yeah I found a site that provide RSS, and I want to use that RSS to post in my blog. is it legal?? Please reply.
Read this post and it will scare the hell out of you for using Rss feed without permission: http://www.iampariah.com/blog/2006/08/feedwordpress-content-theft-with-consequences/
It depends on how much of the content is being reproduced through the RSS feed and how the copyright holders says RSS can be used. Your safest bet is to ask the webmaster/author if they mind you using RSS to feed their content into your own blog.
Good advice from most people. RSS content is still content and can be copyrighted. You cannot use it unless the owner gives you permission.
Whenever you use somebody else's content you have to ask for permission, otherwise you can put a quote or something, you have to make sure that you refer to the author and tell your readers that these thoughts are someone else's.
whenever I find such a Splog with my content on it I do everything in my powers to report/take them down as quick as possible. And I am among the small ones, so be advised, don't mess with the big dogs. They will take you down in notime.
Yes definitely ask the author first, if not then you must follow fair use, and anyone who knows about fair used also knows it is one of the hardest to understand pieces of law on the planet. Best bet is to just ask.
dont go their you will have many issues with the major search engines and directories that is called duplicate content you will get black listed
I have a little different take on this thread... I go out and find RSS based blog posts on specific topics and pull in the intros to those feeds to display on my site. Only the title and introduction are displayed, and only blog posts that are relevant to the target audience of my site are used. My only problem with this has been a few bloggers who either do not know how to use their own software or simply do not care about how much of their posting is sent out through the RSS feed. My intent is to only post introductions with links to the full article, but on several of my favorite blogs they always include the full feed. Whenever I notice this I chop the article down to only the first few sentences then add a Read More Here link at the bottom. It works well for me, and thus far I have not had any complaints. I guess as a disclaimer I should add that all of the bloggers that I post the RSS intros to have indeed said it is okay for me to do so. In fact I am probably one of their biggest drivers of traffic due to the obscurity of our niche.
Posting an introduction isn't necessarily legal by any stretch of the imagination. It's not the same thing as a quote, as in fair use rules. You're still using someone's content. If you're monetizing it, they can not only go after you to have it removed, but to go after income you've earned from their work. If the blog author doesn't grant permission for it to be used, especially on a commercial site, you can't assume you can use it based on quantity alone.
Meastrok I agree with allot of what your saying" rss has many scrambled including me I know that word press blogs have them in the code when you buy it" so do alot of all the other great blog companies online like blogger, etc... when it coes down to the nitty gritty and your trying to put your hat on and go" RSS doesn't seem to really be one that allows this type of online presentation" I even opted in to a rss feed listing and had them add it to my site but it doesn't work if you go to bestpricedcoffee.com on the fire fox browser you will see the RSS widget in the address bar " now when I click the widget it doesn't reference my web site" Im really trying to get the rss trick and the rabbit out of the hat" is their some really easy technique to this inclusion I mean doing it my self and getting feeds in to my site my self" let a dp member in on this tactic"
I don't understand this way of thinking. If you offer an RSS feed on your site, then you are asking people to republish the content already. RSS stands for "really simple syndication". If you don't want people to syndicate your content, then do not offer a way for them to do it! I've heard arguments that these RSS feeds are for personal use only and nobody should profit from the content except the writer. Well, let's explore that thought. What about all those "subscribe to my feed" buttons on your site? You most likely have one for Yahoo, Feedburner, and others. Don't think for a second that when indiduals subscribe to your content through these services that the service itself isn't profiting - and they are certainly profiting from your content. Why is it ok for you to allow Yahoo and Google to profit, but not a fellow blogger? There are many benefits from your posts being picked up by another blog too. In most cases your content is posted as is, meaning that all links that you include in your post remain when it is picked up by other blogs. Think of the incredible marketing power that gives you! You could end each post with a tagline ad for your products or even an affiliate link to someone elses products. Now that tagline is being published on hundreds of other sites. Backlinks, affiliate links, whatever you want to send out there. The thing that gets me the most about people that get upset when their feeds are used is that they can stop it themselves, rather than doing what they can to harm the person using the feed. Whenever you publish an RSS feed, you have the option to allow your entire post to be fed or just title and summary. The bottom line is that "splogs" can be a win-win for you and the splogger. If you still disagree, then stop publishing RSS feeds, or at least publish only summaries. What say you?
There's a BIG difference between splogs and feed readers. Feed readers are providing a legitimate service which they've put time into developing. Splogs generally offer nothing... they're run by lazy asses who believe it's ok to make money from stealing someone else's work as opposed to working themselves. On top of it, they would rarely, if ever, have any real readership, so comparing them to feedreaders as in something that could possibly have a benefit to you (at least one that would outweigh losing exclusivity), is ridiculous. All those types do is steal content and slap some ads on it. RSS feeds are a tool; not a license. If you want to publish someone else's content, you need to obtain a license from them, unless they don't particularly care, and choose to simply allow it. Not everyone offering the tool is offering you a license to their content, and you have no legal right to assume so. It doesn't matter what the tool is called or what it stands for. It's a tool; simple as that. It makes syndication possible if you also have the right to use the content... it doesn't give you that right. Offering a tool for private use by your readers to benefit them doesn't mean someone has a right to use the tool for content theft. Of course they're still going to... and it's perfectly fine for anyone who cares at all about their work to go after them. All they do is cheapen what you do.
So you see no benefit at all to having your content (including links) placed in front of as many eyes as possible?
No, because I value my content, know how to market it very effectively, and sell it for a good bit of money when I write it for someone else. Having my content all over the place on splogs cheapens my work and affects my future marketing abilities. I also don't buy into the bs of it being such a great thing for link-building. I rank well for terms I try to rank for. My sites always get nice PR. And I don't go around getting tons of cheap links. Again, I focus on quality content, and I get authority sites linking to me naturally. It's a novel concept that too many webmasters forget about. The link value is absolutely not worth losing the exclusivity... that's just more valuable if you know how to leverage it. I also sell resell rights on content from several of my sites, so it very directly impacts the sites negatively... and I charge more than a link from a crappy splog to republish my content. There's no benefit. I aim to build solid authority blogs over time. No one has the right to steal and monetize the trust that I put effort into building. If you just run a few crap sites for the sake of easy adsense revenues with not much invested in them, you may not care as much. I do. A lot of people do. Just because some don't care, it doesn't mean people automatically have the right to become thieves. And like I've already said, splogs don't get your content "in front of as many eyes as possible." Legitimate sites who put the effort and work into creating content, marketing to build readership, and building trust in order to be able to refer sites are the only ones that matter for getting it in front of anyone's eyes.