Hello,

I'm "the blonde" you so kindly refer to in your post. If you received notification of dozens of blogs posting about Coutts, why did you decide to highlight mine out of all of them?

No, my blog is not an "advertising" blog and I am an "individual." If you had taken more than a minute to look at my site, you would've realized that.

I participate in PayPerPost, which pays bloggers to write about certain businesses. Coutts was an advertiser in their program.

If you have a beef with the company, don't drag me into your battle and don't attack ME personally.

Sponsored post or not, you don't have the right to copy my post verbatim as you have.....ethically at least. I would appreciate it if you would take it down.

Would an exclamation point help convince you to do so?!!!!!!!!!

I find it hard to reconcile "my blog is not an 'advertising' blog" with "I participate in PayPerPost, which pays bloggers to write about certain businesses. Coutts was an advertiser in their program."

I was amused that virtually the same Coutts article appeared on so many blogs on the same day. I picked your blog because I thought the name was extremely clever. Your blog was more "visual" than the others. I don't believe I've "attacked" you, personally or otherwise. My apologies if you feel otherwise.

Your posting is quoted with full attribution. A quotation is allowed, under copyright law, for the purposes of a review.

Are you really that upset by this article? It does have a link to your site, so will (in a small way) increase your site traffic --- which I assume is not perceived as a bad thing.

You didn't just "quote" me. Copyright laws do NOT allow you to copy my entire post, so long as you attribute it to me.

You haven't personally attacked me? "I like the exclamation points! Impressive!!!!" Your sarcasm towards my writing, my blog, my "pink links" etc. is an attack.

You don't like this company, so you have decided to take out your frustrations on me by posting this. This was not a friendly post meant to point out my blog because it was "extremely clever," or "visual." And the lovely dumbfounded blonde picture really compliments your complimentary post very well.

If you find it hard to reconcile "my blog is not an advertising blog," how about taking five minutes to scroll through my archives?

I write about my life, my feelings, my family, etc. Don't lump me in with sites that simply advertise. That is an unfair characterization. Are you an advertiseing blog simply because you have Google ads in your sidebar?

You really expect me to be grateful to you for the two hits you sent my way? Really? "Oh please attack me so I can get two hits!" Come on.

You, however, can thank ME for the tons of traffic I'm about to send your way.

On the question of how much of a copyrighted work can be quoted, see the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C, Section 107:

"[...] the fair use of a copyrighted work [...] for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—

(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;

(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

For the purposes of (3), above, the "copyrighted work as a whole" should, in my opinion, be the whole of the Blonde Blog (all postings).

In any event, most of the Coutts posting appears to have been written by Coutts itself. See also:

http://www.investorblogger.com/archives/couttscom-wouldnt-you-trust-the-que ens-bankers

http://www.nowg.net/2007/10/15/the-courtesy-of-coutts/

http://mybabybay.com/blog/index.php/2007/10/16/experience-with-coutts/

http://www.newbieshub.com/courtesy-of-coutts/

Wow. You really believe that it's perfectly fine for you to go in and copy entire posts of mine as long as you don't COPY MY ENTIRE BLOG?!!!! I hardly thing that's what #3 means.

I've written for several websites and I have always been instructed to quote only a small portion of others' works and attribute those quotes to the authors.

I was specifically told NEVER to copy an entire work of someone's.

If you're so sure about being within your rights, I could double check with all of your advertisers and your site host if you'd like.

Please be my guest.

This website sits on our own dedicated server. We are essentially our own host. We own Lucies Farm. And as for the Google Adwords --- the ads change depending upon where you are, time of day, phase of the moon, etc.

I don't think Google chooses to exercise any control over the content of websites. Your own site is hosted by Blogger, part of Google. I doubt you'd want them looking over your shoulder and hypothetically saying, "Oh no --- you can't say anything bad about Peapod because they place lots of ads with us."

This is the internet, where speech is supposed to be (generally) free and (generally) uncensored.

And I am within the provisions of the "fair use" doctrine. Honest!!!!

