19 comments for “MedicalMnemonics.com

  1. 2. Mai 2007 at 6:56


    If you’re going to take the entire content of my post, could I at least please have a link?

    I’d also be grateful to have attribution for the other content you’re appropriated from my blog.

    Thank you,


  2. 3. Mai 2007 at 3:34

    Oliver, you’re also hotlinking the image directly from my blog. This means that you’re using my bandwidth to show the image on your blog.

    Please correct this.
    Thank you.

  3. ob
    4. Mai 2007 at 11:07

    Dear David, sorry for my sloppiness, I’ve corrected that. I appreciate your blog very much and would like to continue disseminating your entries to German colleagues.

    To cope with the many interesting blog entries, on holidays I use an agregator which allows to blog the full text very easily without editing. Later on I would go to the blog entries and cite, give credit, etc., if I found more time and a steady Internet connection, which in North Cyprus isn’t that easy. 😉

  4. 4. Mai 2007 at 3:21

    Oliver, you can disseminate them by linking to them. Please stop copying them entirely.

    Your convenience aside, displaying the work of others without credit is copyright violation and plagiarism. Please don’t do it.

  5. ob
    5. Mai 2007 at 9:35

    Dear David, please make me aware if I display the work of others without credit unintentionally.

  6. 5. Mai 2007 at 2:31

    Dear Oliver,

    Please stop reproducing my posts in their entirety, with or without attribution. To do so is a violation of ethics, propriety, and law.

    It is not my responsibility to police your site for theft of my intellectual property- it is your responsibility to stop doing it.

    If you want to point your readers towards something I write, please link to it.

    Thank you,


  7. B.-C.
    7. Mai 2007 at 9:16

    Lieber Herr Obst,

    an Ihrer Stelle würde ich diese Site links liegen lassen, wenn der Owner solchen Trouble macht. Ich kann wahrhaftig nicht erkennen, dass Sie keine Credits geben. Im Gegenteil: während David Rothman nur den Originalautor und sein Bog nennt, ohne direkten Link, verlinken Sie. Sooo originell war der Beitrag von David Rothman nun auch nicht, dass man einen solchen Aufstand davon machen muß. Die Credits gebühren letztlich „Dymphie“. Für Mitarbeit bei Wikipedia und Co ist David Rothman gewiß nicht geeignet, wenn er sich so anstellt. Sein Ego scheint aber ohnehin sehr ausgeprägt zu sein, wenn ich all den Hype in eigener Sache sehe – erinnert mich doch sehr an die Klappentexte amerikanischer Bestseller …

  8. B.-C.
    7. Mai 2007 at 9:27

    To David: in Germany we require a minimum of „creative height“ in order for a work to be granted itellectual property rights. I don’t see that this is given in your posting which is simply a short not particularly witty summary of another blogger’s post. It seems rather laughable that in this context you speak of „theft of intellectual property“. If we start arguiung on that level, we could begin to question whether you had the right to translate another authors dutch posting to plain english, by the way without even linking to this authors website and original article.
    Best regards, Bernd-Christoph Kaemper

  9. B.-C.
    7. Mai 2007 at 9:47

    Correction: I saw the short form in the archive, the full form does link to the blog. Still, I am asking myself whether the nth iteration of a posting should be asked to give detailed attribution to all authors. I.e., I am so grateful that Sam in Samsblog directed me to the note about David at Davidsblog who took the pain to translate a dutch blogger’s (Dymphie) entry to plain english and thus make it readable to the world at large. Wow …

  10. 7. Mai 2007 at 11:00


    As you’ve noted I *did* link to the source where I heard of MedicalMnemonics.com. I did not translate the post (I know perhaps six words of Nederlandse), and wrote my own short summary. Regardless, I would not have heard of MedicalMnemonics.com without having seen Dymphie’s post at Biomedblog, which is why I linked to it. This is very typical propriety among bloggers.

    Now putting aside this individual case:

    Oliver has repeatedly copied whole posts of the work of others and failed to provide attribution. This is wrong and extremely rude for anyone to do, but especially awful for a librarian. Above all other professionals, a librarian should know better.

    Other examples:
    http://medinfo.netbib.de/archives/2007/01/12/1759 (read the comments).

