Slugger mainly relies on leeching, at least initially, content from other sources to provide the starting point for blogs. Rarely we provide original content that the MSM then takes and follows up, sometimes with a credit more often not. It usually doesnt bother me when this happens and Ive only ever chased a media outlet once when they took video footage and passed it off as coming from a bystander and my commentary as from a passerby.
Im an Open Content advocate take it, do what you will, just recognise where it came from. This idea is clearly defined in the Creative Commons License in use across sites like Wikipedia. The only real restriction on using content from another is the request for a credit.
Does this and can it work?
For example recently reading a story in An Phoblacht with a photograph of a train at Lisburn station I thought; ‘there is no way SF took that photo or purchased it’ and sure enough when you look about you find it comes from a Open Content project under a Creative Commons Licence.
As with most, the originator cant/wont be bothered or isnt interested in enforcing his licence/copyright and probably wouldnt know the content had been lifted at all.
Do Creative Commons Licences really have value or is the reality non-profit contributors to the internet have their content used and/or abused by anyone and only business contributors have the money and legal backing to apply content restrictions, as we recently witnessed with the BBC limiting Sluggers ability to use their material?