Your right to "free speech" ends where plagiarism begins. Here's one definition of plagiarism, which your post falls into:

"copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on "fair use" rules)"

found here:

http://www.plagiarism.org/learning_center/what_is_plagiarism.html

and this:

"If I cite the source, can I still be accused of plagiarism?
You are allowed to borrow ideas or phrases from other sources provided you cite them properly and your usage is consistent with the guidelines set by fair use laws. As a rule, however, you should be careful about borrowing too liberally -- if the case can be made that your work consists predominantly of someone else's words or ideas, you may still be susceptible to charges of plagiarism. Also, if you follow the words of a source too closely, and do not use quotation marks, it can be considered plagiarism even if you cite the source."

and:

"The amount you've used.
The more you've "borrowed," the less likely it is to be considered fair use. What percentage of your work is "borrowed" material? What percentage of the original did you use? The lower the better."

from here:

http://www.plagiarism.org/learning_center/plagiarism_faq.html

and finally:

"The penalties for plagiarism can be surprisingly severe, ranging from failure of classes and expulsion from academic institutions to heavy fines and jail time!"

In my opinion, no matter what Coutts has done to you or your company; no matter how bad your relationship is with Coutts, it is unethical and unprofessional to copy the work of someone who simply provided a service to Coutts. However, you didn't stop there. You continued to make snide remarks about her personal blog being "more visual" and "clever" than the others that just so happened to pop up in your search. Let's not forget about the "pink links" and "!!!" either!!!

Blonde Blogger (as I will call her here) is not an advertising executive. She has written in her blog for years, yet she only recently started accepting paid reviews. Did you think about looking through her archives? Did you even bother to scroll to the bottom of the page? Obviously not. The majority of the writing on her blog is <i>not</i> sponsored, but you wouldn't know that.

If you have an ethical bone in your body, you will remove this post as you were asked to by the author of the work that you plagiarized. Not only is this post unethical, it is immoral, and most likely illegal.

I did the same coutts post, feel free to delete blond bloggers and toss mine up. *smirk* I wont even get mad if you copy the whole post. I like linkage.

http://redpaintblue.blogspot.com/2007/10/courtesy-of-coutts.html

I did a Google search for "Courtesy of Coutts" and found pages and pages of these "sponsored blogs." On some of the blogs it's clear that the author was paid a fee to write and place the story. On others it's not clear at all.

I found another favourite. It's a blog called "Pointless Directives - More Knowledge Than In A Buttload of Libraries." The self-proclaimed pointless directive about Courtesy of Coutts is at:

http://pointless-drivel.com/directives/?p=1142

I love the idea of patrician Coutts paying money to have a blog posted on a website that calls itself "Pointless Directives." Hey, I wonder if Coutts should be paying me for my postings?

Thank you, Angel! You really are my angel! :)

Blue, you still read me? I am flattered. *smirk*

Craig, I am totally LMAO now. You messed with me, and so far haven't really had to face the music. But Mr. Fab of Pointless Directives? Oh you have no idea what you've gotten yourself into! ROFL!

Dear Craig,

Better be careful the last time I wrote something that the Blonde Blogger didn't like she complained about me to Mr. Fab (an oxymoron or simply moron works too) and he threatened to "take a hit on me".

Nice huh?

The irony of it is her "moral outrage" at you for "mentioning her blog" when she thought it was great that Mr. Fab would threaten my life.

So expect a "death threat"- this is how these people work.

But I think you called this blog pretty accurately. The good thing about quoting from a dictionary is that the spelling of plagiarism was corrected. Finally.

Good luck in your crusade against Coutt's bank.

Mary
P.S. Like you I have never hidden behind a pseudonym for my blog. I'm not ashamed of what I write.

Hi, Mary -

Thanks for your nice comments. I quite liked Mr. Fab's blog site, and the name is great. I hope he won't get mad and kill me.

I'm still trying to figure out LMAO and ROFL. I found this definition of ROFLMAO in the Urban Dictionary:

"Short for Rolling On the Floor Laughing My Ass Off. Often used in online chat rooms. Also an amusing thing to name a cat when pronounced as a word.

