Yeah, we made a mistake. It’s our policy to always credit and link back to our sources, and in this case we made in error in judgment combined with a misunderstanding about the source of the image (we mistakenly thought that DAPreview watermarked a photo that wasn’t theirs — clearly that was not the case).
Regardless, I take full responsibility for the mistake and that this will not happen again. We do a 1000 posts a month and occassionally we do screw up.
To be clear, we did NOT plagiarize, at worst we failed to properly credit and infringed on DAPreview's image copyright.
Aaron
· 3 years ago
That's respectable of you, Peter. I commend you for not ducking and throwing up PR bullshit. Engadget is resilient and I'm sure won't suffer longterm consequences.
Jesse
· 3 years ago
Blown way out of wack. There was an error, and it was fixed. Big deal. People seem to like going after the big boys
Aaron
· 3 years ago
It gains notoriety to do so. It really doesn't make friends though and friends are critical in the world of blogs - moreso than notoriety.
Jesse
· 3 years ago
[Comment ID #4827 Will Be Quoted Here]
with friends like these...
Martin
· 3 years ago
Aaron,
You say "not throwing up PR bullshit" - the comment that Peter has placed here is pure PR - it's the exact same comment (word for word) at all the relevant blogs he's placed it on.
I don't really think the issue is about plagiarizing stories - it's more the fact that they cropped an image and removed a watermark. It's pretty clear cut.
I guess all blogs take images here and there but the issue here is that this particular image had a watermark and that watermark was a link. A simple email would have sorted it out as 99% of publishers who'd take that image that had such a watermark would naturally assume it belonged to whomever watermarked it.
I'm hoping it's more laziness on their part rather than anything underhand.
Aaron
· 3 years ago
Yeah it was the first time I had seen the comment, Martin. After seeing it here, I started seeing it everywhere else too.
All Comments
Regardless, I take full responsibility for the mistake and that this will not happen again. We do a 1000 posts a month and occassionally we do screw up.
To be clear, we did NOT plagiarize, at worst we failed to properly credit and infringed on DAPreview's image copyright.
with friends like these...
You say "not throwing up PR bullshit" - the comment that Peter has placed here is pure PR - it's the exact same comment (word for word) at all the relevant blogs he's placed it on.
I don't really think the issue is about plagiarizing stories - it's more the fact that they cropped an image and removed a watermark. It's pretty clear cut.
I guess all blogs take images here and there but the issue here is that this particular image had a watermark and that watermark was a link. A simple email would have sorted it out as 99% of publishers who'd take that image that had such a watermark would naturally assume it belonged to whomever watermarked it.
I'm hoping it's more laziness on their part rather than anything underhand.