

You raise a tricky issue as there are a number of threads on this forum that discuss scraping various web sites for share prices and other information.

As the sites being scraped are often not mentioned it is hard to be sure but it almost certain that scraping is against those site's Terms Of Service.

Clearly if there is someone scraping the TLF either automatically or manually and the TLF objects does this not mean that the scraping threads must be removed as well as any links to scraping tools?

Bye

Ian

I'm sure it's a bit of a grey area to which we tend to turn a blind eye. And hopefully the legal eagles do also
To me, the key thing is that the scraping tools do not republish the data on another site. They essentially allow the user to view share prices using Excel, for example, instead of via a web browser. It's not so different than the user reading the prices using a browser and then typing them into Excel.

--kiloran

PeterGray wrote:

johnhemming wrote:Normally quoting extracts is OK.

Hence Mark Taber logically would not have a case against you for posting an extract of the material he put on his site here.

I suspect not, but my practice (at least when I don't forget, am in a rush etc) is to quote an extract and link to the original, that both credits the source and encourages readers to look at the whole thing and not just the quote I've picked to support the argument I want to make!

Peter

Indeed and the Fool Rules app.php/rules cover this:

Extract only: In general, it is acceptable to quote a short extract from another source, under the "fair dealing" exception, provided due credit is given and a URL link to the originating site is provided (or citation if no URL is available). and For Gov.UK guidance on "fair dealing" exceptions please refer to https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright .