Buy Topamax Without Prescription

Buy Topamax Without Prescription, Yesterday was an exciting day in the Columbus blogosphere. My friend Andy, buy Topamax from mexico, Topamax street price, who blogs at Fine Repast, blasted (ill advised I might add) Columbus Underground, Topamax samples, Buy generic Topamax, alleging that it steals content from him and other sites. Comments were exchanged, Topamax pharmacy. After Topamax, I tweeted the exchange. Walker put up a forum post on CU. 

Then it got interesting, Topamax dangers. Lawsuits were threatened, Buy Topamax Without Prescription. Purchase Topamax online, Fair Use was claimed. Andy was called a douchbag (not by Walker), Topamax canada, mexico, india. Cheap Topamax, Hey, don't say I didn't warn you, rx free Topamax. Order Topamax online overnight delivery no prescription, The fur was flying. Buy Topamax Without Prescription, Then, as soon as it started, it ended. Both took down their posts, is Topamax addictive. Online buying Topamax hcl, And unless Google or someone else cached it, the exchange was lost in the ether, purchase Topamax for sale. Buy Topamax without prescription, I'm not trying to fan any more flames (becuase I like and admire both Andy and Walker), but now that the issue has raised its ugly head, where to buy Topamax, Purchase Topamax, is it gone? 

If you goto the Columbus Underground homepage, you'll find a WordPress blog with posts that consists of original content and snippets of blog posts from other blogs or news articles from the media (I'll call these snippet posts), fast shipping Topamax. Topamax price, coupon, Walker takes great care in not posting the entire article in the snippet posts and only publishes one or two paragraphs. Often he'll post a picture from the article or blog, Buy Topamax Without Prescription. And if you catch CU on the right day, Topamax description, Topamax reviews, well over half of the posts on the front page consists of snippet posts.

Is this Fair Use as Walker contends, order Topamax online c.o.d. Topamax from mexico, Or is Andy right. Give me enough time, Topamax treatment, Topamax over the counter, and I'll craft a legal argument for both Walker and Andy. Buy Topamax Without Prescription, But that's not the point of this post.

The point is: Is Columbus Underground the 800 pound gorilla in the main street media's room, order Topamax from United States pharmacy. Where can i buy Topamax online, Let's not kid ourselves. The Dispatch has attorneys, Topamax results. Topamax cost, So does every other media outlet in Columbus. And with media dying, I have no doubt that the Columbus Underground has been vetted by one or more of these company's attorneys, Buy Topamax Without Prescription. That's just the world we live in, buy Topamax from canada. Buy Topamax online cod, We want an open web. But the ones in control, Topamax pics, Topamax overnight, well want control.

So Walker said that Andy's the first that has ever made a stink about copyright, buy Topamax from canada. Buy Topamax Without Prescription, And for Walker's sake, I hope it will be the last. My personal theory is that Walker has built sooooo much goodwill within this city, that any media company would be foolish to try to force him to change his ways. 

But while threatened lawsuits from Andy might not change CU, increased competition from the likes of Indie Columbus might. As far as I can tell, CU and IC reach out to the same audience. Posters on CU also write for IC. But IC relies on original content to spur discussion. CU uses other sources to spur discussion (although there's plenty of originally spurred discussion on the message board), Buy Topamax Without Prescription.

So I guess what I'm saying, is that I'd like to see CU move in the direction of providing more original content on the main page. Move away from the snippet posts. If a post anchors on an article from the media, write content that links to it rather than copying and pasting a couple of paragraphs. CU has the readers and contributors that will continue to make CU the vibrant community that it is. Buy Topamax Without Prescription, But with more original content on the front page, CU will be seen as more than JUST an aggregator from outsiders and its detractors.

There. That's my non-legal analysis. Even though I am an attorney. :) Now Walker and Andy, kiss and make up.

