Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Tes Authors' Group' started by Adasgupta, Sep 15, 2016.
I like this idea c for a
I think it would be too big a job to check every resource as it is published and I know I would get annoyed by delays in things being released.
Definitely think a copyright infringement button would work a lot more effectively.
I guess the question is where does the responsibility lie?
--> Should I, as an author, have to keep checking resources that have been uploaded to the TES to make sure nobody is copying my work? (remember that I cannot check paid resources without buying them myself first)
--> Or should TES, who are allowing the uploads (and have full access to them), be checking them?
Certainly feel TES should be checking them. It's when you consider how many are uploaded each day though and putting a block on them until they are checked that the whole thing then grinds to a halt.
We can't police other authors easily and like Owen said we can't see premium resources anyway. Finding them wouldn't be easy, unless you are as brazen as Mr K! Change title, preview and description - who will know?
TES profit from resources and must have some liability and responsibility for what is sold.
The SPAG tube mat is one of the resources I emailed them about and they acknowledged the email, so there's no question they are aware of this user.
I stopped uploading resources to TES a couple of years ago because they were so militant about hyperlinks to other sites.
Now it seems anything goes.
Any user that does this should have their account suspended or removed and TES should openly donate any profits from the account to a suitable charity.
They have the resources to 'moderate' every one of my messages but not to check stolen resources!
This is true, but I think it would only be a problem initially. In the long run the premium resources will be seen as more prestigious as they will have gone through a more rigorous vetting process (so users would be more likely to spend their money on them). At the same time people will be dissuaded from plagiarising as the stuff won't get through. Short term effort = long term gains for all in my opinion.
other organisation do do this, but there is a cost, so either resources will cost more or authors will get less.
It seems Kaitheman9898's resources have been taken down.
And is replaced by another:
has been taken from:
has been taken from:
has been taken from:
Again, all free resources being copied and charged for. Hopefully they get taken down before anyone spends their money on them...
@TES Resource Team
Please read and investigate the information in the post above.
I've found this one:
which is an uplifted premium resource listed here.
Ironic that this is a presentation about crime! Both members based in Nigeria. Hmm.
Both members with the same resource again
And again ...
I've other things to do now ...
Good spots, Marlin. What can tes do about this? Shut one down, like Mr k, and they can just do it again with a different username. Tes need some system that flags unusual activity e.g. a new user that suddenly uploads lots of resources. They maybe legit, but it wouldn't take long to check...
I think TES should issue clear warnings to those people tempted to plagiarise and issue this link to all TES authors with particular reference to Section 6 of this document (copyright infringement).
It even states, 'Deliberate infringement of copyright on a commercial scale may be a criminal offence.' TES should echo these words and make it clear that users will not simply be blocked/removed but will also be referred to the appropriate authorities and follow up on this (whether this be to trading standards or police.)
Hopefully this would deter the would-be plagiariser.
The link above is very interesting and makes me wonder whether the TES itself would be committing a criminal offence by making money (such as royalties) from plagiarised material? Or by hosting it on their site? I doubt that 'sorry we didn't check it' would be an effective argument!
Worth being aware of!
No response to this yet.(Posted 19th August)
It would be useful to know.