Thank you to our Sponsors
Am I missing something?
Apart from the plagerism of members' articles, surely we should all be happy that there's another B&O resource online?
I agree, I think it's good with more beo-sites.
Regarding your first question: Steve, who according to some is the man behind the new site (and I think they're right, it looks lika a Steve-site), was the creator and owner of "old" Beoworld.
Boring, nothing new to me and I daresay that any news posted on Beoworld will be posted almost immediately on there.... and claim to be a leading and... argh cant be bothered.
Surely as the genesis of Beoworld was the brainchild of Steve James and it is his early work and ownership that this site greatly benefits from - if the rumours are true and he is behind this site then it should be applauded. There is nothing controversial on there, are you suggesting that all on Beoworld is totally original and down to the new owner and the Moderators? I think not.
Surely as the genesis of Beoworld was the brainchild of Steve James and it is his early work and ownership that this site greatly benefits from - if the rumours are true and he is behind this site then it should be applauded. There is nothing controversial on there, are you suggesting that all on Beoworld is totally original and down to the new owner and the Moderators? I think not.
On the other hand, he sold the site, presumably along with the copyright to all that was within. To do some superficial rewrites and resurrect the site he sold is not only pointless but also very bad form, maybe even in direct contradiction of the terms of the sale to which he agreed.
The choice to sell and give up his "brainchild" was his - he did, end of story! I don't see what he hopes to achieve from this new site, other than mischief.
I for one won't be supporting it.
Although it is said there is nothing wrong with this, what about from an ethical point of view?
Selling a site, then stealing the content of that site to start another site of the same ilk sounds dodgy to me...
Although it is said there is nothing wrong with this, what about from an ethical point of view?
Selling a site, then stealing the content of that site to start another site of the same ilk sounds dodgy to me...
Exactly!
Although it is said there is nothing wrong with this, what about from an ethical point of view?
Selling a site, then stealing the content of that site to start another site of the same ilk sounds dodgy to me...
Exactly!
It's common practice when someone sells an organisation/ company that there is an agreement not to re-enter that market for a fixed period of so many years etc. I wonder whether the transfer of Beoworld had such an agreement?
Having said that there would be nothing to stop the previous owner keeping a copy of the website html from the days of his ownership and then updating it under another name unless excluded by an agreement or outright sale of copyright including the html code. I am not an expert in html but it would be interesting if someone compared the sites looking for historically linked common html code use.
Graham
i recall reading at the beocollectors site that it was going to discontinue and beophile was going to be run from 1 July.
i gather the beocollectors site had some affiliation to the beophile and a "handover"
I just noticed that beophile.com has added a "random pages" feature. Wonder where that idea came from? 😎
Mika, I knew someone would notice this but (i may be wrong, i normally am) i thought it was the other way around.
The one time i looked at that site i seen the random thing and then a few days later it was mentioned on here. Im not saying anything is wrong with taking a good idea and using it.
To be fair the beophile site is pointless realy when we've got Beoworld.
You must be logged in as a BeoWorld member to post replies to forum threads.
Register to access the forums, reference material, and exclusive member benefits — including our monthly prize draw.
Become a Member