Similar posts: Lormetazepam For Sale. Buy Zopiclone Without Prescription. Carisoprodol For Sale. Propecia For Sale. Buy Lunesta Without Prescription. Buy Aleram online no prescription. About Acyclovir. Imovane no rx. Generic Zopiclone. ProSom description.
Trackbacks from: Buy Topamax Without Prescription. Buy Topamax Without Prescription. Buy Topamax Without Prescription. Buy Topamax Without Prescription. Buy Topamax Without Prescription. Online buying Topamax. Generic Flomax. ProSom class. Low dose Tafil-Xanor. Purchase Niravam.

  • Pingback: Quoting and Linking « Andrew Miller

  • Andrew

    Ok Wyliemac – your comment box wouldn't allow me to post the comment I crafted so I ended up creating a post on my website which you are welcome to read (or ignore) here: ” target=”_blank”>http://andrew-miller.com/2009/02/24/quoting-and-l…

  • Andrew

    Ok Wyliemac – your comment box wouldn't allow me to post the comment I crafted so I ended up creating a post on my website which you are welcome to read (or ignore) here: ” target=”_blank”>http://andrew-miller.com/2009/02/24/quoting-and-l…

  • wyliemac

    You just have to learn to be less wordy. :) Thanks for the reply.

  • Lyndsey aka theteet

    I've said this before, and I'll say it again: CU was built on the backs of poor traditional media slobs. Sure, Walker had his DJ thing, but the content provided by other publications gave the masses on the message boards something to talk about and respond to. That's not illegal. Maybe unethical, but one thing's for sure: It's a damn smart business decision and I wish I would have thought of it. Walker doesn't seem like an unethical kind of guy. He's very sweet and well-meaning. And I honestly believe he does think he's doing media a huge favor by linking at the bottom of the stories he posts, and to a small extent, he is helping traffic. But people who want to stay informed will read the news. And they will find information one way or the other. And then they will talk about it online. And as long as CU is around, that's conversation (traffic and hits) that WON'T be happening on said media's website. So he is sort of pillaging the work of others. And as we've opened our stories to comments, I've grown to understand how EASY a message board would be to run. (And I can say that because I go to all the same meetings.) The hard part — that part that takes time, staff, resources, smarts, etc. is providing the CONTENT. I think as CU grows, and as Walker contributes more and more original content, he will grow to appreciate how hard it is. WHILE also trying to maintain regular advertisers. Right now, he's pretty much only gotta worry about the latter. If there's a controversial topic, he can post someone else's mean story about the subject matter. Let another publication do the dirty work: Keep advertisers happy. Again, what he's doing is not illegal. It's smart. And I would be cool with it all if there wasn't this vibe of "we hate traditional media," on these message boards. You can't hate something you're exposed to on 80 percent of the board's content. And CU became a gathering place AROUND the reports of traditional media. Don't hate so hard on it. We made you. WORSHIP US. :)

  • Walker Evans

    Hi Alvin. Thanks for the post. I'm trying not to give this whole issue much more of my time or energy, as I'm way too busy with other things as is. I will say though that with the re-launch of ColumbusUnderground.com on January 1st, we've refocused our efforts on providing more original/unique content. Over half of the content to grace the front page is unique content. This doesn't mean we're going to stop quoting, citing, and linking to other blogs and news sources. I think CU functions very well as a balance between a news publisher and a news aggregator. Thanks again for your civility and rationality with your post. Talk to you soon, Walker

  • wyliemac

    Thanks Lyndsey. I do worship you. Liked your articles dating back to SNP. Now, when are you getting on my story idea I submitted to you? :) ” target=”_blank”>http://12seconds.tv/channel/wyliemac/96720

  • wyliemac

    Thanks Lyndsey. I do worship you. Liked your articles dating back to SNP. Now, when are you getting on my story idea I submitted to you? :) ” target=”_blank”>http://12seconds.tv/channel/wyliemac/96720

  • jodyNcolumbus

    I love CU and have no problem with his blurb and link posts. Original content is dead, the days of Copyright as we once knew it are gone. I see CU as an aggregator of news around my topics. We should always honor the "take down" requests, but trying to step lightly around copyright is outdated. I feel if people post something to the internet, you should expect it to be picked up and linked to if it is any good. That said, I do feel people should always give source credit when using something.