    Look around the biblioblogosphere and you won’t see other bibliobloggers doing what Oliver is doing. They don’t do it because they know it is rude, unethical, and sometimes illegal.

    I tried to address this concern privately with Oliver, but he didn’t bother to even reply to my emails.

    Also worthy of note: I am not the only biblioglogger who has asked Oliver to stop doing this.



  11. Melissa
    8. Mai 2007 at 3:41

    Attributing content and selecting only a small portion of the author’s post to put on this blog may take a few minutes, but I think it would be time well spent. Truly, it is an honor to have good posts recognized here, but the honor is diminished when full blog posts are republished without explicit permission of the author.

  12. B.-C.
    8. Mai 2007 at 9:34

    The very notion of a „good post“ does not fit here. It was a very ordinary post. Not the originality of the posting was important (neither David Rothmans translation nor the original dutch blog entry) but the fact or news that was blogged. You may note that according to German copyright law the copying and distribution of mixed (daily) news of factual content is expressly allowed, if reported in the press of radio. Certainly blogged news is not different. I don’t believe that any explicit permission is necessary in this context.

  13. B.-C.
    8. Mai 2007 at 10:00

    An entirely different question, of course, is, it is worthwile or necessary in the first place to reblog content or to link to it especially if it is not particularly original or controversial. In the time of RSS feeds where we can syndicate content through RSS feeds there is less need for reblogging, except if it comes from a source that otherwise gets little attention. However, if the blogger sees its own blog as a tool to organize and remember his own readings, I can still understand why one would want to blog an item that is also available through RSS feeds. This suggests the question whether RSS feed readers could recognize near duplicates and make it possible to give them less prominence or weight. But perhaps blogging is outdated for such purpose and social bookmarking is a more useful tool for that.

  14. B.-C.
    8. Mai 2007 at 10:05

    In fact, are there RSS feed readers that group messages like Google News displaying prominently only the top source(s) (according to whatever ranking criteria) and making the rest only available when you click on the link „plus thousandfivehundred similar messages“? That would be useful – because – let’s face it – much blogging certainly isn’t more original than ordinary news, if we put the author’s ego aside.

  15. Melissa
    8. Mai 2007 at 11:58

    B-C: While I don’t want to drag out this argument, I must let you know that David’s post is far from the only one that has been reposted in full here–and this includes many that were not „factual,“ but were rather essays and commentaries of personal experiences–indeed that were very good posts with substantial and original thought. Content from T. Scott, omg tuna is kewl, medlibrarian.net, and many others beyond David’s blog have been thusly appropriated, though many times, when asked to cite a source or shorten the snippet posted to Medinfo, Dr. Obst has updated the post to reflect the content author’s request.

  16. B.-C.
    9. Mai 2007 at 12:13

    Melissa: I believe you overstate the case. I closely follow Dr. Obsts blog, and this is certainly not the impression that I got. Through Dr. Obsts blog I have been drawn very often to very interesting sites, and always found him crediting his sources, especially when quoting from interesting commentaries appearing elsewhere on the net. To speak of „appropriation“ is a gross misrepresentation of the intent and actual practice of Dr. Obst in this highly useful blog.

  17. ob
    9. Mai 2007 at 1:54

    Thanks everybody for his 2 Cent on this subject. I think it’s time to close this thread now. I have learned some important things in this disputation for which I’m really glad and thankful to all participants. I hope I will have the opportunity to met David and Melissa, which I admire respect truly, one day in real life.

  18. ob
    11. Mai 2007 at 9:50

    Dear David Rothman, I’m very sorry for the trouble I caused you. I cited your blog postings with the best of intentions just as I cite others since years. It was absolutely not my intention to offend you or to appropriate your postings in any way. If you conceived it in that way, I apologize sincerely for any of my faults. With kind regards and peaceful intentions, Oliver Obst

  19. 11. Mai 2007 at 2:18

    Thank you, Oliver.

    While this may be a result of the language barrier, I must point out that my complaints have been based on the fact that you have *not* „cited.“ To cite would be to present an excerpt and note clearly from whence it came. Posting the entire item without attribution is not citing.

    This aside, I very much appreciate the sentiment.

Comments are closed.