Reposting of reviews by someone other than the reviewer

[CWatkinsNash]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

That's totally true...but the GR push feature doesn't allow for removal of some parts of the review and it always says something about being via Goodreads.

Yes, I just wanted to point out that there is more than one way for this to happen, and that sometimes it can be legit. I wasn't stating that this was the case here, not at all. I only thought that some might be interested to know this, considering the topic. It's totally NOT cool what happen to Loosheesh's review.

However, I would not be entirely surprised if some people (like some authors, perhaps) might be under the impression that it's open-season in terms of review syndication, without an understanding that it's not across-the-board okay to use them. Authors do some really silly things on GR, enough that I can't hold them to a higher standard of common sense just because they are authors.

[Loosheesh]

An update: since contacting the author, I've received 3 separate replies. According to the first one, a family member who handles the author's PR is responsible for reposting the review and I was promised it would be removed at both bookstores ASAP (and that these are only places it was posted).

The second was an update message, to let me know one review had been removed and the other may take longer to be gone. The third was to inform me that the review was removed from the second store. I've since confirmed that it's been removed from both stores. However, the user accounts (in my handle) remain …

The tone of all three messages was appalled that such a thing was done, apologetic, and eager to make things right. For my part, I'm just relieved the situation is resolved but I'm left wondering if the reviews (for this book) of other GR users were lifted in this way.

Thanks for all your advice, which helped me deal with this in a calm and assertive manner

[Frida Fantastic]

Originally Posted by Loosheesh

However, the user accounts (in my handle) remain …

Congrats. I recommend you pursue the closure of these accounts, or at least whoever opened them could relinquish control of them and give the accounts to you, perhaps in the form of a switch email address function. If an author or an associate of theirs were to open up an account in another site under my book blogging name, masquerading as me, the sh*t would go down. I wouldn't let go of this issue until I felt safe that the threat of identity theft (for present or future uses) is eliminated.

[Loosheesh]

Originally Posted by Frida Fantastic

That's creepy and highly unprofessional of the author. I'd be really pissed off if that happened to me. Quotes and links are fine (and are even flattering), but re-posting an entire review is not cool. If the author doesn't resolve this, please do PM me the name. I'll make sure to never review a book by him/her, and I'll let other book bloggers know about this extremely crude behaviour.

From the messages I received from the author, I choose to believe that the reposting was not a direct action on this person's part, though, of course, the responsibility is theirs at the end of the day. I don't want to get anyone blackballed or anything like that; I just want my "rights" to be respected, like I respect the rights of others.

Originally Posted by Frida Fantastic

Congrats. I recommend you pursue the closure of these accounts, or at least whoever opened them could relinquish control of them and give the accounts to you, perhaps in the form of a switch email address function. If an author or an associate of theirs were to open up an account in another site under my book blogging name, masquerading as me, the sh*t would go down. I wouldn't let go of this issue until I felt safe that the threat of identity theft (for present or future uses) is eliminated.

You're right; until they're taken down (or possibly passed on to me), I'll keep wondering, and checking to see what, if anything, is posted under these accounts. It will, quite literally, drive me batty I've sent the author another message, asking about the possibility of the accounts being closed. The response will determine my next steps ...

[Loosheesh]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

I just wanted to point out that there are two different ways that Goodreads reviews can end up on other sites. Blatant copying of reviews without permission is obviously NOT okay, but there is also a GR setting that allows GR partners (online bookstores, WorldCat and others) to retrieve and publish book reviews via the GR API.

I don't think this option is selected by default, I'm pretty sure that you have to check the box to approve the publication elsewhere, but I don't recall for sure, so those who are worried should check their GR "settings" tab in the profile edit page. (That particular option is under "Privacy" just below "who can view my profile?")

Just to confirm, this was not the case here, and I do have this option unchecked

[MrsJoseph]

I'm glad you're getting everything straight but I am appalled at what happened. That's just too much!

[afa]

Originally Posted by Loosheesh

From the messages I received from the author, I choose to believe that the reposting was not a direct action on this person's part, though, of course, the responsibility is theirs at the end of the day.

I'm not sure I would believe that if I were you.

So 'someone else' took your review, used your name to post copies of the review on websites... and the author didn't have a clue this was happening?

Simply copying the review itself is not that big a deal. Sure, I would be annoyed, but then I'd shrug and move on. But the fact that they were posting under the same ID as your user name takes it to a different level. It basically means they were not just re-posting (i.e. plagiarism, which on the Net is virtually unavoidable), they were actively pretending to be you, which is a form of deception. And the author had no idea that 'someone else' (it's always someone else, isn't it?) was doing this? Sorry. Not buying it.

What steps is this author taking to ensure something like this doesn't happen again? Did he say? Did he confirm whether 'someone else' has done this to several other reviewers, as well? Or are you, by sheer coincidence, the only one this happened to? More likely, you're the only one who caught them.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Frida Fantastic

That's creepy and highly unprofessional of the author. I'd be really pissed off if that happened to me. Quotes and links are fine (and are even flattering), but re-posting an entire review is not cool. If the author doesn't resolve this, please do PM me the name. I'll make sure to never review a book by him/her, and I'll let other book bloggers know about this extremely crude behaviour.

They probably didn't think they were doing anything wrong. A book review would be more use to them on a site where the book is actually for sale than on someone's blog or similar. Sure, they could quote it in the book blurb, but does anyone really take any notice of that? Using the same name as the reviewer would add credibility, and would also mean that they are not claiming ownership of the review.

But they really should have asked the reviewer's permission first.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

They probably didn't think they were doing anything wrong. A book review would be more use to them on a site where the book is actually for sale than on someone's blog or similar. Sure, they could quote it in the book blurb, but does anyone really take any notice of that? Using the same name as the reviewer would add credibility, and would also mean that they are not claiming ownership of the review.

