Search Engine Relationship Chart (tm)

[bruceclay]

As many of you know, I have published the Search Engine Relationship Chart(tm) for several years. When I started there were no charts with that name or in a similar format. The SERC name is proudly displayed with a TM (trademark) symbol, and it is similarly mentioned on all pages of my site (in the footing). I think it is used by nearly everybody [http://www.bruceclay.com/searchenginechart.pdf]

The chart is, of course, evolving to keep pace with the industry, and there have been a great many imposters. My next version, due out in a week or so, will tie charts worldwide, contain my backup content, and will be available in both pdf and flash. But the look will remain the same with my copyrighted materials and trademarks intact.

So why do so many feel it is necessary to duplicate my content in slightly reformatted fashion and to steal my trademarked name? And these same people seem to operate reputable businesses:

http://www.ihelpyou.com/search-engine-chart.htm

In my opinion, taking my name and look and feel is blatently theft, and far more serious than spam.

Comments?

[JuniorHarris]

>So why do so many feel it is necessary to duplicate content in slightly reformatted fashion...

Possibly they wish to present their own ideas and opinions. SEO is a prime example, as everybody seems to have their own interpretation as to what works for each engine and what does not. So in a sense, every SEO site has slightly reformatted content.

The real question, is why so many feel it necessary to scrape serps and place content on their page for engines that users may or may not see. Now days it seems as if the net is full of slightly reformatted information, especially SERP links.

Maybe the answer is starring at you in the mirror?

John 8:7

[undercover_seo]

no theft

no spam

yours - pdf
ihelpyou's - flash

yours - static
ihelpyou's - dynamic

yours - clicking a se takes the user to a different page
ihelpyou's - clicking a se shows the related engines on the chart itself

stop whining

[bwelford]

In my opinion, taking my name and look and feel is blatently theft, and far more serious than spam.
Connecting objects by lines and arrows is hardly something you can claim to own. It's been around for ever. Equally you could hardly copyright the phrase Search Engine Relationships. By your reckoning, bruceclay, no one could ever put objects representing search engines (in fact their own trademarked logos) on a sheet of paper and attempt to show the inputs and the exports of each without seeking permission from you. I'm speechless ...

[ihelpyou]

sheesh Bruce.

Don't you have anything better to do?

How many other charts are out there using the same words? Why havn't you gone after them? Isn't there something that has to do with "common" words?

Ya know guy, this morning was the VERY first time I had EVER layed eyes on your chart. THE first time. I had seen phplive one's chart before but NOT your chart.

Okay fine guy:

Relationship Chart of the Search Engines

How's that. LOL :green:

What a waste of a thread and space this is.


uncover seo said it best:

Stop Whining

Welcome to the forums undercover_seo! :hi:

[ihelpyou]

My next version, due out in a week or so, will tie charts worldwide, contain my backup content, and will be available in both pdf and flash. But the look will remain the same with my copyrighted materials and trademarks intact.
huh? That's next week as you said. What's that got to do with my chart? Mine is in Flash "today", not next week. LOL When you open your flash one up, I guess I can then claim copyright infringement on you??

Get a life please.

Further; you say 'the feel?' How is it that my chart looks like your chart? My goodness. We all know mine is MUCH prettier than your's is.

The only thing that looks the same are the logos of the engines. Are you saying "only you" can use those? Please.

[Gage]

Not only is it more attractive, but Doug's version is much easier to understand. The other one confuses me.

[ihelpyou]

http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=12081

[ihelpyou]

Hi Bruce, Do you feel threatened or something? What is it. Why is it you had no problems with the other charts but "now" you have a problem with mine? Is it because you fear others linking to you might change their links and link to mine? Is that it? What's the real scoop?

As JH said above, you think it's quite okay for SERPS and content to be 'scraped' from other sites "including" Nationally Trademarked Names, etc, but it's not okay for ME to have a chart?



Your post indicates that anyone doing anything at all would be committing some kind of crime. This forum software is made by vBulletin. Other forum software look pretty much like this one. Many of them can do the same things but are simply reformatted according to the likes and dislikes of the owner. What's the difference?

I don't care for your chart. It's confusing to me as well. For me anyway, my chart is less confusing. I happen to like it better. So what? I can click on the individual engine links and get a "focused" view of a relationship of incoming and outgoing. That's greatly different than your chart. I have not studied yours, as I said, this morning is the FIRST time I had seen it, but I don't see any similarities at all except for the fact we use the logos.