  • Jon Myers

    Alvin, thanks for the indieColumbus props it's very much appreciated. Our first month with the gate down (January) we've received nearly 4,000 unique visitors with a bounce rate of under 3%. That's without any announcements and without actually having "launched". The jist is simple. Lots of people showed up and stuck around to read the stories. Aside from the fact that I'm biased and think we have some of the most amazing thinkers and writers in the city, my reason for sharing those numbers is simple. I believe they indicate a desire for well written, deep content about our community. That is the goal of indieColumbus. To provide smart, fun, honest content that you may/ may not find elsewhere. Secondarily the aim is to give visitors a voice, and tools to share, sculpt and interact with that content in relevant ways by which they're already consuming information. I like what Walker has done with CU and would consider myself a "prolific CU commenter" and "CU reactor". I enjoy the community on CU. That said, I think we have different goals. In terms of content strategy I feel like the way one "interacts" with unique content on a publisher's site is much different than the tone and interaction of "reacting" to content. Just different content strategies. Another glaring difference. You'll notice there is no advertising on indieColumbus. We'll continue to keep it that way. Obviously things can change. Being that my day job and pursuits revolve around the interwebs I feel like I have some relevant insights to advertising on the web. I've never felt comfortable that a local community website (even one that gets 40,000 monthlies) could deliver enough value to an advertiser from a display ad. Thus, until that happens I don't ever think there will be ads on indieColumbus. It's a pursuit of passion of all those involved. All 25 of us have our own reasons. What I'm getting at is we have different business models and objectives. I would agree we're pulling some of the same audience. What the audience does at the sites are different. Stay tuned. We launch soon. Thanks again. -Jon

  • Michael Reed

    I would rather be called a content thief than someone who engages in unethical business practices (by the way, I think Walker in neither).

  • Andy

    I was happy to see that the right thing was done and my content was taken down. It appears that CU.com has had all original material the past two days despite lip service to "business as usual." I think that this will serve them better in the long run. I was also happy to see that members of CU.com (in their forum) questioned their current practices and suggested that perhaps they were skirting the line and (in their current format) not adding value to the non-original content that they were adding to their site. If you want to use someone else's content, you need to ask permission at the outset. Despite what many think, the internet is not a free-for-all where if you can copy and paste someone else's content, it becomes yours. As far as the 800 pound gorilla question, CU.com's decision to feature this on their blog and forum may answer it.

  • Andy

    Beyond the copyright infringement issue, I find interesting what took place here on a broader level and what that may say about our society. We basically had two individuals engaged in a disagreement. The issue at hand was the use of photos and content on a website without permission. At some point during the discussion, one individual decided that he could no longer engage in that discussion. So he decided to make a post on his blog about the discussion. The title of that post was words to the effect of: FineRepast doesn't want CU.com linking to his site anymore. The content of that post was words to the effect of: He's mad; he's lashing out, he's angry; and he's threatening lawsuits as a result of that link. Last I checked, the post was gone so forgive me if I'm slightly off. He didn't stop there. He also put up the same post for discussion in his forum. He may have also alerted others to the discussion via tweets and other social networking media. Now it's common for all of us to seek alliances from our friends when we are engaged in a disagreement. We want to hear from our friends that we are in the right and the other party is in the wrong. In seeking that alliance, we put the best spin on the story to quickly gain their alliance. Go back and look at the original issue and then look at what it became. Anyone who read the headline of the blog post or discussion topic would quickly conclude that this guy at finerepast.com is a real jerk. Let's go kick his ass for picking on our friend and complaining about being linked to. How many who read that actually tried to determine what the complete story was? 3% or less? In fact, only one person that I am aware of at CU.com actually stopped to consider whether I had a valid point and what the whole story was. Most people who responded immediately jumped on the bandwagon and got their punches and kicks in through vulgar name-calling. I immediately recall Stupe, Douchebag, Asshole and Asshat to name a few. I applaud the loyalty to a friend, but at what cost? Before we hide behind the anonymity of our computer screen and lob verbal grenades in aid of our friend perhaps we should ask ourselves – do we really understand the complete story? Is this how I would act in person? And is this the type of person I want to be known as?

