Proof of ATS Scooping the Web?

reply to post by SLAYER69


Whoaa, you are on TV (news I mean). Next time you need to put up Copyright claim before pasting.

Hmmm dang, an evil thought pass my mind, just now. Hmm...should I ?
Somehow, I think ATS have trained me to become a psyops terrorist.

I always check ATS first for news and then get into it from there. IMO, ATS is the best starting point there is.

reply to post by schuyler


well i'm not a lawyer, so i'm not 100% sure. but under the Standard YouTube License, there is a fair use clause. which says that it's content can can be, commented on, be remixed, or criticized. which the linked video has a Standard YouTube License.
now i haven't found the exact wording yet on ATS, but i know some where i saw that posts become property of ATS.
and i haven't found fair use in the DMCA page on ATS. it maybe there but i haven't found it.

besides i did say maybe.

neo96
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Sorry man.

I don't think that is 'blackwater' unless 'American mercenaries' carry ak-47's and dragonov sniper rifes.

mercenaries carry what ever they like, no official weapons, and all kinds of modifications.
that's the one of the benefits for merc's

and look here, found it on the T&C page.

) Use Of Content; Copyright. All content created by Users of TAN website are governed by an "Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivs 3.0 Unported" Creative Commons Deed (hereinafter "Creative Commons License"). Users can share, distribute, copy, and transmit the work Users find on TAN websites provided Users provide proper attribution that includes the name of the Website User, the name of the Website, and a link to the content thread. These usage rights do not apply to any commercial use of the content found on TAN websites, and such use is strictly prohibited without prior written authorization from TAN. These usage rights also do not apply to derivative works, and such use is strictly prohibited without prior written authorization from TAN. Each post of each thread contains a "copyright" link that clearly specifies the method in which the material may be shared, distributed, modified, or used.

You will not copy, distribute, display, or publicly perform material from the Websites to Post on other websites or quote in offline research in a manner that does not comply with the Creative Commons License that specifies the author's member name as a member of AboveTopSecret.com, includes The Above Network, LLC and the member as owners of the content, provides the title of the thread, and a full URL to the board thread. 


i can't find the link that is talked about in the posts that are made, anyone know where that is.

I haven't had a chance to read the thread. Has anyone looked at the EXIF data from the images to see if they match or if it's been pulled? That would be a sure way to tell as long as the data is there. I would look but I don't have the software on this machine.

Slayer i start a thread on this recently.

link

Interesting... Seems to be more than mere coincidence.

It's a sad commentary on journalism when they seem to rarely research their own information before publishing a story. Very easy for them to take what they need from ATS. More important to them is the vetting process here that goes on in the threads with content they are interested in. You all do the work for them, they grab what they need, tweak it, write it up and publish it. Payday!

ATS is a great free resource for journalists. Ahead of the game, and can do the research and vetting through some great members and contributors.

I'm sure some are here now looking their next scoop.

hounddoghowlie
and look here, found it on the T&C page.

Well I think that applies to ATS members.

reply to post by SLAYER69


This image was not posted to ATS first, in spite of what the OP wants us to believe. The topic of "Blackwater in Ukraine" was not broken on ATS first, in spite of what the OP wants us to believe. So why does this post exist to mock Dailymail for stealing content from ATS?

Here is the original topic from Russia Today:
Popular uprising looming in eastern Ukraine
Published time: March 07, 2014 13:04

Hotlink directly to one of the images in question:
rt.com...



RT also first broke the "Blackwater in Ukraine" allegation.


Slayer's post:
Blackwater troops in Ukraine.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
posted on Mar, 7 2014 @ 02:28 PM

Hotlink directly Slayer's image:
files.abovetopsecret.com...





The images Slayer posted are nearly identical to the ones posted by RT, which were on the Web before Slayer's post existed.

In addition:
FB "White Poppy for Peace Campaign"
Direct link to image:
i1.ytimg.com...



This image existed on March 3rd.

The image claimed by the OP, posted on March 7:



The image(s) were out there, 4 days before anyone posted it here. Either the OP copied the image without giving credit where due, or made a screen grab that is nearly identical - the very thing the OP is mocking the Dailymail for allegedly having done (they did at least provide an image credit for AlexK, the uploader of the YT video.)

ATS has an excellent SEO, and often times outranks the original sources for content in search results. The OP did not create the content/headline claimed in the subject heading, so it's a moot point to mock another organization (the DailyMail) since they did at least credit the original sources, which is clearly not ATS. Put the Ego in check, you can't claim to the original source of someone else's content.

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


Ouch, nice work. Seems solid. Another reason why ATS is a good resource.

doompornjunkie
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

Shall we conspire via PM's to create an elaborate hoax with pics and everything and see if they try to scoop it up? Make them look really really stupid if we could make it work.

No because then ATS won't be allowed as a credible source on other alternative news sites. Just as certain sources are immediately moved to the HOAX bin here, the same will happen to our content if you're plot is successful.

Dumb idea in my opinion.

Blackmarketeer
This image was not posted to ATS first, in spite of what the OP wants us to believe. The topic of "Blackwater in Ukraine" was not broken on ATS first, in spite of what the OP wants us to believe. So why does this post exist to mock Dailymail for stealing content from ATS?

No, I wrote....

I know it could simply be a coincidence that they just happened to take the same exact screens from the youtube video as I did but damn it if isn't eerily so?

The image(s) were out there, 4 days before anyone posted it here. Either the OP copied the image without giving credit where due, or made a screen grab that is nearly identical - the very thing the OP is mocking the Dailymail for allegedly having done (they did at least provide an image credit for AlexK, the uploader of the YT video.)

How can my screen grabs be a copy of theirs if mine have the Youtube player locations and theirs don't?

ATS has an excellent SEO, and often times outranks the original sources for content in search results. The OP did not create the content/headline claimed in the subject heading, so it's a moot point to mock another organization (the DailyMail) since they did at least credit the original sources, which is clearly not ATS. Put the Ego in check, you can't claim to the original source of someone else's content.

No one is 'Mocking' Also, Again, I wrote

I know it could simply be a coincidence that they just happened to take the same exact screens from the youtube video as I did but damn it if isn't eerily so?

reply to post by ausername


The thing is, it could easily be a similar screen grab. Which is where I don't get the mocking of the Dailymail, since it appears they got their content from RT. The RT image exif data shows it was created at 09:30 March 7th.

They took their screen grabs before yours. They posted their images to the Web before you. So apparently it is a "coincidence" - eerily so, as you say. So why does this post exist, insinuating that ATS (aka you) "scooped the Web," with content posted by you that wasn't original (including images)?

Blackmarketeer
They took their screen grabs before yours. They posted their images to the Web before you. So apparently it is a "coincidence" - eerily so, as you say. So why does this post exist, insinuating that ATS (aka you) "scooped the Web," with content posted by you that wasn't original (including images)?

I asked a question

Proof of ATS Scooping the Web?

reply to post by Blackmarketeer


It is possible that all including the OP got leads and information from other sources and put it together on their own, but the images are a very odd coincidence.

Timing is suspect and relevant, maybe everyone should get credit?

News on the internet seems to always be fair game.

Well Slayer apparently these guys like your pics also.
Link to Laziness!

simple - start embedding a watermark and/or "easter egg" in any pics/grabs you post. You'll then know for sure if it's been nabbed

reply to post by Danbones

you probably get more viewers than they do Slayer
they are just trying to catch up

This is the stuff that has made me and Dan good friends. To the core.