[chris]

Ya know guy, this morning was the VERY first time I had EVER layed eyes on your chart.

So when it and others were described by you as good resources (http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=132&highlight=search+engine+relationship+chart) you said that without ever having seen it did you Doug?

Let's acknowledge that you must have known about Bruce's chart given that any half decent SEO would. In all probability you've seen Bruce's chart because every half decent has and you would have excluded it when describing it and others as good resources. Then you make your own. Would it not be Best Practices and morally right to admit so by adding a link providing credit to Bruce for being the original work from which yours is derived. Whether directly or indirectly it would be unreasonable to expect us to believe you did not know about the derivation.

I don't think Bruce's posting here was a wise way of going about things given your reputation but I do honestly think that he deserves more of an explanation than "Stop Whining" or "It's in flash so it's alright". I'm off to copy all of the content of these forums into pdf, give it a different layout and it's perfectly fine. Yeh right.

So here's the challenge Doug, coz we wouldn't want you slipping to the dark side. I want you to follow Best Practices and do what's morally right. So:

1. Admit you have seen Bruce Clay's chart before. If you can't manage that, although it's patently obvious, then admit that you knew yours was a derivative work.

2. Provide a link on your chart to Bruces acknowledging it as the original from which yours was derived, thereby not selling it as entirely your idea.

3. Change the title and stop trying to be a smart arse, that makes you no better than the so called spammers you draw in here to verbally thrash the hell out of when they don't follow your idea of Best Practices.

4. Stop trying to justify your actions by what other people do. Is it okay if I cloak because others do? Then do you really think it's okay for you to take ideas without credit because others do?

[ihelpyou]

Buzz off Chris Ridings. I read your stupid thing this morning. Only "you" could stick up for Bruce.

Also, OH YES. This is the first time I had seen it. TRUST me bud.

You can also get a life. You all feel threatened. I feel very sorry for you as you a a little kid yet that's toooo damn young for your own good. A baby yet. Grow up first, and then come back to whine some more. Go thru 25 years of 'real world" experience first and then come back to me when you are done.

You've needed a spanking for along time now. Most kids need spankings every now and then.

[ihelpyou]

btw, could someone please post the url of Chris Ridings writings of this morning? I can't seem to find the damn thing right now.

I want everyone to read what kind of kid you are.



I found it:
http://www.chriseo.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=46&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

btw Chis, thanks for all the links! :thumb:

[ihelpyou]

Chris, you write about "YOUR" PageRank article and the fact that others have written articles. I find that extremely funny.

Your latest article is hilarious since it looks to me like your PageRank articles are based on original work by Page & Brin which, IMO, was easier to read, more informative, contained fewer errors and served a better purpose.

So you see bud, you could have the same damn argument no matter what the heck you are writing about. IMO, my chart is easier to read, easier to understand, is more interactive (and will be moreso soon), and is Prettier. What's the difference in my chart and all your PageRank articles?

[chris]

Doug, this particular kid isn't going to get into a bickering session with you but I do need to answer that particular miscomprehension of yours. You once said you'd never read my paper, you clearly still haven't. I based everything I wrote on a formula published in Page and Brin's original papers, not on the papers themselves (that's the difference between research and plagiarism). However, Page and Brin neglected to tell us how to use it for SEO. Still, even had I based it heavily on Page and Brin's work (which with no disrepect intended I find it hard to believe you understood any better) I would argue that the title was different, they were aware of what I was doing because I told them so, they even have an interview in the later version and I offered them power of veto. Had you done the same for Bruce's chart I'm more than certain there wouldn't be an issue.

[bruceclay]

BTW, I'm not whining. I have a right to defend my original art, copyrights, and trademarks any way I choose. FYI: I am filed with the PTO (but it is a slow process), and I do already have an issued and registered copyright.

Logo's are used with permission, in fact they were sent to me by each engine. The pages that you get when you click thru are mostly containing data provided by the search engines themselves. I have reprint rights... in other words, don't accuse me of not asking for and receiving the support of the search engines.

As for never having heard or seen my chart, search your own forum for "search engine relationship chart", including the lengthy discussion we just finished. I am sure that a person that studies their postings would have stumbled over the chart in their own forum.

As for your chart, it is cute. I am sure you have received permission and logo's from the SE's as well?

I do not want to get into a character debate. I am simply stating the obvious, I did it in 2000, it has been here for three+ years, constantly updated, every update has been posted in I-Search and other commonly reviewed search publications, it has been handed out to attandees of SES for years, and yes several have tried to copy me. I find it impossible to believe that you never heard or saw this chart considering your role. But if you insist that yours was done in a vacuum (considering the facts that your own forum discusses it), then I just do not buy it.