  • Jon Myers

    Andy, I called you a stupe and would stand by that anytime online or in person. I use my real name and don't hide behind some clown style, dungeons and dragons false name. Ironically, I agreed with you on many levels. Anyhow, you wasted an opportunity to make a valid point and create conversation around it. Plain and simple. I believe the reason it was wasted is because you immediately started posturing as a lawyer and dropping the SUE bomb. Aside from being childish and a major distraction to the point being made, that sort of garden-variety legal posturing immediately shuts down conversation. Shutting down conversation when you want people to discuss and understand you're point of view is – stupid. It's contrary to the concept of community. Whenever things immediately shut down and digress to legal dramatics they'll generate equally proportionate, digressive remarks. It wasn't a "disagreement". You were threatening legal action immediately. What ticks me off is we could be discussing the actual point you were trying to make.

  • Andy

    Jon, You exemplify the Columbus Underground community. Instead of engaging the issue at hand, you still resort to name calling. I guess that is the only way that you can defend your friend's actions which, in the end, is no justification at all. The only thing that is preventing anyone from discussing the issue is themselves. While I disagree with your characterization of what I immediately did, I had every right to threaten legal action. It was my property that was being taken and CU.com had no right to use it. Instead of offering to take down my copy and photos, Cu.com wanted to somehow justify their use of it. When it became apparent that Cu.com had a sense of entitlement to what was mine, I threatened legal action. Btw, the original threat was not directed at Cu.com but to another website that had stolen my content. The best way I've heard this all summed up is that I'm dealing with a bunch of kids who feel that just because something is on the internet, it is theirs for the plundering. If people are offended by threats of legal action, perhaps they shouldn't violate the law in the first place.

  • Carl

    nuff said!

  • dublinohguest

    i dont read either, i got hear from a random google search but i would like to chime in and explain something about blogging technology. You should be familar with a feature called trackback. Its a mechanism to facilitate this type of syndication or aggregation of content. Essentially the software you use, say for instance wordpress, pings the quoted site. Thats just how blogging works, you stumble across some other blog, you might find it interesting enough to discuss or share, you do so, either outright or your opinion of it, you link to it, you ping it back with a trackback so the original article can see who is talking about it. Welcome to the blogosphere. learn 2 internet noobs.

  • seriesoftubes

    also fair use ++. quit bitching about how the internet works, its hypertext, your article being discussed on another site that links to your article is a Good Thing. Thats how you get visitors to your site. They clickity click from other places on the internet. Did you honestly invite everyone to your website personally? no they clickity clicked from the interwebs. its only copyright infringement if a substantial portion of the material is being recreated with attribution. a paragraph and a link to your content is something you should be greatful for on the internet. it means someone is visiting or site and someone cares about your meaningless internet babble. Why are you going to shoot your self in the foot and complain that people are advertising your pointless articles. (as if your opinion on anything really matters you self important douchebags). god you guys need some marketing skills, some blogging skills, some internet skills, some legal skills, something.

  • Andy

    I see indiecolumbus is really cranking out new content with its most recent post in early August 2009. Maybe it's time to start stealing content.

  • http://www.sixsingles.com free dating sites

    new content with its most recent post in early August 2009

    free dating sites

  • http://www.sixsingles.com free dating sites

    This entry was posted by Vasile Filat on Tuesday, February 3rd, 2009 at 12:00 am and is filed under Doctrine, Practical advice.

    free dating sites

  • mandy mills

    Hello! I could have sworn I’ve been to this blog
    before but after browsing through some of the post I realized it’s new to me.
    dateing sites