Niche Directories

Edwin Haywood: Quality work. The resource is so good I put it in here also.
http://www.uncoverthenet.com/dir/2872/1.php

 

Bob, if you insist on stealing my hard work and my livelihood, I can see that I may need to talk to one of my lawyers soon.

And I have already told you that putting up links to my site doesn't change a thing about the situation, so you might as well take them all down again.

In 9.5 years of building websites, you are the first person to have publicly acknowledged your intent to steal my material. It's a very sad day...

 

OK I have started my project. I am working on hiring a full time person that will be adding directories to my free, paid and now this niche directories also. I am hoping to have 500 within the first 2 months for my niche directory resource.
www.seocompany.ca/directory/niche-directories.html

I have just finished the backend for my French, German and Spanish directories but it is going to take a bit of time to get the work done so I can start having the niche directories added up.
www.seocompany.ca/directory/annuaire-gratuit.html
www.seocompany.ca/directory/webverzeichnisse-und-webkataloge.html

 

Edwin Hayword: "And I have already told you that putting up links to my site doesn't change a thing about the situation, so you might as well take them all down again."
The links are placed on the merit of your quality work and for no other reason.

"Bob, if you insist on stealing my hard work and my livelihood..."
I have clearly stated the following "I accept that. I will not voliate the copyright of you[r] site. I would never consider taking your complete site with format, code and categories and posting it on my site."
I will clearly state it again. I will in no way shape or form break any of the copyright laws that of our land (Canada) or of your land (I am guessing USA).

"...you are the first person to have publicly acknowledged your intent to steal my material. "
I stated the opposite and have gone on record clearly that I will not do that.

 

It would appear that I am out of the sandbox. I created the Niche Directories page on June 10th and I am ranking #7 for Niche Directories all ready. While I realize "nicke directories" only shows an Overture PPC monthly search of 50, I am still happy. I am just wondering if it will drop off or stay there.
http://www.google.com/search?q=Niche+Directories&start=6

While I am on the subject of out of the sandbox my "free seo tools" (203) and "seo tools" (3802) are both going good on Google now since the last backlink update. #1 & #2 and #6 & #7.

 

My god .. I started a revolution.

Just wanting to connect you people, so that all the visitors can benefit from those directories

Anyway, thanks Bob and thanks Edwin.

 

expertu: Well I just was looking for meaningful discuss. I looked at Edwin's directory a bit closer this weekend and viewed a good number of the sites and found out that alot of the directories he has in there are of lower quality. Not that I want to take away from the value of his site or his quality work.

I did more research and spend the week end checking out other other niche directories or directories that have niche categories and have found out that there is lots of good quality stuff out there. More than I thought.

I found the sites in Aaron Wall's directory of directories to be of the higher quality that most and recommend it highly.
www.directoryarchives.com/index.php?c=4

I will keep on looking and in the mean time we are putting a category "By Topic" in the Skaffe Web Directory category.
http://www.skaffe.com/viewCat/8241
And also I am working on the Topical category over on UncoverTheNet.
http://www.uncoverthenet.com/dir/2872/1.php

This is probably a good place to put in a pitch for editors over at Skaffe. expertu has just joined up. Skaffe is a great place to learn and they have their way of doing things down to a craft. It truely is a quality directory.

Also while I am at it Shawn is looking for quality editors also. I think Skaffe is a better place to learn but being a part of building UncoverTheNet is going to be fun. Shawn is really moving that site forward.

So between adding up to these two directories and maintaining my own list of directories of niche directories I should be more educated on what is out there shortly.

I also found alot of niche directories over in DMOZ scattered all over the place. (Speaking for DMOZ I am in the process of applying again for an editor position there. I have a good feeling about this app. Wish me the best.)

So what I am going to do first is create a list of Niche Directoires or Directories that have a good Niche categories. Then from there I will build a qualilty list of my own using those resources as my base and adding to them and perhaps starting a number of niche directories my self.