Who here has been around as long as you and has never seen or heard of this chart? It is probably a very low percentage. What I do not understand is how I can be castrated for years for a programming bug that I admitted and promptly corrected, and how others can steal my protected materials and even hint that I am the guilty party in this case?

[excell]

Well I am going to run the risk of piping up here :D

I don't think Chris is being childish or whatever it is you are trying to say about him Doug... I think he has some valid points and has the right to express them.

Also, just from a totally outside point of view I think your new look chart is great... but I do also find it very hard to believe that you have not ever seen Bruce's chart in all these years. Especially when in your design and launch thread it is referred to.

Anyway, just wanted to say there are more ways to look at a matter than one and a better way to go might be one that doesn't attack others for expressing a view point or explaining and pointing out a problem that they perceive or whatever it is... :eek:

[ihelpyou]

My goodness. This is unbelievable.

First of all Bruce:

Search Engine Partnership Chart

is what it will be called. Is that okay? LOL

You have no leg to stand on with your other arguments. I have every right to build a chart as anyone else does. AND, I had NEVER viewed your chart in my life. As far as my designers? I can't speak for them. Let's face it; there are now MANY charts out there that use these logos. These same logos are used on MANY sites for many different things.

It's hard to believe you are making such a big deal out of this. You sure are scared of something.

[ihelpyou]

excell, you don't know the history of Chris Ridings and these forums. He has many other motivations for his writings and none of them have to do with my silly chart.

[excell]

But exactly Doug.. don't you see? I and a great many of your forum viewers DON'T know the history of everything, we are only reading the current thread etc.. and I'm just saying it doesn't shed you in a real good light if you take it in that context..

I'll disappear now, but I just did want to chirp up :)

[ihelpyou]

That's fine. I disagree as I don't think he made any good points. :)

[patrickh]

Wow Doug, I would of never expected you to respond to this the way you have... I guess I was just giving you too much credit.

If I can get past the fact that you claim to have never seen one of the essential SEO resources on the internet (which I can't, btw), I still don't understand your reaction. There are many, many ways to communicate the fact that you disagree with Bruce, and I think you managed to choose the least professional method of them all. If this happened in any other public enviroment, would you have the same reaction? I would certainly hope not. Also, Chris made some very valid points that you decided to completely ignore, instead adressing some past dispute you have had with him.

You've needed a spanking for along time now.

:confused: Such a pity, you are embarassing yourself so much.

[ihelpyou]

Yeah, and there are other ways he could have communicated with me instead of posting his exact same post in multiple forums around the internet.

Do you agree?

Besides, I thoroughly disagree with him and don't mind saying so. Also besides, the headlines ARE going to be changed and we will put the little TM mark beside it as well just like he did.

And yeah, he's a 19 or 20 yr old kid fresh out of college. No world experience. I don't take well to a kid that has never shown any respect. And yes, it DOES have to do with a few "years" of history. I'm getting very tired of his crap to say the least.

[yellowwing]

"In my opinion, taking my name and look and feel is blatently theft, and far more serious than spam. Comments?" - Bruce Clay

You have a genuine concern on the work you have done. What do you propose? Licencensing, or an acknowledgement link, or small credit blurb?

You asked for comments and that is all you got. You will not get relief on comments, only additional greif. The first step on Solutions should come from you.

[patrickh]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
Yeah, and there are other ways he could have communicated with me instead of posting his exact same post in multiple forums around the internet.

Do you agree?

I do agree, things could of been handled different on his side as well; I still don't think it deserved the reaction you gave it though.

[ihelpyou]

Your Name?

Look/Feel?

Show me where.

Again, His "Name" as he calls it will be changed to this:

Search Engine Partnership Chart

complete with the little TM as he done with "HIS" name. LOL

[ihelpyou]

Sure it did when it could have been done VERY easily thru email or over the phone, just like Bruce called me about his LinkMaps spam software awhile ago.

Instead, he chose to make all of this very public. It's one thing to make a post about this in MY forums. It's quite another to make the exact same post in multiple forums.

[patrickh]

Doug, theres nothing you can say to justify comments like:

Further; you say 'the feel?' How is it that my chart looks like your chart? My goodness. We all know mine is MUCH prettier than your's is. Na-na--nana---naaaaaaa

I am always first in line to pump up ****iness, but not in a serious debate over this (it may not be serious to you, but I think it is very serious to Bruce).

