Publishing ethics: Have I been screwed?

In My Humble Opinion
1

I publish a business newsletter that covers a small industry. My circulation is less than 500 (although that represents maybe one-fifth to one sixth of all the people working in the business).

I’ve just received the latest copy of a much larger publication that covers a much wider subject area, of which my particular industry is a small subset. The first article in this issue is a one-page report, at least 75% of which is based directly on a special report I published two months ago.

Now, they have given my publication credit (once, in a box near the top of the page that says: "Source: Commasense and Ripoff Press analysis.), and they haven’t lifted any of my text verbatim, so I don’t think they are violating copyright per se. But they present a numerical analysis of the state of my industry using the numbers and research that I have compiled in the course of publishing over the last eight years. They include a graph that is virtually a duplicate of one in my report. They have some other material and points not derived directly from my report, but which they could have gotten by doing queries from the database I make available on my Web site. (If it makes any difference, I am in the U.S. and they are located in the U.K. Also, we have traded mutual subscriptions for many years, which is how they got the issue with my report.)

My first reaction is anger. I think that, at the very least, they should have contacted me to ask permission, or just say, We plan to base a story on your report, do you mind?

Although I certainly base many small (2-3 paragraph) items I publish on other press reports (usually with credit), I have never run a major feature story that was based on someone else’s work, with or without credit. (And AFAIK, I’ve never used anything I’ve seen in their publication.) To my lights, what they’ve done is is a violation of basic journalistic ethics and courtesy. Just citing a source, is not, in my mind, adequate, when the majority of the substance of a piece is taken from another source.

Am I wrong about this? Is this a common and accepted practice? Is it looked on differently in the U.K. than in the U.S.?

I’m inclined to write them a rather haughty letter saying that in the future I would appreciate their contacting me before stealing my stuff. I might also cut off their subscription or threaten to do so. But if this kind of thing is considered acceptable, I don’t want to look like a touchy prima donna.

General opinions are welcome, but I’m particularly interested in the views of journalists and others in the publishing business. Thanks.

2

Crikey, that sucks, and is impolite at the very least, especially if you’ve had some kind of subscription deal.

I work at a publishers in the UK (am not an expert, however, and don’t work directly on newsletters) and I would consider it a real no-no to nick copy from another publication we had that kind of deal with, without asking. If it was just some random newsletter, however, and in the form of a report, I might consider it fair game.

Seeing as you still have the deal, and it’s beneficial to you, and you presumably have a contact at the magazine, could you give em a call and tell them (politely if a little sarcastically) that since your info is so interesting to their readers, you and they should set up some kind of contra so that in future both they and you could benefit from it?

This would draw their attention to it (in case they really didn’t know it was bad form) without risking turning them into a competitor.

3

I’m neither a publisher nor a lawyer, but the behaviour you describe seems to be at best unethical & plagiarism.

4

are you upset because they paraphrased your text? I don’t see anything wrong with that. And yes, i’ve publised works before and in much larger publications.

Some journalists, particularly these days, don’t include journalistic courtesy in their MO, unfortunatley… perhaps you can submit your complaint to the editor of that publication and hope for a reply. Personally, I wouldnt make a big stink about it, given that they publish in the same industry as you, are larger than your newsletter’s publication, maybe you can make an interesting twist on your situation, in the U.S. we call it, “networking” (which is always subject to interpretation).

5

Are you working as an independent contractor or as an employee for the company publishing your newsletter? Or rather, is this something only you do - i.e., do all the copy, design and send it off to the printer yourself as an independent publisher - or is it something you do for a company who does all that and you do the research and copy? Is it possible that, if you do work for the publishing company, the U.K. company has obtained reprint permission from the company without your knowledge? Also, when you produce a newsletter, is the work considered solely yours, or do you give up rights? If it’s solely yours, I would contact the U.K. publisher and ask that they request reprint rights or at least a decent amount of recognition (clear byline when citing sources) when using your work as the basis for their article. If not, it seems that you would talk to whoever is responsible for reprints and publicity in your publishing company and ask them what they think. They might prefer to contact the company themselves. I am not a lawyer, but that’s probably what I’d do.

6

It’s not that they paraphrased my text: I do that all the time with small items from other publications, and don’t consider it a problem.

It’s that they used the results of a detailed numerical study I did on my industry and created a substantial article on the basis of my research. They might have been able to do a similar report from data they collected independently, but they certainly would have gotten slightly different numbers. They printed my numbers, to the tenth of a percent.

I wouldn’t have minded if they had asked. I would have given permission. I have had a good relationship with them for years, although my main contact there left late last year. Although I don’t know his replacement, who inherited his subscription to my newsletter, I suspect this article is his work.

Yesterday I sent the editor in chief a note with a “more in sorrow than in anger” tone, saying in the future I’d appreciate their contacting me in advance. No reply yet.

7

Well, they might be within the lines and they might not. Depends on how ‘proprietary’ your numbers are. OTOH, you published them so they’re public knowledge at this point.

OTOOH, a free press is only as free and the nearest lawyer. If you’re really upset about it contact a lawyer and see if they think anything actionable occured. There’s usually SOMETHING you can find worth filing a suit over.

  • Jonathan Chance, longtime publishing veteran.
8

I’m not in the industry at all, so this is just a layman’s take. I don’t see anything wrong. You did a study, and published the results. They read your study, found it interesting, and published an article about the topic. They used your study as background, and gave you full credit for it.

I kind of figured that’s how this sort of thing works. If something is published you can reference it, even down to the tenth of a percent, as long as you give credit.