I can see that Lawyers & Legal Services, Shopping, Web Design, Real Estate, and Financial niches are in big demand.

So this whole deal has been a huge learning curve and all and all a good experience.

I also learned a number of important point from some of Edwins posts and links he posted that I was not aware of and where I was wrong.

1. It would appear that you can't copy someone elses URL list wholesale (not that I would ever consider doing that with out giving credit or getting permission). I am not taking about look and feel, categories or code just a URL list. So it appear that Edwins position was more correct than mine (I say was because my position has changed).
2. You don't have to have a copyright notice on your site for your site to be copyright protected.
3. I learned that you spell copyright c o p y r i g h t and not copywrite : )

Those are the thee that come to mind.

One think that didn't work out that I was hoping to see, was to have a good constructive discuss over the copyright law as concerning the use of other peoples lists. I took the liberal view and was willing to argue that side and Edwin certianly took the conservative view.

I would have liked to see the discuss happen as there are a couple of sites based off Dan's list of 200 free web directories being created that are not giving Dan's acknowledgement or asking him if its ok that may be in copyright violation. I felt this discuss would put pressure on them also.

I have even seen one that has the same look and feel or format as Dan's.

Unfortunately Edwin bowed out and settled for crying thief and I have a lawyer instead of good constructive discuss.

 

Bob, I made my point, and backed it up with hard evidence [which has obviously largely convinced you, based on your last post]. When faced with a tough issue, I prefer to argue as much as possible based on facts, rather than speculation, feelings, "gut feel", etc. which is why I supplied such a selection of sources for the URL copyright law material.

I don't really see how the discussion would progress much further, given that we're now sitting on the same side of the URL copyright fence, though not necessarily in the same place on the same side. But if you have a few suggestions to kick-start a wider discussion, I'm interested.

Note that I'm off travelling for 3 weeks in a couple of days time, so my participation may be sporadic at best, but I will try and chip in if I see anything else I can contribute.

Incidentally, I'm glad to see that so many more quality link resources are turning up - you can never have too many sources when it comes to trying to promote your site effectively. I'm deliberately choosing not to visit any of them so that I can continue to add stuff independently to IncomingLinks.com when the opportunity arises, and I have more time to get the search engines to cough up more candidate sites...

 

Edwin Hayward: "Bob, I made my point, and backed it up with hard evidence [which has obviously largely convinced you, based on your last post]."
I would disagree with that. You Googled up a few links on copyright, but said little or nothing about them. You took that position that no one can copy one URL from your diectory and you threaten with lawyers and you disingenuously accused me of "stealing". With all due respect I would not call that "argue[ing] as much as possible based on facts."

No I am not convinced at all. I learned a few things that I was not aware of and reajusted my view.

"I don't really see how the discussion would progress much further, given that we're now sitting on the same side of the URL copyright fence, though nt necessarily in the same place on the same side. "
I have been on the legal side of the copyright fence for years and 15 years ago I was on the legal site of the fence when I oposed the photo copying of song sheet material instead of puchasing extra song books and did research and wrote an article on it. So as far as you are on the law abiding side of the fence if you look around you will see me there also.

But I believe we are still on the opposite side of the fence when it comes to URL hording. You try to refused me the right to copy even one link from your directory and put it in my list. You threaten with lawyers and you disingenuously accused me of "stealing".

I am not going to insult you by telling you what I think of that position. Instead of heaping scorn on your position I again commenting you for your good work and quality niche directory.

It is my view point, which I would be happy for to discuss, that while you can't copy the URLs from a complete list wholesale you can copy a portion of them and I take the position of 90%.

I would be interested to hear your view argued based on fact that you can't copy one URL for a list of URLs.

 

How would you prove that a URL came from a specific list? It seems that either it would be impossible to show, or that you could take legal action against anyone who publishes a URL that you have on your own list at a later date to you. A significant section of the list might be different, but one link could be got from anywhere.