[ihelpyou]

hmm. You have made only a couple of posts in here and a few have called me as being "unfair" in some way.

http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=99446#post99446

What's up with that?

I don't need to defend the way I post in my own forums Pat. If you don't like it, you certainly don't have to view in here. I would be sad if you did not view, and I'm not happy you don't post in here much, but I simply disagree with you. Let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that? :)

[Webmaster-Toolkit]

You people must drink too much coffee or something...

[excell]

Regardless of how and where a person posts, this issue is an issue that DOES affect the entire industry. You are fond of calling it your industry etc and that you have a say in it and will have your say and do have your say :p .. these are your forums for sure and you can indeed do what you like..

But, I think that folks are just trying to help you and protect you is all :)

Perhaps they care.

Adding: LOL@webmaster-toolkit

[ihelpyou]

The 'name' I'll give him. Although, I still think those words are too common to be trademarked. There is no registration yet at the office for those words. Further, I doubt a National Trademark would be granted for those words as they are all over the internet in some fashion.

BUT, the name will be changed as I've noted a couple of times now.

As far as 'look and feel'? No way. The functionalities are Very different. The only thing that looks the same is the logos of the search engines. Nothing else does.

[patrickh]

Originally posted by ihelpyou
hmm. You have made only a couple of posts in here and a few have called me as being "unfair" in some way.

http://www.ihelpyouservices.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=99446#post99446

What's up with that?


It was what it was, I simply disagreed with what you said and (I felt I) politely explained it. It's not like I have been holding that against you this entire time ;)


I don't need to defend the way I post in my own forums Pat. If you don't like it, you certainly don't have to view in here. I would be sad if you did not view, and I'm not happy you don't post in here much, but I simply disagree with you. Let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that? :)

I agree, you don't need to defend anything you say -- it would make for a very un-interesting debate between you and Bruce if you did not though.

[ihelpyou]

hmm excell, I'm quite surprised. You know who you are dealing with in this thread, and you should know the motivations of the two who have posted in here. Recently we had a thread on Bruce
s LinkMaps software. He was not happy that many of us viewed it as spam. This was recent stuff.

Surely you can understand where all of this is coming from? This truly has very little to do with any chart. My chart is toooo darn different as it sits now from his chart. In a few days, it will be even more different.

[Webmaster-Toolkit]

Try some decaff, and eat more fibre. Then you all won't be so narky.

[excell]

As I said, I really like your chart Doug, it's very spunky :)

I've looked at this a few times over the years and regardless of anything else, side issues or personalities I think that a *concept* or arranged data module should be credited back to the originator of the idea... now if Bruce (or as intimated by others - someone else) was the originator of the idea of a relationship chart for search engine flow then a little note to say "based on the original chart by ..blah..blah.."

I know it treads on generic waters but I just think it bears thinking about.

[ihelpyou]

The only thing that might be arranged similar is the opening map. To make the lines 'straight', we couldn't lay it out any other way that I can see. Although, we are looking into that now and as we speak. His don't have 'all' straight lines that I can see.

As far as functionality goes there is no comparison. My chart gives the view of each individual engine and the comings and goings. The other one does not.

Give us a few days and it will be 'more' different. My goodness. :)

As far as the 'concept' of a chart to begin with? hmm. I guess he could try and 'patent' it if he wanted to? Not sure how original this chart thing would be though. Charting with lines and objects and graphs etc, has been done since the beginning of time. Who is the "original" chart maker from waaay back? That's the person who should get the credit for any kind of chart.

[xcandyman]

This discussion should not have been made public. I know Bruce Clay started it all but I would have thought Doug would have closed this thread in an instant and talked to Bruce directly to sort it out between themselves.

IMO totally both of you acted unprofessionally and would have expected better. Now do yourself a favour Doug and close this thread, get in contact with bruce THEN post a notice when it has been sorted.

Don't take this the wrong way Doug ;)

[ihelpyou]

Yeah, I agree but since he posted the same things in other fora, I did not want to look like I was censoring things. Remember, the first post was made late last night. I did not see it until I posted to this thread this morning. Others had already posted to it.

Because of the circumstances involved, no way would I close this thread or delete it or hide it.

[ihelpyou]

Besides, he has the complaint. He can contact me. But it would not do any good at this point as we are changing everything around with the chart.

[WebSavvy]

In order to make a legal claim that no one else can develop a chart similar to yours, you would have to have legal ownership to the concept.