Here Roflmao, kitty muffins!
Roflmao: MEOW!"

"Blue, you still read me? I am flattered. *smirk*"

Some days I forget you are blond Dawn.

Some people have things like stat counters ect. they can look at them and see where people have come from and where the are going.

then *smirk* they can follow them

What? Mary is still alive?

I need to get my deposit back...

LOL! Well, Craig, it appears you've brought out all of the crazies who have a beef with me out of the woodwork...people I thought were long gone.

To clarify, I doubt Fab made a death threat against Mary. That is so ridiculous. And even if he did (which I'm sure he didn't), I would in no way "support" that.

Mary likes to threaten people with lawsuits for character assasination, yet she feels free to make those false accusations against me and Fab here. Ironic.

Mary expected me to be happy with her when she called me a "so-called mommy blogger" and "less of a person" because I curse. You see, I'm supposed to be happy when someone tells me I'm a not a good mother because I say "fuck."

Blue thought I should have left her comment up on my blog in which she said Steve Irwin's wife "looked like shit" after he died and that she "hopes she gets her act together for the kids." When I didn't, and even tried to be nice to her about it and said I hope she understood, she instead shoved a stick up her ass and it's obviously still there to this day (and maybe that's why she likes to smirk so much.)

So those are the people who are standing with you on this. It has nothing to do with whether you're right or wrong and everything to do with petty grudges.

I found it funny that you recieve emails on whoever posts "Coutts". That probably isn't healthy.

Mary, get a life. Watching you post on here is almost painful..yet slightly amusing.

Oh, Fab, I totally missed your comment! ROFL!!! Hey, I have a new list of people for you to take care of...k? lol

Good heavens.

I am assuming (purely a guess on my part) that some bright young spark in the Marketing Department at Coutts read an article about viral marketing. The hypothetical marketing guru then found PayPerPost, and thought, "Heck, this is an easy way to go viral. We just pay for it."

My point is that BlondeBlogger et. al. are not classic Coutts customers. While on the surface they appear to write in their blogs about the new "Courtesy of Coutts" service from personal experience, they are (in fact) writing from a script, and are being paid (rather poorly, in my opinion) to do so.

Yes, in the strange world of cyberspace links from other sites are generally good.

But I wonder if the Marketing Department at Coutts is happy to have links from folks who write, "You see, I'm supposed to be happy when someone tells me I'm not a good mother because I say 'f**k.'" And devolve into a discussion about how Steve Irwin's wife looked after her husband died? What, no comments about Anna Nicole Smith and/or Paris Hilton?

Such are the perils --- and the excitement --- of viral marketing. You can't control it. The BlondeBlogger made threats to contact my hosting company and website advertisers if I didn't remove this page from this website. And at one time Coutts tried to shut down this whole site --- and succeeded in doing so for about a day. But the (essentially) uncensored internet prevailed.

The Couttssucks.com website was never intended to be a blog, and I think that we've all probably taken this discussion as far as we should on this website. I suggest, therefore, that we adjourn to the sitting room for cocktails.

We can move the discussion to (just a suggestion) the BlondeBlogger's blog. Or I have a little-used forum at www.cw.cx.

But, for now, and before Mr. Fab takes out a contract on me, I will delete further comments on this page. (Unless they're really funny. Remember, I said ESSENTIALLY uncensored!!! Darn, there are those exclamation points again!!!)

I have a degree of interest in this site and, while I know it's way after the action's finished, your comments have this evening amused me no end!

I stumbled across this site whilst looking for information on opening an account with Coutts.

Craig, your site has been successful - because I certainly won't be pursuing the account now.

However, and my main reason for this comment, thank you for the top notch entertainment provided by virtue of your exchanges with BlondeAndWritesLikeOne. There is something ever so sadistic (and pleasurable) about reading articulate posts in response to, how shall I say, 'less than informed and considered posts'.

TheBlondeWhoFailed seems unable to grasp the points you make so eloquently, but don't blame yourself for that because I suspect English is something she's still getting the hang on.