But they really should have asked the reviewer's permission first.

It's blatant copyright infringement, and an author, of all people, should be very well aware of that!

[avantman42]

Originally Posted by Loosheesh

You're right; until they're taken down (or possibly passed on to me), I'll keep wondering, and checking to see what, if anything, is posted under these accounts. It will, quite literally, drive me batty I've sent the author another message, asking about the possibility of the accounts being closed. The response will determine my next steps ...

I entirely agree with everyone else that the author's (or the author's representative's) actions were entirely reprehensible.

I just wanted to point out, though, that it may not be possible to delete the accounts - some websites simply don't have a mechanism for deleting accounts. If that is the case, though, there's no reason why he can't hand over control of the accounts. He could change the password, then tell you the new password. Then you log in and change the password to something else. Even if you never use the account, at least you'll know that no-one else is using it.

[Loosheesh]

Originally Posted by avantman42

I just wanted to point out, though, that it may not be possible to delete the accounts - some websites simply don't have a mechanism for deleting accounts. If that is the case, though, there's no reason why he can't hand over control of the accounts. He could change the password, then tell you the new password. Then you log in and change the password to something else. Even if you never use the account, at least you'll know that no-one else is using it.

The situation with the user accounts has now been dealt with; one account was deleted, and the other supposedly belongs to the reposter so the profile name has reverted to their own name. I can live with that.

Originally Posted by afa

Simply copying the review itself is not that big a deal. Sure, I would be annoyed, but then I'd shrug and move on. But the fact that they were posting under the same ID as your user name takes it to a different level. It basically means they were not just re-posting (i.e. plagiarism, which on the Net is virtually unavoidable), they were actively pretending to be you, which is a form of deception. And the author had no idea that 'someone else' (it's always someone else, isn't it?) was doing this? Sorry. Not buying it.

Yes, the reposting was bad enough, but under my username? That's the part that really creeps me out. More than once the author has assured that the review was reposted under my username because the reposter wanted to give credit to me ... make of that what you will, as I'm still trying to wrap my mind around it.

Originally Posted by afa

What steps is this author taking to ensure something like this doesn't happen again? Did he say? Did he confirm whether 'someone else' has done this to several other reviewers, as well? Or are you, by sheer coincidence, the only one this happened to? More likely, you're the only one who caught them.

I was only assured that it would never happen. I did not ask and was not told whether it had happened to anyone else.

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

They probably didn't think they were doing anything wrong. A book review would be more use to them on a site where the book is actually for sale than on someone's blog or similar. Sure, they could quote it in the book blurb, but does anyone really take any notice of that? Using the same name as the reviewer would add credibility, and would also mean that they are not claiming ownership of the review.

I'm trying not to go into too much detail here, but it seems like, according to the author, the reposter may be an older person and not too computer/internet-savvy (???) so you may on to something there.

To conclude, the author has been very cooperative and moved quickly to rectify the situation, and I'm grateful for this. While it was certainly the author's responsibility to fix, in our culture of 'wrong and strong', I could've ended up with the hassle of trying to get these stores to take down the review.

[avantman42]

Originally Posted by Loosheesh

The situation with the user accounts has now been dealt with; one account was deleted, and the other supposedly belongs to the reposter so the profile name has reverted to their own name. I can live with that.

Glad to hear it's been dealt with to your satisfaction.

Originally Posted by Loosheesh

I'm trying not to go into too much detail here, but it seems like, according to the author, the reposter may be an older person and not too computer/internet-savvy (???) so you may on to something there.

As the saying goes, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". I suspect this was down to lack of knowledge rather than malice.

[SensualPoet]

Just to be clear, are we talking about the arrangement Goodreads has with the Sony eReader Store in which all (or select?) review postings are embedded into the Sony store? My reviews appear there and I don't recall providing any overt approval.

This has been going on for quite some time. I'm not crazy about Sony having access to my property but then again, once I've posted it to the net it by definition becomes part of the public domain by whatever rules I am binding myself to with Goodreads. It would be a different matter if I had my own (public) website where I posted my own stuff with a "all rights reserved" notice.

The main trouble I have is whether review changes, edited later (or deleted from Goodreads), "flow through" to these other sites Goodreads has (hopefully) formal relationships with.

[TFeldt]

It's great to hear it resolved but there's a couple of things that should be noted concerning this for future reference. Using another person's internet handle does not constitute identity theft and it is not illegal in any way. If you have trademarked the handle then using it without permissions, assuming you have reserved all rights, might become an illegal act. Copyrighting a handle isn't possible.

Posting anything on internet sites today might very well mean you grant them limited or entire rights to what you post. I doubt any country is willing to entirely strip an author of his/her copyright but signing up and clicking "Yes" when confronted with the terms of service and thereby granting them rights to re-post the content is a concept that has already been ruled on in many countries. That's the main reason why many sites have those "you swear to indemnify us if you post copyrighted content on our X, Y or Z".

Kind of amusing, really. They want us to indemnify them when they use content we've posted, so they don't get in trouble if they use our content (without asking us first) and it turns out we were quoting someone else who had copyrighted it. Oh, what a world we live in. This obviously wasn't what happened here since goodreads wasn't the party propagating the review, just saying in general.

[taming]

Originally Posted by TFeldt

It's great to hear it resolved but there's a couple of things that should be noted concerning this for future reference. Using another person's internet handle does not constitute identity theft

No, it doesn't. However, using someone else's handle and then posting something written by the original person sure seems like it fits the bill. I have a very common name. People all over the world have the same name. However, if someone--with my name--helped themselves to my work, well, it sure would seem like identity theft to me.