This is something that you however, cannot own, simply because showing relationship between elements of supply and demand are what's known as a schematic. These elements are then connected by lines, dots, arrows, etc., to show their process of either supply or demand from point A to point B.

Clearly if you say you own the concept of schematics then perhaps you'd best serve yourself by doing some further research into the subject and its origin.

Schematics have been used to show relationships between elements since the development of the first chart outlining atoms and molecules.

There are literally thousands of "submission companies" on the Internet. One can trademark their name, however they cannot claim to hold legal ownership of the "concept" and prevent anyone else from developing or offering the same type of service.

I'm sorry Bruce, but if you took this into court, you would legally not have a leg to stand on.

[Webmaster T]

Originally posted by bruceclay
BTW, I'm not whining. Yes you are! You have yet to make an informative post in the 8-9 months I've been here. In fact every post is whining about the way you are portrayed. You are portrayed in that manner simply because that is what you are!

No amount of "the dog ate my homework" spin posts are going to change the fact you are an abusive to SE SEO and/or a poor programmer who doesn't test his programs before taking them live. You have absolutely no qualms about pushing the envelope to the point of abuse.

Everything you say about the page jacking fiasco fails to address the fact it was running in a frame cloaking program. A program which wouldn't be so bad if it was for personal use but you were selling that crap to the unsuspecting and uninformed. Sound familiar folks? Of course the LinkMaps fall under the same category and once again Bruce claims he's innocent "the dog ate his homework" again.

Bruce I recommend that you buy yourself a good book bag and get some training for that dog!

By the way you aren't the innovator of a SE relationship chart! Danny Sullivan was the first to document the relationships between SE, your only claim to fame is putting it into a clumsy confusing picture chart! Danny's was/is text based and a simple table design. So, are you saying that you never perused Danny's table before you implemented yours. Are you also claiming that it didn't influence what you did? Isn't this exactly what you are accusing others of doing? Using your idea, which as it turns out isn't yours exclusively, but Danny's, since he was the first to document the relationships between engines. I think your walking along a pretty fine line!

In fact Doug's is much easier to use and will take away links from yours. You know that, and that is why you came here to raise some shite and question Dougs' integrity. We all know whose integrity should be questioned and it isn't Doug! How about some proof that you already had a flash version or did that nasty dog eat that as well!

[ihelpyou]

New Headings:

http://www.ihelpyou.com/search-engine-chart.htm

That's what we could change immediately. There ya go.

MANY more changes coming "very" soon. :)

[polarmate]

My next version, due out in a week or so, will tie charts worldwideWill that be a graphical representation of information available in this one?
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum18/544.htm

[bruceclay]

Thank you Doug. I withdraw my complaint about your chart for the time being as I am rather sure that your newer version will be dissimilar. BTW, there are others who are running my exact chart with only my name cut off and yes, I am upset. If you do a unique representation of the feeding habits of search engines then fine. But do not do a minor artistic improvement (straight lines versus bent lines? A little flash?), and also exactly use a name I coined, and call it yours. Maybe your designers blindsided you.

T - twice in the last 8 years I have made prompt changes to my code and actions to appease the masses. As hunted and hunter I assure you that neither is very satisfying. I felt compelled to gripe, and IMO I was justified. I also felt no need to hide my opinions - I seem to remember others openly griping about me without contacting me first.

I have always believed that mistakes happen and that the prompt and appropriate repair demonstrates the character of the individual. I acted promptly, answered questions, did not run and hide, and certainly did not whine. Doug acted promptly as well and I commend his quick action and superb dancing ability. For those of you agreeing with me, thank you.

Please close this thread when you wish. I only posted now 3 times and do not feel the need to continue. I will not post in this thread again.

[ihelpyou]

Good Bruce.

Just one thing:
unique representation of the feeding habits of search engines.
Correct me if I am wrong; but what do you mean by unique? There is only one way the engines feed each other, right? If you are saying that I cannot use their se logos and give a presentation of coming and going dots as I have done, then you might be wrong about that. Maybe I am not understanding what you are saying? And flash is flash. I'm using flash. It is interactive as well. You are not using flash. Your's is 'not' interactive. I don't know how much more unique I could possibly make it?

I have a left hand navigation bar that by clicking shows a focused view of 'each' engine. You do not. My chart is way different right now Bruce. But you are right, it will be more different, but not that much more. There are only so many ways you can display the feeds of the search engines. The se logos are not your logos. They are not unique and are all over the internet.

[ihelpyou]

I'll just wait and see as to what the guys come up with. For right now, I'll close this thread.