Finally, if TheBlondeReallyIsStupid had bothered to read a multitude of paragraphs that are freely available on the internet she'd have realised you were entirely within the law to quote her site. But hey, she's blonde.

My wife is blonde too. She's upset at TheBlondeMakesUsAllLookIdiots.

Regards

Mr Entertained

Mr. not funny-

I feel bad for your wife. After a few months of pretending to laugh at your witticisms, I would've left.

As far as the copyright act goes, the work as a whole would be the article or post. Say her entire blog was just that post and she posted no more. The entire blog is a work in progress and ongoing. The post you cited was complete, therefore, arguably being the complete work. However, most of this applies to actually cutting the section out.

In fact, I might add the actual exchange between both of them is an argument that companies like ticketmaster are having. It is very current and actually quite intellectual so before you get off on the sadism you might want to read up!

Hi Bloggingforfaith ---

I confess I have no idea what you're talking about. Ticketmaster?

I did a quick Google search for Bloggingforfaith and came up with: http://bloggingforfaith.blogspot.com/

Imagine my surprise to find a blog called "The Brilliant Brunette," run (apparently) by Amanda in Virginia. Amanda describes herself as follows: "I am religious and not your stereotypical nut. I like to have fun, and no that does not include going to Bible camp and preaching from door to door. I party, cuss, and blast Nirvana on my way to work rather than Jesus Christ Superstar. I love forensics and studying serial killers. I'm an outgoing person that says exactly what I am thinking."

From the Blonde Blogger to the Brilliant Brunette? Oi!

Ticketmaster is having a war concerning deep links and copyright issues. Though I must confess I did not see your entire post and realize you did not just deep link, but you did copy an entire post. I'm going to have to side with her here because it does violate copyright laws.

If I didnt want you to see my blog I wouldnt have used my blogger name, lol. If you had done more investigating, Sherlock, you would see who my friends are and understand why the name is similar. ;)

I did see that you were friends with the Blonde Blogger -- it was so obvious I didn't see a need to mention it.

You're both wrong about the copyright issue. But that's flogging a dead horse.

The post was copied with complete attribution. And the post itself is hardly the Blonde's original work: she was paid by Coutts to post it, and there are many other blogs from around the same time frame that contain virtually identical postings.

I would have more sympathy if the Blonde's posting was a lovely work of original prose --- but it's just a pre-packaged advertisement for a bank. And one, at least in my opinion, that sucks.

And one that almost undoubtedly wouldn't open an account for the Blonde because of the bank's stuffy net worth and income requirements.

The absurdity of someone in Virginia blogging about a stuffy bank in England, and doing so for money, is the whole point of this article.

Craig, you are in the wrong here.

I came to your site looking for objective information about Coutts' service or lack thereof. Your tittle tatting back and forth and small mindedness in this post shows a very different person than an innocent past customer has been abused by an incompetent bank.

You also don't ever get round to explaining why exactly Coutts dumped you from their list.

Based on your level of dialogue and ethics shown here, it is clear there is more to the story than you have let on.

Sam --

This "tittle tattle" posting started quite a while after we were marched out of the door at Coutts. I thought it was interesting that Coutts was actually paying bloggers to write favourable stories about its services. I didn't know then (but know now) that such a thing as paid blogging actually exists.

The blonde customer who wrote one such article, for pay, was amusing to me. So obviously different from the stereotypical Coutts customer.

As for why I was "dumped," everything we received from Coutts -- letters, e-mails, etc., is faithfully reproduced elsewhere on this site. You know what I know -- unless you work for Coutts.

It is easy for you to opine that "it is clear there is more to the story than you have let on," and impossible for me to disprove that.

This website has existed ever since Coutts "dumped" us. Other than a letter to our previous hosting provider (never seen by me) the bank has made no further effort to close this site. If there was, as you suspect, "more to the story" then you'd think that Coutts would have taken steps to close this site.

After these years I don't much care. They "dumped" us, we created and continue to maintain this website. The universe is in balance.