 

Proving that doesn't have to be hard sometimes. I know about few directories that were announced via Vilesilencer's list ONLY. So everyone who has them now in their list has copied them from Dan's list. Not sure how's that for legal proof (and not even care), but for me it's a proof enough.

 

Okay, in that sort of situation, where the distribution of an URL is very specific it might be easier to prove. But what if the site can be found by searching on the search engines, even after the list is published?

 

edgclrt: "...or that you could take legal action against anyone who publishes a URL that you have on your own list at a later date to you."
I agree! His position is untenable, his charges disingenuously, his link hording unacceptable, but his work is of good qualilty.

ArticleFactory: "Proving that doesn't have to be hard sometimes. I know about few directories that were announced via Vilesilencer's list ONLY. So everyone who has them now in their list has copied them from Dan's list. Not sure how's that for legal proof (and not even care), but for me it's a proof enough."
I don't think the issue so much is being able to prove if some one has found a site in Edwins, Dan's or my list. The question is does the copyright law afford some one with the right to claim "stealing" and threaten legal action if you go into their "list" of URLs and make a copy of one URL and put it in your list.

I say clearly no. Personally I think that position is not only sillyness but URL hording and if I found some one doing that with my one of my URLs that I owned I would promptly demand the removal of my URL from their list.

I say beware all ye poor niche directories owners if your URL gets in Edwin's grasp you are then owned by him. Beware for he refuses your work discovered via his list to be promoted anywhere at any time by any means with refusal backed by disingenuously charges of "stealing" and wanton threats of legal action.

 

Now who's exaggerating here, Bob? It's been nothing to do with "1 URL" in your case.

You asked me by email:

That doesn't sound like somebody wanting to copy a link or two. Your later emails confirmed your first line of approach:

When I I refused point-blank to sell you my database [to which you replied "Sure if you don't have an interest in doing business that's fine.", which I mistakenly thought ended the matter], you then came on here and started deriding my "strange" position [before I'd even heard of Digital Point!] You then got into a whole discussion about how you could essentially totally disregard my clearly stated views and copy my material anyway.

And THEN you got bent out of shape because I came on here to defend my site and my situation.

So please don't "spin" the situation for the audience. If you can't take 5 or 6 "no"s for an answer, it's hardly surprising that I have to get more vigorously defensive!

 

Edwin Hayward: "Now who's exaggerating here, Bob? It's been nothing to do with "1 URL" in your case."
Your Post #17: "Let us be even more clear. You, Bob, explicitly DO NOT have my permission to work through IL to extract the URLs.""

"Your later emails confirmed your first line of approach:"
It is considered unprofessional to take private business emails and make them public in the way that you have here. It is find to perhaps refer to them but to start quoting line for line is considered unprofessional.

"...you then came on here and started deriding my "strange" position..."
I didn't deride your strange position. I noted I thought it was strange that you would not sell me some thing that is not copyrightable. And when I said that I referred to the URLs only and in this case 90+/-% of them.

"You then got into a whole discussion about how you could essentially totally disregard my clearly stated views and copy my material anyway."
Your "clearly stated views" are not with in the copyright law. I didn't disregard them I disagreed that you now own other peoples URLs and that some one can't go into your site and take a portion of them.

"And THEN you got bent out of shape because I came on here to defend my site and my situation."
I have not at all got bend out of shape. While disagreeing with your I have remain rational, calum and no accustive and have continued to comment your for your work.

"So please don't "spin" the situation for the audience. If you can't take 5 or 6 "no"s for an answer, it's hardly surprising that I have to get more vigorously defensive!"
I am not spining anything. You no's at this point have nothing to do with the matter. You don't want to sell your rights to the list, thats fine. That has been over for a long time. I am no longer asking to puchase them. You don't own the URLs they are someone elses. The copyright law doesn't protect these other peoples URLs that are in your hands to the degree you claim it does in my opinion. They are not your URLs.

