2oceansvibe News | South African and international news

Sponsored by RSAWeb rss
2ov Radio
  • Home
  • About
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Seth Rotherham
  • Lifestyle & Hospitality
  • Café du Cap
  • Cabine du Cap
  • Media Packs / Advertising
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Anonymous Tips
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
Seth Rotherham
  • Every SA Online Publisher Needs To Know About This Landmark Ruling – Moneyweb Vs. News24

    06 May 2016 by Sloane Hunter in Crime, Media, South Africa
    Related Posts
    • US DJ Accused Of Stealing SA DJ's Beat - You Decide [Videos]
    • Banksy’s Hidden Identity Is Causing Him Problems
    • Mom And Dad In Court Battle Over This Teenager’s Tattoo
    • The Closing Arguments Against Johnny Depp
    • Wednesday Morning Spice

    When I began my journalism course just seven years ago, lecturers were flustered over the uptake of online news. Anyone could be a journalist now, thanks to Twitter.

    Jobs were being stripped from nearly every department of the newsroom and research journos were being replaced with saucy, opinionated columnists – ideal for that quick online read.

    Thankfully, it is apparent that the online media business is on its way to straightening itself out – media owners now have more of an idea of how readers consume news. Celebrations all around.

    So when Moneyweb took Fin24 to court on accusations of copyright infringement back in 2013, they may have thought they would win considering the old-school style of print journalism.

    However, that’s not the case. It all began when Fin24 published seven articles over a year ago that included news elements derived, with attribution, from Moneyweb. Fin24 explains it all:

    In 2013, Caxton-owned Moneyweb accused Media24’s Fin24 of aggregating seven of its articles unlawfully.

    Moneyweb subsequently launched legal action in a bid to force Fin24 to remove the articles from its website and pay damages at a later date.

    Moneyweb editor Ryk van Niekerk also accused Fin24 at the time of committing “plagiarism on an industrial scale”.

    Yesterday, the South Gauteng High Court issued its ruling: Online business publication Moneyweb’s claim that Fin24 committed “systematic plagiarism on an industrial scale” is extravagant.

    Fin24 only committed copyright infringement on one of these articles while Moneyweb failed to prove that four of its stories were original.

    Judge Berger found that three of Moneyweb’s stories were original. One of these stories was an exclusive Moneyweb interview with the said ‘mastermind’ of the alleged Defencex scam, Chris Walker.

    Judge Berger wrote that it appeared that the journalist who wrote this story was the “only one interviewing Mr Walker”.

    But with two of these original stories – including the Defencex scam story –  Judge Berger found that Fin24 had made fair use of them by not using substantive amounts of copy from these storie

    Judge Berger found that Fin24 had made a “word-for-word copy” of a story about Anglo Platinum CEO Chris Griffith’s response to former Mineral Resources Minister, Susan Shabangu’s comments about the company’s decision to leave government out of its retrenchment talks.

    Judge Berger ruled that a “substantial part” of this Moneyweb story had been reproduced by Fin24.

    But this is the ruling that has now set the precedent for all online media publications:

    In the judgement, the court also ruled that using a hyperlink back to the original web page of a story is sufficient in citing an original source.

    Media24’s chief executive Esmaré Weideman has this to say on the ruling:

    The ruling vindicates our conviction that our conduct was fair and lawful. The fact that the court ordered Moneyweb to pay 70% of Media24’s cost speaks for itself.

    Discovery and reporting do not move public domain news elements into a monopolised private domain and to suggest otherwise, as Moneyweb did, would be contrary to the public interest in news dissemination.

    It would lead to the illogical result where the first reporter can monopolise a news story and prevent another reporter from re-reporting the story’s core elements. Clearly this cannot be, and a contrary position would have been a global-first and would have destroyed much of news reporting and many of today’s journalists’ jobs.

    Like mine.

    [source: fin24&fin24]

    • ← Think It’s Impossible For The Military To Turn On Zuma? Even The BBC Are Talking About It
    • If You Missed The DA’s John Steenhuisen Destroying The ANC Yesterday You Need To Watch This [Video] →
    • Tweet
    • Tags:
    • Court
    • fin24
    • Media24
    • moneyweb
    • plagiarism
    • ruling

    Latest News

    • Western Cape Government Wants These Lockdown Restrictions Changed

      [imagesource:here] One of the toughest challenges that we've had to face during the pan...

    • It’s Not Too Late To Fight Back Against Sun Damage

      [imagesource:here] We've had some scorching hot days over the past few weeks. If lik...

    • Read The Letters Left From One US President To Another (And What Biden Says About Trump’s)

      [imagesource: Pete Souza / The White House] The outgoing Trump administration, and the ...

    • Portraits, Cityscapes, And Night Shots: Stunning Photos Taken With The iPhone 12

      [imagesource: Rohit Vohra] Rohit Vohra shot the image above on an iPhone 12 Pro Max, bu...

    • Greta Gave Trump The Final Middle Finger

      [imagesource: Getty] In 2018, Greta Thunberg started skipping school on Fridays to prot...


    • 2oceansvibe Partners

    • CONTACT US
    • GOT A HOT STORY?
    • 2oceansvibe Radio
    • 2oceansvibe Media
    • Media Pack
    • Seth Rotherham
    • Café du Cap
    • Cabine du Cap
    • Cape Town City Accommodation
    • Terms & Conditions
    • Business
    • Media
    • Entertainment
    • Tech/Sci
    • World
    • Travel
    • Lifestyle
    • Sport
    • Politics
  • Follow

    2oceansvibe.com is part of the 2oceansVibe Media Group

    DMMA Logo