User talk:SandyGeorgia/AlainFymat

Feedback needed

@Berchanhimez, Seppi333, WhatamIdoing, Sphilbrick, Elcobbola, and Mdennis (WMF): I have placed my first version of letters to send at User:SandyGeorgia/AlainFymat#Letters (Fymat has copied Wikipedia content to two different journals, one publisher already listed as predatory). I recognize that should things advance to that stage, I cannot send takedown for Epilepsy or Parkinson's, as I'm not a major contributor to them, but if needed, I could ping in the editors who are.

Am I off to the right start, here? Is there someone else I should ask to look at these letters?

I also have some questions listed at User:SandyGeorgia/AlainFymat#To do, ask, figure out, in case any of you can help. Thanks so much! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

While I'd recommend having a lawyer review them (it sounded like you'd have access to one, but if not I get that may be complicated), to me they seem to contain enough information to inform the websites of the problem and your desired actions (either to comply with the terms or remove them) without being overly threatening or invoking DMCA. Keep in mind after this gentle reminder to the journals themselves, it may be a good idea to begin expanding your complaints to their webhosts (GoDaddy and the other one that I can't remember), as the webhosts have a much larger legal burden to remove copyrighted material to maintain their safe harbor status. bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 19:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Berchanhimez; I am hoping Elcobbola will look, and also have a lawyer looking. Also, am planning to escalate to this version of letter and follow the steps listed here. Should I need to escalate, I have the strongest case at Dementia with Lewy bodies (because I wrote pretty much the whole thing), but I can ping in other editors for the other three articles. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

You probably don't need a lawyer as long as you're willing to do the work yourself. I sent an email to researchgate saying "see attached", attaching this - https://sites.google.com/site/seppi333files/home/file-drop/noticeofclaimedcopyrightinfringement.zip?attredirects=0&d=1 - and they took down access to the resources immediately.

Sent this message to the omics journal and they immediately contacted the authors who subsequently revised their manuscript. The attachment to that email was this: https://sites.google.com/site/seppi333files/home/file-drop/noticeofcopyrightinfringement.zip?attredirects=0&d=1

Extended content
Hello. I'm writing to you to notify you of copyright infringement by a review article titled "Amphetamines: Potent Recreational Drug of Abuse" which was published in the Journal of Addiction Research and Therapy. Please see the attached "Notice of copyright infringement.pdf" for details. Regards, Joseph Mickel

Main 2 things you need to establish are that you wrote the allegedly infringing content elsewhere and that you wrote it prior to its publication date. Edit: really busy RN, so I don't have any time to look it over. Sorry about that. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 20:03, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Seppi ... I am contemplating the possibility that this case may be more complex, because something is not kosher here ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:19, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Seppi333 sorry to trouble you again when you are so busy, and your letter is very helpful, but I am confused. The article is still on their website. https://www.omic$online.org/archive/jart-volume-8-issue-4-year-2017.html (blacklisted, change $ to s) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm aware. It's actually rather trivial for authors of a publication that plagiarized material from elsewhere to address the plagiarism problem when they copy/pasted CC-BY-SA text. All they have to do is add attribution to become compliant with the licensing terms. For that reason, it's actually rather retarded for anyone to challenge your claim of original authorship. It entails adding like a single sentence to the bottom of the article saying something along the lines of "This paper/webpage/[medium] incorporates material from source which is licensed under CC-BY-SA-#.#." It takes more effort to dispute your claim than to add attribution and doing nothing leads to the very real possibility/risk of a DMCA takedown of the webpage containing the plagiarized text in the near future. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 11:24, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

These seem not unreasonable letters to me. There may be some consideration of strategy/tack: cease and desist letters generally are represented to be by, or on behalf of, the party(ies) and include either explicit or more forcefully implicit assertions of a breach and consequences for failure to correct (e.g., the so-common-it’s-a t-shirt “govern yourself accordingly.”) These lack those elements and thus read more like observations of a concerned member of the public than the notices of aggrieved parties who may ultimately act to enforce their rights. This could increase the likelihood the letters would be disregarded. Ultimately, however, that is not likely a point of much consequence. (For example, although the product of a mountain-of-salt-worthy 5-minute search, I don't find a business named "Scientia Ricerca" registered with the Secretary of State of California and the address appears to be a residential apartment complex--not generally the hallmarks of a "business" that cares about the phrasing of letters.)

I wouldn’t say “Failure to do so is a copyright violation.” Copyright violation is wiki jargon and is not used, or not generally used, in “the real world” (copyrights are infringed; agreements and their terms are breached; etc.) Something like “distribution of the subject text without attribution or the same, similar or a compatible license is actionable as an act of infringement under section 501 of Title 17 of the United States Code"; “a breach of the terms of the Creative Commons license”; etc. would be more accurate. Эlcobbola _talk 22:18, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks ever so much, Elcobbola (and wonderful to "see" you again)! Thanks for the advice, and I will let you know when I work in the changes, all the best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:37, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Also, because I wrote 90% of dementia with Lewy bodies in just a few months, this may be as good of a case as we'll get for DCMA. @Diannaa: do you want to have a look in here as well? Best SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

The wording needs to be changed to indicate "a violation of the terms of the Creative Commons license" rather than a copyright violation per se. I am not familiar with the DCMA or how it might apply in this case so I can't comment on that aspect.— Diannaa (talk) 15:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. The letter says, "Failure to do so is a breach of the terms of the Creative Commons license", so I am unclear precisely what change I need to make??? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Ok cool that's all right then. I must have been looking at an old version of the letter or made some other mistake. — Diannaa (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Asclepius.com

Auctores.com took theirs down, I am escalating to legal on scientiaricerca, and I am just starting on Asclepiusopen.com. Berchanhimez is this correct? [1] Their website lists a US address, but the address given here is weird. Am I out of luck ? Are you able to determine an ISP for them? (I have also learned that a good deal of the information Wikipedia pages provide is bogus. It would be just really nice if WMF legal cared.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:05, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Detail at User:SandyGeorgia/AlainFymat#Asclepius_Open,_first_letter SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

This is what I found for Hostgator which seems to be the company they are hosting it with - if you can go after the host you're better off than going after the domain registrar itself (kinda like going after the car rental company whose cars are running red lights, and not going after the state registration authority, as a poor analogy):

HostGator Bengaluru
7th Floor, Pritech Park Annex,
Behind Ecospace, Varthur Hobli,
Bellandur, Bengaluru East Taluk,
Bengaluru Urban District, Bengaluru - 560103
Karnataka, India

Was also able to find https://www.hostgator.com/dmca and https://www.hostgator.com/copyright which provide the following US fax number and address:

(281) 476-7801, Attn: Abuse Department, DMCA Complaint
HostGator LLC
Attn: Abuse Department, DMCA Complaint
5005 Mitchelldale, Suite #100
Houston, TX 77092
United States of America

I don't have a ton of experience looking into hosting information for sites hosted by companies/on servers outside the US, and as you can probably see, the rules regarding clear abuse contact are more lax in other countries. Given that HostGator does business in the US, I believe their US office is going to be obligated to act if you contact them - probably better given they have the online form (first link) and the mail/fax information. One caveat is their abuse-address listed with ICANN all are at logicboxes.com - so I'm only about 90% sure HostGator is their host based on the information I found. Hopefully this helps (as always, not able to give legal advice yadda yadda disclaimer) -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 17:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Berchan ... very helpful ... we shall see what this learning curve yields! At least we have had one success so far, while I wait for legal appointments because of COVID delays, Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:31, 14 August 2020 (UTC)