Again you have done a quality work but at the same time a misservice to any ones URL that is in your directory. I am clearly against going in and taking some ones complete work against there will (urls only I mean here), as I have lists also and have posting a copyright on them.

How ever to try to stop other resourses from using any sites they find in your list is going beyond the protecting the copyright law allows you. Unless of course I have understood you and that is not your position.

Perhaps I should ask you directly. Do you have a problem with some one going in and adding about 25 to 100 directorys from your list there to there list? Yes or No. I think I know the answer. But suprise me and tell me that it is not a problem.

 

You were the first person to reference a private email conversation, here...
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=204223&postcount=14

And yes, I would have a problem with you taking that many URLs.

Under a dozen, maybe. 25 to 100 is a substantial number when I think about the original effort it took me to find them (and by definition you weren't able to find them yourself under your own steam, since otherwise you wouldn't need to be taking them off of my site).

100% of the sites I listed on IL.com came from 4 sources:-

A) A decade's worth of "Favorites" I have stored up
B) My notes on directories I have promoted my sites on in the past
C) Mining the search engines in depth for individual directories ['"add a site" widget' etc. searches]
D) Dmoz/Yahoo!

I deliberately avoided any other "directory of directories compilation" sites in my research. Why can't you do the same and build your own list, put in the time and effort rather than piggybacking on mine?

What is it you find so hard to understand? Is it impossible to fathom the concept that it REALLY did take me a LOT of effort to build up the list of URLs, and that is why I am so defensive about it?

You will never - and I mean NEVER - get the green light from me to copy my list. I am on public record as being opposed to it. So do what you have to, but my side of the discussion ends at this point because I could be using my time a lot more productively than this.

 

Edwin Hayward: "You were the first person to reference a private email conversation, here..."
I didn't say referenceing private email I said quoting them line for line. It is considered unprofessional to display private email in that manner with out the consent of the party that sent it.

"And yes, I would have a problem with you taking that many URLs."
That is what I thought.

Why can't you do the same and build your own list, put in the time and effort rather than piggybacking on mine? What is it you find so hard to understand?
I don't have a problem understanding your position at all. I just disagree with it. So the issue it not the understanding it is the agreeing and also I would go as far as to say that your claims are not backed up by the copyright law.

"Is it impossible to fathom the concept that it REALLY did take me a LOT of effort to build up the list of URLs, and that is why I am so defensive about it?"
Not impossible not even hard. I full understand your position but I strongly disagree with it. And keep in mind that I have my own lists that I have worked hard to build and have not been taken from other sources. I have worked hard to build my lists also. But I don't try to hord them. I note in my copyright notice (which by the way has not changed since we started this conversation) that my sites are copyrighted and refused people that right to take my whole list with out giving credit.

So I know what is like to work hard to build lists. But you will not see me URL hording other peoples sites just because I found put them in my list.

"You will never - and I mean NEVER - get the green light from me to copy my list."
I am not asking for it. We covered all that in private email and I have not asked since that. I did ask your to clarify your position as to the number that entailed. It has seemed like to me that even one was out of bounds accord to your view. Now it seems your ok with 12.

"So do what you have to, but my side of the discussion ends at this point because I could be using my time a lot more productively than this."
I would agree with your on that statement.

All the best. Free free to check out my niche directories page down the line and feel free to fill out your list with it if you like.

 

Legally, I do not believe that items in a directory can by copyrighted. This makes receiving any permission from Edwin unnecessary. (Sorry Edwin)

Personally, I would be pretty darned annoyed if you copied my extensive directory lists verbatim, due to grief from duplicate content penalties.

However, please feel free to copy my extensive directory lists if you then incorporate them into larger and better works.

The folks who operate these directories deserve PR. Please give them all the inbound links you can.

 

Quoting from The Copyright Website

 

And then from there they were sent from one person to another in an e-mail, and then posted on a forum, and then compiled into another list, and then, and then, and then...

You just can't stop a meme.