During recent days, there's been a lot of hub-bub regarding Dove's latest "Campaign for Real Beauty" ads for their firming lotion. One of the most interesting happened in Chicago.
The Sun Times did a feature on the ads, and supposedly a "he said/ she said" piece as well. I say supposedly because there was only one journo credit on the piece. And apparently she only wrote the introduction, which is a background on the campaign and the new massive media buys.
Beckham was making £1m a year on being the face of Vodafone live! but the coupling is now off, despite the fact that Beckhams sexually explicit text messages to Rebecca Loos really sold the idea of mobile phones practical use.
Mr Pocky Snack inventor, Mr anime fan - yes, the real american genius (or heroes as they used to be called before it went out of fashion) ads for Bud Light have been deservedly spoofed, as Pocari Sweat real otaku heroes radio ads.
Sometimes ads find themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. Back in '97 when cutting edge news sites employed a keyword system to get the right banner near the right articles, it seemed like a great idea until a banner for Mercedes showed up above an article about Princess Di's death. Since then we've seen many more combinations like that, this usually doesn't happen in printed newspapers. But last week, Politiken newspaper ran an ad with a somewhat unfortunate visual of a girl holding a video-camera..... Perhaps I was the only one who noticed.
Getty Images has teamed up with PicScout to search and destroy.. Ah, no maybe not that dramatic, to "investigate internet use of its entire collection of approximately 450,000 Rights Managed images." the StockArtistsAlliance reports.
The SAA (Stock Artists Alliance), a global trade association
The worldwide 'fair use' idea is pretty simple, if you like what someone has written, or hate it even, you can quote from that piece to critique it or review it or simply highlight it. Quoting from a piece doesn't mean copy the entire piece though. But y'all knew that. Anyway, part of MarketingSherpas story focuses on those fake blogs that scrape RSS feeds off other blogs, sorting themselves after topics like "Google adsense", "Britney Spears" and even advertising - we wrote about the phenomenon in May: "Faux blogs live off RSS feeds and AdSense". So what does Google plan to do about it? Nothing much it seems, as this is what they told Marketingsherpa.
Here's what Barry Schnitt in Google's PR department said in response to my query about this problem:
"Copyright violations are against our policies. We ask that the owner of the copyrighted material comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (the text of which can be found at the U.S. Copyright Office website: http://lcWeb.loc.gov/copyright/) and other applicable intellectual property laws. In this case, this means that if we receive proper notice of infringement, we will forward that notice to the responsible web site publisher. To file a notice of infringement with us, you must provide a written communication."
My take on this? It's not awfully reassuring. Google seems to want to put the policing ball in the copyright owner's corner despite the fact that few of these stolen content sites would exist if it were not for AdSense revenues.
In short, the only way to get rid of those faux blogs is to report them, following the US DMCA (even though you and your work might be French), one by one it seems. Can anyone be bothered?