While I was an employee of a certain company, I wrote and published several technical magazine articles. As an employee, I retained no rights to the articles, and when they were published, the copyright passed to the magazine(s) that published them. I have learned, quite by accident, that another company (a competitor of my ex-employer) has appropriated one of those articles and has posted it on their website. They credit me as being the author, and they include a note that the article was originally published in <name of magazine> on <date of publication.> However, this company has substituted their name in place of the original company’s name in the body of the article, making it appear as if I wrote the piece for the offending company. I guess I’m flattered that the article was worthy of being stolen, but I am offended by the theft.
Would you guys do anything if you were in my place? If so, what? If not, why?
I agree with Otto - it’s very possible that whoever develops content for their site contacted your former company for permission to post the article. If you’re really concerned and have friends at your old company who you can trust to be discreet, you might ask them to look into it. But you probably shouldn’t contact the offending company yourself, particularly if you’re not certain they are guilty of infringement.
Sounds to me like they stole the work and made it appear as though whatever was said about company X was actually said about their company, which clearly, as per the original author, it was not. So it’s not just copyright infringement, it’s fraudulent misrepresentation (and I have no idea if that’s a proper legal term, but that’s the best description I can provide).
I would definitely contact your former employer (if they have a legal department, go straight to them) and make them aware of it, as well as the current holder of the copyright (who will probably care less about that particular violation than your former employers will care about the violation against them).
IF a copyrighted paper, or a portion thereof, is re-printed with permission of the copyright holder, it is customary to make a statement along the lines of "Reprinted with the permission of <copyright holder.> I have never seen a reprinted copyrighted paper modified from it’s original format, especially a change that modifies the original import.
Shayna has the right of it; what the company in question did is a blatant ripoff. If anyone has been wronged, it is the publishing company that holds the copyright----my question was just an attempt to acquire a few opinions as to what course of action the members of SDMB might elect to pursue. I didn’t intend to make a mountain out of a molehill.
Well, no, I didn’t. He doesn’t know that the other company didn’t have permission to use the article. Which is why I suggested making sure of the facts before making a stink. I haven’t a clue how what sort of reputation the OP has with his former employer or how important that rep is. But were I his former employer I would not look favorably about someone making accusations (which, by the way, if false might open the OP to legal liability for defamation) without the knowledge to back it up. Hence, my advice to find out the facts and continue from there. That it is customary in printed matter to attribute copyrighted material doesn’t mean that company 2 used the content without permission.
I would be willing to bet any reasonable sum of money you might name that the company in question does not and did not have permission to republish and especially does not and did not have permission to alter the paper to make it appear as if it was written for them. I am well known in my industry, at least partially because of my published articles, and the company in question is well known as being less than reputable.
Moderators, please close this before it degenerates any further. Thanks.